nobody knows 1/4 mile times for an 04 maxima se auto??
07-11-2003, 07:02 AM
#44
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 184
Originally posted by gmc74
gtech? What is that?
gtech? What is that?
07-11-2003, 05:28 PM
#46
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 78
hmm 14.8 at 95.. usually the gtech is pretty accurate with with times but not trap speeds, is this the new gtech or the old one??? thats with the 4spd auto sl, i wonder what the 5spd se would run??????? some0ne take there car to the track already lol
07-13-2003, 05:58 AM
#49
Originally posted by gmc74
You are pretty quick to call someone out for being wrong, when you are wrong yourself.
I guess we can agree on the salesmen, they are idiots... Anyone who listens to the BS they spew is just as big an idiot, or bigger.
You are pretty quick to call someone out for being wrong, when you are wrong yourself.
I guess we can agree on the salesmen, they are idiots... Anyone who listens to the BS they spew is just as big an idiot, or bigger.
07-13-2003, 12:14 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
Originally posted by tonylittell
com on now we all arent idiots.....without the salesmann you wouldnt have a car.....and not to blow my own horn, but i definatly have more product knowedge than yall on all of nissans new line of vehicles.....some of us salesmen actually read and study the referance guides and books the boss gives us....thats what makes the differance between a 50k a year salesman and a 120k a year salesman like myself.....but i would agree,most saesmen are idiots...we have 3 true salesmen out of 26 at my dealership....
com on now we all arent idiots.....without the salesmann you wouldnt have a car.....and not to blow my own horn, but i definatly have more product knowedge than yall on all of nissans new line of vehicles.....some of us salesmen actually read and study the referance guides and books the boss gives us....thats what makes the differance between a 50k a year salesman and a 120k a year salesman like myself.....but i would agree,most saesmen are idiots...we have 3 true salesmen out of 26 at my dealership....
No offense man, but I don't need a sales person to buy a product. Unfortunately in the case of cars there really isn't any way around it. I would prefer to go to a store and pick one off the shelf and pay for it like I do with every other item I buy, but that isn't possible. Instead I have to deal with a sales person, and a sales manager, and a LieNance person. Each of which is designed to wear you down more and more, not exactly like buying a TV at the store... If an educated salesperson was such an integral part of the process, a) why do they have to go running to their manager for everything, and b) why is the sales person turnover so high?
I am sure you aren't an idiot, but lets be realistic... your colleagues are not the most respected people, I can't think of a profession (that is legal) that is respected less.
That being said, anyone that goes out car shopping and doesn't know almost everything about the car they are going to see, is an idiot. You need to know this info before you look, it isn't like the information isn't readily available everywhere on the net. In order to get a good deal you have to be educated about the product you are looking at, and the competitors products. You also have to be stern and in some cases an a$$hole in order to get a fair deal.
07-25-2003, 03:58 PM
#53
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally posted by QuikSilver04
No times yet?!?! Geez, looks like next Wednesday I'm headed to Gainesville
:woowoo : :ben :
No times yet?!?! Geez, looks like next Wednesday I'm headed to Gainesville
:woowoo : :ben :
When you go, be sure to make note of the weather conditions (temp and humidity) as this can make a HUGE difference in times. Also, try to ask somebody who looks like a regular how the track usually runs compared to others (fast or slow), and how people are doing that night (faster than usual or slower than usual).
Doesn't really matter what you get. Just get some hard data and we can all stop guessing and then be able to figure out whether the time was good or bad, and what the car should really be capable of as well.
Good luck!
07-25-2003, 05:10 PM
#55
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 58
Originally posted by QuikSilver04
No times yet?!?! Geez, looks like next Wednesday I'm headed to Gainesville 
No times yet?!?! Geez, looks like next Wednesday I'm headed to Gainesville
I know August 1st(friday) is street legal drags.
I will try to get my coworker to go also. PM me is something changes.
07-25-2003, 05:13 PM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 167
Originally posted by SteVTEC
When you go, be sure to make note of the weather conditions (temp and humidity) as this can make a HUGE difference in times. Also, try to ask somebody who looks like a regular how the track usually runs compared to others (fast or slow), and how people are doing that night (faster than usual or slower than usual).
Doesn't really matter what you get. Just get some hard data and we can all stop guessing and then be able to figure out whether the time was good or bad, and what the car should really be capable of as well.
When you go, be sure to make note of the weather conditions (temp and humidity) as this can make a HUGE difference in times. Also, try to ask somebody who looks like a regular how the track usually runs compared to others (fast or slow), and how people are doing that night (faster than usual or slower than usual).
Doesn't really matter what you get. Just get some hard data and we can all stop guessing and then be able to figure out whether the time was good or bad, and what the car should really be capable of as well.
The car seems to be really strong, compared to my other friend's black '04 auto SE. We drove his before and it didn't seem as fast as mine. I'll let the tires down a little bit and try to get a good hookup and we'll see what an auto SE can get Weather permitting 
07-25-2003, 05:14 PM
#57
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 58
Originally posted by SteVTEC
Excellent!
When you go, be sure to make note of the weather conditions (temp and humidity) as this can make a HUGE difference in times. Also, try to ask somebody who looks like a regular how the track usually runs compared to others (fast or slow), and how people are doing that night (faster than usual or slower than usual).
Doesn't really matter what you get. Just get some hard data and we can all stop guessing and then be able to figure out whether the time was good or bad, and what the car should really be capable of as well.
Good luck!
Excellent!
When you go, be sure to make note of the weather conditions (temp and humidity) as this can make a HUGE difference in times. Also, try to ask somebody who looks like a regular how the track usually runs compared to others (fast or slow), and how people are doing that night (faster than usual or slower than usual).
Doesn't really matter what you get. Just get some hard data and we can all stop guessing and then be able to figure out whether the time was good or bad, and what the car should really be capable of as well.
Good luck!
Moving to Jacksonville next summer for school (thank God!)
07-27-2003, 02:09 PM
#64
Well, since the tests in the magazines so far have shown that the 2002/2003 Maxima is faster, I also wanted to plug the information in and check it scientifically based on everything about the cars from curb weight to claimed power, to gear and axle ratio, to everything.
With zero elevation, a 160 pound driver and shifting at computer optimized shift points and this is what the details showed.
2003 Maxima SE 6 speed manual
0-30...2.11
0-60...5.85
0-100..15.43
0-60 ft...2.35 @ 33.51
0-500 ft..8.02 @ 69.38
1/4 mile..14.63 @ 96.24
Now for the 2004 Maxima 3.5SE 6 speed manual
0-30...2.20
0-60...6.01
0-100..16.04
0-60 ft...2.41 @ 32.94
0-500 ft..8.12 @ 68.84
1/4 mile..14.79 @ 94.91
So as you can see, with equal drivers, perfect launch and shifting perfectly at optimium shift points, even the computer shows the 2002/2003 Maxima is faster.
Oh, and for ****s and giggles I checked the 2003 Nissan Altima 3.5 SE with 5 speed manual
0-30...2.37
0-60...6.33
0-100..15.82
0-60 ft...2.48 @ 31.43
0-500 ft..8.15 @ 71.55
1/4 mile..14.83 @ 96.02
With zero elevation, a 160 pound driver and shifting at computer optimized shift points and this is what the details showed.
2003 Maxima SE 6 speed manual
0-30...2.11
0-60...5.85
0-100..15.43
0-60 ft...2.35 @ 33.51
0-500 ft..8.02 @ 69.38
1/4 mile..14.63 @ 96.24
Now for the 2004 Maxima 3.5SE 6 speed manual
0-30...2.20
0-60...6.01
0-100..16.04
0-60 ft...2.41 @ 32.94
0-500 ft..8.12 @ 68.84
1/4 mile..14.79 @ 94.91
So as you can see, with equal drivers, perfect launch and shifting perfectly at optimium shift points, even the computer shows the 2002/2003 Maxima is faster.
Oh, and for ****s and giggles I checked the 2003 Nissan Altima 3.5 SE with 5 speed manual
0-30...2.37
0-60...6.33
0-100..15.82
0-60 ft...2.48 @ 31.43
0-500 ft..8.15 @ 71.55
1/4 mile..14.83 @ 96.02
07-27-2003, 02:17 PM
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 200
Well since everyone here was complaining about going to the track about the temp., I decided to go last night. Since this was for a basic idea of what the car will run i left everything in stock condition, didnt remove spare, left all tires at 32 psi. I had a lot of trouble from shifting from 2nd to 5th instead of 3rd, but that only happened a couple times. Il post my 4 best slips. Reminding you I did not change my tire pressure so I had crappy 60' times.
60' - 2.464 - 2.572 - 2.431 - 2.022
1/8 - 9.939 - 9.981 - 9.848 - 9.592
MPH - 73.83 - 74.71 - 74.16 - 73.75
1/4 - 15.207 - 15.195 - 15.086 - 14.851
MPH - 92.66 - 94.81 - 93.05 - 92.94
On all of my runs i would stage and rev up for the launch and my car would roll and unstage, then i would hesitate and start to reverse and the light would go green...lol so i just revved and dumped it. Thats mainly why most of my 60' suck. although on the 4th run i didnt roll and was ready and got an insane launch. My friend watching said it looked insanely faster on that one. anyways the slip is quite puzzling to me. anyways the last run of the night I got a 2.382 60' and got off the line good and then i hit 5th instead of 3rd. ended up running a a 15.554. if i would have hit 3rd and done good im sure that would have been another 14 sec run. anyways im talking to much so... later and enjoy!
Oh yeah temp was about 80 degrees and it was really humid.
Last edited by Glude on 07-27-2003 at 09:54 PM
Report this post to a moderator
07-27-2003 09:50 PM Reply to Post Edit/Delete Message IP: Logged
specv
Maxima Enthusiast
Profile E-mail
Send a Private Message
Add to buddy list
Trader Rating: (0)
60' - 2.464 - 2.572 - 2.431 - 2.022
1/8 - 9.939 - 9.981 - 9.848 - 9.592
MPH - 73.83 - 74.71 - 74.16 - 73.75
1/4 - 15.207 - 15.195 - 15.086 - 14.851
MPH - 92.66 - 94.81 - 93.05 - 92.94
On all of my runs i would stage and rev up for the launch and my car would roll and unstage, then i would hesitate and start to reverse and the light would go green...lol so i just revved and dumped it. Thats mainly why most of my 60' suck. although on the 4th run i didnt roll and was ready and got an insane launch. My friend watching said it looked insanely faster on that one. anyways the slip is quite puzzling to me. anyways the last run of the night I got a 2.382 60' and got off the line good and then i hit 5th instead of 3rd. ended up running a a 15.554. if i would have hit 3rd and done good im sure that would have been another 14 sec run. anyways im talking to much so... later and enjoy!
Oh yeah temp was about 80 degrees and it was really humid.
Last edited by Glude on 07-27-2003 at 09:54 PM
Report this post to a moderator
07-27-2003 09:50 PM Reply to Post Edit/Delete Message IP: Logged
specv
Maxima Enthusiast
Profile E-mail
Send a Private Message
Add to buddy list
Trader Rating: (0)
07-27-2003, 02:19 PM
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 200
glude ran the times above, this is his post i just copy and pasted it over her.. i think the 04 6spd is good for mid 14s with better weather and a better launch.. and as far as i can tell the auto 5spd woudld have no problem running high 14s..
07-27-2003, 03:31 PM
#67
Well, there you go, those times listed for that 6 speed 04 Maxima at the drag slip are almost identical and on par to what the computer states it should be.
As for an auto Maxima SE with the 5 speed auto
Here's what the computer states
(I didn't know the gear and axle ratio of the 04 Maxima SE 5 speed auto, so I used the same as the Infiniti G35 sedan's 5 speed auto)
0-60... 6.53
0-100.. 16.86
0-60 ft.. 2.65 @ 29.91
0-500 ft. 8.40 @ 67.90
1/4 mile. 15.17 @ 94.74
So, I don't know if high 14's from the auto will ever be seen without pulling some weight or having so mods.
Just for comparision sake, the computer states the Infiniti G35 sedan with 5 speed auto runs
0-60 ... 6.25 seconds
1/4 mi.. 14.90 @ 94.07
Obviously, it's faster for two main reasons: 1. RWD for better launch and 2. G35 Sedan is lighter than Maxima
As for an auto Maxima SE with the 5 speed auto
Here's what the computer states
(I didn't know the gear and axle ratio of the 04 Maxima SE 5 speed auto, so I used the same as the Infiniti G35 sedan's 5 speed auto)
0-60... 6.53
0-100.. 16.86
0-60 ft.. 2.65 @ 29.91
0-500 ft. 8.40 @ 67.90
1/4 mile. 15.17 @ 94.74
So, I don't know if high 14's from the auto will ever be seen without pulling some weight or having so mods.
Just for comparision sake, the computer states the Infiniti G35 sedan with 5 speed auto runs
0-60 ... 6.25 seconds
1/4 mi.. 14.90 @ 94.07
Obviously, it's faster for two main reasons: 1. RWD for better launch and 2. G35 Sedan is lighter than Maxima
07-27-2003, 07:25 PM
#71
Originally posted by c2003k
what about the 4spd SL....
what about the 4spd SL....
Well according to the computer analysis it should get the following numbers:
0-30 in .. 2.59
0-60 in .. 6.87
0-100 in . 17.76
0-60 ft... 2.52 @ 29.11
1/4 mi... 15.11 @ 92.17
Sorry SpecV, I know you desperately want the 2004 Maxima's to be as fast as the 2002/2003 but there not.
EVERYTHING from weight, aerodynamics (new ones are worse), tire size, gearing, final driver ratio, horsepower per pound, torque per pound, etc etc ALL are WORSE on the 2004!
They won't be faster than the 2002/2003 all else being equal. Some things you just have to face the facts!
07-27-2003, 07:36 PM
#72
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 58
Originally posted by Driver72
Well according to the computer analysis it should get the following numbers:
0-30 in .. 2.59
0-60 in .. 6.87
0-100 in . 17.76
0-60 ft... 2.52 @ 29.11
1/4 mi... 15.11 @ 92.17
Sorry SpecV, I know you desperately want the 2004 Maxima's to be as fast as the 2002/2003 but there not.
EVERYTHING from weight, aerodynamics (new ones are worse), tire size, gearing, final driver ratio, horsepower per pound, torque per pound, etc etc ALL are WORSE on the 2004!
They won't be faster than the 2002/2003 all else being equal. Some things you just have to face the facts!
Well according to the computer analysis it should get the following numbers:
0-30 in .. 2.59
0-60 in .. 6.87
0-100 in . 17.76
0-60 ft... 2.52 @ 29.11
1/4 mi... 15.11 @ 92.17
Sorry SpecV, I know you desperately want the 2004 Maxima's to be as fast as the 2002/2003 but there not.
EVERYTHING from weight, aerodynamics (new ones are worse), tire size, gearing, final driver ratio, horsepower per pound, torque per pound, etc etc ALL are WORSE on the 2004!
They won't be faster than the 2002/2003 all else being equal. Some things you just have to face the facts!
07-27-2003, 07:40 PM
#73
Originally posted by c2003k
WHOA.....2.52 60' thats slowing then my """"""""&q uot;"""""""&quo t;"
WHOA.....2.52 60' thats slowing then my """"""""&q uot;"""""""&quo t;"
It's an automatic, what do you want? Can't brake torque as fast as clutch dump.
I even entered for an optimum launch in the 0-30 time. That time is obtained by brake torquing at 900 rpm's.
Anything more results in too much wheelspin, anything less and it bogs.
07-27-2003, 07:50 PM
#74
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 58
Originally posted by Driver72
It's an automatic, what do you want? Can't brake torque as fast as clutch dump.
I even entered for an optimum launch in the 0-30 time. That time is obtained by brake torquing at 900 rpm's.
Anything more results in too much wheelspin, anything less and it bogs.
It's an automatic, what do you want? Can't brake torque as fast as clutch dump.
I even entered for an optimum launch in the 0-30 time. That time is obtained by brake torquing at 900 rpm's.
Anything more results in too much wheelspin, anything less and it bogs.
07-27-2003, 08:48 PM
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
Originally posted by Driver72
Well, there you go, those times listed for that 6 speed 04 Maxima at the drag slip are almost identical and on par to what the computer states it should be.
Well, there you go, those times listed for that 6 speed 04 Maxima at the drag slip are almost identical and on par to what the computer states it should be.
I am sure my first couple of times at the track will suck. I need to find the optimum launch point so I don't light them up, but still get a good jump with the SE Auto
07-27-2003, 08:59 PM
#76
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 717
Originally posted by Driver72
Well according to the computer analysis it should get the following numbers:
0-30 in .. 2.59
0-60 in .. 6.87
0-100 in . 17.76
0-60 ft... 2.52 @ 29.11
1/4 mi... 15.11 @ 92.17
Sorry SpecV, I know you desperately want the 2004 Maxima's to be as fast as the 2002/2003 but there not.
EVERYTHING from weight, aerodynamics (new ones are worse), tire size, gearing, final driver ratio, horsepower per pound, torque per pound, etc etc ALL are WORSE on the 2004!
They won't be faster than the 2002/2003 all else being equal. Some things you just have to face the facts!
Well according to the computer analysis it should get the following numbers:
0-30 in .. 2.59
0-60 in .. 6.87
0-100 in . 17.76
0-60 ft... 2.52 @ 29.11
1/4 mi... 15.11 @ 92.17
Sorry SpecV, I know you desperately want the 2004 Maxima's to be as fast as the 2002/2003 but there not.
EVERYTHING from weight, aerodynamics (new ones are worse), tire size, gearing, final driver ratio, horsepower per pound, torque per pound, etc etc ALL are WORSE on the 2004!
They won't be faster than the 2002/2003 all else being equal. Some things you just have to face the facts!
Granted this is the first run with a 6th gen posted here, however with the computer sim and these real life runs, looks like the 6th gen may be comparable to the early 5th gens (00 and 01 maximas.......which were slower than late 4th gens.....) Like you said should make nissan happy considering they wanted to move the 6th gen upscale and more luxurious.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
scutmud
8th Generation Maxima (2016-)
110
08-16-2018 10:56 AM
yat70458
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
2
08-03-2015 01:16 PM