its official...the CL is gone on friday
#81
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by SilverBullet
Well, I would rather spend 30k on a truck than a 2 door coupe. #1 reason, more versatile. I can do alot more with it and get my moneys worth compared to the CL which has no room for what I need and can't haul alot of people either comfortably.
Well, I would rather spend 30k on a truck than a 2 door coupe. #1 reason, more versatile. I can do alot more with it and get my moneys worth compared to the CL which has no room for what I need and can't haul alot of people either comfortably.
Just an example, my gf's father has a 2001 CLS (he convinced me to get mine). His wife drives a RX300. He absolutely loves the versatility of the RX300 and is now trading in his CL to get a 2004 MDX. He said he's sick of the limited space and lack of doors on the CL. The power of the CL was nice, but the MDX is a nice compromise in his opinion.
#82
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by scalbert
Spoken like someone who doesn't enjoy driving; the separation of an enthusiast from an onlooker. :P
But hey, I too own an SUV as our double stroller would not fit in the 3-Series. The need fits the choice in many cases.
Spoken like someone who doesn't enjoy driving; the separation of an enthusiast from an onlooker. :P
But hey, I too own an SUV as our double stroller would not fit in the 3-Series. The need fits the choice in many cases.
I went for a test drive of the new MDX over the weekend and it wasn't too far off the CL in regards of driving enjoyment. It had a nice torquey engine with plenty of power. The handling was okay; not the the best, but acceptable, but the CL isn't a handling demon either, so it wasn't too far off.
Again, I think you can drive an SUV and still enjoy driving.
#83
Senior Moderator
Originally posted by cusdaddy
Again, I think you can drive an SUV and still enjoy driving.
Again, I think you can drive an SUV and still enjoy driving.
#84
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by cusdaddy
The new trucks aren't too shabby in the handling/acceleration arena. Some aren't far behind most cars anyone.
I went for a test drive of the new MDX over the weekend and it wasn't too far off the CL in regards of driving enjoyment. It had a nice torquey engine with plenty of power. The handling was okay; not the the best, but acceptable, but the CL isn't a handling demon either, so it wasn't too far off.
Again, I think you can drive an SUV and still enjoy driving.
The new trucks aren't too shabby in the handling/acceleration arena. Some aren't far behind most cars anyone.
I went for a test drive of the new MDX over the weekend and it wasn't too far off the CL in regards of driving enjoyment. It had a nice torquey engine with plenty of power. The handling was okay; not the the best, but acceptable, but the CL isn't a handling demon either, so it wasn't too far off.
Again, I think you can drive an SUV and still enjoy driving.
You must be joking if you do...
I own an RX300 and it is a far cry from driving a car. So much that my wife even wants to get rid of it. I have driven just about every reasonably priced SUV available today and none compare to the response of a decent (read: decent car). Nor should they; they have a different intention.
To compare a truck to a CL, and considering the CL isn't the greatest handler (it is good from a GT standpoint), is ludicrous. I like trucks and the ability they provide but to consider them on a back road is ridiculous. The center of gravity is too high to drive seriously. The brakes are inadequate for repeated stops. And unless the top line is picked, the power is lacking for enthusiastic driving. They are powered and geared to tow, not carve apexes.
I am shocked that a person who bought one of the pure sports cars would say that trucks could give nearly the same experience. That leads me to believe that you don't drive your car as intended??
Just look at the average slalom, skid pad and braking numbers to gains insight on the enthusiastic driving ability. They have a different purpose and if needed they are GREAT. But not a driver’s vehicle...
#85
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mattg
yup, it's called an x5.
yup, it's called an x5.
#86
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by scalbert
Do you really own a 350Z???
You must be joking if you do...
I own an RX300 and it is a far cry from driving a car. So much that my wife even wants to get rid of it. I have driven just about every reasonably priced SUV available today and none compare to the response of a decent (read: decent car). Nor should they; they have a different intention.
To compare a truck to a CL, and considering the CL isn't the greatest handler (it is good from a GT standpoint), is ludicrous. I like trucks and the ability they provide but to consider them on a back road is ridiculous. The center of gravity is too high to drive seriously. The brakes are inadequate for repeated stops. And unless the top line is picked, the power is lacking for enthusiastic driving. They are powered and geared to tow, not carve apexes.
I am shocked that a person who bought one of the pure sports cars would say that trucks could give nearly the same experience. That leads me to believe that you don't drive your car as intended??
Just look at the average slalom, skid pad and braking numbers to gains insight on the enthusiastic driving ability. They have a different purpose and if needed they are GREAT. But not a driver’s vehicle...
Do you really own a 350Z???
You must be joking if you do...
I own an RX300 and it is a far cry from driving a car. So much that my wife even wants to get rid of it. I have driven just about every reasonably priced SUV available today and none compare to the response of a decent (read: decent car). Nor should they; they have a different intention.
To compare a truck to a CL, and considering the CL isn't the greatest handler (it is good from a GT standpoint), is ludicrous. I like trucks and the ability they provide but to consider them on a back road is ridiculous. The center of gravity is too high to drive seriously. The brakes are inadequate for repeated stops. And unless the top line is picked, the power is lacking for enthusiastic driving. They are powered and geared to tow, not carve apexes.
I am shocked that a person who bought one of the pure sports cars would say that trucks could give nearly the same experience. That leads me to believe that you don't drive your car as intended??
Just look at the average slalom, skid pad and braking numbers to gains insight on the enthusiastic driving ability. They have a different purpose and if needed they are GREAT. But not a driver’s vehicle...
I drove the X5. It's 9/10ths of what my old CL could do in regards to handling and accelerating. The new MDX may be 6-7/10ths of the CL in those areas. How many times do you drive your CL 9/10 and 10/10ths? For 90% of the driving most of us do, a good performing SUV is fine. (X5, Cayanne, SRX, etc.).
BTW, I also drive an 03 Accord. In the winter and city driving, I much prefer the Accord. I think I'd like a truck even more for that type of driving actually, as I can have much more versatility.
#87
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is the test data from the X5 4.4i and 2001 CLS from Motortrend:
X5:
0-60 mph, sec: 6.6
1/4 mile, sec @ mph: 15.1 @ 91.0
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft: 125
Skidpad, g: 0.82
600-ft slalom, mph: 58.4
CL-S:
0-60 mph, secL 6.4
1/4 mile, sec @ mph: 14.8 @ 96.5
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft: 124
600-ft slalom, mph: 63.7
Skidpad, g: 0.82 (from C&D)
Yes, the CL outperforms the X5 in the slalom, but the rest of the #'s are very very close, and again, for the vast majority of most of most of our driving, the difference is minor.
X5:
0-60 mph, sec: 6.6
1/4 mile, sec @ mph: 15.1 @ 91.0
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft: 125
Skidpad, g: 0.82
600-ft slalom, mph: 58.4
CL-S:
0-60 mph, secL 6.4
1/4 mile, sec @ mph: 14.8 @ 96.5
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft: 124
600-ft slalom, mph: 63.7
Skidpad, g: 0.82 (from C&D)
Yes, the CL outperforms the X5 in the slalom, but the rest of the #'s are very very close, and again, for the vast majority of most of most of our driving, the difference is minor.
#88
Senior Moderator
you started off comparing the mdx and cl-s.
the x5 is a little bit out of the mdx league.
the x5 is a little bit out of the mdx league.
#89
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mattg
you started off comparing the mdx and cl-s.
and the mdx sure is hell ain't an x5.
you started off comparing the mdx and cl-s.
and the mdx sure is hell ain't an x5.
0-60 mph, sec: 8.1
1/4 mile, sec @ mph: 16.3 @ 84.3
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft: 139
Skidpad, g: 0.74
600-ft slalom, mph: 57.3
The 2004 MDX which I drove has 265hp instead of 240 that the version above has, it has better tires, yet this performs 1mph less than the X5 in the slalom, so I wouldn't say it's out of it's league.
I've driven both and the performance difference between the two isn't terribly striking. Yes, the X5 is superior, but not strikingly so.
Again, I'm not trying to say that trucks handle better than cars, just that a good SUV like an X5, MDX, SRX, FX45 are very close in performance to many of the cars on the road, and satisfy most of their users needs. They must be doing something right if you look outside and see over half the autos on the road are SUV's/Trucks
#90
Senior Moderator
i know what you were saying. you were just trying to get in your daily dig on the cl-s. we've grown to expect it.
#91
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mattg
i know what you were saying. you were just trying to get in your daily dig on the cl-s. we've grown to expect it.
i know what you were saying. you were just trying to get in your daily dig on the cl-s. we've grown to expect it.
I don't see any problem with being able to talk about a car's limits. If we all went around here kissing the CL's ass every minute it would be a very boring place.
The story about my gf's father is indeed true. I was suprised when he asked me to go to the Acura dealer with him, but after his arguement about the MDX being more versatile it made sense.
#93
go like hell
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Anna,OH(home of the honda/acura motors)
Age: 42
Posts: 5,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Re: its official...the CL is gone on friday
Originally posted by I am RobG
as of tomorrow, i'm buying the 2004 ford f-150 lariat, black with tan 2 tone...tan leather. Its sexyyyyyy i'll post pics when i can, got it for 35 and change, took some moneys off the 39 sticker price and whatever my trade in value is
as of tomorrow, i'm buying the 2004 ford f-150 lariat, black with tan 2 tone...tan leather. Its sexyyyyyy i'll post pics when i can, got it for 35 and change, took some moneys off the 39 sticker price and whatever my trade in value is
The F-150 has lowest payload in the 1/2 ton class.
plus that new 5.6(i think) Nissan V-8 DOHC is torquey as HELL.
#94
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by cusdaddy
Yes, the CL outperforms the X5 in the slalom, but the rest of the #'s are very very close, and again, for the vast majority of most of most of our driving, the difference is minor.
Yes, the CL outperforms the X5 in the slalom, but the rest of the #'s are very very close, and again, for the vast majority of most of most of our driving, the difference is minor.
Trucks/SUVs serve a great purpose and are useful as I have owned three SUVs now. But they are not fun to drive even in daily commutes nor do they come close even at half their intended capability. Heck, we might even our fourth SUV in a few months. My wife hates the numb feeling from the RX300 so we are looking at the new X3 even though we know it won't come close to her E46 328i in terms of response and overall driving dynamics.
#95
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by cusdaddy
600-ft slalom, mph: 57.3
Again, I'm not trying to say that trucks handle better than cars, just that a good SUV like an X5, MDX, SRX, FX45 are very close in performance to many of the cars on the road, and satisfy most of their users needs. They must be doing something right if you look outside and see over half the autos on the road are SUV's/Trucks
600-ft slalom, mph: 57.3
Again, I'm not trying to say that trucks handle better than cars, just that a good SUV like an X5, MDX, SRX, FX45 are very close in performance to many of the cars on the road, and satisfy most of their users needs. They must be doing something right if you look outside and see over half the autos on the road are SUV's/Trucks
My old Typhoon would blow every one of those vehicles away in terms of acceleration; but it is not a superior driver. I would tend to agree that they serve the purpose intended. But that is not we are about; we enjoy driving (taking the perfect line through a turn, making a proper downshift, etc.). The vast majority of people do not care about driving and their vehicle is simple transportation. So the sheer numbers of SUVs means nothing about capability
#96
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Age: 50
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by scalbert
Spoken like someone who doesn't enjoy driving; the separation of an enthusiast from an onlooker. :P
But hey, I too own an SUV as our double stroller would not fit in the 3-Series. The need fits the choice in many cases.
Spoken like someone who doesn't enjoy driving; the separation of an enthusiast from an onlooker. :P
But hey, I too own an SUV as our double stroller would not fit in the 3-Series. The need fits the choice in many cases.
#97
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Age: 50
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by cusdaddy
The new trucks aren't too shabby in the handling/acceleration arena. Some aren't far behind most cars anyone.
I went for a test drive of the new MDX over the weekend and it wasn't too far off the CL in regards of driving enjoyment. It had a nice torquey engine with plenty of power. The handling was okay; not the the best, but acceptable, but the CL isn't a handling demon either, so it wasn't too far off.
Again, I think you can drive an SUV and still enjoy driving.
The new trucks aren't too shabby in the handling/acceleration arena. Some aren't far behind most cars anyone.
I went for a test drive of the new MDX over the weekend and it wasn't too far off the CL in regards of driving enjoyment. It had a nice torquey engine with plenty of power. The handling was okay; not the the best, but acceptable, but the CL isn't a handling demon either, so it wasn't too far off.
Again, I think you can drive an SUV and still enjoy driving.
#98
im back
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York
Age: 40
Posts: 2,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: its official...the CL is gone on friday
Originally posted by Water-S
dude you should habe went for the Nissan Titan it's 10 times better truck than the new F-150.
The F-150 has lowest payload in the 1/2 ton class.
plus that new 5.6(i think) Nissan V-8 DOHC is torquey as HELL.
dude you should habe went for the Nissan Titan it's 10 times better truck than the new F-150.
The F-150 has lowest payload in the 1/2 ton class.
plus that new 5.6(i think) Nissan V-8 DOHC is torquey as HELL.
yes i fully agree, the titan has more power and better payload...but again i say...ITS HIDEOUS!!! the outside is by far one of the ugliest things i've ever seen and i'm talking up there with the aztek and the rendezvous. its fuckin ugly!!
#99
go like hell
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Anna,OH(home of the honda/acura motors)
Age: 42
Posts: 5,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Re: Re: Re: its official...the CL is gone on friday
Originally posted by I am RobG
yes i fully agree, the titan has more power and better payload...but again i say...ITS HIDEOUS!!! the outside is by far one of the ugliest things i've ever seen and i'm talking up there with the aztek and the rendezvous. its fuckin ugly!!
yes i fully agree, the titan has more power and better payload...but again i say...ITS HIDEOUS!!! the outside is by far one of the ugliest things i've ever seen and i'm talking up there with the aztek and the rendezvous. its fuckin ugly!!
#100
Full-Time IDIoT---DoH!!!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: DUMB ISLAND
Age: 42
Posts: 4,654
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
10 Posts
Re: Re: Re: its official...the CL is gone on friday
Originally posted by I am RobG
yes i fully agree, the titan has more power and better payload...but again i say...ITS HIDEOUS!!! the outside is by far one of the ugliest things i've ever seen and i'm talking up there with the aztek and the rendezvous. its fuckin ugly!!
yes i fully agree, the titan has more power and better payload...but again i say...ITS HIDEOUS!!! the outside is by far one of the ugliest things i've ever seen and i'm talking up there with the aztek and the rendezvous. its fuckin ugly!!
rob,
at 1st I was mad when I heard you were getting rid of ur cl-s for a truck...but then i thought abt it and realized, you should get whatever the fuck YOU WANT and not get what other people want you to get...i'm happy for ya and hope the f150 is very very good to you
good luck bro
#101
im back
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York
Age: 40
Posts: 2,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thank you unsure! and btw truckin magazine did the 04 truck shoot out and the new f-150 won that
no see i'm not gonna be doing much payload and towing being i'm a heating contractor so i only pick up pipes and shit. but the titan is ugly i'm sorry
no see i'm not gonna be doing much payload and towing being i'm a heating contractor so i only pick up pipes and shit. but the titan is ugly i'm sorry
#103
teh Senior Instigator
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Huntington Beach, CA -> Ashburn, VA -> Raleigh, NC -> Walnut Creek, CA
Age: 42
Posts: 44,094
Received 976 Likes
on
330 Posts
Originally posted by chungkopi
i really don't understand why people would spend 35k for a truck!! i rather drive 10k CL anyday over 35K truck..
i really don't understand why people would spend 35k for a truck!! i rather drive 10k CL anyday over 35K truck..
what's the difference between owning a truck or a car?
#104
teh Senior Instigator
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Huntington Beach, CA -> Ashburn, VA -> Raleigh, NC -> Walnut Creek, CA
Age: 42
Posts: 44,094
Received 976 Likes
on
330 Posts
our navigator handles great, then again it's got a handfull of hotchkis suspension mods
Thing can take some turns faster then my cl and ain't no slouch in the accleration mark either, esp. once we finally do the heads
Thing can take some turns faster then my cl and ain't no slouch in the accleration mark either, esp. once we finally do the heads
#105
Senior Moderator
what year nav? my dad just picked up an '04.
#106
teh Senior Instigator
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Huntington Beach, CA -> Ashburn, VA -> Raleigh, NC -> Walnut Creek, CA
Age: 42
Posts: 44,094
Received 976 Likes
on
330 Posts
Originally posted by mattg
what year nav? my dad just picked up an '04.
what year nav? my dad just picked up an '04.
'00
tell him to get the hotchkis sway bars, best fucking mod i've ever pot on any car!!!
#107
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Woodstock, GA
Age: 54
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by CLpower
Thing can take some turns faster then my cl
Thing can take some turns faster then my cl
#108
teh Senior Instigator
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Huntington Beach, CA -> Ashburn, VA -> Raleigh, NC -> Walnut Creek, CA
Age: 42
Posts: 44,094
Received 976 Likes
on
330 Posts
Originally posted by scalbert
You might want to consider putting the suspension back on the CL or remove the marshmallow tires.
You might want to consider putting the suspension back on the CL or remove the marshmallow tires.
i'm dead serious though man, the truck handles good, we put some sticky goodyears on it, and the sway bars made a HUGE HUGE HUGE difference! Yes it's still a SUV though
#110
Senior Moderator
Originally posted by CLpower
'00
tell him to get the hotchkis sway bars, best fucking mod i've ever pot on any car!!!
'00
tell him to get the hotchkis sway bars, best fucking mod i've ever pot on any car!!!
#111
teh Senior Instigator
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Huntington Beach, CA -> Ashburn, VA -> Raleigh, NC -> Walnut Creek, CA
Age: 42
Posts: 44,094
Received 976 Likes
on
330 Posts
Originally posted by darrinb
y would u put sways on a navi
y would u put sways on a navi
why not? I think it's more important on cars like that anyways, for a safety issue. The car isn't as top heavy anymore and sit's more firm on the pavement.
our plan all along has been to throw an SC on it
I think we are just gonna do the heads though
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
BoricuaTL
Car Parts for Sale
138
04-08-2016 01:08 PM
Mugen TSX
Eastern Canada
0
09-16-2015 09:52 PM
brandnewcolony
3G TL (2004-2008)
53
09-12-2015 10:39 AM
IndycarFaster
2G TSX Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
0
09-11-2015 02:52 PM