Yeah I see what you are saying. I have seen some wide ranging results for some cars. And I don't always trust mag numbers either. However when different mags are getting almost the same results in various test vehicles and when placed up against a competitor with the relative results being consistent with the difference in power/weight ratios then you have to come to the conclusion that they are all at the very least pretty close to getting it right. Of coarse the owner of a vehicle may learn the vehicles traits much better and be able to beat the mag times. But it looks to me like those numbers are pretty accurate. We're talking about 2 tenths of a second difference between the testers thus far. The car is quick for sure but I don't think that these results are that far off from what this car will really do out the box.
You may however see a huge difference in the winter time since this engine likes to suck air- as is the case in the current generation.

 

I agree with you .. comparision reviews are always accurate coz they test the cars in the same weather condition .. but there is something no one noticed till now in edmunds review when they tested the g37 the temp was 77 F and they got 13.9 in 1/4 mile here is the link http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do.../pageId=125509

in comparsion with another review from edmunds 335i vs IS350 , the 335i got 13.4 in 1/4 mile and the is350 got 13.8 in 1/4 mile the temp was 54.5 Fand here is the link http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do.../pageId=124138
which is alot lower temp and certainly will give the is and the 3-series an advantage in performance .. If the g37 was tested in the same weather condition we may have seen a 13.7 in the 1/4 mile , So i think the gap between the 335i performance and g37 is 0.3 which i expected.. we all knew that the lack of tourqe will make the g37 slower

 

I think that since the best Sedan results seen were 5.2 in the 0-60 and a 13.8 quarter mile, everyone was just shocked to see that the Coupe didn't get lower numbers than it did with the extra 30 hp. http://autos.yahoo.com/infiniti_g35_sedan_sport_6mt-performance/
I think that much of the weight must be from them making the car 36% more rigid that is hard to do without adding some weight.


Another thing to keep in mind is that the 335 has been tested as low as 4.9 0-60 and 13.6 in the quarter
http://autos.yahoo.com/bmw_3_series_...i-performance/
So perhaps under those same conditions the G37 would be at 5.0 or 5.1 (the same difference relative to the competetor) And perhaps the G has the potential to hit 13.7 in the quarter under optimum conditions. But like you said oftentimes mag numbers are all over the place.

 

Is this one of your problems? How old are you?

 

Yea, we nd to see a true side by side test.

 

Correct me if im wrong, but dont turbos suffer from Heat Soak? So wouldnt the bmw's performance at 77 degrees decrease more than a linear factor?

 

A stillen type of supercharger seems like a perfect answer (more so than a vortech) for the low end torque deficiency.

 

Infiniti was never made to be pushed on the Track or anything it is a luxory car that is faster than many other cars, Infiniti is also veryy veryy veryyy smart because they increased the horsepower of the G37 but kept nearly the same torque and on top of that they add an adittional 200 pounds, Like it has always been said " horse power sells cars, and torque wins races" They also kept the cost of the motor low ....they kept the same exact bore as the VQ 35 but raised the Stroke and got 3.7 liters , which threw up the horsepower, but heyyy , wheres the TORQUE?? In any car that was made to race....simple as that

 

Wow Bloodhound thats a Very nice FIND smart point right their buddy, i didnt think of that ... or see that ....... we should look into that thats preety smart... I LIKE loll

 

inversely, would the dual intakes, shouldnt the g37 at 55 degrees increase performance at more than a linear factor?

 

Thank you...
Would be nice if both cars were tested at diff temp ranges / conditions done side by side.....55, 75, 95 degrees.
VQ's love cold air too.....

 

Hmmm...typically:

short stroke = higher rev => high HP (think race bikes/formula engines)
Long stroke = lower rev => high torque

Obviously there are numerous other factors...

 

Yeh they do turbo engines perform better in a cold weather and in a high temp the perform less . But the G who was tested in the 77 F not the bmw .. the bmw was tested in 54.5 F which is an advantage to the bimmer !!

 

Are these posts about turbo performance on a beautiful 77F day meant as sarcasm? If so, then i'll stop responding. If not, can anyone smarter than me show some imperical data (from track runs) that shows a drastic drop in performance on a 77F day for an FI car compared to a high 50's day? I can't believe there would be much difference.

 

Hmmm... how much torque does an EVO make? An S2000? an F1 car? all less than 270ft/lbs... yet, at least one of those is "made to race" and all three of them focus on horsepower. So, I don't want to start this long discussion here or anything, but if you really feel what you typed, you might want to do a little research. (F1 = ~ 250ft/lbs, 900HP, 2.4L V8, top speed @ 230mph)