what caused the 6th gen turning
#1
what caused the 6th gen turning
circle to be so massive? It's 44'. That means the circle is 11' larger than a volvo 240, and 4' larger than a Lincoln LS.
Interesting that in Consumer Reports the 6th gen ranked 8th in performance. What was also interesting was the 330i and A4 got semi black circles for reliability (below avg.). They sure praise Lexus, Toyota, and Honda to the high heavens!
Looks like torque steer will never be cured on the Max until it goes to RWD (well it probably wouldn't).
Interesting that in Consumer Reports the 6th gen ranked 8th in performance. What was also interesting was the 330i and A4 got semi black circles for reliability (below avg.). They sure praise Lexus, Toyota, and Honda to the high heavens!
Looks like torque steer will never be cured on the Max until it goes to RWD (well it probably wouldn't).
#2
Re: what caused the 6th gen turning
Originally posted by Frank Fontaine
circle to be so massive? It's 44'. That means the circle is 11' larger than a volvo 240, and 4' larger than a Lincoln LS.
Interesting that in Consumer Reports the 6th gen ranked 8th in performance. What was also interesting was the 330i and A4 got semi black circles for reliability (below avg.). They sure praise Lexus, Toyota, and Honda to the high heavens!
Looks like torque steer will never be cured on the Max until it goes to RWD (well it probably wouldn't).
circle to be so massive? It's 44'. That means the circle is 11' larger than a volvo 240, and 4' larger than a Lincoln LS.
Interesting that in Consumer Reports the 6th gen ranked 8th in performance. What was also interesting was the 330i and A4 got semi black circles for reliability (below avg.). They sure praise Lexus, Toyota, and Honda to the high heavens!
Looks like torque steer will never be cured on the Max until it goes to RWD (well it probably wouldn't).
#3
Re: Re: what caused the 6th gen turning
Originally posted by Newman
combine the already terrible turning radius of recent maximas with a larger body and 18 inch wheels and you have an even more disgusting turning radius. its kind of sad really. seems like all the SUVs ive ever driven have a tighter radius than my car.
combine the already terrible turning radius of recent maximas with a larger body and 18 inch wheels and you have an even more disgusting turning radius. its kind of sad really. seems like all the SUVs ive ever driven have a tighter radius than my car.
#5
Re: Re: what caused the 6th gen turning
Originally posted by Newman
combine the already terrible turning radius of recent maximas with a larger body and 18 inch wheels and you have an even more disgusting turning radius. its kind of sad really. seems like all the SUVs ive ever driven have a tighter radius than my car.
combine the already terrible turning radius of recent maximas with a larger body and 18 inch wheels and you have an even more disgusting turning radius. its kind of sad really. seems like all the SUVs ive ever driven have a tighter radius than my car.
I was driving in my friends 99 4 door honda accord (stock) and as he takes those turns when exiting and entering highways, even going kind of slow (25 or so) u feel like u about to flip over, but when driving it feels real nice and makes u feel like u going slower than u actually are...on my car, you feel like u always going fast cause u feel so many bumps but it feels good to take those exits at 40+ and just stick to the road...big difference
#6
Re: Re: what caused the 6th gen turning
Originally posted by Newman
combine the already terrible turning radius of recent maximas with a larger body and 18 inch wheels and you have an even more disgusting turning radius. its kind of sad really. seems like all the SUVs ive ever driven have a tighter radius than my car.
combine the already terrible turning radius of recent maximas with a larger body and 18 inch wheels and you have an even more disgusting turning radius. its kind of sad really. seems like all the SUVs ive ever driven have a tighter radius than my car.
#7
crap, all those u-turns i do every day, i'll never make it around...oh, yeah, that's right, u-turns are a rarity for me. As for driving in Europe, u-turns are mostly illegal (where I drove in Germany for a few years). Half the time you couldn't even make a left turn there.
True, Europeans drive smaller cars, b/c parking is so limited and the streets are narrow. But that doesn't exclude long, big cars, Mercedes are everywhere over there.
Ooh, another Ion comparison. that's new.
True, Europeans drive smaller cars, b/c parking is so limited and the streets are narrow. But that doesn't exclude long, big cars, Mercedes are everywhere over there.
Ooh, another Ion comparison. that's new.
#8
Re: what caused the 6th gen turning
Originally posted by Frank Fontaine
circle to be so massive? It's 44'. That means the circle is 11' larger than a volvo 240, and 4' larger than a Lincoln LS.
Interesting that in Consumer Reports the 6th gen ranked 8th in performance. What was also interesting was the 330i and A4 got semi black circles for reliability (below avg.). They sure praise Lexus, Toyota, and Honda to the high heavens!
Looks like torque steer will never be cured on the Max until it goes to RWD (well it probably wouldn't).
circle to be so massive? It's 44'. That means the circle is 11' larger than a volvo 240, and 4' larger than a Lincoln LS.
Interesting that in Consumer Reports the 6th gen ranked 8th in performance. What was also interesting was the 330i and A4 got semi black circles for reliability (below avg.). They sure praise Lexus, Toyota, and Honda to the high heavens!
Looks like torque steer will never be cured on the Max until it goes to RWD (well it probably wouldn't).
#9
so you want a one sided conversation? only people that are ****ed about it?
How do you solve the issue?
I see 4 possible options.
1) move the wheels to the corners like a dodge.
2) smaller engine so it has more room in the compartment
3) RWD - the engine is no longer sideways
4) widen the car
5) make the wheels smaller
1) ok, I hate the cab forward styling of dodge, so for me #1 is out
2) I wouldn't buy this car if the engine was smaller, so 2 is out
3) RWD would be great, but don't count on it... that is about all the G35 has over the Max
4) widen the car? I hear people complain that it is too wide already
5) it is the most feasable option, but I would rather deal with the poor turning radius
Can you come up with a better way? Let's be realistic, we have to take some bad with the good. Certain benefits are going to have side effects.
How do you solve the issue?
I see 4 possible options.
1) move the wheels to the corners like a dodge.
2) smaller engine so it has more room in the compartment
3) RWD - the engine is no longer sideways
4) widen the car
5) make the wheels smaller
1) ok, I hate the cab forward styling of dodge, so for me #1 is out
2) I wouldn't buy this car if the engine was smaller, so 2 is out
3) RWD would be great, but don't count on it... that is about all the G35 has over the Max
4) widen the car? I hear people complain that it is too wide already
5) it is the most feasable option, but I would rather deal with the poor turning radius
Can you come up with a better way? Let's be realistic, we have to take some bad with the good. Certain benefits are going to have side effects.
#11
Originally posted by gmc74
so you want a one sided conversation? only people that are ****ed about it?
How do you solve the issue?
I see 4 possible options.
1) move the wheels to the corners like a dodge.
2) smaller engine so it has more room in the compartment
3) RWD - the engine is no longer sideways
4) widen the car
5) make the wheels smaller
1) ok, I hate the cab forward styling of dodge, so for me #1 is out
2) I wouldn't buy this car if the engine was smaller, so 2 is out
3) RWD would be great, but don't count on it... that is about all the G35 has over the Max
4) widen the car? I hear people complain that it is too wide already
5) it is the most feasable option, but I would rather deal with the poor turning radius
Can you come up with a better way? Let's be realistic, we have to take some bad with the good. Certain benefits are going to have side effects.
so you want a one sided conversation? only people that are ****ed about it?
How do you solve the issue?
I see 4 possible options.
1) move the wheels to the corners like a dodge.
2) smaller engine so it has more room in the compartment
3) RWD - the engine is no longer sideways
4) widen the car
5) make the wheels smaller
1) ok, I hate the cab forward styling of dodge, so for me #1 is out
2) I wouldn't buy this car if the engine was smaller, so 2 is out
3) RWD would be great, but don't count on it... that is about all the G35 has over the Max
4) widen the car? I hear people complain that it is too wide already
5) it is the most feasable option, but I would rather deal with the poor turning radius
Can you come up with a better way? Let's be realistic, we have to take some bad with the good. Certain benefits are going to have side effects.
#12
Originally posted by JAKE02
No I cant come up with a better way.....I'm not an engineer. It is difficult for me to believe Nissan couldnt have improved the turning radius after the pathetic 5th gen. turning radius, I guess some things "bug" some people more than others.
No I cant come up with a better way.....I'm not an engineer. It is difficult for me to believe Nissan couldnt have improved the turning radius after the pathetic 5th gen. turning radius, I guess some things "bug" some people more than others.
The turning radius is quite annoying, when pulling a U turn on a divided road the other side better have 3 lanes
#13
Originally posted by JAKE02
No I cant come up with a better way.....I'm not an engineer. It is difficult for me to believe Nissan couldnt have improved the turning radius after the pathetic 5th gen. turning radius, I guess some things "bug" some people more than others.
No I cant come up with a better way.....I'm not an engineer. It is difficult for me to believe Nissan couldnt have improved the turning radius after the pathetic 5th gen. turning radius, I guess some things "bug" some people more than others.
The turning radius is quite annoying, when pulling a U turn on a divided road the other side better have 3 lanes
#14
The Acura TSX has a 40' turning radius and it is much smaller than the 2004 Maxima.
Front wheel drive + power + large wheels = large turning radius
I do not have an engineering explanation for this but the Acura TL and CL have this problem as well.
Oh well...
Front wheel drive + power + large wheels = large turning radius
I do not have an engineering explanation for this but the Acura TL and CL have this problem as well.
Oh well...
#15
Originally posted by marmadogg
The Acura TSX has a 40' turning radius and it is much smaller than the 2004 Maxima.
Front wheel drive + power + large wheels = large turning radius
I do not have an engineering explanation for this but the Acura TL and CL have this problem as well.
Oh well...
The Acura TSX has a 40' turning radius and it is much smaller than the 2004 Maxima.
Front wheel drive + power + large wheels = large turning radius
I do not have an engineering explanation for this but the Acura TL and CL have this problem as well.
Oh well...
I have an engineering explanation, two objects can not occupy the same space at the same time... shrink the engine or shrink the tires...
#19
Originally posted by gmc74
it has become glaringly apparent that I am smarter than you, but then again at least you are smart enough to figure that out.
it has become glaringly apparent that I am smarter than you, but then again at least you are smart enough to figure that out.
#20
Well, I just did a uturn yesterday in the same spot that I have many times in the past with my 300m (peice of $hit that I traded in.) Didn't feel much different. Seems that front drive sports sedans with fat tires all suck for turning radius but that's the nature of the beast.
#22
Originally posted by jacksprat01
Well, I just did a uturn yesterday in the same spot that I have many times in the past with my 300m (peice of $hit that I traded in.) Didn't feel much different. Seems that front drive sports sedans with fat tires all suck for turning radius but that's the nature of the beast.
Well, I just did a uturn yesterday in the same spot that I have many times in the past with my 300m (peice of $hit that I traded in.) Didn't feel much different. Seems that front drive sports sedans with fat tires all suck for turning radius but that's the nature of the beast.
#23
Originally posted by raiste
It's not even in the same class but the BMW M5 has a turning radius of ~38' and is approx the same in all dimensions as the 2003/2004 Maxima.
It's not even in the same class but the BMW M5 has a turning radius of ~38' and is approx the same in all dimensions as the 2003/2004 Maxima.
The 530i is much slower and it still costs 15K+ more than a comparably equipped 04 Maxima SE. The 545i is faster but costs much more than 20K+ more.
At least compare a 530i to the 04 Maxima as the 530i costs almost half what a M5 costs. The 04 Maxima is much faster than a 530i so there is not comparison.
#24
Originally posted by marmadogg
I could buy 2 loaded 04 Maximas and spend a week in Aruba for the price of a M5.
The 530i is much slower and it still costs 15K+ more than a comparably equipped 04 Maxima SE. The 545i is faster but costs much more than 20K+ more.
At least compare a 530i to the 04 Maxima as the 530i costs almost half what a M5 costs. The 04 Maxima is much faster than a 530i so there is not comparison.
I could buy 2 loaded 04 Maximas and spend a week in Aruba for the price of a M5.
The 530i is much slower and it still costs 15K+ more than a comparably equipped 04 Maxima SE. The 545i is faster but costs much more than 20K+ more.
At least compare a 530i to the 04 Maxima as the 530i costs almost half what a M5 costs. The 04 Maxima is much faster than a 530i so there is not comparison.
Um... I may be wrong... but I think he was comaparing the turning radius of two similarly-sized cars, not attempting to equate them on a price / performance scale. The comparison to the 5-series BMW does raise an interesting point - my experience has been that a rwd car will have a smalller turning radius that a similarly-sized fwd car. I don't have an engineering explanation for this, but I would guess it has something to do with the additional drivetrain hardware of the fwd car.
All this moaning and groaning about the gigantic turning radius has me pining for my old '91 240 SX with Super HICAS - that d@mn thing would turn around in a phone booth!
Cheers,
Jaeger
#25
Originally posted by Jaeger
Um... I may be wrong... but I think he was comaparing the turning radius of two similarly-sized cars, not attempting to equate them on a price / performance scale. The comparison to the 5-series BMW does raise an interesting point - my experience has been that a rwd car will have a smalller turning radius that a similarly-sized fwd car. I don't have an engineering explanation for this, but I would guess it has something to do with the additional drivetrain hardware of the fwd car.
All this moaning and groaning about the gigantic turning radius has me pining for my old '91 240 SX with Super HICAS - that d@mn thing would turn around in a phone booth!
Cheers,
Jaeger
Um... I may be wrong... but I think he was comaparing the turning radius of two similarly-sized cars, not attempting to equate them on a price / performance scale. The comparison to the 5-series BMW does raise an interesting point - my experience has been that a rwd car will have a smalller turning radius that a similarly-sized fwd car. I don't have an engineering explanation for this, but I would guess it has something to do with the additional drivetrain hardware of the fwd car.
All this moaning and groaning about the gigantic turning radius has me pining for my old '91 240 SX with Super HICAS - that d@mn thing would turn around in a phone booth!
Cheers,
Jaeger
have you all noticed that on some cars and trucks when you turn the wheels all the way left or right the wheels actually start to "lean" a little bit. like, when maximas wheels are all the way to one side the wheels are perfectly perpendicular to the gound...|---|
some cars have wheels that "lean" and they are at an angle... /---/
the cars and trucks that i have noticed that have the "lean" have all been RWD.
i am thinking that this "lean" is most definitely the reason for the reduced turning radius on larger cars. and i am also thinking that FWD cars do not have this feature because of issues stemming from the fact that the car is in fact FWD. maybe it is dangerous to have the driving wheels "lean" like that (especially if the wheel is turned at a semi-high rate of speed)
so, thats why i think the maxima has a fairly poor turning radius where as some SUVs, and larger RWD sedans seem to have a superious turning radius even though they may be larger than the maxima.
#26
I think the issue really is as simple as this-
FWD has a sideways engine, so instead of the length being front to back, it is now side to side. This causes there to be more space in front and behind the engine instead of on the sides. Because of this the wheel wells are smaller and thus there is less room for the tires to turn, resulting in a smaller turning radius.
RWD the engine is sitting with the length going from front to back, and this allows for more room on the sides, allowing the wheel wells to be deeper, and that allows the tires more room to turn.
The real question is why does the BMW take so much space to turn, it has an inline 6 that is quite narrow... odd.
FWD has a sideways engine, so instead of the length being front to back, it is now side to side. This causes there to be more space in front and behind the engine instead of on the sides. Because of this the wheel wells are smaller and thus there is less room for the tires to turn, resulting in a smaller turning radius.
RWD the engine is sitting with the length going from front to back, and this allows for more room on the sides, allowing the wheel wells to be deeper, and that allows the tires more room to turn.
The real question is why does the BMW take so much space to turn, it has an inline 6 that is quite narrow... odd.
#27
Originally posted by gmc74
I think the issue really is as simple as this-
FWD has a sideways engine, so instead of the length being front to back, it is now side to side. This causes there to be more space in front and behind the engine instead of on the sides. Because of this the wheel wells are smaller and thus there is less room for the tires to turn, resulting in a smaller turning radius.
RWD the engine is sitting with the length going from front to back, and this allows for more room on the sides, allowing the wheel wells to be deeper, and that allows the tires more room to turn.
The real question is why does the BMW take so much space to turn, it has an inline 6 that is quite narrow... odd.
I think the issue really is as simple as this-
FWD has a sideways engine, so instead of the length being front to back, it is now side to side. This causes there to be more space in front and behind the engine instead of on the sides. Because of this the wheel wells are smaller and thus there is less room for the tires to turn, resulting in a smaller turning radius.
RWD the engine is sitting with the length going from front to back, and this allows for more room on the sides, allowing the wheel wells to be deeper, and that allows the tires more room to turn.
The real question is why does the BMW take so much space to turn, it has an inline 6 that is quite narrow... odd.
Don't forget the 5-series has a longer wheelbase and is built around the 4.5 liter V8 which is a wider engine. They throw the 2.5 and 3.0 liter inline sixes in the 5-series to sell more cars. Thats what my service manager told me when I had the 330i.
#28
Originally posted by marmadogg
The Acura TSX has a 40' turning radius and it is much smaller than the 2004 Maxima.
The Acura TSX has a 40' turning radius and it is much smaller than the 2004 Maxima.
#29
Originally posted by soundmike
I don't know about that, i test drove the TSX quite extensively and i swear the turning radius on that is much smaller than on my Maxima.
I don't know about that, i test drove the TSX quite extensively and i swear the turning radius on that is much smaller than on my Maxima.
Why would you refute something without any proof?
#30
Originally posted by soundmike
I don't know about that, i test drove the TSX quite extensively and i swear the turning radius on that is much smaller than on my Maxima.
I don't know about that, i test drove the TSX quite extensively and i swear the turning radius on that is much smaller than on my Maxima.
Sounds like Mike does not know what he is talking about.
#31
Originally posted by marmadogg
Sounds like Mike does not know what he is talking about.
Sounds like Mike does not know what he is talking about.
#33
Originally posted by gmc74
it may feel smaller because the car is smaller... but it isn't.
it may feel smaller because the car is smaller... but it isn't.
#34
Having looked under an '04 (while on a rack), the problem is just as gmc74 put it. Big engines matched with big tire/wheel combos on a front-wheel drive vehicle are not conducive to tight turning.
The sacrifice of good turning radius is somewhat bothersome, but I would hate to give up the things that cause it. I do hope Nissan does find a way to lessen the problem, but they may let it go until the AWD version arrives.
The sacrifice of good turning radius is somewhat bothersome, but I would hate to give up the things that cause it. I do hope Nissan does find a way to lessen the problem, but they may let it go until the AWD version arrives.
#35
Originally posted by lightonthehill
Having looked under an '04 (while on a rack), the problem is just as gmc74 put it. Big engines matched with big tire/wheel combos on a front-wheel drive vehicle are not conducive to tight turning.
Having looked under an '04 (while on a rack), the problem is just as gmc74 put it. Big engines matched with big tire/wheel combos on a front-wheel drive vehicle are not conducive to tight turning.
#36
Originally posted by soundmike
I'm sure there's a way around it, If i'm not mistaken the Murano has a 38ft. turning radius. And it uses the same engine as the Max/Altima having similar if not bigger tires.
I'm sure there's a way around it, If i'm not mistaken the Murano has a 38ft. turning radius. And it uses the same engine as the Max/Altima having similar if not bigger tires.
#37
Originally posted by soundmike
I'm sure there's a way around it, If i'm not mistaken the Murano has a 38ft. turning radius. And it uses the same engine as the Max/Altima having similar if not bigger tires.
I'm sure there's a way around it, If i'm not mistaken the Murano has a 38ft. turning radius. And it uses the same engine as the Max/Altima having similar if not bigger tires.
On the flip side, it is pretty much a non issue in daily driving.
#38
Originally posted by gmc74
If there was a way around it, surely one of the dozens of car manufacturers would have come up with a suitable solution by now. The fact that they haven't is a pretty good indication of the size of the problem.
On the flip side, it is pretty much a non issue in daily driving.
If there was a way around it, surely one of the dozens of car manufacturers would have come up with a suitable solution by now. The fact that they haven't is a pretty good indication of the size of the problem.
On the flip side, it is pretty much a non issue in daily driving.
44' is outrageous, really. A new V8 Toyota 4Runner has a 36.7' turning radius (AWD ie full-time 4wd). I believe it has to do with design. Saying it's big rims is a weak explanation imho, because a 4Runner has 265's standard no matter which model, that's another 20mm wider than any Maxima.
#39
Originally posted by Frank Fontaine
Non issue? Not if you live or work in a city. Parallel parking and leaving your car with a valet in a tight garage, you want the car to work with them, not against. They pack the cars in like sardines and move them around several times a day.
44' is outrageous, really. A new V8 Toyota 4Runner has a 36.7' turning radius (AWD ie full-time 4wd). I believe it has to do with design. Saying it's big rims is a weak explanation imho, because a 4Runner has 265's standard no matter which model, that's another 20mm wider than any Maxima.
Non issue? Not if you live or work in a city. Parallel parking and leaving your car with a valet in a tight garage, you want the car to work with them, not against. They pack the cars in like sardines and move them around several times a day.
44' is outrageous, really. A new V8 Toyota 4Runner has a 36.7' turning radius (AWD ie full-time 4wd). I believe it has to do with design. Saying it's big rims is a weak explanation imho, because a 4Runner has 265's standard no matter which model, that's another 20mm wider than any Maxima.
Check the engine on the 4Runner, it is not transverse mounted(sideways), which is the cause of the problem. Engines are longer than they are wide, if you turn it sideways it takes up the space that the tires need when turning.
Here are the specs (in feet) of some comparable cars that are all FWD-
G35 Coupe - 37.4
G35 Sedan - 36.0
Camry (V6) - 36.7
Accord (V6) - 36.1
Impala - 38.0
Mazda 6 - 38.7
Altima (V6) - 38.7
03 TL Type S - 40.0
03 Max - 40.0
04 Max - 40.0
No offense to anyone, but I am guessing the engineers at some of the best car companies in the world are going to do a bit better at this than we are. If they can't seem to solve this issue, then maybe it is a bit more than a design problem.
#40
Originally posted by gmc74
Here are the specs (in feet) of some comparable cars that are all FWD-
G35 Coupe - 37.4
G35 Sedan - 36.0
Here are the specs (in feet) of some comparable cars that are all FWD-
G35 Coupe - 37.4
G35 Sedan - 36.0
As someone said earlier, though, I wouldn't trade away the big motor and big wheels for a smaller turning radius.
Cheers,
Roger