You all want proof that the 05 sedan 6mt has 298 HP go to infiniti's website, its there in black and white.

 

+5

HAve you seen that the spacer's do nothing for the 05? I've seen a couple threads over the last several months where the 05 repsonded less favorably to mods than the 03/04. Can you enlighten is as to where and how you derived your factual and "without a doubt" information??

Since the 05 is just that much closer to the NA limit, I wonder how much better it responds after all and how you would actually separate the effect of the changes to the 05 factory design compared to the 03 and 04 and the change effect from the mods themselves..?

 

This topic has come up several times, and some people have mentioned the increase weight of the 05 model, but few of us know where that increased weight actually came from...

I was checking the oil in our cars the other night, and I noticed that the hood on the wife's 04 was considerably lighter than on my 05. I can't really believe that there would be much of a difference in the weights of the hoods; I would assume that they are basically the same in total surface area and in materials. Maybe it was just resistance in the hinges, but my 05's hood required much greater effort to fully raise than the 04's.

However, I never would have noticed had I not put them up side-by-side.

 

It's the flux capacitor under the passengers seat - 1.21 gigawatts. That's also where the extra power comes from.

Maybe you were just tired after 'lifting the wife's hood' (or whatever you want to call it...hehehe)...

 

I still need to take my G to the truck scales and see what she weighs. I have a hard time believing the 05+ gained 150+lbs. I can see ~40lbs (bigger wheel/tires, brakes), but not 150lbs. The weights for the quoted weights for the 03, 04, and 05 are all over the place. The only thing that certain is the 6MT weighs about 42lbs more the 5AT.

As for the hood, it's possible the new 05 hood has been designed for the new pedestrian crash requirements therefore the hood has been reinforced.

 

It’s all about the curve as someone already stated. The 298 figure comes at the end of the curve. The curve on the 2004 and 2005 G35’s are practically identical until like 6600 rpms. The 2005 G35 makes more power at peak and holds it longer to redline. Therefore, the 2005 G35 will be slightly faster than a 2004 overall. 0-60 mph is too short of test to see the marginal advantage of the 2005 G35.

Here is another way to look at it and one that I have personal experience with: Why does Mustang GT tie the pre-2003 Mustang Cobra at the 1/8 mile, but lose to it in the ¼ mile? The two cars weigh the same and have the same gearing.

Answer: The Cobra has more average horsepower. The Mustang GT makes 230 rwhp peak at 5000 rpms and then it starts to drop as it approaches redline at 6000 rpms. The Cobra is also making 230 rwhp, but it makes it for a longer period of time throughout the curve and well beyond 5000 rpms.

The car with more avg. horsepower will eventually show up as the race progresses. 0-60 mph is a very short test. It doesn’t tell the entire story, but it’s what the general car buying public has been trained to focus on. Many cars are pretty respectable 0-60 mph, but then fall flat on their face after 60 mph. 0-100 mph is the best test for a car’s quickness.

Check out 0-100 mph on the G35 and then on Lexus IS350. It’s like 14.7 seconds vs. 12.7 seconds. Two seconds is a lot in the 0-100 mph test. The curve on the new IS350 is probably a lot beefier than the G35.

 

ummm.. the only proof that people are looking for isregarding the comment that the 05 responds better to mods than the 03-04's

 

+++1

 

+1.
C.

 

What does that mean?

 

I agree, to a point Don't forget that the 05 rev-up motor shows about 7-10 less whp/wtq in the 3000-5500rpm range than the 03/04 motors does. That lack of power, though small, impacts the overall 1/4 mile performance more than people think. Trey's 05 6MT showed the same power as his wife's 04 5AT till about 5500rpms. Same dyno, same day. That's a 5AT which typically shows about 10-12whp/wtq less than the 6MT.


I think C&Ds test of the "13.7 second" IS350 was a fluke. MT and every other mag has only been able to extract a 14.1-14.3@98-99mph out of the IS350. I think C&D got quite a nice ringer. We'll know the truth when actual owners start putting their production IS350s to the test. I've seen this all before with the preproduction testing of the 300C. The mags were getting 13.8-13.9@101mph, but the production models got 14.3-14.5@97 as tested in later mags and by the owners themselves.

 

I don't know the stats of a lot of cars but I have not heard of a manual tranny car weighing more than an auto same year everything else being the same?

 

The dynos amongst our cars that night show a few interesting things. First off, my peak torque was 210, while Cheryl's was 208. That's only a difference of 2 pound feet, though admittedly that could be explained as within tolerance.

Let's assume that the drivetrain loss for the auto is an extremely optimistic 2% greater than the manual(when measured against the crank). Both of our cars are rated at 260lb/ft torque. If both engines did in fact produce 260 at the crank, then that two percent difference would yield 5.2 pound feet, not two. Not that it matters, but either her car is making slightly more than 260, or mine is making slightly less than 260; peak, of course.

Another interesting note from that night was that an 05 5AT Coupe produced 225 peak hp(can't remember his torque), bone stock. And I didn't see the actual graph of the pull, so I couldn't compare his curve against Cheryl's car. However, that 10hp difference(Cheryl had 215), at least in peak numbers, is real.

....
And one more last thing. The first time we all went to the drag strip as a group, my best run ended up being faster than any other g's best runs, at least in ET's. These other g's included Cheryl's sedan, and three other coupes(1 04 5AT with a few mods, 1 04 6MT with a few mods, and an 05 5AT bone stock). Although I would love to believe that's because of innate driver ability, I'm just not that good. So, the extra HP at peak definitely contributed to my better times. But I really think the largest factor was the ability to run to 7k instead of 6600.

 

That means I agree- excellent points.

 

I don't have any hard facts, but one thing that comes to mind is that the the 6MT sedan comes standard with a limited-slip diff and 18" wheels, compared to a 5AT's open diff and 17" wheels. I would think both items would cause an increase in the 6MT's listed weight over the 5AT. It would be interesting to know how a 5AT with the sport package compares to a 6MT, all other options being equal. Maybe the differences in the 6MT's higher-power motor (variable exhaust valve timing?) also adds a bit more weight?