Last post on Jun 06, 2011 at 4:49 PM
You are in the Infiniti Q45
What is this discussion about?
Infiniti Q45, Sedan
#347 of 975 Q45 0-60 time
Jun 05, 2001 (10:37 am)
If Motor Trend - the publication that usually has the lowest 0-60 times among all car magazines - cannot produce 0-60 in 5.9 sec., then I would also think it's a little fishy. I don't know. It seems Nissan's recent HP ratings seem inflated. Case in point, the 2000 Maxima. When Motor Trend compared the Max to the Accord V6 and the Camry V6, they came away with nearly identical 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. A little funny don't you think? It's not like the Maxima weighs any more..and with 30+ hp advantage and torque advantage...you would think that the Max would be at least 1/2 sec faster or so.
Marketing a full size luxury vehicle based on it 0-60 time? I think Nissan/Infiniti should think more luxurious for a lower price and a little more conservative design.
We'll see how the Q does in the long run. But their ideas and their target audience don't seem to agree.
Jun 05, 2001 (1:19 pm)
It could be the transmission, and it isn't geared right for the power. 4.5L is certainly big enough to produce 340hp, so I would think it would be something else, and not inflated numbers.
It's interesting because R&T recorded a 6.5 0-60 too. I think it must be something wrong with the gearing because the LS430 recorded a 6.4 and it weighs more and is a luxury car, not sport luxury.
#349 of 975 maybe...
Jun 05, 2001 (11:43 pm)
whatever the case is.. it's pretty embarrassing to say the least to focus your marketing around a car that you claim does 0-60 in 5.9 (Porche Boxster S level) and when the auto magazines get their little paws on the cars the Q only does 6.5. Of course 6.5 still is very fast, but Infiniti is trying to be the leader in performance while providing a very luxurious interior.
It certainly can't claim to be more posh then the Lexus LS430, it's chief rival. But now that tests show that it's slower than the Lexus, which is supposed to be primarily a luxury car.. it's quite embarrasing to say the least. No wonder why the sales numbers are what they are.
Just when you think Infiniti has it all together... another blooper. It's really a shame because the Q45 is a very nice car that's packaged very, very nicely. But like my dad used to say, you better do what you say you can do, or else you lose your credibility.
Well, the new Z is claimed to have 0-60 time under 6 seconds as well...we'll see about that one too.
#350 of 975 Trunk space and 0 to 60 times
Jun 06, 2001 (9:18 am)
Interesting thing about the trunk is that it also had the widest opening. Its widest point was wider than any of the others, even though its narrowest point was more narrow.
Road and Track would have tested the same pre-production vehicles that MT did so one would expect the same discrepency in the 0-60 times. Not that it really matters, because no one actually drives their $55,000 car in a way that produces drag race starts.
Infiniti is pushing the performance and handleing of this car because they are getting back to their roots as a performance first luxury second automaker.
#351 of 975 0-60 Times
Jun 06, 2001 (12:03 pm)
I believe the MT article said that the journalists surmised that the engine management module was the culprit. (after talking with Infiniti). But LSC has a point about bringing the car to market (or providing test units to mags) that do not deliver as promised. And especially in the performance area, where Infiniti has led the public on with anticipation for a no-excuses luxury car with sub six-second 0-60 times. While the car is still very quick, It was touted to be faster, not slower, than the competition. And by competition I mean the LS430.
I really like this car, but couldn't wait for Infiniti to get it to market and bought a competitor. I will say that the trunk is a big improvement over the previous models, but it's still fairly small for that category of car. Like the journalists in MT, I was also enamoured with the voice activation system. It should impress a lot of potential buyers...
Jun 06, 2001 (2:55 pm)
Well, I have a New Q and I like it, but I do not know if it goes from 0-60 in 5.9 seconds or 6.5 seconds. The car still feels fast enough, but I am a bit surprised that the magazine test cars could not perform the way that they advertise......
Jun 06, 2001 (2:58 pm)
sysadb- I don't think you sold yourself short in picking the best in class BMW 7 (in my opinion). It may be the oldest design, but it still performs flawlessly. I don't know how BMW is going to make it even better!~ A.R.
Jun 06, 2001 (2:59 pm)
I would still take the new Q over the LS430. Edmunds has a new article on the LS430 and at the end they quesiton the premium of the LS430 over the new Q which is faster (?), more fun to drive and offers the same amount of luxury~ A.R.
#355 of 975 2002 Q-45.....warning!
Jun 09, 2001 (1:57 pm)
I test drove it today in the summer (desert) heat. Not only was the air conditioning suboptimal, but it was INADEQUATE. Thought it was the specific car so my wife and I drove two more. ALL had the same problem ! When I confronted the salesman regarding this, he said that Infiniti was "working on" refining the a/c. So, if any of you are contemplating buying one, I'd suggest to try your test drive on a hot day, and see if this presents you with the same conclusion I made... INADEQUATE air on a $50K+ car is UNACCEPTABLE ! This was so much so that the car is out of consideration for us ! BMW, when I got into the car I was trading to drive off, even after my car was sitting out in the heat, it was almost immediately cooler than the cars I was test driving for a longer time period. BEWARE !
Jun 09, 2001 (10:16 pm)
are you sure about that? no other publication has made any complaints about a poor air conditioning system...BTW i didnt know lexus made a 2002 LS400. can you even buy a 2002?