My Max S is not overly different than a loaded Accord V6 in features. CVT -v- traditional auto, push button -v- key start. Sure the power output is different, but so is the octane consumed. Could an Accord beat a Max, yea, I think it could.... wha? driver fluctuations mean a lot when cars are close.

Where the Accord clearly wins is key fob design. I never set off the panic alarm with my Honda fobs (in 12 yrs of ownership). I have set off the Max alarm twice this week already

 

so what modes make the car drive the fastest.
My car has the D the DS and the Paddle shifters.Can anyone explain the differences for a newbie..

 

To my understanding anything other than D is slower because the transmission is imitating the shift feeling of a regular transmission which slows the cars acceleration. In regular D the RPMS don't fluctuate, making constant torque to the wheels.

 

so D makes it faster than DS..how about the paddle shifters

 

D is faster than DS and Paddle Shifters.

 

not for long! im getting the reprogramming done and hopefully the manual tranny will behave as its supposed to (letting me do it!)

 

I'd rather have the alarm go off once in a while rather then not being able to get intelligent key standard which the Accord does not offer

I've raced two Accords since having my Maxima and I've beaten them each time. One was even a 6cyl!

 

HP numbers sell cars. It's the area under the curve that's important. But in reading your post I gather you already know this.

 

I wish people could drag themselves away from discussions that center around peak horsepower ratings. Ryd was closest, with the WRX vs Max dyno comparison in that focusing on it can be meaningless or even misleading.

I don't know about anybody else, but I don't drive around strapped to a dyno.

Comparisons of torque, gearing (including tranny ratio), and weight make for a far more meaningful measure for pretty much all driving that isn't defined by marks on the pavement that are a quarter or an eighth of a mile apart and a set of blinking countdown lights, or out on the salt flats.

For one perspective, I suspect that it takes around 40 hp to maintain 80 mph, maybe 80 for 100 mph. And even in a WOT burst to or at peak torque rpm (4400) you're using less than 220.


Norm

 

I'm with Norm here. Somehow the HP of a car is way down my list of what I am looking for.

I want a car that can move right along, but whether it does 0 to 60 in 5.5 or 6.0 or 6.5 is, for me, WAY less important than how
the car handles, how comfortable I feel in it, and even how it stops.

Anyone who thinks the Maxima is losing the horsepower race does not understand what the Maxima is all about.

 

Exactly, and even prior to that as well!

 

I think all of you need to mellow out a bit!! It was a QUESTION, not a statement and I think for the most part it has been answered here several times.

I think some people are getting too defensive in anything that is said about our cars that isn't on the side of positivity, it's just a car.

I like my car but i'm not in love with it, at the end of the day it does what it is supposed to do for me, don't get caught up on material things. This is a machine and sooner or later something is going to break on it.

 

Then I will go back to your original thread-starting question, and answer thusly:

No, Nissan vehicles are not losing the HP race as a manufacturer's make, and the Maxima is not losing the HP race in its class. That is
true for three reasons.

1 - Nissan vehicles (including the Maxima) have ample, sometimes class-leading power.

2 - The Maxima has excellent HP/power for a FWD vehicle, which is the type we should be comparing it with.

3 - There is no longer a 'HP race.' Fuel requirements that manufacturers are going to have to meet in just a few years mean HP will
actually probably DECREASE on many manufacturer's fleets as electric cars, hybrids, etc, become more common.

Whether we like it or not, the automotive world is now entering a period of profound change in which the term 'HP' will be subservient
to the much more important 'MPG.'

 

Yup. I heard Mercedes is developing a 4 cylinder turbo diesel for their sedans. The 7 series already comes in a V6 like they did years ago.

 

BMW does not make V6, inline 6

 

I'm not so sure about that!! All the Car Mags I've been getting lately is showing an upward swing of HP numbers for sports cars and sports sedans, so I beg to differ with you on that.

Maybe in the next year or two we will see the HP numbers stabilize or even decrease as you stated before but for now I see that the numbers are getting higher.

 

Sports cars and sports sedans? The Maxima is not a sports car or a sports sedan. It is a near-luxury FWD, CVT-powered family sedan with a sporty edge.

I saw in Saturday's paper where the new VW Jetta sedan is being released. It has grown to mid-size, almost four inches longer, with several more inches of rear seat kneeroom featured. The 2010 base model came with a 170 HP 5 cylinder engine, while the larger 2011 base model comes with a 115 HP 4 cylinder. That is a considerable drop in HP.

The version of the new Jetta that VW feels will do very well is diesel powered, and can get up to 42 MPG with a 140 HP engine.

Yes, there are a few manufacturers of sports type vehicles who are still trying to hedge their bets by continuing to participate in the HP race. That happens because not everyone adapts to any new reality at the same time. There are leaders planning for the future such as Nissan with their new CVT, and there are followers who will stay in the present as long as somebody will buy their product.

But those who don't understand we will see significant changes in the near future for the way our vehicles will be powered will soon be living in the past.

 

Duh!! I never said the Maxima was either, besides you act as if you're talking to someone who doesn't own one, hell, I own 3 of them so i know outright what a Maxima is, I was just telling you that your statement is not altogether factual for cars in general.

 

You may have forgotten that you quoted the mags as saying 'sports cars and sports sedans.' as your proof HP is going up.
I never denied that. I simply explained why that proof did not apply to the Maxima.

All I'm trying to convey to you is that there is a shift coming with HP, and the beginning volleys are now being fired. There
will always be special cars with big HP, but most family sedans, both sporty and unsporty, will not be going much higher in
HP in future years. The coming rage will be efficiency, not HP. The planning for this has been on the drawing boards for
several years, and the very high fleet MPG requirements beginning in 2015 leave little choice.

 

Time will tell just how commercially acceptable that concentrating on mpg at much expense in performance will end up. With only a few relative exceptions, the 1970's are not remembered fondly by performance enthusiasts.

What I expect we will see is lots more cars with forced induction of some sort, probably turbocharging combined with direct injection. And we'll probably have to learn to drive a little differently than we do with normally-aspirated larger displacement engines, or look for ECU/TCM module programming that keeps the turbo(s) spooled up a little better. I am finding that I'm using 2nd in the Legacy in a number of places where all of my other cars can use 3rd. Yes, this affects us stick-shift fanatics a little more.


The sad thing is that already in much car advertising, features that have nothing to do with the physical tasks of driving or the vehicle's behavior and performance are being pitched as important selling points for the vehicles, and driver involvement in the driving itself downplayed to the point of not even being mentioned. Today's version of minivans and "cupholder count"? (Ugh/yuck/retch)


Norm

 

I didn't forget that i made that statement but you seemingly took it out of context to assume I was including the Maxima just because I said sports cars and sports sedans, of which I know the Maxima is neither.

I was generalizing when I was making that statement but I can see that the future will show a major decrease in HP as fuel efficiency will once again become the focus.

It seems when go through this HP war every 10 years or so then the Eco War rears its' ugly head and we get cars with very low HP, personally I'm ok with what the Max has but I wouldn't shun an HP boost at all.

I keep hearing that FWD cars can't handle no more than 300HP but i've seen FWD cars running on the track that far exceed that number and have no issues with handling, torque steer or any other thing people say that might cripple or hinder fwd cars from performing adequately.

 

I personally think we are going to see more and more hybrids, electric cars, moderately powered gasoline engines with turbocharging,
low HP diesel engines with high torque, etc.

I think we will see more and more family sedans using the CVT, and I think the programming of the CVT control software will tend to
follow what we have in this 7th gen Maxima, where it is possible with careful driving to go from standstill to cruising speed without
the engine reaching 2K RPMS. I am quite aware many here do not consider that to be a barrell of fun.

I also expect to see increasing emphasis on low rolling resistance tires. The difference between a low rolling resistance tire vs a high
rolling resistance tire has reached 3 MPH in Consumer Reports testing. I think more progress is possible in that area.

At some point, I expect to see gasoline-electric hybrids where the car can be plugged in for recharging, PLUS high efficiency solar
panels will be built into the top of the car that are formed to a normal car shape, and are almost invisible. In places where there
is lots of sunshine, that could give a great boost to MPG.

The thing I see coming that I think will bother many folks is total computerization, where we enter a main highway, and from that
point, a computer has complete control of our car; gas, steering, speed, brakes, etc, are all done by computer.

There will always be specialty cars available for those who refuse to give in to the growing world energy crunch and opt for pure power.
Unfortunately, I expect the cutoff for incurring the gas guzzler charge will gradually be raised to 30 MPG or higher, and the charge will
be increased considerably.

I am thankful I had the great fun of driving from the 1940s until now, because I think the future will eventually hold less personal
control and less driving fun for most of us.

 

Yeah, i agree with you there and this sounds like one of the Stallone movies I've seen. It is going to be a sad driving affair in the future because of all the control that will be implemented upon society.

One thing that could help elevate our driving experience in America (especially for going across the country) is to open up Autobahn-like highways that run North, East, South and West, our archaic speed limits are one of the major problems.

Germany is about the size of Idaho and per capita (if the US was the same size) we'd still have more accidents than that country, despite their increased speeds allowed on the autobahn they have less accidents than we do.

 

Interesting thoughts.

This puts CR in a bit of a quandary, don't you think? Even though they are economy-conscious, they are also consistent in recommending that tires be chosen first on the basis of their "braking, handling, and hydroplaning resistance" (quoting directly from their November 2010 issue, where they compare high-performance tires). Everything else, as in "tread life, ride comfort, or rolling resistance" is what you use to narrow down the choices that satisfy the performance criteria. 3 mpg is a worthwhile advantage, until you actually need to access the last few hundredths of a g in braking or cornering. Or if the tire's responsiveness is poor enough to never let you forget what their primary purpose is.


I should nominate you for some "understatement of the year" award for that one ↑↑↑. Then again, the result of that extent of computerization would not be recognizable as a privately owned automobile.


I'd be more than willing to part with 20% or so of today's power levels, if they'd cart half a ton of car weight away along with it.


How's that line go . . "pry it from my cold, dead . . ."? Guess I'll have to hang onto a couple of my old cars.


Norm

 

The Interstate system was a good start, but it became mired in politicism is some areas, and catered to special interests
in other areas. Sometimes routes were chosen based on which powerful politicos owned what land parcels.

Our interstate system never approached the level of the autobahns, and has not been properly upgraded and maintained, either.

For instance, I-85 running from GA-20 northeast of Atlanta all the way to the SC state line is still two lanes in each direction -
same as when it was built 45 years ago. That roadway is up and down the entire route, and is clogged with monstrous numbers
of semis. The semis fill both lanes, do 90 MPH on the downgrades, 40 MPH on the hills, and run side-by-side for up to five miles
attempting to pass each other. I absolutely abhor having to drive on that detestable road.

I envy those who live in western Texas, the rural Great Plains and Rocky Mountains, where there is room to actually enjoy
driving a vehicle.

 

Yep, CU has to make a choice, and sometimes that choice is not the one we might choose. I agree with them that safety,
handling, etc, should come before rolling resistance.

I am a little concerned with some of the safety equipment being loaded onto some cars these days. Some of it can override the
gas pedal, and even to some extent, the steering.

For instance, on back roads, I often pick up speed, rapidly closing the distance between my car and the vehicle in front of me,
carefully timing it so that as soon as the last car in the oncoming lane has flashed by, I will be in position and have the speed to
pass the vehicle in front of me in a short passing lane. The electronics now being installed in some cars will not let me do that.

These marvelous devices may help some drivers, but will be much less appreciated by drivers who prefer to let their own brain help
them make decisions.

Fuel efficiency is definitely impacted by weight. I think passenger vehicles will gradually become lighter. We still have 4,000 pound
cars being built. I think the full size cars of around the year 2025 will probably weigh around 3,000 pounds, and many smaller cars
will weigh under a ton.

'Pry it from my cold, dead hands' sounds like something Charlton Heston might say. I won't say whether I agree with Heston, but a
clue might be that none of my guns is registered, and I will have absolutely no hesitation using them if I feel my family is in danger.

Back on topic, some of the happiest days of my life were driving along the open roads of the Southwest, Great Plains and Rockies over
fifty years ago. I felt a kind of freedom that is difficult to find these days.

 

In full context

Cold, dead hands more than likely is C.H or some equally avid firearms enthusiast; I know I've heard it before. But only a little off-topic, from the point of the pervasiveness of the attitude that adds layers of regulations and complexity in the name of safety or some other agenda, each at some cost in personal choice and control, I offer the following . . .

We have a paper shredder whose feed slot is too narrow for even our 5 y/o granddaughter to stick her fingers down into. But the mfr still felt it necessary to add an interlock that permits the motor to run only when a paper is inserted down the slot far enough to trip it on. Fine so far. But soon after purchase, the interlock system in ours went inop. So we learned to turn the main switch on and wait for the motor to start. Here's where it gets good. Couple days ago, it apparently wasn't working for my wife, who asked me to look at it and try to fix it. I couldn't make it work, either. Wasn't until early this morning that I remembered about the interlock, and sure enough the machine was back to working as originally intended. And this is after it had briefly "fixed itself" once before.

I am not making this (↑↑↑) up. Not even the time frame. 30 or 40 years ago, we'd have turned a switch on, the motor would have started, and that would have been that. When did we start not wanting to think for ourselves? Or become willing to let somebody else do our thinking for us?


Norm

 

Norm - I think things will eventually get worse than we can imagine. If we do not not destroy ourselves with unimaginable
weaponry, or some dread medical malady does not wipe out most of the earth's population, or we don't have a natural disaster
such as an asteroid a hundred miles in diameter wiping out humanity, or unprecedented volcanic activity doesn't blot out the sun
for years, leaving everything on earth to die of starvation, then the earth will continue its gradual overpopulation to the point
where everyone travels in little pods.

We will enter our pod, give a voice command which informs the computer of our desired destination, then doze off or catch up on
the news while we are whisked quickly to where we want to go.

Somehow, although I can't argue with the efficiency of such a system, I don't think I would find it nearly as enjoyable as my drive
west on US Route 66 back in the 1950s. Granted, I had to think for myself and make decisions enroute, but I found that to be rather
enjoyable.

In a way, I'm glad I will not still be here when we all become an entity with a number, but with nothing left to decide or operate for
ourselves.

 

I don't want the Max to have more HP, but maybe if the sport model has less governors on it that slowed it down that might be nice. Or maybe a sport drive mode that changes the governors. I just feel like for 290 HP I don't really get all of that power, with the mushy starts off the line and sometimes the car just simply not accelerating how you expect it to. My Sentra was a lot slower, but more predictable in the sense that when I pushed the pedal down hard it WENT.

Then again I can't really complain because as others say this isn't a track car and I don't race off the line much. This car has plenty of passing power for the highway, and I love being able to rocket from 50-80 in a matter of seconds and pass people. On top of that there aren't many "sporty" cars that have this much power and drive SO smooth (even with Eibach's). I love how I can be driving aggressive and the intake is loud, or I can just relax at 1800 RPMs and the car barely makes a noise.

And on the topic of Accord's, I don't think they are comparable to the Maxima. Definitely one of the most bland cars on the road now, and probably only quick because it is so light. I've had a V6 accord keep up with me in the lower speed ranges but that doesn't surprise me because my Sentra would be able to keep up until 60 or so too. From 60-100+ though it couldn't touch the Max.

 

never has there been an accord faster then the maxima. never, not once in its 30+ years of existance. do you really think Nissan is going to hand over 1st place to Honda? we have the superior engine end of conversation. hp numbers are all B.S. no car makes those numbers off the inventory line. its just sales hype. i've rolled many many many accords, and many maxima's including my own. i've never seen stock for stock, a Honda faster than a Maxima.

and who f'n care about the key fob? if you have enough to throw down on a brand new maxima, shouldn't you have more then enough to get a new aftermarket alarm system which is BETTER then any factor key fob? how on earth could you base the decision of buying a car on its key fob, that is just idiocy. good lord.

there is no way you can look at the maxima, and then look at the accord side by side and say, ill have the accord. thats like picking out a dirty, moldy, black, oozing banana that fell behind the fruit display last month over a perfectly ripe banana. You want the NICE YELLOW BANANA!!!!

 

Keep the car under 60 and see how the Max does against lighter cars. Honda Civic's would dip off on my boys Trans Am off the line because they weigh nothing, but obviously he catches up and destroys them. Obviously the Accord's don't touch the Max in the 40-100 range - this car is a freaking ANIMAL for that speed range...

 

[QUOTE=twentyeggs;8041792]never has there been an accord faster then the maxima. never, not once in its 30+ years of existance.[QUOTE] Well thats not valid, the current 6 spd V6 Accord coupe is faster than the Max.

 

Well that not correct, the current V6 6spd Accord Coupe is faster than the Max.

 

why did you add exclamation points on my quote, that makes it NOT a quote when you add anything to it.

and auto to auto the max is fastest. the six speed honda, if driven correctly will beat the maxima to 60 but will lose to 80, and almost completely behind the maxima by 100. so if you put them on the strip the honda will lose making the maxima faster as i stated before.

also, i raced my friends brand new 2011 in my 6th gen, we both had exhaust, we both had CAI. i beat the 6 speed accord by a mile every time, from a stop, from a 20 roll and a 40mph roll. don't know what you guys are talking bout but this was my experience. and don't tell me he couldn't drive, he used to race semi-pro with me.

 

When discussing acceleration from standstill with the 7th generation Maxima, we should always specify whether the Maxima involved has had the TSB applied that eases some of the restrictions Nissan put on low speed acceleration with this newly redesigned CVT.

 

6spd V6 Accord will not be behind a Maxima to 80 or any speed.

Accord
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 26.6 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.2 sec @ 102 mph

Maxima
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...ab9e62f834.pdf
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 15.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: ***
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.0 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.5 sec @ 98 mph

Accord 6spd V6 traps some 3 to 4mph faster and is 1.8 sec faster to 100......Only Accord a Max is beating up on is the Automatic or a poooorly driven 6spd. At the track just as some Maximas have done better as has some V6 6spd Accords also.

 

ok, so you went and found a bunch of numbers from the internet. when it comes down to it, i have almost NEVER seen these number prove true in person. i know for a fact my maxima didn't do 0-60 in 5.8 seconds stock, thats complete bullsh** and there is no way a honda accord does 0-60 faster then a wrx. i took my max to the shop and rolled it the day i bought it. my 0-60 was over 6 second every time.

like i've state above, i've seen these car in person, on my dyno, on the street head to head, no way are these numbers accurate. car and drive probably just copied and pasted those numbers from nissans web site. its almost as much bull as saying the maxima has 290 hp. complete bull. none of you have 290 unless you did some heavy modding.

so as i stated again, its been MY experience that the honda is slower then the maxima, all around. my friend HAS the 6 speed accord, we were equals with his modded with full exhaust and cai, and when i got done doing my exhaust and cai i took him every time we raced.

not to mention everyone on here who has raced an accord v6, this site is full of stories on max vs. accord. its common knowledge the accord doesn't have the maxima. we are much faster. i've raced many, others have as well. hell, i just beat a 2010 accord WITH my gf in the car last month on the track. mind you, my car is automatic. meaning the 6 speed maximas would make mince meat of an accord.

 

Maybe yours didn't. And it certainly wouldn't when driven fresh off the transport truck (most engines free up a little power after they've been broken in a bit). But since production tolerances also apply to actual power output and even to the efficiency regarding how much of it actually makes it to the drive wheels, you cannot use your single car experience to suggest that nobody else's same-model car could get into the fives either. A sample size of one is not statistically significant beyond its own results.

Last I knew, mfrs advertised HP and torque at the crank. If you've seen any cars on your dyno, then it's not an engine dyno and of course your at-the-wheels power and torque will be less than whatever was advertised for its engine by the car's mfr. About 15% less, at a first-cut guess.

You're still thinking in terms of peak power rather than torque or even average power delivered over a range of rpm. When 290 HP occurs at 6400 rpm, that 290 number means nothing when you're running at, say, 3500 rpm.

If you think that it would be more accurate for Nissan and all of the other mfrs to advertise power at the wheels, and that it would be a sufficiently consumer-friendly thing for them to do, then I suggest you take the matter up with them instead of using it as a straw-man argument on an internet forum.

Youtube actually is useful for demonstrating some things. "Proving" the accuracy of power & torque ratings isn't one of them.


Norm

 

look, i am a seasoned gear head. i know all about what your talking about like the back of my hand. i don't need any lessons. when a car company says 290 at the crank, i say WHO CARES, you can have a million horsepower at the crank, what matters is what it puts down at the wheels.

and the 0-60, i challenge ANY of you to prove faster than 5.8 sec in a stock maxima. ill give you a free tune and send you 100 buck gift certificate for any aftermarket part on my shelf. maximas do 0-60 in a little under 7 seconds. 5.8 is a JOKE.

and i used that you tube video because it just verified my experience i had with my buddies accord. it was almost picture perfect except my buddies accord did a little better in the 0-60 range than the video.

 

Exactly and well said, and VQ's are known and has been proven to get quicker as they pile on the miles!