Road &Track 2006 M45, 0-60 in 5.3, 1.4 mile 13.8

[RandyWatson]

Kudos to Infiniti. Finally some very solid times. Very impressive.

[CoCo_PuFf]

Kudos to Infiniti. Finally some very solid times. Very impressive.



http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/blush.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/ooo.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/ooo.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/ooo.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/ooo.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/ooo.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/ooo.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/ooo.gif http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

[GroovinGTR]

Like I was telling some BMW troll that was on here the other day, R&T always seems to get the best times of any magazine and that to me seems a little fishy.

However with that grain of salt taken, these numbers tie what R&T got for the 545i SMG which is by far the fastest of this class excluding the in-house tuner models. And the SMG is by far a quicker tranny, their auto is about 1/2 second behind. So the M45 is by far the quickest auto in it's class and ties as quickest overall.

[Steve_L]

If R&T is consistently getting lower times, then that's ok. It just means they have:

1. better drivers
2. better driving conditions (lower altitude? cooler weather?)
3. both

[GroovinGTR]

True but having optimal conditions with professional drivers does lead to unrealistic results.

[CoCo_PuFf]

True but having optimal conditions with professional drivers does lead to unrealistic results.



How is it unrealistic if they actually acheived it? isn't the whole point to show the capabilities of the car being tested? it really doesn't matter if the regular Joe Schmo can't duplicate those times cause it's all about braging rights and class domination at the end of the day.

[Steve_L]

True but having optimal conditions with professional drivers does lead to unrealistic results.



The point isn't that a customer can repeat what R&T does, but the fact that they do it means that the car is capable of it. And the fact that they are consistent means that comparisons between different cars driven by R&T is more valid.

[c3po33]

R&T said:"The M45's 0.90g skidpad performance validates this, setting a new R&T best for a production sedan. And its 65.4 mph slalom speed is among the fastest for a luxury 4-door, bested only by more expensive hot rods like the Audi RS 6, BMW M5, and Mercedes C55 AMG."

[paulb]

Here's the article from R&T (posted on clublexus.com):

http://www.bhangraomega.com/images/off-site/M45-1.jpg
http://www.bhangraomega.com/images/off-site/M45-2.jpg
http://www.bhangraomega.com/images/off-site/M45-3.jpg
http://www.bhangraomega.com/images/off-site/M45-4.jpg
http://www.bhangraomega.com/images/off-site/M45-5.jpg

[Milesblue42]

R&T said:"The M45's 0.90g skidpad performance validates this, setting a new R&T best for a production sedan. And its 65.4 mph slalom speed is among the fastest for a luxury 4-door, bested only by more expensive hot rods like the Audi RS 6, BMW M5, and Mercedes C55 AMG."



I hope INFINITI capitalizes on this when it comes to advertising the M45 http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[psteng19]

R&T said:"The M45's 0.90g skidpad performance validates this, setting a new R&T best for a production sedan. And its 65.4 mph slalom speed is among the fastest for a luxury 4-door, bested only by more expensive hot rods like the Audi RS 6, BMW M5, and Mercedes C55 AMG."



I hope INFINITI capitalizes on this when it comes to advertising the M45 http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/cool.gif



Too bad most consumers won't understand or care about this statistic.

[SMac]

Heavier than the 545i, the E500, even the AWD A6 4.2, and it still lays the smack down on the skidpad and 0-60. Dammmnn.

But 4220 lbs? How did that happen? Did this one include the 4-bottle wine frig option?

And that is with the active rear steer, only present on the Sport models. Hmmm.

16mpg. Yeah, had to figure that one. Nissan is certainly trading fuel economy for the power and gearing to get the numbers. Isn't 2300rpm a bit high at 60mph for a 4.5L?

[Q45tech]

The 90-96Q 4.5V8 turned 2000 [exactly] rpm at 60 mph and the 97-01 turned 2100 rpm with the smaller 4.1 liter engine.

The tranny [gear span and 5th ratio] is still the weak link in that it was designed for a Nissan V6 [which need to turn 2300 rpm at 60 mph].


4220 lbs? Lighter than my old 90Q where 3968 goes up to 4300+ with a full tank and me [178 pounds] on board.

What is impressive is the 50-80 mph ~~ 4.8 seconds with a gear shift at 68 mph........0.5 secs faster than my old JWT Q with no gear shift!.......that's up to 58 feet less exposure when facing a semi in a pass.

40 series 19" will still bring tire/wheel replacement cost into a new realm for most unsuspecting buyers!

[SukairainKupe]

Those performance numbers are ridiculous to say the least. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/blush.gif 5.3sec to propel a 4000+lb car to 60? Infiniti must have really improved the transmission shifting speed. I agree with the others though, the car is porky. Perhaps a supercharged M35 Sport would be a better choice.

[ZandSkyLineRox]

R&T had traction control off (of course!), used manual shift mode (faster auto-shift response?) and "slight" power-braking to achieve those performance numbers (quickest in the Infiniti stable?).
As others have noted: 2300rpm @ 60mph in top gear is a bit high and deteriorates cruising MPG. The 11.4 cu. ft. trunk is smaller than G35's 14.8. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[jwaters943]

I think the acceleration times are about right. Car & Driver got 0-60 in 5.6 seconds I believe. There are so many things to consider when evaluating acceleration test results (weather conditions, elevation, tire pressure, etc.). If the 300C which has pretty poor aerodynamics and average at best tires could manage 0-60 times of 5.3-6 seconds I don't think it's so far fetched that the M45 manages similar numbers.

On a side note, did anyone else notice the interior noise numbers? They must be typos as the 50mph & 70mph numbers are about 10 decibals too high. The G35 is significantly quieter based on those numbers.

[SMac]

I don't get the 5th gear choice.

2nd gear has 62% of the gearing of 1st gear.
3rd gear has 64% of the gearing of 2nd gear.
4th gear has 66% of the gearing of 3rd gear.

5th gear has 83% of the gearing of 4th gear?

Had they continued the trend, 5th gear would have 68% of the gearing of 4th gear, and give us a 1900 rpm engine speed at 60 rather than 2300 rpm.

Doh. The EPA highway rating is only 23?

I'm guessing swapping the .83 5th gear for a .68 is not really an option?

Any ideas why so short a 5th gear? Only thing that comes to mind to me is they are using the same gears for the M35, but why then not use a more appropriate rear diff gear there if using the same tranny, rather than killing the MPG for all the V8 owners?

[smthpal]

but why then not use a more appropriate rear diff gear there if using the same tranny, rather than killing the MPG for all the V8 owners?



Cheaper to build. Cheaper to service. Cheaper everything.

[Madmaster]

Any chance of there being a 6 speed?

[biker]

Any chance of there being a 6 speed?


Sure - when the new Q comes out. Gotta have something to spread the R&D costs over on.

[Opplock48]

Forget a manual transmission. It won't happen. There aren't nearly enough buyers to make that huge investment worthwhile.
Autos are getting so good that it's almost a fait accompli.

[ewalljr]

I don't get the 5th gear choice.
Any ideas why so short a 5th gear? Only thing that comes to mind to me is they are using the same gears for the M35, but why then not use a more appropriate rear diff gear there if using the same tranny, rather than killing the MPG for all the V8 owners?


The Nissan-Infiniti News Bureau specifications page lists the gearing on the M35 as slightly shorter than the M45's in 1st, 3rd and 5th gears. The 2nd gear ratio is listed as 2.353/M35, 2.368/M45, and the same ratio for 4th gear at 1.000. The Y50/M45's trans gear ratios are identical to those used in the Titan/Armada/QX56. The Y34/M45 and F50/Q45 uses the same ratios of the G35's tranny. All of the vehicles mentioned except the M35 use the 0.834 fifth gear, with the M35 using an again slightly different 0.839 ratio (unless it’s a typo). Installing the new M45's tranny in a F50 or Y34, and upgrading from a 2.76 or 3.13 to a 3.36 rear would certainly make their acceleration more brisk.


The 90-96Q 4.5V8 turned 2000 [exactly] rpm at 60 mph and the 97-01 turned 2100 rpm with the smaller 4.1 liter engine.



I'm guessing swapping the .83 5th gear for a .68 is not really an option?



Definitely not a cheap option, especially on a new vehicle. Labor cost of disassembly, installation, reassembly, testing, etc. May need to remap ECU and TCU as some parameters may be thrown off (cruise, ABS, throttle blip feature, etc.), and would likely void the warranty. Or if the manufacturer did it, may need EPA recertification. Though costly, could probably be done.

The road test data in the Feb. 2005 issue of Car&Driver shows that the new M45 pulled to 152 mph at redline in 4th gear. A .69 O/D gear change may slightly prolong the 3 mph increase to the electronically limited speed of 155 mph (C&D Feb 05), but is not a bad trade off for lower rpms at legal cruising speeds.

With the same .69 O/D gear ratio of the G50’s RE4R03A, the 60 mph rpm would be well under 2000 due to the taller 26.7 tire diameter of the new M (245/45-18, 245/40-19), compared to the 26 inch diameter of the 90-96 Q (215/65-15).

[SMac]

I'm not sure I followed all that. I figured it wouldn't be so simple to change an auto tranny gear. It's just a bit frustrating to have a big 4.5L wasting gas cruising the interstate.

It's interesting to look at the engine/tranny/rear diff breakdown across the Nissan models:

engines:
VQ35 -- G35, 350Z, M35, FX35, Altima, Maxima, Quest
VQ40 -- XTerra, Pathfinder, Frontier
VK45 -- old M45, M45, Q45, FX45
VK56 -- Armada, Titan, QX56

transmissions:
5AT #1 (3.540) -- G35, 350Z, old M45, Q45, FX (all VQ35 and VK45, RWD and AWD)
5AT #2 (3.842) -- M35, XTerra, Pathfinder, Frontier (all VQ40 except M35)
5AT #3 (3.827) -- M45, Armada, Titan, QX56 (all VK56 except M45)
5AT #4 (4.657) -- Altima, Maxima, Quest (all VQ35, FWD)

rear diffs:
2.269 -- Altima, Quest
2.440 -- Altima SE-R, Maxima
2.937 -- XTerra 2x4, Armada 2x4, Titan 2x4, QX56 2x4
3.133 -- M45, Q45, XTerra 4x4, Pathfinder 2x4, Frontier 2x4, Frontier 4x4
3.357 -- G35, 350Z, old M45, Pathfinder 4x4, Armada 4x4, Titan 4x4, QX56 4x4, Frontier NISMO
3.538 -- G35 AWD, M35 (also G35 6MT and 350Z 6MT)
3.692 -- M35 AWD, FX

Interesting that the trannys were generally: RWD/AWD car, FWD car, V6 truck, and V8 truck. And then the new M comes along and gets not the RWD/AWD car tranny, but the light truck and heavy truck trannys. Looking at the V6 truck and V8 truck trannys, they're hardly any different. Any good reason for developing/producing/maintaining two models that are practically the same? The V8 model has a barely shorter jump 1-2 and a barely longer jump 2-3. And a slightly shorter reverse. The differences for gears 3/4/5 are hardly worth noticing.

[shholt]

The final drive ratio is not as big a deal on freeway gas economy as you seem to think. It takes a given amount of horsepower to move a car at constant speed on a level road. It is the sum of wind resistance, rolling resistance, and system losses within the car. A couple of hundred rpm will slightly increase the friction losses in the engine, but usually inproves the volumetric efficiency, so the net loss in economy is rather small. It is even smaller when the speed is not constant or the road is not level.

Big, wide, sticky, heavy tires are more of a mileage issue than final drive ratio.
Steve

[SMac]

Yes, but 2300rpm at 60? Who does 60? What's that going to mean at 70 and at 80? It's going to mean a lot more rpms than necessary for normal US interstate cruising.

Talking about the 5th gear ratio, not the final drive ratio. Sure, I'd be just happy if they gave me a fuel flow gage in cfm. Then I could really tell if car X or car Y is more efficient at speed Z. But is a cfm reading from the fuel pump even possible? Sure, should be. But do manufacturers really want people to have access to that information real-time.

And still curious why Infiniti decided to pull out the heavy dudy transmissions for the new M. Stock surplus?

[My45]

I think the 2300@60 is wrong. If you look in the drivetrain table from the save review, it shows 4930@145 in 5th gear, which comes out to 2040@60. Car and driver also has a similar table (5600@155) and it comes out to 2168@60.

[baaboo]

I wonder about those times too. Consider the 2003, with the SAME engine got 97 in the 1/4 mile in the magazine, and 95 - 96 in real life. Add another 5 mph? That translates into 30 - 50 more horsepower on my desktop dyno. Either the 2003 had weak engines, like the Mustangs, or the test 2006 had a "ringer". Kudos!

[jwaters943]

I wonder about those times too. Consider the 2003, with the SAME engine got 97 in the 1/4 mile in the magazine, and 95 - 96 in real life. Add another 5 mph? That translates into 30 - 50 more horsepower on my desktop dyno. Either the 2003 had weak engines, like the Mustangs, or the test 2006 had a "ringer". Kudos!



I think the biggest factor accounting for the impressive acceleration times of the new M is the gearing of the automatic transmission which seems quite a bit more aggressive than the previous generation M45. The new M also has better aerodynamics, a more taut suspension & fairly aggressive wheels/tires which CAN help acceleration times due to less squat & wheelspin when taking off from a stop. Aside from the numbers posted in R&T, the M45 did 0-60 in 5.6 seconds & the 1/4 mile in 14.2 at 101mph in Car and Driver. For comparison, the M35 did 0-60 in 6.3 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 14.7 at 92mph.

Until we get one of these beasts on a dyno, we'll never know for sure. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Madmaster]

Road and Track doesn't always get the quickest times. They hit 60 in 4.5 with the C6 vette.