a 6 series is also a much larger car than the G37...

 

i was hoping to get some A/C seats...leather gets damn hot in the summer! Over all though good options. can't wait for the autoshow.

 

Well, Turner Motorsports does.
http://www.turnermotorsport.com/html...=100-100-00008

I doubt they would and BMW didn't. Now, whether or not that is good for a product car is a different story. But then again, as Turner states, BMW stopped putting LSD in non-M cars in '95. That is not because they "didn't have an LSD", but rather they didn't want to put it in non-M cars.

Sounds like a profit-maximizing decision to me.

 

Much larger?
I've rode in a 6-series; it's just as snug (or cramped)as the G coupe.

 

If all you care about is low end torque, why were you hoping for a 13.4 1/4 mile time? Also, if you drive 99.999999% of your time at low rpms, then you don't want a G - you want a diesel truck.

Obviously kidding, but if putting around town is all you need, then who cares about having 300 lb-ft of torque, right - a car is just about getting from point A to B?

I don't want to drive a '92 Rustang 5.0. This car has improved on the old G's low end torque and no high end power characteristic. I've driven the 335 and I wasn't wow'd by the low end torque, so I'm not sure what all the hoopla is. Then again, I guess it is all relative.

 

13.7-13.8 is a little high. The 07 Sedan runs the 1/4 in 13.7 and the 07 Z runs 13.4

 

I haven't seen any 13.7s (I think someone on this forum ran their car at the track and supposedly rans a 13.7). Every road test for the sedan has been 13.9 (I think one was a 14.0). Almost all tests of the 335 are at 13.5-13.6. Knowing that the coupe is 100 lbs heavier than the sedan, but has better HP, and a flatter torque curve, I think that may be worth 0.2 seconds or so. Either way, the 335 vs. G coupe debate should go away if the cars are 0.1-0.2 seconds apart.

The argument about torque:

The G is not like S2000, where there was NO torque at all and all power was based on high rpm (just to squeeze out 250 or so). 270 lb-ft of torque is respectable and if they can keep it flat, that means good continuous power throughout the rev range.

 

Certainly profit would be a benefit of no LSD in a non M. However it wouldn't be the primary motivation. BMW needs to have something to differentiate the higher end (sport) M division from the base cars. LSD is one of those items.

 

All of which would make sense if, in fact, BMW was not developing an electronic limited slip differential. VWAG is also developing their own elsd. Haldex has one and offered it to VWAG for their front drivers. For whatever reason VWAG believed it make a better elsd, so VWAG passed on the Haldex. BMW has been developing theirs since the middle of the last M3's run. Apparently, BMW believes a car like the M3 needs a "modern" elsd and an old fashioned lsd isn't good enough for their M3. It has hinted BMW wanted to include it in the 335i sport package, but it wasn't ready.

Bottom line, all the talk about profit or undercutting the mighty M3 is really just excuses because the elsd isn't ready for production. If it were, BMW says it would be an available option.

 

I defined low end by being under 5K RPM. If you spend all your time driving at redline, then you're in that .00000001% that I alluded to. Most car owners don't like to have to drive at 7K RPM to experience a car's power, especially when the price of a gallon of gas is approaching $3 again. If you aren't impressed by the 335, then you are in a tiny minority again.

 

Any development BMW may be doing on a future improved LSD has no bearing on the statements I made earlier and doesn't make them any less sensible. A better LSD may not currently be available but that isn't the reason why the current LSD is not offered in the 335. I've outlined the reasons in my post above.

We're talking about what BMW has done in the past and is currently doing, not what they might do in the future or speculating on "hints" of what they might have done.

BMW may be in develpment of an improved LSD for production but there is no guarantee of what cars it will be offered in or when it will be ready, unless you can provide a source proving otherwise. It may well be offered in the lower line of cars like the 335 but historically the M cars have contained different higher performance components. These include LSD, better brakes, stronger engines, suspension etc. and my guess is they will continue to do that in the future.

 

I think the car will hit 13.7 easily, possibly 13.5-6; however, the car is really portly. I like the looks of the 1G over the 2G anyday, the 2G front is too much Lexus and the back is too squarish and chopped off. The 1G's lines are way more pleasing and agressive. I think Infiniti's goal was to appeal to 35+ age group because the 2G is more "flowing" looking, shrug. I am disappointed overall.

I was contemplating the IS, 335, and new G coupe. I think I can almost cross the G off my list now; however, I will wait for the road tests to come out.

 

What is AFS?

 

Horsepower is a function of rpm. Just because you make 270 lb-ft of torque does not mean you need to be at 7k rpm in order to "experience the power". Do you understand that a 335 with all that low-end torque still has more power at high rpms than it does at 3k or 4k rpm? So you still need to wind out a 335 in order to "experience the power". If a car puts out 300 lb-ft of torque at 2600 rpm, then it is putting down 150 horspeower at that rpm. A car that has 270 lb-ft of torque at 2600 rpm puts down 135 hp. At that rpm, it is only a 15 horsepower difference. Keeping high torque at high rpm is where you get real power, not down low.

I owned a '04 coupe and never needed to go to 6k rpm to experience the power. The car had good power down low, just like this one will have. Do you think having 300 lb-ft of torque makes the car a street demon and having 270 lb-ft of torque won't allow it to get onto a freeway ramp? My point about not being that impressed with the 300 lb-ft of torque in the 335 is that it still not THAT much. That is always the case - it's always relative. If you think that the extra 30 lb-ft of torque puts the car into another league then go out and get a 335.

Back in the early 90's the 5.0 mustang had 300 lb-ft of torque and 225 horsepower. That's because it's torque numbers dropped off at high rpm. So you had a car that was great to punch at a light and then you just wanted to get out of gear because the car died up high. Sounds like your kind of car.

 

Just noticed that the coupe has the rear-view camera in the Navigation Pkg now.
The 07 sedan had it as a part of the tech package !

Soon it would become standard !