Would you? Which is a better car for the money.

 

I think I would go with the CL Type S. 260 hp is too hard to turn down, plus it looks a lot nicer than the new Maxima (sorry guys, i have 4th gen.). Although cost-wise, the Type S is getting up there. If you can afford it, go with the Type S.

 

Now if cost is a factor, that I can understand, however here anyways, a fully loaded GLE or SE or an AE 2001 Max, is within a few hundred dollars of the CL type S which varies 30 to 32K price range. Some of you guys seem to have better new car dealer pricing for Nissans though.

 

man, you can get a typeS for 28-29 with everything but the dvd navigation. Definitely cooler than the ae for more money. Only thing that sucks about the type s is that you can't get a stick, only that triptronic bulls*** and no 4dr

 

Just don't get that god-awful pumpkin-orange-metallic paint color!!!

 

That car is $hit Ugly ...

260 is a LOT of Horses for a 3.2 engine ... but damn its GROSS looking!!!

With the WING it looks even WORSE!!!!!

And that ORANGE ... even worse!!!!

I do like my 5th gen look over the CL-S!!!

 

if i ma not mistaken, that supposely gives a taste of the imola orange as on the Japanese spec NSX type zero.

 

That orange color would give me a taste of stomach acid as I throw up...
Still...would a new Max w/stillen SC kit be comprable in price/performance? I'd rather do that I think.

 

The CLS is a really nice car, with one of the best engines on the planet, but I chose the Maxima AE for the following reasons:

1) 5sp. manual not available on the Acura. The manumatic is nice, but no real replacement for rowing your own. If I were comparison shopping autos only, then the 5sp "tiptronic" in the CLS would be a significant advantage over the regular 4 sp. auto in the Max.

2) Styling. Or rather the lack thereof. I really don't understand how anyone can call the Acura ugly (to each his own, I guess) but to me it looks simply bland. It looks not much different than a Camry Solara to me, or maybe the Lexus SC 400 - which represented cutting-edge styling about a decade ago. The interior is very niicely done, but no real advantage over the Maxima. Plus, if you happen to carry more than one passenger, they wil be much happier in the back seat of the Maxima.

3) Way too big for a coupe. If it were about 7/8ths scale, it would appeal to me more. I just don't get the notion of a supposedly sporting coupe that's even bigger than the Maxima.

At the end of the day, my main purchase criterion was getting a vehicle that was more fun to drive than my '98 Accord Coupe V6. The Maxima fit the bill in spades, and at a significant price advantage over my #2 choice - the IS 300. The CLS finished third.

And yes, that orange colour is truly nauseating - the stuff of nightmares. I see that Honda has introduced it on the new Civic Coupe. Go figure: this from a company known for the most boring colour selections on the planet.

Jaeger.

 

If you want 2 doors then the Acura makes sense. If you want 4 doors and are short, the Acura TL is a nice choice but is an auto but it has LOTs o' options. Accord V6 is cheapest and just OK but doesn't really move until about 4000 rpm or so. And the Avalon and Camry are too damned boring!

 

the only thing you want to rip off the Type-S is the engine.

may be the tranny...... or the cupholders......

 

the type S is a real nice car..but its way too big for a coupe

 

Riiiight and the maxima is good looking car.

Look, this CL-S and Maxima comparison is stupid... different class of car... maxima is a nice family sedan, CL-S is a luxory coupe... why the comparisons? I just don't understand.

For the money, the CL is a better car.... not looking at cost the CL is still a better car.... plus the Acura dealer will treat you 10 times better than you average nissan dealer.

-Shing

 

Thanks for all the input. I won't get to try the is300 again tell next week. The one I was looking at was sold yesterday. Choices choices, hmmm.

 

There's no question that the Acura looks better. Nissan just wont pay attention to styling. I don't know if it's a Japenese thing, but I believe that the Acura has skinny rims/tires just like the Maxima even when equipped with 17". Somehow I think that implies show and not go.

If you consider that Acura is selling for list, then maybe you should look at BMW/Audi. At least the car will have 8"+ rims from the factory. I think that implies performance by design.

 

Not always... certainly wider tires, to an extent, will improve performance. but going larger isn't needed. Also, consider that tire choice has a lot to do with it. Wider isn't always better. Also consider that wider tire will have negative impacts as well: 1) more fuel consumptio, 2) slower acceleration due to weight and more contact patch and 3) more road noise. It's a compromise that the car maker has to make.

So wider isn't always better, unlike pontiac will have you believe.

-Shing

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Shingles
[I]

 

I like the maxima better it looks sweet and u gotta love the 5spd

 

I'm not trying to rub anyone the wrong way on this forum, but I helped my sister purchase a TL earlier this year, and I must admit, those things haul (esp. the 260 HP type S on the test drive), even if it is an automatic (5 speed nonetheless), and they have a really good value (fully loaded w/o navigation, around $28K for the TL, and about $30K for the CL type S; pretty comparable to a fully loaded Maxima). I looked at MT and they listed the TL at 6.7s (0-60) and 15.2/93.1 for the 1/4, and for the CL type S 6.4/14.8/96.5--those are seriously fast cars for stock automatics. Styling notwithstanding, as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, these Acuras are top-notch cars w/ an extremely good engine in it (esp. in the 4K+ range on the tach). But then again, I must admit there is something about having a manual to shift around the corners (I used to have a 3rd gen SE, and I do miss that).

 

Thanks for the input, those were my thoughts exactly.