G37 Sedan

MT article - Q/G by the numbers..

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 3, 2013 | 12:32 PM
  #1  
MalbecG37S's Avatar
MalbecG37S
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 452
Likes: 30
From: Southlake, TX
MT article - Q/G by the numbers..

Unsure if this has already been posted - my apologies if it already was..

Interesting figures....G37S wins if purely comparing #'s...

By the numbers...
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2013 | 07:56 PM
  #2  
oliveview's Avatar
oliveview
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 120
Likes: 6
How sad. What's more sad, is there will be a sizable number of people here (the rims & slammed crowd) who will gladly give Nissan their money for a car with no real engineering progress. In fact, not just that, but a car with the same utterly useless 7AT...and no 6MT option.

I really enjoy our '09 G (despite the crap 7AT) but as it stands now, we won't be replacing it with ANY Nissan products.
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2013 | 08:44 PM
  #3  
CodeG's Avatar
CodeG
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 248
Likes: 6
^^ .2 in 0 to 60 differences and the sky is falling? Did you find other cars that are faster, cheaper and more "engineering progress"? Let us know!
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2013 | 09:00 PM
  #4  
G3710's Avatar
G3710
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 111
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by oliveview
How sad. What's more sad, is there will be a sizable number of people here (the rims & slammed crowd) who will gladly give Nissan their money for a car with no real engineering progress. In fact, not just that, but a car with the same utterly useless 7AT...and no 6MT option.

I really enjoy our '09 G (despite the crap 7AT) but as it stands now, we won't be replacing it with ANY Nissan products.
There is a hybrid option that produces more HP and is faster then the model compared in this article.

For the price, the engine is fantastic, the styling inside and out has been upgraded and is ahead of the curve in its class.

MB, Lexus, BMW, Audi have either have done a face lift or body style change in 2013-14 model year with no change to engine (328i/528i did get a i4 turbo change from an the 6, 335i/535i remains same)
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2013 | 09:25 PM
  #5  
g37guy01's Avatar
g37guy01
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 15
From: Where the Sopranos and Saguaros are
Originally Posted by oliveview
How sad. What's more sad, is there will be a sizable number of people here (the rims & slammed crowd) who will gladly give Nissan their money for a car with no real engineering progress. In fact, not just that, but a car with the same utterly useless 7AT...and no 6MT option.

I really enjoy our '09 G (despite the crap 7AT) but as it stands now, we won't be replacing it with ANY Nissan products.
There are potential buyers who might look at this differently.
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2013 | 10:49 PM
  #6  
MACS's Avatar
MACS
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 24
From: SoCal (Shawn)
2 and a half years later and I still love my car.

As a car nut, sure I look at other cars and drool... maybe even shop around for fun, but I'm still content with my G. For now...
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2013 | 11:48 PM
  #7  
g37guy01's Avatar
g37guy01
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 15
From: Where the Sopranos and Saguaros are
Originally Posted by CodeG
^^ .2 in 0 to 60 differences and the sky is falling? Did you find other cars that are faster, cheaper and more "engineering progress"? Let us know!
That 5 seconds from the 2009 is outside of the bell curve. I can bet the farm one couldnt get those numbers 3 times in a row without damaging the car beyond an expensive repair.

Even 5.2 is pushing it.
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2013 | 01:01 AM
  #8  
P Casey's Avatar
P Casey
Premier Member
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,960
Likes: 34
From: San Antonio, TX
It's a snail.
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2013 | 05:19 AM
  #9  
CodeG's Avatar
CodeG
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 248
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by g37guy01
That 5 seconds from the 2009 is outside of the bell curve. I can bet the farm one couldnt get those numbers 3 times in a row without damaging the car beyond an expensive repair.

Even 5.2 is pushing it.
I got that. MT number is always the fastest most of the time, and performance testing number away varies due to many factors. But just for comparison sake, the .2 sec difference was the source of people disappointment.
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2013 | 11:33 AM
  #10  
oliveview's Avatar
oliveview
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 120
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by g37guy01
That 5 seconds from the 2009 is outside of the bell curve. I can bet the farm one couldnt get those numbers 3 times in a row without damaging the car beyond an expensive repair.

Even 5.2 is pushing it.
When the car came to market, all the rags were getting extremely low (and a few sub-five) runs to 60. That was with the slightly faster 7AT, not the 6MT. But by your logic, you then have to discount the numbers for the new car. Either way, Nissan has made a new "performance" car that is slower than its predecessor.
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2013 | 11:36 AM
  #11  
g37guy01's Avatar
g37guy01
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 15
From: Where the Sopranos and Saguaros are
What did you expect it to be? The .2 seconds means diddly squat. I'd like you to take your G to the track and abuse it three times in a row to get the lowest 0 to 60 you can possibly can. The target market for the Q50 isn't the boy racer market and these people don't give a hoot about 0-60.

And window dressing is important....it's the most important thing about a vehicle; ask Hyundai/Kia. The way Infiniti dressed up the Q50 has me very interested in the car.
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2013 | 11:37 AM
  #12  
oliveview's Avatar
oliveview
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 120
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by CodeG
I got that. MT number is always the fastest most of the time, and performance testing number away varies due to many factors. But just for comparison sake, the .2 sec difference was the source of people disappointment.
Since the 3.7 car arrived, the 7AT has posted faster runs to sixty, and fractionally better fuel economy. In fact, most every one of the comparable German and Japanese sport sedans are faster, now, in automatic form, than manual.

Speaking for myself, and no one else, it doesn't matter whether the new car is .2 slower. It matters that it's not demonstrably faster.
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2013 | 11:40 AM
  #13  
g37guy01's Avatar
g37guy01
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 15
From: Where the Sopranos and Saguaros are
Originally Posted by oliveview
When the car came to market, all the rags were getting extremely low (and a few sub-five) runs to 60. That was with the slightly faster 7AT, not the 6MT. But by your logic, you then have to discount the numbers for the new car. Either way, Nissan has made a new "performance" car that is slower than its predecessor.
I haven't trusted 0-60 from mags for at least 10+ years, so by my logic I don't believe the 5.2 either. These mags all tweak the numbers with a proprietary formula and abuse the car to boot.

So to me the car is not slower. As I said I like the Q50...it's plenty fast for me.
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2013 | 11:42 AM
  #14  
oliveview's Avatar
oliveview
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 120
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by g37guy01
What did you expect it to be? The .2 seconds means diddly squat. I'd like you to take your G to the track and abuse it three times in a row to get the lowest 0 to 60 you can possibly can. The target market for the Q50 isn't the boy racer market and these people don't give a hoot about 0-60.

And window dressing is important....it's the most important thing about a vehicle; ask Hyundai/Kia. The way Infiniti dressed up the Q50 has me very interested in the car.
Again, that apologetic attitude is the one which allows a company like Infiniti to offer a car more tailored to the female buyer now.

That .2 seconds means "diddly squat"? Seriously? It sure means a great deal to those of us who price performance over looks. But like I said, a fair majority of the posters here are more into the rims, stance, and plasti-dip thing. And don't get me wrong, I like a nice-looking car. But not one which trades progress for window-dressing. There will always be a divide between those of us who prize substance over style, and the reverse.
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2013 | 11:50 AM
  #15  
Rochester's Avatar
Rochester
Administrator
15 Year Member
Loved
Community Favorite
Top Answer: 1
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 19,830
Likes: 5,137
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by oliveview
Speaking for myself, and no one else, it doesn't matter whether the new car is .2 slower. It matters that it's not demonstrably faster.
Spot on. Perhaps the Q50Sh will have better luck.

Originally Posted by oliveview
Again, that apologetic attitude is the one which allows a company like Infiniti to offer a car more tailored to the female buyer now.
More tailored to the non-enthusiast buyer, you mean. The female buyer may be more predisposed to prioritize comfort & gadgets over performance than a male driver, but that doesn't mean the Q50 is intended for a female audience.
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:06 PM.