On paper, the 2003 is faster than the 2004 despite having less power.
Can anyone who has driven both say which one actually feels faster.
Here are the specs from Car&Driver mag:

2003 SE
255 horsepower and 246 pound-feet of torque
6.0s 0-60 mph
14.7s quarter-mile

2004 SE
265 horsepower and 255 pound-feet of torque
6.4s 0-60 mph
15.0s quarter-mile

 

IMO, it depends on the driver.

I've read different numbers for the 04s. From Motor Trend Mag, the 04s 0-60 is 6.8 and 1/4 mile is 14.8

 

So many variables involved. My 5th gen SE will fly like the wind, while my 6th gen SL will fly like the wind in plusher comfort, a tad more room, and wonderful amenities llike a heated steering wheel, which I absolutely love.

The 5th gen is a four door sports sedan, while the 6th gen is a four door sports-near luxury sedan. I love the styling of both.

Can't go wrong with either. For the price involved, these are two of the best cars ever built.

 

I'll Smoke you, regardless...

 

PS, don't know what Car and Driver was using, however 6th gens have been averaging in the mid to high 14's off the lot. Nice try, take that $hit someplace else...

 

the 6th gen is a lot heavier isn't it?

 

I test drove a 2003 Se 6 speed, and I drive a 2005 6 speed and in my opinion, the 05 is faster. Remember, on paper and on street, are two entirely different things. I have a LOT of confidence and experience in my "butt dyno".

 

Not A LOT, however the 6th gen makes up for it in more power and torque. Look, stock for stock a 5th gen will not take a 6th gen, get over it... PS, cancel your subscription to Car & Driver if you have one...

 

those 1/4 mile times are a joke.... look at nismomax80 stock 1/4 mile run, 14.5...

that makes us faster...lol

 

What's wrong with Car and Driver? I've always enjoyed their mag almost the best. Am I missing something?

Taylor

 

There's nothing wrong w/ C&D, or other mags. Each magazine has different standard in testing, check their disclaimers like equipment on board. I've seen 6th gen 5AT run 0-60 from 6.1 to 7.1 sec in different mags, and 1/4 from mid 14's and up. There are stock 6th gens in the racing forum that ran 14.3 1/4 mile. Other than driver's skill; track condition, weather condition, and amount of gas in the tank can make a significant difference.

edit: 14.3 6-SPD, 14.4 5AT Don't know if they were on stock RS-A's

 

My stock 14.3 was on rsa tires. Havent come close since but I blame it on the blown front struts and horrible weather conditions. Also seems like the only thing the UDP did was make it way harder to get good traction in 1st and into 2nd. Also, my girl owns an 02SE auto and my car owns it bad. Not much of a comparison because im a manual. I did race a buddy back in the day with an 02 6speed when I had the Injen and 19s. We were DEAD even the whole time so I say drivers race because the cars are pretty farely matched.

 

Actually nothing wrong with C&D, I just don't believe everything I read. So like RHMax said.

"Each magazine has different standard in testing, check their disclaimers like equipment on board. I've seen 6th gen 5AT run 0-60 from 6.1 to 7.1 sec in different mags, and 1/4 from mid 14's and up. There are stock 6th gens in the racing forum that ran 14.3 1/4 mile. Other than driver's skill; track condition, weather condition, and amount of gas in the tank can make a significant difference."

 

Does it really matter?

 

Actually your right, since I am a total Max fan, it doesn't and it's all good...

 

My post was really directed at the starter of the thread. BUt I am glad we agree. The two cars listed are SO close that it would be a complete waste of time to prove.

 

I’ve driven a stock 2003 6MT and a stock 2005 6MT. The ‘03 felt marginally quicker. That shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who knows cars. It weighed 225 pound less and didn’t suffer as much from torque steer. It was better off the line and although the ’03 didn’t have quite as much horsepower as the ’05, it still had plenty of power! Give credit where credit is due.

Besides if anyone defines their Maxima only by its 0-60 time, I think they’re missing the point of the car. It is a well engineered, classy, comfy, safe, four-door car. For hard core performance drivers looking to spend around $30,000, there are a lot of cars that will utterly annihilate the Maxima in a drag race. (Mustang GT, Neon SRT-4, Evo, WRX STi, etc.) So what?! Look at what they sacrifice to be fast. A few ticks of a stopwatch don’t make up for inferior engineering, poor comfort and no room. Our Maximas are great cars for more reasons than a high 14 second quarter mile. It is a total package.

With regard to the ’03, it is a very nice car that is a fraction of a second quicker. But the 6th generation Maxima is such a better overall car, the slight speed difference is meaningless.

 

I agree. I looked inot the Evo and WRX STi and what amazing performing cars. But when you boil it all down, they are $15,000 crappy cars with $5-10,000 of go-fast stuff on them. I still see an Evo or Sti drive by and I think . . hmmmmm . .it would be fun to go that fast and feel like ur in a real performance vehicle. On the other hand, when you floor my car and hear and feel it, I'm not too disappointed. This is a fine car with very good performance and even better performance potential with aftermarket mods.

 

Thank you.
Peace
Warren

 

They are pretty close, but the 6th gen auto vs. the 5th gen auto definately goes to the 6th.

 

Enough said....

 

Not true they both produce similar 0-60's and 1/4mile times despite the 5spd vs 4spd auto, I have yet to be pulled by an 04-05 (they all have been very close)!

 

Just by feel my 6th gen manual is faster than my ex-wife's 5th gen auto. Granted I don't know that I ever really tried to get the most of hers and I wouldn't want to put it to the test. Probably because I wouldn't want to lose to the ex.

Scott D.

 

well what u say about the udp is true since my cousin with the six speed went bac to the track last week with advance timing and udp bein the only changes and ran one high 15's another mid 15's and 14.8 flat on the thirdrun. He said he has no traction in first or second at all. and even though i have no proof of his 14.1 before i complelty believe it now since he told me about running high 15's. We were suppose to go to the track this wednesday but the weather showin rain my side, so maybe next week and i'll bring a video camera when i go.

 

You know those older Mustang GTs aren't really that much faster than the 6th gen max. My wife has an 02 that's pretty fast but I am thinking one of the heavily modded Maxima's would be dead even if not faster.
Of course the 05 GT is listing 300hp so that one is out of reach.

But's it's the class, luxury and quality that really seperate our cars from that pack. In my mind it's the most car you can get for your money. You can get a faster car for less but the options and luxury aren't there. You can get a more luxurious car with speed but your going to spend at least another 5k.

My only disappointments have been the fading chrome strip on top fo the car, the Bose 6disc doesn't play MP3s, the lack of support from Nismo and getting only 16.5k out of my tires.

All things considered I would buy it again in a heartbeat.

 

I don't care about 0-60 times anymore for the max. This car has more than enough pull to do the job and looks INCREDIBLE doing so.

If I wanna race, I break out my Yamaha R6.

NO Maxima, Mustang, Evo or STi will be able to hang with it (0-60 in 2.5 to 3 secs and 1/4 are 10.5 - 11 secs). The bike produces close to 128hp and weighs 354 lbs - that is what I call a power to weight ratio

 

You wouldnt lose, I basically own the same cars. My car is the 04 but I drive the 02 all the time and have raced it multiply times and its not near as quick as my 04 manual.

 

And they said it couldn't be done, "you just can't have more than 265 HP w/FWD 'cuz the torque steer would be too much to handle"... or can you?

"Still, the 303-hp, 5.3-liter V8-equipped Impala SS is the one you want. It rips out 323 pound-feet of torque at 4,400 rpm, and is the quickest Impala ever built. That's right, 409 fans. Sorry, big-block buffs. Chevy says the new Impala SS can hit 0-60 in 5.7 seconds which dusts every single one of the car's storied ancestors. If only it was rear-wheel drive."

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...6/pageNumber=1

 

I would say that we are in the new "muscle-car" era. Similar to the 1966-72 era where each year the cars got faster and faster. It's crazy. The new Impala and the new Monte Carlo SS will both be faster than the Maximas are.

Too bad their Chevy's....

 

when i had the 02 max, my friend had the 04, we raced a bunch of times, of the line, he would beat me by a inches, so its very close, in a race over 120mph, the 04-05 will win because of the extra gear...

 

I actually posted this question in a diferent topic earlier which was probably not the rite one to ask it in, this one seems a little bit more like it.

Can someone clarify this for me, I say no, but on my 05 maxima SE I am arguing with somebody that tiptronic does not make the car faster one bit. The only thing possibly is holding a gear at highway speeds, but from the start switiching it yourself the shifts are ridiculously slow. It's defense though but if you slap it into tiptronic mode and just let the car shift by itself, because after a certain rpm even in tip mode it still shifts, it does seem like it possibly a little bit faster because it feels like it might get another 200 rpm out of each gear.

Thanks fellas

 

200 rpm's?

on regular auto the tranny shifts at around 3000 rpms when you step on it alittle more.. on the tip tronic, it will go all the way to redline almost... that looks more like 3500 rpms more than normal to me my friend..

and its quicker cause it holds the gear longer = more rpms = more revolutions...

 

02-06's in similiar trannies(auto to auto and manual to manual) are pretty much even, now you manual drivers if you cant shift (launch) we will get you. For that matter since 02 the 1/4 mile times between the auto and manuals are alot closer, the manual's most of the time just have a slighlty higher trap speed !

 

^^^ but the 04-06 auto to manual is pretty much even.

logik05se,
tiptronic helps a lot. you decide when to shift and not the tranny. if you let it shift, it's just shy of redline. that alone is an advantage over auto shifts. if you can find the sweet spot in each gear, you can shift even better. there is slight lag, but no worse than the automatic. It down shifts in slow stages and often not to the lowest possible one. you can down shift 2 gears very quickly with tipping.

So you're down to 2nd way quicker compared to the auto. Autp would be down to 4th, about to get to 3rd, and possibly too late for 2nd.

Man, we really need to get some auto and manual 6ths together at Maple Grove. then even better if some 5th gens could come.

 

That sounds nice. I'm currently located near Reading, PA so MG is pretty close to where I live. But I doubt we'll have a "meet" there.

 

200 rpm's?

on regular auto the tranny shifts at around 3000 rpms when you step on it alittle more.. on the tip tronic, it will go all the way to redline almost... that looks more like 3500 rpms more than normal to me my friend..


...I ment when you floor it, not drive like my father lol but thanks for the info from people who answered, I think auto's are fastest when put in tip mode and still let the car shift for itself.

As far as meeting up and running this, I'm in Brooklyn NY, and im down, just lemme know.
:

05 SE Auto, stock, straight pipe in place of resonator, Berk cold air in the mail.