Another ~125 posts and I will be a Maxima Guru.

 

Aww and I wanted to cut my power steering.....too bad.

 

My CAI increased HP at high rpms. I didn't pull that out of my @ss.

 

that blows...sorry that happened to you. i had a buick where the paint started chipping on the hodd in the spring. by the end of the summer, it looked like someone peeled the paint from the hood to the trunk!

 

I think the rim discussion is like the 87 vs 93 discussion, there will never be 100% agreement. When a person on this forum says they put on 15's and the car could go faster, I believe them. After all, they went to the trouble of doing it, I doubt they're gonna just make it up. On the other hand, I don't want to put 15's on my car. And when I went from 16 to 18 which is +2, I didn't notice any difference. My car still handles poorly, maybe worse. but any slowness is imperceivable. It's like saying the car is slower when a 250# person is driving, vs. a 125 lb. person. In theory, yes, but in the real world, the car doesn't know.

A c6 Vette has 1" larger rims front/rear respectively when compared to the c5, it's not merely power that overcomes what should be a slower and poorer handling car; that would be naive to say the least. On a vehicle like that they do not simply tack on fake duals, 18" RS-A's, chrome and sideways moonroofs for no reason.....

 

I'll agree with you there and just leave it at that

(though I'm not entirely sure if you're referring to octane or Maxima years)....

luckily, it's not that bad - just the bottoms of the rocker panels - thanks to monster-size road salt on a ski trip and me going 70mph through it for 3 hourse....SANDBLAST....

but gotta say, I did the same thing in my black 92 Accord coupe many times and that never happened...

...of course, I have a nice amount of hood/bumper chips too ....

 

93 octane only. put the best in and get the best out.

 

another thing with bigger rims on certain cars is that brakes are getting bigger every year and they have to put on bigger wheels to go around those rotors. I know on some of the BMW M cars the rotors are the size of most peoples actual wheels

 

I still think McIntosh, Paradigm, and tons of other speaker brands produce better sound. You can get a great infinity home theatre for much less and come almost as close to bose.

 

Although those other brands you mentioned are very good, They are not the same type of technology so it is like comparing apples and oranges. Bose is a proprietary direct reflecting technology and therefore have a completely different sound presence than the brands you mentioned. People either love it or hate it. They are all very good just very different in the way they reproduce sound. I personally like infinity and have had many of their products over the years both in my cars and home, but this is a completely different type of sound reproduction.

Basically some people bash Bose for sounding the way the do when thats exactly what they are supposed to sound like, sound like a live performance. While the Infinity speakers have very bright, tight and crystal clear sound traits, they absolutely do not sound like a live performance and you can easily tell exactly which direction the sound is coming from. They are way too clean, bright and directional and no live performance sounds like that.

Don't get me wrong they are very good for that type of sound but comparing them to Bose is like comparing a minivan and a motorcycle. Both means of getting from one place to another, both can be very good but very different purposes.

 

I don't agree with what you say at all. Your analogy is off--the former and latter could be compared, but there would be no purpose. Bose would be like a Toyota Camry, and McIntosh would be like a Maybach. They are not different like a minivan and motorcycle. Yet the two would never be mentioned in the same conversation.

The other dude mentioned McIntosh. That is audiophile equipment. Their bottom of the line amp goes for $3000--that's simply a 200w/channel power amp. Does not include the preamp. The bottom of the line preamp will cost you $3600. So $6600 later, you have a 200w/channel integrated amp. Can't call it a receiver because it has no FM tuner. You don't go to a mall or factory outlet store to buy something like that, the way you do with Bose. And nobody is gonna spend $6600 for 200w/channel to settle for Bose sound, trust me. Very few people can afford McIntosh--if you're willing to settle for 75W/channel, which is actually going to be too little power to drive all but the tiniest of speakers (nothing is free--there is a tendency for the best sounding speakers to be less efficient, and it takes double the amplifier power to achiever a 3db gain), you could get an integrated amp for roughly $4000-$4500, again, that's 75W/channel. Yes, it's McIntosh, but 75W/channel doesn't deliver much value at that price.

Bose's flagship speakers are the 901, they have been around for what, decades? People who bash Bose are simply judging it based on how it sounds, nothing more. People who shop for McIntosh and the likes don't even comment on Bose, because there's nothing to say about it. It's like Merion Golf Club (#8 in the nation) vs. FDR Park.

Don't get me wrong, I do not find Bose to be cheap at all. For its price, there are alternatives that sound much, much better. But it's like anything else, one has to do research and actually spend the time to listen to the stuff. GMAIL baby!

 

They are pretty quick for what they are.
you have a 4th gen, you have nothing to ***** about.

 

Actually I respectfully disagee and believe my analogy is spot on. The motorcycle and minivan is a valid comparison. What you are talking about is super high end traditionl technology equipment when Bose is of course not in that high end of a markert to begin with but a completely different approach in it's design to sound reproduction. It seems this major difference in how the sound is reproduced is difficult for many people to realize when they compare Bose to other traditional technologies. Another analogy which may help would be comparing a rotoray engine to a conventional engine. Both motors but both very different technologies. The Price and quality comparisons you state really have nothing to do with the design differnces I am explaining just different price segments. I am not saying that the Bose is in the same league as those others, just that it is simply completely different. It may benefit you to check out the Bose web site and take a look at how their direct reflecting technology works and why Dr. Bose invented it. The take a look at the design specifics of the other brands mentioned and then I think it might be easier to see what I am saying.

Also what sounds better to one person may not sound that good at all to another. This is a matter of taste which is very subjective and not a measurable value at all. Same thing for foods, art, etc..
I love all types of audio equipment there are many different brands which all have wonderful traits but as far as I know Bose is the only company out there with this unique design technology which of course is why they sound so different than everyone else.

 

Uh...what? C&D hit 6 flat with a 2k2 SE in their October 2002 issue (car-stats.com is a wonderful thing).

And the 2k4 is apparently slower at 6.3...

 

2K4 is slower by the smallest hair. Latest C&D did a comparo which included the 2K4 SE did 0-60 in 6.1. 1/4 mile in 14.9

 

I love my 901's. Great for surround sound when you add a sub to the system.

 

That's nice.
I am glad "Dr. BoSE" had such good intentions. I am a professional orchestral musician for 25 years and also an audiophile and I hate Bose. Multi reflected sounds are fine for a symphony hall, but an audio playback system is supposed to reproduce what the mikes and the engineer picked up. Bose used this stuff for years and he built an empire using the lowest possible technology in their speakers. Bose speakers use paper cone tweeters and paper cone woofers with foam surrounds of the same quality/value as those you will find at Radio Shack. I understand that it's not even practical to use exotic driver materials in a car: a place where temperatures can reach 135 degrees in a parking lot at noon, or -45 in Minesotta or Canada. But even in the 60's and 70's Bose was underbuilding their speakers, compared to the competition. "better sound through research" ... give me a F$%^& break. You should see some of the stuff real physicist work at on their free time: have you seen plasma tweeters or electrostats, ribbons etc... that IS technology!I hate it when marketing tries to fool people with phsychobabble.

 

girls love maximas, it turns them on


:

 

You may be onto something. Went out to dinner last night, and found out my friend's wife has a 99 GLE, artic white (why did Nissan spell arctic wrong in 98?). She said it had starting problems after she had it a month, I wonder if it was that chipped-key??

 

Bose is an absolute success story thanks to clever marketing. The money they make through OEM is fantastic--too bad they don't pay their employees too well up there in Framingham. Many cos. rest on their laurels like Bose does. The feather in their cap is not publishing any tech. specs on their products (who would buy a car not knowing how many HP it had, fuel economy, etc.?), and having people still insist their products sound great. One needn't be an audiophile to realize that Bose is no better or worse than any audio equipment one would find in a mass marketer like Circuit or Best. Real physicists are probably working on new MRI and CT Scan technology....

 

LOL thats funny

 

Thats great that your a musician and of course like everyone else your certainly entitled to your opinion if you don't like Bose. I am not a musician but enjoy what I feel is good quality sound to my tastes. Bose to me is that sound. Being an audiophile means nothing to me since what your opinion of good sound is, may not be mine. Remember we are talking about what sound good to someones ears which is the same type of thing as what tastes good to one person may taste like garbage to another. Sound like alot of other things is subjective. You can measure specs that is true but you can not measure what the quality of those specs are to an individual person's ear. It is simply a matter of a person's taste.

On the subject of the paper drivers and the quality of the components within Bose products, well here I believe you are confusing two different things. The discussion of the direct reflecting technology in Bose speaker designs are just that the designs not the materials used to produce them. Now granted you mentioned they use paper cones and such and yes that is true but they use these for a reason. The paper provides a sound difference over other materials not just cost savings. Yes they will not last as long as synthetic materials but also offer a sound difference. If I were going to fault Bose for what cheap materials used in their products were then I would target the cabinet substrate being particle board with laminate and really not using paper drivers.

Anyhow whether a person hates Bose technology or not is simply irrelavant since they are free to not purchase Bose products and just buy whatever brand they like. But it won't ever change the fact that there are a great many people out there that actually appreciate the Bose sound and the quality it brings to their ears. To say they are only popular because of clever marketing or because a non-audiophile doesn't know better, is simply ridiculous. If they sounded as crappy as some say then nobody would buy them.

All in all I personally like the Bose technology while I can appreciate other different technologies as well. However to me Bose offers something no other company I have seen does, and that is direct reflecting technology which to me is a great sound technology. I have many Bose products over the years as well as alot of other brands such as Inifinty,Polk,JBL,AR,Advent and a few others as I was lucky enough years ago to have worked in an audio store with an employee discount and a big love for what I felt to be good sound. Funny thing was over the years I started to appreciate the Bose sound even more slowly buying more and more Bose models and today Bose is all I use in my audio setups. So to me I have no problem at all with someone not liking Bose, just don't buy it. But regardless of a persons personal opinion, it is just that their opinion just as mine is that I feel the driect reflecting technology is a good one and sounds great to me.

 

Wow still fighting over Bose... No offense guys but Bose does suck compaired to Diamond audio or ARC audio compounts. Ive been inside many maxima's with Bose and hands down my audio setup destroys Bose 1000x till sunday. My friend keeps sweating his Bose system and cranks it up to VOL 30 you can hear all the distortion, rattling ah it just nasty. Then I get inside my fathers 03 pathfinder.. it has Bose and its horrible.. Then I jump inside my brothers 04 TL with navi, and again it's not even close to as good as my setup. Get real guys, Bose is a "high class" "PREMIUM" system for vehicals. Maybe a lot of you guys never heard of ARC or Diamond audio?! Why don't you install them in your car then come back to me and tell me how great Bose is because I will guaranty you that you will never want to go back to Bose ever again...

 

My setup:

Eclipse CD 8445 with Area shot navi. (HEADUNIT) (The features are insane)
www.eclipse-web.com

Diamond audio m6 compounts with crossovers. (The sound is amazing!)
www.diamondaudio.com

Solo Barric kicker sub (10 inch)

All Stinger audio wires. Full installation with Alarm, LEDs, Headunit, Compounets,AMP, Wiring and of coarse the testing part was done by DON.

 

hehe I think one of the problems we have on this forum is there's really no discussion, it's always a monologue. Either your opinion is cool, or it's not. We can never just express what we think. For example, there's always been this mentality that if you don't think the Maxima is da bomb, why are you here? Well, many of us drive them. We get info on how to repair them, make them feel nicer, etc. That doesn't mean we can't be open with the Maxima's faults, imho.

Anyway, Bose has a name. Also, it is sold to the mass market, in the mall, at Bust Buy, Short Circuit City, etc. It costs more than avg. so it has snob appeal. That long list of audio equipment that guy listed are all mass market amazon.com type of audio. He thinks it sounds great, and he's entitled to his opinion. If that direct reflecting theory is so great, then just imagine how unlikely a mass market consumer would be able to correctly place the speakers, or that their room is to Bose's specs.

I don't think Bose sounds that good; it's way overpriced, and you can get much better equipment if you do your homework, for the same price. my .02

 

lol bose is garbage, and its not bose its BLOSE

 

OT........beautiful sig pic

 

Paper drivers add colorations and are too weak to reproduce strong transients they "bend". They also degrade much quicker than polipropilene and kevlar under extreme heat, plus not to mention the foam surrounds. A cone tweter in this day and age is not acceptable they are way too colored in their sound and don't have good off axis response. The reason BOse uses them is cost. If anything positive can be attributed to them is that, they are efficient. Any dome tweeter will have a more uniform frequency response and better HF extension.
About "direct reflecting" technology.... you realize that is an oximoron? sound is either DIRECT, or REFLECTED. I know wht their philosophy curtails and that is the reason we had quadraphonic and today we have 5.1 Digital audio. nginneers really try hard to recreate an acoustic space at home, etc. In a car, you already have reflection built in. In my opinion is just better to have the best quality source, amps and drivers available. This will probably cost more than a Bose system, but Bose is overcharging for their stuff anyway...

 

:sprinty: I must admit to this.. my daily drive '95 Accord has almost no mods, but it does sport Brembo blanks and Axxis MetalMaster pads. However I find that braking is especially important to me considering my maniac style of driving, and it's certainly worth the extra money I spend on brakes to prevent even 1 accident in 10 years.

-Cyrus

 

Honestly, you're not right, and I own 2 sets of Bose speakers (501, 301). The quality of Bose speakers versus others in their price range is debatable, but their quality versus higher end components is not. Bose speakers are very warm and people like that sound. That doesn't mean they are accurate though. Your post makes it sound like Bose are amazing for rich textural, subtle sounds and they're really not. Try listening to some cello on Martin Logan electostats and then come back and tell me how textural the Bose are. They just produce a colored sound as a lot of speakers in their price range do. It's fine to say you like them better than speakers in their price range, completely understandable (which is why I own 2 pars) but they are nothing special at all when compared to higher end stuff.

Let me also be clear in saying that the Acoustimass stuff is just plain garbage. They are tinny and their ability to reproduce *any* type of music can be described as "poor" at best.

Getting this back to the car systems, that stuff is junk. You can put together a system that will make the factory Bose sound like a hello kitty boom box for the same price.

 

I have to admit my OEM's did a nice job yesterday, it was my bad if you want to get technical. I was doing 60 on a 45 mph double-yellow road, and I was trying to remember a realtor's number from the sign. All of a sudden these ***** are completely stopped in the driving lane, in a convertible Formula Firebird or something, looking at birds. I mashed my foot to the floor and steered into oncoming traffic and back. Happened so quickly I had no time to think. I have to admit the Maxima and its ABS did what it was designed to do. No joke, if it were on film it could be in a Volvo commercial.