Agreed. Sort of. First gen Infinitis got great reviews on performance (sedans and coupe) relative to their target market. However, they were panned for their cheap interiors and appointments...also relative to their target audience.

Agreed. But that does not equate to failure. In the eyes of the auto mags they were still considered on par or even superior to the previous market darling, the 335i. And splitting the difference between high performance and luxury is no mean feat.

Good thing you avoided the first gen coupes. But don't sell them short on performance. With the sport suspension, 19" rims, and MT it is not a bad sports car and is considerably faster than the RX-8 from zero to sixty...not in the curves obviously.

And lets get real, what you call luxury today will be found in a Ford Focus tomorrow. A lot of what we call luxury today is electronic gadgetry.

Correct. As one auto columnist recently wrote, everything that makes a car good on the track makes it a terrible daily driver.

Sure. I'm not knocking the X. I love mine and from 0-60 in a straight line I think it would take my coupe any day.

Again, this misses the point. There are many fabulous GT cars out there that feature astonishing performance and a high degree of driveablity. But you can't get one for under six figures and you can't get a truly world class one for under $200.

My whole point is that the G/GT-R would be a world class GT car for less than six figures. That's all I'm saying.

I'm not sure I understand that sentiment. Why does Lexus 'need' an LF-A? Heck, Nissan, of all companies, doesn't need a GTR. But as long as there are Jaguar XK-Rs and BMW 6 series coupes and M5's there is clearly a perceived 'need' within the industry.

And for a reference, I bought my coupe well used and was very familiar with its ride and luxury issues. The performance was more important to me than that. Could I have gone with a 350Z? Sure. But 1) the G is world's better looking and 2) the G has a trunk meaning I can actually take mine and my wife's luggage if we intend to drive somewhere other than work or church. And in the end, I find this 6MT to be loads of fun to drive.

 

I don't have an RX8. I don't really consider that much of an all around sports car either, FWIW. An engine that can't make >500 RWHP reliably and (relatively) easily doesn't belong in an all around performance vehicle.

Agreed. Though overall build quality is relevant too. Not a lot of Fords I've driven have that solid "thunk" when you shut the door.

If Toyota sold it as a Supra, there would be no point to have it as a Lexus. If BMW sold a Mini that was just like a 6 Series, there'd be no reason to have the 6 Series. My point was that Nissan already has a halo car. They don't need two of them competing and diluting the brands. GM is pretty much the only company that does this with the CTS-V series and the Corvette, and GM is a LOT larger company than Nissan.

You enjoying the car is by far and away the most important part.

 

Wow, you're eliminating pretty much every production vehicle out there with that standard. Here are some of the few that will put 500+ to the wheels. I'm sure I missed one or two.

MB 65 Series (CL65, S65, SL65)
Murcielago
Ferrari 599
Bentley (several models)
Corvette ZR1
Porsche GT2 RS

The Mercedes and Bentley models hardly qualify for "all around performance", so we're talking about maybe 4 cars.

There are plenty of vehicles that have 500+ at the crank, but with transmission loss, they drop below that figure at the wheels. Porsche 911 Turbo S, Gallardo, GT-R, M5/M6, 458 Italia, Lexus LFA, MB SLS, none of them would qualify based on your standard.

 

I didn't say stock, I was inferring that they had the potential. In fairness, I suppose I wasn't very clear above. Apologies.

The RX8 would be an example of a car with a drivetrain that really isn't up to the task; a 2nd/3rd gen RX7 is more than capable of getting their with some effort. In all honestly, I'd expect the VQ motors are pretty capable without insane spending as well.

Some "performance vehicles" have powertrains that are essentially "tapped out" at 250-300 whp. I've never rally cared for a vehicle that feels like you're wringing every last bit of potential out of to run a 12.5 in the 1/4 mile.

 

Lets ignore performance numbers for a second.
Do you really think Infiniti could or would produce a car that looks far nicer than the GT-R or would they just add some leather and aluminum to the interior?

Another point to consider is the following.

Is the interior of a G really that much nicer than a GT-R?
In my opinion it isn't.
It might be, but not enough for a buyer to demand an Infiniti interior when they're already getting all the performance.

You decide:





as for exterior, I would love to see a cross between a GT-R and a G
but I'd still pick the GT-R over even an IPL based purely on looks.
Think about it:

 

Interesting...

 

I have to agree. The interior on the GTR is really very nice, and the exterior is GREAT.

I think the argument was to put a GTR drivetrain in a mildly "dolled up" G37 sedan though, making an M5 competitor. That might have a little merit. In a G37 coupe is just pointless though, just get a GTR.

 

I LOVE the GTR. Put it in a smoother lined more curvy body and it would be even better.

 

That's really my whole point. I really don't care that much about the interior. The last time I was in a GT-R was about 2 years ago and the interior was cheesy. The newer ones look much nicer.

And for the record, when I began this thread I was thinking mostly of the coupe but nothing wrong with a GT-R in Infiniti sedan cloths.

And, I don't really care what they _call_ this dream car. There is no "Infiniti" line in Japan. Its all Nissan. So badging makes no difference to me.

As for the exterior appearance of the GT-R, well, some folks might like it but it has been pretty widely ridiculed in the print and TV media. And if you put it in a line-up of cars with similar performance it is easily the most homely on the lot.

And there is no reason for that. That is my whole point. Use Infiniti design to make this car, which performs along the levels of a Ferrari GTO, and make it look as good as a Ferrari. And cost 1/3 as much. Again, it would be beautiful, it would have world class performance and cost 1/3 less than many of the world's most famous cars. With that formula it would join those world class cars rather than being considered a techno-oddity from Japan.

 

I've never owned a car that gets as many head-turns, 2nd looks and gas station questions as my G35. I've done some mods to it and it certainly doesn't look stock any longer but I really didn't spend too much on it. The G35 can hang right there (LOOKS WISE) with Porsche, M3's, A6's, and a lot of other middle class sport cars and is probably the cheapest to buy and maintain. So on look factor alone the G35 is the best bang for your buck IMO. Somebody even asked if it was a Maserati the other day! LOL..

 

Agreed. Again, that goes back to my point. You have a company that makes one of the best performing cars in the world (GT-R) and in my opinion one of the best looking cars on the road (G35/37). Put them together and what do you get? Truly world class car!

 

Agreed on all accounts. The GTR is my ~75k dream car. I have different cars for different price brackets .

 

I have a feeling that Nissan sees Infiniti as it's luxury lineup and performance isn't the priority (unfortunately). Infiniti and a lot of other car makers new priority is going green or hybrid, this is what caused Mitsubishi to stop making the EVO line. That sucks for us sport-car enthusiasts.
With all that said I think Infiniti would have a great shot at selling a goosed up G37 as a G56 for $85000 rather then that API model they rolled out.
I would rather cross my fingers rather then hold my breath for that to happen though.
But hey, who knows if they get enough return profit on the API maybe they'll see the light. Lexus looks like they are getting a little more into the performance game so that if that goes well perhaps Infiniti will take it more seriously.