And that's absolutely fine, Shawn...but things like interior design of a car are TOTALLY opinion. Everyone who has ridden in my car LOVES the interior where in my CL, nobody ever said shit. I preferred the CL's seat comfort, the tilting right side mirror, and the memory seats. I love the interior of my G...seats are very comfortable, buttons are easy to locate and read, stereo is just as sub-par as the CLS was, but the power...the torque...it's night and day.

 

TLS owns you all though!

 

 

SCREW YOU GUYS……….I’m goin HOME !!!!!

 

Rear bumper???

 

http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/showt...&highlight=G35

 

And........

http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/showt...335#post897335

 

But again...insurance less the deductible.

 

Are you too stupid to realize that this poor design will affect your rates and if you claim too many times you will be dropped?
Plus, once the Insurance adjusters realize this they will adjust ALL the rates on the car accordingly even if you don’t have an accident.
A slight bump in the ASS shouldn’t result in large and/or MULTIPLE insurance claims.

 

I don't give a fuck...nobody has hit me yet. I got rear-ended a couple times in the CLS and it went to the shop for repairs. Is this really something you sit down and calculate before buying a car?

 

First... It was $1480 for the cost of the bumper damage.

Second... Who cares if it was $3000 or $300, you're still going to pay something. MOST people carry, $250 deductibles. I carry a $500. So in the end, it'd basically come out the same, regardless of the cost of damage.

Third... This test is :ghey: It doesn't tell you anything about the car.

Fourth... Go take a look at the other crash tests performed on the G and other competitors.

http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_rat...idmod.htm#0307


Seems that the G does pretty well??? In fact, I'll gladly give up $1500 in a 5-mph bumper test, and take the rating of "GOOD" on the Head Restraint Design...

Would you look at that... The TL got a "POOR" rating. Geee... Keep my brain intact and be out $1500, or have scrambled eggs in my head and have an intact bumper.

Decisions, decisions...

 

I give up.
This time I really mean it.............

 

wow 7 pages...
all of you would take a g35c over the cl-s, including me ...excluding zapata and shawn .. deal?

 

Please truck-boy, enlighten me. How, for the vast majority, is the G35 superior? Chassis wise I would 100% agree. But even that is nearly irrelevant for the type of driving 99.9% of these cars will ever see.

If you are talking about sheer ability on the track, then I would agree. If you are talking about the vehicle as most will drive it, use it and live with daily, I disagree.

Excluding the RWD aspect (which is a major one but of no relevance for daily driving) the drivetrain is debatable. I find the shift action to be better in the CL-S6. From there it is on to the body and interior. Exterior wise I find the G35C to be more attractive but others, surprising to me, don't think it is attractive so this is subjective. Interior wise, well, it has been stated to death.

In the end, and all options equal, the CL-S6 is a better value. If you track the car and need the extra 1/10 ability then the G35C is the leader. But if driven on the road only the performance difference is minimal and doesn't outweigh the price difference.

 

Let's get real here. The G35c is a ten best winner, it won Car of the Year, it's won comparisons, the car has gotten rave reviews in a short time from here, Japan and Europe (they are that interested, that they tested it). LOOKS overcome any sub-par interior. It looks good, like a sport coupe should.

In comparison, I saw maybe 1 no more than 2 reviews on the CL (no one cared), it won no awards, it is now gone. It had no looks and a sport coupe needs LOOKS, especially with SUVs more popular than ever. Yes, it's more practical (trunk/room) but quite frankly those are pretty dumb reasons to buy a 2-door (especially since we have all these swift sedans).

While the CL was called a Japanese Thunderbird, the G35c is called a 350Z 2+2. Not saying this is true, but this is the image the public sees.

The CL-S interior is better but not exactly killing the G-35.

WIth sedans as fast or faster than coupes and they handle and brake the same, the ONLY reason to buy a 2-door is LOOKS. The G35c has plenty of that.

On top of that, LOOKS attract buyers. Chrysler has done will with proving that, making concepts into reality. If u look at the names:

G35 (no history, no one knows what the hell it is)
CL( been out since what 97 and no one knows what it is)

If u can't expect buyers to flock to your dealer with style that does not stand out from the crowd with a new or no-name model. So u got to ATTRACT attention.

It's like a new store going against Macy's. Macy's is established, it does not need to do much of anything. A new store has what, balloons, NEON signs, etc to ATTRACT attention because no one knows the stores name or what it's about.

Simple business actually.

 

Come on...most of the members here drop at least 3-5K into the CL to make it handle 1/2 as good as a G35. That isn't value.

 

maybe for the AT :P

 

You were being facetious?? There would be no way to get the CL-S (even 6-Speed) to handle as well as a prepped G35C. But it can get within 90% of the G35C's ability for a little money.

 

Do you really believe that? Springs, sways, strut bars, tires... On a FWD car with 62/38 weighting?

I'm no where near an expert, but I find that sort of hard to believe it...

 

6speed w/ rims/tires/sways ownz joo yet even still i realize the drawbacks of FWD application

 

What is the ultimate ability of the G35C, we need a definition then of a test. Lets take skid pad for instance. There is less than a 3% difference in most test numbers I have seen.

For slalom, there is less than a 5% difference.

Now add springs, sways and tires to the CL-S and that margin is reduced. But what you have in the G35C, which cannot be reproduced in the CL-S, is greater confidence when pushed due to better balance.

 

I should add, what does that 3% difference net you when comparing lap time; 1 - 2 seconds behind on a tight course when running around a minute.

But this is on a track where the magazines test. Most here will never reach 80% of the cars potential.

 

(stock vs. stock comparison of sport model CL to sport model G35c)

While I agree with what you are saying...

The G35 holds more than 1/10 on the CLS on the track. It has many advantages there..

suspension
brakes
tires
wheels
chassis
weight balance
RWD

All of those together also produce a better daily driver...

If you drive in stop and go and never get above 30mph. I could see your outlook. But if you do a lot of hard driving. The CLS does show it's faults...


G35 is new, so comparing the price to a discontinued vehicle is irrelevant to me.

Also the G35 *is* a sport coupe. CLS isn't.

(being FWD, having bad weight balance, and undersized brakes says enough about the CLS for me in terms of Sport)

G35 is lighter, more powerful, and is better with everything listed above. I don't believe for a second. Stock vs Stock CLS could hold anything (sports) to the G35...

The G35 has not been out long enough to make a aftermarket to aftermarket comparison. It will come up the underdog by lack of aftermarket parts. The CLS has had more than 3 years for aftermarket parts to surface. Such a comparison is unjust at this time.

When modifying the CLS you start with some inherent problem(s) which cannot be fixed with modifications. Weight balance being the major one. Unless you add weight to the rear. Or acid dip the front end...

G35 reigns... I honestly don't understand the CLS vs. G35 argument. The G35 was engineered to be a sports car... CLS in an in-between from sport to luxury... Leaning on neither side of the line IMO.

 

TAKE IT TO THE TRACK!!!!!

 

i remember reading somewhere that 65/35 (or maybe 60/40) was the IDEAL weight distribution for FWD. the extra weight up front keeps the front tires on the ground for traction purposes id assume.

 

 

And you guys say we CLers exaggerate on the interior comparison? C'mon. Teins coilovers, sways, strut bar, tie bar, sticky tires which can be had under $3k, it only handles 1/2 as good? The G handles well, but it's not a Porsche/Viper/Ferarri.

The G35 is a great car. It has good performance, handles well, and is priced reasonably too. Looks on the other hand are subjective. Magazines can rave about the car, give it 10 billion awards, but when it comes down to buying a car, people are not going to buy it if they don't like the way it looks. I'm not saying that's what the general public thinks, but I for one do not like the way it looks and I'm sure there are people that don't like the way the CL looks.

 

 

Stock for stock there is a difference but I wouldn't consider the sport packages equivalent. I wouldn't even consider the Type-S a sport package whereas the sport suspension on my old BMW was well defined.

But a better daily driver, I disagree. Except for accelerating I don't go over 5/10th on my commute and most here would not either. But to comment on the list:

Suspension, is it a better suspension or a better chassis?? For being FWD I feel the CL-S6 does very well for its given handicap which lends credit to its suspension.

Brakes, the Brembo package would help and is nice but for daily driving it isn't any better. They are not there for reduced stopping distance which the CL-S isn't too bad at. They do resist fade significantly which would show themselves well at a road course.

Wheels, I dunno as I never compared them but again, irrelevant for daily driving.

Tires are something lacking on the CL-S and easily replaced when the stocks are shot.

The last three go without saying. Although in some cases the RWD chassis provided better feel in everyday driving, unless pushed its benefit is not what people make it out to be.

I find it hilarious when some people state they will only At the same time they joke about people buying SUVs and never taking them off road.

 

I had a CLS with sways/rims/tires and it didn't hold a candle to the performance of the G35 stock.

 

 

Gladly, when are we going...

 

Cars should have a self-esteem option.

"Feel good about the 30k you just spent without having to argue on the internet!"

 

You can't drive then. :P

Seriously, the feel is different which lends to the percieved ability. But that is not the actual ability.

 

Sportscar vs. Sportluxury, no comparison. The corners I hit now are the same corners I hit in the CLS.

 

Ya, I'm an enthusiast so my views will definitely lean in that direction. Which is where I thought the conversation was... 'focused on sport enthusiasts'

Now ... when I go back and read more of the thread. I've decided it has taken quite a few turns... hehe

I think I'll just sit and read from here on out in this one

 

I'm done with this too. They are both great cars...it's just that the G is better. :P

 

no, the cl-s is better. HAHA!!!1








end of thread-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------end of thread

 

i guess u r wrong.....