The G-Spot General discussion about the G Series;
G35 & G37, Coupes & Sedans

What do you hate about YOUR G35?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old May 17, 2010 | 09:27 AM
  #1396  
G3LU5's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 406
Likes: 2
From: Roanoke, VA
Originally Posted by scrapiron7
You're seriously saying our cars are fast because they could beat a car built in 1990? How the hell can you make that comparison? It's 14 years of technology difference.
Yes that is what I am saying. Oh and it has 20 years of technology since 1990. But still if you take a 1990 348 GTS and look at the price tag it is going to be around $40,000.00. On top of that you have to pay for the $300 oil change every 2k to 3k, then you also need to have the car re-tuned every 5k to 10k. So yes the G is a fast, luxurious, and handles good. Think of that at 20 years ago for over $100,000.00. now we can pick up a car with the same numbers as a Ferrari. I remember when 0-60 in 5.5 seconds was crazy fast. I guess I am just old or something.
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 09:34 AM
  #1397  
NjMatteSedan's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,985
Likes: 98
From: Elmwood Park. NJ
Originally Posted by scrapiron7
You're seriously saying our cars are fast because they could beat a car built in 1990? How the hell can you make that comparison? It's 14 years of technology difference.
20 years
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 10:32 AM
  #1398  
Hammerhead i-Eagle Thrust's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,891
Likes: 5
From: Upstate New York
Originally Posted by myGi$Gangsta
20 years
its not 20 years, g35s came out in late 2002 so thats 12-13 years after 1990.

although honda had a 3.0 DOHC V6 with 270hp back in 1990(which later became a 3.2 making 290hp). the acura legend with the type 2 motor had 230hp so a DOHC 3.5 that makes 260-280hp isn't exactly ground breaking.

on the other hand powerwise it kicked the IS300's *** and the TL/CL is fwd. it was a performance bargain compared to other entry level luxury cars...sort of falls between the 330 and the m3
 

Last edited by Hammerhead i-Eagle Thrust; May 17, 2010 at 10:41 AM.
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 10:47 AM
  #1399  
scrapiron7's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by myGi$Gangsta
20 years
My G35 is a 2004, so it IS 14 years in my case.


Originally Posted by G3LU5
Yes that is what I am saying. Oh and it has 20 years of technology since 1990. But still if you take a 1990 348 GTS and look at the price tag it is going to be around $40,000.00. On top of that you have to pay for the $300 oil change every 2k to 3k, then you also need to have the car re-tuned every 5k to 10k. So yes the G is a fast, luxurious, and handles good. Think of that at 20 years ago for over $100,000.00. now we can pick up a car with the same numbers as a Ferrari. I remember when 0-60 in 5.5 seconds was crazy fast. I guess I am just old or something.
So a new G is fast, luxurious and handles good compared to a 20 year old Ferrari? Technology has come a long way. It's not even the same league. You can pick up the same numbers as a 20 year old car, way to go
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 11:11 AM
  #1400  
G3LU5's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 406
Likes: 2
From: Roanoke, VA
Originally Posted by Hammerhead i-Eagle Thrust
its not 20 years, g35s came out in late 2002 so thats 12-13 years after 1990.

although honda had a 3.0 DOHC V6 with 270hp back in 1990(which later became a 3.2 making 290hp). the acura legend with the type 2 motor had 230hp so a DOHC 3.5 that makes 260-280hp isn't exactly ground breaking.
20 years from now. I was a huge honda guy back then. I don't think the 3.0 could get the car to 60 in under 6 seconds. Actually in 1990 when they came out with the 3.0 liter v6 it only had 160 hp and 162 ft lbs. the 0-60 time was a little over 9 seconds. There has never been a car that has close to supercar stats for the price you can get a G or Z for. There is just no comparison. I Love my honda's. The engine is put together 100% better than almost any other out there. Hell I had a 86 Honda Accord 2 door hatchback Lx-i model with the 2.0 liter Programmed Fuel injection engine and that baby would fly, I out ran an eighties model BMW M3 in that little accord, on the interstate with speedo buried at 130mph and I was still picking up speed while the M3 was topped out at about 120mph.

Oh and the Acura CL Type-S with the 3.2 liter v-6, 0-60 is 6.8 sec. Then the 3.5 liter TL did 0-60 in 6 seconds. None of these cars hit the marks that the G hit.
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 01:37 PM
  #1401  
SedanManBen's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,407
Likes: 7
From: Indianapolis, Indiana
^ pwnd
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 02:06 PM
  #1402  
G3LU5's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 406
Likes: 2
From: Roanoke, VA
Originally Posted by scrapiron7
My G35 is a 2004, so it IS 14 years in my case.




So a new G is fast, luxurious and handles good compared to a 20 year old Ferrari? Technology has come a long way. It's not even the same league. You can pick up the same numbers as a 20 year old car, way to go
It is a fvcking Ferrari, I don't care if it is 28 years old. 0-60 in 5 sec was unheard of back then. In 20 years do you think we will have Ferrari's getting to 60 in 1 second? I doubt it.
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 02:16 PM
  #1403  
BokChoiBoi's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
I hate the fact that my G isnt a NSX

Other than that i love it
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 02:39 PM
  #1404  
K Dub's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 135
Likes: 1
From: NW NJ
I have something to add that I HATE about my G.

I HATE my loose, rocking driver's seat. And my B to B warranty is no longer, so it looks like I am out of luck unless I want to spend like a grand on some new rails.
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 02:45 PM
  #1405  
jibberjabbers's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,968
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by G3LU5
Comon dude, 0mph to 60mph in 5.1-5.5 sec. That is fast as hell in most standards. Back in 1990 we would own supercars.

The 1990 Ferrari 348 GTS = Zero to sixty was achieved in only 5.5 seconds, with the top sped of 165 mph. This thing had a V8, and it is a Ferrari, the numbers look a lot like the G35 numbers. G35 not fast, ha.
5.1 seconds? Where did you get those numbers?

Edmunds tested the G35 coupe auto & got 6.2 & 14.66 .

MotorTrend has it @ 5.8
Car and Driver hast it @ 6.0 & 14.6
 

Last edited by jibberjabbers; May 17, 2010 at 02:51 PM.
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 03:34 PM
  #1406  
scrapiron7's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by G3LU5
It is a fvcking Ferrari, I don't care if it is 28 years old. 0-60 in 5 sec was unheard of back then. In 20 years do you think we will have Ferrari's getting to 60 in 1 second? I doubt it.
You make no sense. My point was it's rediculous to say your car is fast based off comparing to something 20 years old.
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 03:43 PM
  #1407  
Hammerhead i-Eagle Thrust's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,891
Likes: 5
From: Upstate New York
Originally Posted by G3LU5
20 years from now. I was a huge honda guy back then. I don't think the 3.0 could get the car to 60 in under 6 seconds. Actually in 1990 when they came out with the 3.0 liter v6 it only had 160 hp and 162 ft lbs. the 0-60 time was a little over 9 seconds. There has never been a car that has close to supercar stats for the price you can get a G or Z for. There is just no comparison. I Love my honda's. The engine is put together 100% better than almost any other out there. Hell I had a 86 Honda Accord 2 door hatchback Lx-i model with the 2.0 liter Programmed Fuel injection engine and that baby would fly, I out ran an eighties model BMW M3 in that little accord, on the interstate with speedo buried at 130mph and I was still picking up speed while the M3 was topped out at about 120mph.

Oh and the Acura CL Type-S with the 3.2 liter v-6, 0-60 is 6.8 sec. Then the 3.5 liter TL did 0-60 in 6 seconds. None of these cars hit the marks that the G hit.
the 6 speed 3.2CL Type S, 04+ TL 6 speed or even 03+ V6 accord 6 speed are a good bit quicker then 0-60 in 6.8 seconds. They will all run somewhere between 14.0 and 14.5 which is about the same as a g35. the g will have an advantage from a dig being rwd



if you want to talk auto vs auto

 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 03:45 PM
  #1408  
SedanManBen's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,407
Likes: 7
From: Indianapolis, Indiana
^ ^ Go buy a Honda then if you swang on their nuts so hard
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 04:32 PM
  #1409  
Hammerhead i-Eagle Thrust's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,891
Likes: 5
From: Upstate New York
geez you guys are fanboys....i didn't buy my car from straight line speed and I certainly wouldn't buy a TL/CL/Accord for that reason, but the topic of power was being discussed..why you gotta be such a douche about it, sorry for telling the truth about your car

and how exactly is saying that g35 have comparable acceleration to CLs and TL being a honda fanboy, i could say the same thing about maximas and 3.5 altimas being as fast or faster then g35s
 
Reply
Old May 17, 2010 | 06:19 PM
  #1410  
jibberjabbers's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,968
Likes: 32
I'm still hating the fact that I can't recirculate the cabin air w/o turning the A/C on.
 
Reply


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:20 PM.