:EDIT: 2009, my mistake

Anybody else seen this? The whole article puts the car down. They pretty much say it shouldnt have been badged a 4DSC and that they would pick up a G37 sedan over it any day of the week. Says they like the styling but the performance is definitely lacking. I was surprised by the article.

 

Yes, we discussed this in another thread on this forum at length and we pulled all type of reviews from several different sites. I would recommend you do a search and pull that up so that the members here don't have to beat a dead horse again.

I hope I'm not sounding like I'm being mean, I just want to save you some time.
Thanks

 

Actually, I don't know how there could be another thread for it since it was in the May 2010 issue of MT that I just got in the mail a couple days ago that he is referring to. I think what makes the article sound so familiar is that it sounds similar pros and cons to the Maxima other magazines and reviewers have commented on the Maxima. Unfortunately, I agree with most of their criticisms. The 4dr sports sticker on the rear side window is a joke. The CVT and FWD layout is the sports buzz kill for the car. Now does that mean the car is bad, absolutely not. I personally like the way it drives, but it does not drive like a sports sedan.

Here is some quotes from the article in question to put some of this stuff into perspective.

"Nissan heralded the 2009 Maxima as the return of the four-door sports car (4DSC), a tag its marketeers surely rue to this day. At the very least, these mavens overstated the Maxima's case. But can you blame them? At first blush, it certainly looks the part, with Coke-bottle curves in all the right places and a dashing sete of head- and taillights. Nissan has done an excellent job on the styling. It's soooo much better than the car it replaces. But as sexy and sporty as it may appear, the Maxima is no sports car."

"The CVT wrecks this car and the front-drive layout finishes the job. If Nissan's intent really was to build a 'foor-door sports car,' the choice of FWD seems absurd. It handles nicely and the sharp-edged front fenders rmind me of looking out the front window of a Viper, but that's where the fun ends. I just can't warm up to the CVT. The constant rev drone it provides the engine is so unispiring and makes my passengers wonder if something is wrong with the car's transmission."

"So the CVT is a major killoby, but does the Maxima posses any saving grace? Absolutely. This isn't a sport sedan, far from it. Let that notion get pass you, and the car is great for what is is: a stylish, unique, upscale four-door sedan. It seems to slot somewhere in between luxury and sport, with interior appointments and trim that seems to rival Nissan's upscale Infiniti brand."

Motortrend was right in regards to the price point though on the Maxima. A semi to fully loaded Maxima costs $36-39k and that is well into G37 territory in regards to price, especially since a G37 loaded with a premium package costs about $39k itself. Those are just the facts on paper with the numbers. What Motortrend failed to mention is, that for about $37k you can get it semi-loaded and if offers a more comfortable upscale alternative to a RWD sports sedan with FWD and good fuel economy. The Maxima is great for people like you and I who want a unique and aggressive FWD sedan with good fuel economy that can tout a famil around in a little bit of style and piazzz. The Maxima, in its current iteration, is not going to satisfy the super sport enthusiast community who equates luxury with sport performance and handling, but I don't need any of that. Those people will not be happy in anything less than a Infiniti, Audi, or BMW! So let them go buy those vehicles.

 

so the May 2010 article was a copy of the 2009 article? Wow, nice reporting there M. T. Now I know why I let my subscription expire.

 

Same here. I have subscribed since the 80's and finally stopped after years of frustration like comparison tests where one vehicle puts out a superior objective performance only to have MT award another car the victory due to "intangibles".

Hint...BMW always has the intangible edge. Then, there is the obligatory whine about no manual transmission when 95% of the public would sell a manual if it were given to them free of charge. MT is stuck in the 70's. Magazines should test what we drive with an occasional exotic for a change of pace. GT-R last year's car of the year? Probably not one in ten thousand of us have one, would want one or could afford one.

They are very picky in their initial Maxima review but some long term follow-ups were more positive but always include a caveat.

 

Maybe because he said this in his post is why I posted what I did.

 

I meant in the issue it says 2009 maxima review. The edit is for the wrong year of car. Smarty666 realized what I was talking about. Its a review of the 2009 Maxima in the May 2010 issue. It hadn't been covered, so I started this thread

 

You need to provide proof (links) if your going to say this. Copy the May 2010 article and this 2009 article you keep talking about.

 

Oh, OK, there is much confusion on this.

 

So far, there's been more than enough misunderstanding to go around. And that's as close as I'll let myself get to that off-topicness.

The MT issue in question wasn't at the top of my list of things to even open yet, until I read this.

It'll be with eyes wide open, and fully aware that MT misses the enthusiast mark from time to time.


Norm

 

WHO CARES ABOUT MOTOR TREND THEY LOST ONE CUSTOMER

 

OK. Time to clear a few things up.

1. The May 2010 article was not in any way a fresh, clean sheet of paper review of a brand-new car. It was the final wrap-up of their long-term evaluation of the 2009 model, which they drove for 13 months and about 23,500 miles. So yes, any frequent MT readers probably have seen interim reports over the last year or so.

2. That also means that it's more of a report on how well the MT staff as individuals managed to live with the car over an extended period of time. Not a snap judgement, written to get 1000 words by deadline, IOW.

3. It's a fairly even-handed review, as long as you haven't been conned by the "4DSC" tag into believing that it's a cut-rate (and pre-V8) M3.

Lots of things they liked, and really only the one item (the CVT) that they specifically couldn't ever seem to warm up to in a car that's either blatantly out on the hardcore sporting edge of luxury-sport or is attempting to lay claim to being so. All I'll say here is that I understand their point of view, and that whether a CVT is (or can be) consistent with enthusiastic driving involvement in the traditional sports car sense is a separate issue that properly belongs over in the CVT vs MT thread.

That, and the price of admission I guess, which will vary based on an individual's willingness and ability to deal. Keep in mind that MT posts base and MSRP prices.

4. There's some good and some bad in the logbook excerpts. Praise for the over-the-road performance, gripes for the tires and supposedly stiff suspension (and by implication from the data panel, launch from a standing start with 0 - 30 in 2.6 with 30 - 60 nearly as quick by normal untimed perception at 3.4).

The praise I'm reasonably willing to stipulate to. Decent acceleration and cornering grip, so the potential is there.

I don't particularly agree with the comments of tire-based NVH. I have a little experience with the same tire model (Bridgestone Potenza RE050A summer tires) that have essentially the same sidewall height and rim width relative to tire section width ("size"), and do not find them to be at all harsh.


Norm

 

August 2008, April 2009, feel free to go look yourself. That's proof enough for most folks.

Also in the FAQ thread, the MT long term review.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...e_1/index.html

and another link

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html

 

Ok, Norm, that absolutely makes more sense. It was a continuation of their 2009 review. So this thread really should be merged into the other magazine review threads....

 

Norm is right, there might be some similar points, but the article in the May issue is another long term update on the car. Hopefully, this clears up everyone's confusion !