I will try to scan it tonight but the problem is that this site will only allow 640x480. You wont be able to read the article when it's that small.

 

I guess I'm also getting old. I don't care how the TL does in magazine comparos anymore. I know why I ordered the TL instead of the G35 - I looked at how I actually drive. The G35 does handle better but the interior reminds me of a Sentra.

These guys are jaded and rag on everything short of a 911 GT3. You would think cars are getting worse if you read C&D, take everything with a grain of salt. They ripped the new GTO for build quality issues on a pre-production car.

Don

 

they didn't like the GT3 either.

 

Based on performance, maybe the C&D review is on target after a slight rwd bias is included. Without the bias perhaps the top cars are within a point of one another.

However, when you look at the total package of performance, interior room/luxury & price the TL wins hands down!

 

Skidpad tests are more about the tires than anything else. The TL's 60/40 weight bias could have also caused slightly lower numbers. The slalom is a much better test of a cars overall handling than a skid pad. Edmunds recorded a super run with the TL (67.5), besting the G35 (66.4) and even the 330i (63.6). C&D used to do slaloms, but I guess not on this test. IMHO, the TL will beat the G35 and possibly the 330i in future comparison tests when done by a magazine with less RWD bias.

 

Sigh, unless C&D states otherwise, they always go after the sportiest car. Always have, always will. The S2000 just whooped much new ass (350Z, new Z4 etc) and as stated, Honda is always a winner in their book. The LAST generation Accord beat the new Camry, Altima and a bunch of other sedans recently.

When it comes to the limits, FWD cannot mess with RWD. Period. It beat some strong competition. In reviews like this, it's more about driving and feel, not interior and space.

The TL went up 3 spots. I think it placed 6th last time (type-s).

If the review was about going to Wal-Mart and picking up the kids, the TL would have won on it's features and space and you FWD doesn't matter as much for basic driving.

 

I agree... I just don't think RWD make a car better. its the entire package

 

I agree. The entire package is more important. However, if the assumption is that the sportiest car of the bunch here is going to win, then the G35 deserves to win. The weird thing is that the BMW 325 got 2nd I guess this competition is the best "handling" car in the class.

 

PLEASE SOMEONE SCAN IT!!!! (hopefully at a resolution such that we can read it).

 

who cares about the entire package when they're doing a performance test??? it's not CR. if you want the best value, look to them. if you want the best performance, although sometimes biased (but who isn't), then look to CD.

 

C&D felt the Acura bottomed and topped it suspension and undulating 2 lane blacktop where the others didn't. That plus the torque steer (or whatever you want to call throttle induced feedback through the front wheels) and the TL lost.

Now if they had tested the auto versions....

 

I don't see what the fuss is everytime C & D ( who most consider to be the holy grail of Auto Reviews ) says something bad or ranks the TL lower than most of you would have. YOU KNOW that the TL is the best buy, looking, performing, priced, etc. car in its class. It even owns some cars in a class above it.

The TL did very well if you ask me. Although it is FWD which is suppose to be a dissadvantage traction wise, out performed everyone in straight line test.

What doesn't make since is the number for the G35 and TL. The TL has a huge advantage in the 0 - 60, but only beats the G by .1 seconds in the 1/4 mile??? I would have thought that the TL would continue to pull up to that point given that it has more top end power

 

Exactly why I chose a TLS over the IS300. The superior handling which the IS300 provides will be useful to me maybe one day a year. For the other 364 days, the TLS wins out. Plus it didn't help that the IS300 felt as fast as a Corolla after I test drove the TLS. If CR is biased towards overall packages, I might have to switch my subscription over from CD to CR.

 

I was with you on your argument, until you said that only because Nissan says different.

http://www.nissannews.com/infiniti/n...14113210.shtml

anniversary last November. And, we've had much to celebrate, including:
– Surpassing 100,000 annual sales for the first time - and, I might add, by close to 20,000 vehicles
– Maintaining the lowest average incentive spending among luxury nameplates
– Achieving the highest ranking in the 2003 J.D. Power and Associates Customer Satisfaction Index Study
– And the implementation of a dealer facilities upgrade program, with nearly all Infiniti dealers expected to complete construction by March in time for the arrival of the QX56

If they rebate the G35 heavily, wouldn't increase their incentive spending by a huge margin, considering that it is a high volume car?

 

No ones posted 0-60's or 1/4 mile times yet??

 

It sounds to me like a number of you are crossed up as to the definition of skidpad, as it relates to handling:

Skidpad = Skidpad measurements do not strictly determine how well a car handles, rather it gives an indication as to how well the car can hold onto the road.
See link---> http://www.kent.k12.wa.us/staff/trob...g/skidpad.html

That said, I think slalom speed better demonstrates how well a car can handle. Seeing as I dont have the article in front of me, how did each do in the slalom??

 

Imagine the TL on the 18s with summer tires. Think it could pull 0.95?

 

I think if you read a few posts back someone stated that C & D didn't do a slalom test.

However, Edmunds did and found it to be one of the fastest sedans through the slalom that they have tested. Even faster than the G35.

 

Agreed.

I don't think that C&D did the slalom test. For Edmunds slalom results see my post in this thread earlier. The TL was one of the fastest ever tested by Edmunds.

 

Me too! (in the northeast, as I pass a few RWD'rs stuck on the side of the road)

 

Problem with the 330, I think is that it does not fall into the $35,000 price range with any options at all, so they had to use the 325

 

Here's some more specifics as you've requested them:

Interior Scores: TL - 80, G35 - 75, Audi - 72, Saab - 70, BMW - 68, Jag - 66, Lexus - 63. Categories included comfort, space, fit and finish, etc.

0-60 Times: TL - 5.8, G35 - 6.3, BMW - 7.0, Jag - 7.1, Saab - 7.2, and Lexus 7.3.

Some areas where G35/BMW beat TL - 0-100, 0-120, top speed, MPG (600 mile trip).

Hope this info sheds some more light on things. Overall, I think the TL is the best all-around car in this class for the balance between sport and luxury. But then, you already know that!

 

Like I ever race someone from 0-100 or 120.

what were the quarte mile times?

 

uhhh...what do you race to then? 60? that'd be one short ass race

 

Your wish is my command. Here are the 1/4 mile times AND speeds: TL - 14.5@99, G35 - 14.6@99, Saab - 15.4@94, BMW - 15.4@91, Lexus - 15.5@90, Jag - 15.7@90, and Audi - 15.8@89.

 

Where can I see the current C&D? I have a Subcrip but have not received it yet. This data isn't on the C&D web site either.

 

I do! That's pretty much how I personally rate a car's acceleration ability 0-120 or 0-130 (a la Road & Track 0-130-0mph tests). (i.e.: the 350z gets beat by the Evo 0-60, 0-100 but the Z is measurably quicker to 130mph, per C/D)

 

What were the 0-60 and 1/4 times? How about the G35?

 

Look up in this thread and you'll see them...

 

lol

 

can someone scan in the article - my issue hasn't come yet and I'm kinda pissed and anxious...

 

Did the G35 beat the TL in MPG?. I can see the under 200 hp BMW beating the TL, but not the G. It is notorious for poor mileage. My own mileage on the TL is in the mid 20's and 30's on the highway. But then again I don't race and flog the car that much.

I have to echo your statement about the best balance of sport and luxury. That, more than performance is what makes this car special.

 

Their bias against FWD is so obvious in previous articles, it isn't even worth debating.

 

I haven't received mine either. probably tomorrow or next week sometime.

 

OK I'm confused. A message above states that the BMW beat the TL in 0-100 and yet the 1/4 mile times are 14.5/99 for the TL and 15.4/91 for the BMW. Something's not quite right here...

 

It's funny, actually, how the TL came in 3rd. Like the last review, there are some conflicting points that C&D never resolves.

In this comparo, they ranked each of the 7 cars in 3 main categories:

Vehicle, Powertrain, and Chassis.

If you add up the ratings from these 3 main categories, it falls out like this:

TL: 167
G35: 165
325: 160
A4: 150
IS300: 148
9-3: 144
X-type: 138

Then you have to add their uber-subjective ratings to this total:

- Gotta-have-it factor (out of 25)
- Fun to Drive (out of 25)

The TL got 20 out of 25 on both (more on this in a bit), whereas the 325i got 23 and 25, the G35 got 23 and 23, ,and the A4 got 20 and 19.

This is how the TL went from 1st place to 3rd place.

So, how about that 20 out of 25 for fun to drive factor?

In the review, they go on about the problems...
"The combination of big power, front-wheel drive, and an LSD produces quite a bit of tugging at the steering wheel as the front wheels encounter varying surfaces. This is exacerbated by the TL's peculiar suspention tuning. The car is simultaneously firm yet springy, and the front suspention felt as if it were topping out over certain road crests, whereupon it would produce a big weave as it touched back down. We also experienced some twitchy head-tossing motions on bumby surfaces from the TL's spring and anti-roll-bar interactions. Acura engineers obviously sought a compromise between ride comfort and body-motion, and the side effect is some spooky rough-road responses."

They went onto the fact that on smooth roads, all is well. This is where the TL is at home.

So, with that, it's interesting to see an average fun-to-drive score of 20 out of 25. I think that's pretty impressive when the A4 comes in at 19 and the G35 comes in at 23.

Jon

 

I don't know how they got 6.3s to 60 and then 14.6s in the 1/4 for the g35. It just doesn't add up. If the numbers here are true, then the g has better midrange and top end. How do they both trap at 99mph?

 

I should also note that the picture of the TL in their comparo has the TL literally flying down the road.

Literally, flying. All four wheels are in the air!

It's a weird shot, and makes the TL look like a tiger ready to pounce!

Jon

 

That's because it is!

 

<----wishing he had a subscription to C & D just so he could see this article.


Could someone please post a scanned copy of the comparo?? Please please please. Okay, enough whining.