The Official CVT vs Manual Transmission Thread
06-21-2010, 12:14 PM
#441
...you know....i wanna agree with you on this statement....but then i come across articles like this one http://www.motortrend.com/features/c...ick/index.html
and you mean to tell me that i can get a Mazda 5 minivan in a manual and not a Maxima? let me tell you, that i see more Maximas on the road than Mazda 5 minivans. and what about the Hyundai Tucson? the Buick Regal? i don't think it has anything to do with "customers not buying them".
it may have something to do with it, but not the SOLE reason.
and unless you're the spokesman for Nissan of America, then i think there has to be another reason why they took the route of a CVT only option.
and i beleive that someone as older and wiser such as yourself can concour with me on this one.
06-21-2010, 12:29 PM
#442
Beater, both the Hyndai Tuscon and Mazda 5 can only be configured with a MT when purchasing the base trim level vehicle. Once you go up the line, the MT is no longer available. This seems to be typical in the industry lately.
That scenario differs from the upcomming Regal GS, which is catering to a more enthusiast, upscale market. It's this second group of cars (like the new Regal GS) that the Maxima would be associated with... if they actually offered a MT.
Your previous comment made a good point, inferring that the CVT is not a good platform for power mods that exceed factory specs. If Nissan put a MT in the new Max, people would be modding them.
That scenario differs from the upcomming Regal GS, which is catering to a more enthusiast, upscale market. It's this second group of cars (like the new Regal GS) that the Maxima would be associated with... if they actually offered a MT.
Your previous comment made a good point, inferring that the CVT is not a good platform for power mods that exceed factory specs. If Nissan put a MT in the new Max, people would be modding them.
06-23-2010, 06:13 PM
#443
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: a meadow south of Atlanta
Posts: 8,143
...you know....i wanna agree with you on this statement....but then i come across articles like this one http://www.motortrend.com/features/c...ick/index.html
and you mean to tell me that i can get a Mazda 5 minivan in a manual and not a Maxima? let me tell you, that i see more Maximas on the road than Mazda 5 minivans. and what about the Hyundai Tucson? the Buick Regal? i don't think it has anything to do with "customers not buying them".
it may have something to do with it, but not the SOLE reason.
and unless you're the spokesman for Nissan of America, then i think there has to be another reason why they took the route of a CVT only option.
and i beleive that someone as older and wiser such as yourself can concour with me on this one.
and you mean to tell me that i can get a Mazda 5 minivan in a manual and not a Maxima? let me tell you, that i see more Maximas on the road than Mazda 5 minivans. and what about the Hyundai Tucson? the Buick Regal? i don't think it has anything to do with "customers not buying them".
it may have something to do with it, but not the SOLE reason.
and unless you're the spokesman for Nissan of America, then i think there has to be another reason why they took the route of a CVT only option.
and i beleive that someone as older and wiser such as yourself can concour with me on this one.
Comes back to exactly what I have been saying: THE MARKET DETERMINES THIS. The manuals in those vehicles would NOT be available if nobody was buying them. The buyers of Maximas are obviously a different target customer base than those other vehicles are aimed at.
I can't say this emphatically enough: Nissan made manual Maximas for a quarter century, and over that span of time, the percentage of Maxima buyers opting for manuals kept dropping, and was between 2% and 3% at the time Nissan finally gave in to what the public was clearly telling them. Worse, many of that 2% to 3% were sold below cost to free the lot space.
A manufacturer would be unwise to do the engineering to drop a manual into the 7th gen Maxima when he knows ahead of time dealers won't accept a car that only 2% of the Maxima-buying public would be interested in, and that having it available on special order would probably mean less than 1K would be sold each model year. This is about as simple as economics can get.
)
06-24-2010, 04:21 AM
#445
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
Whether it's as simple as "simple economics", a matter of Carlos Ghosn riding his pet technology for all it's worth, Nissan's long-term goals, or any other reason - the end result is that the powers-that-be finally decided to make their top-tier sedans less than acceptable to some of us. No, there isn't much any individual or even a thousand of us a year can do about it, other than shop elsewhere. And that's a shame.
Just because I know exactly where to find a little something I posted in the 6th Gen forum a little over three years ago in response to the thread title's question "Will you buy another Max?". I know they tried to keep the MT option available, and held out longer than most. And that was a big attraction.
My post is here and the thread is here.
FWIW, the 7th Gen was not all that far off the short list this past go-round. I was probably as close as I'll ever get to tossing in the towel with respect to what was to be my wife's DD, until she mentioned two very specific items that took it out of contention. I'll give this much detail - one was transmission related, the other was something entirely separate and not even mechanical, neither was prompted by me even subconsciously, and either was a deal-breaker all by itself.
Probably worth noting
Just thought I'd add that the fact that CVTs and their care & maintenance differ a bit from conventional transmissions is getting wider exposure, and occasionally turns up in unexpected places. My September issue of Circle Track magazine has a "race products" page on which new products are given some exposure. I'm not pitching for Amsoil, but they have a new Engine and Transmission Flush product . . . and they are very careful to note that this product is not recommended for CVT's (or differentials). Guess that means that the rate of CVT fitment has gotten high enough that product developers and their marketing crews can no longer afford to do the "head in sand" thing and ignore the CVT even if they choose not to develop products specifically for it.
Norm
Just because I know exactly where to find a little something I posted in the 6th Gen forum a little over three years ago in response to the thread title's question "Will you buy another Max?". I know they tried to keep the MT option available, and held out longer than most. And that was a big attraction.
It's a matter of how loyal Nissan is to people like me rather than the other way around.
FWIW, the 7th Gen was not all that far off the short list this past go-round. I was probably as close as I'll ever get to tossing in the towel with respect to what was to be my wife's DD, until she mentioned two very specific items that took it out of contention. I'll give this much detail - one was transmission related, the other was something entirely separate and not even mechanical, neither was prompted by me even subconsciously, and either was a deal-breaker all by itself.
Probably worth noting
Just thought I'd add that the fact that CVTs and their care & maintenance differ a bit from conventional transmissions is getting wider exposure, and occasionally turns up in unexpected places. My September issue of Circle Track magazine has a "race products" page on which new products are given some exposure. I'm not pitching for Amsoil, but they have a new Engine and Transmission Flush product . . . and they are very careful to note that this product is not recommended for CVT's (or differentials). Guess that means that the rate of CVT fitment has gotten high enough that product developers and their marketing crews can no longer afford to do the "head in sand" thing and ignore the CVT even if they choose not to develop products specifically for it.
Norm
Last edited by Norm Peterson; 06-24-2010 at 04:52 AM.
06-24-2010, 05:09 AM
#446
Thank you. I appreciate that.
Same here. The CVT and the awkward dashboard graphics were the only 2 things that gave me pause, leading me to a decision to keep my 5.5 gen another few years. Otherwise, you could do a whole lot worse than the 7th gen. Beautiful car. Great ride. Comfort, command and sport.
Same here. The CVT and the awkward dashboard graphics were the only 2 things that gave me pause, leading me to a decision to keep my 5.5 gen another few years. Otherwise, you could do a whole lot worse than the 7th gen. Beautiful car. Great ride. Comfort, command and sport.
06-25-2010, 10:21 AM
#447
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
Had this link end up in my mailbox today. It's not just the featured "Innovations" book that's of interest here; there's another title down toward the lower right.
http://books.sae.org/book-t-109
Norm
http://books.sae.org/book-t-109
Norm
06-27-2010, 08:52 AM
#448
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Eugene Oregon
Posts: 15
I have to say I enjoy the cvt. Sure it doesn't give me the controll over the RPM's and does take some of the finner control out of my hands. In everyday driving that is fine in fact I don't care. I purchased the car for a game show on Speed TV and think that it is perfectly suited for the event.
I have added already a new y-pipe and k&N ram air kit to the car and those two improvements have really awakened the 2010 car. Now if I can find a tuner shop that can get into the ECU and tweek it's factory limits it should be around 400 hp and the cvt should be awakened by that improvement alone.
I have added already a new y-pipe and k&N ram air kit to the car and those two improvements have really awakened the 2010 car. Now if I can find a tuner shop that can get into the ECU and tweek it's factory limits it should be around 400 hp and the cvt should be awakened by that improvement alone.
06-27-2010, 10:05 AM
#449
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 780
I have added already a new y-pipe and k&N ram air kit to the car and those two improvements have really awakened the 2010 car. Now if I can find a tuner shop that can get into the ECU and tweek it's factory limits it should be around 400 hp and the cvt should be awakened by that improvement alone.
06-27-2010, 02:48 PM
#450
I have added already a new y-pipe and k&N ram air kit to the car and those two improvements have really awakened the 2010 car. Now if I can find a tuner shop that can get into the ECU and tweek it's factory limits it should be around 400 hp and the cvt should be awakened by that improvement alone.
uuuhhhh..... :metalmax:
06-27-2010, 02:58 PM
#451
91 Percent of 2009 MY Cars Were Equipped With Automatic Transmissions
Manual transmissions continue to die off in all segments of the auto market
It wasn't too long ago that we were discussing the decline of V6 and V8 engines in favor of more fuel efficient naturally aspirated and turbocharged four-cylinder engines for mainstream vehicles. However, we're also beginning to see the death of another automative staple: the manual transmission.
According to the Detroit News, more than 91 percent of 2009 model year cars sold in the United States came equipped with an automatic transmission. Advances in technology are making the "fuel economy gap" that one favored manuals over automatic transmissions disappear. And in many cases, automatic or CVT-equipped versions of vehicles get better fuel economy than their manually-shifted counterparts.
In the case of the 2011 Mustang V6, the automatic transmission achieves 19 mpg in the city and 31 mpg on the highway. The manual transmission version also achieves 19 mpg in the city, but gets a slightly lower 30 mpg on the highway.
As for the Honda CR-Z, the difference between the automatic transmission and the manual is even more dramatic. A CR-Z with a CVT transmission gets 36/38 mpg (city/highway) versus 31/37 for the manual transmission.
High performance cars, often a sector where you'd expect to only find a manual transmission, are ditching traditional manuals for single- and dual-clutch automated transmissions. Sports cars like the Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG and Ferrari 458 Italia are only available with dual-clutch transmissions.
"Europeans tend to buy manuals on entry models, while Americans view it as an option for enthusiasts," said BMW 5-Series project manager Willem Rombauts.
"Manuals lend a special connection to the car, and that's highly appealing to our customers," said Mini project manager Vincent Kung. "Looking at the next generation of the Cooper, we'll continue to see a significant place for the manual."
In addition to the fuel economy benefits mentioned before, automated transmissions now often provide faster acceleration as well. It's a win-win in the technical sense. However, many people feel that they aren't "one with the machine" if they don't have a third pedal on the floor and a stick to row.
Others see the rise of automatic transmissions as byproduct of America's laziness and penchant for multitasking be it eating, talking, texting, or applying makeup while driving. Whatever the reasons for uptick in automatic transmission adoptions, it doesn't appear to be a trend that will stop anytime soon -- at least not in the United States.
Manual transmissions continue to die off in all segments of the auto market
It wasn't too long ago that we were discussing the decline of V6 and V8 engines in favor of more fuel efficient naturally aspirated and turbocharged four-cylinder engines for mainstream vehicles. However, we're also beginning to see the death of another automative staple: the manual transmission.
According to the Detroit News, more than 91 percent of 2009 model year cars sold in the United States came equipped with an automatic transmission. Advances in technology are making the "fuel economy gap" that one favored manuals over automatic transmissions disappear. And in many cases, automatic or CVT-equipped versions of vehicles get better fuel economy than their manually-shifted counterparts.
In the case of the 2011 Mustang V6, the automatic transmission achieves 19 mpg in the city and 31 mpg on the highway. The manual transmission version also achieves 19 mpg in the city, but gets a slightly lower 30 mpg on the highway.
As for the Honda CR-Z, the difference between the automatic transmission and the manual is even more dramatic. A CR-Z with a CVT transmission gets 36/38 mpg (city/highway) versus 31/37 for the manual transmission.
High performance cars, often a sector where you'd expect to only find a manual transmission, are ditching traditional manuals for single- and dual-clutch automated transmissions. Sports cars like the Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG and Ferrari 458 Italia are only available with dual-clutch transmissions.
"Europeans tend to buy manuals on entry models, while Americans view it as an option for enthusiasts," said BMW 5-Series project manager Willem Rombauts.
"Manuals lend a special connection to the car, and that's highly appealing to our customers," said Mini project manager Vincent Kung. "Looking at the next generation of the Cooper, we'll continue to see a significant place for the manual."
In addition to the fuel economy benefits mentioned before, automated transmissions now often provide faster acceleration as well. It's a win-win in the technical sense. However, many people feel that they aren't "one with the machine" if they don't have a third pedal on the floor and a stick to row.
Others see the rise of automatic transmissions as byproduct of America's laziness and penchant for multitasking be it eating, talking, texting, or applying makeup while driving. Whatever the reasons for uptick in automatic transmission adoptions, it doesn't appear to be a trend that will stop anytime soon -- at least not in the United States.
06-27-2010, 03:21 PM
#452
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
06-27-2010, 03:57 PM
#453
I have added already a new y-pipe and k&N ram air kit to the car and those two improvements have really awakened the 2010 car. Now if I can find a tuner shop that can get into the ECU and tweek it's factory limits it should be around 400 hp and the cvt should be awakened by that improvement alone.
And here I thought the 7th gen forum was dull, and without humor.That was a little bit of fun to read.
06-27-2010, 08:04 PM
#454
Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 133
Read through an Altima brochure while in Kingman visiting my dad last week. Manual transmissions in an Altima are now only available on special order, and you cannot get the Tech package with a manual transmission. Guess they won't sell too many of them.
One comment on the issue of getting less mileage with a manual transmission. If you check the specs, you will usually find manual transmission-equipped cars have shorter final gearing, so the engine spins faster in high gear, ergo less mileage.
One comment on the issue of getting less mileage with a manual transmission. If you check the specs, you will usually find manual transmission-equipped cars have shorter final gearing, so the engine spins faster in high gear, ergo less mileage.
06-27-2010, 08:25 PM
#455
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Eugene Oregon
Posts: 15
400hp is not at the wheels. 290 is factory 13hp (y-pipe) = 303 K&N 6hp = 309 and a underdrive pully 10hp = 310 stillen mufflers 10 = 320hp
So if you add a street tune to the 3.5 I do believe that even more ponys will be released. ---- 375 to yes 400! Everyone knows that factory tunes are for eco and not racing. Am I wrong?
So if you add a street tune to the 3.5 I do believe that even more ponys will be released. ---- 375 to yes 400! Everyone knows that factory tunes are for eco and not racing. Am I wrong?
06-28-2010, 02:12 AM
#456
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: a meadow south of Atlanta
Posts: 8,143
Read through an Altima brochure while in Kingman visiting my dad last week. Manual transmissions in an Altima are now only available on special order, and you cannot get the Tech package with a manual transmission. Guess they won't sell too many of them.
One comment on the issue of getting less mileage with a manual transmission. If you check the specs, you will usually find manual transmission-equipped cars have shorter final gearing, so the engine spins faster in high gear, ergo less mileage.
One comment on the issue of getting less mileage with a manual transmission. If you check the specs, you will usually find manual transmission-equipped cars have shorter final gearing, so the engine spins faster in high gear, ergo less mileage.
I feel Nissan is making a mistake by not having a manual easily available on the 3.5 Altima. Gohsn told us back in 2001 that the Maxima was moving upscale to near-luxury, and the 3.5 Altima was replacing the Maxima as Nissan's affordable 4DSC, and, with its manual tranny option, the 3.5 was fun to drive. Altima is a volume seller, so Nissan should have been able to justify a manual option available on dealer lots.
You are exactly right about the final ratio in manual vehicles often resulting in a faster RPM level than an automatic moving at the same speed. That is because the brains of the auto world assume drivers choosing manuals are more prone to explore the performance aspects of a car.
That was a pet peeve of mine in every manual tranny car I ever owned. On long, level interstate highways, I would love to have a six speed manual where sixth gear let the engine idle along at 1800 RPMs at 75 MPH. If I need a little acceleration, I can shift down a gear.
The only two reasons the CVT will eventually be more fuel-efficient than manuals are the absence of shift points and (more importantly), the CVT allows drivers with a light foot to keep RPMs surprisingly low at all speeds. That second factor could be offset by having a TRUE overdrive on the manual.
06-28-2010, 03:59 AM
#457
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
400hp is not at the wheels. 290 is factory 13hp (y-pipe) = 303 K&N 6hp = 309 and a underdrive pully 10hp = 310 stillen mufflers 10 = 320hp
So if you add a street tune to the 3.5 I do believe that even more ponys will be released. ---- 375 to yes 400! Everyone knows that factory tunes are for eco and not racing. Am I wrong?
So if you add a street tune to the 3.5 I do believe that even more ponys will be released. ---- 375 to yes 400! Everyone knows that factory tunes are for eco and not racing. Am I wrong?
You cannot make estimates of where your modified horsepower will end up by adding up all of the mfr claims. It just doesn't work that way even if the sales claims weren't inflated.
Norm
06-28-2010, 04:33 AM
#458
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
You are exactly right about the final ratio in manual vehicles often resulting in a faster RPM level than an automatic moving at the same speed. That is because the brains of the auto world assume drivers choosing manuals are more prone to explore the performance aspects of a car.
That was a pet peeve of mine in every manual tranny car I ever owned. On long, level interstate highways, I would love to have a six speed manual where sixth gear let the engine idle along at 1800 RPMs at 75 MPH. If I need a little acceleration, I can shift down a gear.
That was a pet peeve of mine in every manual tranny car I ever owned. On long, level interstate highways, I would love to have a six speed manual where sixth gear let the engine idle along at 1800 RPMs at 75 MPH. If I need a little acceleration, I can shift down a gear.
That's a capability not available with a MT, and the average driver is probably less inclined to downshift until the engine is lugging coming out of a 90° turn in a residential neighborhood. Shorter gearing (larger numerically) makes it a little easier to get away with driving like that.
I think that people like you and me were given an advantage in this by learning to drive stick back in the days of carburetors. Unlike EFI, those things really don't work at all well with the throttle plates wide open and the engine at low revs. So you tended to avoid making the engine struggle under such conditions, either by downshifting in advance of a tight turn or as you were exiting it and about to add throttle. With only three tranny gears to choose from in most cases (and one of those not necessarily synchronized), you really weren't having to shift all that much.
Light and Rochester - this round's on me. Cliff'll cover the next one.
Norm
Last edited by Norm Peterson; 06-28-2010 at 10:16 AM.
06-28-2010, 08:09 AM
#459
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 49
Slighty off topic, but somewhat relevant, so don't kill me guys. But anyway, the 2011 Porsche 911 Turbo S is ONLY releasing with their version of the Dual-Clutch Transmission with Paddle shifters.
All that to say I really think manual trannies are getting the ole heave ho slowly but surely. Not to say they'll be extinct, but definitely on the endangered species list. Even the top end sports cars are either going away from them, or offering them as a non-default option. And if the 911 Turbo S (yes there is a distinction between the plain ole Turbo and the Turbo S) isn't a TRUE sports car then Ms. Butterworth 'aint syrup.
All that to say I really think manual trannies are getting the ole heave ho slowly but surely. Not to say they'll be extinct, but definitely on the endangered species list. Even the top end sports cars are either going away from them, or offering them as a non-default option. And if the 911 Turbo S (yes there is a distinction between the plain ole Turbo and the Turbo S) isn't a TRUE sports car then Ms. Butterworth 'aint syrup.
06-28-2010, 08:53 AM
#460
Very odd watching the two 7th gens run at Maxus. Their launch looked slow from the stands. They were whisper silent (relatively speaking). They never dipped and chirped during acceleration (duh). And yet, they ran absolutely consistent, effortless mid-14's every single time.
Now that's not scary fast by any measure, but it is respectable considering the weight, cost, technology and class of car. In other words, you get exactly what's advertised.
Now that's not scary fast by any measure, but it is respectable considering the weight, cost, technology and class of car. In other words, you get exactly what's advertised.
06-28-2010, 09:23 AM
#461
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
With a PDK/DSG/etc., you're still giving away mechanical involvement to electronic control, and the idea of bumping a glorified microswitch to cause a computer to issue commands to a couple of solenoids is not my idea of how to shift a mechanical device like a transmission. Too remote and way too video-game-ish and artificial, with no driver reward in it at all when it goes right. Nothing you can do when it shifts more harshly than necessary for conditions except b!tch about its stupidity.
A matter of a few tenths of a second is meaningless unless you really are racing.
Incidentally, I guess that imitation syrup needs additives like imitation butter.
Norm
Last edited by Norm Peterson; 06-28-2010 at 09:50 AM.
06-28-2010, 10:10 AM
#462
400hp is not at the wheels. 290 is factory 13hp (y-pipe) = 303 K&N 6hp = 309 and a underdrive pully 10hp = 310 stillen mufflers 10 = 320hp
So if you add a street tune to the 3.5 I do believe that even more ponys will be released. ---- 375 to yes 400! Everyone knows that factory tunes are for eco and not racing. Am I wrong?
So if you add a street tune to the 3.5 I do believe that even more ponys will be released. ---- 375 to yes 400! Everyone knows that factory tunes are for eco and not racing. Am I wrong?
this just gets better and better. im not leaving this forum ever!
hew newb, do you mind if i use you're quotes in my sig? this is good stuff!
06-28-2010, 10:15 AM
#463
400hp is not at the wheels. 290 is factory 13hp (y-pipe) = 303 K&N 6hp = 309 and a underdrive pully 10hp = 310 stillen mufflers 10 = 320hp
So if you add a street tune to the 3.5 I do believe that even more ponys will be released. ---- 375 to yes 400! Everyone knows that factory tunes are for eco and not racing. Am I wrong?
So if you add a street tune to the 3.5 I do believe that even more ponys will be released. ---- 375 to yes 400! Everyone knows that factory tunes are for eco and not racing. Am I wrong?
let's just put it this way. the new Max was not (and probably will never) be able to be seen from a performance standpoint. PERIOD! the car cannot even be dyno tuned with it skipping to the next gear. making it near impossible to get a real number.
so instead of beating you head against the wall
trying to figure out why, it's better to just accept it and sit back and enojy the ride.
06-28-2010, 12:14 PM
#464
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 780
06-28-2010, 12:52 PM
#466
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 49
I keep hearing about how the 7 Gen is lacking in the performance arena. While in all reality the EMPIRICAL evidence says otherwise. Forget all the romanticism about RWD and Manual tranny, ok, ok, we get it, TRADITIONALLY sport oriented automobiles have had those features. What we are in the midst of is a paradigm shift. Things evolve and change much faster than our stodgy old beliefs. The 7th Generation Nissan Maxima is yet an example of this concept.
So what justification do I use to make my claim that the Max is indeed a Sports Sedan? Well for one I'll start with a definition from Websters...which interestingly enough has a list of cars that fit the description. Also I will include some performance specs from a car that I will not mention at first in order to provide a basis of comparison.
Here are some specs from a popular sports car in the not so distant past.
0-60: 5.8 seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.8- seconds
Skidpad: .89-.91 G's
60-0 Braking 119 ft.
Now here is the 7th Gen Maxima
0-60: 5.8- 6+ seconds
1/4 Mile: <=14.5 seconds (though some member in here broke 14 seconds, I forget who he is)
Skidpad: .87 G's
60-0 Braking 113 ft.
BTW the first car is a 350Z...definitely a sports car.
What point am I proving? That maybe it's not so much a stretch to call the 7th Gen a 4DSC, if not that it is definitely a Sports Sedan with numbers not very far off a very popular and capable sports car in the 350Z. Of course the numbers are better in the 350Z but considering the Maxima is a sedan and not a two door coupe it isn't that much of a difference.
People are focusing on the fact that it has a CVT and FWD and making statements alluding to it not being a performer when the empirical evidence shows it is pretty competitive.
So what justification do I use to make my claim that the Max is indeed a Sports Sedan? Well for one I'll start with a definition from Websters...which interestingly enough has a list of cars that fit the description. Also I will include some performance specs from a car that I will not mention at first in order to provide a basis of comparison.
A sports sedan is a descriptive term applied to a sedan or saloon automobile that is designed to look and feel "sporty" - offering the driver more connection with the driving experience. Most vehicles in this category overlap with the compact executive car classification.
Traditionally sports sedans have a manual transmission and tachometer in order to provide that "sports look and feel" and are rear wheel drive, have good handling characteristics, and adequate power. Because of the move to automatic transmission and front wheel drive these types are now also to be found in the sport sedan category.
Traditionally sports sedans have a manual transmission and tachometer in order to provide that "sports look and feel" and are rear wheel drive, have good handling characteristics, and adequate power. Because of the move to automatic transmission and front wheel drive these types are now also to be found in the sport sedan category.
0-60: 5.8 seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.8- seconds
Skidpad: .89-.91 G's
60-0 Braking 119 ft.
Now here is the 7th Gen Maxima
0-60: 5.8- 6+ seconds
1/4 Mile: <=14.5 seconds (though some member in here broke 14 seconds, I forget who he is)
Skidpad: .87 G's
60-0 Braking 113 ft.
BTW the first car is a 350Z...definitely a sports car.
What point am I proving? That maybe it's not so much a stretch to call the 7th Gen a 4DSC, if not that it is definitely a Sports Sedan with numbers not very far off a very popular and capable sports car in the 350Z. Of course the numbers are better in the 350Z but considering the Maxima is a sedan and not a two door coupe it isn't that much of a difference.
People are focusing on the fact that it has a CVT and FWD and making statements alluding to it not being a performer when the empirical evidence shows it is pretty competitive.
06-28-2010, 01:38 PM
#467
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: a meadow south of Atlanta
Posts: 8,143
Maxim_ized - You are making the old mistake of comparing things SCIENTIFICALLY. When it comes to 'sports cars', science goes out the window.
Sports sedans can't be fully measured scientifically; they are purely a 'state of mind' thing. Although manual fans may say otherwise, a manual RWD car fills an EMOTIONAL need, not a real-world one.
Even if a CVT FWD sedan completely destroyed a manual RWD vehicle in every way performance can be measured, that proves nothing to those attuned to the lifelong mantra that, no matter what dictionaries or science or timers may say, it cannot be a sports car unless it has that old knobby stick thing that requires constant attention, and that long driveshaft splitting the length of the passenger compartment with a high hump.
So get with the 'real' world; the world where EMOTION rules.
And before someone feels this post is strictly a putdown of manuals and RWD, remember that for most buyers of anything but basic, efficient vehicles, EMOTION is a key factor in that purchase. Our cars are often an extension of ourselves. As proven by the never-ending disasters of our political system, Americans are driven by EMOTION, not by logic or common sense.
So using science in an attempt to prove a CVT FWD car can be considered a 'sports car' is like spitting into the wind. Or telling commonfolk Europeans of the thirteenth century that the world is round.
The time will eventually come when sports cars can have FWD and CVT. But it isn't here yet.
Sports sedans can't be fully measured scientifically; they are purely a 'state of mind' thing. Although manual fans may say otherwise, a manual RWD car fills an EMOTIONAL need, not a real-world one.
Even if a CVT FWD sedan completely destroyed a manual RWD vehicle in every way performance can be measured, that proves nothing to those attuned to the lifelong mantra that, no matter what dictionaries or science or timers may say, it cannot be a sports car unless it has that old knobby stick thing that requires constant attention, and that long driveshaft splitting the length of the passenger compartment with a high hump.
So get with the 'real' world; the world where EMOTION rules.
And before someone feels this post is strictly a putdown of manuals and RWD, remember that for most buyers of anything but basic, efficient vehicles, EMOTION is a key factor in that purchase. Our cars are often an extension of ourselves. As proven by the never-ending disasters of our political system, Americans are driven by EMOTION, not by logic or common sense.
So using science in an attempt to prove a CVT FWD car can be considered a 'sports car' is like spitting into the wind. Or telling commonfolk Europeans of the thirteenth century that the world is round.
The time will eventually come when sports cars can have FWD and CVT. But it isn't here yet.
06-28-2010, 02:09 PM
#469
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
Maxim_ized . . .
'Sport' is not about the numbers. Nobody here is really arguing that anyway, other than with respect to the 7th Gen's softish acceleration off-the-line.
'Sport' with respect to the driving is about the driving experience and the actual tasks of appropriately using the steering, brakes, throttle, and transmission control - all those high tech add-ons like nav, bluetooth, SYNC, a sound system that's better than what's in your house, etc., are completely irrelevant as far as the 'sport' of driving is concerned.
It is entirely possible for a car with lower maximum performance numbers to be more enjoyable and satisfying to drive than a vehicle with more impressive paper stats. To crib from the Harley-Davidson guys - "If you have to ask, you wouldn't understand.". I think the Miata/MX-5 guys "get it", too.
Methinks a paradigm shift is flawed if it refuses to acknowledge that some intangibles cannot be forced in the same manner with which electronic or mechanical technology can be 'pushed'. Not as long as humans are individuals and free to have independent thought. Taking away choice isn't the same thing, and human evolution is a pretty slow process.
adamantly on my 1000th post here,
Norm
'Sport' is not about the numbers. Nobody here is really arguing that anyway, other than with respect to the 7th Gen's softish acceleration off-the-line.
'Sport' with respect to the driving is about the driving experience and the actual tasks of appropriately using the steering, brakes, throttle, and transmission control - all those high tech add-ons like nav, bluetooth, SYNC, a sound system that's better than what's in your house, etc., are completely irrelevant as far as the 'sport' of driving is concerned.
It is entirely possible for a car with lower maximum performance numbers to be more enjoyable and satisfying to drive than a vehicle with more impressive paper stats. To crib from the Harley-Davidson guys - "If you have to ask, you wouldn't understand.". I think the Miata/MX-5 guys "get it", too.
Methinks a paradigm shift is flawed if it refuses to acknowledge that some intangibles cannot be forced in the same manner with which electronic or mechanical technology can be 'pushed'. Not as long as humans are individuals and free to have independent thought. Taking away choice isn't the same thing, and human evolution is a pretty slow process.
adamantly on my 1000th post here,
Norm
Last edited by Norm Peterson; 06-28-2010 at 02:14 PM.
06-28-2010, 04:09 PM
#471
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 49
Maxim_ized - You are making the old mistake of comparing things SCIENTIFICALLY. When it comes to 'sports cars', science goes out the window.
Sports sedans can't be fully measured scientifically; they are purely a 'state of mind' thing. Although manual fans may say otherwise, a manual RWD car fills an EMOTIONAL need, not a real-world one.
Even if a CVT FWD sedan completely destroyed a manual RWD vehicle in every way performance can be measured, that proves nothing to those attuned to the lifelong mantra that, no matter what dictionaries or science or timers may say, it cannot be a sports car unless it has that old knobby stick thing that requires constant attention, and that long driveshaft splitting the length of the passenger compartment with a high hump.
So get with the 'real' world; the world where EMOTION rules.
And before someone feels this post is strictly a putdown of manuals and RWD, remember that for most buyers of anything but basic, efficient vehicles, EMOTION is a key factor in that purchase. Our cars are often an extension of ourselves. As proven by the never-ending disasters of our political system, Americans are driven by EMOTION, not by logic or common sense.
So using science in an attempt to prove a CVT FWD car can be considered a 'sports car' is like spitting into the wind. Or telling commonfolk Europeans of the thirteenth century that the world is round.
The time will eventually come when sports cars can have FWD and CVT. But it isn't here yet.
Sports sedans can't be fully measured scientifically; they are purely a 'state of mind' thing. Although manual fans may say otherwise, a manual RWD car fills an EMOTIONAL need, not a real-world one.
Even if a CVT FWD sedan completely destroyed a manual RWD vehicle in every way performance can be measured, that proves nothing to those attuned to the lifelong mantra that, no matter what dictionaries or science or timers may say, it cannot be a sports car unless it has that old knobby stick thing that requires constant attention, and that long driveshaft splitting the length of the passenger compartment with a high hump.
So get with the 'real' world; the world where EMOTION rules.
And before someone feels this post is strictly a putdown of manuals and RWD, remember that for most buyers of anything but basic, efficient vehicles, EMOTION is a key factor in that purchase. Our cars are often an extension of ourselves. As proven by the never-ending disasters of our political system, Americans are driven by EMOTION, not by logic or common sense.
So using science in an attempt to prove a CVT FWD car can be considered a 'sports car' is like spitting into the wind. Or telling commonfolk Europeans of the thirteenth century that the world is round.
The time will eventually come when sports cars can have FWD and CVT. But it isn't here yet.
Oh and don't act like the sports car world isn't spec driven...Yeah, like car manufacturers can make cars fly off the lot by saying "It just Feels Good". I mean yeah there is the famous and successful marketing campaign of "The Ultimate Driving Machine" but you better believe there is more to BMW's than the Emotion Fairy sprinkling its magic dust upon their vehicles.
Norm, Sport IS about the numbers, because a car that is taking 9 seconds to get to 60 MPH and has a skidpad reading of less than .70 G's is not Sport...point blank. Anyway where did I mention anything about Bluetooth, Nav or anything of the matter? As a matter of fact I just got the SV Sport without any of the Nav doo-dads. All I wanted was the suspension, the chassis stiffening, and the wheels. Anything else was cool to have but not necessarily needed.
I am in no way proclaiming to be Mario Andretti, but I know about performance driving both by actually driving and from attending Skip Barber's Racing School in the Poconos. I also still own what some consider as the benchmark for Sport Sedans with my BMW 5 Series (yes it's a manual). At least with my SV Sport I can honestly say that the car communicates the road very well to me, it points and shoots precisely as far as the steering, it sits down in the curves and accelerates out of the apex with with power and control, and yes you can steer with the throttle so to speak. All that to say the intangibles are there...is it the best Sports Sedan in those regards...no, but it is a Sports Sedan.
If I'm still getting a sub 6 second 0-60 even with its "softish acceleration off-the-line" then something must be right.
I tell you...people see the six letters of FWD and CVT and become extremely myopic.
06-28-2010, 06:23 PM
#472
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
I guess I should have said "It's not ONLY about the numbers". I'm an engineer and work with those things all day long. And frequently during lunch or when I get home I'll work with them some more to specifically try to understand more about this automotive thing.
I've been at it long enough to know that any of the simplistic objective numbers only help you keep score. They're only part of the story - while they indicate where the potential lies, they give no information about the subjective feel when you're getting close to it.
As to the subjective value of even the hard numbers, even that varies. I've posted elsewhere that I'd rather drive a 15 second MT car than an otherwise identical AT car that runs 13's - and I really would rather drive my 626 than an AT version of my Mustang GT. It's 15 years old, about 110,000 miles with only a few tweaks and it's still a hoot to drive. It doesn't matter one iota that any number of current cars with AT or any other tranny type can show taillights to it in an impromptu acceleration contest. Try to understand that. Please.
Lateral g's is another number that people tend to assign too much value to, particularly when you realize that maybe one person in ten thousand ever intentionally drives above about 0.5, maybe 0.6 lat g. How the car feels as you get past that level (you're out of the linear range of tire behavior and pretty deep into transitional behavior at that point) is more important. If the driver runs out of confidence at 0.65 lat g (hopefully that happens before he runs out of talent), it makes no difference if the car will pull 0.75 or 0.95.
Light did say it - Sports sedans can't be fully measured scientifically.
More generally, the sports car experience is a convergence at least of car capability, car operation, driver (including personality), and road character. There's a lot of subjective going on that pure numbers simply can't describe. Were it otherwise, MG and Austin-Healey would have died off before 1965.
Norm
I've been at it long enough to know that any of the simplistic objective numbers only help you keep score. They're only part of the story - while they indicate where the potential lies, they give no information about the subjective feel when you're getting close to it.
As to the subjective value of even the hard numbers, even that varies. I've posted elsewhere that I'd rather drive a 15 second MT car than an otherwise identical AT car that runs 13's - and I really would rather drive my 626 than an AT version of my Mustang GT. It's 15 years old, about 110,000 miles with only a few tweaks and it's still a hoot to drive. It doesn't matter one iota that any number of current cars with AT or any other tranny type can show taillights to it in an impromptu acceleration contest. Try to understand that. Please.
Lateral g's is another number that people tend to assign too much value to, particularly when you realize that maybe one person in ten thousand ever intentionally drives above about 0.5, maybe 0.6 lat g. How the car feels as you get past that level (you're out of the linear range of tire behavior and pretty deep into transitional behavior at that point) is more important. If the driver runs out of confidence at 0.65 lat g (hopefully that happens before he runs out of talent), it makes no difference if the car will pull 0.75 or 0.95.
Light did say it - Sports sedans can't be fully measured scientifically.
More generally, the sports car experience is a convergence at least of car capability, car operation, driver (including personality), and road character. There's a lot of subjective going on that pure numbers simply can't describe. Were it otherwise, MG and Austin-Healey would have died off before 1965.
Norm
Last edited by Norm Peterson; 06-28-2010 at 06:26 PM.
06-28-2010, 06:58 PM
#474
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: a meadow south of Atlanta
Posts: 8,143
Ummm . . . could it be that someone here completely missed my 'tongue-in-cheek' approach to sports cars? Could that person perhaps go by the board name Maxim_ized?
Maxim_ized - Rest assured I am a very firm believer in science and statistics. And if you read my full post thoughtfully (and between the lines), you will discern I am one who is saying I believe a sports sedan can have a CVT and also be FWD. That won't yet fly with those who are not yet 'CVT-tuned', but will come to pass at some point. Just as the fact the earth is really round finally came to be accepted.
Perhaps I misled you with my emphasis on the emotional attachment manual/RWD folks have to their driving past. But it is true that many really dedicated and very competent drivers do have emotional attachments to things such as a manual tranny and RWD. There is nothing wrong with those emotional attachment. I have a few emotional attachments myself.
But please understand my satire was absolutely in support of your scientific approach to evaluating things. But just be aware that, althought many, if not most drivers do pay attention to measured stats, those cold hard facts do not always convince drivers with strong emotional ties built over many years of driving.
Last edited by lightonthehill; 06-28-2010 at 07:00 PM.
06-29-2010, 03:46 AM
#476
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 780
Here is what I have come to understand or at least my take on it so far. There is the Sports Car and there is the Sport of Driving. The sport of driving is more than just pushing the pedal and turning the wheel. Full control is somthing a "Driver" wants to have and it is what makes it fun. I can understand how a sports driver can hop into a car with only two pedals and a wheel and consider it not a sports car because they feel that it takes half of the sport right out of driving that car.
In football if a reciver got to stand in the endzone the whole time with out any body covering him and just wait for some one to throw the football his way I could understand how he would feel it was less of a sport.
The sport of hunting is tracking and being able to catch your prey. Tie a deer to the tree to shoot and it's less of a sport to the hunter.
Fishing in a bucket is less of a sport to a fisherman.
Take the control of shifting and control of the car by feel out of the drivers hands and it's less of a sport to him. It doesn't have everything to do with speed.
In football if a reciver got to stand in the endzone the whole time with out any body covering him and just wait for some one to throw the football his way I could understand how he would feel it was less of a sport.
The sport of hunting is tracking and being able to catch your prey. Tie a deer to the tree to shoot and it's less of a sport to the hunter.
Fishing in a bucket is less of a sport to a fisherman.
Take the control of shifting and control of the car by feel out of the drivers hands and it's less of a sport to him. It doesn't have everything to do with speed.
06-29-2010, 05:33 AM
#477
Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 169
I haven't read this thread thoroughly yet, but wanted to give my quick 2 cents. I've got an 09' Maxima. I bought it when it was new and was a little skeptical of whether the CVT would grow on me or not. It was certainly a different feel, but I loved the car so much, I figured I would adjust to it quickly. There was talk of not judging it too quickly in other threads and that there may be some element of the CVT "learning" your driving habits after some time, etc. I now have 13K on the car and can honestly say it has just not grown on me like I hoped it would have. To me, it just seems to sap the "spirit" right out of a great engine. Sure, the power is there if I get my foot in it heavy and sure the DS mode makes some attempt at emulating shifts, but I just can't help but feel like I'm trying to drive around in a tall gear that slipping most of the time. And the sound of the engine slowly revving down on the RPM's as I accelerate lightly just doesn't make me smile for some reason. I just wish it had a traditional 5-speed auto in it and shifted like every other car I've ever driven. I know I probably sound like one of those people that is just stuck in my ways...an old dog that can't learn new tricks, but I'm still in my 30's...love new technology and any kind of a scientific advancements, but still just can't get in bed with this tranny. If I could push a big red button and trade out this CVT for a traditional auto, I would do it in a second. I might even lay $500 on the table and give up a few MPG. Sorry to vent a bit, but I feel better now 
Having said all that, it's still the most enjoyable car I've ever owned and I love it. I just wish I could have zero regrets about any part of it, but life goes on and I'll keep driving my beautiful Max
Having said all that, it's still the most enjoyable car I've ever owned and I love it. I just wish I could have zero regrets about any part of it, but life goes on and I'll keep driving my beautiful Max
06-29-2010, 05:55 AM
#478
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
I get a strong feeling that if you are made less aware of the engine operating somewhat out of sync with what road speed and acceleration suggests should be happening under the hood - that you'll be happier with it. On the exhaust side, the loss of a few top-end HP would be insignificant if making the engine note less noticeable makes you happier with the car.
Norm
06-30-2010, 04:49 AM
#479
I'll add some fuel to this fire..... my timeslips from this weekend at Maxus. The temps were maybe 90, on pavement temp is an unknown. One thing is for sure, the cars could never cool down.
This is my first ever time on a track so save the RT comments, though I did get a lot better as the day progressed
my stock where it counts 7thgen is 0636
This is my first ever time on a track so save the RT comments, though I did get a lot better as the day progressed
my stock where it counts 7thgen is 0636
06-30-2010, 05:40 AM
#480