Ask the Car People.SM


Article Comments - 2010 Ford Taurus SHO vs. 2009 Infiniti G37 Journey

35 messages,  Last post on Feb 28, 2010 at 4:57 PM

You are in the Infiniti G37 Forum.

What is this discussion about? Infiniti G37, Ford Taurus, Car Comparisons, Sedan

Comparison Test: 2010 Ford Taurus SHO vs. 2009 Infiniti G37 Journey - Put the spec charts of the 2010 Ford Taurus SHO and 2009 Infiniti G37 Journey next to one another, and there are good reasons to believe these two sport sedans are peers — on paper, at least.(more)

Messages Page 2 of 4

#6 of 35 Irresponsible by ram88

Jul 07, 2009 (4:50 pm)

This article totally irresponsible and ridicules article/comparison I have seen. Reviewer was just looking to bash a ford and practicing his/her Japanese/Import ass kissing. (This coming from a Indian).

#7 of 35 G37X by sjaieve

Jul 07, 2009 (5:29 pm)

G35X is trapped at 5.4s by CD, the G37X should be slightly faster than that, maybe a 0.2 to 0.4 difference from the RWD model. Fact of the matter is, the FWD SHO would have lost in this comparison to the G37S anyways. So they brought the better version which still lost, no suprises there.
 
I have not read the article, fact of the matter is the SHO will never arouse my interest and in any case the current VQ engine in the G37 is on its way out, to be replaced by a Direct Injection engine making around 350HP at which point it wont make a difference (not that it does now) which they compare, X or RWD.
 
I had not realized that Edmunds choice is the G sedan in this category, good choice Edmunds, thats my choice too. Many dont realize how much of a beast this thing is, but thats just the way I like it, I just wish my back up camera could take pictures of the salty looks I get sometimes. LOL

#8 of 35 Just read the article by sjaieve

Jul 07, 2009 (5:40 pm)

Are you guys serious, the SHO does the 1/4 mile in 14.2s 99.1mph, the X will smoke this thing. Does the same in 14s 100mph, and thats my G35X with 306HP, the SHO has HP well north of this number but can still be smoked by my G35X. The G37X will have better results than my X. So no matter which car they bring the X or the RWD, the results will be the same.
 
Again Edmunds, clearly lots of people continue to hallucinate about the X not performing as well as the RWD. Guys, do the research, go to CD they have the numbers.
 
Its always pathetic to me for a car to not make good use of its horses, get the Camaro SS, better use of ones money in the domestic market IMHO

#9 of 35 Mustang Vs G37 by ram88

Jul 07, 2009 (7:02 pm)

It may have lost to every version of G37 but the point is these cars are in different class SHO is much-2 bigger car. Why not compare G37 with Mustang GT it hits 60 mph in 5.2 seconds and costs 10K less.

#10 of 35 Re: Mustang Vs G37 [ram88] by sjaieve

Jul 08, 2009 (5:52 am)

Replying to: ram88 (Jul 07, 2009 7:02 pm)
Problem is the SHO could be compared with the A6, 5 series, E Class. But since that is a category for a person who has evolved financially and in maturity as well, I doubt it will win there too, neither will the G. Thats why they probably defaulted to this segment. I do see your point though, maybe the ES, 09+ TL are the better comparisons for the SHO. IMHO, its very likely it may come out on top if compared to these 2.
 
However I do like the fact that they compared the G to the SHO, its these comparisons that give me more information to see if the G is worth it. Pit the SHO against the 328i with pleather manual seats, see how that goes. I will pick the SHO in that comparison BTW

#11 of 35 Re: Mustang Vs G37 [sjaieve] by ingvar

Jul 08, 2009 (6:48 am)

Replying to: sjaieve (Jul 08, 2009 5:52 am)
Problem is the SHO could be compared with the A6, 5 series, E Class.
Nope, it couldn't. Nobody who have money will cross shop "das auto" designed for autobahn with "appliance" designed for 55mph drive:-)

#12 of 35 This is a Joke by curt1234

Jul 08, 2009 (9:17 am)

Who is going to buy a Taurus for over 30k, let alone 40k. Its a good car but terrible resale value, I don't care if it has 500HP.
 
I can buy a couple year old Mercedes Benz CL63 or E63 that would flat smoke either one of these cars, look better, ride better, ect.
 
Only an idiot would buy an SHO, even with the 10K plus rebates they will have to offer in order to unload these things.
 
Now the normal run of the mill Taurus should be a decent value if discounted, but sticker shock is not the word for it, it should be SHMO, So How Much Off.
 
The Infiniti is a good car but not better than the 335i, Ive driven the BMW, the new Audi and the Infiniti and I place the Infiniti in third, its not as refined, gets terrible gas mileage and is over priced.

#13 of 35 Re: This is a Joke [curt1234] by jimveta

Jul 08, 2009 (5:05 pm)

Replying to: curt1234 (Jul 08, 2009 9:17 am)
Exactly! The new SHO's biggest issue by far is its price! At $45k, and $46k with the performance package, most shoppers will be thinking: hmm.. what else can I get for $45-46k?
 
Unless it soundly and resolutely beats all other sedans in that price range in every metric, the SHO will be a hard sell.
 
GM really had the right value equation with the G8 GT (and a bit less so with the GXP)

#14 of 35 Re: Just read the article [sjaieve] by charlesb

Jul 08, 2009 (6:30 pm)

Replying to: sjaieve (Jul 07, 2009 5:40 pm)
Again Edmunds, clearly lots of people continue to hallucinate about the X not performing as well as the RWD. Guys, do the research, go to CD they have the numbers.
 
The "X" doesn't perform as well. With more weight, higher center of gravity, inferior brakes, (and on) the RWD G37S with 6MT will eat the "X's" lunch and kick sand in its face on any surface short of snow or ice. And most of the advantage that the "X" has there would evaporate if snow tires were fitted to the G37S.
 
Car and Driver's testing numbers are, in a word, garbage. .
 
As someone noted earlier in this thread the SHO's biggest problem is the fact that without a seriously hefty, say something in the seven to ten thousand dollar range, 'market adjustment" or incentive acting to lower these announced retail prices the new Taurus SHO is just way, way too much money for this segment. Either Ford's brass is kidding themselves, or just misreading the market horribly. Because I don't see the current market as craving an overtly large, under performing domestic "sport" sedan in the $45K+ range ( with or without the wonderful green-tinted snake oil of Ecoboost.)

#15 of 35 Re: Just read the article [charlesb] by sjaieve

Jul 08, 2009 (6:59 pm)

Replying to: charlesb (Jul 08, 2009 6:30 pm)
The "X" doesn't perform as well. With more weight, higher center of gravity, inferior brakes, (and on) the RWD G37S with 6MT will eat the "X's" lunch and kick sand in its face on any surface short of snow or ice. And most of the advantage that the "X" has there would evaporate if snow tires were fitted to the G37S.
 
Agreed, you might have read my post out of context here, in a post just before that you will find I noted the X will be at least 0.2 to 0.4 s slower to 60. It will be against the laws of physics for a car with more weight & the same engine to be faster than the lighter vehicle. I think what you said here is stating the obvious quite frankly.
 
When I said will perform "as well" I was merely commenting that even if you replace the X with the RWD in this comparison, the results will be the same. Read the 2 posts again.
 
In as much I dont like CD, I think their times are not bad, there are pretty close to what everyone else reports anyways.

Messages Page 2 of 4

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement