what will 0-60 be? in 08 g37
03-27-2007, 10:12 AM
#16
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: bkny
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
torque makes a street race, because you dont have much room to accelerate to.
on an average head to head street race you will reach a max of 80mph.
street racing is bad regardless but just to give some info on the matter, the g37 will have about 30 less pounds of torque then the 335.......plus the 335 can have a blow off valve lol..
im still a fan of the g37 over the 335 but the car will be too similiar, as far as speed goes.
infiniti messed up big time, if they added a little more horse and torque to surpass the 335 they would dominate the market but now it looks like shoppers will be 50/50 between the 335 and the g35 coupe.
on an average head to head street race you will reach a max of 80mph.
street racing is bad regardless but just to give some info on the matter, the g37 will have about 30 less pounds of torque then the 335.......plus the 335 can have a blow off valve lol..
im still a fan of the g37 over the 335 but the car will be too similiar, as far as speed goes.
infiniti messed up big time, if they added a little more horse and torque to surpass the 335 they would dominate the market but now it looks like shoppers will be 50/50 between the 335 and the g35 coupe.
03-27-2007, 11:23 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HP is just a marketing game? So all the high HP lower tq engines are just marketing genius?
Not really. Torque gets you there, HP keeps you there.
Anyway the 07 Z with the 3.5 HR is running mid 13s @ 105..
Figure 200-300 less pounds. The 3.7 should make up for that at the least.
Not really. Torque gets you there, HP keeps you there.
Anyway the 07 Z with the 3.5 HR is running mid 13s @ 105..
Figure 200-300 less pounds. The 3.7 should make up for that at the least.
03-27-2007, 12:12 PM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm amazed at the lack of knowledge of HP and Torque. Big torque and low HP doesn't win anything. Sustained torque at HIGH rpm is where real power will aways be made. People keep looking at the PEAK torque and HP only. What good is a car that makes 500 lb-ft of torque at only one rpm, and then dies out after that and before that point? Area under the curves is more telling.
I think Infiniti did a great job of changing their engines from truck-like things that were asthmatic at high rpms to engines that now rev to 7,500 rpm.
That being said sustaining 300 lb-ft of torque over the rev range is better than 270 lb-ft over the whole rev range.
I think Infiniti did a great job of changing their engines from truck-like things that were asthmatic at high rpms to engines that now rev to 7,500 rpm.
That being said sustaining 300 lb-ft of torque over the rev range is better than 270 lb-ft over the whole rev range.
03-27-2007, 05:54 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by muscarel
I'm amazed at the lack of knowledge of HP and Torque. Big torque and low HP doesn't win anything. Sustained torque at HIGH rpm is where real power will aways be made. People keep looking at the PEAK torque and HP only. What good is a car that makes 500 lb-ft of torque at only one rpm, and then dies out after that and before that point? Area under the curves is more telling.
I think Infiniti did a great job of changing their engines from truck-like things that were asthmatic at high rpms to engines that now rev to 7,500 rpm.
That being said sustaining 300 lb-ft of torque over the rev range is better than 270 lb-ft over the whole rev range.
I think Infiniti did a great job of changing their engines from truck-like things that were asthmatic at high rpms to engines that now rev to 7,500 rpm.
That being said sustaining 300 lb-ft of torque over the rev range is better than 270 lb-ft over the whole rev range.
Again HP is for the Track and Torque is for the street. An ideal arrangement is someting like on a Vette: 400 HP and 400 lb/ft of torque. I'm starting to believe that a lot of you guys haven't driven a real performance car in your life based on the comments I've been reading. Drive a torque monster like any of the MB AMG cars or better yet a C6 Z06, and you'll see what pleasure it is to drive a high torque car on the street. The antithesis is an S2000 with a decent amount of HP for its low curb weight, but it doesn't have much grunt for the street. Nevetheless, it's an outstanding track car, especially for the price.
03-27-2007, 05:58 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, then we are in agreement. No would argue that a car with 330 lb-ft of torque and the same 330 HP, would be just as good up high while providing more HP down low. Most V-6 NA cars do not have that (I can't think of any). Most sacrifice up high for low end or vice versa. I'd rather have it the way the G37 does.
03-27-2007, 08:08 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FAST1
Who in the hell said anything about high torque and low HP? In debating that's called a straw man.
Again HP is for the Track and Torque is for the street. An ideal arrangement is someting like on a Vette: 400 HP and 400 lb/ft of torque. I'm starting to believe that a lot of you guys haven't driven a real performance car in your life based on the comments I've been reading. Drive a torque monster like any of the MB AMG cars or better yet a C6 Z06, and you'll see what pleasure it is to drive a high torque car on the street. The antithesis is an S2000 with a decent amount of HP for its low curb weight, but it doesn't have much grunt for the street. Nevetheless, it's an outstanding track car, especially for the price.
Again HP is for the Track and Torque is for the street. An ideal arrangement is someting like on a Vette: 400 HP and 400 lb/ft of torque. I'm starting to believe that a lot of you guys haven't driven a real performance car in your life based on the comments I've been reading. Drive a torque monster like any of the MB AMG cars or better yet a C6 Z06, and you'll see what pleasure it is to drive a high torque car on the street. The antithesis is an S2000 with a decent amount of HP for its low curb weight, but it doesn't have much grunt for the street. Nevetheless, it's an outstanding track car, especially for the price.
The VQ37HR-VVEL will do fine seeing as how they improved torque across the board and added 30hp.
03-27-2007, 08:50 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the S2K isn't a z06, but i wouldn't say it has 'horrible torque'. especially weighing around 2800 pounds. The S2000 gets a lot of crap, and i don't think it's deserved. The only thing questionable about the entire vehicle is the engine, and most who criticize haven't driven one hard. plus, when all-out shifting, the gearing keeps you above 5500 rpm (vtec range) and there's tons of power at these speeds. Sorry for the Honda tangent!
03-27-2007, 09:15 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being in a family with an AMG and an S2000:
Torque feels fast. HP is fast.
The curve is important for street driving (AMG good, S2K bad).
Gearing in the S2, as mentioned, keeps you in the powerband on the track. My S2000 was quicker than the AMG, if I shifted at red and we went for a longer race (up to 80 or so). But from light to light, the AMG is much quicker car.
We'll see when the car comes out. I doubt Infiniti would make it slower...
Torque feels fast. HP is fast.
The curve is important for street driving (AMG good, S2K bad).
Gearing in the S2, as mentioned, keeps you in the powerband on the track. My S2000 was quicker than the AMG, if I shifted at red and we went for a longer race (up to 80 or so). But from light to light, the AMG is much quicker car.
We'll see when the car comes out. I doubt Infiniti would make it slower...
03-27-2007, 10:24 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wyatthanson
Being in a family with an AMG and an S2000:
Torque feels fast. HP is fast.
The curve is important for street driving (AMG good, S2K bad).
Gearing in the S2, as mentioned, keeps you in the powerband on the track. My S2000 was quicker than the AMG, if I shifted at red and we went for a longer race (up to 80 or so). But from light to light, the AMG is much quicker car.
We'll see when the car comes out. I doubt Infiniti would make it slower...
Torque feels fast. HP is fast.
The curve is important for street driving (AMG good, S2K bad).
Gearing in the S2, as mentioned, keeps you in the powerband on the track. My S2000 was quicker than the AMG, if I shifted at red and we went for a longer race (up to 80 or so). But from light to light, the AMG is much quicker car.
We'll see when the car comes out. I doubt Infiniti would make it slower...
LOL I'm not certain what you mean when you say your S2000 is quicker than an AMG, since AMG is the tuning shop for MB and there are a variety of AMG MBs. I have an '05 SLK 55 AMG with an auto tranny and unless you have a blower on your S2000, I'll easily beat you in 0/60, 1/4 or 0/100. and from a rolling start I'll beat your S2000 so badly that you'll think your car is in desperate need of a tuneup.
My car only has around 20 more HP than the G37 but it has over 100 lb/ft of torque more than the G37, so not only does it feel fast, but it is fast. We can talk in circles for the next few days, but I invite any of you to go to your nearest MB Dealer and if they have any AMG car, please test drive it and you'll know what I'm talking about.
Anyway I think it's time to move on since this one has been beaten to death.
03-27-2007, 10:34 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horsepower = Torque * RPM/5252
Therefore, you can't say TQ is or is not better than HP. HP is derived from TQ and the speed of rotation of the engine. This is why the area under the curve of the torque really tells the story of how an engine behaves and torque value at a fix RPM will tell you what happens when you dump the accelerator at this specific RPM.
Therefore, you can't say TQ is or is not better than HP. HP is derived from TQ and the speed of rotation of the engine. This is why the area under the curve of the torque really tells the story of how an engine behaves and torque value at a fix RPM will tell you what happens when you dump the accelerator at this specific RPM.
03-27-2007, 11:23 PM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're right. Your SLK would own my S2000 in those strait line tests. But my S2000, which is "rated" similar to our C43 AMG, was faster in certain applications.
Similarly, my S2000 - which I tuned for auto-x and tight circuits - would destroy your SLK in an auto-x event or tight circuit.
Different cars, for different purposes.
And FWIW, I think AMG is now part of MB, so it's not longer their "tuning shop". Also, no need to specify that your SLK is an auto-tranny, since that is all they come in.
As far as beating the G37 - it's not just the TQ. You have an extra gear (with more aggressive gearing), are lighter, and more aerodynamic. A lot of elements contribute to your crushing of the G (which I cannot deny!).
Similarly, my S2000 - which I tuned for auto-x and tight circuits - would destroy your SLK in an auto-x event or tight circuit.
Different cars, for different purposes.
And FWIW, I think AMG is now part of MB, so it's not longer their "tuning shop". Also, no need to specify that your SLK is an auto-tranny, since that is all they come in.
As far as beating the G37 - it's not just the TQ. You have an extra gear (with more aggressive gearing), are lighter, and more aerodynamic. A lot of elements contribute to your crushing of the G (which I cannot deny!).
Last edited by wyatthanson; 03-27-2007 at 11:30 PM.
03-27-2007, 11:30 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by g35pat
Horsepower = Torque * RPM/5252
Therefore, you can't say TQ is or is not better than HP. HP is derived from TQ and the speed of rotation of the engine. This is why the area under the curve of the torque really tells the story of how an engine behaves and torque value at a fix RPM will tell you what happens when you dump the accelerator at this specific RPM.
Therefore, you can't say TQ is or is not better than HP. HP is derived from TQ and the speed of rotation of the engine. This is why the area under the curve of the torque really tells the story of how an engine behaves and torque value at a fix RPM will tell you what happens when you dump the accelerator at this specific RPM.
03-27-2007, 11:52 PM
#28
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my guess is 5.5-6 seconds 0-60...
and please don't compare the s2k to a G37... 2 entirely different vehicle... s2k will leave our current G in smokes. not only with a smaller engine, but with better gas mileage..
the best car to compare the new G to is a toyota solara. pretture sure the new G37 will give any it a run for the money.
and please don't compare the s2k to a G37... 2 entirely different vehicle... s2k will leave our current G in smokes. not only with a smaller engine, but with better gas mileage..
the best car to compare the new G to is a toyota solara. pretture sure the new G37 will give any it a run for the money.
03-28-2007, 12:22 AM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Southern Cali
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Spoonie
Since when did the G37 become a 1/4 mile car? Both the G35 and the 335 are slow when it comes to the 1/4 mile. Who cares? Are you guys gonna be racing 335's on the street? If so, the driver will be the differentiator, not the car.
Man, some people just have the bar set way too high.
Are you sure you're not comparing these cars to a Z06?
Because 13.7 and 13.3 are generally not considered slow.
.