What Generation 7 should be.....
Originally Posted by chernmax
The 6th Gen already supersedes the 95 Max in every aspect (not disrespecting, but TRUE...)
And I would prefer a design engineer who can properly spell and word his grammar so it makes sense...
One aspect in which the 4th gen Maxima supercedes the 6th gen, by far, is the quality of the interior. The 6th gen is way too cheap plastic looking, and the design of the console and the instrument cluster is boring and maybe just a little weird, too. I don't think it is going to age well.
But, I'll grant that it is a matter of opinion.
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 10,197
From: Displaced New Yorker in Southern, MD
Originally Posted by Stephen Max
First of all, all the really good engineers I've known couldn't spell worth beans.
One aspect in which the 4th gen Maxima supercedes the 6th gen, by far, is the quality of the interior. The 6th gen is way too cheap plastic looking, and the design of the console and the instrument cluster is boring and maybe just a little weird, too. I don't think it is going to age well.
But, I'll grant that it is a matter of opinion.
One aspect in which the 4th gen Maxima supercedes the 6th gen, by far, is the quality of the interior. The 6th gen is way too cheap plastic looking, and the design of the console and the instrument cluster is boring and maybe just a little weird, too. I don't think it is going to age well.
But, I'll grant that it is a matter of opinion.
[QUOTE=Stephen Max]
One aspect in which the 4th gen Maxima supercedes the 6th gen, by far, is the quality of the interior. The 6th gen is way too cheap plastic looking, and the design of the console and the instrument cluster is boring and maybe just a little weird, too. I don't think it is going to age well.
I didn't buy my car just for the interior which I like anyway. Warren
One aspect in which the 4th gen Maxima supercedes the 6th gen, by far, is the quality of the interior. The 6th gen is way too cheap plastic looking, and the design of the console and the instrument cluster is boring and maybe just a little weird, too. I don't think it is going to age well.
I didn't buy my car just for the interior which I like anyway. Warren
Originally Posted by ArcticW
Hey ....I'm an engineering student looking at a 2009 Graduation.....sothen.
I think we can all agree on at least that much....
I think we can all agree on at least that much....
What they should do is just lengthen the Z frame to 4 doors and leave the internals and put a new max body on top of that. Similar all these AMERICAN companies putting Viper engines in pickup trucks and Corvette Engines in questionable Australian cars. That is essentially what most of us want from Nissan, take the new GT-R, lengthen it and put on a Maxima (more likely Altima) body and away you go.
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 10,197
From: Displaced New Yorker in Southern, MD
[QUOTE=ramberg][QUOTE=Stephen Max]
One aspect in which the 4th gen Maxima supercedes the 6th gen, by far, is the quality of the interior. The 6th gen is way too cheap plastic looking, and the design of the console and the instrument cluster is boring and maybe just a little weird, too. I don't think it is going to age well.
I didn't buy my car just for the interior which I like anyway. Warren
Warren, this is one of my favorite shots of your interior with the cigar humidor.
6th gens have there moments...
One aspect in which the 4th gen Maxima supercedes the 6th gen, by far, is the quality of the interior. The 6th gen is way too cheap plastic looking, and the design of the console and the instrument cluster is boring and maybe just a little weird, too. I don't think it is going to age well.
I didn't buy my car just for the interior which I like anyway. Warren
Warren, this is one of my favorite shots of your interior with the cigar humidor.
6th gens have there moments...
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,720
Originally Posted by RHMax
TSX w/ Navi priced just as high as TL w/o Navi.
Originally Posted by geo1317
this looks like it might be the 07 maxima, or new teana to way to tell. These where taken in the US.
That Ford 500 grill has to go. 
[QUOTE=ramberg]
I like the Humidor too, next time I see you at a meet I'll have to share some of mine.
Originally Posted by Stephen Max
I didn't buy my car just for the interior which I like anyway. Warren
If the trend towards rwd sedans continue, I think Nissan should offer up a rwd sedan at some point. But if they want to keep the larger sized category, they will have to borrow from a suv platform. What Nissan should have done is offer the M35 as a Nissan, then only offer the M45 as the Infiniti.
With all the American big 3 offering large rwd sedans, Nissan should get into it and offer a larger sedan with a lower price point than it's Infiniti division
With all the American big 3 offering large rwd sedans, Nissan should get into it and offer a larger sedan with a lower price point than it's Infiniti division
Newbie just Registered
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,795
From: LA/OC, CA
Originally Posted by F23A4
The TSX w/Navi is still about $4k cheaper than a non-Navi TL. But I agree on your Avalon Limited reference.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
If the trend towards rwd sedans continue, I think Nissan should offer up a rwd sedan at some point. But if they want to keep the larger sized category, they will have to borrow from a suv platform. What Nissan should have done is offer the M35 as a Nissan, then only offer the M45 as the Infiniti.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
With all the American big 3 offering large rwd sedans, Nissan should get into it and offer a larger sedan with a lower price point than it's Infiniti division
Even the vaulted Skyline is a direct decendent of old Audi's.
When they do something, though, they tend to do it well, so we will probably see a rwd sedan that kicks a$$, soon, but they don't tend to move fast either. Blame it on the nature of their business practices or culture of making no mistakes.
A good number of their designers are American-born or American educated, but while their designs are good, they are seldom allowed to be groundbreakers.
Just my opinions, and you know what they say about opinions.
Newbie just Registered
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,795
From: LA/OC, CA
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
If the trend towards rwd sedans continue, I think Nissan should offer up a rwd sedan at some point. But if they want to keep the larger sized category, they will have to borrow from a suv platform. What Nissan should have done is offer the M35 as a Nissan, then only offer the M45 as the Infiniti.
With all the American big 3 offering large rwd sedans, Nissan should get into it and offer a larger sedan with a lower price point than it's Infiniti division
With all the American big 3 offering large rwd sedans, Nissan should get into it and offer a larger sedan with a lower price point than it's Infiniti division
Originally Posted by 97SEdriver
I don't think that you can make a SUV platform behave like the sports sedan they tout the Altima/Maxima as being. Plus, that may offset any performance gains because truck frames are usually HEAVY. I think size-wise the Max may have hit it's highwater mark.
Most of Nissan's SUVs are NOT on frames anymore. Most if not all use unibody construction. In fact, many of the sedans and suvs share the same basic platform.
Not to directly flame Japanese carmakers, but they tend not be leaders. The new max is a veiled copy of the 7 series,
the old Z's are somewhat similar to old Corvette's, the 2nd gen RX-7's are very close to 944's, even in the beginning the smaller cars were similar to smaller cars in Europe. Supras are not too much different than whale-tail slant-nose 911's.
Even the vaulted Skyline is a direct decendent of old Audi's.
When they do something, though, they tend to do it well, so we will probably see a rwd sedan that kicks a$$, soon, but they don't tend to move fast either. Blame it on the nature of their business practices or culture of making no mistakes.
A good number of their designers are American-born or American educated, but while their designs are good, they are seldom allowed to be groundbreakers.
Just my opinions, and you know what they say about opinions.
A good number of their designers are American-born or American educated, but while their designs are good, they are seldom allowed to be groundbreakers.
Just my opinions, and you know what they say about opinions.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
Most of Nissan's SUVs are NOT on frames anymore. Most if not all use unibody construction. In fact, many of the sedans and suvs share the same basic platform.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
:
I don't see even a distant similarity of the maxima to the bmw 7 series. Neither in looks, drivetrain or chassis
I don't see even a distant similarity of the maxima to the bmw 7 series. Neither in looks, drivetrain or chassis
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
:
These are some pretty LARGE assumptions.
These are some pretty LARGE assumptions.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
:
Direct decendant? How could that be? The Audi uses a fwd biased awd system while the skyline uses a rwd biased awd system? The skyline has been around for a long time.
Direct decendant? How could that be? The Audi uses a fwd biased awd system while the skyline uses a rwd biased awd system? The skyline has been around for a long time.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
:
I tend to disagree. Remember Infiniti is Nissan. And Infiniti's G35s, FX series has taken the world by storm.
I tend to disagree. Remember Infiniti is Nissan. And Infiniti's G35s, FX series has taken the world by storm.
Don't get me wrong, I like Nissan's, but aside from the Wankel engine, (which was a German invention) I can't point to much that's really ground-breaking.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
Most of Nissan's SUVs are NOT on frames anymore. Most if not all use unibody construction. In fact, many of the sedans and suvs share the same basic platform.capable like the old school Pathfinders. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/niss...50/review.html
Originally Posted by 97SEdriver
my mistake, I should've caught my own mistake, but you don't see that as a problem?
The old Audi's that had twin turbos (before the skyline) and were winning pikes peak races by using left-foot braking to keep the turbos spooled up (again before the skyline)
and how exactly are they ground breaking? The S4 was around before that, so was the TT and it's not like Nissan have the only awd sports cars either, ie Porsche, Audi.
Don't get me wrong, I like Nissan's, but aside from the Wankel engine, (which was a German invention) I can't point to much that's really ground-breaking.
Don't get me wrong, I like Nissan's, but aside from the Wankel engine, (which was a German invention) I can't point to much that's really ground-breaking.
1st S4 1992:
Isn't that covered under "most"??
Originally Posted by TXT-1
Actually, Nissan moved away from unibody construction for the 2005 Pathfinder. They went back to body on frame to make it more offroad
capable like the old school Pathfinders. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/niss...50/review.html
capable like the old school Pathfinders. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/niss...50/review.html
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
Isn't that covered under "most"??
Edit: Come to think of it, "most" would be inaccurate considering Nissan sells the Murano (unibody), Pathfinder (frame), Xterra (frame), Armada (frame). So it's mostly body on frame now, not vice-versa.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
Why would it be a problem?
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
So? Were they fwd or rwd biased? Old Audis? Older than 1957 when the Prince Corp first introduced the Skyline to the world? http://www.driftclub.com/SkylineHistory.htm
August 1989 the Skyline GT-R (4WD) legend is born with the RB26DETT DOHC inline 62568cc powering away at 280hp @6800rpm
With the "Quattro" of the 1980s, a 4WD turbocharged sportscar, Audi distinguished itself as leader in technology
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
1st skyline turbo awd 1989:
1st S4 1992:
1st S4 1992:
Originally Posted by 97SEdriver
That's your opinion.
August 1989 the Skyline GT-R (4WD) legend is born with the RB26DETT DOHC inline 62568cc powering away at 280hp @6800rpm
With the "Quattro" of the 1980s, a 4WD turbocharged sportscar, Audi distinguished itself as leader in technology
With the "Quattro" of the 1980s, a 4WD turbocharged sportscar, Audi distinguished itself as leader in technology
Short decription of Audi's awd: Historicly 50/50 split. Nice. But now bias's it rearward 60% to 40%
http://wardsauto.com/ar/auto_audi_la...newgeneration/
Short decription of Nissan awd: Mainly a rwd bias'd system. Rear wheel drive then transmits power up front.
http://www.skylinesdownunder.com/ind...d=12&Itemid=40
The GT-R also introduced the ATTESSA system, which controls the car's all wheel drive capabilities. ATTESSA is Nissan's AWD on-demand system, and it diverts torque from the rear wheels to the front wheels as required, increasing traction with inputs from sensors in the car. The VSpec (also known as 'Victory Specification') version of the GT-R had a better suspension and Brembo brakes as stock. The R32 was produced up until late 1993, which saw another change in design.
http://wardsauto.com/ar/auto_audi_la...newgeneration/
Short decription of Nissan awd: Mainly a rwd bias'd system. Rear wheel drive then transmits power up front.
http://www.skylinesdownunder.com/ind...d=12&Itemid=40
The GT-R also introduced the ATTESSA system, which controls the car's all wheel drive capabilities. ATTESSA is Nissan's AWD on-demand system, and it diverts torque from the rear wheels to the front wheels as required, increasing traction with inputs from sensors in the car. The VSpec (also known as 'Victory Specification') version of the GT-R had a better suspension and Brembo brakes as stock. The R32 was produced up until late 1993, which saw another change in design.
Newbie just Registered
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,795
From: LA/OC, CA
OT 7th gen topic.
European and American car makers are more like the creators of new technologies and engineering. Japanese are better at re-engineering and re-application, for the most part: like VCR's and TV's. Audi Quattro was first in turbo AWD, Skyline R32 was better in adaptation.
BTW, 97SEdriver, which Nissan has the Wankel engine?
European and American car makers are more like the creators of new technologies and engineering. Japanese are better at re-engineering and re-application, for the most part: like VCR's and TV's. Audi Quattro was first in turbo AWD, Skyline R32 was better in adaptation.
BTW, 97SEdriver, which Nissan has the Wankel engine?
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
This would imply that Nissan used a very similar awd system. After all there are more than one way to build an AWD system.
Porsche has been using awd since 1901, Ferdinand himself won some races in a Lohner in 1901.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not trying to say the skyline is bad, or I don't like it, far from it, I'm just trying to say it's not groundbreaking.
Japanese carmakers tend to improve things, but not invent them.
All the smaller cars that suddenly became very popular in the 70's (the datsun 510 for instance) are not new. Austin Healey's, MG's, Triumphs, BMW 2002's were around previously.
Originally Posted by RHMax
OT 7th gen topic.
European and American car makers are more like the creators of new technologies and engineering. Japanese are better at re-engineering and re-application, for the most part: like VCR's and TV's. Audi Quattro was first in turbo AWD, Skyline R32 was better in adaptation.
European and American car makers are more like the creators of new technologies and engineering. Japanese are better at re-engineering and re-application, for the most part: like VCR's and TV's. Audi Quattro was first in turbo AWD, Skyline R32 was better in adaptation.
Originally Posted by RHMax
BTW, 97SEdriver, which Nissan has the Wankel engine?
I owned a 82 RX-7 for 9 years, the engine is still running, 5 years later. Wish I hung onto that car, it was fun.
I still would take my max over it though.
My point was just because Audi had an AWD system before Nissan did, doesn't mean their system was in anyway related in design or theory. That is what you implied. Nissan decided it was time to create an awd system and designed it on their own. I believe their Hicas and SuperHicas are innovations?
Originally Posted by 97SEdriver
I was not trying to imply that, and the awd systems that they used in the skyline were racing inspired, which made them so good. But similiar systems to the ATTESSA systems were around back then, but that doesn't mean I'm saying it's not an improvement or that it sucks or something.
Porsche has been using awd since 1901, Ferdinand himself won some races in a Lohner in 1901.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not trying to say the skyline is bad, or I don't like it, far from it, I'm just trying to say it's not groundbreaking.
Japanese carmakers tend to improve things, but not invent them.
All the smaller cars that suddenly became very popular in the 70's (the datsun 510 for instance) are not new. Austin Healey's, MG's, Triumphs, BMW 2002's were around previously.
Porsche has been using awd since 1901, Ferdinand himself won some races in a Lohner in 1901.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not trying to say the skyline is bad, or I don't like it, far from it, I'm just trying to say it's not groundbreaking.
Japanese carmakers tend to improve things, but not invent them.
All the smaller cars that suddenly became very popular in the 70's (the datsun 510 for instance) are not new. Austin Healey's, MG's, Triumphs, BMW 2002's were around previously.
Newbie just Registered
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,795
From: LA/OC, CA
Originally Posted by 97SEdriver
.... I owned a 82 RX-7 for 9 years, the engine is still running, 5 years later. Wish I hung onto that car, it was fun.
I still would take my max over it though.
I still would take my max over it though.
Newbie just Registered
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,795
From: LA/OC, CA
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
.... I believe their Hicas and SuperHicas are innovations?
Originally Posted by RHMax
Pain the the a$$, those Wankel engines. Rev pass redline w/o a worry, but costly to repair.
I don't know if Hicas or SuperHicas were inovations, I'd put money on it they weren't, they were also probably improvements on another design. Again, there is nothing wrong with that, I still like Nissans. I remember being 7 or 8 driving around in my dad's 510. It was fun, it didn't handle as well as his Austin Healey Sprite (according to him, it was gone before I made my appearance) and after than we had 3 Sentra's. They are more affordable than BMW's and still have some decent performance.
I'd like to see a picture of whatever French version of this must be. Scary would be my first thought!
Originally Posted by RHMax
HiCas and SuperHiCas, yes. 4-wheel-steering, I believe the Frenchies did it first in the 60's on Citroens.
Newbie just Registered
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,795
From: LA/OC, CA
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
I'd like to see a picture of whatever French version of this must be. Scary would be my first thought!
I was wrong about 4ws, but it has the follow-me headlights and adjustable hydraulic suspension.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,879
Originally Posted by RHMax
Please elaborate, what stiff competition? Should the 7th gen Max be the 4 door version of 350Z qualify as good replacement? There are plenty of larger sports sedan than the 6th gen in the market, though cost 2-3 times as much.
It is interesting that from your opinnions, you don't see that the competitors took aim at the Max and built cars to compete.
Altimas/Stanzas were in the shadows of Accords and Camry's for a long time, now kicking their asses. Vigors/TL's, especially the new TL's were designed to target Max buyers. Avalons are also targeting Max buyers. Nissan only need to move forward.
As far as the price is concern, the Avalon XL is priced less than Camry XLE, and the Avalon Limited is priced more than base ES330 with more hp than both. TSX w/ Navi priced just as high as TL w/o Navi.
It is interesting that from your opinnions, you don't see that the competitors took aim at the Max and built cars to compete.
Altimas/Stanzas were in the shadows of Accords and Camry's for a long time, now kicking their asses. Vigors/TL's, especially the new TL's were designed to target Max buyers. Avalons are also targeting Max buyers. Nissan only need to move forward.
As far as the price is concern, the Avalon XL is priced less than Camry XLE, and the Avalon Limited is priced more than base ES330 with more hp than both. TSX w/ Navi priced just as high as TL w/o Navi.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
I'd like to see a picture of whatever French version of this must be. Scary would be my first thought!
Originally Posted by JP_magazine
The concept of combining four-wheel steering with four-wheel drive was a favorite idea in the early days of four-wheeling. Some of the more notable four-wheel-steer 4x4s include the 1900-1902 Cotta Cottamobile, the '04-'07 Four-Wheel-Drive truck, the '06-'12 American 3/4- to 10-ton trucks, the '13-'28 Jefferey (Nash from '16-'28) Quad 3-ton truck, the '14 Golden West truck, and the '15-'17 Beech Creek truck.
The four-wheel-steer rig that made the most lasting impression on the military was the Nash Quad. Not only did it serve with distinction in World War I, but its steering and drive systems were particularly well designed for the day. But then the Quad only had a top speed of 15 mph, so handling oddities weren't a problem. And the Quad's rear steering could be uncoupled with just a few minutes' work. Still, this was a rig that was remembered for many years. Jump ahead to 1940 and the development of the 1/4-ton 4x4. Right from the beginning, four-wheel steering had been considered by those involved with the development of the 1/4-ton 4x4 we now call the Jeep. As history has recorded, the American Bantam Car Company of Butler, Pennsylvania, was first off the line with a Jeep, although it wasn't called "Jeep" at the time. Eight of the first 70 prototype units from Bantam (the Mark II or BRC-60 model) were equipped with four-wheel steering. This was at the specific request of the U.S. Army's Cavalry branch, which was mainly responsible for reconnaissance duties. The Calvary felt the increased maneuverability was an asset, even though testers from other branches of the Army found the four-wheel-steer Bantam lacking in many respects.
The four-wheel-steer rig that made the most lasting impression on the military was the Nash Quad. Not only did it serve with distinction in World War I, but its steering and drive systems were particularly well designed for the day. But then the Quad only had a top speed of 15 mph, so handling oddities weren't a problem. And the Quad's rear steering could be uncoupled with just a few minutes' work. Still, this was a rig that was remembered for many years. Jump ahead to 1940 and the development of the 1/4-ton 4x4. Right from the beginning, four-wheel steering had been considered by those involved with the development of the 1/4-ton 4x4 we now call the Jeep. As history has recorded, the American Bantam Car Company of Butler, Pennsylvania, was first off the line with a Jeep, although it wasn't called "Jeep" at the time. Eight of the first 70 prototype units from Bantam (the Mark II or BRC-60 model) were equipped with four-wheel steering. This was at the specific request of the U.S. Army's Cavalry branch, which was mainly responsible for reconnaissance duties. The Calvary felt the increased maneuverability was an asset, even though testers from other branches of the Army found the four-wheel-steer Bantam lacking in many respects.