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

$35k sedans comparo from C&D (from E60 board)

Old Aug 29, 2005 | 11:30 AM
  #31  
Deang35c6's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by terryw
conditions such as temperature, humidity can really effect these stats. I believe C & D have no reason to lie about these numbers.
So what you're saying is if the Is350 was tested in the same conditions the G35 pulled a 5.5, then it would actually be quicker to 60, like 4.9 seconds? Like I said, I don't have a problem giving credit where due, but the IS only has 11 more hp and 6 more ft/lb of torque than the '05 6 speed G35. Do you honestly believe that accounts for a .8 second difference to 60? Before you answer, know that a 333 hp M3 0 to 60 is 4.9, but at least has 53 more horsepower than the,03 Coupe which pulls 5.5 seconds, a .6 second difference to 60.

Is using the G's and the other car's worst 0 to 60 numbers during the test considered a lie?
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 11:54 AM
  #32  
GSCoupe's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver
The IS350 is rated under the new SAE standards at 306 hp/277 lb.ft, under the old SAE standard, which most other manufacturers are still using, the IS350's hp/torque would have rated higher(they're also rated higher if you looks at the specs. in Japan).
Torque is more relevent to acceleration than hp, so at 277, it should be at least 17 more lb.ft. more than the 2005 G35 at 260 lb.ft.(rated under old SAE)
The IS350 also has a 6 speed auto tranny as well.
 

Last edited by GSCoupe; Aug 29, 2005 at 12:11 PM.
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 01:37 PM
  #33  
hayaku's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
damn that lexus is fast. Makes me wonder what Toyota will do with the upcoming Supra
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 02:00 PM
  #34  
JoeyG35's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
First of all, like other people have suggested, the Lexus may have been a ringer. Let's wait for some other magazines to do a review.

Second, the Lexus IS350 looks interesting and promising, but I won't have any real interest in it until it comes with a proper 6spd manual. Also, I hope it doesn't have the new GS's VDIM (which doesn't even completely disengage when you "turn it off").
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 03:51 PM
  #35  
Dave E H's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
First of all, like other people have suggested, the Lexus may have been a ringer. Let's wait for some other magazines to do a review.
That seems unlikely to me - I would think C&D has the experience to sniff that sort of stuff out.
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 07:45 PM
  #36  
JayDee's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
I'm totally shocked! Car and Driver had a comparo and a BMW was picked number one? Must be the first time ever!

The little Lexus was clearly the winner, just had the wrong grill ornament.
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 07:52 PM
  #37  
akm2k5's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 41
Likes: 1
In a very early article I read, a man tested the is350, and was told by the lexus engineer that it produces 314hp.. Lexus could have under rated the engine.. Or maybe its not 314hp because of the new SAE standard? Whatever the case, It looks like it has potential.. But I would still like to see more tests done on it...
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 09:37 PM
  #38  
Armani350GT's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
I knew that the New IS350 will rape G35s, but 5.1 is hard to believe. News cars HAVE to come out better than old competitor's. I'm sure V36 will be faster than the New IS350.
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 11:12 PM
  #39  
ashtangaz2001's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Link

Does anyone have a link to this article?
 
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2005 | 12:43 AM
  #40  
GSCoupe's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver
Scanned article in post #81 and #82 HERE
 
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2005 | 01:54 AM
  #41  
trebien's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
From: ATX
Originally Posted by Armani350GT
I knew that the New IS350 will rape G35s
Maybe auto-for-auto... But I would have assumed the 6MT to be about the same speed as the IS350 since the weight is about the same and the power is only slightly higher.
 
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2005 | 12:04 PM
  #42  
Picus's Avatar
Staff ALUMNI
Staff Alumni
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,204
Likes: 7
From: Toronto, ON
Anyone else notice the price as tested? Hah.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/BAHILL99/03.jpg

TL $35,870
A4 $41,520
BMW $42,390
Caddy $36,515
G $34,760
IS350 ~$40,000
9-3 $34,445
S60R $47,600

So ok, the G was the second lowest as tested price to the 9-3, which got *last* place. The TL is only 1k more, which is good for Acura owners, same with the Caddy. Shame they scored 4th and 6th respectively. The real "surprises" are the S60R at over $12,500 *more* than the G (If I'm not mistaken, you can get an M35 for less than this with most options since base is $41k), the BMW at 8k more than the G (called that one) and the A4 at 7k more. Oh, and the mightly IS3500 at approx. $6k more (probably closer to 8 in the real world).

OK so listen. I am all for mag tests, reviews, winners, losers, arguments, whatever - but these cars aren't even in the same class anymore. I consider a 12-33% price difference (in this case $6 to $12k) to be a different class, sorry. Maybe that's just me, but at $35k as tested versus $43k as tested, the BMW 330i and (probably) the IS350 should be compared to an M35. Hell, the S60R should be compared to an M45.
 
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2005 | 12:28 PM
  #43  
tekknikal's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 971
Likes: 1
From: Caribbean
i find it difficult to believe the new is350 is nearly a full second quicker and does 7mph faster through the quarter mile compared to a 6 speed 298hp g35..
 
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2005 | 12:53 PM
  #44  
terryw's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,337
Likes: 1
From: University of Maryland
if its rated under the new SAE ratings, it might really be 320hp compared to the old ratings. 320 vs 298 is a bigger difference.
 
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2005 | 01:00 PM
  #45  
tekknikal's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 971
Likes: 1
From: Caribbean
Originally Posted by terryw
if its rated under the new SAE ratings, it might really be 320hp compared to the old ratings. 320 vs 298 is a bigger difference.
it is, but things still arent adding up...
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:
You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:38 PM.