Howdy, Stranger!

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





Acura TL vs Infiniti G35

1151618202124

Comments

  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    I remember yeeeeeeaaaaaars ago one magazine tested the auto AND stick versions of supra TT, rx7 TT, corvette, hmmm maybe 300Z TT? not sure on that. It was interesting to see the differences...they did acceleration and lap times. Corvette (If I recall correctly) was faster 0-60 in auto (LOTS of torque), the rest I think were all faster in stick. Rx7, with it's lack or torque, was a horrendous dog in auto...ROCKED in 5 sp though.
  • darrenwdarrenw Posts: 23
    I'm not sure about lack of torque, my G35 has more torque than any TL.

    Not so optimistic about racing against a manual fwd, I have read that the G lacks about 0.5 to 0.7 secs compared to its manual(old G thou). But its good to know that the 07G manual is 0.3-0.5 secs faster than the old one.
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    I believe they are performance sedans...no? Acceleration is a part of performance...no? Prob the most enjoyed, at least on the street, part of any car's performance. What car exactly vibrates over 100? I've had this thing to 137 and it's butter smooth. And posts are like TV...no one is forcing you to read them.
  • scottm123scottm123 Posts: 1,501
    I don't understand the vibration comment either.
    Not only does my G not vibrate (at any speed), but I haven't heard of any others complaining either. :confuse:

    Oh... and let's not speak of the Neon in this forum again, huh?
    I'm trying to hold my breakfast down, if you don't mind.
  • hausshauss Posts: 169
    Yes, I'd say these are performance sedans. Or maybe a better way to state it is that the buyers of cars in this segment for the most part expect some level of performance along with the creature comforts. I agree with you too that for the most part acceleration is the one performance aspect that most drivers enjoy. However, to leadfoot's point, there are many cars out there these days that are quicker than ELLPS. Heck, I think the whole brake torquing thing or dropping the clutch at mid-range RPMs is very unrealistic for the driving population. scottm123 is right that the auto publications have grossly misjudged their performance testing. I think better ways to emulate how a person is going to drive their car is mimicking passing times at highway speeds (but drop this top gear crap because who does that?). One place that seems to me to have the most sound testing procedures is Consumer Reports. I know you can't always follow their recommendations but if you ever get a subscription and read up on their testing procedures they far outdue the other auto publications in terms of keeping things honest.
  • danny1878danny1878 Posts: 339
    R&T : A high amount of vibration resonates through the 6-speed manual gearbox, and the take-up point of the clutch is like an on/off switch, making it nearly impossible to leave the line smoothly

    May be this remark?
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    I've always liked consumer reports...I like that they rate cars two ways...as in recommended for performance, then recommended in the big picture (Reliabilty considered). I think leadfoot makes no sense as the 0-60 talks were only in the recent day. My original TL Vs G post had nothing to do with 0-60, 1/4 mile, top speed, etc...someone countered with track times...and here we are. I'm a motorcycle person also..and have always thought the top-gear tests were ridiculous...like you said..who does that? Especially in a motorcycle geared for 180-190....do you really expect it to move fast from 60-80? That being said...I wouldn't buy a slow car...period...not in this price range. As for the vibrations, it was on the 6spd..and it didn't seem to have anything to do with speed. A little weird...one magazine said BMW could learn form the G's 6 spd....few others tore it apart. Since mine is auto...I really don't care!!
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    P.S. If I wanted a well-built, nicely done sedan that can't get out of it's own way....I'd get a GS300. Thankfully (For them), lexus saw fit to put the motor of the avalon in it and give it some balls.
  • scottm123scottm123 Posts: 1,501
    The 6MT vibration was just that, a vibration in the shift and it could also be felt in the clutch pedal.
    It has nothing to do with the car itself vibrating, at 120 or any other speed.
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    I wonder if infinti might have some QC issues (kinda like my memory seats not holding and my oil-line trans modification on my early release 04TL). At any rate...here is car and driver:

    We took our test car to the track, where it hunkered down and dashed to 60 mph in 5.2 seconds, covering the quarter-mile in 13.9 seconds at 103. Hmm, that is swell, and considerably quicker than the last G35 we tested (0 to 60 in 5.9 seconds and the quarter in 14.6 at 98 mph) as well as just a blink behind the IS350. More impressive still, our G35 tester went to the track with fewer than 250 miles on the odo. That’s like putting an Olympic sprinter in the starting blocks in his street clothes. What’ll it do with a proper break-in? We look forward to finding out.

    The power feeds through a six-speed manual gearbox that’s the personification of precise engagement — it makes BMW’s 3-series manual transmissions seem rubbery — to a limited-slip rear end and thence to the pavement via a set of 245/45-18 Bridgestone Potenza RE050A tires.
  • hausshauss Posts: 169
    LOL! It's funny when you think about it really. A 3600 lb car with leather seats, blue tooth phone, a hard drive to store music, a moonroof, dual climate control, power seats, etc. doing 5.2 seconds 0-60 and 13.9 seconds in the 1/4 miles is ridiculous. That's faster than 1970 Chevrolet Chevelle SS454 that barely has power steering and doesn't even have a cup holder!

    http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/chevrolet-chevelle/chevrolet-chevelle-hi- story.shtml

    Plus, the G (or any other ELLPS) will outcorner the crap out of it.

    Oh, and John, you'll be happy to note the Lexus GS does have some cohones now that they dropped the IS350 engine in it. A month ago I leased an '07 GS350 for my fiance and we just passed the break in period. I'm anxious to give her a workout but even without that I've seen that thing has some giddy up.
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    Wow...those #'s are nuts....427 kicked [non-permissible content removed]....LS6 I would guess needed some slicks Radials = molten rubber lol
    Oh yeh new GS350 kinda makes the 430 less appealing. That friggin toyota 3.5 is a beast...did you see the RAV4 running like 6.6 or something 0-60? Imagine getting beaten by a rav for in your big-block chevelle (396, anyway).
    I was kinda partial to the 455SD trans am myself...I like a car that can at least TRY to turn lol
  • hausshauss Posts: 169
    Are you talking about that 1970 Trans Am? That was a slick looking hot rod there. Pre-bird on the hood. LOL! I actually liked that and the 1970 Camaro better than the golden '67 - '69. But it's just crazy to think how things have changed from the dog days of 1970s and 1980s cars. Nothing much was very exciting back then (at least to me) and now cars outperform those old American Muscle cars routinely. I wonder what the skip pad and slalom numbers would be on that Chevelle? Probably like .61g adn 48 mph.
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    I think it was like 73 or 74..small firechicken...big blocked that turned like 6000 + RPMs (In SD trim). Love the camaros also. It is kind of amazing when you look back. There are people running 12s or so in daily driver civics these days...what the heck is that about? lol
  • hausshauss Posts: 169
    Right...with a four banger getting 30 mpg to boot! What do you think that 1970 Chevell SS454 got for gas mileage? Maybe 9 mpg?
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    Right right....9 mpg down a really long hill. I think once the secondaries (Good old carbs) opened up those things were just dumping fuel ! hmmm I think I should get one for weekends lol
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    reminiscing...laughing...not a care in the world...ahh, to be young again...Diet Pepsi, anyone? :P :P
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    Diet pepsi don't go well with my heart/kidney/blood pressure meds!!!
  • ??? I currently own a 2007 6 Speed TL-S. Other than the need to finess a 1st gear launch (I used to Open Road Race a 630 Horse Mustang, RWD!!), this car is FAST! We've clocked a best of 5.4 sec. 0-60 with the factory JUNK tires. Not a FWD fan but I have ran down so far two new G-35's as we passed 90-100 MPH. The car handles with "Press you up against the door" handling. I think most of the new sport sedans out right now are great vehicles... I went for the TL's reliability, roominess, and styling.
  • Does anyone else here think the G35 is a bit narrow. If I recall correctly, it's 2.5 inches narrower than the TL. It is also slightly more narrow than the BMW 3 coupe. Why did Nissan make this infiniti this way?
  • kring5kring5 Posts: 144
    Which measurement are you using? mirror to mirror? wheels, body?
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    Def tighter inside than my old TL. Looks even thinner from the rear view (Tail tapers). Total interior volume is higher per kbb (A lot more front headroom). Trunk is actually bigger, but TL has better opening so it seems bigger when you try to load. Not sure why they are so thin..but I sat in (Didn't bother driving based on interior and price) a 335 and it def seemed thinner. Oddly enough, the 335 coupe seemed to have more front seat room than the sedan.
  • johninnjjohninnj Posts: 243
    Oddly enough (Maybe because of fwd), my knee used to rub on the TL's console right on the aluminum trim piece. After a few years of this, it developed a light noise if you pushed there even lightly. G I have more leg & knee room in. I'm 6'2, 220. My [non-permissible content removed] is kinda wide for the sport seat though!!!!
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    I think most coupes tend to have more front seat room than their sedan counterpart.
  • I was using the info provided by the manufacturer's technical specs. I think they're measuring body, not mirror to mirror. But I'm not sure. Anyway, here's the comps: (these #'s can be found in yahoo cars or kbb.com)

    Make ........ Width

    Infin G35= 69.8 inches
    BMW 335= 70.2
    Lexus IS= 70.9
    Acura TL= 72.2

    Are there any advantages to being that slim other than parking? I personally prefer lower & wider profile cars for more stability when cornering hard.
  • factfinderfactfinder Posts: 103
    Wanna know what the new TL will look like?

    Get a load of the new accord:
    http://www.vtec.net/news/news-image?image=679080/08accord_sedanbp-04.jpg

    :sick:
  • factfinderfactfinder Posts: 103
    If Acura built a 310 HP RWD TL that looked like this, I'd buy it!

    http://www.carview.co.jp/tms/2005/just/honda_sport_4_c/images/01_l.jpg
  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    right......because the current TL and Accord look sooooo much alike.....
  • dleshinedleshine Posts: 2
    I have both of these cars. First, the TL is far roomier, and far better interior quality. More seat room, front and back. The infiniti is higher, and narrower. I'm always bumping my arm into the armest trying to get to the window controls. Having the seat controls as part of the seat, is a great place to spill coffee. The infinit inerior it definitely cheaper. Granted I love the Infiniti for speed, and AWD. However, in 2009, the AcuraTL will have AWD. I've had many folks in the AcuraTL that say they love the ride. It's a tough choic.
  • vegasflyervegasflyer Posts: 4
    LOL, that is so classic. BMW's windshield wipers going off in sunny day whenever it wants to... So he has to turn on the spray to mask he's not crazy...

    Or how about back mirror on convertible gets stuck, and you have to bang it to work? It happened to co-worker's sister's BMW.
This discussion has been closed.