Nissan Z vs Ford Mustang GT

Before the numbers: the Toyota GR Supra is no longer sold new in Australia. The GT, GTS and Track Edition are all off the price list. If you want one you are shopping used. What follows compares the Z against the closest thing still on sale at similar money, the Ford Mustang GT Fastback.

The Nissan Z opens at $76,160 before on-road costs for either the 6-speed manual or 9-speed automatic, with the hardcore Z Nismo at $94,065. The Ford Mustang GT Fastback is $87,990 with the 10-speed automatic or $84,990 with the manual, and the range starts lower with the four-cylinder EcoBoost Fastback at $72,990.

Like for like on automatics, the Z undercuts the Mustang GT by $11,830. If you want a manual the gap narrows to $8,830. And if the Mustang badge is what you are after but the V8 is not essential, the EcoBoost Fastback at $72,990 actually undercuts the Z by $3,170, though it gives up 66kW and 1.3 seconds to 100km/h.

Running costs favour the Nissan for once. The Z automatic uses 9.8L/100km (10.8L for the manual) against 12.8L for the Mustang GT auto. At 12,000km a year and $2.20 a litre for premium that is roughly $792 a year in the Z's favour. Both take premium unleaded.

Resale is the Mustang's quiet advantage. V8 Mustangs have held values strongly in Australia, helped by scarcity as the segment shrinks, while the Z is more of a value play up front than a resale star.

Neither car has an ANCAP rating on record, which is normal for low-volume sports coupes that are not submitted for testing. That does not mean they are unsafe, but it does mean there is no independent star score to lean on for either.

The Nissan Z comes with Nissan's Safety Shield suite: autonomous emergency braking with pedestrian detection, blind-spot warning, rear cross-traffic alert, intelligent (adaptive) cruise control, lane-departure warning and a reversing camera with rear sensors.

The Mustang includes Ford Co-Pilot360 with AEB, adaptive cruise, lane-keeping, blind-spot monitoring, rear cross-traffic alert and a reversing camera. The two are closely matched on active-safety equipment; both have the essentials covered for a modern performance car.

One practical difference: the Nissan Z is a strict two-seater with no rear seats or ISOFIX points. The Mustang is a 2+2 with a rear bench, which is tight for adults but useful for kids or extra luggage. If you occasionally need to carry more than one passenger, that decides it.

The Nissan Z leans into retro charm. Standard kit includes a 12.3-inch fully digital driver display, an 8-inch central touchscreen with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, an 8-speaker Bose sound system, heated front seats, a frameless digital rear-view mirror and Z-specific analogue-style turbo gauges atop the dash that nod to Zs of the past.

The Mustang GT runs Ford's big 13.2-inch SYNC 4 touchscreen alongside a 12.4-inch configurable digital cluster, with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, a B&O audio system, heated and cooled front seats and selectable drive modes including an electronic drift brake on some builds.

Tech-wise the Mustang has the bigger screens and the more configurable interface, while the Z leans on retro detailing and its analogue-style turbo gauges. Both offer wireless smartphone mirroring as standard.

This is the heart of the matchup. The Nissan Z uses a 3.0-litre twin-turbo V6 (the VR30DDTT, shared with Infiniti) making 298kW and 475Nm. It is muscular, free-revving and sounds purposeful, with strong, linear thrust and the theatre of two turbos spooling. Drive goes to the rear wheels via a 6-speed manual or 9-speed automatic, both with a mechanical limited-slip differential and launch control.

The Mustang GT runs a naturally aspirated 5.0-litre Coyote V8 producing 347kW and 550Nm, with a 6-speed manual or a 10-speed automatic. It is the bigger, louder engine, with 49kW and 75Nm on the Nissan and a character no turbocharged six can imitate.

On the claimed numbers, though, the smaller car wins the sprint. The Z automatic is quoted at 4.3 seconds to 100km/h against 4.9 for the Mustang GT auto (5.3 for the manual). Turbocharging and a lower kerb weight do the work there. The Mustang's advantage is on the long straight and in the noise.

Fuel use favours the Nissan clearly: 9.8L/100km for the Z automatic against 12.8 for the Mustang GT auto, and 10.8 against 13.6 if you compare the manuals. That is a 3L/100km gap either way, which is real money if you cover distance.

This is the Mustang's strongest section. It holds 408 litres of boot against the Z's 241, and it has rear seats where the Z has none. For a car in this class that combination is genuinely useful: a weekend away for two with luggage, or a school run at a pinch.

The Z is the smaller, tighter, more single-minded cabin. Two seats, a driver-canted dash and 241 litres behind them, which is enough for a couple of soft bags and not much else.

Front-seat space and comfort are good in both for average-height adults. The Z's more upright glasshouse makes it marginally easier to see out of; the Mustang is the physically larger car in every direction, which matters in a city car park.

Both come with a 5-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty. Nissan will extend its cover year-by-year up to 10 years/300,000km if you service on schedule at a Nissan dealer, which is a genuine ownership perk.

Fuel favours the Nissan by roughly 3L/100km, worth about $792 a year at 12,000km and $2.20 a litre for premium. Servicing is broadly comparable, and both brands run capped-price programs with wide dealer networks.

The Z is cheaper to buy, quicker on the claimed figures and cheaper to fuel. The Mustang is likely to hold its value better, particularly the V8, which is increasingly scarce in this market. Over five years the Mustang's stronger resale narrows the Z's $11,830 head start but does not erase it once you add the fuel difference.