On the 6MT, with 273 ft-lbs of twist on tap, why does it feel like nothing happens until 3,000 RPM? It's a 3.7L engine, running a lot of compression, plenty of stroke, and a fat bore. How come the G37 "feels" (subjectively, of course) like it has better low end, especially under 2,500 RPM? Am I imagining things or is there just more area under the torque curve on the G37 motor?

 

Nissan engines generally have more low end torque than Honda engines. I've had 5 Nissans before getting the TL and I noticed the exact same thing.

Nothing out of the ordinary.

 

2 problems with the TL:

1. Too much weight (esp. the SH-AWD)

2. 5-sp AT

 

The J-Series are not a torquey V-6. Most of the competition is torquier.

Your feelings are not subjective!

 

4 words
Single Over Head Cam.

These Honda V-Tak engines suck balls unless you are above 5K RPM all day. Nissans have DOHC and can put down way more torque at a lower RPM.

 

I noticed a significant difference in "thrust" between the base model i have now and the SHAWD model i had before.

with the SHAWD model, it doesn't get moving until 3-3.5k rpms. Even then, you don't get that "push" into the seat you usually get with high torque cars.

However, with the base model, the "thrust" seems to come earlier, more like 2.5-3k rpms, and you feel it go. It may only be 500rpms (or so) earlier, but in everyday driving i don't need to drive the base model as hard to keep up with traffic. The feeling of "thrust" is also very satisfying.

 

Honda is primarily a FWD automaker thus the reason for the lack of torque down low to combat torque steer.

The way I see it, even though the 3.7 is only used in the SH-AWD it probably will find its way into a FWD at some point hens the reason for the lack of torque down low. Let’s face it, lots of torque and FWD do not make good bedfellows.

 

You're right. On acuras website, it says:
"On models without SH-AWD, a torque steer reduction system reduces engine torque in first and second gears when torque steer is most likely to occur."

This is sad. I did not notice this til now. So for the base/fed model, they reduce torque. For the shawd model, torque is lost in the shawd.. jeeze. If they made their vehicles with RWD to begin with, or simply paired the engines with better transmissions or lighter weight, they wouldn't have this issue.

 

The reason for this is weight.

But when you compare the Automatic SH-AWD to the 6MT thing change significantly though. With about 200 less lbs. and different gear ratios, the 6MT is faster. About 1 second faster 0-60.

When driven hard, IMO my 6MT's 1st gear is violent. It pushes you back in your seat with authority. Once I switch to 2nd and beyond you are right in the sweet spot as far a torque goes.

I find that my 6MT has two different personalities. One is a good everyday driver that has a nice smooth non jolting power band. The other is a rough, exciting sport sedan as long as you drive it the right way and keeping it above 3500 RPM from 2nd gear on. This is the reason I got the 6MT vs the automatic. The automatic just did not have the level of UMMFF that the 6MT has.

 

+1

As one of the magazine reviews stated, the 4G TL is "a gentleman's sedan."

With the wife and kid, the 6MT TL can be the touring luxury sedan you can drive to fancy restaurants, business meetings, and upscale shoppings...

By yourself, the 6MT TL becomes that ferocious sports sedan you can drive with anger, yet be happy at the same time. It can almost pass for a sports car

 

Exactly, my 2003 Maxima is a beast on take off compared to the TL.
These cars are totally differeent. The Max is for speed the TL is for Luxury IMO.

 

Yeah, I forgot to qualify that I've never driven the AT; only the 6MT. Is the ECU's pulling timing or fuel at low RPMs? Seems like we should be able to tune out the pussiness under 3,000 RPM given that all of the other factors (displacement, bore, stroke) are already in place. RE the DOHC comment - do you think the extra torque on the Nissan engines is due to the ability to separately tune intake/exhaust valves? If that's truly the case we're SOL on pushing much more torque out of the J37 without forced induction. Does anyone have trouble making tight, uphill, unprotected left turns from a stop on their 6MT? This is a major PITA on the Evo, especially with the A/C running.

 

There should be some way to tune out the first and second gear torque retarding.

Below 3,000 in all gears it's a little light on torque in all gears. That's just the nature of the engine, so that won't be as easy to fix.

 

Aint' that the truth! My '97 Maxima with a FOUR speed auto tranny feels a lot quicker off the line and that's with a 3.0L V6. But then again, it was only 3000 lbs. and not close to 4,000!

 

I think the long-awaited arrival of the 6AT is going to significantly help the TL in the performance dept. With the 6AT, the new MDX was able to shave off almost 0.8 sec off it's 0-60 run and is now just a few ticks of matching the TL in acceleration. Fuel economy should also be improved. For those on the verge of buying a TL (w/ an auto) I think should wait until there is confirmation that the 6AT will show up in 2011 models.

 

I'm EAGERLY awaiting the 6spd auto. From what i've read (see TOV's 2010 MDX review) it makes the power much more useable and makes the car more responsive. That's one of the reasons I didn't get into another SHAWD, but got the base model instead. I just felt that the 5spd fit the base model, not the SHAWD. I'll take the loss if i trade it in 2 years for the refresh just to make myself happy.

 

^With the typical resale most experienced, you can bet that you will at least break even at that point.

 

Guys, maybe I just have not driven enough truly fast cars, but my 6MT feels - as one poster said - pretty "violent" when you get on it hard, especially in first through third gears. And I've yet had the room (or courage) to hold it to redline.

Hondas typically are high-rev motors, but the 3.7 seems to have plenty of beans when loafing it around. As one person described, it has dual personalities. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. VTEC!!!!

(And by the way, with only about 1500 miles on the clock, I'm averaging 24.1 MPG with 50% city/suburban and 50% highway driving. What's not to like about that?)

 

I think it's the hard WOT launch that's violent, not the acceleration. But I haven't driven a TL SH manual, just auto.

 

I wouldn't call it violent, it is quick though. Point is that this quickness only comes north of 3000 rpm. Nothing wrong with that per se, but the car lacks off the line push you back in your seat torque that other sport sedans have.

My last car was a 350Z and that's one of the things I miss about it.

 

I don't know what you 6MT guys are complaining about. 0-60 in 5.2 sec.....what's to complain? You want anything faster, dump the TL and get a M3 or a Camaro SS or GT500.

 

They're not talking about launching. The 0-60 isn't the problem.

 

Yea - I've got the 6MT - It feels quick... quicker than my 07 Type-S was... But there is a definite feel of low torque @ less than 3k RPM's. Above that, and it screams, and pulls hard. But driving around town below 3k.. it does feel sluggish, but I don't complain, it's fast enough for me. But more speed is always better

 

Let me clarify. When I say violent I am basing it on what I see from the driver seat. Watching whoever is sitting in the passenger seat is very entertaining both on acceleration and in between shifts. You don't get the real feeling of the torque when you're in the driver’s seat.

I'm not saying the TL is this crazed HP monster. What I'm saying... for what it is, its impressive when you get on it but it does need more torque down low.

 

Some of the other sport sedans are turbocharged (335i) or supercharged (S4). My guess is that the 4G's feeling of low-end torque is a function of modest engine displacement and the car's near-4,000-pound weight. The G37 6MT is 250 pounds lighter than the SH-AWD 6MT. Can anyone put together a dyno comparison with a G37?

 

Having driven 2008 300C AWD as a rental car for almost two weeks straight my car felt like an absolute DOG when I got back into it.

Woofdah that thing has some low end balls.

 

It's not the 0-60, it's the around-town driving under 2000 rpms. If you're accustomed to Honda (or BMW for that matter) engines, this isn't how you drive. But once you've driven big iron around town, it's nice to be able to stay in, e.g., second gear even at a 3mph coast.

I do agree with the posts that the TL feels lacking in low torque, but I'm not sure it really is lacking... it may just have gobs more up high. Keep in mind that it's a bored-out 3.5L, which inherently means it gained horsepower more than torque, or alternatively that the max torque moves up the RPM range. (The over-squared rule.) Since Honda rates the maximum torque as at 5Krpm, that's clearly waaay too high on the curve. (They state 254 for the 3.5L and 273 for the 3.7L.) They also rate HP at 6300... which isn't a rev-range you can maintain for long. The question is really, how much torque does it have at 1500rpm?

Also, being a V-TEC, the engine switches profiles at a certain point. I recall Honda documenting that as 4700rpm, so again, pretty high in the torque curve.

 

For us automatics, I drive around town in sport. It makes it more responsive and takes alot of the sluggishness out. I think part of the problem is the DBW lag. Late down shifts and slow overall responses make it seem worse.

 

Yeah, agreed that 0-60 times are adequate. This discussion is about life below 3,000 RPM, which is unfortunately, most stop & go driving.

The scenario: stopped on an incline, unprotected left turn, 50+ mph oncoming traffic, a/c compressor and blower running on full. The solution in the Evo is to rev it to 4,000 RPMs, slip the clutch while flooring the throttle, and let the AWD do its thing. The solution in a G37S is to let go of the clutch (even at 1,750 RPM) and floor it.

What are people's experiences with the 6MT? Do you have to rev it up to 3,000 RPM to get it across those intersections?

 

Wow really? I live around some serious hills, and I don't need to start in first and give it more than 1500RPMs to start up a steep hill, hill assist helps there. Getting it going, there is plenty of torque, you can actually start the car on flat ground in first with ZERO gas. The problem is just after you get going, there is a dead zone around 1750 and 2500ish RPM's where there is some dead space... but i had that on my TL also.

 

Good to know - hill assist is a good feature. The Evo frustrates me daily on that unprotected left. Get that turbo spinning and it's like a scalded cat on digging its claws into carpet but you're dead meat below 3,000 RPMs.

 

I'm coming to the sh-awd auto from an 03 CL-S 6 speed (heavily modified N/A).

I'll tell you - you don't miss the torque so much if you get some weight off the driveline. Lightened flywheel and pulleys made a HUGE difference in how quick that car got outta the hole. The revs just zing....

I'd consider pulleys on the auto. I bet you'd shave at least a tenth 0-60, and probably a half second off to 100.

 

You guys calling the Nissan engine more torquey than the Honda are Nissan fan boys. I owned a VQ3.0 in an MT Maxima for 6 years, and am just coming off a lease of a 335i MT. I also owned a Prelude VTEC for 6 years. In other words, I know the full spectrum of broad torque vs. peaky torque.

I test drove an MT TL and MT G37 back to back 3 times before deciding the TL was a better around town driver with better torque and gearing for acceleration around town. It has far less torque than my 335i across it's rev range, but it was noticeably better than the G37 below 5k rpm, especially in gears 1-4.

And if you want some facts and specific observations to back my opinion up:

- Check out C&D website for test data on 30-50 and 50-70 top gear acceleration times for G37 6MT and TL-SHAWD 6MT (separate tests about 6 mos apart if I remember correctly). The TL kills the G37 by full seconds.

- Do a little research on the benefits of DOHC - it's better breathing for more power at HIGH rpms. The G37 gets 23 more hp than TL, but it's all up at the top of the rev range. Note redline on G37 is about 1250 rpm higher than TL. Also, take a look at peak hp and torque figures and what rpm they occur. TL peak torque is 4 lb ft more at a lower rpm than G37.

- Read the posts from enthusiast drivers of both cars. G37 drivers get much worse gas mileage. Why? They have to keep that engine above 5000 rpm to have their fun. TL drivers don't have to keep the engine screaming to enjoy a little push in their backs.

I am so convinced the posters starting this thread are wrong, I can't help but wonder if they are Nissan employees working on a "viral marketing" campaign.

 

Easy there. We're having a discussion that is labeled subjective. I'm not a Nissan employee and candidly, the G37S is an only interesting discussion topic for a semi-comparable vehicle.

It's complete doo doo that you can't get an Infiniti G or M with a sport package and AWD. Additionally, it's a travesty that the Infiniti "Intelligent" AWD doesn't have torque vectoring diffs or even a freaking limited slip diff. This is just like how the 335i cannot be had with a LSD and those bastards *weld* the diff to make an installation difficult/expensive. That's plain insulting.

This is in no way a sneaky attempt to discourage anyone. This is a way to ensure that the frustrations I feel driving the Evo won't be mirrored in a bigger, heavier car. Especially when I'm hustling it from a stop, across unprotected left turns.

VTEC is a marvel of modern engineering; allegedly there's never been a warranty claim against it, which, if true, is simply astounding. However, the 1,800 RPM torque of a small block LS1 is positively grin-inducing; I think it's possible to get closer to that grunt with a positive displacement supercharger (a development we all eagerly await).

In a dream world, we could have the TL's body, build quality, NVH characteristics, 6MT, and operational costs combined with the Nissan GTR's engine and AWD system. And it would weigh about 3,000 lbs and cost around $30K new. But that's why it's called a dream - the TL right now is a pretty good compromise but it doesn't stop us from dreaming.

In summary:
- Still want a TL SH-AWD 6MT.
- Like talking about this stuff.
- Still want a ton more torque below 3,000 RPM and preferably, 2,000 RPM. Think "stump pulling" torque and that's the right direction.
- Don't work for Nissan.

 

For comparisons sake and my own personal experiences I love Nissans (no I don't work for Nissan either), but when shopping for a new car for my wife the TL came out on top.

My sister has owned 2 Infiniti G's (AWD) a 2005 (280HP) and a 2007 (306HP). Both cars are fast off the line and had plenty of torque. But when shopping we just didn't like the G's due to lack of interior room.
Also having owned 2 Maxima's a 1992 SE(190HP) & still own a 2003 Maxima SE(255HP), we loved both cars as they were/are fast & dependable.

So how did we end up with the TL? We consider BMW 3 Series, Lexus E350 and a 2010 Maxima SV. To be honest with you,my wife & I did not like the interior in the Maxima and from a driving perspective, I thought I really had to push the gas pedal to get the Maxima moving. In other words my 2003 Maxima seemed faster off the line than the 2010 Max.

So I told my wife lets go drive a TL which I wasn't even considering and we both fell in love with the car as a whole cabin design & performace wise. This is my first Honda product, so time will tell if I have switched from a Nissan guy to a Honda guy. Although I also own a Toyota to.

 

You need to calm down, jackson.

Yes I work for Nissan and only drive Nissans as my signature suggests. Huge fanboy.

Back to reality:

Speaking of enthusiasts who drove the cars,

Automobile "All the while, the V-6 seems soft on torque down low ..."

The only actual test CarandDriver did that I could find was an October 2009 test where I saw no 50-70 or 30-50 times.

And if you hit the reviews on YouTube there are testers there as well saying things like you'll have to keep the revs up.

 

The VQ is traditionally a bit more torquey than the J motor. Power to weight comparisons aside...output measurements don't lie. This isn't quite as true with the VQ37 vs the J37A4.

They each throw out about 270 ft/lbs on the dyno - with a roughly 30hp advantage to the VQ.

The VQ35 was also a 270 ft/lb machine, bettering the J35 by 10-15 ft/lbs dependingo n variant. The 30hp gap also maintained here.

The J32 now, gave up 40 ft/lbs to the VQ35...which was quite noticeable.

 

I've owned 2 maxipads, an 05 G35 (rwd) and the SHAWD and a few in between. The maxis were a bit quicker in the first 1 1/2 seconds off the line for three reasons; a little more down below, less weight and fwd. No mystery here. The down side was torque steer and those other 4 1/2 seconds afterwards. They weren't bad, it's just where there was something lacking. My G was the same as my SH, nothing down below, but from a roll, it went.
If we pick our cars apart, we can find things we don't like about any of them in any brand. Show me the perfect car for under $50k and I'll buy two

 

In the name of disclosure I did work for Nissan for about 5 years, ending in 2001.

Just purchased a SH-AWD/tech for my wife last week, and I spent a lot of time in the G37. The TL and G37 are both great vehicles, and they each shine in different areas. Yes, without a doubt the G37 has the better engine. The seven speed though always seemed to be searching, which bugged me a little bit.

My biggest gripe with the G37, aside from non-existent rear legroom was the Sport seats are totally uncomfortable. The lateral supports were built for a small framed person. I'm 5'11" and 185 lbs., not big by any stretch. Every time I drove the Sport my lats literally hurt.

 

Here are some dyno plots that might interest you guys:
2007 TL-S 6MT:


2008 G37 6MT:


I haven't been able to find a dyno plot for the 09 TL SH-AWD 6MT. But the overall shape of the torque curve should be similar to J35. Looking at these torque curves from the G37 and the TL, it seems to me that the TL has better low end torque than the G. Perhaps the driver in the G37 didn't floor it until 3000rpm?

Clearly, the J series does not lack bottom end torque. There are several possible reasons the TL SH-AWD feels like it has no low end torque.

1.) Weight - the TL SH-AWD 6MT is about 100-200lb heavier than a G37 6MT

2.) Drivetrain layout - AWD has more losses than RWD

3.) DBW - from my experience, the throttle is quite sensitive in the G. A little tap on the gas pedal and the car would leap forward. Not sure if that's the case for the TL though.

DOHC is theoretically inferior to SOHC when it comes to low end torque because of the extra valvetrain weight. But DOHC is usually better for high end power because each individual part is lighter/less complicated than SOHC. With that said, SOHC engines can be made to rev high (from what I have read, the F22B engine in the CF Accord can rev to 8000+rpm with a few changes).