saywat?

iTrader: (3)

Doesn't BMW and Audi offer a lower entry turboed 3 series and a4/5 that puts out only 2xx something hp. Lexus too. Wat u guys whining about?

eljoker

That's what I'm saying. These guys over here acting like its the end of the world that the Fusion has more HP and TQ.

saywat?

iTrader: (3)

Why don't they compare the 300hp lower model q60 to ford fusion lower model? I kno why bc that would be idiotic like comparing the red sport to this fusion sport

Landshark

i'm sorry i didn't phrase it correctly, professor - "AWD with torque vectoring". you mean "recently", like in the 2008 Evo?

you fanboi is showing. i wouldn't get crazy thinking that the Haldex ATESSA system is anything special. it will do the job for me, and i like that its RWD-based, but if i'm given a choice in a snowstorm, i'd choose a real full-time AWD system.

gill1606

The only differenece between a torque vectoring AWD and the ATTESA ETS is that when torque is divided when wheel spin happens, the vectoring has the ability to monitor all 4 tires individually, and affect torque delivery to any 1 of 4 tires individually. While the ETS system delivers power in pairs, either to the front 2 wheels, or the rear 2 wheels. in stable conditions the ATESSA ETS acts as a RWD with nearly 100% power to the rear wheels. When these start to slip, up to 50% torque (or more not sure), can be delivered to the front pair of wheels to maintain traction.

Torque vectoring does have an edge as individually monitoring all 4 wheels is more effective in managing and correcting traction. This would probably come in handy in heavier than normal snow conditions to the point you should not even be on the road in the first place, but probably nuanced in a race with normal conditions. Moreover, don't count out the ATESSA ETS as completely obsolete in snow conditions, it can still get the job done and pull out the rear wheels if they start to slip. ie the ATESSA wont leave you stuck either because it is also still a "real" AWD system able to adjust torque in pairs, while torque vectoring does it individually.

Ape Factory

iTrader: (3)

This from the same company that has a 400hp bolt on kit for the G. Riiight.

Ape Factory

iTrader: (3)

Look, I respect your opinion but you're also an Infiniti employee so there's a certain about of clouded bias in that. The whole checking in with Ford thing is a straw man argument. Fact of the matter is, 300hp is pretty underwhelming these days and there aren't any sports coupes I'd pay $50K+ for with only 300hp when they weigh 3800 pounds. I remember when the new Lexus RC came out. I was piqued until I saw it came with a 300hp V6. Yawn. One doesn't need a twin turbo setup to achieve those numbers. They were able to lower the displacement and I'm sure, improve NVH in the process and there's tons of room left to improve the power output (hence the RS). IMO, Infiniti really missed a chance to knock it out of the park and instead, they've aimed at Audi and the A5/S5 line which will be hampered by the whole VW scandal.

I'm sure there are a group of people at Nissan who wanted to more output from each of the iterations of the Q60 but for whatever reason, they weren't able to do so. I'm guessing it's fleet emissions but I could be wrong.

gill1606

not all AWD vehicles with Torque vectoring are always full time AWD all the time, with a constant split of torque between the rear and front wheels. It depends on the manufacturer. There are cars with Torque vectoring who are usually FWD, or RWD, and then individually splits torque to any wheel when slippage is detected. Subaru, is one of the only ones that offer constant torque delivery to all 4 wheels in standard conditions plus the torque vectoring.

Torque vectoring doesn't mean an AWD that is on all the time, that depends on individual manufacturer, it means that torque can be vectored or sent to any individual wheel when slippage is detected. It can be added to AWD cars that are RWD in normal conditions, FWD in normal conditions, or 4WD in normal conditions like Subaru.

saywat?

iTrader: (3)

That's like saying why didn't BMW 335 or Subaru jus get their engines 400+ hp from factory bc its very possible and easily done but they didn't. idk why but they jus chose not to for whatever reasons but I'm sure they kno they could've. Same with Infiniti.

Ape Factory

iTrader: (3)

Well BMW's M3 is well above 400hp. The M2 is what, 355? They're claiming 4.1 seconds to 60 with the DCT in that car. The new 335i, making 300hp, again is weak sauce given the cash outlay. And it's not getting stellar reviews. I owned a 2014 with a sport package and it was about as dynamic as a Buick.

The Suby is 300hp, or 100hp more than the 2.0T Infiniti so not much of an argument there. Hell, My Evo 8 was making 285hp way back in 2005. I had an SSL package, heavies one, and that car was properly quick. I'm sure the 2.0T Infiniti will be a dog, much like the Audi A5 is with the 2.0.

saywat?

iTrader: (3)

Ugh I don't understand now let's compare the Infiniti 300hp model to the m3? Wtf

Ape Factory

iTrader: (3)

It's ok. Take an aspirin or two along with a few deep breaths. It'll be ok.

saywat?

iTrader: (3)

Lol give the q a fighting chance and at least compare the m3 to the red sport sheesh

Ape Factory

iTrader: (3)

I would but Infinit's already stated it's not an M3/M4 challenger. Sort of a cop out but even I have to admit, the M3/M4 is a pretty big price jump over an RS.

saywat?

iTrader: (3)

I'm jus glad Infiniti is finally offering turbo action in the US. I jus hope its reliable