6spd cls vs. g35cpe 6spd

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 15, 2004 | 10:01 AM
  #41  
EZZ's Avatar
EZZ
Burning Brakes
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by jtkz13
220whp is just about exactly 260hp (~15% driveline loss), so if the G35 dyno's at 225-230rwhp it is underrated at 260hp at the crank. It is pretty commonly thought that the G35 sedan makes the same hp as the coupe. Nissan is the one fudging numbers (which they do an absolute TON), not Honda.
Maybe they just have a more efficient tranny All kidding aside, the coupe and sedan seem to be comparable but the coupe still dyno's a little higher. We had a discussion on this on the G forums and most people believe that the little gain is from the exhaust system being a little different (maybe intake too). The coupe still gets better 1/4 times and handles a bit better due to the tires it comes with. Michelin Pilots are great.
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2004 | 07:26 PM
  #42  
Joe5.0's Avatar
TQ > MPG
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,624
Likes: 8
From: Metro Detroit
You wont get any argument from me that the VQ35 in the G35's make more power than the J32. They have consistently dyno'd 5-10whp more, dependant on tranny. Dont forget that the G35 is also slightly lighter (50-100lbs) and will definitely have a better 60' time due to much better tires and the benefit of rwd.

Lets not forget the 30-40lb ft of tq advantage. :o I'd trade my J32 for a VQ35 anyday of the week.
Reply
Old Jun 19, 2004 | 12:16 PM
  #43  
dfv3.2CL-S's Avatar
Burning Brakes
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 991
Likes: 8
From: Dallas area
Originally Posted by EZZ
I see that your car dynoed at 218hp. Isn't that low??? Most G35 sedans have hit around 225-230hp. Remember, both are 260hp. Maybe Acura is lying about their numbers :sqnteek:

The G35 C has 280 and not 260 HP. The sedan has 260, but Iwould say it's a drivers race.
Reply
Old Jun 19, 2004 | 12:58 PM
  #44  
kevin79925's Avatar
Drifting
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,879
Likes: 1
From: Houston
Originally Posted by jtkz13
For a bone stock CL-S6 to run LOW 14's it gonna need at least a 2.10 60', awesome weather, and probably 99mph traps. I was able to get mine down to consistent 14.5-14.6 @ 97'ish mph with low 2.3 60's. Anyone who has driven on the stock tires in the 6 speed knows how difficult it is to launch cleanly and aggressively.

Maybe with some sticky ass tires, a well prepped track, great weather, and a expert driver a stock CL-S6 could hit 14.1-14.2, but thats not being 100% realistic.


i ran a 14.3 with just aem cai.. can my 60' was a 2.2 , on stock tires too. it was a good launch.

i also ran a 14.4 with the same setup 60' 2.2 with an ok launch. but i was hitting 14.4 consistantly only hit the 14.3 one time.
Reply
Old Jun 19, 2004 | 03:05 PM
  #45  
EZZ's Avatar
EZZ
Burning Brakes
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by dfv3.2CL-S
The G35 C has 280 and not 260 HP. The sedan has 260, but Iwould say it's a drivers race.
I know the sedan has 260, but it still dynos at 225-230. Don't believe me, go check G35driver.com. many stock dynos for your enjoyment. The coupe probably doesn't dyno much higher. The cars "feel" the same to me (and I should know since I own the coupe and my friend has the sedan).

BTW, the G manual is simply faster than the CLS manual. Everything is a drivers race but objectively talking about just the cars, the CLS just isn't as fast.
Reply
Old Jun 19, 2004 | 04:59 PM
  #46  
SilverBullet_RENAMED's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio, Tx
Originally Posted by dfv3.2CL-S
The G35 C has 280 and not 260 HP. The sedan has 260, but Iwould say it's a drivers race.
Actually in #'s yes. But in real life, the Sedan dynos 280, the same as the coupe.
Reply
Old Jun 19, 2004 | 05:00 PM
  #47  
SilverBullet_RENAMED's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio, Tx
Originally Posted by kevin79925
i ran a 14.3 with just aem cai.. can my 60' was a 2.2 , on stock tires too. it was a good launch.

i also ran a 14.4 with the same setup 60' 2.2 with an ok launch. but i was hitting 14.4 consistantly only hit the 14.3 one time.
Good times, but I beat them with my bone stock G35 Sedan 6mt.
Reply
Old Jun 19, 2004 | 05:08 PM
  #48  
kevin79925's Avatar
Drifting
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,879
Likes: 1
From: Houston
Originally Posted by SilverBullet
Good times, but I beat them with my bone stock G35 Sedan 6mt.

im not doubting ya.. i get beat by g35 coupe sometimes and sometimes i win.. depends on if i get a good launch or if the gets a good launch.. and know the sedan owners are dynoing the same as the coupe so i think its just a drivers race...
Reply
Old Jun 19, 2004 | 05:13 PM
  #49  
robeaneee's Avatar
Pro
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
From: 909 foo
i believe its time to end this damn dispute..yes your g35 coupes have more horsepower, but believe it or not you can lose to a cl-s 6 spd despite your advantages...regardless of what any g35 owner says it probably is a drivers race..you win some you lose some..in the end theyre both very good cars in their class and nobodys complaining
Reply
Old Jun 21, 2004 | 07:34 AM
  #50  
scalbert's Avatar
Suzuka Master
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
From: Woodstock, GA
Originally Posted by SilverBullet
Good times, but I beat them with my bone stock G35 Sedan 6mt.
Didn't you beat just about everything with your CL?? What was it prior to that too??
Reply
Old Jun 21, 2004 | 10:24 AM
  #51  
ferizzo's Avatar
still a Masshole
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 8,774
Likes: 2
From: New York, NY
Originally Posted by scalbert
Didn't you beat just about everything with your CL?? What was it prior to that too??
C'mon, scalbert, he's an expert driver!
Reply
Old Jun 21, 2004 | 12:14 PM
  #52  
SilverBullet_RENAMED's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio, Tx
Originally Posted by scalbert
Didn't you beat just about everything with your CL?? What was it prior to that too??
Maybe I should have mentioned I have ran faster times in my 6MT at the track than the CL-S 6mt did.

Also, my CL-S auto ran 14.4 at 99.8 mph, so it was very fast once rolling.
Reply
Old Jun 21, 2004 | 12:31 PM
  #53  
scalbert's Avatar
Suzuka Master
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
From: Woodstock, GA
Originally Posted by SilverBullet
Maybe I should have mentioned I have ran faster times in my 6MT at the track than the CL-S 6mt did.

Also, my CL-S auto ran 14.4 at 99.8 mph, so it was very fast once rolling.
Of course, every vehicle you drive is special.
Reply
Old Jun 21, 2004 | 01:45 PM
  #54  
mattg's Avatar
Senior Moderator
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 22,909
Likes: 388
From: OR
Originally Posted by SilverBullet
Good times, but I beat them with my bone stock G35 Sedan 6mt.
that's great. have a cookie.
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2004 | 01:17 PM
  #55  
JOEY_16's Avatar
Intermediate
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: Canada
my cuz owns a g35c6mt and i gotta say its faster then my 01cl-sa, we raced on the highway once and it has more tq then the cl-s other then that i think they are beatable with a few mods.
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2004 | 04:23 PM
  #56  
RUF87's Avatar
Lead Footed
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,415
Likes: 15
From: Plano - Texas
Originally Posted by EZZ
I know the sedan has 260, but it still dynos at 225-230. Don't believe me, go check G35driver.com. many stock dynos for your enjoyment. The coupe probably doesn't dyno much higher. The cars "feel" the same to me (and I should know since I own the coupe and my friend has the sedan).

BTW, the G manual is simply faster than the CLS manual. Everything is a drivers race but objectively talking about just the cars, the CLS just isn't as fast.
FWIW:

FWD autos are less efficient than RWD auto at maximizing power to the wheels . . hence the greater loss of power, and of course even more so than manuals.

And, yes . . technically the G35C 6spd is faster than a CLS 6spd, but as you say . . . anything can happen.

Ruf
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2004 | 05:01 PM
  #57  
EZZ's Avatar
EZZ
Burning Brakes
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by RUF87
FWIW:

FWD autos are less efficient than RWD auto at maximizing power to the wheels . . hence the greater loss of power, and of course even more so than manuals.

And, yes . . technically the G35C 6spd is faster than a CLS 6spd, but as you say . . . anything can happen.

Ruf

Sorry man, but you have that mixed up. RWD has MORE powertrain loss to the wheels because the driveshaft is longer. FWD has less loss to the wheels. The advantage of RWD is that the weight transfer at launch allows for more favorable traction therefore, RWD gets better 1/4 times. Also, RWD trannies are a LOT stronger than FWD trannies especially in auto form. Everything crammed in the front must be miniaturized and becomes more breakable. The G35 auto has reliably handled over 350hp so far in many turbo and s/c vehicles.
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2004 | 01:29 PM
  #58  
RUF87's Avatar
Lead Footed
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,415
Likes: 15
From: Plano - Texas
Originally Posted by EZZ
Sorry man, but you have that mixed up. RWD has MORE powertrain loss to the wheels because the driveshaft is longer. FWD has less loss to the wheels. The advantage of RWD is that the weight transfer at launch allows for more favorable traction therefore, RWD gets better 1/4 times. Also, RWD trannies are a LOT stronger than FWD trannies especially in auto form. Everything crammed in the front must be miniaturized and becomes more breakable. The G35 auto has reliably handled over 350hp so far in many turbo and s/c vehicles.
Partially true as I understand it. But the issue is that the FWD trannies are not as straight forward as RDW design trannys, which makes it a problem in getting the power through the tranny, not the drive shafts. It's odd that folks with RWD get a better result than FWD . . . so what are the issues then?

Where are the resident experts on this sort of discussion . . . the ones I would believe. EricL, Scalbert . . . comments?

Ruf
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2004 | 01:43 PM
  #59  
scalbert's Avatar
Suzuka Master
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
From: Woodstock, GA
I'm in no way an expert but I will add this. It all depends on the design.

I have seen some RWD designs, BMW in particular, which have very efficient drivetrains losing less power than many FWD vehicles. In addition, our 6-Speed is a bit high for FWD vehicles dropping nearly 17%.

But I have also seen the opposite end of the spectrum for both.

If I were to make a general guess when lumping all together I would say that most FWD manuals tend to lose less than RWD manuals. But FWD automatics tend to lose more power than RWD automatics.

Hows that for making this less clear.
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2004 | 01:54 PM
  #60  
RUF87's Avatar
Lead Footed
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,415
Likes: 15
From: Plano - Texas
Originally Posted by scalbert
I'm in no way an expert but I will add this. It all depends on the design.

I have seen some RWD designs, BMW in particular, which have very efficient drivetrains losing less power than many FWD vehicles. In addition, our 6-Speed is a bit high for FWD vehicles dropping nearly 17%.

But I have also seen the opposite end of the spectrum for both.

If I were to make a general guess when lumping all together I would say that most FWD manuals tend to lose less than RWD manuals. But FWD automatics tend to lose more power than RWD automatics.

Hows that for making this less clear.
Clear as mud :P , but it does support my thoughts on this subject.

Ruf
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2004 | 02:19 PM
  #61  
Montez's Avatar
Instructor
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: DFW,TX area
Originally Posted by scalbert
Of course, every vehicle you drive is special.
Russ what mods did you have to trap that high with a 14.4 1/4 in an auto CLS, your trapping 4-7 mph more than stock ones just curious.
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2004 | 03:07 PM
  #62  
mattg's Avatar
Senior Moderator
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 22,909
Likes: 388
From: OR
he had intake and headers
Reply
Old Jun 27, 2004 | 09:30 PM
  #63  
CRIMESAGA's Avatar
10th Gear
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: LONG ISLAND,NY
I Have Also Raced A 6 Sp G35 With My Auto Cl-type-s And Won It Came Do To Me Be Up By About A .5 Car Lead
Reply
Old Jul 15, 2004 | 11:46 PM
  #64  
NSX-Tuner's Avatar
boosted is best
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,289
Likes: 4
From: .
I'd favor the CLS 6MT over the G35 6MT. But I'm biased.
Reply
Old Jul 16, 2004 | 08:37 AM
  #65  
03typeS6spd's Avatar
misanthropist
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 0
From: Tyson's Corner
Originally Posted by jtkz13
For a bone stock CL-S6 to run LOW 14's it gonna need at least a 2.10 60', awesome weather, and probably 99mph traps. I was able to get mine down to consistent 14.5-14.6 @ 97'ish mph with low 2.3 60's. Anyone who has driven on the stock tires in the 6 speed knows how difficult it is to launch cleanly and aggressively.

Maybe with some sticky ass tires, a well prepped track, great weather, and a expert driver a stock CL-S6 could hit 14.1-14.2, but thats not being 100% realistic.

couldn't be more on...

I have only been to the track once, and I couldn't hook up all day, and it only got worse the more I went

my times were like 14.5, 14.44, then higher up to 14.9 on my last run

I spun 1st every time, 2nd every time, 3rd once, and on my next to last run I started to get a little sideways... tires are the :killer: on the 6spd, I would love to go back to the track stock with just tires and see what I could lay down...

and if my friend hurries up and gets his g coupe 6spd I will video... after I drag his unbroken in VQ to the track
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2004 | 01:33 AM
  #66  
TypeSKiller's Avatar
Official BS Sniffer
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
From: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted by SilverBullet
Good times, but I beat them with my bone stock G35 Sedan 6mt.
Hey look everyone....Russ is still around. I haven't seen this scrot in a year or two....I thought he got laughed off here a long time ago.

Hey Russ....I beat your G35 E.T.s with my Z's bish....look who's better now.
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2004 | 07:57 AM
  #67  
F23A4's Avatar
Senior Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 18,017
Likes: 1,737
Originally Posted by TypeSKiller
Hey look everyone....Russ is still around. I haven't seen this scrot in a year or two....I thought he got laughed off here a long time ago.

Hey Russ....I beat your G35 E.T.s with my Z's bish....look who's better now.
13.68@103mph 2.09 60' BONE STOCK That's def a factory freak. The fastest time I've seen at the track for a stock Z was 13.8 @ 101mph. Very Nice!!
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2004 | 09:28 AM
  #68  
TypeSKiller's Avatar
Official BS Sniffer
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
From: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted by F23A4
13.68@103mph 2.09 60' BONE STOCK That's def a factory freak. The fastest time I've seen at the track for a stock Z was 13.8 @ 101mph. Very Nice!!
Thanks for the props....most of the time I get cr@p for it and people call BS...and then I have to pull out the timeslips, video and thread about it.

The wierd thing is I don't think my car is a factory freak at all. I dyno'd right around what other Z's dyno. I've run two Z's on the street, one stock and we were dead even (before my intake...like it makes a difference anyway) and one with cat-back exhaust...and he pulled me very slowly.

I think any healthy Z is capable of 102-103traps...you just need the right conditions and a decent driver.
Reply
Old Jul 22, 2004 | 05:42 PM
  #69  
numbaonestunna's Avatar
Racer
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
From: LBC
not really...

Originally Posted by Zapata
Wha? 3 cars? Have you ever gone to the track? 3 cars is a huge amount of time. It's a drivers race.

3 cars is nothing. Let's assume you trap at 100 mph. So at the high end,

you're going 100mph * 1/60 hours per minute * 1/60 minutes per second * 5280 feet per mile = 146.7 feet per second. Assuming a car is about 10 feet long, then for every tenth of a second you're going 14.7-ish feet, so roughly .25 seconds time difference. That's really not that much. If you beat a car by half a second, you'll be MANY car lengths ahead (well, roughly 6 or so, but probably more because your trap speed will be even higher)

Now given that you're probably pulling only at 90mph or so the last second or so of the quarter mile, you can substitute 90mph for that equation and still only get about .3 or so seconds difference...
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
drillzzz
2G CL (2001-2003)
19
Jul 28, 2019 06:30 PM
BoricuaTL
Car Parts for Sale
138
Apr 8, 2016 01:08 PM
CL-S progression 01
Car Parts for Sale
65
Jan 26, 2016 04:15 PM
Oakroadsteve
3G TL (2004-2008)
9
Oct 28, 2015 10:28 PM
Tsov Tom
2G CL (2001-2003)
7
Sep 6, 2015 07:56 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:07 PM.