Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Nissan Altima

1102103105107108161

Comments

  • Fuel economy is determined by several factors besides weight. The gear ratios can have an effect, and aerodynamic drag has a very large effect (especially at high speeds). Perhaps this is why the 2.5S is listed as having slightly better fuel economy than the Spec V. Also, a 5 speed Altima only weighs 250 lbs. more than the Spec-V. That's not too large a difference.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Aerodynamics are not a factor in the EPA cycles. The cars are tested on dynos, so shape and frontal area are not taken into account at all.

    In the real world, they matter plenty. The amount of drag increase with the square of speed.

    -juice
  • RonaHRonaH Posts: 12
    Has anyone seen any crash test results on the 2002 Altima? Checked one out today. I checked NHTSA and the insurance institute's web site and haven't seen anything. It seems odd that some of these 2002 models have been out for awhile and no safety testing has been published. Thanks for any feedback.
  • jrct9454jrct9454 Posts: 2,363
    ...it will be months before all of the completely new models get run through the various crash test cycles. They all have been tested to meet the minimum standards of course, as that is a pre-production requirement, but the testing you refer to occurs relatively infrequently and they tend to batch together cars / trucks of a similar configuration and class when doing the tests.
  • imprtlvrimprtlvr Posts: 38
    Naw..I'd still take the Passat. It's just a much classier vehicle. The Altimas tail lights will be out of style in a few years, things like that go in and out every 3-4 years or so. The worst thing is the interior, knock on the dash and hear hollow plastic ring.....just too cheap for me. Sure the 3.5 is fast, but for most people that doesn't make the whole car. If I wanted fast, I'd go buy a cheap American sportscar, like a Z28. The car mags choose the Passat over the Altima in head to head competition, even the Edmunds comparison picks Passat. Says the Altima's ride is too stiff, just like the Maxima SE as one reason.
    As to your comment about "doubling the budget" for modifications, it'll only take a $500 chip to give the Passat more torque, equal horsepower and make it as fast as a Altima 3.5. And chipping has proven totally safe and undetectable by the dealer in the Passat. Yes, the automatic with tiptronic is slower, but the 5 speed manual with the 4 cylinder turbo is an extremely fun drive.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    Actually, the testing for mainstream cars such as the Altima and Camry seems overdue IMO. For example, last year, the NHTSA had already crashed the Honda Civic by the time Consumer Report's April Auto issue was on Newsstands. And the last time a Camry was redesigned (for 1997), the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety had that as well as the then redesigned Pontiac Grand Prix crash tested by the end of January. In addition, the IIHS just crash tested models that came out around the same time as the Altima... the Mitsu Lancer, Sube Impreza, and the Kia Sedona, for example. I personally am tired of waiting. What I really dislike is that on the NHTSA website, one of the icons still reads "BUYING A SAFER CAR 2001". UM FREKIN GET A WEB MANAGER or something.. its one thing to not have new results... but to have a banner thats outdated by 4 months is absurd.
    ~alpha
  • vocusvocus Posts: 7,777
    That chip is NOT totally undetectable by the dealer. If it would cause a problem, all the dealer has to do is check your computer and your boost levels. If they are not the same as the factory (unless you buy an extra ECU and put that on there when going to the dealer for service), you're busted. I talked to a shop foreman about it, so I know it's true.
  • 1969iggy1969iggy Posts: 17
    I get 24.9 mpg according to the little trip computer... i haven't done the math myself based on the gas i buy and the milage i get, but it seems to at least be in the ballpark.

    I do about 50/50 city/highway driving, but i do have a lead foot... so milage would improve if i drove a little more responsibly. But if i did that i'd have bought the 2.5!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    imprtlvr: we're different, I guess. I'd sooner modify the suspension and brakes before even looking at the engine. A quick engine with a soft suspension is a recipe for trouble IMO.

    I prefer the opposite - that's why I own a Miata. Handling comes first, then brakes, then maybe chassis bracing. Engine mods come last, so that the car is never unbalanced.

    -juice
  • vocusvocus Posts: 7,777
    I got a rental 2001 Altima GXE yesterday when I took my car back to the shop. They replaced a part on the dash, and left dirty fingerprints in the car. I asked them to give me something to clean it up with, and they said they would do it (that's cool).

    Anyway, this Altima has 33,800 miles on it and it's beat down! The interior was dirty, but I knew that when I got the car. Actually, I was kinda shocked about the car. I like the handling, which is very good for a family car. Acceleration is pretty nice with automatic as well. And fuel economy has not been too bad either.

    It's just the inside feels cheap to me. Maybe I am just used to my VW, but the Altima is not too bad for a family car though. A pretty nice ride for the price.
  • lgoldinlgoldin Posts: 90
    You are right about rental car. I have my Altime for 4.5 years, and it runs very well. However when on a business trip I had 2001 Altima with 14K miles on it as a rental one, I couldn't beleive how rough it was. I guess people just abuse rentals way too much.
  • alow13alow13 Posts: 14
    hello all,

    I am considering the purchase of 2.5S with convenience package and ABS and I wanted to know if any of you have tried to upgrade the factory stereo. I know that the reviews of the Bose system have been quite good, but I am not a fan of sunroofs and I also have an MP3 player that I'd like to be able to use in my car. I'd be looking to install a stereo with and aux audio port so that I could hook up my MP3 player. Any suggestions or comments would be greatly appreciated.
  • alow13alow13 Posts: 14
    I got a chance to test drive both the S and the SE and there was definitely a noticeable difference in power between the two cars, but I wonder how much that would come in to play during normal driving. My big concern about the 4 banger is how it will handle hills with people in the car. I'm not a speed demon, but i'd like the power to be there when i need it. As always any insight that anybody might have would be much appreciated.

    A.L.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    The 4 banger has more hp and torque in its usable RPM range than many 6 cylinder vehicles of a few years ago. Heck, the previous generation Maxima (1995-1999) used a heavier 3.0V6 that only made 15 more hp than the current Altima 2.5. If you aren't a speed demon, the 8.1-8.5 second 0-60 times I would expect from the 4 are more than sufficient.
    ~alpha
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Posts: 650
    Altima gets the best $15K-20K Car. Not that AAA is the authority on cars, but at least it is another award for the Altima.


    http://carpoint.msn.com/Browse/win_2887.asp

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Actually, the SE Maxima from that time period made 190hp, but all other models made just 160hp, or less than the current 4 banger Altima.

    By the way, the Altima's VQ series engine made Ward's 10 Best. They even listed the Altima, specifically, not any other VQ equipped model.

    I hit the NY Auto Show, and boy, was the Nissan stand crowded or what? Murano was popular, only the Z had more people around it. Infiniti was right next door, and there were 3 G35 sedans, with lines to get in all three of them. They had one (locked) G35 coupe and it was swarming with people, that thing is gorgeous!

    The only eye sore was the M45, that thing looks decades old (it is, based on the Cedric/Gloria).

    -juice
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Posts: 650
    I am sure it was an oversight for Ward's to only list the Altima when then mentioned the VQ. As you know, it was the Maxima where the engine begun and continues its life.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Yep, but they specifically state 240hp. Odd, but I'm just the messenger. ;-)

    -juice
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    If your post 3137 was in regards to my post, 3135, in which I stated that the 1995-99 Maxima had 190hp, I'd say you were WRONG in correcting me... All Maxima models have had at least 190 hp since the redesigned '95 model. The generation before that (1989-94) were the ones that used a 160hp 3.0L V6 except for the SE in the later years, which had the 190hp version.
    ~alpha
  • prophet2prophet2 Posts: 372
    My clients had their sights on the 2.5S Altima, but the ride seemed a bit "firm" to them and they wanted to test-drive the Maxima again. Alas, no GXE in stock, only SE (spoiler) and GLE (leather, moonroof) and much higher prices.

    Ended up with a Pearl White Maxima SE. About $4K more, but the extra 80 hp seemed to "smooth" the sport suspension to their liking.

    It's a sight to see an upper-septugenarian racing around with a spoiler tacked on the trunk lid! Wonderful .....
  • i like the altima, but with a new design due in a few month, accord's price is going down fast, so i think in a few month i can even get an ex v6 with less than $22000. so now i am facing this difficult choice: get a all new design altima 2.5s, or spent a little more get an accord ex v6? the altima with my prefered option would cost between $21000 and $22000.
  • speedracer3speedracer3 Posts: 650
    Motor Trend pitted an Altima SE vs. Chevy Impala LS, Ford Taurus SEL, Honda Accord EX-6, Toyota Camry SE V-6. They basically said that Nissan built the Altima around the engine and critizied the road noise and the fit and finish of the interior. The folks at MT when as far as saying that the interior resebled something from a Korean automaker from a few years back (harsh). Verdict was as follows:

    1) Camry
    2) Accord
    3) Altima
    4) Impala
    5) Taurus
  • would have been more decisive if MT didn't get a Camry with NAV. It would have been cheaper and easier to use. Apparantly NAV scares MT. I've used the Toyota NAV for audio controls and it's pretty simple.
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Posts: 1,467
    What made the Camry beat out the Accord? Was the Camry an XLE or SE? The price alone would make me choose the Accord.
  • lsclsc Posts: 210
    I think the choice is simple. The Accord EXV6. No question about that one.

    The Altima is getting killed in the reviews because of the interior. Once again, that's my biggest gripe with my Altima. However, I couldn't see myself in a Camry or an Accord and the power of the Altima had me mesmorized...

    I feel my only other choice at the time was the Maxima SE but it was a lot more expensive last October, so I got the Altima.

    Nissan's marketing is working well though at least from the March sales report..it looks like people are buying the Maxima w/ incentives over the Altima V6 which means that they are both selling well. I'm sure most of the Altima sales are the 4 cylinder 2.5.

    This probably means they'll improve the interior on the Altima when they are good and ready (2004?).
  • alow13alow13 Posts: 14
    Hey thanks for the insight about the engine choices. I definitely see what you are saying and I think that the V6 is probably overkill, but it in a good way. I am going to take another extended test drive before I make my decision. Thanks again.

    I think that the Altima is a sweet ride, and although I will admit that the interior is a little low rent compared to some other cars I found it is very functional and comfortable and I thinks thats what really counts in this segment.

    A.L.
  • personally i don't really care a lot about altima's interior material quality, it can't be worse than 91 camry, which is what i am driving right now, can it? and i don't care much about resale value either, because i don't like to switch cars often.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Take it easy, alpha01, no need to shout (all caps). Now that mistake was bigger than mine.

    You guys are not arguing the merits of Motor Trend, are you? Caprice won Car of the Year. Enough said.

    -juice
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    I am taking it easy- but if you are going to correct me, you'd better be right. If I was wrong, I'd have no problem admitting it. I would agree in your assertion that MT is not one of the best mainstream auto enthusiast magazines- but nonetheless, its out there, and it was an interesting article to read.
    ~alpha
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    ...or you could be polite and point out that it was the 4DSC years that had the 160/190 hp variants, without shouting.

    You were right, but you were also rude. Can you admit that?

    -juice
This discussion has been closed.