Nissan Altima

speedracer3

The more ponies the better!. Nothing like the feeling of smashing the gas and feeling your ears pinned to the head rest.

alewishus

Still waiting for my car and a few responses...

otoluva

Where did I get the info? 2 sources,1 is a Nissan dealer(owner)here in the northeast,he told me that Nissan is redesigning the Maxima for 2004 and it will be totally new,say good bye to FWD,and welcome a gigantic hp,plus edge cutting style,needless to say there will be no more Maximas for $25-30k.My other source is a long time Nissan salesman from a different dealership,who pretty much told me the same,How credible are both men? It remains to be seen.

dat2

I have only test driven one and found the shifter to work well. I think the complaints must be coming from its clunk when you shift. This is noticiable especially when sitting in the car with the motor off, and shifting. It really clunks and has a gritty feeling. Howver when driving it seemed to work well!! Kinda weird, and un-nissanlike. I am more used to nissan shifters that are very slick with positive engagement but somewhat long throws. These new boxes seem the complete opposite of that!?!?

storyteller

otoluva: V8? Hmm. I wonder. I'm not sure there is much demand for more cylinders, and Nissan enjoys a reputation for making the best 6 cylinders in the industry.

I do expect the new Max to go significantly upscale. It has to distinguish itself from the new Altima. The new Max has to get independent suspension all around. But how fancy and how expensive can they make it? The Infiniti G35 is coming in at a bit over 30K. That would seem to limit what they can charge for the new Max unless Nissan is willing to risk confusing consumers about which is the standard line and which is the luxury line of cars.

sebring95

I'll take a car with a smooth useable torque curve over one with big spikes in HP anyday. German cars always feel quicker than their HP numbers would have you believe.

The Nissan motors are terrific, which is why I'm looking to put a Altima 2.5S in the company fleet. I've normally hated 4cyls, but the 2.5L is nice. Nissan keeps the torque up pretty good, much better than what alot of other manufacturers are doing. Good example I've personally seen is the Jeep Cherokee and the Jeep Liberty. The old 4.0L (that was ancient by todays standards) pumped out 190hp @ 4600 rpm and 225lb-ft @ 3000rpm. The new 3.7L Liberty has 210hp @ 5200rpm and 235lb-ft @ 4000 rpm. So basically you've got 1000 rpm before you're getting near the power band of the old one. Partly explains why the liberty is over 2 seconds slower to 60mph and can't tow nearly as well. But you get 1 extra mpg and DC can claim it has "more power". Whatever.

At least Nissan is putting some displacement in their engines instead of making them smaller with more gizmos to boost HP in the 7000rpm range. 2.5L 4cyl and 3.5L V6 is pretty big by todays standards. And they are still getting good mpg.

krystalg

The 2003 Nissan Max will be built on the same plateform as the Infinity Q45. It will be rear wheel drive and a V-8. It will share alot of the Q45 components, and will be the same size as the current Q45. All of this is being done to upscale the current Max from the new Altima.

ateixeira

James: I agree. Nissan used to make some of the best shifters, but the new Altima's did feel clunky.

I say make the Max a budget-priced G35. That's a big enough, and powerful enough, platform. The Q is a big boat in comparison. The smaller G will be far more nimble and sporty. I'd take the G over the Q, or even the Max is that's what it's based on.

RWD is enough to distinguish the Maxima from the Altima. Of course everyone is going upscale, look at VW, Toyota.

The Liberty is also heavier than the Cherokee, isn't it?

-juice

ruski

hey I am all for torque

I used to have a Grand Prix GTP with 280 lbs*ft of torque and a Chrysler 300M with 255 lbs*ft of torque and was very happy with them. I never thought that it was too much torque.

ateixeira

Good point about HP selling, torque moving, BTW.

-juice

sebring95

yeah it's a bit heavier, although not really bigger. Still you'd think if they were going to replace the Cherokee they'd give us something that could compete in the performance aspect. The Cherokee did 0-60 in the 8sec range which was class-leading even on a 13 year-old design. The Liberty 0-60 is minivan territory. Nevermind the torque at 3000rpm is great for towing. You'll drive yourself nuts towing something and spinning the motor at 4000rpm.

All this RWD stuff really alienates us up in the snow belt from buying cars. My wife hates SUV's and several of the cars she liked were RWD this time around. Trac-control or not, RWD won't drive the roads we run during the winter without problems. Buddies LS8 sits in the garage because it no-go in the snow.

afty

The 2003 Nissan Max will be built on the same plateform as the Infinity Q45.

That is completely wrong. The new Maxima will be based on the Altima platform and built in Smyrna. No word on whether it will be RWD, but my opinion is that it will be FWD with an AWD option. If it were going to be RWD, it would probably be built on the FM platform (G35, 350Z, etc.) and not on the Altima platform.

From a Nissan press release:

"The new Maxima will share a vehicle platform with the Nissan Altima."

http://www.nissannews.com/corporate/news/2001/reljanel20010927110025.shtml

ateixeira

Cherokee did outsell the CR-V. But the Escape arrived to crash the party, and now the new CR-V. The Liberty is fighting it out with those two now, but the competition has improved a lot.

My Miata stays parked when it snows, too. I use my trusty Subaru for that.

Come to think of it, I'd almost prefer to have the Maxima basically be an AWD Altima with more features. Afty's comments give me good hopes.

-juice

lsc

If the prices are similar than it of course it can legitimately be called an alternative.

I just have a problem with getting a BMW with vinyl interior and less than "BMW like" power.

No doubt that a 325i w/ a manual will be adequate and the engine is smooth as silk but I won't buy a BMW unless I can at least afford 530i. I'm too big for a 330i. I don't like the idea of getting a BMW and getting smoked by fellow Altima owners.

ateixeira

For some, yes, but not for me. Too small to be used as a family sedan (sports or not). I liked the 5-series, though even that is snug.

-juice

speedracer3

It's a compact for goodness sake!.

ateixeira

That's why I don't consider it an alternative, not for my needs.

-juice

lspangler1

Keep an eye on the '03. Some improvements coming supposedly.

vocus

I just might think about getting one if the interior wasn't so cheap looking.

obiwankenobi1

I just can't WAIT until April 1st! I'll be waiting by my front door!

;-)

timfarago

I've had my 2002 Altima 3.5SE auto (options: sunroof, spoiler, Bose system) since September, and I've encountered most things you can do in a car:
-750 mi trip to Atlanta through a snowstorm in the mountains of Tenn. with a total of 4, 200lb guys in the car.
-Almost an entire Mich. winter with snow, sleet, ice storms.
-30 miles to/from work daily, regular weekend trips of 100 miles or more.
I'm an occasional hard driver of cars; hard acceleration, braking, cornering.

All of that being said, I've found the following:
Good things - great acceleration at all speeds, gas mileage (avg 26 mpg per computer), steering & handling in both city/highway/snow/rain driving, very sporty look (several times I've been told it looks like a Lexus), 6 disc in dash system is very handy, large amount of trunk space, very roomy interior, interesting - telescoping center console puts cell phone right at my ear when elbow is on it (something no one has talked about even though the push against cell use and driving).

Bad things - wind noise with sunroof as well as interior closure creeps open frequently, Bose front speakers rattle playing high bass music, fit and finish issue on steering column covering, interior has the "cheap" feel everyone has complained about - very simple, plasticy.

Thus far I've been very pleased. I was concerned with buying a first year model redesign, but so far I haven't had problems (though the problems usually surface after 50,000 miles). I would recommend this vehicle to anyone, except don't go to the dealer that I went to. Since I bought it so close to the release of the vehicle, this vehicle was hard to come by on lots so they were treated like pieces of gold. It was very hard to negotiate with that being said, but that aspect will go away as the car goes further into its production cycle.

sailorbeavis

My '86 Topaz finally gave up the ghost and I'm looking for a fairly reliable car that will carry me through the next few years. I have been given a really good deal on an '94 Altima 4-cylinder with a 5-speed transmission. It's black and it is absolutely loaded : Power brakes/locks/windows/mirrors, CD, A/C, tilt steering, cruise, sunroof... but having driven a Ford for the past few years, I'm not familiar with the Altima at all. The only downside is that it has 120,000 miles on it, but it's in very good condition and the Carfax report comes back clean. Maintenance was done regularly by the dealer, one owner, no hard driving.

Are there any issues with Nissans over 100k miles, or could I drive this thing for another 100,000 without any problems? $2000 is a hard deal to pass up on a nice car like this, but something tells me that it's "too good to be true." Any advice?

casmiras01

I am trying to choose between these two cars? What would you pick, I recently saw a 95 altima for 4 grand at a dealer with almost 100 thousand miles. I really like the g20s but would like the larger altima? Is the altima a better choice or should i pay a grand more and get a g20?

iowabigguy

We have a 1995 Altima SE 5 speed that we bought new. It currently has only 51,000 miles of use. I know of another another person whose Altima of the same year has over 130,000. I believe that the engines are capable of easily going over 200,000 mile with proper care and feeding. I would be more concerned with the peripheral equipment. The only major complaints I have with my Altima are with the sunroof and squeaks/rattles. The sunroof causes wind noise even when closed and rattles when going over bumps. The whole car has loosened up over time so there are various squeaks and rattles emanating from the dashboard, seats and under the car. That said I would not be afraid of throwing a suitcase in the trunk and driving cross country. The car inspires confidence and after driving the 2002 Altima I can see no compelling reason to trade in my 95 for a few more years. The car is still A BLAST TO DRIVE, and looks almost as good as it did new. A well cared for older Altima with high miles might make a good purchase if the price was fair but I'd keep in mind that you will potentially be making some fairly expensive repairs in the near future. If you can do your own work then the cost would be significantly less than if you had to take the Altima back to Nissan. Rick

obiwankenobi1

My fiancee has a 93 Altima GLE with 105,000 miles on it, and that thing is a rock. She doesn't even take care of it that well and the thing just keeps going and going.

Kind of like that dang pink bunny!

elmoblatch1

I am looking at the 2002 Altima S, the Camry LE & the Accord LX.

I checked out the Camry today....the interior seemed nicer than the Altima...the cars are close in price for the options that I want ( ABS, Automatic transmission ). Just got the Consumer Reports 2002 Buying Guide in the mail...not much on the Altima for 2002 due to the makeover.

Just wondering how the Altima will stack up against the Camry in 5 years as far as trade-in value/blue book value goes.....

Also the Altima horsepower is higher in the 2.5 liter than the 2.4 liter Camry, but Camry mpg is 3 higher on the highway.

Would like to hear from other 2002 Altima S owners if they post here....thanks in adavnce.

ateixeira

Keep in mind EPA highway tests do not ever exceed 60mph. I bet real world figures are within 1 mpg.

-juice

speedracer3

Having driven Camcords (granted I haven't driven the new Camry) and the Altima I would run with the Altima in terms of driving dynamics. I think the Altima had the better styling of these three cars (can't get over the Camry's odd styling). In terms of resale value the Camry and Accord have the edge over the Altima. In the "interior" department I think the Camry and Accord win. You really can't go wrong with any of these cars, it really comes down to preferences. If you haven't already, drive them all and get the car that gets your juices flowing. Here's how they would rank in my book.

1) Altima
2) Accord
3) Camry

Good luck,

Speed

elmoblatch1

alpha01

how can you rank the Camry if you havent driven the redesigned model?
elmoblatch- for a comparo on the cars you are looking at, check the January 02 issue of Consumer Reports, not the buying guide.
their rank went as follows:
Passat GLS
Camry LE 4
Accord EX 4
Altima 2.5S
(it should be noted they they all fininshed at the top or near the top of their category).
~alpha

speedracer3

I rank the Camry so low because I can't stand the styling. I know how Camrys drive, I've owned them before and although they are a good appliance, they are mind numbing to drive (maybe the new SE is a little better in the "fun" dept).

elmoblatch1

I was wondering if CR had compared those cars.....I just signed up for CR...will have to get a copy of the Jan 02 issue.

Just looked at a 2002 Accord LX. The one in the showroom had a power seat & a dead battery...the salesman I told about this did not make any effort to get the problem fixed or offer to get the keys for another car....must be he met his quota for the month.

elmoblatch1

ateixeira

If you just signed up, I doubt you'll get that issue. I've already received the next issue.

-juice

elmoblatch1

I am thinking about purchasing one in May when my existing lease runs out. Since the car has been re-designed, there does not appear to be many reviews out there....I would like to hear from owners of this car...thanks in advance.

vocus

I read somewhere (don't remember, sorry) that they were going to change the interior of the Altima a little bit for 2003. There are many complaints about it looking and feeling cheap, and those would be addressed. Any truth in this?

ateixeira

Consumer Reports tested both Altima engines, and both were coupled to automatics. There you go.

-juice

vocus

Most Altimas (that I have seen on lots and on Carmax.com anyway) are equipped with automatic. And most people that purchase in that class also buy automatic, so i would assume that's why CR tested both cars in automatic form.

ateixeira

I was just pointing out reviews of automatics, since the question was asked. I wasn't trying to make a point about tranny choice.

-juice

sobers

If you like & prefer to get an Accord make sure you get an SE (special Edition) & not Lx. For additional $1000 SE offeres Sunroof, CD/Cassete, Alloys, Security, Keyless, Fake Wood, Std Mats etc

Also SE keep their values better than the Lx versions. Overall Accord retains a better value than the Camry(10-12% rental sales)

b_thedude

#2838
Kim I have the same problem on a 2 month old Altima, the paint is chipping all over the car and Nissan representive came and inspected the car twice with no final answer. The response to the paint problem has been terrible, they are dragging there feet on a solution. I am sure other owners are having the same problem. Please email me back your response on how Nissan is handling your problem. Thank you in Advance

kcb2

b the dude, I have not bought the Altima yet. I posed the question on paint issues because I read about paint problems with the late model Maximas and want to know if it is a problem with the new Altima. I believe there is a web site dealing with this issue. www.nissanpaint.org or www.nissanpaint.com or maybe .net. I don't remember off hand. I have not seen any other post besides yours on the paint. Where was your car manufactured and build date?

gasman1

I received my March '02 copy of Money mag. This issue contains their 2002 Car Guide. My concern is with their "Resale Value After 5 Years" of 33% and the "Cost to Insure" rating of HIGH. They credit the following sources for their info: AutoFasTracks.com, Autofusion, Edmunds.com, and Insurance Services Office, and manufacturers.

The 33% isn't as good as I want or think this car deserves, but it isn't that bad when compared to other cars in the article. We can usually beat this average by taking care of our vehicles. However, I don't see why the Altima is 3-10% less than the Accord, Camry, and Passat. Could this rating be based on the Altima's past record? (not that the past-generation Altima has a reason for a low rating) The car has been totally redesigned. It appears to continue to be in short supply (only a few on the lots that I've seen).

The HIGH insurance rating really puzzles me. WHY??? I understand that insurance ratings are "normally" based on a driver's age and driving record as well as location (on- or off- street parking, rural or city), safety ratings, and some other insurance industry factor. I tried to access the Insurance Services Office web-site with no luck. Does anyone have a good idea or any hard facts as to why we should pay more to insure our vehicles?

I really like my '02 Altima S with >10K miles on it already. Many others must have the same thoughts since this car has won so many awards (N. American Car of the Year, Canadian Auto Journalist, PBS-Motorweek Driver's Choice and Overall Choice, etc...). It's a great value, but ratings and costs such as these in Money mags article do tend to put a dent its overall value.

Bottom line is that the article has me concerned, but I'd still purchase another 2002 Altima. It's a really nice car that provides satisfaction.

vocus

are also based on the cost of repair. The car is brand new, and alas parts are going to be expensive if it's in an accident. Example, the 3.5SE model has the option on HID lights and they are very expensive to repair if broken.

ateixeira

More horsepower means higher insurance, too. Both of the Altima's engines lead the class in that dept.

They are likely basing depreciation on the 1997 models being re-sold now. I bet the 2002 models hold their value better.

-juice

sunilb

i think this also has to do with Nissan's practice of offering serious discounts [ie, cash-back] on their cars at model year-end. i believe Honda doesn't do this, except through low financing rates; not sure about Toyota.
But, Nissan is on the rebound... it'll just take some time for the secondary market to adjust.

mdmetz

One thing that's never really quantified is the ratio of resale value to actual street price. If a hypothetical Altima is consistently discounted by $2,500 and an Accord with a similar MSRP on the lot over at Hypothetical Honda is only discounted by $500 (and although Honda pricing is closer to actual street price than the inflated and then discounted prices of Camrys and (past) Altimas, local ads for Accords show sizeable discounts, even with BS doc fees thrown in), then even if the Altima depreciated less from its transaction price than the Accord, the reported numbers would still reflect noticeably higher depreciation. Street prices aren't something that dealers want to make public, and even records for sales tax purposes probably don't reflect the price difference between base and heavily-optioned versions of the same mode, so true depreciation percentages are still fuzzy.

ateixeira

Toyota offers rebates, but much smaller than Nissan's, historically.

I agree about street prices. Used 2000 Odysseys still sell near 100% of their original sticker. But many of those owners paid a markup and wait for months to get it. So let's say they paid a $3k markup on a $24k van. The books will say 100% resale, but actual resale was 89% (still pretty good).

Conversely, at one point Mazda Millenias carried a rebate of a whopping $8 grand! So if you calculate resale based on MSRP, it's terrible. Real world it wasn't bad. Let's say it stickered for $33 grand, but you paid $23 grand (invoice minus rebates). Two years later it sells for $20k. Sounds awful at 61% resale value, but it's actually 87%.

I bet Altimas will hold their value better. People will snap up the 240hp V6 models as they become cheaper, demand will be strong is my guess.

-juice

dsgnr

I purchased my new 2002 Altima 2.5 S back in January. The insurance cost is only about $150 more per year than the 1991 Honda Accord EX that I traded in.

ateixeira

What did that Honda have? 130hp IIRC? That seems about right given the new S is a lot more powerful.

-juice