so that means that the MAXIMA should be a touch faster with HLSD.. like 5.7

http://www.acura-tl.com/forum/showth...752#post291752

 

Doesn't Motorweek correct their times for altitude or something like that?

 

i hope not.. then they would actually be running 15's like someone in cali

 

 

Did you guys read the March SCC issue on the Altima?
They're picking the Altima over the Maxima on page 96.
They got quarter miles of 14.9 at 95.5 for the Altima and 15.0 at 95.6 for the 2002 Max SE.

 

but which has better handling?

 

The Altima!

 

did they use a limited slip maxima? I doubt it. I'm so sick of magazine times that I don't really trust them as more than a basic guideline. This of it this way... its more of a headline to say the altima is faster than to say the maxima is (which we would expect).

 

How does it feel sitting in the car. Does it give
you the sense of speed and agility. ie feel low to the
ground. Looking at the interior it seems to 'camry' to me.
How are the seats when pulling some lateral g's.

 

Magazine times suck. 15.0 in a new maxima haha. A retarded chimpanzee could run a 15.0 in a new maxima. Where the hell do they do their testing at.

 

What if the testing is done in Colorado at 6000 ft? It's not at all unreasonable to get much higher-than-expected times simply due to higher altitude.

You guys need to lighten up about the test results, anyway. Sheesh, get a life or something...acting like they called your momma a bad name. Re-lax.

 

SCC doesn't do their testing in colorado. Its done in california. Though much of california is high altitude as well. I was just pointing out the fact that magazine times do not necessarily reflect real world times.

 

They can call my momma names all they want. When they start coming up with bad times for the Maxima, that's when I draw the line.

Stereodude

 

SCC claims that the 6spd Maxima handles better than a 5spd Altima. They believe that the 6spd Max's suspension is tuned a bit tighter. You'll find this in a little boxed excerpt after the main article which compared the Max with the Altima.

 

its the rear beam

 

It would only handle better on a flat surface. (e.g.: no bumps in the road)

 

 

When I first read that article, I thought that SCC didn't even TEST a maxima. I think they just fudged the numbers from the altima, and just assumed it would be slower because of the extra weight. Did anyone write SCC an e-mail? DMB ran back to back 14.3s bone stock, right? I'm actually offended that they probably didn't even test a Max, and just assumed the altima to be faster. The altima is a great car for sure, but it's not cool to be dissin' it's big brother.

 

whos that gurl?