Ok well I own a 1997, and I am currently driving a 2002 SE as my rental.

My SE is fully loaded, the rental is pretty much base with a sunroof.

Anyways, here are my observations:

2002 Pro's:
-Engine has MAD torque
-Engine has significantly more low end power
-Brakes are amazing (I can't believe these brakes)
-Suspension is taught and car handles remarkably well for what it is.
-One touch sunroof, one touch down and UP on both driver and passenger windows.
-Xenon lights (however hanabi's on a 4th gen are better then stock 2k2's)
-Quietness

The 2002 by far outhandles a stock 1997 SE, and the brakes are more impressive on the 2002. I can't compare transmissions because mine is a 5spd while the 2k2 is an auto.

1997 Pro's:
-Interior Quality seems nicer on the 1997's.
-Less rattles, considering my car is 5-6 years old and this 2002 only has 2000 miles on it I was somewhat disappointed with the rattles and thinner door panels..
-The quality of the plastics don't seem as nice on the 2002
-Front seats on the 97 are better. The 2k2's headrests and lumbar areas don't feel natural to me.
-Stock ride quality is nicer on the 97 SE, the 2002 is kind of stiff. It rides like a 97 with H&R's.
-Rear seats look better on the 97 in my opinion
-Rear seat armrest in the 97 is bigger and heavier, the 2k2's is kind of chincy.

Otherwise, the 2002 is a very nice car. For an auto it really scoots, especially in first gear. It has a viscious first gear (surprised a FWD can go that fast).

However, the service engine soon light turned on at like 2300 miles???

 

What is your opinion on the steering between the two? Quicker? More responsive? Lighter? Stiffer? In your opinion was the 2k2's body structure noticeably more rigid than our 4th gens?

 

I can't tell body structure because I don't remember it that well on my 4th gen, but the steering is much tighter and smoother on the 5th gen. The steering actually feels great on the 5th gen. The 5th gen actually feels lighter then the 4th gen based on steering, braking, and accelleration.

 

damn your sig is evil

 

Evil but true...

 

Mr. Frog!

I thought someone said that the 2k2 Steering is a little slush when cornering and such. Maybe that was just a misjudgement.

 

Well I certainly think it's better.

 

Brian,

Are you telling me that a 2002 AUTO feels faster than a '97 5-speed down low?? The 5-speed '97 is significantly faster, like .4 of a second in the 0-60.

I just don't see how an automatic 4-speed could feel faster than a 5speed manual that is a faster car.

 

65 (rated) horsepower

 

Gonna reset the ECU on the 2002? You know you're a fanatic when you want to do mods on a rental vehicle!

 

Auto's have torque built up off the line. This thing would dust a 97 5spd 0-40

 

I curently own both a 97 and a 2002 both SE's. The steering feel in the 2002 is slightly better and slightly tighter. To me the 97 is slightly quiter than the 02, and my 97 brakes better than the 02. handling is a draw but my 02 definately feels bigger and heavier although it is. I do like the seats as far as appearance in the 02 better but comfort 97. Quality of materials is on par to the 97 neither is as great as my old 93GXE and the styling inside isnt as great in the 97 or 02 as the 3rd gens. Looks my 97 still gets me more positive remarks and more positive looks. Acceleration, the 02 feels slight slower of the line but is faster 20mph and up. Thats my opinion and I am not biased to either Gen since I own both now.

 

I agree with a lot of this, but damn the brakes on this 02 SE I'm driving are remarkable, and the accelleration off the line is quite impressive, but yeah 20-40MPH on the SE really cooks.

 

Cool.
Thanks for the comparison...I'm really leaning towards a 2k2 SE auto.

 

BA and EBD sure feels nice huh?

The nice thing about EBD is it applies braking power to the wheel that has the most grip (sort of like an LSD for braking). I've already had to do evasive maneuvers and been in a couple of "have to stop NOW" situations and i too was surprised at how quick the Max could brake. (BA helped me in this instance)

 

Craig...Craig...Craig...

stock:
2002...255hp
1997...190hp

Come on Craig, thought you know better.

 

Interesting how 2 people who've driven both have differing opinions on 2k2 vs. 4th gen. Guess looks is the tie-breaker, so which would win?

 

To me the 97-99s design is still "fresh". The 5th gen doesn't look like an evolution of the 4th gen, so the styling is still "unique".

When the current BMW 5 series came out in the 97 model year, I thought it made the E34 (predecessor) into an instant antique.

At any rate, Its an even split for me. I like both designs.

 

Couldn't have worded it better.

 

I had the very same "instant antique" opinion about the 5-series. But when you look closely, the old 5-series is more modern than the 4th gen. And it's uncanny how quickly rounded cars went out of style.

Even today one can split hairs too and say the 97 528i is pretty ugly when compared to a 2001 530i, though the shell is the same. You can spot the 97 by the really ugly muffler.

Anyhow, I remember feeling extremely heartbroken when I first saw the 2000 Max, couldn't believe my eyes. Then the car mags came out around Feb? and I knew it were true. 3 years later and unfortunately it's not grown on me at all.....really strange way the rear bumper and lamps join the quarters...

 

Thats how I feel about the 95-96 Maximas .

 

IMO 97-99 maximas are and will be the best designed maxima ever. Design as in shape wise and interior wise. 5th gens are good looking from the front but from the rear.. it just doesnt makes sense.. something loooks not right and i cant figure out what it is.. rear on the 5th gens GOT TO GO! Hey Brain, when is ur car getting fixed?

 

Amazingly so, the US-spec Maxima was designed based on American tastes. The original Maxima design (Cefiro elsewhere, I35 in the US) is how it was originally supposed to look like. Now that's a tail i can live with

As for 4th gens having better design. I like the front and side but to me the taillights is just as out of place as it is on the 5th gens. Now i see why a lot of people complain about Nissan not knowing how to design the rear-end of their cars.

 

I wish they kept the i30 design for maximas here.. well may be us american peepz like tHOSE KIND OF BACKS?

 

I shudder to think

I wonder if anyone ever considered swapping the I35 rear end with the Maxima's? A Maxima with the I35 tail would look sweet!

 

I own a '97 SE, but I think a clean 3d gen is the best looking Maxima.

 

I agree with you the 97-99 Se's are the best looking stock Maxima yet.

 

Ah, but Cumalot my good friend, you are forgetting.

-4-speed autoTRAGIC vs. 5-speed efficient manual.

-3290?lbs. vs. 97's 3100

-0-60 in 6.7 for the '97, around 7.2 for the 2k2.


...maybe I just don't have enough experiance with these 2 cars, but I do know the '97 with a 5speed should be significantly faster, but I guess I understand on the off the line. Dave B. explained to me that once torque gets higher and higher (multiplies) the gap between auto and manual gets very slim for off the line power.

But answer me this, for those of you know know/own a '95 5spd and are fermilier with the 2k2 auto, would the 5spd take it off the line if it launched at like 4,000 rpms with a few bolt-ons and performance tires?

All I know is the 1995 Maxima GXE does 0-60 in 6.5 which is the second fastest Maxima EVER. Import car of the year baby WOOO!

1995 OWNZ EVERYBODY...except the 2k2 with comparitive transmissions of course

 

After 89, the ugliest Maxima's ever made were the 89-91 GXE and the 95-96 GXE/GLE. It always takes Nissan two years to get a generation right. I also happen to think that the 97-99 SE was by far the best looking stock Maxima that Nissan ever made and still looks amazingly fresh today (Especially in my four favorite colors of White, Neptune Blue, SuperBlack and Rosewood all with black leather and every single option). The 2K-2K1 GXE/GLE was once again unacceptable in terms of styling and performance (Auto, 8 seconds?), sorry but the 2K-2K1 GLE just doesnt look like it should sticker for 30K, especially with the nasty stock 9 spoke GXE/GLE wheels. Things got much better this year with several luxury upgrades (HID, Heated Steering, Memory Seats, stock 17's, Muscle Car performance for both AT and MT models). I thought the interior was flawless and the car drove comparable to a GS400, which is a hell of a compliment since I look at those as a benchmark, but the exterior styling is where it lacks just a bit, although not bad by any means.

I also happen to agree with the 5-Series opinions, a 95 540I is still a world class sports sedan but to me its just worthless, would seem like driving an 88 model.

 

craig mack is gonna flame u watch out u can't say anything bad abt the 95s hehe

 

2k2 autos are faster then a 4th gen 5-spd and prolly are about 6.5-6.4 0-60 which is faster then a 4th gen.

 

I have made similar observations, I just drove my rental 2K2 max (SE, Auto) in Cali. I think it is much more refined, but I am comparing it to my rough riding 97 SE. It is silky smooth, and don't ever recall my car running that smooth. But, look at what I have and plus 140,000 miles. I was not that impresed with the brakes, I think my 97 has more bite. The 2k2 has a lot of power, but on the highway when I go WOT in my 97, it puts me back in my seat, and I could not do that in the 2k2. But, off the line I almost loose control of the 2k2, and I don't have that problem in my 97.
As far as the steering, it is not a comparison, too many mods to my 97. Overall, I am impressed with the smoothness and power of the engine, everything else is close, and I agree with Brian for the most part.
I can't wait for my 350Z to come in now, I am gald I got to test out the VQ35, and in a car that is RWD, LSD 6spd, and lighter, I think the engine will be perfect....

 

I own a 1998 SE (5 speed, Sage Mist, Loaded) which I plan to keep another 2 years because I have extended warranty. I have been thinking of buying the 2002 SE or, under the right circumstances, even a 2002 Altima 3.5 SE. I got to drive both these vehicles but only the auto versions. I thought both of them were substantially larger than mine and felt so in driving. They did not feel as nimble as mine and I am dismayed at the increase in the turning diameter -- the Maxima is now 40' as against app. 35.4' for my 1988 SE! My previous car (which my son drives now)was a 1993 Camry SE (V6, 5 speed, loaded) which felt more solid than my Maxima, though it was less luxurious and less agile. I love the proportions of my car (the balance of interior space and exterior dimensions in particular), though I have to admit I have grown to like its looks. To my eyes now, it looks quietly handsome! My ideal car would have the proportions of the 4th generation Maxima and the solidity of the 1992-'96 Camry. Is there any chance Nissan will offer something along those lines (FWD or AWD would work for me since I live in the Midwest) in the near future?

 

Ah....young Dennis

I don't care becuase I don't have a GXE/GLE...I have a SE which looks alot better.

And I have so many mods that my car doesn't even look close to a stock '95 so me don't care

 

I'd like to smack the '95 just to spite Craig but dang! everytime i look at his car... shhwweeeet!

 

I agree his car looks 2 good 2 smack down a 95, oh well I can still smack down 95 gxe/gles

 

I get my car back next week, in the mean time I'm kind of enjoying the 2k2.

The 2k2 auto is definately faster than a 97 5spd. How I know:

My friend has an ultra-quick, near stock 1996 Integra GSR. I always race him. When I used to race him before the S/c (Stillen Intake, Cattman Y, RT Cat, Greddy Exhaust) I used to barely pull on him in first, and we'd be pretty even after that until 5th gear (I'd slightly pull in every gear, butyou wouldn't even notice). Now this bone stock 2k2 auto with 87 octrane gas, rapes the gsr in first gear, and he stays pretty even, all the way to 110.

Now I know for a fact my friend's gsr would be a 97 stock se, but he would still lose in 1/4 mile to a 2k2 auto.