Wow...a new car that captures the spirit of the 3rd generation Maximas....
04-08-2003, 10:33 AM
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,105
more ranting.
Originally posted by NYCe MaXiMa
understandible.
so there are things that may be better about 4th gens..
people want new and less milage.. that's a legit reason.
if you haven't personally had your *** handed to you by a 4th gen, then it is typically common knowledge that a 4th gen is quicker, sure there are a select few cases when a VE does it's thing and holds it's own but - face it
there are other things that can be argued, such as reliability, - no ticking, noisy engines, no crappy, lagging automatic transmissions, no broken exhaust studs and no underpowered 160 horses
why can't some of you 3rd gen owners just acknowledge that your car is not as good as the generations following it on many things? it's true, it is better at some things, but it isn't in others..
why can't you just go ahead and admit that?
understandible.
so there are things that may be better about 4th gens..
people want new and less milage.. that's a legit reason.
if you haven't personally had your *** handed to you by a 4th gen, then it is typically common knowledge that a 4th gen is quicker, sure there are a select few cases when a VE does it's thing and holds it's own but - face it
there are other things that can be argued, such as reliability, - no ticking, noisy engines, no crappy, lagging automatic transmissions, no broken exhaust studs and no underpowered 160 horses
why can't some of you 3rd gen owners just acknowledge that your car is not as good as the generations following it on many things? it's true, it is better at some things, but it isn't in others..
why can't you just go ahead and admit that?
as far as getting my a$$ handed to me i've held my own with a 5th gen auto where i had a 300lb+ weight DISadvantage. i've personally smoked 4th gen autos (my dad being the most often case) like they were 5speed KA powered altimas. i've also smoked(more like slowly pulled on the modded ones) 4th gen 5speeds from stock to 2 with intake, exhaust and short shifter. surprised an SS camaro 6speed, owned a built 4.3L S10, held my own against the same S10 with a built 327SBC(obviously not very built, otherwise it would've been running 11s). should i go on? how about a WRX(only to be owned by another one with upped boost and exhaust)? this isnt impressive, but both 5.0 and 4.6L 5speed and auto mustangs, GTI VR6s, GTI 1.8T, audi A4 2.8 quattro 5speed w/intake, 240sx (intake, header, exhaust, cam, ECU, ignition, CF STGII clutch), integra LS and GSR 5speeds, took me till 135+ MPH to start pulling on an overboosted eclipse GST 5speed
what has beaten me: E36 M3 3.2L, E39 M5 (3 or 4 of them), supercharged older Z28 camaro, 300zx with intake, header, exhaust, flywheel, clutch, UDP, ECU, Z06 vette, countless E46 M3s. what about the almighty VQ35? i hung with an auto G35 sedan(trying to impress his girl, i was very surprised how weak it was on the highway, i mean being kept up with by the lowly VE).
call any BS you'd like, maybe i happen to be running into people who dont know how to drive (highly unlikely for a few of those kills), or maybe a few of the cars arent all they're cracked up to be...or [gasp] maybe the 3rd gen is something special?
overall the 3rd gen FEELS alot more solid than the 4th gen
to each his own
04-08-2003, 11:12 AM
#83
the only thing thats plaguing the 3rd gens is mileage.. mine is about to crack 120k 
so now im being overly cautious of running it hard/"modding". The 5sp swap idea is about to head out the window, i dont really feel like messing with mechanical equipment thats been fixed in there for 11 years and 120k miles to run the risk of breaking something major. If by the time im ready for a 2nd car, ill definitely put a ve 5sp on my search list, provided its around 100k miles or less; but ill probably be "moving on" to lower mileage VQ 5sp, something i wont be afraid to toy around with
so now im being overly cautious of running it hard/"modding". The 5sp swap idea is about to head out the window, i dont really feel like messing with mechanical equipment thats been fixed in there for 11 years and 120k miles to run the risk of breaking something major. If by the time im ready for a 2nd car, ill definitely put a ve 5sp on my search list, provided its around 100k miles or less; but ill probably be "moving on" to lower mileage VQ 5sp, something i wont be afraid to toy around with
04-08-2003, 11:20 AM
#84
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Re: more ranting.
So what has your Camaro SS killing 3rd Gen run at the track? I don't see any posts in the 1/4 mile timeslip forum.
I don't see any posts in the 1/4 mile timeslip forum.
Originally posted by MaDMaX024
as far as getting my a$$ handed to me i've held my own with a 5th gen auto where i had a 300lb+ weight DISadvantage. i've personally smoked 4th gen autos (my dad being the most often case) like they were 5speed KA powered altimas. i've also smoked(more like slowly pulled on the modded ones) 4th gen 5speeds from stock to 2 with intake, exhaust and short shifter. surprised an SS camaro 6speed, owned a built 4.3L S10, held my own against the same S10 with a built 327SBC(obviously not very built, otherwise it would've been running 11s). should i go on? how about a WRX(only to be owned by another one with upped boost and exhaust)? this isnt impressive, but both 5.0 and 4.6L 5speed and auto mustangs, GTI VR6s, GTI 1.8T, audi A4 2.8 quattro 5speed w/intake, 240sx (intake, header, exhaust, cam, ECU, ignition, CF STGII clutch), integra LS and GSR 5speeds, took me till 135+ MPH to start pulling on an overboosted eclipse GST 5speed
what has beaten me: E36 M3 3.2L, E39 M5 (3 or 4 of them), supercharged older Z28 camaro, 300zx with intake, header, exhaust, flywheel, clutch, UDP, ECU, Z06 vette, countless E46 M3s. what about the almighty VQ35? i hung with an auto G35 sedan(trying to impress his girl, i was very surprised how weak it was on the highway, i mean being kept up with by the lowly VE).
call any BS you'd like, maybe i happen to be running into people who dont know how to drive (highly unlikely for a few of those kills), or maybe a few of the cars arent all they're cracked up to be...or [gasp] maybe the 3rd gen is something special?
overall the 3rd gen FEELS alot more solid than the 4th gen
to each his own
as far as getting my a$$ handed to me i've held my own with a 5th gen auto where i had a 300lb+ weight DISadvantage. i've personally smoked 4th gen autos (my dad being the most often case) like they were 5speed KA powered altimas. i've also smoked(more like slowly pulled on the modded ones) 4th gen 5speeds from stock to 2 with intake, exhaust and short shifter. surprised an SS camaro 6speed, owned a built 4.3L S10, held my own against the same S10 with a built 327SBC(obviously not very built, otherwise it would've been running 11s). should i go on? how about a WRX(only to be owned by another one with upped boost and exhaust)? this isnt impressive, but both 5.0 and 4.6L 5speed and auto mustangs, GTI VR6s, GTI 1.8T, audi A4 2.8 quattro 5speed w/intake, 240sx (intake, header, exhaust, cam, ECU, ignition, CF STGII clutch), integra LS and GSR 5speeds, took me till 135+ MPH to start pulling on an overboosted eclipse GST 5speed
what has beaten me: E36 M3 3.2L, E39 M5 (3 or 4 of them), supercharged older Z28 camaro, 300zx with intake, header, exhaust, flywheel, clutch, UDP, ECU, Z06 vette, countless E46 M3s. what about the almighty VQ35? i hung with an auto G35 sedan(trying to impress his girl, i was very surprised how weak it was on the highway, i mean being kept up with by the lowly VE).
call any BS you'd like, maybe i happen to be running into people who dont know how to drive (highly unlikely for a few of those kills), or maybe a few of the cars arent all they're cracked up to be...or [gasp] maybe the 3rd gen is something special?
overall the 3rd gen FEELS alot more solid than the 4th gen
to each his own
04-08-2003, 11:20 AM
#85
Guest
Posts: n/a
why are you afraid?
I have 264k THATS RIGHT 264k no misprint, I just did the 5 speed swap, it ran me $1200, since I had to put my auto into my buddys car that I took the 5 speed out of. Total was $500 per car, then $200 for him to swap VI from the 5 speed to mine, so $1200 total, then rental cars are what killed me, $600 there, so total we are at $1800, then I had to get a new clutch and flywheel, which rang the total to $2200. If I didnt have to rent cars, I would be in ALOT better of shape. Then, 2 months later, then tranny took a crap, it was still VERY drivable, but the gears were making LOTS of noise, so I took it in and told them to replace all the gears and every single bearing and bushing,etc...in that thing. They got me another new clutch(since they wouldnt warranty the trans with a used clutch) and charged me $1700(gears are expensive), then I paid another $120 on a rental, so total...
$1600 on swap.
$1700 Full Rebuild.
$720 in Rentals.
Now dont you think I could of got a 4th gen if I was denying the 3rd gen for what it is and really thought the 4th gen had something special? I think not...
Now I have a VE 5 speed w/ 264k and a new transmission, I also have a newer motor on the way, which I am going to rebuild and then slap in there. Then it is time for boost, since the VE WILL handle it better, due to a number of things.
I have 264k THATS RIGHT 264k no misprint, I just did the 5 speed swap, it ran me $1200, since I had to put my auto into my buddys car that I took the 5 speed out of. Total was $500 per car, then $200 for him to swap VI from the 5 speed to mine, so $1200 total, then rental cars are what killed me, $600 there, so total we are at $1800, then I had to get a new clutch and flywheel, which rang the total to $2200. If I didnt have to rent cars, I would be in ALOT better of shape. Then, 2 months later, then tranny took a crap, it was still VERY drivable, but the gears were making LOTS of noise, so I took it in and told them to replace all the gears and every single bearing and bushing,etc...in that thing. They got me another new clutch(since they wouldnt warranty the trans with a used clutch) and charged me $1700(gears are expensive), then I paid another $120 on a rental, so total...
$1600 on swap.
$1700 Full Rebuild.
$720 in Rentals.
Now dont you think I could of got a 4th gen if I was denying the 3rd gen for what it is and really thought the 4th gen had something special? I think not...
Now I have a VE 5 speed w/ 264k and a new transmission, I also have a newer motor on the way, which I am going to rebuild and then slap in there. Then it is time for boost, since the VE WILL handle it better, due to a number of things.
04-08-2003, 11:24 AM
#86
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally posted by dmontzsta
Now I have a VE 5 speed w/ 264k and a new transmission, I also have a newer motor on the way, which I am going to rebuild and then slap in there. Then it is time for boost, since the VE WILL handle it better, due to a number of things.
Now I have a VE 5 speed w/ 264k and a new transmission, I also have a newer motor on the way, which I am going to rebuild and then slap in there. Then it is time for boost, since the VE WILL handle it better, due to a number of things.
04-08-2003, 11:25 AM
#87
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by SteVTEC
So the guys here with their turbo and S/Ced VQ's are getting in excess of 400 fwhp on Dynojet dynos. To prove the superior strength of the VE engine over the VQ, I eagerly await your 500 fwhp turbo VE project results.
So the guys here with their turbo and S/Ced VQ's are getting in excess of 400 fwhp on Dynojet dynos. To prove the superior strength of the VE engine over the VQ, I eagerly await your 500 fwhp turbo VE project results.
Alluminum will pop much before iron sir.
04-08-2003, 11:27 AM
#88
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,105
Re: Re: more ranting.
Originally posted by SteVTEC
So what has your Camaro SS killing 3rd Gen run at the track? I don't see any posts in the 1/4 mile timeslip forum.
So what has your Camaro SS killing 3rd Gen run at the track?
I don't see any posts in the 1/4 mile timeslip forum. i havent been to the track, which explains the lack of a time slip. also 1/4 mile/stand still racing is alot different than racing from a roll, and most of my races are in fact from a roll. when i do goto the track, i will post what i have run, but more likely i'll be on a dyno before that.
04-08-2003, 11:30 AM
#90
Originally posted by dmontzsta
why are you afraid?
I have 264k THATS RIGHT 264k no misprint, I just did the 5 speed swap, it ran me $1200, since I had to put my auto into my buddys car that I took the 5 speed out of. Total was $500 per car, then $200 for him to swap VI from the 5 speed to mine, so $1200 total, then rental cars are what killed me, $600 there, so total we are at $1800, then I had to get a new clutch and flywheel, which rang the total to $2200. If I didnt have to rent cars, I would be in ALOT better of shape. Then, 2 months later, then tranny took a crap, it was still VERY drivable, but the gears were making LOTS of noise, so I took it in and told them to replace all the gears and every single bearing and bushing,etc...in that thing. They got me another new clutch(since they wouldnt warranty the trans with a used clutch) and charged me $1700(gears are expensive), then I paid another $120 on a rental, so total...
$1600 on swap.
$1700 Full Rebuild.
$720 in Rentals
why are you afraid?
I have 264k THATS RIGHT 264k no misprint, I just did the 5 speed swap, it ran me $1200, since I had to put my auto into my buddys car that I took the 5 speed out of. Total was $500 per car, then $200 for him to swap VI from the 5 speed to mine, so $1200 total, then rental cars are what killed me, $600 there, so total we are at $1800, then I had to get a new clutch and flywheel, which rang the total to $2200. If I didnt have to rent cars, I would be in ALOT better of shape. Then, 2 months later, then tranny took a crap, it was still VERY drivable, but the gears were making LOTS of noise, so I took it in and told them to replace all the gears and every single bearing and bushing,etc...in that thing. They got me another new clutch(since they wouldnt warranty the trans with a used clutch) and charged me $1700(gears are expensive), then I paid another $120 on a rental, so total...
$1600 on swap.
$1700 Full Rebuild.
$720 in Rentals
04-08-2003, 11:30 AM
#91
Originally posted by SteVTEC
So the guys here with their turbo and S/Ced VQ's are getting in excess of 400 fwhp on Dynojet dynos. To prove the superior strength of the VE engine over the VQ, I eagerly await your 500 fwhp turbo VE project results.
So the guys here with their turbo and S/Ced VQ's are getting in excess of 400 fwhp on Dynojet dynos. To prove the superior strength of the VE engine over the VQ, I eagerly await your 500 fwhp turbo VE project results.
04-08-2003, 11:34 AM
#93
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 50
Absolutely. The new Mustang Cobra has an iron block after 8 years of having an aluminum one because they added factory boost. Maybe you want to take that risk, but the manufacturer doesn't want to have to replace everyone's engine after 20k miles Those new Cobras push 400hp (some over that) bone stock and are warrantied just as long as any other new car.
About the rear beam thing- stop being in denial so badly. It's pure physics. You'd be better off with an oldass VW swing axle suspension.. at least the wheels can move on different planes. Front wheel drive has nothing to do with it- All four wheels are on the pavement. If that was the case, then Indy cars would have a live axle front suspension.
That is all this Mustanger has to add to the subject.
Those new Cobras push 400hp (some over that) bone stock and are warrantied just as long as any other new car.About the rear beam thing- stop being in denial so badly. It's pure physics. You'd be better off with an oldass VW swing axle suspension.. at least the wheels can move on different planes. Front wheel drive has nothing to do with it- All four wheels are on the pavement. If that was the case, then Indy cars would have a live axle front suspension.
That is all this Mustanger has to add to the subject.
04-08-2003, 11:37 AM
#95
Originally posted by MaDMaX024
where is the meet?
where is the meet?
04-08-2003, 12:37 PM
#96
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 641
Originally posted by SteVTEC
I am a 4th Gen owner and can admit freely that there are things that are MUCH better about the 3rd Gens over any newer Maxima. But there are also things that are better about the 4th Gen and newer Gens. However, there are certain 3rd gen owners that simply cannot admit that there is anything better about any newer Maxima. They cling to the stengths of their particular car while denying its own weaknesses, and then bash on the weaknesses of the newer cars while also denying its strengths over the 3rd gen.
I find this selective vision and acknowledgment amusing.
And I would also just like to say that...
VQ 0wNz j0o !!!11!
I am a 4th Gen owner and can admit freely that there are things that are MUCH better about the 3rd Gens over any newer Maxima. But there are also things that are better about the 4th Gen and newer Gens. However, there are certain 3rd gen owners that simply cannot admit that there is anything better about any newer Maxima. They cling to the stengths of their particular car while denying its own weaknesses, and then bash on the weaknesses of the newer cars while also denying its strengths over the 3rd gen.
I find this selective vision and acknowledgment amusing.
And I would also just like to say that...
VQ 0wNz j0o !!!11!
04-08-2003, 12:40 PM
#97
Re: Re: my thoughts.
Originally posted by NYCe MaXiMa
And still, it is possible to find a 3rd gen with 90k miles, yet people buy a 4th gen.. because they want a newer car.
And still, it is possible to find a 3rd gen with 90k miles, yet people buy a 4th gen.. because they want a newer car.
Could you point me to the research study peformed that shows a significant percentage of people buy a 4th gen instead of the "plethora" of 3rd gens with 90k on them? THANKS!
meaning the 3rd gen styling is outdated.
I'm not sure what rock you are under, but quite the contrary is reality. 3rd gens still look better than any subsequent Maxima, and Nissan has had several chances to get it right. They've yet to do so. The 97 to 99 models had the best showing.
BTW, having driven both, a 93 SE for a long period of time, as well as a 98 gxe and 97 SE. I can post plenty of things that i drew from my personal experience as far as the two compare..
Me too.
and to be fair to both, despite my never ending love for my troublesome 93 SE, I was/is much happier with my 98 and 97.. the engine ALONE makes it worthwhile.
My opinion: the VQ is the only thing that makes a 4th gen, or any subsequent gen for that matter. Thank goodness it is the most important thing and makes up for a lot of other shortcomings.
and my 97 SE has 131k miles with ZERO repairs done, and my 93 SE had almost 3k dumped into it with 106k and was coming up for a second trans rebuild.. thats when i had enough.
I've had as many nagging things go wrong on my 99 with 57k on it as I have my 94 with 135k on it. 99 was bought new and the 94 was not. To me, that's pathetic.
if you haven't personally had your *** handed to you by a 4th gen, then it is typically common knowledge that a 4th gen is quicker, sure there are a select few cases when a VE does it's thing and holds it's own but - face it
There really aren't any 3rd gen owners who dispute this, but you sure enjoy blanket assessing all of us as insisting this be the case. I don't know why.
We other 3rd gen owners aren't Donald.
there are other things that can be argued, such as reliability, - no ticking, noisy engines, no crappy, lagging automatic transmissions, no broken exhaust studs and no underpowered 160 horses
No broken studs here.
No bad window regulators.
No ticking.
No noise.
No lagging auto trannies, and the wife consistently comments on how much better 3rd gen slushboxes are than 4th gens (which I agree)
VG POWA!
why can't some of you 3rd gen owners just acknowledge that your car is not as good as the generations following it on many things?
Why does it bother you so much? Jealous?
it's true, it is better at some things, but it isn't in others..
Uh, yeah. Agreed.
why can't you just go ahead and admit that?
Why can't you?
and looks are very subjective, so you can't really argue that and call my opinion wrong..
Sure I can.......and not just my opinion, but strangers coming up and complementing my 94, while not saying much of anything about my Super Chippy Black 99.
04-08-2003, 01:18 PM
#98
Here is an Ebay auction for a nice 3-gen VE 5-sp. Look at the winning bid price. This isn't the offer or what the seller *tried* to sell it for. This is what someone bid to PAY for it. This is also Ebay, known for good deals.
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=203798
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=203798
04-08-2003, 02:01 PM
#100
Originally posted by dmontzsta
I can get 4th gens all day here in SoCal for $3-6 grand.
I can get 4th gens all day here in SoCal for $3-6 grand.
I'll find you a 3rd gen for a grand
3rd gens the best looking?
opinion no doubt they look good especially for being so old but I really have a thing for 97-99 SEs people tell me all the time they are the best looking Maximas bar none3rd gens especially VEs are awesome.. i wont say any more- but I'm driving a 4th gen and I'm frickin happy all that matters to me
i did see two hot asian girls driving 3rd gens yesterday soo... they arent all bad ehehe
04-08-2003, 02:40 PM
#101
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 641
Originally posted by Jeff92se
Here is an Ebay auction for a nice 3-gen VE 5-sp. Look at the winning bid price. This isn't the offer or what the seller *tried* to sell it for. This is what someone bid to PAY for it. This is also Ebay, known for good deals.
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=203798
Here is an Ebay auction for a nice 3-gen VE 5-sp. Look at the winning bid price. This isn't the offer or what the seller *tried* to sell it for. This is what someone bid to PAY for it. This is also Ebay, known for good deals.
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=203798
My interior is clean as his but my engine isn't 
oh, he has a VE too, damn. Oh, his is stick, oh...ok damn he wins.
04-08-2003, 03:39 PM
#102
Originally posted by Jeff92se
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=203798
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=203798
thats what im talking about, if i can find a low miles manual like that in black, id immediately choose that over an equally equipped/conditioned 4th gen
04-08-2003, 11:43 PM
#103
Re: Re: Re: my thoughts.
Originally posted by bill99gxe
Could you point me to the research study peformed that shows a significant percentage of people buy a 4th gen instead of the "plethora" of 3rd gens with 90k on them? THANKS!
Could you point me to the research study peformed that shows a significant percentage of people buy a 4th gen instead of the "plethora" of 3rd gens with 90k on them? THANKS!
No. Why do I need to show a study? I was simply trying to say that Donald was wrong when he said it is almost impossible to locate a 3rd gen with 90k miles. Meaning, there is availability of both, with similar milage, so you can't really justify people not buying 3rd gens because they can't find them with 90k miles, because infact you can find them with 90k, just as I just happened to find 4 right here on maxima.org.. all on the very front page of the maximas for sale forum. Obviously, there are more low milage 4th gens, but this is not to say that low milage 3rd gens are so impossible to find. These cars are everywhere, surely there has to be some that have low miles, yet it is likely that people still search for and buy 4th gens. For one reason or another..
I'm not sure what rock you are under, but quite the contrary is reality. 3rd gens still look better than any subsequent Maxima, and Nissan has had several chances to get it right. They've yet to do so. The 97 to 99 models had the best showing.
This is purely subjective. A Ford Tempo might look better than an E46 BMW to me. I am not saying that you must have crawled under from some rock to think that an E46 is better looking than a Ford Tempo.. You are entitled to your opinions, as I am to mine. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I said it myself, I think 3rd gens were WAY ahead of their time and are still holding their ground well as 10+ year old cars.. however, styles change, and peoples tastes change.. You have no proof that the 3rd gen looked better, just like i have no proof that the 4th or 5th gen looks better. Neither of us are wrong or right, it's an opinion.
Me too.
good
My opinion: the VQ is the only thing that makes a 4th gen, or any subsequent gen for that matter. Thank goodness it is the most important thing and makes up for a lot of other shortcomings.
Cool. Since it's your opinion, I can't really say anything except that I may find some other qualities of the 4th gen that I personally like over the 3rd gen.
I've had as many nagging things go wrong on my 99 with 57k on it as I have my 94 with 135k on it. 99 was bought new and the 94 was not. To me, that's pathetic.
That's your experience. But that does not mean everyone elses is the same. Generally, 3rd gens have proven to be more problematic. No I do not have any charts or surveys for you, but you should know this yourself as a long time member of this board.. It has been established that exhaust studs are somewhat of a common problem on VGs, as are failing VTCs on VEs, as are auto transmissions on both.
There really aren't any 3rd gen owners who dispute this, but you sure enjoy blanket assessing all of us as insisting this be the case. I don't know why.
I thought I said "some" 3rd gen owners, not all. If I did say "all" then I appologize and take it back, but again, I do believe I said some.
We other 3rd gen owners aren't Donald.
My response/address was to Donald only, since he seems to be the only one still completely disregarding things that have been proven over and over again.
No broken studs here.
No bad window regulators.
No ticking.
No noise.
No lagging auto trannies, and the wife consistently comments on how much better 3rd gen slushboxes are than 4th gens (which I agree)
That's good. I feel the 4th gen auto is better..
A tranny tech told me friend he sees 3rd gen auto trannies go very early all the time, rather than 4th gens which typically last almost twice as long. I also found this to be true quite often through the years I've spent on this board.. although there are always exceptions.
VG POWA!
VQ
Why does it bother you so much? Jealous?
lol, it really doesn't..
This is just too fun
Uh, yeah. Agreed.
Why can't you?
hm, I did admit it.. your turn.
Sure I can.......and not just my opinion, but strangers coming up and complementing my 94, while not saying much of anything about my Super Chippy Black 99.
I've know of some ricers with Neons and Tiburons who get comments all the time, while my car never gets any and it looks completely stock.
Thus, Neon / Tiburon > Maxima.
Right?
Most of your argument is based on personal taste. That is really weak. I do acknowledge the superior built quality, rattle free interior, some cool factory features LSD/Variable Intake Manifolds.. great looks for it's time blah blah blah.. i've said all of this before many times.. when compared to 4th gens, yes, 3rd gens may be better in those terms. Yet it is not that crazy of a difference. The way some 3rd gen owners make it out to be is that 4th gens are utter junk and 3rd gens are gods chariots.
Even if it IS just the engine, which to me and many others, it is not. Some people buy cars only because of their engines. Don't care for their other aspects, be it looks, reliability, paint quality, etc.. this happens.. Not saying this is always the case for why some people prefer 4th gens over 3rd gens, but it may very well be.
04-09-2003, 12:02 AM
#104
Originally posted by Jeff92se
NYCe MaXiMa I guess since you didn't address my post you are admiting defeat. )
NYCe MaXiMa I guess since you didn't address my post you are admiting defeat. )
NEVAR
sorry Jeff, I didn't see it right away.. and it was too late to type out a response.
here we go.. i actually agree with most of what you are saying. My main argument is the utter disregard of the 4th gen and how it is being portrayed as far worse than it really is.. it might not have some of the perks that 3rd gens did, but it holds it's own well.
Originally posted by Jeff92se
Why don't the 4-geners accept the fact that Nissan was in the financial butthole in 1995 when it introduced the 4-gen? Other than the motor, everything else was subpar to the 3-gen(VE espcially) Everything the 5-gen 3.5VQ has now, the VE 5-sp had already. VI, coil on plug ignition/varible cam phasing, LSD tranny, IRS finally came back on the Altima and 6th gen.
It's well known by us here(and by alot of 4-gen owners that used to own/do own 3-gens), that the interior is better made in the 3-gen. Paint was superior in the 3-gen, build quality was superior in the 3-gen.
Why don't the 4-geners accept the fact that Nissan was in the financial butthole in 1995 when it introduced the 4-gen? Other than the motor, everything else was subpar to the 3-gen(VE espcially) Everything the 5-gen 3.5VQ has now, the VE 5-sp had already. VI, coil on plug ignition/varible cam phasing, LSD tranny, IRS finally came back on the Altima and 6th gen.
It's well known by us here(and by alot of 4-gen owners that used to own/do own 3-gens), that the interior is better made in the 3-gen. Paint was superior in the 3-gen, build quality was superior in the 3-gen.
At last, a somewhat factual response. I can't say anything. I accept the fact Nissan was having rough times. I do feel that reliability wise, VQs are equal or even superior to the 3rd gens. I think reliability is a significant issue. At least it is and always was for me, which was a definite decisive factor for me when making the switch from the 3rd gen to a 4th gen. But yea, I admit the 3rd gen had a lot to offer, no question. I will even argue this for my 3rd gen friends like yourself, Bill and Donald next time an ignorant 4th genner dares to say otherwise.
Styling. The 3-gen was ahead of it's time as it was designed in 1989. The 4-gen was never wildly accepted as a styling breakthough or even widely acclaimed as "good looking". It CAN be great looking w/ modifications or if it's really clean though.
I can't think of another gen of maxima that can command MORE money on the used market than it's newer brother. I've consistenly seen VE 5-sp maximas actually SELL for more than a same mileaged 4-gen.
If this was indeed that significant of a case everywhere, 3rd gens bluebook value would be typically higher than that of the 4th gen. But it's not. So there are always instances...
Newer is not always better. It's just newer. There's more chances at getting a low miler 4-gen vs the same in a 3-gen. What would you rather have? A 68 Mustang or a 78 Mustang?
And if the 4-gen was so great, why didn't the article mention the 4-gen instead of bashing it?
[/B]
[/B]
I believe the 95 Maxima did win car of the year by a certain magazine back in the day
04-09-2003, 12:23 AM
#105
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 641
Originally posted by NYCe MaXiMa
Admitting Defeat?
NEVAR
sorry Jeff, I didn't see it right away.. and it was too late to type out a response.
here we go.. i actually agree with most of what you are saying. My main argument is the utter disregard of the 4th gen and how it is being portrayed as far worse than it really is.. it might not have some of the perks that 3rd gens did, but it holds it's own well.
At last, a somewhat factual response. I can't say anything. I accept the fact Nissan was having rough times. I do feel that reliability wise, VQs are equal or even superior to the 3rd gens. I think reliability is a significant issue. At least it is and always was for me, which was a definite decisive factor for me when making the switch from the 3rd gen to a 4th gen. But yea, I admit the 3rd gen had a lot to offer, no question. I will even argue this for my 3rd gen friends like yourself, Bill and Donald next time an ignorant 4th genner dares to say otherwise.
I agree. I said the same thing, it was ahead of it's time, no question about that. 4th gen was definately more bland when it was introduced, 95 gxe's for one, look like crap to me stock. if i wanted a car for it's looks alone and had a 3rd gen in front of me and a 95/96 gxe.. i'd pick a 3rd gen.
Really? I haven't.
If this was indeed that significant of a case everywhere, 3rd gens bluebook value would be typically higher than that of the 4th gen. But it's not. So there are always instances...
True.
who cares about the article.. i can write an article bashing 3rd gens..
I believe the 95 Maxima did win car of the year by a certain magazine back in the day [/B]
Admitting Defeat?
NEVAR
sorry Jeff, I didn't see it right away.. and it was too late to type out a response.
here we go.. i actually agree with most of what you are saying. My main argument is the utter disregard of the 4th gen and how it is being portrayed as far worse than it really is.. it might not have some of the perks that 3rd gens did, but it holds it's own well.
At last, a somewhat factual response. I can't say anything. I accept the fact Nissan was having rough times. I do feel that reliability wise, VQs are equal or even superior to the 3rd gens. I think reliability is a significant issue. At least it is and always was for me, which was a definite decisive factor for me when making the switch from the 3rd gen to a 4th gen. But yea, I admit the 3rd gen had a lot to offer, no question. I will even argue this for my 3rd gen friends like yourself, Bill and Donald next time an ignorant 4th genner dares to say otherwise.
I agree. I said the same thing, it was ahead of it's time, no question about that. 4th gen was definately more bland when it was introduced, 95 gxe's for one, look like crap to me stock. if i wanted a car for it's looks alone and had a 3rd gen in front of me and a 95/96 gxe.. i'd pick a 3rd gen.
Really? I haven't.
If this was indeed that significant of a case everywhere, 3rd gens bluebook value would be typically higher than that of the 4th gen. But it's not. So there are always instances...
True.
who cares about the article.. i can write an article bashing 3rd gens..
I believe the 95 Maxima did win car of the year by a certain magazine back in the day
[/B]
04-09-2003, 12:55 AM
#106
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,105
Originally posted by MaximaGXE93
...Man you sure like typing a lot.
...Man you sure like typing a lot.
on a side note, has anyone else noticed that sh*t talkin' is alot of fun when it involves people with both strong opinions and alot of knowledge?
04-09-2003, 10:00 AM
#107
Originally posted by NYCe MaXiMa
Really? I haven't.
If this was indeed that significant of a case everywhere, 3rd gens bluebook value would be typically higher than that of the 4th gen. But it's not. So there are always instances...
Really? I haven't.
If this was indeed that significant of a case everywhere, 3rd gens bluebook value would be typically higher than that of the 4th gen. But it's not. So there are always instances...
Really, what about the Ebay auction I just posted? If cars of this year/condition were NOT commanding those prices, cars like the ebay one would never have gone for that much. I can show you an Autotrader ad for a VE 5-sp w/ 100k going for $6,800. And some more for high $5k etc..
who cares about the article.. i can write an article bashing 3rd gens..
I believe the 95 Maxima did win car of the year by a certain magazine back in the day
I believe the 95 Maxima did win car of the year by a certain magazine back in the day
hehe. Yes, you CAN write an article. But can you get YOUR article PUBLISHED by a magazine that has a readership of tens of thousands??
We aren't that far off in opinion, just ribbing you now.
04-09-2003, 10:03 AM
#108
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,018
Re: Re: Re: my thoughts.
Originally posted by Jeff92se
Why don't the 4-geners accept the fact that Nissan was in the financial butthole in 1995 when it introduced the 4-gen?
Why don't the 4-geners accept the fact that Nissan was in the financial butthole in 1995 when it introduced the 4-gen?
) admited elsewhere as being too expensive to produce. They sound like someone is playing an episode of "60 Minutes" under the hood too( ), but that's another issue.Nissan offered high quality and better equipment on cars like the 3rd gen, but lost money because they couldn't recoup the investment. If Nissan priced the Maxima any higher, they might not have sold as many as they did. If that were the case, they would have been in even worse shape.
Anyway, my point is: You guys argue about which generation of Maxima was better for you personally, but think about which ones were better for Nissan as a company. Sure, Car and Driver can talk all they want now about how nice they thought the 3rd gens were, but it doesn't do Nissan any good. Maybe the build quality on the 4th and 5th gens would be better if Nissan hadn't spent so much money on the 3rd gens.
04-09-2003, 10:12 AM
#109
Re: Re: Re: Re: my thoughts.
They sold ALOT of 3-gens. I don't think Nissan lost any money on the 3-gen maxima. They lost money on all the idiot other models they had at the time. 240sx w/ an idiot truck motor/Stanza/200sx/hardly any truck sales/trying to gear up the Infiniti line and failing horribly w/ the Q45/M30. If Nissan didn't sell as many 3-gen maximas as they did, they probably would have gone totally under.
Nissan spent money on the 3-gen and what happened? They sold a ton. They skimped on the 4-gen and what happened? They sold a ton to people that thought they were getting 3-gen quality. And sales went into the crapper from there.
Originally posted by Black VQ
And think about what car helped get Nissan into that position. The 3rd gen[/SIZE], especially with the VE motor, which Dmontzsta(don't make me go find that quote) admited elsewhere as being too expensive to produce. They sound like someone is playing an episode of "60 Minutes" under the hood too( ), but that's another issue.
Nissan offered high quality and better equipment on cars like the 3rd gen, but lost money because they couldn't recoup the investment. If Nissan priced the Maxima any higher, they might not have sold as many as they did. If that were the case, they would have been in even worse shape.
Anyway, my point is: You guys argue about which generation of Maxima was better for you personally, but think about which ones were better for Nissan as a company. Sure, Car and Driver can talk all they want now about how nice they thought the 3rd gens were, but it doesn't do Nissan any good. Maybe the build quality on the 4th and 5th gens would be better if Nissan hadn't spent so much money on the 3rd gens.
And think about what car helped get Nissan into that position. The 3rd gen[/SIZE], especially with the VE motor, which Dmontzsta(don't make me go find that quote
) admited elsewhere as being too expensive to produce. They sound like someone is playing an episode of "60 Minutes" under the hood too( ), but that's another issue.Nissan offered high quality and better equipment on cars like the 3rd gen, but lost money because they couldn't recoup the investment. If Nissan priced the Maxima any higher, they might not have sold as many as they did. If that were the case, they would have been in even worse shape.
Anyway, my point is: You guys argue about which generation of Maxima was better for you personally, but think about which ones were better for Nissan as a company. Sure, Car and Driver can talk all they want now about how nice they thought the 3rd gens were, but it doesn't do Nissan any good. Maybe the build quality on the 4th and 5th gens would be better if Nissan hadn't spent so much money on the 3rd gens.
04-09-2003, 10:19 AM
#110
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Re: Re: my thoughts.
Originally posted by Black VQ
And think about what car helped get Nissan into that position. The 3rd gen[/SIZE], especially with the VE motor, which Dmontzsta(don't make me go find that quote) admited elsewhere as being too expensive to produce. They sound like someone is playing an episode of "60 Minutes" under the hood too( ), but that's another issue.
Nissan offered high quality and better equipment on cars like the 3rd gen, but lost money because they couldn't recoup the investment. If Nissan priced the Maxima any higher, they might not have sold as many as they did. If that were the case, they would have been in even worse shape.
Anyway, my point is: You guys argue about which generation of Maxima was better for you personally, but think about which ones were better for Nissan as a company. Sure, Car and Driver can talk all they want now about how nice they thought the 3rd gens were, but it doesn't do Nissan any good. Maybe the build quality on the 4th and 5th gens would be better if Nissan hadn't spent so much money on the 3rd gens.
And think about what car helped get Nissan into that position. The 3rd gen[/SIZE], especially with the VE motor, which Dmontzsta(don't make me go find that quote
) admited elsewhere as being too expensive to produce. They sound like someone is playing an episode of "60 Minutes" under the hood too( ), but that's another issue.Nissan offered high quality and better equipment on cars like the 3rd gen, but lost money because they couldn't recoup the investment. If Nissan priced the Maxima any higher, they might not have sold as many as they did. If that were the case, they would have been in even worse shape.
Anyway, my point is: You guys argue about which generation of Maxima was better for you personally, but think about which ones were better for Nissan as a company. Sure, Car and Driver can talk all they want now about how nice they thought the 3rd gens were, but it doesn't do Nissan any good. Maybe the build quality on the 4th and 5th gens would be better if Nissan hadn't spent so much money on the 3rd gens.
04-09-2003, 10:28 AM
#111
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,018
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: my thoughts.
Originally posted by Jeff92se
If Nissan didn't sell as many 3-gen maximas as they did, they probably would have gone totally under.
If Nissan didn't sell as many 3-gen maximas as they did, they probably would have gone totally under.
I already said that.
Nissan spent money on the 3-gen and what happened? They sold a ton. They skimped on the 4-gen and what happened? They sold a ton to people that thought they were getting 3-gen quality. And sales went into the crapper from there.
I mean seriously, many high-dollar luxury cars still don't have HUD in 2003. Why would a 3rd gen have needed it 10 years ago? It's just another expensive piece that could go out and be difficult to replace.
Why did Nissan decide to offer the expensive VE engine for only two years? The DOHC engine was from the Z, and was overbuilt for the amount of power it was actually making. A waste, imho. The VG was working just fine...if you can call it that.
04-09-2003, 10:34 AM
#112
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: my thoughts.
Originally posted by Black VQ
I already said that.
And my point is: Why was Nissan forced to skimp on quality with the 4th gen? You can't say building up the 3rd gen to be so ahead of its time didn't hurt a little.
I mean seriously, many high-dollar luxury cars still don't have HUD in 2003. Why would a 3rd gen have needed it 10 years ago? It's just another expensive piece that could go out and be difficult to replace.
Why did Nissan decide to offer the expensive VE engine for only two years? The DOHC engine was from the Z, and was overbuilt for the amount of power it was actually making. A waste, imho. The VG was working just fine...if you can call it that.
I already said that.
And my point is: Why was Nissan forced to skimp on quality with the 4th gen? You can't say building up the 3rd gen to be so ahead of its time didn't hurt a little.
I mean seriously, many high-dollar luxury cars still don't have HUD in 2003. Why would a 3rd gen have needed it 10 years ago? It's just another expensive piece that could go out and be difficult to replace.
Why did Nissan decide to offer the expensive VE engine for only two years? The DOHC engine was from the Z, and was overbuilt for the amount of power it was actually making. A waste, imho. The VG was working just fine...if you can call it that.
04-09-2003, 10:42 AM
#113
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: my thoughts.
Because Toyota was spending mega bucks on their Camry. The 3-gen Camry is MUCH better than the newer 95-ish+ designs also.
The VE is it's OWN engine(not from the Z VG30DE is not a VE30DE). But Nissan IMHO was practicing on this engine for some stuff on the VQ. ie.. coil on plug ign, dohc heads on a FWD car etc... Nissan probably had to upgrade the maxima power because the Camry had more than 160hp at the time. And none of the existing V6s would fit into the maxima engine bay.
Any other questions?
The VE is it's OWN engine(not from the Z VG30DE is not a VE30DE). But Nissan IMHO was practicing on this engine for some stuff on the VQ. ie.. coil on plug ign, dohc heads on a FWD car etc... Nissan probably had to upgrade the maxima power because the Camry had more than 160hp at the time. And none of the existing V6s would fit into the maxima engine bay.
Any other questions?
Originally posted by Black VQ
And my point is: Why was Nissan forced to skimp on quality with the 4th gen? You can't say building up the 3rd gen to be so ahead of its time didn't hurt a little.
I mean seriously, many high-dollar luxury cars still don't have HUD in 2003. Why would a 3rd gen have needed it 10 years ago? It's just another expensive piece that could go out and be difficult to replace.
Why did Nissan decide to offer the expensive VE engine for only two years? The DOHC engine was from the Z, and was overbuilt for the amount of power it was actually making. A waste, imho. The VG was working just fine...if you can call it that.
And my point is: Why was Nissan forced to skimp on quality with the 4th gen? You can't say building up the 3rd gen to be so ahead of its time didn't hurt a little.
I mean seriously, many high-dollar luxury cars still don't have HUD in 2003. Why would a 3rd gen have needed it 10 years ago? It's just another expensive piece that could go out and be difficult to replace.
Why did Nissan decide to offer the expensive VE engine for only two years? The DOHC engine was from the Z, and was overbuilt for the amount of power it was actually making. A waste, imho. The VG was working just fine...if you can call it that.
04-09-2003, 10:46 AM
#114
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,018
Yeah, you read right(probably not, but anyway) it was a waste to put such an expensive, overbuilt engine into the Maxima. Why take an engine that can handle 500hp, detune it from the 200+hp it was making in the NA Z32, and change it to fwd so that it can be used in a Maxima for only two years? It wasn't a good idea to switch engines like that, especially in the middle of a chassis run. Imho, Nissan would have been better off sticking with the VG for a couple more years, then switching to th VQ in '95.
Now before you scream bloody murder and mention the switch to the VQ35 in the '02+ 5th gens, that is a different situation. All Nissan did was make changes to the existing VQ, and that was it.
Now before you scream bloody murder and mention the switch to the VQ35 in the '02+ 5th gens, that is a different situation. All Nissan did was make changes to the existing VQ, and that was it.
04-09-2003, 10:56 AM
#115
Ah again: VE30DE is not a VG30DE. So they didn't "detune" it and turn it sideways for the maxima.
Again. If Nissan didn't up the hp on the maxima, the Toyota Camry would have kicked it's **** all over the sales sheets. Hindsight is 20-20. They had boatloads of cash back then.
Hate to break it to you but, 3.0 to 3.5 liters, adding varible cam phasing, brand new intake manifold w/ VI again, hot wire throttle is not "make changes". It's basicly a brand new motor.
Again. If Nissan didn't up the hp on the maxima, the Toyota Camry would have kicked it's **** all over the sales sheets. Hindsight is 20-20. They had boatloads of cash back then.
Originally posted by Black VQ
Yeah, you read right(probably not, but anyway) it was a waste to put such an expensive, overbuilt engine into the Maxima. Why take an engine that can handle 500hp, detune it from the 200+hp it was making in the NA Z32, and change it to fwd so that it can be used in a Maxima for only two years? It wasn't a good idea to switch engines like that, especially in the middle of a chassis run. Imho, Nissan would have been better off sticking with the VG for a couple more years, then switching to th VQ in '95.
Yeah, you read right(probably not, but anyway) it was a waste to put such an expensive, overbuilt engine into the Maxima. Why take an engine that can handle 500hp, detune it from the 200+hp it was making in the NA Z32, and change it to fwd so that it can be used in a Maxima for only two years? It wasn't a good idea to switch engines like that, especially in the middle of a chassis run. Imho, Nissan would have been better off sticking with the VG for a couple more years, then switching to th VQ in '95.
you scream bloody murder and mention the switch to the VQ35 in the '02+ 5th gens, that is a different situation. All Nissan did was make changes to the existing VQ, and that was it.
04-09-2003, 11:07 AM
#116
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Black VQ
Yeah, you read right(probably not, but anyway) it was a waste to put such an expensive, overbuilt engine into the Maxima. Why take an engine that can handle 500hp, detune it from the 200+hp it was making in the NA Z32, and change it to fwd so that it can be used in a Maxima for only two years? It wasn't a good idea to switch engines like that, especially in the middle of a chassis run. Imho, Nissan would have been better off sticking with the VG for a couple more years, then switching to th VQ in '95.
Now before you scream bloody murder and mention the switch to the VQ35 in the '02+ 5th gens, that is a different situation. All Nissan did was make changes to the existing VQ, and that was it.
Yeah, you read right(probably not, but anyway) it was a waste to put such an expensive, overbuilt engine into the Maxima. Why take an engine that can handle 500hp, detune it from the 200+hp it was making in the NA Z32, and change it to fwd so that it can be used in a Maxima for only two years? It wasn't a good idea to switch engines like that, especially in the middle of a chassis run. Imho, Nissan would have been better off sticking with the VG for a couple more years, then switching to th VQ in '95.
Now before you scream bloody murder and mention the switch to the VQ35 in the '02+ 5th gens, that is a different situation. All Nissan did was make changes to the existing VQ, and that was it.
And Go Jeff! You are owning him.
04-09-2003, 03:49 PM
#120
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Maximan190
why is it still the "VQ" then
why is it still the "VQ" then
Also, I found this article on a recent search:
A complete redesign for 1995 was a disappointment for most Maxima devotees. The all-independent suspension was gone, materials seemed cheaper and lighter and the styling was a big letdown. This has helped keep up values for the 1989-94 models. Even huge discounts and incentives on the new model has failed to depress prices much. In fact, in 1996 an "old design" '94 Maxima could be expected to bring close to the street price of a used '95 model with less mileage. That's quite a performance.