Damn Nissan Isn't Messing Around This Year

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

The guy is a hater.. and will seemingly defend anything Foreign. U could get into a conversation about the 1988 Dodge Omni.. and he would somehow creep into the conversation with how a 2011 335i is a better compact... :( a 1988 Dodge Omni

[Russo]

Originally Posted by CombatVet0311

that's good, the collective ears of Camaro 5 are open for you guys to b!tch and cry freely at your leisure. enjoy.

dont get mad that there are more Camaros on the road than Civics...

[mrray13]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

The guy is a hater.. and will seemingly defend anything Foreign. U could get into a conversation about the 1988 Dodge Omni.. and he would somehow creep into the conversation with how a 2011 335i is a better compact... :( a 1988 Dodge Omni

It wasn't an 88, but...




I used to own a 1985 Omni Charger, wasn't a bad car for an 17 year old, lol...





BTW, I have nothing relevant to add to this discussion except to say the CTS-V has got to be the sexiest sedan on the planet. IMHO.

[truth411]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

The guy is a hater.. and will seemingly defend anything Foreign. U could get into a conversation about the 1988 Dodge Omni.. and he would somehow creep into the conversation with how a 2011 335i is a better compact... :( a 1988 Dodge Omni

Just for the record he is not pro everything foreign. He seems to be anti-gm and almost exclusively pro ford. (nothing wrong with that , we all have preferences)

edit: Notice the best car that fits his rear shoulder room criteria is the SHO

[Jay J]

Originally Posted by mrray13

BTW, I have nothing relevant to add to this discussion except to say the CTS-V has got to be the sexiest sedan on the planet. IMHO.

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

Originally Posted by truth411

Just for the record he is not pro everything foreign. He seems to be anti-gm and almost exclusively pro ford. (nothing wrong with that , we all have preferences)

edit: Notice the best car that fits his rear shoulder room criteria is the SHO

Riiight.. and just for the record.. if Hitler had of lived to make it to the Nuremberg Trials... his Lawyer's defense would have been that the Fuhrer had the looking for Ann Frank.. because he wanted to adopt her, proving that he actually loved the Jewish people.

Sorry Ford.. he's not your friend. He just say that U are his friend to make it look like he's not biased.

[CombatVet0311]

Originally Posted by Russo

dont get mad that there are more Camaros on the road than Civics...

if this is true thats great news, provide a link so we can post up a new thread to celebrate

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

198K Civics this year. vs Camaro 66K

[kbui]

Originally Posted by Jay J

Not saying this is not a nice car, but I am seeing very similar lines from Hyundai, Lexus.....

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

Originally Posted by kbui

Not saying this is not a nice car, but I am seeing very similar lines from Hyundai, Lexus.....

Benz actually hired Hyundai's design guy... no joke.

[Leolee]

all im saying is that the m56 is a better LUXURY car out there than a cts, sts, and dts. just saying. if i buy a sedan its not for the performance of it. buy a sports car if you want to go fast.

[kbui]

Originally Posted by Leolee

all im saying is that the m56 is a better LUXURY car out there than a cts, sts, and dts. just saying. if i buy a sedan its not for the performance of it. buy a sports car if you want to go fast.

I think the original contention was the M56 with its V8s and its performance. If performance was not a factor, why not a M37 instead? To me, the new M's is simply a move toward the design of the successful G's (my wife do drive one of these G's). If pure luxury, I think the Lexus is a better car. When I view an Infiniti, I am looking at it as a luxury PERFORMANCE sedan. Hence you are seeing people comparing it to the CTS-V.

[truth411]

Originally Posted by kbui

I think the original contention was the M56 with its V8s and its performance. If performance was not a factor, why not a M37 instead? To me, the new M's is simply a move toward the design of the successful G's (my wife do drive one of these G's). If pure luxury, I think the Lexus is a better car. When I view an Infiniti, I am looking at it as a luxury PERFORMANCE sedan. Hence you are seeing people comparing it to the CTS-V.

Good point.

[TOBY J]

Originally Posted by syr74

I think you're missing the point. From the standpoint of transporting passenger the CTS-V sedan is just about as limited as the coupe is. Outside the CTS-V is larger than it's actualy rivals, the 3-Series, C-Class, etc. Inside, it's really not any better at transporting people in the rear seat than the worst of those and some of them, like the Audi A4, are noticeably more comfortable in the back despite being much smaller.

The CTS-V in either coupe or sedan is only a better car than the M56 if you don't actually need a sedan that can comfortable seat adults in the back.



Sit comfortably in? I think you need to revisit your number. Take, for example, rear leg room.

The Infiniti has 36.2 inches while the Cadillac has 35.9 inches. Sounds close, right? Ah, but wait....there's more. The Caddy only has 42.2 inches of front leg room compared to the Infiniti which has 44.4 inches. That might not mean much but for the fact that manipulating the seat track to allow the front seat to move ridiculously far forward is an age old trick car companies use to inflate their rear leg room numbers of cars with rear leg room issues.

Put the seats in those two cars in the same position for the same driver (oddly makes sense, doesn't it), and the Infiniti will have about 2.5 inches more rear leg room. To put that into perspective, 6 inches of rear leg room turns a mid sized sedan into a virtual limo....2.5 inches is still a lot. Or put more simply, a rear seat passenger can get comfortable in the back of a CTS...so long as nobody is actually sitting in the front.

The Infiniti also has four inches more shoulder room in back, and of course that smidge extra head room too. Even more, having worked in the auto industry.....specifically with interiors and for a time in prototyping....my time tells me the Caddy is playing the numbers game in the rear seat area because, to be blunt, it feels even more cramped than the difference in numbers indicate. And virtually every review I can find supports this notion with a search for cramped or tight rear seat on the CTS sedan bringing up hits from Car and Driver, Automobile, Auto.msn, and a few dozen others. On the new M I could not find a single complaint about rear seat room, but I did find comments like this....



http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...m37/specs.html

Worst of all, I don't even understand why GM or their enthusiasts are fighting this fight in the first place. The CTS is a G-Series competitor, not a M Series competitor. And in that segment the CTS shines as an ode to the fact that GM really can get it right.

Oddly, neither GM nor their fans are content to leave well enough alone and, when somebody makes a post about a car that the CTS cannot hope to compete with in terms of rear seat comfort, some yahoo is going to chime in an say how they would rather have a CTS-V as though nobody actually buys a sedan to carry people in the back and, as such, segment doesn't matter. What you're really doing is setting up a good car to fail in a fight it shouldn't have been in to begin with.

Honestly, I think I could throw a review of a Rolls Royce Ghost up on here and somebody would say "I would rather have a CTS-V", and most of the folks on here would just nod their heads.

best post by far! winner winner...chicken dinner!!!