2014 Q50 Review
05-01-2013, 11:08 PM
#46
Just because they haven't done it, doesn't mean its not possible. And why not wait to make such improvements and refinements until the redesign of your most important model. Why spend that R&D dollars on an aging model when you're designing and developing the new iteration that is critical to the future of your entire brand? But I quit. I'm not going to convince you guys to look at the car objectively. I'm wasting my breath...
05-02-2013, 12:19 AM
#47
nisslover - Nissan can't perform magic - no one can. The VQ37VHR should have been replaced by now. It doesn't have competitive low-end torque in a market with FI engines (modern 4-cyl turbos beat it, not to mention 6-cyl), it has too much NVH, and it guzzles too much gas for the performance you get out of it. It was good for its time, but that time has passed. Minor improvements aren't going to change that.
I don't know about the hybrid other than that kaotic (who drove it) didn't think it performed better than the 3.7, and he mentioned a squishy brake feel.
What is there to get excited about with the Q50? I'm not ruling out Infiniti - just waiting for the good stuff from them - maybe the Q50 IPL.
I don't know about the hybrid other than that kaotic (who drove it) didn't think it performed better than the 3.7, and he mentioned a squishy brake feel.
What is there to get excited about with the Q50? I'm not ruling out Infiniti - just waiting for the good stuff from them - maybe the Q50 IPL.
Last edited by visualguy; 05-02-2013 at 12:24 AM.
05-02-2013, 01:04 AM
#48
I'm not claiming that they're going to magically make the car faster and no the torque will not magically increase, although they could possibly shave a tenth or so off with just adjusting gearing of the tranny. And it is quite possible that they could have resolved the NVH issues and increased MPG SLIGHTLY. These things are not impossible, probably hard as hell but the VQ is probably extremely cheap to produce at this point and they could have poured a few $$ into it to get its act together. OR it could be EXACTLY the same.
As far as the hybrid, if that system can move the heavier M to 60 in 4.9 seconds, I am sure the slightly lighter Q50 will AT LEAST match that number, of course when the system is fully charged. The car at the test track could have been down on power from all the lapping before hand.
As its been hinted at and speculated, its possible that they will introduce a new FI engine in the Q60. Maybe the new powertrain isn't ready to go into the Q50. Infiniti would NOT be making such bold statements about the future if they didn't have some things up their sleeves.
Obviously there will be assumptions made, but like I said it seems EVERYONE on here is just unanimously assuming the worse.
And I'll stress again, the drivetrain is only part of the equation. The dynamics and handling of the car could be the benchmark of the class but it seems that part doesn't matter to anyone.
And I quit for real this time. lol... ok probably not.
And THE HELL, anything below 5.5 sec is fast! Esp for a 3600lbs Sedan. So to me personally, the 3.7 gets the job done.
As far as the hybrid, if that system can move the heavier M to 60 in 4.9 seconds, I am sure the slightly lighter Q50 will AT LEAST match that number, of course when the system is fully charged. The car at the test track could have been down on power from all the lapping before hand.
As its been hinted at and speculated, its possible that they will introduce a new FI engine in the Q60. Maybe the new powertrain isn't ready to go into the Q50. Infiniti would NOT be making such bold statements about the future if they didn't have some things up their sleeves.
Obviously there will be assumptions made, but like I said it seems EVERYONE on here is just unanimously assuming the worse.
And I'll stress again, the drivetrain is only part of the equation. The dynamics and handling of the car could be the benchmark of the class but it seems that part doesn't matter to anyone.
And I quit for real this time. lol... ok probably not.
And THE HELL, anything below 5.5 sec is fast! Esp for a 3600lbs Sedan. So to me personally, the 3.7 gets the job done.
Last edited by nisslover; 05-02-2013 at 01:09 AM.
05-02-2013, 01:24 AM
#49
you also drove a brand new car, and probably driven the pissed out of with all the tests. it is expected not to have any lag. my 2010 was great during the test drive, as well as the first few months. however, like with a lot of people experienced, this slowly turned into a laggy, jerky, and sluggish 7AT. if nothing was changed with the Q's tranny, why should we expect any difference? And if there was an improvement based simply on a software update, why can't they update the G37 so we can all experience this 7AT that feels like Audi's DSG?
05-02-2013, 02:57 AM
#50
nisslover - Nissan can't perform magic - no one can. The VQ37VHR should have been replaced by now. It doesn't have competitive low-end torque in a market with FI engines (modern 4-cyl turbos beat it, not to mention 6-cyl), it has too much NVH, and it guzzles too much gas for the performance you get out of it. It was good for its time, but that time has passed. Minor improvements aren't going to change that.
I don't know about the hybrid other than that kaotic (who drove it) didn't think it performed better than the 3.7, and he mentioned a squishy brake feel.
What is there to get excited about with the Q50? I'm not ruling out Infiniti - just waiting for the good stuff from them - maybe the Q50 IPL.
I don't know about the hybrid other than that kaotic (who drove it) didn't think it performed better than the 3.7, and he mentioned a squishy brake feel.
What is there to get excited about with the Q50? I'm not ruling out Infiniti - just waiting for the good stuff from them - maybe the Q50 IPL.
Torque; low end or otherwise; doesn't really matter. Power is what counts, and in specific, putting power to the street (ergo, better tranny tech such as LC, more gears, and DSG). Plus, a turbo-4 isn't going to be more refined, and then you'll have lag and muted sound (plus the psychological albatross about yer neck knowing you paid $50k+ for a 4-banger car
).The Japanese were right to stick with V6s vs. the Germans, Koreans and Americans going turbo-4. Turbo-4 can game the EPA cycle a bit bit better but when all is said in done the V6s are just as efficient real-world, and offer a much better driving experience. Also of note, the Japanese V6s are all old - the newest of the bunch is the Toyota GR at 11 years. Imagine a Honda J-series with DOHC and DI!
3.7VQ as is works well IMO. 4 years later and it is STILL the class leader in power. VVEL is as sophisticated as it gets really. Sure it thrashes a bit at upper RPM but I'm convinced that a 7sp DSG or an 8AT slushie would make a huge (positive) difference for the VQ. I was really really hoping that Nissan would do one or the other for the Q50. I have hard time believing that the current 7AT could be reworked to such dramatic effect.
05-02-2013, 04:02 AM
#51
That's exactly the problem - the Q50 is very close in price to significantly better cars. For just a few thousand dollars more, you get a car with a much more satisfying drivetrain, and equal or better in all or most other areas. The price difference is small relative to the price of the car.
05-02-2013, 01:30 PM
#52
you also drove a brand new car, and probably driven the pissed out of with all the tests. it is expected not to have any lag. my 2010 was great during the test drive, as well as the first few months. however, like with a lot of people experienced, this slowly turned into a laggy, jerky, and sluggish 7AT. if nothing was changed with the Q's tranny, why should we expect any difference? And if there was an improvement based simply on a software update, why can't they update the G37 so we can all experience this 7AT that feels like Audi's DSG?
You have to remember I drive brand new cars all the time, so I am comparing apples to apples. Also one of the cars we drove had about 10k on it, so not quite new and it is still a better transmission feeling
05-02-2013, 01:54 PM
#53
The Infinity marketing army can't arbitrarily decide what this car competes with; the market, specs, and price will determine that whether they like it or not. As it stands at 52-54K, it sits right up against the Audi S4 and is actually a few thousand more than a comparatively equipped BMW 335xi. That's real competition. It's about $10,000 more than a comparatively equipped A4 and C350 Infinity "wants" it to compete with (TMV from Edmunds - 2013 models). I definitely see a pattern... 
51.5k for a loaded A4 quattro (not including upgraded wood and accesories)
61k for an S4 with comp equipment
47k for a comp c250 (no sport or awd)
50.5 k for a comp c300 (no sport or awd)
53.5k for a comp c350 (non awd), sport with no leather)
56.5k 328xi loaded with comp (insane)
61k for 335xi load comp
pricing does not seem relative to me
05-02-2013, 03:44 PM
#54
Torque; low end or otherwise; doesn't really matter. Power is what counts, and in specific, putting power to the street (ergo, better tranny tech such as LC, more gears, and DSG). Plus, a turbo-4 isn't going to be more refined, and then you'll have lag and muted sound (plus the psychological albatross about yer neck knowing you paid $50k+ for a 4-banger car ).
The Japanese were right to stick with V6s vs. the Germans, Koreans and Americans going turbo-4. Turbo-4 can game the EPA cycle a bit bit better but when all is said in done the V6s are just as efficient real-world, and offer a much better driving experience. Also of note, the Japanese V6s are all old - the newest of the bunch is the Toyota GR at 11 years. Imagine a Honda J-series with DOHC and DI!
3.7VQ as is works well IMO. 4 years later and it is STILL the class leader in power. VVEL is as sophisticated as it gets really. Sure it thrashes a bit at upper RPM but I'm convinced that a 7sp DSG or an 8AT slushie would make a huge (positive) difference for the VQ. I was really really hoping that Nissan would do one or the other for the Q50. I have hard time believing that the current 7AT could be reworked to such dramatic effect.
).The Japanese were right to stick with V6s vs. the Germans, Koreans and Americans going turbo-4. Turbo-4 can game the EPA cycle a bit bit better but when all is said in done the V6s are just as efficient real-world, and offer a much better driving experience. Also of note, the Japanese V6s are all old - the newest of the bunch is the Toyota GR at 11 years. Imagine a Honda J-series with DOHC and DI!
3.7VQ as is works well IMO. 4 years later and it is STILL the class leader in power. VVEL is as sophisticated as it gets really. Sure it thrashes a bit at upper RPM but I'm convinced that a 7sp DSG or an 8AT slushie would make a huge (positive) difference for the VQ. I was really really hoping that Nissan would do one or the other for the Q50. I have hard time believing that the current 7AT could be reworked to such dramatic effect.
05-02-2013, 04:07 PM
#55
Registered User
True but NOT always true. Once HP develops at higher speeds, it will feel faster than the "torquier" but less powerful car.
For instance...
a BMW M3 has 420HP but only 295 Torque...
Now a BMW 335d has 425 Torque but only 265HP...
Do you really think the 335d will feel faster from 60-120?
I think not.
For instance...
a BMW M3 has 420HP but only 295 Torque...
Now a BMW 335d has 425 Torque but only 265HP...
Do you really think the 335d will feel faster from 60-120?
I think not.
05-02-2013, 04:17 PM
#56
Tell that to an F1 driver (whose previous V10-powered cars didn't have any more torque than the G37) .
But yes, it's power, power, power, and getting it to the street effectively. There's a reason why the VQ CVT pegs RPM to 6,000 - 6,200 rpm under WOT (this is peak HP RPM, which varies a bit depending on application) - peak power @ drive wheels = peak acceleration.
.But yes, it's power, power, power, and getting it to the street effectively. There's a reason why the VQ CVT pegs RPM to 6,000 - 6,200 rpm under WOT (this is peak HP RPM, which varies a bit depending on application) - peak power @ drive wheels = peak acceleration.
05-02-2013, 04:34 PM
#57
True but NOT always true. Once HP develops at higher speeds, it will feel faster than the "torquier" but less powerful car.
For instance...
a BMW M3 has 420HP but only 295 Torque...
Now a BMW 335d has 425 Torque but only 265HP...
Do you really think the 335d will feel faster from 60-120?
I think not.
For instance...
a BMW M3 has 420HP but only 295 Torque...
Now a BMW 335d has 425 Torque but only 265HP...
Do you really think the 335d will feel faster from 60-120?
I think not.
Tell that to an F1 driver (whose previous V10-powered cars didn't have any more torque than the G37) .
But yes, it's power, power, power, and getting it to the street effectively. There's a reason why the VQ CVT pegs RPM to 6,000 - 6,200 rpm under WOT (this is peak HP RPM, which varies a bit depending on application) - peak power @ drive wheels = peak acceleration.
.But yes, it's power, power, power, and getting it to the street effectively. There's a reason why the VQ CVT pegs RPM to 6,000 - 6,200 rpm under WOT (this is peak HP RPM, which varies a bit depending on application) - peak power @ drive wheels = peak acceleration.
05-02-2013, 04:46 PM
#58
True but NOT always true. Once HP develops at higher speeds, it will feel faster than the "torquier" but less powerful car.
For instance...
a BMW M3 has 420HP but only 295 Torque...
Now a BMW 335d has 425 Torque but only 265HP...
Do you really think the 335d will feel faster from 60-120?
I think not.
For instance...
a BMW M3 has 420HP but only 295 Torque...
Now a BMW 335d has 425 Torque but only 265HP...
Do you really think the 335d will feel faster from 60-120?
I think not.
When the HP kicks in you're already at 60mph.
How is it relevant as a normal DD?
05-02-2013, 04:51 PM
#59
Tell that to an F1 driver (whose previous V10-powered cars didn't have any more torque than the G37) .
But yes, it's power, power, power, and getting it to the street effectively. There's a reason why the VQ CVT pegs RPM to 6,000 - 6,200 rpm under WOT (this is peak HP RPM, which varies a bit depending on application) - peak power @ drive wheels = peak acceleration.
.But yes, it's power, power, power, and getting it to the street effectively. There's a reason why the VQ CVT pegs RPM to 6,000 - 6,200 rpm under WOT (this is peak HP RPM, which varies a bit depending on application) - peak power @ drive wheels = peak acceleration.
F1 cars rev to 8-10k RPM constantly. as where their peak power at. They rarely go slower than 60mph.
If you are able to drive your G at 5-6k RPM constantly, you got the right car.
Tacking the car is different than DD. How many people will track their cars? Maybe 3-5%.
05-02-2013, 05:15 PM
#60
.