Toronto Star Maxima vs. Grand Prix review
05-28-2003, 12:18 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 422
Toronto Star Maxima vs. Grand Prix review
interesting comarison of Maxima vs. a Grand Prix
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=969048871196
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=969048871196
05-28-2003, 12:41 PM
#2
Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 256
Not really unbiased though. I also think it was unfair to compare the top performance model Grand Prix against the luxury appointed Maxima SL. Compare it to the SE 5spd auto or the 6spd manual and you would have a different outcome for sure.
Also, I don't believe that the Grand Prix is as refined or reliable as GM would like you to believe. I've driven many Pontiac cars (having worked in the rental car industry for many years) and they are horrible when it comes to reliability.
The only thing this proves to me is that you can pretty much convince anyone of anything if you control the test environment.
Also, I don't believe that the Grand Prix is as refined or reliable as GM would like you to believe. I've driven many Pontiac cars (having worked in the rental car industry for many years) and they are horrible when it comes to reliability.
The only thing this proves to me is that you can pretty much convince anyone of anything if you control the test environment.
05-28-2003, 01:23 PM
#3
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Posts: 3,751
Originally posted by Jules Maximus
Not really unbiased though. I also think it was unfair to compare the top performance model Grand Prix against the luxury appointed Maxima SL. Compare it to the SE 5spd auto or the 6spd manual and you would have a different outcome for sure.
Also, I don't believe that the Grand Prix is as refined or reliable as GM would like you to believe. I've driven many Pontiac cars (having worked in the rental car industry for many years) and they are horrible when it comes to reliability.
The only thing this proves to me is that you can pretty much convince anyone of anything if you control the test environment.
Not really unbiased though. I also think it was unfair to compare the top performance model Grand Prix against the luxury appointed Maxima SL. Compare it to the SE 5spd auto or the 6spd manual and you would have a different outcome for sure.
Also, I don't believe that the Grand Prix is as refined or reliable as GM would like you to believe. I've driven many Pontiac cars (having worked in the rental car industry for many years) and they are horrible when it comes to reliability.
The only thing this proves to me is that you can pretty much convince anyone of anything if you control the test environment.
05-28-2003, 01:50 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
That was just poor... you don't do a write up, much less a comparison, from a test drive at the manufacturers proving ground. No kidding the Grand Prix did better on the autocross, they didn't take the right Maxima...
"SL-trim level Maxima, equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission. Some models of Maxima offer a five-speed autobox, but this combination provided the closest, most-comparable configuration to the Pontiac.
And as equipped, the Maxima still cost a couple of thousand dollars more."
This is funny too, they pick the Max that costs the most and has the least performance, then say that it is the closest match. A base SE would have been the way to go.
"SL-trim level Maxima, equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission. Some models of Maxima offer a five-speed autobox, but this combination provided the closest, most-comparable configuration to the Pontiac.
And as equipped, the Maxima still cost a couple of thousand dollars more."
This is funny too, they pick the Max that costs the most and has the least performance, then say that it is the closest match. A base SE would have been the way to go.
05-28-2003, 03:20 PM
#5
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Posts: 3,751
Go to this link and look at http://www.pontiac.com/grandprix/ and click on "See how we beat the competition then click on "test results". Look at the 1/4 mile time for some of the cars including the V6 Altima at 16.76, they are saying that a Taurus,Galant, Sebring ETC. are faster than a V6 Altima yeah right we know its rigged. We all know 03 Maxima auto and V6 Altima are much quicker than the times posted. 03 Maxima came in 2nd and the 3.5 Altima 6th. Funny how the Maxima came in second since it has been the car Pontiac has targeted for a long time.
05-28-2003, 06:12 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
What a joke that article is, almost as bad as the list of times on Pontiac's site. I wrote that clown an email, we will see if he responds.
"Hi Jim,
I recently read your article titled "Grand Prix showdown" and I must tell you that it seemed awfully skewed towards the Grand Prix before you ever started the engine.
First of all, how do you take the highest performance level of one car and the luxury model of another and race them on an autocross track with a clear conscience? You should have had an SE Maxima, not an SL. In your article you stated "The timed events would pit the supercharged Grand Prix with the Comp-G package against an SL-trim level Maxima, equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission. Some models of Maxima offer a five-speed autobox, but this combination provided the closest, most-comparable configuration to the Pontiac." How did you come to this conclusion? It seems that you consider a 4 speed auto to be the deciding factor in what makes these "the closest, most-comparable configuration". I think anyone who has ever run an autocross course knows that running with a sport suspension makes a huge difference. Why would you ever try running autocross with a car that is optimized for a luxury ride? You are going to lose seconds, not fractions because of this difference.
You also wrote that "GM had previously conducted some tests of its car versus others in the class, including the Maxima. In acceleration, braking and timed laps on an autocross course, the Grand Prix came out on top." No kidding... Did this surprise you? Do you think they are going to tell you that the Grand Prix lost? On their website they show a chart of who they claim to have beat in tests. They list an 03 Maxima, and they list it at 15.496 quarter mile where Car and Driver comes in at 14.7. Worse than that, they claim that an 03 Altima 3.5SE runs the quarter at 16.766 where Motor Trend states (Feb 03) "At 5.95 seconds to 60 mph, the Altima is the quickest front-drive production car we've ever tested. If that weren't enough, its quarter-mile time (14.46 seconds at 98.6 mph) is also a record-setter and nearly tied a 350Z's 14.02-second run." I don't get it, how can these numbers be so different. You don't suppose GM may have posted numbers that are slightly less than accurate do you? I don't know who to believe, an independent car magazine, or an automobile manufacturer that states "See how we beat the competition", they should have stated "See how we beat the cometition in independent tests that we sponsored"... sure it was "independent"....
Later in the article you wrote "And as equipped, the Maxima still cost a couple of thousand dollars more." You chose the wrong model. If you had tested the SE the prices would have been about the same or slightly higher, definitely not "a couple of thousand dollars more". The Maxima performs better, and has styling that is in another class, which justifies the higher cost. The interior of the Grand Prix looks a lot like the 1989 Grand Prix that I had, a long time ago. Which brings me to the most accurate part of your article "there was still a long way to go in areas like interior finish...". The only car with a more dated interior is the Mustang.
Finally, don't you think it is a bit slanted in GM's favor when you test with their drivers, on their track, with their tests? Add to that the fact that you chose their sportiest package to go against Maxima's luxury package and you have an article that is about as predictable as a race between a Porsche and a Saturn.
As a journalist you should have presented the facts on an even playing field, and you didn't... shame on you for that.
Thanks for your time,
Grant Cline"
"Hi Jim,
I recently read your article titled "Grand Prix showdown" and I must tell you that it seemed awfully skewed towards the Grand Prix before you ever started the engine.
First of all, how do you take the highest performance level of one car and the luxury model of another and race them on an autocross track with a clear conscience? You should have had an SE Maxima, not an SL. In your article you stated "The timed events would pit the supercharged Grand Prix with the Comp-G package against an SL-trim level Maxima, equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission. Some models of Maxima offer a five-speed autobox, but this combination provided the closest, most-comparable configuration to the Pontiac." How did you come to this conclusion? It seems that you consider a 4 speed auto to be the deciding factor in what makes these "the closest, most-comparable configuration". I think anyone who has ever run an autocross course knows that running with a sport suspension makes a huge difference. Why would you ever try running autocross with a car that is optimized for a luxury ride? You are going to lose seconds, not fractions because of this difference.
You also wrote that "GM had previously conducted some tests of its car versus others in the class, including the Maxima. In acceleration, braking and timed laps on an autocross course, the Grand Prix came out on top." No kidding... Did this surprise you? Do you think they are going to tell you that the Grand Prix lost? On their website they show a chart of who they claim to have beat in tests. They list an 03 Maxima, and they list it at 15.496 quarter mile where Car and Driver comes in at 14.7. Worse than that, they claim that an 03 Altima 3.5SE runs the quarter at 16.766 where Motor Trend states (Feb 03) "At 5.95 seconds to 60 mph, the Altima is the quickest front-drive production car we've ever tested. If that weren't enough, its quarter-mile time (14.46 seconds at 98.6 mph) is also a record-setter and nearly tied a 350Z's 14.02-second run." I don't get it, how can these numbers be so different. You don't suppose GM may have posted numbers that are slightly less than accurate do you? I don't know who to believe, an independent car magazine, or an automobile manufacturer that states "See how we beat the competition", they should have stated "See how we beat the cometition in independent tests that we sponsored"... sure it was "independent"....
Later in the article you wrote "And as equipped, the Maxima still cost a couple of thousand dollars more." You chose the wrong model. If you had tested the SE the prices would have been about the same or slightly higher, definitely not "a couple of thousand dollars more". The Maxima performs better, and has styling that is in another class, which justifies the higher cost. The interior of the Grand Prix looks a lot like the 1989 Grand Prix that I had, a long time ago. Which brings me to the most accurate part of your article "there was still a long way to go in areas like interior finish...". The only car with a more dated interior is the Mustang.
Finally, don't you think it is a bit slanted in GM's favor when you test with their drivers, on their track, with their tests? Add to that the fact that you chose their sportiest package to go against Maxima's luxury package and you have an article that is about as predictable as a race between a Porsche and a Saturn.
As a journalist you should have presented the facts on an even playing field, and you didn't... shame on you for that.
Thanks for your time,
Grant Cline"
05-28-2003, 06:21 PM
#7
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 184
Originally posted by gmc74
What a joke that article is, almost as bad as the list of times on Pontiac's site. I wrote that clown an email, we will see if he responds.
"Hi Jim,
I recently read your article titled "Grand Prix showdown" and I must tell you that it seemed awfully skewed towards the Grand Prix before you ever started the engine.
First of all, how do you take the highest performance level of one car and the luxury model of another and race them on an autocross track with a clear conscience? You should have had an SE Maxima, not an SL. In your article you stated "The timed events would pit the supercharged Grand Prix with the Comp-G package against an SL-trim level Maxima, equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission. Some models of Maxima offer a five-speed autobox, but this combination provided the closest, most-comparable configuration to the Pontiac." How did you come to this conclusion? It seems that you consider a 4 speed auto to be the deciding factor in what makes these "the closest, most-comparable configuration". I think anyone who has ever run an autocross course knows that running with a sport suspension makes a huge difference. Why would you ever try running autocross with a car that is optimized for a luxury ride? You are going to lose seconds, not fractions because of this difference.
You also wrote that "GM had previously conducted some tests of its car versus others in the class, including the Maxima. In acceleration, braking and timed laps on an autocross course, the Grand Prix came out on top." No kidding... Did this surprise you? Do you think they are going to tell you that the Grand Prix lost? On their website they show a chart of who they claim to have beat in tests. They list an 03 Maxima, and they list it at 15.496 quarter mile where Car and Driver comes in at 14.7. Worse than that, they claim that an 03 Altima 3.5SE runs the quarter at 16.766 where Motor Trend states (Feb 03) "At 5.95 seconds to 60 mph, the Altima is the quickest front-drive production car we've ever tested. If that weren't enough, its quarter-mile time (14.46 seconds at 98.6 mph) is also a record-setter and nearly tied a 350Z's 14.02-second run." I don't get it, how can these numbers be so different. You don't suppose GM may have posted numbers that are slightly less than accurate do you? I don't know who to believe, an independent car magazine, or an automobile manufacturer that states "See how we beat the competition", they should have stated "See how we beat the cometition in independent tests that we sponsored"... sure it was "independent"....
Later in the article you wrote "And as equipped, the Maxima still cost a couple of thousand dollars more." You chose the wrong model. If you had tested the SE the prices would have been about the same or slightly higher, definitely not "a couple of thousand dollars more". The Maxima performs better, and has styling that is in another class, which justifies the higher cost. The interior of the Grand Prix looks a lot like the 1989 Grand Prix that I had, a long time ago. Which brings me to the most accurate part of your article "there was still a long way to go in areas like interior finish...". The only car with a more dated interior is the Mustang.
Finally, don't you think it is a bit slanted in GM's favor when you test with their drivers, on their track, with their tests? Add to that the fact that you chose their sportiest package to go against Maxima's luxury package and you have an article that is about as predictable as a race between a Porsche and a Saturn.
As a journalist you should have presented the facts on an even playing field, and you didn't... shame on you for that.
Thanks for your time,
Grant Cline"
What a joke that article is, almost as bad as the list of times on Pontiac's site. I wrote that clown an email, we will see if he responds.
"Hi Jim,
I recently read your article titled "Grand Prix showdown" and I must tell you that it seemed awfully skewed towards the Grand Prix before you ever started the engine.
First of all, how do you take the highest performance level of one car and the luxury model of another and race them on an autocross track with a clear conscience? You should have had an SE Maxima, not an SL. In your article you stated "The timed events would pit the supercharged Grand Prix with the Comp-G package against an SL-trim level Maxima, equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission. Some models of Maxima offer a five-speed autobox, but this combination provided the closest, most-comparable configuration to the Pontiac." How did you come to this conclusion? It seems that you consider a 4 speed auto to be the deciding factor in what makes these "the closest, most-comparable configuration". I think anyone who has ever run an autocross course knows that running with a sport suspension makes a huge difference. Why would you ever try running autocross with a car that is optimized for a luxury ride? You are going to lose seconds, not fractions because of this difference.
You also wrote that "GM had previously conducted some tests of its car versus others in the class, including the Maxima. In acceleration, braking and timed laps on an autocross course, the Grand Prix came out on top." No kidding... Did this surprise you? Do you think they are going to tell you that the Grand Prix lost? On their website they show a chart of who they claim to have beat in tests. They list an 03 Maxima, and they list it at 15.496 quarter mile where Car and Driver comes in at 14.7. Worse than that, they claim that an 03 Altima 3.5SE runs the quarter at 16.766 where Motor Trend states (Feb 03) "At 5.95 seconds to 60 mph, the Altima is the quickest front-drive production car we've ever tested. If that weren't enough, its quarter-mile time (14.46 seconds at 98.6 mph) is also a record-setter and nearly tied a 350Z's 14.02-second run." I don't get it, how can these numbers be so different. You don't suppose GM may have posted numbers that are slightly less than accurate do you? I don't know who to believe, an independent car magazine, or an automobile manufacturer that states "See how we beat the competition", they should have stated "See how we beat the cometition in independent tests that we sponsored"... sure it was "independent"....
Later in the article you wrote "And as equipped, the Maxima still cost a couple of thousand dollars more." You chose the wrong model. If you had tested the SE the prices would have been about the same or slightly higher, definitely not "a couple of thousand dollars more". The Maxima performs better, and has styling that is in another class, which justifies the higher cost. The interior of the Grand Prix looks a lot like the 1989 Grand Prix that I had, a long time ago. Which brings me to the most accurate part of your article "there was still a long way to go in areas like interior finish...". The only car with a more dated interior is the Mustang.
Finally, don't you think it is a bit slanted in GM's favor when you test with their drivers, on their track, with their tests? Add to that the fact that you chose their sportiest package to go against Maxima's luxury package and you have an article that is about as predictable as a race between a Porsche and a Saturn.
As a journalist you should have presented the facts on an even playing field, and you didn't... shame on you for that.
Thanks for your time,
Grant Cline"
That is a great letter! You beat me to it.
Good job!!
Nat
05-28-2003, 06:32 PM
#8
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 67
Originally posted by Jules Maximus
Not really unbiased though. I also think it was unfair to compare the top performance model Grand Prix against the luxury appointed Maxima SL. Compare it to the SE 5spd auto or the 6spd manual and you would have a different outcome for sure.
Also, I don't believe that the Grand Prix is as refined or reliable as GM would like you to believe. I've driven many Pontiac cars (having worked in the rental car industry for many years) and they are horrible when it comes to reliability.
The only thing this proves to me is that you can pretty much convince anyone of anything if you control the test environment.
Not really unbiased though. I also think it was unfair to compare the top performance model Grand Prix against the luxury appointed Maxima SL. Compare it to the SE 5spd auto or the 6spd manual and you would have a different outcome for sure.
Also, I don't believe that the Grand Prix is as refined or reliable as GM would like you to believe. I've driven many Pontiac cars (having worked in the rental car industry for many years) and they are horrible when it comes to reliability.
The only thing this proves to me is that you can pretty much convince anyone of anything if you control the test environment.
I agree with you all on your thoughts, although I am a little biased towards the SL since I own one. However, one thing I found disturbing was the braking test in which the Max' rear swung out about 90 degrees. Any comments on that? I've only had the car less than a couple of weeks, and I've notice that the rear jumps a bit when I drive over anything more than minor bumps . I have a very light load in the trunk.
Regards
05-28-2003, 07:13 PM
#9
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 422
excellent response
Originally posted by gmc74
What a joke that article is, almost as bad as the list of times on Pontiac's site. I wrote that clown an email, we will see if he responds.
.Grant Cline"
What a joke that article is, almost as bad as the list of times on Pontiac's site. I wrote that clown an email, we will see if he responds.
.Grant Cline"
05-28-2003, 07:37 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
Re: excellent response
Originally posted by LeoB
Kenzie usually takes the time to reply to most readers.. A GOOD reply, maybe it will even make the next edition of the Wheels section of the STAR!
Kenzie usually takes the time to reply to most readers.. A GOOD reply, maybe it will even make the next edition of the Wheels section of the STAR!
I tried to be as non-sarcastic as I could be, but it just isn't in me... it kills me that they would race autocross with an SL... that is irresponsible.Nat,
Thanks. I had to wait until I got home because I was busy at work today, I had thought about it pretty much all afternoon and came right to my PC when I got home to drop him a line.
Hanzar,
I can understand you being biased towards the SL, but I am assuming that if you were going to race one you would pick the SE. Would it make sense to race off-road with a 2 wheel drive truck when a 4 wheel drive is available? Same idea, it is all about the application. The SL is a nice car, but it won't do as well in autocross.
I haven't had any issues with my SE, but then again I haven't slammed on the brakes while half on the road and half on the dirt... seems like an odd test... would you really be driving 60-80 mph in that environment?
I will post any reply that I get...
05-28-2003, 09:15 PM
#11
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Posts: 3,751
Originally posted by gmc74
What a joke that article is, almost as bad as the list of times on Pontiac's site. I wrote that clown an email, we will see if he responds.
"Hi Jim,
I recently read your article titled "Grand Prix showdown" and I must tell you that it seemed awfully skewed towards the Grand Prix before you ever started the engine.
First of all, how do you take the highest performance level of one car and the luxury model of another and race them on an autocross track with a clear conscience? You should have had an SE Maxima, not an SL. In your article you stated "The timed events would pit the supercharged Grand Prix with the Comp-G package against an SL-trim level Maxima, equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission. Some models of Maxima offer a five-speed autobox, but this combination provided the closest, most-comparable configuration to the Pontiac." How did you come to this conclusion? It seems that you consider a 4 speed auto to be the deciding factor in what makes these "the closest, most-comparable configuration". I think anyone who has ever run an autocross course knows that running with a sport suspension makes a huge difference. Why would you ever try running autocross with a car that is optimized for a luxury ride? You are going to lose seconds, not fractions because of this difference.
You also wrote that "GM had previously conducted some tests of its car versus others in the class, including the Maxima. In acceleration, braking and timed laps on an autocross course, the Grand Prix came out on top." No kidding... Did this surprise you? Do you think they are going to tell you that the Grand Prix lost? On their website they show a chart of who they claim to have beat in tests. They list an 03 Maxima, and they list it at 15.496 quarter mile where Car and Driver comes in at 14.7. Worse than that, they claim that an 03 Altima 3.5SE runs the quarter at 16.766 where Motor Trend states (Feb 03) "At 5.95 seconds to 60 mph, the Altima is the quickest front-drive production car we've ever tested. If that weren't enough, its quarter-mile time (14.46 seconds at 98.6 mph) is also a record-setter and nearly tied a 350Z's 14.02-second run." I don't get it, how can these numbers be so different. You don't suppose GM may have posted numbers that are slightly less than accurate do you? I don't know who to believe, an independent car magazine, or an automobile manufacturer that states "See how we beat the competition", they should have stated "See how we beat the cometition in independent tests that we sponsored"... sure it was "independent"....
Later in the article you wrote "And as equipped, the Maxima still cost a couple of thousand dollars more." You chose the wrong model. If you had tested the SE the prices would have been about the same or slightly higher, definitely not "a couple of thousand dollars more". The Maxima performs better, and has styling that is in another class, which justifies the higher cost. The interior of the Grand Prix looks a lot like the 1989 Grand Prix that I had, a long time ago. Which brings me to the most accurate part of your article "there was still a long way to go in areas like interior finish...". The only car with a more dated interior is the Mustang.
Finally, don't you think it is a bit slanted in GM's favor when you test with their drivers, on their track, with their tests? Add to that the fact that you chose their sportiest package to go against Maxima's luxury package and you have an article that is about as predictable as a race between a Porsche and a Saturn.
As a journalist you should have presented the facts on an even playing field, and you didn't... shame on you for that.
Thanks for your time,
Grant Cline"
What a joke that article is, almost as bad as the list of times on Pontiac's site. I wrote that clown an email, we will see if he responds.
"Hi Jim,
I recently read your article titled "Grand Prix showdown" and I must tell you that it seemed awfully skewed towards the Grand Prix before you ever started the engine.
First of all, how do you take the highest performance level of one car and the luxury model of another and race them on an autocross track with a clear conscience? You should have had an SE Maxima, not an SL. In your article you stated "The timed events would pit the supercharged Grand Prix with the Comp-G package against an SL-trim level Maxima, equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission. Some models of Maxima offer a five-speed autobox, but this combination provided the closest, most-comparable configuration to the Pontiac." How did you come to this conclusion? It seems that you consider a 4 speed auto to be the deciding factor in what makes these "the closest, most-comparable configuration". I think anyone who has ever run an autocross course knows that running with a sport suspension makes a huge difference. Why would you ever try running autocross with a car that is optimized for a luxury ride? You are going to lose seconds, not fractions because of this difference.
You also wrote that "GM had previously conducted some tests of its car versus others in the class, including the Maxima. In acceleration, braking and timed laps on an autocross course, the Grand Prix came out on top." No kidding... Did this surprise you? Do you think they are going to tell you that the Grand Prix lost? On their website they show a chart of who they claim to have beat in tests. They list an 03 Maxima, and they list it at 15.496 quarter mile where Car and Driver comes in at 14.7. Worse than that, they claim that an 03 Altima 3.5SE runs the quarter at 16.766 where Motor Trend states (Feb 03) "At 5.95 seconds to 60 mph, the Altima is the quickest front-drive production car we've ever tested. If that weren't enough, its quarter-mile time (14.46 seconds at 98.6 mph) is also a record-setter and nearly tied a 350Z's 14.02-second run." I don't get it, how can these numbers be so different. You don't suppose GM may have posted numbers that are slightly less than accurate do you? I don't know who to believe, an independent car magazine, or an automobile manufacturer that states "See how we beat the competition", they should have stated "See how we beat the cometition in independent tests that we sponsored"... sure it was "independent"....
Later in the article you wrote "And as equipped, the Maxima still cost a couple of thousand dollars more." You chose the wrong model. If you had tested the SE the prices would have been about the same or slightly higher, definitely not "a couple of thousand dollars more". The Maxima performs better, and has styling that is in another class, which justifies the higher cost. The interior of the Grand Prix looks a lot like the 1989 Grand Prix that I had, a long time ago. Which brings me to the most accurate part of your article "there was still a long way to go in areas like interior finish...". The only car with a more dated interior is the Mustang.
Finally, don't you think it is a bit slanted in GM's favor when you test with their drivers, on their track, with their tests? Add to that the fact that you chose their sportiest package to go against Maxima's luxury package and you have an article that is about as predictable as a race between a Porsche and a Saturn.
As a journalist you should have presented the facts on an even playing field, and you didn't... shame on you for that.
Thanks for your time,
Grant Cline"
05-29-2003, 10:56 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
I got a reply-
"Hi Grant:
GM is too smart to try and cheat. No advantage there. Car magazines, on the other hand, cheat all the time to get the best numbers so THEY can look like better drivers than the other guys.
We do 0 - 100 km/h acceleration and 100 - 0 braking tests at our AJAC
test-fest each fall, and we never get close to any numbers the American buff books claim. (Incidentally, Nissan's factory-supplied numbers are always hopelessly optimistic..)
We figured the four-speed versus the four-speed was the most equal
comparison of power trains.
The Maxima is more expensive than the Grand Prix, right down the line. If it's not Nissan's fault that GM doesn't offer a five-speed in the Grand Prix, nor is it GM's fault that Nissan doesn't offer a 3.8 litre supercharged engine in the Maxima
We said in the story that the Maxima was the more refined car. Lutz agreed. I even said that the steering of the Maxima was better. Perhaps the ultimate grip was compromised by the smaller tires, but the car was better-handling, as I said in the story.
Styling is a matter of personal taste.
The point of the story was the show that in certain measurable tests, the Grand Prix can compete.
It did.
Cheers, and thanks for reading.
Jim Kenzie"
"Hi Grant:
GM is too smart to try and cheat. No advantage there. Car magazines, on the other hand, cheat all the time to get the best numbers so THEY can look like better drivers than the other guys.
We do 0 - 100 km/h acceleration and 100 - 0 braking tests at our AJAC
test-fest each fall, and we never get close to any numbers the American buff books claim. (Incidentally, Nissan's factory-supplied numbers are always hopelessly optimistic..)
We figured the four-speed versus the four-speed was the most equal
comparison of power trains.
The Maxima is more expensive than the Grand Prix, right down the line. If it's not Nissan's fault that GM doesn't offer a five-speed in the Grand Prix, nor is it GM's fault that Nissan doesn't offer a 3.8 litre supercharged engine in the Maxima
We said in the story that the Maxima was the more refined car. Lutz agreed. I even said that the steering of the Maxima was better. Perhaps the ultimate grip was compromised by the smaller tires, but the car was better-handling, as I said in the story.
Styling is a matter of personal taste.
The point of the story was the show that in certain measurable tests, the Grand Prix can compete.
It did.
Cheers, and thanks for reading.
Jim Kenzie"
05-29-2003, 11:05 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
Of course, I responded back-
"Hi Jim,
Thanks for taking the time to reply.
I assume you have run more than one autocross race in your life time, considering it is pretty much a requirement for your job. If this is true, why would you choose a transmission over a suspension? In an autocross race it is all about your suspension, if you can't hug those corners with out body roll and sliding, you are done. Did the Maxima have VDC?
If you were really looking to match the cars as best as possible and you wanted the 4 speeds in both, how come you didn't choose the regular GTP with out the Comp G package? That is closer to the SL Maxima than the GTP with the Comp G package. Who chose the races and the cars? If Pontiac did, well then we know why. If you did, then you made another mistake. You really should have run the SE vs GTP w/Comp G or the SL vs the GTP with out the Comp G.
As far as pricing goes, the GTP with the Comp G package has an MSRP of $27,890 (Pontiac's site), the Base SE an MSRP of $26,950 (edmunds.com). Those are very close in price and they are the closest in performance between the two models, and as we both stated there is no comparison on style.
Unfortunately no one else has done 1/4 mile tests in the 04 GTP w/Comp G, so I can't compare them to what Pontiac claims. I can compare what Pontiac claims the others received to every reputable source that I can find. In doing so I have found that the 330i which Pontiac claims a 15.579 comes in at 14.8 and 15 elsewhere. I couldn't find anyone who ran it above 15, except Pontiac. The Altima, arguably the biggest competitor for price and performance comes in at 14.46, 14.7 and 15.6. Well under the 16.766 that Pontiac claims. I did search your wheels section on the website looking for your scores for these vehicles, but I couldn't find them. Have you tested these, if so what kind of scores did you get? This isn't meant the way it is going to sound, but if Motor Trend, Road and Track, and Car and Driver are all getting considerably better speeds than you are, are you sure you are correct in assuming they are wrong, and not you?
I also find it interesting that you defend GM's claims at their test results, but call Nissan's "hopelessly optimistic", and I never even mentioned their claims (mainly because I couldn't find them on their site).
In closing, I agree that the GTP is much better than it was, and that in certain measurable tests it can compete against an SL Maxima, but probably not against an SE. It is too bad that you (or they) chose to match these unequal cars against each other, it would have been nice to see what would have come from a fair fight.
I appreciate your response, not all writers are as willing to engage in this type of conversation.
Thanks again,
Grant Cline
Phoenix, AZ"
I wonder if GM wined and dined him a bit, he really seems to be defending their car and their tests. I tried to find the article that he wrote first, the one he mentions in this article, where it sounds like he gave the GTP a bad review, but I can't find it.
I hope you all enjoy, I will let you know if he responds.
Grant
"Hi Jim,
Thanks for taking the time to reply.
I assume you have run more than one autocross race in your life time, considering it is pretty much a requirement for your job. If this is true, why would you choose a transmission over a suspension? In an autocross race it is all about your suspension, if you can't hug those corners with out body roll and sliding, you are done. Did the Maxima have VDC?
If you were really looking to match the cars as best as possible and you wanted the 4 speeds in both, how come you didn't choose the regular GTP with out the Comp G package? That is closer to the SL Maxima than the GTP with the Comp G package. Who chose the races and the cars? If Pontiac did, well then we know why. If you did, then you made another mistake. You really should have run the SE vs GTP w/Comp G or the SL vs the GTP with out the Comp G.
As far as pricing goes, the GTP with the Comp G package has an MSRP of $27,890 (Pontiac's site), the Base SE an MSRP of $26,950 (edmunds.com). Those are very close in price and they are the closest in performance between the two models, and as we both stated there is no comparison on style.
Unfortunately no one else has done 1/4 mile tests in the 04 GTP w/Comp G, so I can't compare them to what Pontiac claims. I can compare what Pontiac claims the others received to every reputable source that I can find. In doing so I have found that the 330i which Pontiac claims a 15.579 comes in at 14.8 and 15 elsewhere. I couldn't find anyone who ran it above 15, except Pontiac. The Altima, arguably the biggest competitor for price and performance comes in at 14.46, 14.7 and 15.6. Well under the 16.766 that Pontiac claims. I did search your wheels section on the website looking for your scores for these vehicles, but I couldn't find them. Have you tested these, if so what kind of scores did you get? This isn't meant the way it is going to sound, but if Motor Trend, Road and Track, and Car and Driver are all getting considerably better speeds than you are, are you sure you are correct in assuming they are wrong, and not you?
I also find it interesting that you defend GM's claims at their test results, but call Nissan's "hopelessly optimistic", and I never even mentioned their claims (mainly because I couldn't find them on their site).
In closing, I agree that the GTP is much better than it was, and that in certain measurable tests it can compete against an SL Maxima, but probably not against an SE. It is too bad that you (or they) chose to match these unequal cars against each other, it would have been nice to see what would have come from a fair fight.
I appreciate your response, not all writers are as willing to engage in this type of conversation.
Thanks again,
Grant Cline
Phoenix, AZ"
I wonder if GM wined and dined him a bit, he really seems to be defending their car and their tests. I tried to find the article that he wrote first, the one he mentions in this article, where it sounds like he gave the GTP a bad review, but I can't find it.
I hope you all enjoy, I will let you know if he responds.
Grant
05-30-2003, 10:12 AM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
I think it is important for people in a position of power to be accountable. You may ask yourself, is he in a "position of power", and the answer is yes, but not in the way we normally think about it. He has the power to influence others, to reach thousands, if not millions of people (I have no idea how big Toronto is, but his articles get published online). So it is important for us to make sure he is presenting the full story, which he isn't.
Ok, I don't really take myself that serious... this is fun and that is why I am doing it
Ok, I don't really take myself that serious... this is fun and that is why I am doing it
05-30-2003, 10:19 AM
#16
Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 30
Re: Re: excellent response
I've slammed on my brakes half on dry and half on ice in my 2k MAX. It stopped pretty damn straight. Not exactly planned but I was happy with the results. I didn't dent anything and only had to change my underwear. I know mine isn't the 2004 max but I can't imagine nissan being off that much. I understand the 2004 has a different package. (larger rotors, etc) Hope no one has to find out the hard way. Nice letter BTW. I agree totaly.
cheers
cheers
Originally posted by gmc74
I can only hope! sorry for the sarcasm... I tried to be as non-sarcastic as I could be, but it just isn't in me... it kills me that they would race autocross with an SL... that is irresponsible.
Nat,
Thanks. I had to wait until I got home because I was busy at work today, I had thought about it pretty much all afternoon and came right to my PC when I got home to drop him a line.
Hanzar,
I can understand you being biased towards the SL, but I am assuming that if you were going to race one you would pick the SE. Would it make sense to race off-road with a 2 wheel drive truck when a 4 wheel drive is available? Same idea, it is all about the application. The SL is a nice car, but it won't do as well in autocross.
I haven't had any issues with my SE, but then again I haven't slammed on the brakes while half on the road and half on the dirt... seems like an odd test... would you really be driving 60-80 mph in that environment?
I will post any reply that I get...
I can only hope! sorry for the sarcasm...
I tried to be as non-sarcastic as I could be, but it just isn't in me... it kills me that they would race autocross with an SL... that is irresponsible.Nat,
Thanks. I had to wait until I got home because I was busy at work today, I had thought about it pretty much all afternoon and came right to my PC when I got home to drop him a line.
Hanzar,
I can understand you being biased towards the SL, but I am assuming that if you were going to race one you would pick the SE. Would it make sense to race off-road with a 2 wheel drive truck when a 4 wheel drive is available? Same idea, it is all about the application. The SL is a nice car, but it won't do as well in autocross.
I haven't had any issues with my SE, but then again I haven't slammed on the brakes while half on the road and half on the dirt... seems like an odd test... would you really be driving 60-80 mph in that environment?
I will post any reply that I get...
05-30-2003, 07:19 PM
#17
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 184
Comp G road test in C&D
The 2004 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP Competition Group is road tested in the July issue of Car and Driver.
0-60 6.6 s
70-0 181 ft
1/4-mile 15.0 sec @ 93 mph
300-ft-dia skidpad 0.81g
The article does say there is no torque steer in this vehicle (hear that Nissan?!?! Get with the program!!!!!).
If GM can remove torque steer from this POS then Nissan should be able to remove torque steer from all of their FWD vehicles.
0-60 6.6 s
70-0 181 ft
1/4-mile 15.0 sec @ 93 mph
300-ft-dia skidpad 0.81g
The article does say there is no torque steer in this vehicle (hear that Nissan?!?! Get with the program!!!!!).
If GM can remove torque steer from this POS then Nissan should be able to remove torque steer from all of their FWD vehicles.
05-30-2003, 09:25 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,677
You guys should have shown the times that the owners of the 04 Maxima are getting in the 1/4mi.
Also you should have countered attacked saying that its not Pontiac's fault they aren't offering a 6-spd manual in the Grand Prix.
Also according to price, the Maxima SE 6-spd is roughly the same cost as the Pontiac Grand Prix with Comp G package in Canada. I got the prices useing the www.gmcanada.com and www.nissancanada.com website.
that said, Jim Kenzie is a very good auto-writer, and I am a big fan of him.
You guys should also understand the background. He wrote a review of the 04 Grand Prix in Feb 8th, and didn't rate it too well, which lead to many complaints...hence causing this article to appear.
Also you should have countered attacked saying that its not Pontiac's fault they aren't offering a 6-spd manual in the Grand Prix.
Also according to price, the Maxima SE 6-spd is roughly the same cost as the Pontiac Grand Prix with Comp G package in Canada. I got the prices useing the www.gmcanada.com and www.nissancanada.com website.
that said, Jim Kenzie is a very good auto-writer, and I am a big fan of him.
You guys should also understand the background. He wrote a review of the 04 Grand Prix in Feb 8th, and didn't rate it too well, which lead to many complaints...hence causing this article to appear.
05-31-2003, 12:49 AM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,753
It would have been much better (as already mentioned) if they compared the top performing 2004 Maxima (6spd SE) against the top performing Grand Prix. Sucks for GM that they don't offer the car in MT but im confident that at the track the 6spd Max SE would win. It doesn't really matter to me, because I already know that, but for the people who will base the decision on that review are really getting an inferior car. Then again, people who don't realise that suspension and transmission can change a car's performance dramatically most likely won't be using their car to the fullest potential anyways, so it won't matter.
05-31-2003, 09:27 AM
#21
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Posts: 3,751
Originally posted by ch13f
It would have been much better (as already mentioned) if they compared the top performing 2004 Maxima (6spd SE) against the top performing Grand Prix. Sucks for GM that they don't offer the car in MT but im confident that at the track the 6spd Max SE would win. It doesn't really matter to me, because I already know that, but for the people who will base the decision on that review are really getting an inferior car. Then again, people who don't realise that suspension and transmission can change a car's performance dramatically most likely won't be using their car to the fullest potential anyways, so it won't matter.
It would have been much better (as already mentioned) if they compared the top performing 2004 Maxima (6spd SE) against the top performing Grand Prix. Sucks for GM that they don't offer the car in MT but im confident that at the track the 6spd Max SE would win. It doesn't really matter to me, because I already know that, but for the people who will base the decision on that review are really getting an inferior car. Then again, people who don't realise that suspension and transmission can change a car's performance dramatically most likely won't be using their car to the fullest potential anyways, so it won't matter.
05-31-2003, 09:58 AM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 112
Originally posted by MONTE 01&97 SE
I see the car hasnt gotten any faster with that extra 20 horsepower, weird.
I see the car hasnt gotten any faster with that extra 20 horsepower, weird.
The new Grand Prix at first glance doesn't appear to be a POS. On the plus side it's got maximum cargo capacity of 46 cubic feet thanks to a fold down passenger front seatback and folding rear seatback. I presume the mod potential to low 12/high 11 seconds with the new engine and supercharger will be at least as easy as before. It's got dual damping suspension. It's got 4 wheel independent suspension with alum. control arms. Plus it's got gobs of class-leading low rpm torque and minimal torque steer. Finally it's got heads up display which people who own vehicles with them say they love them.
A glaring omission however is navigation that you can get in the Maxima. I also think styling in/out of the new Maxima is a lot better than the new Grand Prix with potential for even more with the right wheel/tire/suspension pkg. The VQ is an awesome sounding engine compared to the 3800s whose exhaust is like someone's farting noises; however the blower whine on radical pulley setups is something else.
I guess if you want a boosted sedan and are in it for the mod potential, Grand Prix has few competitors. But if you have any desire for cruising in style, I can't see anybody picking a GTP over a Maxima.
05-31-2003, 02:15 PM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
By the time you mod out that GP to make it nice, you could probably get yourself a nice vette or M3
Here is the most ironic thing, he talks about how he can't touch the american magazine test numbers, implying that they are lower than reality. Thus negating the fact that they all tested a majority of the cars that Pontiac tested, and came up with quicker results for most of them. But now Car and Driver is saying that they are hitting 15 on the 1/4 mile for the GTP, which is what Pontiac got. Very interesting problem he will soon find himself with. How can you write off all the "American buff books" as being inaccurate if they got the same number?
Either the "American buff books" are accurate and Pontiac is fudging every other car out there, or they are inaccurate and Pontiac is fudging just their car to make it look better. Interesting issue... I can't wait to see what he has to say about it.
Here is the most ironic thing, he talks about how he can't touch the american magazine test numbers, implying that they are lower than reality. Thus negating the fact that they all tested a majority of the cars that Pontiac tested, and came up with quicker results for most of them. But now Car and Driver is saying that they are hitting 15 on the 1/4 mile for the GTP, which is what Pontiac got. Very interesting problem he will soon find himself with. How can you write off all the "American buff books" as being inaccurate if they got the same number?
Either the "American buff books" are accurate and Pontiac is fudging every other car out there, or they are inaccurate and Pontiac is fudging just their car to make it look better. Interesting issue... I can't wait to see what he has to say about it.
05-31-2003, 02:23 PM
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
Ok, I felt the need to send that info to Jim, I doubt he will respond, but we shall see.
"Hey Jim,
I had another quick thought that I wanted to share with you. You had mentioned that you were never able to get close to what the "American buff books" claim for testing numbers. I just found that Car and Driver has the 04 Grand Prix in the July issue and that they have run a 15 second 1/4 mile, almost exactly what GM claims. So this leaves us with an interesting situation. On one hand you claim that "GM is too smart to try and cheat" and on the other you imply that the "American buff books" are pulling numbers that are two fast, but in this case they are the same.
Deductive reasoning leaves us with two possible conclusions to this problem. The first is that the "American buff books" are wrong on all of their test drives except the Grand Prix which they actually got correct. Or GM fudged all of the numbers for the cars that would have beat it in that test. It is true that some of those numbers they posted are accurate, unfortunately the only numbers in that test that are accurate are the ones where the Grand Prix should have and did legitimately win.
So what is your take on that? I really would appreciate your thoughts on this.
Thanks
Grant Cline"
"Hey Jim,
I had another quick thought that I wanted to share with you. You had mentioned that you were never able to get close to what the "American buff books" claim for testing numbers. I just found that Car and Driver has the 04 Grand Prix in the July issue and that they have run a 15 second 1/4 mile, almost exactly what GM claims. So this leaves us with an interesting situation. On one hand you claim that "GM is too smart to try and cheat" and on the other you imply that the "American buff books" are pulling numbers that are two fast, but in this case they are the same.
Deductive reasoning leaves us with two possible conclusions to this problem. The first is that the "American buff books" are wrong on all of their test drives except the Grand Prix which they actually got correct. Or GM fudged all of the numbers for the cars that would have beat it in that test. It is true that some of those numbers they posted are accurate, unfortunately the only numbers in that test that are accurate are the ones where the Grand Prix should have and did legitimately win.
So what is your take on that? I really would appreciate your thoughts on this.
Thanks
Grant Cline"
05-31-2003, 06:26 PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 439
i own a 2001 gxe, and a 2003 se 6 spd. i have a co-worker with a grand prix. he thought it was fast. i spanked him in the gxe. i didn't even bother to bring the se. he didn't have the gtp. so i thought it was a fair race. he now wants a maxima.
06-01-2003, 11:39 AM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
Jim responded, essentially saying nothing... this conversation is dead 
"Hi Grant:
There has always been concern over the comparability of ANY test numbers.
Track condition, track surface, temperature, driving technique, test
procedures, even production variations - up to several percent variability
in dyno horsepower test results - all these and more make it very difficult
to compare one magazine or one test session to another.
I'm not saying ALL magazine test numbers are suspect, although they have
been known to run a dozen or more tests and published only the very best
one even if it isn't repeatable.
In the case of the GM numbers, my understanding is that they didn't perform
the tests themselves but hired a testing agency to do the numbers, in as
controllable and consistent way as they could. In the litigious society
that they live in down there - and the car industry is scrutinized even
more closely than most - they have to be very careful with claims. So I'm
pretty sure their numbers can be defended pretty well.
Hope that helps answer your question.
Cheers,
Jim Kenzie"
"Hi Grant:
There has always been concern over the comparability of ANY test numbers.
Track condition, track surface, temperature, driving technique, test
procedures, even production variations - up to several percent variability
in dyno horsepower test results - all these and more make it very difficult
to compare one magazine or one test session to another.
I'm not saying ALL magazine test numbers are suspect, although they have
been known to run a dozen or more tests and published only the very best
one even if it isn't repeatable.
In the case of the GM numbers, my understanding is that they didn't perform
the tests themselves but hired a testing agency to do the numbers, in as
controllable and consistent way as they could. In the litigious society
that they live in down there - and the car industry is scrutinized even
more closely than most - they have to be very careful with claims. So I'm
pretty sure their numbers can be defended pretty well.
Hope that helps answer your question.
Cheers,
Jim Kenzie"
06-02-2003, 10:59 AM
#32
i mean you can mod them out to be fast, but no matter what you do, all they make them in is auto's and off the lot maxima's are atleast as good (but probably better) than the grand prix, i think he rated some cars that are noticably inferior to the maxima, higher than the max, if i'm not mistaken
06-02-2003, 11:36 PM
#35
Originally posted by gmc74
6 speed manual, or 5 speed auto... how can they call it a sports car or sports sedan with a 4sp auto? that is a joke.
I need to pick that mag up tomorrow
6 speed manual, or 5 speed auto... how can they call it a sports car or sports sedan with a 4sp auto? that is a joke.
I need to pick that mag up tomorrow
06-03-2003, 07:51 AM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
Originally posted by johnvt1111
well i don't particularly like the car.....but it does have a s/c
well i don't particularly like the car.....but it does have a s/c
with out the supercharger that thing wouldn't get out of it's own way... it is heavier than the Maxima.
06-03-2003, 09:21 AM
#37
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 184
Originally posted by gmc74
A 3.8L with a supercharger and they can only manage 260HP
with out the supercharger that thing wouldn't get out of it's own way... it is heavier than the Maxima.
A 3.8L with a supercharger and they can only manage 260HP
with out the supercharger that thing wouldn't get out of it's own way... it is heavier than the Maxima.
It just goes to show you that...boat anchor + super charger = speed
06-03-2003, 11:09 AM
#38
Originally posted by gmc74
A 3.8L with a supercharger and they can only manage 260HP
with out the supercharger that thing wouldn't get out of it's own way... it is heavier than the Maxima.
A 3.8L with a supercharger and they can only manage 260HP
with out the supercharger that thing wouldn't get out of it's own way... it is heavier than the Maxima.
06-03-2003, 11:26 AM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
Originally posted by johnvt1111
yeah do you know the size of the stock pully? It's huge, you get a smaller one.......sllllaters on you, i hate the car, but it's common car knowledge, even if it is huuuuge, plus it's rwd
yeah do you know the size of the stock pully? It's huge, you get a smaller one.......sllllaters on you, i hate the car, but it's common car knowledge, even if it is huuuuge, plus it's rwd