Couldn't be farther from the truth, black cars get dirty most easily. They simply do not stay clean longest, the dirt shows to much. White cars ironically don't show nearly as much.

 

Car color vs personality


Red

A red car indicates that you are a passionate person. You are a “take charge” kind of individual and you are at least a little wild. If you are thinking of buying a red car keep in mind that red cars still have the highest rate of theft and the highest insurance rates than any other color vehicle. Bright red paint also subconsciously sends the message that the owner is in a higher income bracket.

Orange

An orange vehicle is exceedingly hard to find. If you have an orange car you most likely crave attention. You are also generally a happy and upbeat person who enjoys being unique.

Yellow

There aren’t too many yellow cars on the road either, but a few companies do put them out; think the Ford Focus and VW Bug for instance. If you drive a yellow car you are confident. You like to have fun and you embrace the child within.

Green

Green is the color of nature. The person who chooses a green car is conscientious. They tend to be the go-to person in tense situations because they know how to keep their emotions in balance.

Blue

If your car is dark blue you are likely a very loyal person. You value relationships over wealth and you are calm. Rather than stand out, you like to blend in. If your car is light blue you are serene and peaceful. You also have a strong maternal instinct.

Purple

This is the color of royalty. If you have found a purple car you are a cherished individual who loves beauty, but walks with strength and purpose.

Pink

There are few pink cars out there, but they can be found. If you have a pink car, you like to be treated with a soft touch. You like to smile and you think good health is important.

Brown

If you have a brown car that signifies that you are reliable. You are true to yourself and to those around you. You are earthy and don’t engage in “showboating.” You are approachable, responsible and worthy of friendship.

Black

A slick black car is the epitome of power and authority. Think CIA or Secret Service. If you have a black car, you are sending the message that you are in control and are self-assured.

White

There are many white cars on the road. What they say about their owners has a lot to do with their upkeep. A clean white car shows that you pay attention to detail. You are careful and pure. A dirty white car makes you look sloppy and indifferent.

Gray

Although gray often represents the dreary and depressing in clothes, furniture and paint, that is not the case with your gray car. A gray car is a comfortable one. It represents stability and self-reliance.

Silver

Silver cars represent prestige, wealth and luxury. The newer and shinier the car, the more this will come across.


During my life I have driven most of the colors above, from Orange (actually Go-Mango on my Challenger) to the present Precision Grey. No purple, brown or pink tho. My black car was the hottest but that was before window tinting was available.

 

The car has a 4DSC sticker on it. I would think they want it to be as fast as possible. Dropping the VQ37 in it does not take away from how upscale the car is. Your argument makes no sense.

Directed at the ppl who forgot that this is a forum and not a 7th gen Maxima lovers convention

 

Other than choosing the Max as your car (very wise decision), its color does tell a lot about your personality. I would have gotten a red Max, but Tuscan red is too brown.

I do not think silver represents prestige, or wealth. It is the most popular color for all cars. Pedestrian is the adjective.

A black Crown Vic police cruiser is obviously authority. But a black PT Cruiser?

Is white reserved for amby-pambi octogenarians? Nah! It's for anyone.

 

Black = Hearses, State Funerals, IRS (eek), Evil Government Politicians....

No thanks.

P.S. - Their is a reason BMW charges extra for the white leather interior.

 

Keep in mind that some of the traffic that may show up in this thread has been specifically directed here. Meaning that there are no prerequisites.
You're probably aiming that at me. No problem, no I don't own a 7th, and no, I really don't think that matters. I think I know myself well enough at this point.

But should my previous Maxima buying history continue (2nd, 5th so far), I'd be up for at least looking at the 8th Gens. Unless/until an 8th Gen forum appears, that means I start looking here to get back in touch with where the latest Gen is and where it might be going. The 5th Gen forum is for what I've already got.

If it makes it easier, just consider me an org member who happens to own a 5th Gen. Not a 5th Gen member who wandered over here by mistake. Let me try to describe where it is that I'm coming from here. As briefly as I can without leaving too much out, here goes . . .

First off, my automotive enthusiasm is most closely associated with traditional sports cars and coupes. MGB, Datsun 240Z, BMW 2002tii sorts of cars, where the fun of driving is paramount and the experience itself is as important as the numerical performance data. That's the framework under which I buy my cars (guess I should say "we").

My standard question has been "Will I still think this car will be fun to drive six months after the note is paid off (or 6 years, whichever is greater)?" Having been lucky (or smart) enough in picking out where to live, convenience as a criterion has been (and still is) a non-starter. It's still consciously fun running up and down through the gears just going to the convenience store for a gallon of milk, and it just isn't possible for me to put a price tag on that. As in "mfr pays me $xxxx to give it up, not the other way 'round").

I'm an engineer by education and by occupation, and an automotive DIY tinkerer by extracurricular interest. I'm not just talking about replacing bolt-on accessories, components, or exhaust systems, either. I've built up engines, rebuilt transmissions and axles, and swapped powertrains, suspensions, aftermarket EFI, alignment, basically done most everything except A/C and glass work at least once. So I think I have some "feel" for the mechanical bits that make up a car and how it works. Maybe I'm almost literate enough to be able describe it.

When I'm driving, I expect certain "linearities". Do "X", get "Y" as the intended result. Do "2X", get "2Y" or at least closely so. Some sense of direct connection between engine and road is the pertinent example here, with no electronic or hydraulic logic interference being interjected. When that isn't happening, I WILL notice. I'll tell you right off if that out of sight V8 rumble or 4-cylinder rasp is coming from an automatic transmission vehicle. And that on the times when I have had to drive an AT car it kind of rubs me the wrong way when it does its thing differently from the way I'd be doing it or if the sensations differ from what I'd get while doing so manually. Bottom line to date - the car that I clash with over control of primary function is the car I don't buy. Life's too short for me to spend any of it getting into arguments with some computer that I just can't win.

While I haven't yet experienced it directly, I have had the opportunity to hear a Murano generate a similar "disconnected" sound character as a conventional AT starting from a dead stop. You just "know". I suppose I could rent a 7th Gen sometime, if any agency has them available for hire. The local Nissan dealership wasn't disposed toward letting us test drive our 5th Gen off their little loop (we'd pretty much decided on it anyway), so I'm not counting on them to be any more willing now.


Norm

 

HTML Code:

I agree with you but there are some people here who never go into the other Gen sites, me i still visit the 5th Gen because I still have my 2K and 2K3 SE Maximas.

 

Quote:

Silver

Silver cars represent prestige, wealth and luxury. The newer and shinier the car, the more this will come across.

Yeaaahhh baby!! This why i bought Silver, hi-ho Silver awaaaayyyyyy!!

Naw, j/k, I really bought because it stands out moreso than any other color and with the seXXXy body shape it has the Silver only helps to accentuate it even more/and it doesn't show dirt like Black or White.

 

Silver WAS the most popular color for cars for a very long time. But white has been the most bought color for several years now.

Silver has been my car color of choice for many years. Between the time I bought a regatta blue Pontiac Star Chief in 1962 and bought my white 2009 Maxima one year ago, every car I owned was silver except for one - a 2000 'robin's egg' blue Maxima SE.

 

Absolutely NO prerequisites.

Pretty much "anything" goes here. Argue, *****, whine, call white cars for "amby-pambi octogenarians".

Just don't step over the line and start insulting each other for your opinions, and I'm good with it. Everyone needs to just let go sometimes. If not in a forum, then where?

Oh, and Light, the only folks I've ever had a hand in "banning" were the users that started with 'V I A G" or "C I A L" LOL. I'm not a big ban type of guy as most folks are usually reasonable after calming down.

Now about that white color you chose.....

"Black is symbolic for sinister. Black is traditionally associated with evil deeds." Um, I like that. From now on, that shall me my mantra!!!!!!!!!

 

This is my first CVT transmission and I love it. If I had to choose between a new hydraulic clutch and a CVT, I would choose the CVT. I recently sold my 2002 Trans Am WS6 and I hated the hydraulic clutch. I have driven a few other cars with hydraulic clutches, and none of them felt as good as the clutch in my first car, a 1991 Cavalier GT, which is pretty sad. You can't beat a clutch with a clutch cable, and unfortunately auto manufacturers have done their best to make the clutch as numb as possible so that you can't feel the friction point, which is absolutely irritating. Instead of making people learn to drive manuals, the manufacturers have made them idiot proof, ruining the feel of the clutch. IMO the bottom line is the CVT is faster than any other automatic transmission or manual gearbox, and isn't that the whole point? How is the 7-speed tranny going to be faster than the CVT?

 

Once the CVT has been perfected, the truth of your statement will become fairly obvious to most CVT doubters. CVTs prior to this redesigned one on the 7th gen Maxima were more than a good step from perfection. But with this 7th gen Maxima CVT, we have clearly improved it to a point where I think it is absolutely on a par with manuals and auto trannies in both efficiency and performance, and it will probably only get better with each redesign.

The 6 speed manual and the 7 speed auto are very good trannies. But, although some folks will not like it, increasing government fuel requirements almost mandate that the CVT will replace manuals and auto trannies in more and more vehicles. I stand by my long-held position that manuals will eventually become a special order item on most of the cars on which they might still be available. The exception would be those strictly sports cars designed not for general/efficient transportation, but for ego boosting.

 

1. I take it that youve never driven a car with a Z-bar mechanical linkage. Cable operated clutches aren't too bad, but they still have less "feel" since a cable is still slightly less rigid than a proper tension/compression link (the individual strands "unwind" a tiny amount that stretches its length and ultimately "softens" its feel). Cable clutches also have a tendency to fatigue-fail the cable at the pedal end ball. As the cable "dies", you can feel it progressively going away until the last four or five strands go away all at once.

2. No. Not the whole point at all. With the exception of dragstrip enthusiasts seeking both consistency and performance and who mechanically rework their automatics as well as their engines, it's the convenience and/or luxury image of any variety of automatic that attracts most buyers away from the MT. The last fraction of a second in the zero to 60 sprint is really quite meaningless in street driving, and tends to be within the range of "scatter" at the dragstrip - it's part of what makes some races "driver's races". Sure makes for good bench-racing, though.

FWIW, the same can be said about most of the paddle-shift or DSG "manuals" that are now showing up.


3. It's not always about being quicker or faster, and I don't see there being much carry-over of conventional AT performance improvement techniques. A CVT does not, for example, have the ability to take advantage of a torque converter's stalled torque ratio (which typically doubles the torque available for acceleration coming off a complete stop - at least briefly).

Whether I agree with the tendency or not, flagship cars of most mfrs are intentionally skewed toward the luxury side. Pretty much by mfr-consensus definition, that involves an AT of some sort.


A little bit tangential to the topic, but in Philadelphia just this past weekend a Fedex truck was hijacked. It was the intent of the hijackers to throw both of the Fedex guys off the truck before running off with it. Trouble was, not one of said morons knew how to drive a MT, so they had to keep one of the Fedex guys on board just to get away from the crime scene. If it wasn't so funny (and ultimately beneficial as far as the known cargo was concerned) it would stand as sad commentary on the current average driving skill level.


Norm

 

We keep butting heads due to the fact that everyone is discussing different aspects:

1. Performance (e.g. acceleration)
2. Efficiency (e.g. fuel consumption)
3. Feel (e.g. sense of feel)
4. Satisfaction (e.g. fun to drive)

IMO the CVT takes on each one of those aspects and personally it either matches or exceeds in each one of them.

 

I will venture into this "taste great" vs. "less filling" debate.

For many years, companies have been trying to commercialize a CVT for many reasons. Now that Nissan has a design, what happens to the MT? Those who have a long history with MTs have an attraction to the control it affords. It is axiomatic that what you grow up with is better than the new fangled stuff. I am afflicted with this mental disease and will always like a MT over a CVT.

But....

Nissan's Maxima CVT delivers on its promises. Smooth, low gas consumption, and with the paddle shifters, almost like a MT. I can dominate the road with this tranny as well as an MT.

I suspect that Light is correct. New mileage regulations will tilt towards CVT.

But one of these days, I am going to buy a German sportscar with double clutches and 7 speeds just to get my jollies.

I did say that I have a mental disease.

 

That may be a very slight 'apples-to-oranges' thing. I personally feel it takes as much skill to OPTIMALLY drive either an automatic or a CVT as it does to manually shift. A poor driver can slop through the gears on a manual just like a poor driver can fail to take full advantage of all the nuances of an automatic or CVT. With an automatic, I find I have considerable control over when and how the tranny shifts. With a CVT, I find I have considerable control over exactly what RPMs the engine turns in any situation.

Also, remember that many drivers who now prefer automatics or CVTs because of congestion, etc, once drove manuals very efficiently. I drove only non-synchronized manuals in the 1940s and early 1950s, and drove a manual as recently as 1984. But a manual is not an optimum choice for most folks for use in today's endless creepy-crawly traffic.

I will grant you that the skill of the average driver on the road today absolutely does, as you eloquently worded it, 'stand as sad', and that many of them are incapable of properly using their automatic and CVT trannies, and would definitely be incapable of operating a manual tranny at even an elementary level.

 

That pregnant statement sums up the situation as neatly as can be done. When Nissan first mentioned back in 2002 that the Maxima would gradually move up to near-luxury status, and become their flagship, I think the days of a manual Maxima became numbered.

 

Missed a big one - Convenience (make that item 5.?)

I'll assume that any desire for projecting an image of luxury falls under item 4.

Keep in mind that items 1 and 2 can be defined and measured in purely mechanical terms (electro-mechanical, I guess, might be more accurate). Put a robot in the driver's seat and they could be ably demonstrated - probably with better reliability than what a human driver could produce.

But 3 and 4 involve the specific individual driver more than they do the mechanical and electronic bits. Perhaps item 3 can be quantified to some extent and the software/firmware modified to suit, but as far as I know item 4 is 100% on the human side and cannot.

Ultimately, where the line gets drawn with respect to CVT acceptability ends up being almost entirely about item 4 - even I can admit that a reasonably well-developed CVT is better at 1 and 2 than I am (or ever will be). But even if I ignore item 3, I don't see items 1 and 2 in favor of a CVT ever outweighing Item 4 favoring a conventional MT in my specific case. Obviously for some, item 4 is either neutral or preferentially on the CVT side of the ledger already, and for others it will become that way. At face value, I have no problem with that at all, though I might well have some issues with the downstream marketing decisions.


Postscript: there is another little sticking point starting to show its face, both here in this thread and in the actual new car market and one vision of its future - that being the restriction of or complete elimination of buyer choice in this matter. That's a big problem for anybody who doesn't like being squeezed into complete conformity with everybody else. Would it surprise anybody if I mentioned that I listed "conformity" as my "pet peeve" in my H.S yearbook (1965)?


Norm

 

I am new to forum. I have 2010 Maxima and just love it. traded in a 2000 max. I like the CVT but have one issue. It seems to shift down when going down an incline. Is this normal?

 

Norm: Have you driven a 2010 Maxima with the new CVT? If not then I think that you should! To see how it drives. Get the one with the paddle shifters too. You will be surprised how quick the "gear" ratios work. Not saying that you will fall in love with the CVT but you will see how it drives at least. It did take me some time to get used to it, but now i have learned how to drive it, i absolutely love it
I am a mechanical engineer by trade also! and I car really appreciate the design and engineering involved to make the CVT what it is.

The CVT is not a manual however. I do love to drive a stick. Most of my cars have been stick shifts. my 52 Truck is a stick and again the CVT is not a manual substitute. but it is a great transmission, and i really enjoy it.

In a perfect world all would be happy, Nissan max would have the 3.7 7 speed, autos, sticks, cvts. But remember that the g37 is a rear wheel drive car. its not near as easy as just dropping in that drive train. a complete re-engineer would have to be done.

 

I looooovvvvveeee the CVT in my Maxima. I don't even think about it anymore.

 

ottomax - Yes, this is normal. I did not notice any such thing on my 5th gen, but it was very pronounced on my 6th gen, slightly less so on my 7th gen. When the 6th gens arrived ('04 model year), Nissan considered this as a 'feature', and had a name for it. I have forgotten the name. It was supposedly a way of making the car more 'sporty'.

At first, I was a little unsure how to handle this feature, but finally found that if I wanted it to 'happen', I lifted my foot completely off the gas, and the engine compression would do much of the braking for me. I was often able to slow the car enough with this engine compression that I never had to touch the brakes.

But if I wanted to 'coast' and not have the engine compression slowing me down, I hept my foot on the gas pedal just enough to prevent the on-board computer from applying the engine compression.

Yes, it became sort of a 'balancing act', but after a few months of experimentation, I began to really like this feature. The compression is not quite as pronounced on my 7th gen, but it does exist, and I now know how to use it. For me, this is a good 'feature', but I'm sure some folks would just as soon not have it.

 

I like it, and it will probably add some life to your brake pads as well. I've owned GM's all my life and it feels like your in neutral going down a hill and coming to stop signs, the tranny holding me back is a nice change of pace.

 

I do the same thing too!!! just something to learn about the car. My wife even noticed that it didn't "coast" as easy as our TSX. But now she just puts her foot on the gas ever so slightly and it works perfect, when she wants to coast

 

Hey lightonthehill thanks for the reply. I'll try some of your ideas. Thanks again

 

I'm also new to the forum and have learned a great deal from this board. Traded in my 2003 Max SE 6 speed manual (loved the car with absolutely no problems) for a 2010 premium/tech. I can't say I miss shifting in the SF bay area traffic! Sometimes my left foot would be sore! The CVT takes some getting used to but its so smooth and responds well. Gotta love the acceleration too. Only "gripe" is the foot pedal parking brake. What's up with that. Kinda takes away from the "sporty" feel don't you think? No biggie though. It's an awesome luxurious car!

 

It does replicate the engine compression braking that you have with a MT, and that may help it gain acceptance.

In heavy traffic, I'd consider this to be a positive thing. As Gear has noted, GM conventional AT's (and those of most other mfrs, near as I can tell) offer little in the way of engine braking. So every time somebody drops a mph or two for any reason at all, everybody from there back will have to do their little tap dance on the brake pedal. Most times, a little engine compression braking is all that's required.

There might be a highway mpg benefit by having little or no engine braking, which is perhaps why GM and others went that direction. Maybe even a way to 'game' the test procedure in order to pick up a fictitious fraction of a highway mpg that most people would never realize in actual practice. The flip side there (without the option to engage engine braking) being that your brakes wouldn't be getting any help on long downgrades. A few people might choose to manually downshift those conventional AT's, but only a few (fewer still know how to avoid the resulting lurch).

Soooo . . . Nissan's decision to provide a mechanism for determining whether or not to have significant engine braking seems to be the best way to go here (I'd extend this to AT's, generally). It's a neat solution; now the trick is getting people to read the owner's manual so that they (a) know that the feature even exists, (2) what it is/does, and (3) understand how to work with it.


Postscript - even if I hadn't been told, I'd strongly suspect some MT experience in your past. And I'm betting that it's mostly/entirely AT experience in 2010BlackMax's wife's case. It really is that obvious.



Norm

 

my 08 TSX would do it a lot more then others. That was the 1st AT i have ever had that actually would downshift right when i would!!! most AT's it seems you have to really get on it in order for it to downshift. that car made me enjoy driving the ATs again!! i know exactly what you mean Norm with having the engine braking and being responsive.

Norm have ya got a chance to drive the 2010 Max yet???? to see what we are all talking about?

The paddle shifts i 1st thought they were a joke. Never really got it, on our TSX, i rarely used the bump shift on the shifter column. And on our Max i though huh a CVT with 6 cyber gears???

But let me tell you the CVTs "gears" with the paddle shift are a lot of fun. When you hit the paddle shift it is almost instantaneous. it actually is fun. I don't use them very often at all but it is fun. So if ya test drive it, try that out

 

Manual Mazda 3 driver here who drives the wife's max. I love the CVT as well. 10 year warranty makes us more than happy to be guinea pigs for this new technology. I like how it saves brakes and gas by upshifting.

As for absolute efficiency, we'll see. The heat thing bothers me.

If the CVT has much higher cooling requirements than a manual (or even a regular automatic come to that), the first law of thermodynamics dictates that more of the engine's work is being wasted as heat.

So how much cooling is on our CVTs? Is it more than an auto would have?

 

Not yet. I find myself spending more hours in the office than I really want to any more, and have ended up working on "days off". With my previous experience with the local Nissan store I'm not expecting much accommodation from their sales crew. Have to see if anybody rents them out, I guess. Better to test one that's had at least a couple thousand break-in miles on it anyway, if you've got any sympathy at all for the mechanical bits inside.

If/when that happens, you can count on me working the thing manually. More than likely, all but exclusively, if it'll hold a selected "ratio" regardless of the load on the engine or the road speed.

I know that'd involve its own learning curve, since with the exception of about a year driving a dealership courtesy shuttle van (about 2003, between engineering jobs) I haven't had to reach anywhere near the steering column for a shift mechanism of any sort on a regular basis for a very long time. Those 3M column ('55 or '56 Chevy), 2A pushbutton ('56 Dodge), 3A pushbutton ('64 Dodge), and 4A column ('57 Pontiac) are all ancient history at this point.

FWIW (and maybe slightly off topic), back in the late 60's I was playing around with some sketches for a floor mounted shifter of my own design to operate a full-manual valve body in a pattern similar to the 3-speed MT floor shifters of the day. I was looking to gain the benefits of a torque converter without giving up shift control to the hydraulic logic, and it didn't seem that the straight back-and-forth drag-race shifters were going to give what the sports car enthusiast/corner-carver in me was looking for. Provision for overrev protection and throttle blipping on downshift were well into the future and I couldn't figure out any sort of mechanical "end-run" around those little snags, so it never got anywhere. But from that I can picture how the paddles might generally feel.


Norm

 

I am a mechanical engineer by trade. And the engine is so incredibly thermodynamically inefficient its not even funny. Think about how much heat is dissipated through the radiator, engine oil, exhaust, air, ect!!! Now i don't know the cooling requirements of any of these components, but im really sure that the difference in cooling requirements from the manual tranny to the CVT is just a drop in the bucket compared to the overall insufficiency's of the internal combustion engine.

As long as they control the heat generated by the CVT, just like the radiator does, the CVT should be just fine. I would like to think that the engineers did their jobs correctly and sized the cooling requirements correctly. Which is not a difficult job


Norm I totally understand work can take over things sometimes. If ya get a chance let us know what you think about the drive!!!! the car obviously is not for everybody, you may love it and you may hate it... it would be fun to find out right!!!!

 

No doubt, but wouldn't you say the engine couldn't really be expected to convert fuel into 100% mechanical power with combustion being such an integral part of the process. Although I'm certainly in agreement that if you're looking at overall efficiencies of different components, there's ground to be made up in more places than a transmission.

This however is tranny versus tranny. Downstream of the input shaft when a manual tranny spins up, it's generating much less heat than a CVT (and auto). How that input power from the engine is spent must be a major part in comparing efficiencies of the cvt vs anything else and what interests me the most. This guy believes Nissan is on to a winner with efficiencies approaching 97%. Interesting discussion...

 

Wow! A CVT article from almost seven years ago! It is easy to sort of forget how long Nissan has been putting CVTs in their vehicles.

Back then, the energy efficiency of the CVT was recognized, but the concern was long-term reliability because of the heat involved. Nissan evidently feels they have the heat thing under control, or would not be risking their very existance by putting CVTs is so many of their vehicles. The add-on TEN year warranty they recently placed on their CVT tells me they feel really good about its reliability.

The CVT in this 7th generation Maxima has much better software than those early CVTs. Early CVT drivers were not always happy with the way they performed. But most folks here are very happy with the way this redesigned 7th gen Maxima CVT performs. I know I certainly am pleased with it.

 

Good point about the time Nissan has been using CVT. It so happens that I found this week that the tranny in my Jeep Liberty needs to be rebuilt ($$). The same day, a customer brought in a 2003 Murano that also needs to have it's tranny rebuilt. Just to state the obvious the Murano has a CVT, and this car is 7 years old. CVT isn't so new.

FYI, this Murano's CVT apparantly "exploded" at 110,000 miles, according to my mechanic. This is not intended as a knock on the Nissan CVT - I live mine in the Maxima. My Jeep has only 119,000 miles and it's regular auto transmission was built by Mercedes.

 

Do they rent out the SV Sport? I doubt it, maybe the base S.

 

Sorry but you are over 96 years old? 1914 was the last time the USA population was under 100,000,000 (actual population in 1914 was 99,111,000, and by 1915 it was up to 100,546,000)
I doubt you remember the population from the year you were born, so you must be closer to 106 years old. Rock on for still loving the Maxima in your 90s/100s!!

 

Oops! My Dad was only a teeny-bopper when the U.S. population turned 100,000. I never arrived on the scene until the early 1930s. The U.S. population was 122,000 in 1930, so was probably 125,000 when I hatched.

I also missed my guess on the high end, as I said the current population was 300,000,000 and the actual population is now very near 310,000,000.

So during my life, I have seen the population rise around 185,000,000 instead of 200,000,000.

That is still a lot of folks to squeeze into a Maxima.