nbwalton2

Anyone got any idea what the 0 to 60 is on the 8th gen? I'm guessing mid to upper 5's. I think the 7th gen is reported at 5.7 or 5.8.

lightonthehill

Averaging many dozens of of posts, references, interviews and articles, I have had the impression for several years that the zero to 60 time of the 7th gen is around 5.9 seconds. Nissan has told us the zero to 60 time of the 8th gen is around 5.7 or 5.8 seconds. I will await several magazine test reports before 'finalizing' the zero to 60 time for the 8th gen in my mind.

The 8th gen has 10 more HP than the 7th gen, is a tad lighter, and has an improved CVT.

nbwalton2

Thanks for the info.

george__

iTrader: (1)

Probably around 6 seconds

NissanFreak2000

Considering that the 8th gen has more horsepower, is lighter, more aerodynamic, and the CVT is better geared, than the 7th gen, I would guess about 5.5.

Daniel VQ30life

iTrader: (2)

not sure the actual time, but it's quick...

cnp

Saw 5.8, can't remember where. Not on the Nissan site, perhaps was a driving report (eg Motor Trend)

14GmMax

According to the brochure I picked up at the dealer the other day it says "Give it six seconds and you'll never look at a 4 door the same way again" and also below that it says 0-60 comes up in impressive time. Didn't feel that quick with a test drive in "sport" mode so im guessing closer to 6.

NissanFreak2000

It will be quicker than any previous generation, so it should satisfy the vast majority of drivers on a daily basis.

george__

iTrader: (1)

Nah the CVT will hold it back

R1600Turbo

And it didn't on the last one? Even though this CVT is far superior to it?

I think you are being negative just for sake of being negative.

nbwalton2

Car and Driver had the 5.8 for 0 to 60 on their '16 Maxima review. But, reading the fine print said it was

"Tested: Nissan Maxima SV
Test Location: Chelsea Proving Grounds (Chelsea, MI) - September 2008"

So that couldn't be the 8th gen. 7th gen maybe?

nbwalton2

I think so too. FIA, the governing body of F1 has banned the use of CVT transmission waaaayyyy back in 1994. No typo, 1994. The reasoning was that the CVT kept the engine rpms at optimum efficiency with computer controls of the CVT pulleys.

Check out the website http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/05/0...nsmission-cvt/

So, if CVTs are so bad, why are they banned by the top racing league in the world? I admit they sound odd, and are not as fun to drive - unless you are like me and have a SR with paddle shifters!

george__

iTrader: (1)

You do know racing cars get their transmission serviced like 100x more often than a DD?

nbwalton2

Moving to a different negative point regarding CVT? I thought we were talking about track performance.

Look, not busting your chops, but I've read a ton of negatives about CVTs and I don't buy in. I think it's a very efficient transmission. Gets good gas mileage and transfers power well to the tires. It does work off of belts, and I get that. But in a sporty sedan, I think it'll work just fine.

Driving mine, I'm satisfied.

george__

iTrader: (1)

What's so bad about ~6 seconds for 0-60?

R1600Turbo

Most V6 powered Nissan's with CVT are chain driven.

nbwalton2

Yeah, I don't think that's bad at all for a car this size. Like others, I was guessing a little better than previous model. Anxious to see what Card and Driver, Motortrend, etc come up with.

lightonthehill

Considering that the 2016 is slightly lighter, slightly more powerful than the 7th gen, and the CVT has been redesigned to eliminate the dampened start off the line, there is no way the 2016 will not be a little quicker zero to 60 than the 7th gen was. I don't remember where I read/heard it, but Nissan told us around intro time that the 8th gen would be 5.8 zero to sixty. That sounds very reasonable to me.

I have grown to absolutely love the CVT in my 2009. It has given no trouble whatsoever since it was built in Sept 2008. And I have sometimes 'poured the coals' to it. Would have done it more often, but my wife soes not like screeching rubber.

NissanFreak2000

The 8th gen is no doubt quicker, but how much quicker is the question. I am sure it will be more than quick enjoy for day to day use though and more than most people even need,lol.

wtgkb8

I'll just leave this here...

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...t_test_review/

0-60 mph tested at 5.8 sec.

platinum300

It is no faster than a 7th gen. With the reduced weight, more HP and a better CVT, u figure it might do better than 5.8 seconds.

charliebrown

well, the same magazine tested the 7th gen and got a 0-60 of 6.1 seconds, so according to their standards, the 8th gen is faster.

george__

iTrader: (1)

8th gen is lighter but is stuffed with technology so the weight loss is NULL

zillafreak

Say what?
The 8th gen is 79lbs lighter. How does the technology make this weight loss null?

MONTE 01&97 SE

iTrader: (1)

"Just 0-60/ acceleration facts not talking about handling etc etc as thread ask about 0-60."

Just depends on the source C/D, M/T but on average its about on par with the 7th gen, even more baffling is that the 8th gen still traps 2 mph less than the 3.5 SL Altima tested by same source Motor Trend. "Altima ran 5.9 sec to 60 did 14.2 seconds 1/4 mile with a trap speed of 101.7 mph", which is mentioned in the link given. Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2013/...#ixzz3fF5L9ur6
So the CVT in this 8th gen is still holding it back on the top end, I was expecting at least 101 to 101.5 traps.

1)Nearly Identical times to this 7th gen
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...t/viewall.html.
2)Close on this one, same 1/4 mile time, same 0-60 than 7th, trapped 1.8mph faster than 7th gen. http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2013/nissan/maxima/

bheintze

I too will be disappointed if trap speeds still don't cross 100mph on 8th gen. Not a major point as I don't drag race this car, but it is a bit odd this powerplant, even with the latest revision, is trapping right where my 2009 Camry SE trapped at a similar weight.

MONTE 01&97 SE

iTrader: (1)

Motor Trend tested weights of 7th and 8th gen:

2016 SR=3,539 lb (61/39%) July 7, 2015 web
2016 Plat= 3,712 lb (62/38%) " " " "
2013 SV=3528 lb (62/38%) 4/13 issue
2009 SV Sport= 3598 lb (61/39%) 5/10 issue

So its a mixed bag as far as weight, the 2016 Platinum being the heaviest by far, rest are within 71 pounds of each other.

george__

iTrader: (1)

By the year 2021, Nissan has to have a combined fleet economy average of 40.3 - 41.0 mpg for their light truck and passenger cars.

Don't forget the 2016 dead line that's coming too of 35.5 mpg

http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy


The weight loss and technology in the gen 8's likely there to make sure car can survive into the future with mid-life refresh... Don't expect it to be that much faster than the gen 8.

95VQ30

lol at the Platinum hitting the exact same times as the SR. Kind of a let down on that.

I believe a 5.5gen has the 1/4 record at 14 flat and the 60 is 5.8/5.9ish

Edit- I think the Altima Coupe hit it in 5.7 about 5 years ago...

And to keep beating a dead horse, a similarly priced Q50 will hit in about 5 seconds.

So basically, it was an upgrade in everything but acceleration.

I'll laugh when there is a Nismo Maxima R. Think Eau Rouge with a D platform.

wtgkb8

I wouldn't be too worried about comparing times to previous tests here. Unless you test all these vehicles back to back on the same day...a 0.1-0.2 sec difference is error introduced by possibly different weather (hotter or colder...it has impacts on performance)...different tire pressures...different fuel levels and quality (all from same station and similar quality) in the tanks...different drivers...different pavement quality...etc.

dr_2010SV

Right, If I remember correctly it was the 360HP Q50 Hybrid (2wd) that was 0-60 timed @ 4.9 and 5.1 for the AWD.

charliebrown

After driving an SR every day for three weeks now, I can say that it has a great engine (the VQ is much more refined than the one I had in my 2005 G35 coupe 6MT, with smooth and continuous power delivery, and it sounds better too) that is severely hampered by the CVT transmission and FWD platform (big surprise). You try to push it and the tires lose grip, there is ridiculous torque steer, and the CVT groans like a cow. It's a great highway cruiser, but it ain't a real performance car, so all this talk of 0-60 times is humorous at best.

niceguy

Obviously if you enjoy driving the car then acceleration down to the tenths becomes less relevant or important, BUT STILL it would be nice to know Nissan's flagship "sport sedan" was a bit quicker than the Honda Accord V6 smh. As was mentioned, it is on par with the 2009-current 3.5L Camry among others. Oh well, maybe a little break in will quicken the Maxima's step...

EDIT: Almost forgot, one article tested the '13 Altima 3.5 at 5.5 0-60...