Jacko Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Not sure if any of you have seen this, but be interested to see it if they did. http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=16422 If they could keep the lines of the coupe, but have the ability to have top down fun without lots of scuttle shake of course, then sound pretty good to me..... But be interested to see how they'd get around the weight penalties associated with such a roof. I mean, the roadsters already heavier than the coupe and thats with a canvas roof! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Removed Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 it's heavier due to the strenghtening needed as it's got no metal roof. This would be needing less chassis strenghtening as it would have a metal roof in the first place, so wouldn't expect extra weight (apart from the roof motor) on top of a roadster's weight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trev-the-Rev Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 It wouldn't float my boat. It's neither one thing or the other imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sl114 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I think i know what you mean. The weight shift from the roof to the rear would scare me, i dont like the idea of them at all, hence i will never have a convertable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alscar Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I quite like the sound of it.. Having said that, there have been no pictures or sketches of what this would look like.. The other thing Im not sure where they could store a metal roof, not without loosing the already small boot thats on a roadster.. Im interested all the same! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 having had a peugeot 206cc (like a few on here ) i couldn't really tell the extra weight in the back with the roof down but then again it was a FWD car so might make a difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzz... Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 it's heavier due to the strenghtening needed as it's got no metal roof. This would be needing less chassis strenghtening as it would have a metal roof in the first place, so wouldn't expect extra weight (apart from the roof motor) on top of a roadster's weight I think you will find that the body still need strengthening...think that the metal roof is fixed to the boby by pivots and while one section might act as a brace from one side to the other.. it is only as strong as the pivot... and this will not be as good as a solid arch structure. As proof of this, you can look at the underfloors of all metal roof convertibles and you will see chunkier sills and cross braces in the RR near the fuel tank (pug and micra cc are very visible...) others such as astra and golf I am not sure if they will be as visible, or they would have designed it into the body structure more "effectively", but definetely heavier... in saying this new MX5 i seem to remeber managed to keep the weight the same or very similar to the soft top option...~(then again this could be a totally random statement with no back up data... ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Quads Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 IMO I think its not worth the investment. Going with a folding roof is going to add more cost and weight. The Z is a fairly heavy already and shedding a few pounds would really transform it rather than adding a few pounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzz... Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 That is unless the new model is going to have a revised (smaller) platform, which reduced the weight of the vehicle and also has a new 3.7 litre engine increasing the power output, say to something like ... 350bhp... then you could end up with a lightweight coupe with higher power, or a Convertible with similar weight to the current coupe but with more power...so both way you could gain over the current model... but i am only speculating... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek_ZR Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 This was also in Auto Express but again no pictures. Unless they do away with the spare wheel, I fail to see where they are going to find room for a boot if they need to store a metal roof. That was where the 206CC gained - boot was much bigger at 450L than a normal hatchback with the roof up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzz... Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Depends on the folding mechanism. a simple mechanism will require a large space. but technology is getting better and the complexity of folds is becoming easier to do. (See the new astra, and volvos with 3piece roofs) a future 3?0z ( )n only requires a roof not much bigger than a MX5 hard top...and ASTRA and GOLF have to cover a larger cabin area and it is a smaller car...wheelbase wise) Cut a few RR panels, reinforce a bit further forward and away you go... no problem... ( i agree the boot space will not be that much better than current) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alscar Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 The only problem with a complex foling system is that it will go wrong that much more often.. The soft top mech' that they have now isnt the most reliable! I really like the idea of it, but it would have to be tested to destruction first! If anyone gets any pics of this new design i would be interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flakmunky Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I think i know what you mean. The weight shift from the roof to the rear would scare me, i dont like the idea of them at all, hence i will never have a convertable. I used to have a 307cc and with the top down the balance was completely altered... It was a terrible car and I got rid of it within a year due to the wallowy nature of its handling... I would only ever buy a convertible that had been designed from the outset to be a convertible, e.g. Z4, Elise, MX5 as opposed to something that was designed to be a Coupe then choppped up... Anyone remember the Mk1 Golf GTI Cabriolet? That car took 4 months to get to 60 and hand a knee breaking strengthening bar in the dash... I know things have changed and technology is better, but you cut a roof off a car and it needs more bracing! lol... I wouldn't touch a tin-top Z... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GC350z Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I'm with you on the weight distribution issue. The Z has been designed with a specific balance in mind which would also take into account weight in the boot. (Back to the golf club topic ) I also wouldn't buy a convertible that was first designed as a coupe. To be brutally honest I hate nearly all convertibles. They just look wrong. Two seaters look better that four. Most are too flat looking. The convertible Z I do like but not with the roof up. Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alscar Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I have to agree.. The current roadster looks a bit iffy with the roof up.. Having said that, its a cracker with it down!! I have to say, the current roadster has less bufferting than my last Porsche Boxster.. Would almost go as far as to say its better planted on the road too!. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.