5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003) Learn more about the 5th Generation Maxima, including the VQ30DE-K and VQ35DE engines.

Does car and driver accurately show the 2k2s 0-60

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 09:07 AM
  #1  
Charcoal95GXE's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 468
Does car and driver accurately show the 2k2s 0-60

I was reading in a Car and Driver mag or something like that and they said that the 2002 nissan maxima automatic 0-60's in 7.5 secs..seems a little slow to me..any input?
Brian
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 09:28 AM
  #2  
max2001se's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 427
Re: Does car and driver accurately show the 2k2s 0-60

Originally posted by Charcoal95GXE
I was reading in a Car and Driver mag or something like that and they said that the 2002 nissan maxima automatic 0-60's in 7.5 secs..seems a little slow to me..any input?
Brian
That's just plain wrong! That sounds more like a 2k or 2k1 automagic time. A more realistic time would mid to high 6s. With torque braking and shifting manually probably faster.
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 09:30 AM
  #3  
RastaManMax's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,013
Re: Does car and driver accurately show the 2k2s 0-60

Originally posted by Charcoal95GXE
I was reading in a Car and Driver mag or something like that and they said that the 2002 nissan maxima automatic 0-60's in 7.5 secs..seems a little slow to me..any input?
Brian
Car and driver says a lot of things... I seriously doubt that the 0-60 time is 7.5s for an auto 2k2, especially when there's people pulling high 14 1/4 mile times... Then again, check out stillen's site, they said that a stock 5sp 4th gen does 15.5 in the 1/4 and the S/C brings it down to 14.4, there's people running high 14's bone stock, some even in the mid 14's... There's a lesson to be learned here... Don't believe mag times, take it to the streetz
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 10:23 AM
  #4  
ScottG61376's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 141
Re: Does car and driver accurately show the 2k2s 0-60

Originally posted by Charcoal95GXE
I was reading in a Car and Driver mag or something like that and they said that the 2002 nissan maxima automatic 0-60's in 7.5 secs..seems a little slow to me..any input?
Brian
If you look at the C & D itemizations of the cars and there times, they also show the review date of the car. The review date for the Maxima is for either a 2K or a 2K1, and not a 2K2. Therefore all of the listed times are for that model year. I am pretty sure they have not updated the Maxima's times since the 2K2 was released.

Scott
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 12:20 PM
  #5  
MONTE 01&97 SE's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,750
From: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
That was an estimate they made, heck they tested the heavier I35 to 60 and got 6.9 sec a few months ago. Those are definately from a Early 5th gen auto or 4th gen auto times, 02 or 03 auto should be about mid to high 6's depending on testing factors.
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 02:27 PM
  #6  
SkylineGTR's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 878
look at what people run in the quarter mile, typically a high 14s ET translates to a low 6s 0-60, low to mid 14s translates to mid to high 5s.
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 03:56 PM
  #7  
Blu's Avatar
Blu
the tits
iTrader: (63)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,987
From: Charlotte, NC
i say mine is around 6.3-6.4 i ran 14.664 @ 93 stock
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 06:32 PM
  #8  
SkylineGTR's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 878
14.66 sounds more like a 6 second 0-60.....my damn automatic cant get any faster tahn high 6s
Old Aug 12, 2002 | 10:09 PM
  #9  
KLOOGY's Avatar
L33t BMW Drivah
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,421
From: Murrieta, Ca
Originally posted by blubyu2k2
i say mine is around 6.3-6.4 i ran 14.664 @ 93 stock
Yeah. I can stuff groceries and 4 fat A$$ people in my car and run a better time than that !
Old Aug 13, 2002 | 08:36 AM
  #10  
MONTE 01&97 SE's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,750
From: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
My 02 runs a 14.7 @ 94.1 mph.
Old Aug 13, 2002 | 08:42 AM
  #11  
Blackgums100's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 812
Nope

Originally posted by kloogy


Yeah. I can stuff groceries and 4 fat A$$ people in my car and run a better time than that !
Someone on the org did two runs back to back, one by himself the other with four adult males and his quarter mile times went up around 2 full seconds.
Old Aug 13, 2002 | 08:48 AM
  #12  
Blu's Avatar
Blu
the tits
iTrader: (63)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,987
From: Charlotte, NC
i ran with my g/f in the car and slowed down .3 he appox weight is 130
Old Aug 13, 2002 | 12:34 PM
  #13  
95/2k2:6Maxima's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 91
CAr and driver always seems to have slow times if you ask me. THeir 0-60 time for the new Mustang GT auto is 6.3 and a 15.1@93. Shouldnt it be a little faster than that. Ive just noticed that C/D can never get as fast times as M/T. Road and Track cant get as fast as time either as M/T. Take for example this month they both test the 350z. M/T got a 5.49 0-60 and a 13.95@102.25 1/4. Whereas R/T got a 5.6 0-60 and a 14.3@100.2 1/4. THats a big difference in 1/4 times if you as me.
Old Aug 13, 2002 | 01:28 PM
  #14  
BillyBoy's Avatar
Newbie - Just Registered
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 3
I have been a subscriber to Car and Driver for years now. They have not done any in depth reviews on the 2002 maxima as of yet. I know because I am hoping that they will soon. However, there was an ad in last month's issue where it stated the new Altima with the 3.5 liter engine (same as in the maxima) posted a 0 to 60 time of 6.28 seconds. The maxima should be very similar.
Old Aug 13, 2002 | 01:56 PM
  #15  
SkylineGTR's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 878
according to car and driver the 3.5 Altima is only a high 14s car, but we all know that people have run low and mid 14s with it, same with the 2k2 maxima 6spds, and i say it again, low 14s is somewhere in teh 5s for 0-60, roughly a 6spd maxima that runs a 14.2 has a 0-60 of about 5.7
Old Aug 13, 2002 | 04:21 PM
  #16  
ScottG61376's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 141
If everyone could just ready my post again. You have to pay attention to the review date (issue date) that car and driver list. They HAVE NOT reviewed the 2K2 Max yet...just read the line and comprehend what it says. These numbers are for the 2K maxima, not the 2K1 and not the 2K2.
Old Aug 13, 2002 | 11:04 PM
  #17  
JimmyH's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 360
From: Chicagoland
I read in Car and Driver a few years ago that they were changing their testing policy. They used hold the revs at 3-4000 rpm (depending on what was suitable for each car) and drop the clutch on manuals. The same with automatics (only with braketorquing). They decided to switch to a more real-world method of slipping the clutch on standards and starting without any brake on autos.

I believe this is the way R&T does it too.

Being the weekend racers they are, I dont think the guys at MT will ever make that switch.
Old Sep 11, 2002 | 08:51 PM
  #18  
bosssho's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 65
Page 148 of the current 10/02 issue of C&D shows a nice deep blue 02 SE 6 Spd and here are the times compared to the already mentioned 0-60 of 6.28, 1/4 mi in 14.8 and top speed of 140 Altima SE:

0-60: 6 even
1/4 Mi Time and Spd: 14.7 @ 97 MPH (awesome MPH btw)
Top Speed: 145 MPH
Skid Pad; .82

All of these times are incredible for a 4 door Front Drive Sedan and C&D sh*t all over the car for being long in the tooth and then compared it to a WRX and a 3.2TL-S...The WRX is a hair faster, but with half the amenities of the Maxima so you pick...a little more quickness or twice the ride and creature comforts...Yes the Acura has the Max on Fit and Fitness, but it's slower, albeit a hair, but still slower...I'll take the Max and it's Bang for the Buck mixed in with plenty of comfort any day.
Old Sep 11, 2002 | 09:49 PM
  #19  
slickrick's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,228
From: Florida
so whats the typical 0-60 and 1/4 mile of a 2k2 se auto? people swear my car isnt as fast as it is, yet they wont race me. i wont hard evidence to back me up.
Old Sep 12, 2002 | 03:38 AM
  #20  
Blu's Avatar
Blu
the tits
iTrader: (63)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,987
From: Charlotte, NC
well if your not sure about the 93 mph here you go http://www.cardomain.com/member_page...207326&page=5. as for the 15.0 @ 94.39 thats doesn't sound right. 15 sec at 94 mph seems as if you have the fastest mph but not so very fast time. timeslips anywere?


Originally posted by cwerdna

Dunno about 0-60, but the best I've seen anyone claim to do a 1/4 mile stock on a 2K2 auto is 14.6 @ 93 (I'm not sure about 93). My best on my 2K2 GXE auto is 15.009 @ 94.39.

It's pretty fast to me. I win most of the time I go drag racing. Last time I went, I got 6 wins, lost once, and had two opponents redlight (one was still a clear victory, other was close).
Old Sep 12, 2002 | 05:19 AM
  #21  
bosssho's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 65
Originally posted by cwerdna

Dunno about 0-60, but the best I've seen anyone claim to do a 1/4 mile stock on a 2K2 auto is 14.6 @ 93 (I'm not sure about 93). My best on my 2K2 GXE auto is 15.009 @ 94.39.

It's pretty fast to me. I win most of the time I go drag racing. Last time I went, I got 6 wins, lost once, and had two opponents redlight (one was still a clear victory, other was close).
Check out my Tag...with a Frankencar intake I ran my wife's 2002 SE Auto 4 times and pulled three 14.6's all at 94-95 MPH and My younger Brother pulled a 14.7 and 14.6 at the same speeds. My 2nd run was the one in my tag which was a low 14.5 (almost a 14.4) at 94+ MPH...going off of Mag times for 1/4 mi and 0-60 that would put my wife's SE at 5+ seconds 0-60. Check out the 1/4 mi times on this forum for a good snapshot as to what people are running. With out the CAI, we probably would have run 14.6's and 14.7's all day. We never lost one race, beating a WRX, Probe, 94-96 Mustang GT, a 93 SVT Lightning, and two Honda Civics...one with N2O. It was hot and humid so I am hoping for 14.3 to 14.4 as temps come down this fall. We race near the coast and the closer to sea level you are the better your times will be if that helps.
Old Sep 12, 2002 | 08:36 AM
  #22  
MONTE 01&97 SE's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,750
From: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Originally posted by bosssho


Check out my Tag...with a Frankencar intake I ran my wife's 2002 SE Auto 4 times and pulled three 14.6's all at 94-95 MPH and My younger Brother pulled a 14.7 and 14.6 at the same speeds. My 2nd run was the one in my tag which was a low 14.5 (almost a 14.4) at 94+ MPH...going off of Mag times for 1/4 mi and 0-60 that would put my wife's SE at 5+ seconds 0-60. Check out the 1/4 mi times on this forum for a good snapshot as to what people are running. With out the CAI, we probably would have run 14.6's and 14.7's all day. We never lost one race, beating a WRX, Probe, 94-96 Mustang GT, a 93 SVT Lightning, and two Honda Civics...one with N2O. It was hot and humid so I am hoping for 14.3 to 14.4 as temps come down this fall. We race near the coast and the closer to sea level you are the better your times will be if that helps.
Your times are about on par iwth my 14.7 @94.1 mph quarters. It seems as if the auto has closed the gap on the manual in the quarter mile with the 02/03 versus previous auto to manual comparos.
Old Sep 12, 2002 | 04:31 PM
  #23  
bosssho's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 65
Originally posted by MONTE 01&97 SE
Your times are about on par iwth my 14.7 @94.1 mph quarters. It seems as if the auto has closed the gap on the manual in the quarter mile with the 02/03 versus previous auto to manual comparos.
Yep, the 6 Spds are only about 1-2 10ths quicker and 2-4 mph faster...woohooo.
Old Sep 12, 2002 | 04:45 PM
  #24  
mzmtg's Avatar
Minister of Silly Walks
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,772
Why Car and Driver times are slow...
Old Sep 12, 2002 | 07:34 PM
  #25  
kelthombar's Avatar
Donating Maxima.org Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 30
Go to Autoweeks website.They test the 02 Max at 6.21
Old Sep 13, 2002 | 03:41 AM
  #26  
Blu's Avatar
Blu
the tits
iTrader: (63)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,987
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally posted by cwerdna


15.009 @ 94.39 was the exact amount and it is correct. I'll put up a scan of my timeslip sometime (scanner is acting up) soon. That day, I had also had another 94.39 mph run and a 94.01.

Here are some of my timeslips (I was always car 9860):
http://home1.gte.net/res02wrs/timeslip1.gif
http://home1.gte.net/res02wrs/timeslip2.gif
http://home1.gte.net/res02wrs/timeslip3.gif

Yeah yeah, my reaction times sucked in two of those runs. My best ever has been 0.547 (going in middle of 2nd yellow helps me).

When I saw your 14.6 @ 93 w/a stock auto, I was almost in disbelief, but I can kinda believe it now since others have gotten pretty close.

Why would you not believe when I have a timeslip to prove and 2 other orgy members that were present. By the way nice trap speeds
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lakersallday24
6th Generation Maxima (2004-2008)
10
Jun 16, 2019 01:35 AM
Blaxima
8th Generation Maxima (2016-)
37
Aug 31, 2015 01:02 PM
stromm
4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999)
15
Aug 27, 2015 04:13 PM
MaximaDrvr
7th Generation Maxima (2009-2015)
16
Aug 19, 2015 08:20 PM
mrgooch
8th Generation Maxima (2016-)
6
Aug 9, 2015 11:00 AM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:14 AM.