G35 Coupe V35 2003 - 07 Discussion about the 1st Generation V35 G35 Coupe

Coupe 03 vs rivals

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old Mar 29, 2013 | 05:35 PM
  #1  
Al Janinny's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: Georgia
Brakes Coupe 03 vs rivals

I was reading about 2002-2004 rivals on various web-pages.




What are the real times for 283hp Automatic and Manual Coupes:

Acceleration
0 - 60Mph Acceleration
0 - 100Kmh

Quarter Mile

Deceleration
100 - 0Kmh
60 - 0Mph


Info I've got is the following:

'98 M3 (US) that run 0-60 in 5.5 sec and 1/4 mile 14 sec flat; The 118ft E46 M3 braking performance is from 60-0 mph.

A Z4 is around 110ft 60-0 mph IAW Autoweek...

2001 BMW 330i 0-60 mph 6.1 Quarter mile 14.8 @97 Mph

ZHP manual 5.6 secs 0-60 and 14.3 1/4 miles @ 95 Mph

2003 Infiniti G35 Coupe 0-60 mph 5.4 Quarter mile 14.0; 60 - 0 lateral skid pad 0.86g, braking 60-0 111ft (33.8m)

Nissan 350Z 0-60 mph 5.2 Quarter mile 13.6; 60 - 0 112 feet

2001 BMW M3 Coupe 0-60 mph 4.6 Quarter mile 13.2;
 
Reply
Old Mar 29, 2013 | 05:49 PM
  #2  
Xet's Avatar
Xet
Registered User
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,197
Likes: 171
From: sj
Go check the 1/4 mile times thread. I believe it is in the drag sub forum iirc
 
Reply
Old Mar 29, 2013 | 06:46 PM
  #3  
hologram's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 332
Likes: 24
Dont buy this car for performance, its really not a performance car. Its slow, yields poor performance from mods, and the engine altho bulletproof in stock format, is a piece of crap for FI..
 
Reply
Old Mar 30, 2013 | 06:22 PM
  #4  
Audioo's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by hologram
Dont buy this car for performance, its really not a performance car. Its slow, yields poor performance from mods, and the engine altho bulletproof in stock format, is a piece of crap for FI..
Sheesh. I highly disagree. Depends on your preference. It's no RACECAR. But a good performance car yes. Unless you are Jeff Gordan or Tom Cruise from Days of Thunder.
 
Reply
Old Mar 30, 2013 | 06:37 PM
  #5  
hologram's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 332
Likes: 24
Originally Posted by Audioo
Sheesh. I highly disagree. Depends on your preference. It's no RACECAR. But a good performance car yes. Unless you are Jeff Gordan or Tom Cruise from Days of Thunder.
By today's standards it doesn't even have good performance. Even V6 mustangs now come with more power..She's also not light coming in at about 3300 pounds or so? That's a heavy *** car for 280~ hp. And lastly she doesn't respond well to mods and doesn't yield high horse power from anything other than FI at which point your 20k deep in doing that part right.

Some cars are fun when you push them to the edge, this one just becomes more sluggish. I love my car, and acceleration is decent, but it aint a fast car by any stretch.
 
Reply
Old Mar 30, 2013 | 06:58 PM
  #6  
dominate's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 929
Likes: 89
From: O'ahu, Hawai'i
V6 camrys and accords are faster..
 
Reply
Old Mar 30, 2013 | 09:15 PM
  #7  
Irrelevant's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 379
Likes: 21
From: Planet Earth
You guys are comparing a ten year old car with late-models. That's not really a rational comparison. In 2003, there weren't many production cars that performed as well as the G. Ford's 2003 4.6L Mustang produced fewer horsepower, if I recall correctly. How many horsepower did the top of the line Honda Accord or Toyota Camry produce in 2003? Did you realize those two cars have the wrong wheels driving the car?

I agree the engine doesn't respond well to modifications short of Forced Induction - but that just shows how "right" Nissan made the engine to begin with.

Drive a 2013 Honda Accord if you want. My '04 G coupe will still turn more heads, and be more enjoyable to drive. Cars are slow, period. Quick is what motorcycles are for, and fast is what airplanes are for.
 
Reply
Old Mar 30, 2013 | 09:31 PM
  #8  
dominate's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 929
Likes: 89
From: O'ahu, Hawai'i
Originally Posted by Irrelevant
You guys are comparing a ten year old car with late-models. That's not really a rational comparison. In 2003, there weren't many production cars that performed as well as the G. Ford's 2003 4.6L Mustang produced fewer horsepower, if I recall correctly. How many horsepower did the top of the line Honda Accord or Toyota Camry produce in 2003? Did you realize those two cars have the wrong wheels driving the car?

I agree the engine doesn't respond well to modifications short of Forced Induction - but that just shows how "right" Nissan made the engine to begin with.

Drive a 2013 Honda Accord if you want. My '04 G coupe will still turn more heads, and be more enjoyable to drive. Cars are slow, period. Quick is what motorcycles are for, and fast is what airplanes are for.
It is a rational comparison. OP is talking about cars whose speed would rival the G's. New camry and accord v6's are faster, plain and simple. In no way did I degrade the VQ35DE, because at its time of production, it was an exceptional engine.
 
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2013 | 02:07 AM
  #9  
leonardo_06G35's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15
Likes: 4
From: Port Orchard, WA
Originally Posted by dominate
It is a rational comparison. OP is talking about cars whose speed would rival the G's. New camry and accord v6's are faster, plain and simple. In no way did I degrade the VQ35DE, because at its time of production, it was an exceptional engine.
I'm bored so I looked up some some specs on those two cars..

2013 Camry - 3.5L V6 268-hp, 3,395lbs curb weight
2013 Accord - 3.5L V6 278-hp, 3,400lbs curb weiht
2003 G35 Coupe - 3.5L V6 280-hp, 3,450lbs curb weight

So these cars all pretty much weigh the same and are pretty close in power only one is 10 years older I think thats pretty impressive really. I wouldn't say the new Camry's and Accord's are faster but they might keep up, don't forget the rev-up motors are 298-hp and still just a 3.5 liter. Also rear wheel drive and good handling make the G's a lot more fun to drive.
 
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2013 | 02:36 AM
  #10  
Xet's Avatar
Xet
Registered User
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,197
Likes: 171
From: sj
Originally Posted by leonardo_06G35
I'm bored so I looked up some some specs on those two cars..

2013 Camry - 3.5L V6 268-hp, 3,395lbs curb weight
2013 Accord - 3.5L V6 278-hp, 3,400lbs curb weiht
2003 G35 Coupe - 3.5L V6 280-hp, 3,450lbs curb weight

So these cars all pretty much weigh the same and are pretty close in power only one is 10 years older I think thats pretty impressive really. I wouldn't say the new Camry's and Accord's are faster but they might keep up, don't forget the rev-up motors are 298-hp and still just a 3.5 liter. Also rear wheel drive and good handling make the G's a lot more fun to drive.
2003 Infiniti G35 Coupe 0-60 mph 5.4 Quarter mile 14.0
2012 Toyota Camry SE (V6) 0-60 mph 5.7 Quarter Mile 14.1
http://www.zeroto60times.com/Toyota-0-60-mph-Times.html

Drivers race for sure
 
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2013 | 02:42 AM
  #11  
dominate's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 929
Likes: 89
From: O'ahu, Hawai'i
G35 coupes don't run 14.0 second quarter miles stock, not under normal circumstances anyway.
 
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2013 | 03:26 AM
  #12  
Xet's Avatar
Xet
Registered User
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,197
Likes: 171
From: sj
Originally Posted by dominate
G35 coupes don't run 14.0 second quarter miles stock, not under normal circumstances anyway.
Stock VQ35DE

Reserved for Stock Entries for the VQ35DE


1. BobbyD --------- 03 - Sedan - 6MT - 13.84@101 ----- 2.040 60ft --- Verified --- Street --- -1200ft DA
2. QUiKSR20 ------- 06 – Sedan – 6MT – 13.919@100.11 - 2.074 60ft –-- Verified --- Street
2. Reidonly ------- 05 - Coupe - 6MT - 14.05@102.35 -- 2.193 60ft --- Verified --- Street ----
3. Dv8 ------------ 03 - Coupe - 5AT - 14.37@96 ------ 2.217 60ft --- Verified --- Street ---- ????ft DA
4. Buccaneer ------ 05 - Sedan - 5AT - 14.39@97.09 --- 2.198 60ft --- Verified --- Street
5. 06g35meister --- 06 - Coupe - 6MT - 14.40@96.9 ---- 2.253 60ft --- Verified --- Street ---- ????ft DA

https://g35driver.com/forums/drag/41...ile-times.html

You really shouldn't talk if you know nothing about what you're talking about. I'm sure all the verified times as well as the magazines are wrong and you're right >.>
 
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2013 | 03:38 AM
  #13  
dominate's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 929
Likes: 89
From: O'ahu, Hawai'i
Originally Posted by Xet
Stock VQ35DE

Reserved for Stock Entries for the VQ35DE


1. BobbyD --------- 03 - Sedan - 6MT - 13.84@101 ----- 2.040 60ft --- Verified --- Street --- -1200ft DA
2. QUiKSR20 ------- 06 – Sedan – 6MT – 13.919@100.11 - 2.074 60ft –-- Verified --- Street
2. Reidonly ------- 05 - Coupe - 6MT - 14.05@102.35 -- 2.193 60ft --- Verified --- Street ----
3. Dv8 ------------ 03 - Coupe - 5AT - 14.37@96 ------ 2.217 60ft --- Verified --- Street ---- ????ft DA
4. Buccaneer ------ 05 - Sedan - 5AT - 14.39@97.09 --- 2.198 60ft --- Verified --- Street
5. 06g35meister --- 06 - Coupe - 6MT - 14.40@96.9 ---- 2.253 60ft --- Verified --- Street ---- ????ft DA

https://g35driver.com/forums/drag/41...ile-times.html

You really shouldn't talk if you know nothing about what you're talking about. I'm sure all the verified times as well as the magazines are wrong and you're right >.>
You're a certified moron, thanks for proving MY point. Do you see a COUPE with a time of 14.0 seconds or less? Exactly. Reidonly also could have had more dense than normal air to his advantage, maybe even forged wheels and wider tires (since "stock" is interpreted by some as motor/drivetrain only)
 

Last edited by dominate; Mar 31, 2013 at 03:59 AM.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2013 | 12:13 PM
  #14  
Al Janinny's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: Georgia
I've found these times on stock 03 Coupe 5AT:

Dv8 ------------ 03 - Coupe - 5AT - 14.37@96

It's somewhere here:
Mercedes CLK 4.3 V8 0-60 6.1 Quarter mile 14.4 sec
BMW 330i ZHP manual 5.6 secs 0-60 and 14.3 1/4 miles @ 95 Mph

So, what options exist to upgrade?
1. Plenum spacer.
2. Free flowing air filter. (it's about 300HP)
What else?
 
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2013 | 12:42 PM
  #15  
Xet's Avatar
Xet
Registered User
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,197
Likes: 171
From: sj
Originally Posted by dominate
You're a certified moron, thanks for proving MY point. Do you see a COUPE with a time of 14.0 seconds or less? Exactly. Reidonly also could have had more dense than normal air to his advantage, maybe even forged wheels and wider tires (since "stock" is interpreted by some as motor/drivetrain only)
Lol you're such an idiot. I prove you wrong and you start trying to cry that he has"denser air" or "forged wheels and wider tires"?? I didn't realize you were trying to talk about 14.0 in the sahara desert....

My point was proven 14.0 is possible in these cars in stock form, sure it may be a nice cold morning with warmed up tires, but that's still 14.0 in stock form in any way you dice it up. Also there is a .14 sec gap from the fastest sedan to the 14.0 time, the fact is sedans are only barely faster than coupes so there is plenty of time there for good coupe drivers in good conditions to hit 14.0. The fact has been and always be that the vast majority of people who drag their g35's don't post the results, so it is extremely likely that quite a few good drivers have hit 14.0, but they are either not on the forum, or don't go on the drag section (who does?).

So stop making yourself look like an idiot and just accept that coupes are capable of 14.0, you're not a good enough driver to do it? That's your problem, stop making excuses trying to call it impossible.
 
Reply


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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:15 PM.