i was just wondering what everyones opinion was on the pros and cons between the two.

thanks

 

I had a track model cpe, noisy rough ride,tacky interior, don't know about the ragtop but, besides the all above, the it's ugly with top up!

 

It's a matter of choice. 350z is faster and less refined, but even with the slighly lower performance of the XF, I keep running out of road. XF oozes design and (I think) quality. Brakes on the XF are awesome, and it is extremely stable up to 140 (feels like 70).

In the UK, the XF is in insurance group 15 (same as my Voyager); the 350z is in insurance group 19 so I expect the total running costs to be higher for the 350z. I think that Nissan have tried to make the styling too much like the Porsche shape.

If you like the XF and want it to be fast; then wait for the SRT.

If I could make my purchase again, I would definitely get the XF. At the end of the day, you will have to live with your choice, until you can afford to replace the car.

 

I thought about waiting for the SRT, but after seeing some pics of it I wasn't interested. I don't like the static spioler they have stuck on the back of it.

I also looked at the 350z and chose the XFire. True, the 350z is faster, but as english_bob says it is less refined, a rougher ride and higher insurance costs. For me it was a no go as I have to do quite a lot of motorway driving with my job.

 

The 350Z i had may have been a click faster but the xf, feels quicker and and i like the whole package better! plus Nissan is building them like PT cruisers.

 

The front end of the 350Z looks nice but when you get to the back it becomes very plain. The one thing I like about the Z car is that it has instructions mounted on the trunk that tells you how to place gold clubs in it

 

Which part of that is bad?

 

Gold clubs! Wish I could afford some of them! lol :lol:

 

If you see one on every corner? you figure it out! Nissan plans to build 30-50,000 a year i heard!

 

Friend of mine, local Tampa news anchorman, ordered a 350Z roadster, he told me that it was no wonder they never showed him pictures of the car with the top up. When it came in he told them to send it back because of the hideous top. Top down doesn't look bad at all, not as nice as the X-fire, but not bad. The X-fire looks good both ways.
He did buy the coupe but didn't know the Crossfire was coming in a roadster at the time.

 

Ditto!!

 

Nissan is piece of crap! Does anyone know how many problems they have even had with the 350Z since its beginning? Too many... Besides Nissan had a few billion pumped into it by Peugeot (French), I ain't buying their stuff!

 

the 350Z does look bad as a roadster.

 

The SRT6 is a lot faster than the 350Z, and happy to own the mine, this car flies

 

well the SRT-6 costs an arm and a leg more than the 350Z

 

I saw a SRT6 roadster for $39,900 with under 3k miles. To bad it was aero blue.

 

really??

where?

have they really depreciated that badly?

 

Simi Valley Chrysler.

 

I test drove the z and the xf preferred the sound of the z and the gauges on the center of the dash. The Dealer let my wife and I take the managers z roadster with custom wheels and grill for a test drive we really like it but then we tried the xf and the top inside and out was nicer and the the whole package looked good. The lease price really pushed us towards the xf, Nissan was almost $100 higher per month for a longer term.

 

Talking about bringing a thread back from the dead.

These great lease deals is the only reason they have sold so many crossfires, which still is way below goal. What would have done if the price was the same?

350z is a nice car, but if I wanted refinement, power, speed, vert and looks. I would look no further than a used E46 M3 cabriolet. But if you have to go new, SLK350 anyone?