http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/sedans/2009_infiniti_g37_vs_bmw_328i_audi_a4_2_0t_acura_tl_sh_awd_comparison_test
Predictable. I think the G37 is a little overpowered for this group, but definitely the performance bargain. Of course if they put the 335i vs. all it would be no contest, extra couple grand notwithstanding.
G37 should be a much faster car than 14.0 sec 1/4 mile - the V6 Camcords aren't that far behind...
Quote from: GoCougs on May 27, 2009, 12:01:11 AM
G37 should be a much faster car than 14.0 sec 1/4 mile - the V6 Camcords aren't that far behind...
Yes it seems like the 3.7 liter engine isn't that much faster than the 3.5. As in the previous matchup of this kind, the 3.5 ran an identical 102mph trap speed.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/sedans/2007_bmw_328i_vs_2008_cadillac_cts_di_2008_m_b_c300_sport_2008_infiniti_g35_sport_comparison_test+page-4.html
And the old car was only 80 pounds lighter, so that begs the question where all those extra horses went.
I think that Nissan traded horses into making the engine sound a bit more refined. When the G35 was tested C&D commented on wanted earplugs so they didn't have to listen to the engine. For the G37 they mentioned it was just a bit rough.
In fact in this first review of the G37 that is exactly what C&D found. That the G37 was not any faster than the G35, but it was more refined.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/car_shopping/entry_luxury/2009_infiniti_g37_sport_sedan_short_take_road_test
"Maybe it didn?t shine on the test track, but the G37 sedan does burn brightly in the refinement department, an area where the G35 fell decidedly short. Infiniti quelled the G?s buzzy engine and quivering shifter somewhat last year, but things are even better now, with the only hint of engine harshness at the lofty tiptop of the tach?redline is still 7600 rpm?rather than throughout. "
I think that despite Nissan's similar power claims for their new 3.7 liter engine, the unit used in the G37's and the 370z's are actually rather different. I don't think the 3.7 in the G37's actually make that much more power, but overall it's alot less strained than the 3.5. The 370Z seemed to go the other way. This new generation lost alot of refinement but has pulled trap speeds as high as 108mph, levels the old 350Z (of identical weight usually in tests) could not hope to reach.
It's an interesting review. I find it kinda interesting the 328i was basically a stripper model in this case, they could have added leather and it still would have been in the right price bracket. As tested, it had the lowest price. Rankings are about what I expected. TL = Fail.
I must be colored by my rattletrap... I've driven and ridden in quite a few early to late G35s and they seem pretty refined to me. Nowhere near as silky smooth as the original 3.0s or even the FWD 3.5s, but not to the point that it's unbearable. I think it fits in with the character of the car. Only real gripe I had with that car was the awful interior, but they even fixed that in the '05 facelift.
I didn't click the link but I suspect the BMW 328i won, right? :thumbsup:
Typical C&D. :facepalm:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on May 27, 2009, 08:04:52 AM
I didn't click the link but I suspect the BMW 328i won, right? :thumbsup:
Typical C&D. :facepalm:
Hey, they're helping your economy. :lol:
After reading that the X3 xDrive30i took second in a C&D comparo this month, I have lost faith in the mag. That SUV is downright terrible. The 3er at least has some merits, but it was equipped like a base Cobalt in a lux comparison.
C&D = :facepalm:
I know it's obvious that Car and Driver would choose the BMW, but I can't honestly say I'd choose differently among these four cars. The Audi is the best looking, but its size and AWD make it seem a bit stodgy, the TL is far too ugly for me to ever consider it, the G37 doesn't appeal to me at all, and that leaves the agile, but likely slightly boring 328i. At least it has good proportions.
And for once, the car was the cheapest in the group. No more "I know the BMW costs $20,000 more, but the shifter is just so fabulous!" bullshit. At 36K, it would make me rethink a 1 series.
Quote from: the Teuton on May 28, 2009, 10:09:30 AM
The 3er at least has some merits, but it was equipped like a base Cobalt in a lux comparison.
Does it really matter how well it was equipped? We all know the available options across the class are all relatively similar, and perhaps it still drives the best of the 4?
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on May 28, 2009, 10:43:46 AM
Does it really matter how well it was equipped? We all know the available options across the class are all relatively similar, and perhaps it still drives the best of the 4?
When price is a determining factor in the finishing order it definitely does matter.
You have to think they were pricing the cars that way intentionally so the BMW would win.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=18762.msg1069160#msg1069160 date=1243527368
I know it's obvious that Car and Driver would choose the BMW, but I can't honestly say I'd choose differently among these four cars. The Audi is the best looking, but its size and AWD make it seem a bit stodgy, the TL is far too ugly for me to ever consider it, the G37 doesn't appeal to me at all, and that leaves the agile, but likely slightly boring 328i. At least it has good proportions.
And for once, the car was the cheapest in the group. No more "I know the BMW costs $20,000 more, but the shifter is just so fabulous!" bullshit. At 36K, it would make me rethink a 1 series.
It was only cheapest because of the options on the other cars.
Comparably equipped, the 328i would be the most expensive of this group.
I'm not convinced that the BMW is so much better than the Infiniti. The G37 has a much nicer interior than the BMW even fully equipped.
I really don't get the "unrefined" comments about the G35. It really isn't that bad, and this is coming from someone who's used to an A4 and a 5er.
Quote from: CALL_911 on May 28, 2009, 12:27:59 PM
I really don't get the "unrefined" comments about the G35. It really isn't that bad, and this is coming from someone who's used to an A4 and a 5er.
The 2.0T is no more refined than the G35.
As someone who loves the A4, I find the I4 to be buzzy in those cars.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on May 28, 2009, 12:30:29 PM
The 2.0T is no more refined than the G35.
Yeah, but even compared to the 5er, it still isn't terrible. :huh:
Remember the VQ was a truck engine first. It's not gonna be buttery smooth...
Quote from: Minpin on May 28, 2009, 02:16:52 PM
Remember the VQ was a truck engine first. It's not gonna be buttery smooth...
It's a V6
Quote from: the Teuton on May 28, 2009, 02:08:29 PM
As someone who loves the A4, I find the I4 to be buzzy in those cars.
As someone who a very similar engine in a different car, I would tend to agree with you.
That being said the combination of flat powerband and good fuel economy (relative to a V6) make it more than worth it IMHO.
Quote from: SJ_GTI on May 28, 2009, 02:38:32 PM
As someone who a very similar engine in a different car, I would tend to agree with you.
That being said the combination of flat powerband and good fuel economy (relative to a V6) make it more than worth it IMHO.
+1
Plus, when you get the revs up, it sounds great.
Quote from: Minpin on May 28, 2009, 02:16:52 PM
Remember the VQ was a truck engine first. It's not gonna be buttery smooth...
The VQ was first featured in the 1995 Nissan Maxima/Infiniti I30. It wasn't until 2001 that it (in 3.5 form) was put in the Pathfinder and it wasn't until 2005 that a true truck variant of it was designed (the 4.0).
BTW, out of these I'd probably go for the A4. But, given the option, I think the Legacy Spec.B (the current one, not the new one...) would be my pick in this class.
Quote from: Minpin on May 28, 2009, 02:16:52 PM
Remember the VQ was a truck engine first. It's not gonna be buttery smooth...
???
Quote from: Minpin on May 28, 2009, 02:16:52 PM
Remember the VQ was a truck engine first. It's not gonna be buttery smooth...
The VQ IIRC was in the Maxima/I30/Cefiro before it was in any trunk.
Has anyone here ever seen a $47,000 328? I have. It's scary.
Quote from: 2o6 on May 28, 2009, 04:27:32 PM
The VQ IIRC was in the Maxima/I30/Cefiro before it was in any trunk.
Trunk? Since when has Nissan made a rear engined car?
Quote from: the Teuton on May 28, 2009, 04:31:54 PM
Has anyone here ever seen a $47,000 328? I have. It's scary.
Yes.
I've also seen a $35,000 Legacy.
Quote from: CALL_911 on May 27, 2009, 11:50:48 AM
Hey, they're helping your economy. :lol:
I ain't complaining. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Minpin on May 28, 2009, 02:16:52 PM
Remember the VQ was a truck engine first. It's not gonna be buttery smooth...
No. Nissan's trucks and SUVs were running the older VG while the VQ was going in their cars in the 90s. The VQ was several years old before they finally started to transition their trucks from the VG to the VQ.
Quote from: TBR on May 28, 2009, 04:34:55 PM
Trunk? Since when has Nissan made a rear engined car?
(http://lh3.ggpht.com/_NCTKUEHu-jQ/R2fsTmsxU2I/AAAAAAAAHuw/kTGyd5ZxqJ8/Nissan+MID4+Concept.jpg)
(http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/4191/mid45qq5.jpg)
Quote from: 2o6 on May 28, 2009, 06:05:54 PM
(http://lh3.ggpht.com/_NCTKUEHu-jQ/R2fsTmsxU2I/AAAAAAAAHuw/kTGyd5ZxqJ8/Nissan+MID4+Concept.jpg)
(http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/4191/mid45qq5.jpg)
That would be mid-engined.
It's called the "MID 4," doofus. ;)
the comparo left me a bit wondering why they chose an slushbox A4 with $14k in options to compete against a stripper 328i... i guess sometimes its just what their given though
Quote from: r0tor on May 28, 2009, 06:09:41 PM
the comparo left me a bit wondering why they chose an slushbox A4 with $14k in options to compete against a stripper 328i... i guess sometimes its just what their given though
Apparently it was the only A4 available in Audi's press fleet and that was what Audi sent them.