We have an opportunity to buy a 2003 100k mile auto 350Z for £3500. It has most of a FSH and seems pretty genuine. We want it because it has some bodywork issues we can fix and sell it on. However, if it's going to cost us a couple of grand in repairs for its imminent MOT, we'll pass. Most word on the internet seems to be that they're pretty robust. What does the panel reckon...?

Have you already got the Aviator shades, open necked shirt and medallion?

The snchro goes on high mileage gearboxes. The "W" chassis brace rusts severely and drive shaft wear is common. (Listen for "clicking" from the rear when dring off)

All this was advice given to me by a mate who did his due diligence a couple of years bac.

Thanks for that. I knew about the W brace and the drive shafts, but not the synchro. Are the auto boxes any more/less robust?

Auto boxes are supposed to be more robust yes. I've also read clutches are usually only good for 40k miles but most high milers on ebay seem to be on original clutch. Front suspension bushes in lower compression arm also wear.

I've seen that many people replace the bushes with poly ones. It all sounds much as I had expected; could be just an MOT plus a couple of hundred quid - or could be a money pit. I'm quite tempted, but will continue to consult with MrsC

Any chance you can get the seller to put it through an MOT before you buy it? Even if it fails you'd know what you were looking at.

Worth checking the MOT History which gives clues for any underlying issues.

We could try, but not sure they will MOT the car - given that it could knacker the sale - they just want rid. Current MOT has advisories for corrosion on the W brace and cloudy headlamps...

Keen to see how you get on as I keep looking at these. A friend had one several years ago. He had no issues with it, but it hadn't done many miles and he sold it within a year as the fuel economy wasn't good enough for his commute.

We are just looking for desirable cars that have light body damage that we can repair. It just so happens also that our long-term petrol-head dream involves a 370Z, so we would be interested to see what the 350 is like. It's one of the few cars that I don't mind being a bit pimped - within reason, of course!

If it works out, I'll be sure to post...

Even if it doesn't, honest appraisals are invaluable.

Just thinking, I do recall seeing that you can get a base car without the Brembo brakes. Not sure how that affects desirability?

I had a 350z for a while, though it was a 2007 so it had the re-worked "HR" engine, and it had a manual gearbox. Loved driving it, great fun and it never put a foot wrong mechanically. Even the servicing costs weren't too unreasonable.

My only criticisms, and these are mostly because I'm just a complete speed freak, is they don't feel particularly rapid, and the engine note is just a little bit dull (though I've heard some good exhaust systems out there so they can be improved).

I believe the interior cabin quality on the older models is also not the best, but again mine was one of the later ones and apart from slightly cheap looking dials I thought it was actually OK overall.

Ping MCMike Jim - he as a soft-top one.
I like those early ones that came in that Copper colour.
They do sound well.

Thanks gents, I'll see if Mike has anything to add...

My cousin works for Nissan and when I asked him about them he warned me off and didn't have a good work to say

He mentioned the gearboxes being particularly problematic but he did note that most should have been sorted under warranty but this was pre 2006 that was affected

He told me to get an s2000

Blimey! Maybe his perspective is slanted by the issues he's encountered, because most of what I've read seems to suggest reliability is a strong point. If he thinks an S2000 is a direct rival, he might be missing the point of the Zed... But useful info, thanks.

JimO had a Z for a while. I seem to recall he got shot of it pretty quickly. Not sure why.

Was too quick for him

I have a couple of friends with Honda's and I'm not sure reliability is any better than Nissan. In fact, my one mate says he'll only go for Toyota next time after a much better customer service experience with his 2 Prius's. Anyway, that's for newer stuff.

As the for 350Z, I'd love one. Go for it !! I suspect it would have far fewer niggles than a Coupe to be fair. [wash my mouth out ]

It would be my choice of track car I think, if just for the noise !

It wasn't to be. The owner was offered a grand more than we thought the car was worth, so we bowed out. Will be looking for another 350z though. Think I might have become a fan!

I'm confused; from your OP, I thought you were looking to buy and sell a particular 350Z to make a few bob. Are you looking to buy one to keep now?

Both right, Trappy. We were looking at one particular car that we thought we could turn round and make a (small) profit by tidying it up. However, it's more fun if you like the car too and - as I said - a 370Z features in our long-term plans (dreams!), the older brother is a nice place to start.

I realise that, by all accounts, the 370z is a superior car to it's predecessor.. however, I always preferred the look of the 350. I just think the styling tweaks on the newer model are a bit fussy, especially the rear lights.

Horses for courses though!

I've always thought that the 350 was a flawed beauty. The rear 3/4 seemed ungainly to me and there was something too flat about the headlights (after a coupé, perhaps?). But, like some other cars, it has quietly grown on me and now I rather like it. It helps that is one of the few cars I can think of that wears some even fairly dramatic mods well. Though not all, before everyone posts pictures of Frankenstein's 350Z...
For me, the 370 is an evolution that addresses my personal issues with its predecessor. The 350 is also a decade old. I'd like my dream car to be a little more modern...!

Interesting. I quite like both versions. The 350 is a bit more unique and perhaps muscular looking, the 370 looks more like an evolution into a Porsche... which is not a bad thing.

I also like the original Audi TT. They are a classic design.

I always thought the 350 looked like a bad 911 clone. The front is rather good the rear end looks truly awful (in both guises but the imports with the square number plate especially so). The soft-top is hideous. Usually I don't like body modified cars but flicking through Google images some of the modified one's look better than the standard body shape. Can't believe the prices they are fetching, last time I looked they were £3-5K now an import is going for £6K+!

I nearly bought a convertible Z after my last coop died. A white one. It looked really nice on the forecourt. Then they put the roof up and I ran away!

In a recent evo mag it had an article, if i haven't thrown it i will post up or send the pages to you, i lend them to the neighbours too and am waiting for a batch back soon.

I remember one of the registration years pays much more road tax than others.

From memory there are 3 variations of the same engine supplied by Renault all generally good but and I think the early one possibly had some issues....mostly related to infrequent or poor oil quality monitoring.

I recall a TV/net program where the professional drivers said the 350 was a better drive than the 370....

All very vague but worth a 2 mins type.

Tom.

NB. if it had two small seats in the back I would have one at the current prices. Newera Imports I think supplied the guide for evo.

MrCooper wrote a very good review of the 350Z he owned a few years ago

Review of my 350Z

It helped me and my ex when we were looking for hers. She eventually bought a 2006 rev-up / HR model (296bhp). I had access to it for years so knew it fairly well and, although it was great fun at first, it never really grew on me. I liked the image and sense of occasion, but it never really came alive somehow.
The engine is the first thing that was pretty uninspiring. For a start, it wasn't nearly as brawny as I'd have expected for naturally aspirated 3.5 litre lump. Sure it pulled well from any revs but never felt like a big revvy engine or a grunt torque monster. And it was lazy. It felt like the speed at which the car accelerated was limited by how quickly the revs would rise. Engine when out of gear it would just labour up the rpm when you gave it some beans. The noise wasn't great either (although an aftermarket exhaust did remedy this to an extent) and it just didn’t seem to like being ‘revved out’. For me it was best drive at 6/10ths but then you quickly found the next hurdle - the handling.

Don’t get me wrong, it was nicely balanced and very lairy if you played with the throttle (with the overly intrusive TC switched off) but I never found I could string it along around my favourite twisties like I could in the coop. I never found a rhythm with it.

On a more personal note, the seats were simply no good for me at all – far too narrow. I would sit on it with the two side bolsters pushing into my shoulder blades with a good 3inches of air between my back and the seat. The position would have been great other than that. Nice and low with plenty of adjustment but if you’re on the seat rather than in it, then it’s never going to work...

Finally, it just wasn’t fast enough. In hindsight, I do wonder if it was making the quoted BHP because it shouldn’t have been trounced by a mate’s 247bhp fleamapped 20vT the way it was. I later discovered that they need 99RON petrol to make quoted power or the ECU limits performance. That did make it feel a bit peppier but not 300bhp peppy. Over 1500kgs will do that though I suppose…

It had a surprisingly good boot and was very reliable however and was a great partner on a long drive.

Consumables were more expensive than the coop, servicing was OK and fuel economy was a little worse than my coop – with 400bhp.

I can’t help but feel that, if these cars had been turbo or even supercharged from the factory, you’d have a car with a real cult following here.

I really can't see the 30bhp and a little less weight of the 370Z addressing the shortcomings of the 350Z and I ca't believe they're still making it even now. Your average hot hatch wuld blow it into the weeds now!

The 2006 second generation engine (the 296bhp version) wasn't the HR engine. The HR was 2007 onwards, and had 313bhp (this is the version I owned). I drove a couple of 2006 models, and one other 2007 before I purchased mine, so I can offer something of a limited comparison. The later models weren't startlingly quicker by any stretch, but they were definitely better to drive all round and a little punchier than the early models. If you could stretch to a 2007 model I would say absolutely do it.

As noted though fuel economy really wasn't great, though hardly disastrous either. After 18 months ownership I traded the car in with the trip computer showing 22.8mpg. By comparison, the M5 I replaced it with was at 12.9 at the end of my ownership