G37 Tech Specs, Features & Options
#33
Originally Posted by Deang35c6
The G35 is not a sports car, but a GT. If you want a sports car, then this is not the car for you. Some curb weights of other GT cars:
AM DB-9: 3968
BMW 335i Coupe: 3571
BMW 650i: 3814
Ferrari 612 Scaglietti: 4056
Ford GT500: 3920
Jaguar XKR: 3814
Maserati Coupe: 3682
Mercedes CLK550: 3720
Barring the obvious differences in horsepower, you can see the trend with GT cars...they are heavy. Performance takes a back seat to luxury features. While people are complaining about the weight, no one wants to forgo rear view cameras, heated seats, 9.3g hard drive, 11 speakers, etc. Get a true sports car like C5 or Cayman and call it a day.
AM DB-9: 3968
BMW 335i Coupe: 3571
BMW 650i: 3814
Ferrari 612 Scaglietti: 4056
Ford GT500: 3920
Jaguar XKR: 3814
Maserati Coupe: 3682
Mercedes CLK550: 3720
Barring the obvious differences in horsepower, you can see the trend with GT cars...they are heavy. Performance takes a back seat to luxury features. While people are complaining about the weight, no one wants to forgo rear view cameras, heated seats, 9.3g hard drive, 11 speakers, etc. Get a true sports car like C5 or Cayman and call it a day.
Even more troubling is the relatively low torque of the G37 which is horrible for a heavy car. There may be some impressive 0/60 times quoted but they won't mean a dam thing since hardly any of us are going to abuse our cars the way that some magazines do just to knock off a few tenths of a second. If you want a real measure of the G's performance, find some magazine that provides a 5/60 MPH acceleration time. That will give you a far better indication of how the car will perform on the street, than some guy who launches the G at 6K RPM.
#34
Originally Posted by FAST1
All good info. Now compare those weights to a real sports car like the Porsche Cayman which has a curb weight of 2952 lbs with a manual tranny. So the G37 has 35 more HP than a Cayman S, but weighs over 700 lbs more. The extra 35 horses that the G has will no way offset the huge disadvantage of those extra 700 lbs.
Even more troubling is the relatively low torque of the G37 which is horrible for a heavy car. There may be some impressive 0/60 times quoted but they won't mean a dam thing since hardly any of us are going to abuse our cars the way that some magazines do just to knock off a few tenths of a second. If you want a real measure of the G's performance, find some magazine that provides a 5/60 MPH acceleration time. That will give you a far better indication of how the car will perform on the street, than some guy who launches the G at 6K RPM.
Even more troubling is the relatively low torque of the G37 which is horrible for a heavy car. There may be some impressive 0/60 times quoted but they won't mean a dam thing since hardly any of us are going to abuse our cars the way that some magazines do just to knock off a few tenths of a second. If you want a real measure of the G's performance, find some magazine that provides a 5/60 MPH acceleration time. That will give you a far better indication of how the car will perform on the street, than some guy who launches the G at 6K RPM.
Wow, now we're comparing a 35k car to a cayman S. Says alot about the new G.
The new G will perform circles around the old G regardless of the extra 150 lbs. The old coupe 6mt had only 258 lb-ft of torque and 298 HP (275 for the auto) compared to 270 and 330. Plus the car has a flatter curve which means more power throughout the rev range. The 5-60 will be better with the new model as well as 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Can we stop comparing this car to the old model performance-wise? We already know it will be much better in all aspects.
Anyone notice that the final gear ratio of the new G changed from 3.538 to 3.692? All the other ratios seem to be the same. I hope they are right about improving the 6-speed making it more refined.
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chicago, North Suburbs
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by muscarel
Wow, now we're comparing a 35k car to a cayman S. Says alot about the new G.
The new G will perform circles around the old G regardless of the extra 150 lbs. The old coupe 6mt had only 258 lb-ft of torque and 298 HP (275 for the auto) compared to 270 and 330. Plus the car has a flatter curve which means more power throughout the rev range. The 5-60 will be better with the new model as well as 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Can we stop comparing this car to the old model performance-wise? We already know it will be much better in all aspects.
Anyone notice that the final gear ratio of the new G changed from 3.538 to 3.692? All the other ratios seem to be the same. I hope they are right about improving the 6-speed making it more refined.
The new G will perform circles around the old G regardless of the extra 150 lbs. The old coupe 6mt had only 258 lb-ft of torque and 298 HP (275 for the auto) compared to 270 and 330. Plus the car has a flatter curve which means more power throughout the rev range. The 5-60 will be better with the new model as well as 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Can we stop comparing this car to the old model performance-wise? We already know it will be much better in all aspects.
Anyone notice that the final gear ratio of the new G changed from 3.538 to 3.692? All the other ratios seem to be the same. I hope they are right about improving the 6-speed making it more refined.
Good Catch! With VVEL and 3.692 FD, and 50 hp over the 2003 6mt; the new G could perform better than expected even with the extra weight. Keep in mind that the 330 hp is under the new standards, which gets the 5AT 306 hp sedan down the 1/4 mile in 13.9 seconds. The new FD acts as a torque multiplier.
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans / Baton Rouge
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Deang35c6
The G35 is not a sports car, but a GT. If you want a sports car, then this is not the car for you.
. . . .
Performance takes a back seat to luxury features. While people are complaining about the weight, no one wants to forgo rear view cameras, heated seats, 9.3g hard drive, 11 speakers, etc. Get a true sports car like C5 or Cayman and call it a day.
. . . .
Performance takes a back seat to luxury features. While people are complaining about the weight, no one wants to forgo rear view cameras, heated seats, 9.3g hard drive, 11 speakers, etc. Get a true sports car like C5 or Cayman and call it a day.
There's a reason Lotus lists the weight of the options in their brochure for the Elise.
The Ferrari F40 weighs about 2,500 pounds. You open the door with a cable.
#37
Yup, G coupe is definitely a GT car. All the extra refinement they did to the new G coupe only adds weight as it is basically the evolution of the old coupe. They could have made it lighter, but at the same time it would only cost more.
#40
Originally Posted by muscarel
Wow, now we're comparing a 35k car to a cayman S. Says alot about the new G.
The new G will perform circles around the old G regardless of the extra 150 lbs. The old coupe 6mt had only 258 lb-ft of torque and 298 HP (275 for the auto) compared to 270 and 330. Plus the car has a flatter curve which means more power throughout the rev range. The 5-60 will be better with the new model as well as 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Can we stop comparing this car to the old model performance-wise? We already know it will be much better in all aspects.
Anyone notice that the final gear ratio of the new G changed from 3.538 to 3.692? All the other ratios seem to be the same. I hope they are right about improving the 6-speed making it more refined.
The new G will perform circles around the old G regardless of the extra 150 lbs. The old coupe 6mt had only 258 lb-ft of torque and 298 HP (275 for the auto) compared to 270 and 330. Plus the car has a flatter curve which means more power throughout the rev range. The 5-60 will be better with the new model as well as 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Can we stop comparing this car to the old model performance-wise? We already know it will be much better in all aspects.
Anyone notice that the final gear ratio of the new G changed from 3.538 to 3.692? All the other ratios seem to be the same. I hope they are right about improving the 6-speed making it more refined.
#41
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dartmouth,Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Samson
Well said. I just checked out the weights for the 2007 Sedan:
G35: 3,497
G35 Journey: 3,505
G35x AWD: 3.704
G35 Sport: 3,538
G35 6MT: 3.532
Why oh why is the Coupe quite a bit heavier than the Sedan? By rights, it should be lighter, not heavier. 3616 for the base Coupe, 3624 for the Journey and 3,668 for the 6MT. The sportiest is the heaviest. Weight is the bane of any car. As you said, we are in a vicious cycle because we increase weight, so we increase engine size and power to offset the additional weight. This continues until the car becomes a clean sheet of paper redesign. I don't like the direction Infiniti is taking.![Mad](https://www.myg37.com/forums/images/smilies/mad.gif)
G35: 3,497
G35 Journey: 3,505
G35x AWD: 3.704
G35 Sport: 3,538
G35 6MT: 3.532
Why oh why is the Coupe quite a bit heavier than the Sedan? By rights, it should be lighter, not heavier. 3616 for the base Coupe, 3624 for the Journey and 3,668 for the 6MT. The sportiest is the heaviest. Weight is the bane of any car. As you said, we are in a vicious cycle because we increase weight, so we increase engine size and power to offset the additional weight. This continues until the car becomes a clean sheet of paper redesign. I don't like the direction Infiniti is taking.
![Mad](https://www.myg37.com/forums/images/smilies/mad.gif)
The same thing is true with the previous generation however. My coupe weighs more than your sedan. It is most likely some additional bracing in the car to make it stiffer, bigger suspension pieces etc.
#42
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dartmouth,Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hybrid_DET
It seems every year a G hits the streets, it gets heavier even though they increase horsepower output. So you increase weight and add horsepower and you are back where you first started. I don't get it either.
#43
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dartmouth,Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by muscarel
Wow, now we're comparing a 35k car to a cayman S. Says alot about the new G.
The new G will perform circles around the old G regardless of the extra 150 lbs. The old coupe 6mt had only 258 lb-ft of torque and 298 HP (275 for the auto) compared to 270 and 330. Plus the car has a flatter curve which means more power throughout the rev range. The 5-60 will be better with the new model as well as 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Can we stop comparing this car to the old model performance-wise? We already know it will be much better in all aspects.
Anyone notice that the final gear ratio of the new G changed from 3.538 to 3.692? All the other ratios seem to be the same. I hope they are right about improving the 6-speed making it more refined.
The new G will perform circles around the old G regardless of the extra 150 lbs. The old coupe 6mt had only 258 lb-ft of torque and 298 HP (275 for the auto) compared to 270 and 330. Plus the car has a flatter curve which means more power throughout the rev range. The 5-60 will be better with the new model as well as 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Can we stop comparing this car to the old model performance-wise? We already know it will be much better in all aspects.
Anyone notice that the final gear ratio of the new G changed from 3.538 to 3.692? All the other ratios seem to be the same. I hope they are right about improving the 6-speed making it more refined.
Well said.
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Queens, NYC
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vstrizheus
I believe a Sunroof is not seethrough, it is metal, and a Moonroof is glass.