Well, I've put over 200 miles on a 04 5AT G35 and here are my impressions when compared to my 05. The 04 engine seems much smoother, I think this is mainly due to the drive train. Also, the engine feels like the power band is much more linear, the 298hp vq feels like it loses power up high. These cars are very close in speed, so I couldn't really tell which one is faster.

I've been romping on this 04, opening it up at every light, usually shifting at about 5k on the fake shifter thing. The car has adapted to my driving style pretty quick, it seems when I let off the gas before the RPMS get too high, the engine holds the gear waiting for me to give it some more.

The 04 also seems to get better gas mileage. If I drove my 05 how I have been driving this 04 it would have burned much more gas. I've put $25 (I think) of 87 octane gas and gone about 230 miles.

The leather in this 04 also feels much softer (its beige) than the Graphite leather in my 05. The seats are also more plush, but this car has almost 10,000 miles on it, so I imagine all the butts sitting in it have worn the foam down a bit. However, the interior is not so great in it...they used the same plastic in the center console as they used in the Nissan Altima that I had before this car. It seems to scratch easy and look crappy quick.

Body shop has not even started working on my car yet, so looks like I will have the loaner until next week at least. I really miss my 05 6MT, auto is the worst driving experience

 

Isn't the 04 260 hp and the 05 296hp? The performance gap should be huge. Like about .5 seconds in the 0-60 alone. The difference between a fully broken in car vs one that is not I guess.

 

I don't think you are going to get the 1/2 second diff from the 0 - 60 times. I think the extra HP will show up only at top RPM's. Nothing technical to back up my thoughts except from what I have read here in our forum previously.

 

I hope you don't put that in your own car

 

I don't get it. You say the motor is smoother with a wider power band, the cars are close in speed, the gas mileage better, the seats more comfortable (with a qualifier), the transmission seems willing and has adapted to your style of driving, then you say it's the worst.

Aside from the cheesy interior which we'll all agree has improved in 05, what was so terrible about it? Did you just miss the control you have with the MT? Just curious.

 

I am not sure either. Will need to see a bunch more road tests but the new G has the power to weight ratio of the old 300ZX twin turbo with better aerodynamics and a six speed gearbox instead of the old five speed. The old Z ran right around a 5.5 0-60 with one Car and Driver test in 1991 managing 5.0 flat. The tests on the 260hp slushbox Gs are around 6.2 0-60. You would need a good driver mind you but the m/t car should be capable of some really impressive numbers. A well driven manual should be 3-4 tenths quicker in the full quarter than an a/t car of equal power and THEN add 36 more hp. Maybe Nick's needs a tuneup