Infiniti Quality

Post by **pmcd1966** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

Recent JD Power Vehicle dependability study ranks Infiniti #2 behind Lexus. Mercedes was #28. Here's the link:

http://clarkhoward.com/topics/....html

Post by **MattB** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

We'll make number one soon enough....

Post by **Jason B** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

#1 isn't far away.

Post by **crubio** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

buick #3, VW not even mentioned, come on...

Post by **BadQ45t** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

This is INITIAL quality...I'd like to see 5-10-20 year quality. Anyone that sits in my 1984 300ZX can see that Nissan's can hold up quite nicely thank you and people think my 97 is brand new. I've always though that initial quality deal wasn't that important, heck my good friend was a big Buick man and they hit 120k and die a natural death via either engine or transmission failure, my 1985 Maxima has 275k on the original engine and finally need transmission work at 255k.

Post by **Jesda** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

For reasons other than reliability, I really dont miss my MBenz 300E. But apparently a lot of them were lemons. And dealers had a habit of raping people for all they could.

I barely missed out on buying a 92 Maxima for $1500 with 288k. Everything in the car and outside the car was in excellent condition. Would have made a nice beater. Strong engine, responsive transmission, clean body and interior. When I decided I wanted it, it was gone.

-Jesda

Post by **nuQ** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

my 90Q, in the last few months, has been mistaken for a 98 or 99 (by discriminating car people!!), some have thought it's only a couple years old!!! the build quality is incredible, and even though i think it was garage kept for the first 9 years, and the two previous owners have not given the care that i have given her soo far, i was able to bring the Q to almost new condition. top notch parts and construction was definitly used. i looked at tons of 94-96 caddy sts's before i bought the Q, nothing compared----not even close!!!! this car is bank vault solid!!!! jeff

Post by **maxnix** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

nuQ wrote: i looked at tons of 94-96 caddy sts's before i bought the Q, nothing compared----not even close!!!! this car is bank vault solid!!!! - jeff

That is why the the 1995 Q45 was judged best car of the year in long term quality.

Infiniti is #1 for 1995.

Post by **TnQDrvr** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

I was surprised to see Mazda ranked so low until I remembered that some Mazdas are actually re-badged Fords. I have owned several Mazdas, built in Japan, that were bulletproof. I bet if you looked only at cars made in Japan (as Lexus and Infiniti are), the ranking would be higher.

Post by **nuQ** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

my mother owns a 97 mazda 626 4cyl auto. i believe the trans is ford and the original has already been replaced, blew at around 60,000 miles.

Post by **Q45tech** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

Have you ever wonder why Infiniti has the longest warranty 4/60k and 6/70k more than BMW more than Mercedes, more than Lexus..........sure recently some dogs have had to bump the warranty up to sell any cars but the 1990 Infiniti had it from day one.

Post by **Jesda** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

Exactly. The 93-97 Mazda 626 for example. If you had the V6, you got a japanese engine and transmission. If you got the I4 automatic, you got a Ford/Mazda motor and a transmission yanked out of a Ford Contour. This unfortunately damaged 626 resale and didnt win many repeat customers. But, if you got the 5-spd 626 I4, it will run forever. I sold my 95 626 in mint condition with 250,000 miles.

-Jesda

Post by **tkd_q45** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

Though I can agree that Lexus and Infiniti would be so high on lthe list, I have to say SAAB and Porsche being ranked so high is VERY suspect to me. Both those companies should be down with Mercedes as POS manufacturers!!! Don't see how they could go from making POSs to stellar cars in just a year or two! Don't know anyone who's had either Porsche or SAAB who doesn't have constant problems both large and small. Maybe I'm wrong here. But Mercedes used to be ranked highly just until recently. Well let me tell you they've been making problematic cars for YEARS. Why are they only being "busted" now? What about Ferrari? I LOVE Ferrari but talk about problems!!!!!!!! They make my 92 400e MBZ look like a Toyota Corrola!

I have to agree with the comments made about Mazda. I've owned a Miata and have known others who've owned Mazda pickups, 626s, Melineas (SP?), 929s (both gens) - all but 3rd Gen RX7s have been really great cars.

Please note that I do like what Porsche makes and I do think SAAB makes really interesting cars. But I sure as hell wouldn't want to OWN either. Or should I more accurately say I can't AFFORD to own either!

I don't care about Lexus being #1 - there cars are SOOOOO boring and IMHO do not age well.

Post by **Mayhem_J30** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

I'm sticking to my guns as the J30 having the best long term build quality.

Post by **juiceman** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

Mayhem_J30 wrote:I'm sticking to my guns as the J30 having the best long term build quality.

Wife's 2003 dodge caravan 12K miles in to have the transmission rebuilt. Gave her the J and took the Buick Century rental.

What a POS and what cheap materials. Hard to drive, and very weird steering feel.

I finally got my J back and even though I am still having some driveline vibes, it still drives and feels better more than a new car.

I am with you

I was considering getting rid og the J for another car but after that I wont give up until it dies

Go infiniti!

Post by **Jesda** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

Lately, it seems that MB has been slumming. You can now enter the Mercedes-Benz brand for $24k, and reviews on these low-end high-volume (C class) Benzes have NOT been friendly. They all say "This is a dream to drive! But everything fell apart!"

A friend of mine, a local successful restauranteur (and luxury car addict) bought an MB ML-class in the late 90s and dumped it when dashboard pieces starting falling apart, rust started appearing after a few months, paint started peeling, and there were a variety of suspension problems. A Kentucky Fried Benz, made in America. He switched to Lexus and has been satisfied ever since.

It seems that around the late 90s, during the Daimler-Chrysler merger, someone stopped paying attention to quality control. And Chrysler quality has been improving at almost the same rate at which Mercedes-Benz quality has been dropping.

German cars have a knack for making you feel like youre behind the wheel of something rock solid, with excellent handling, fit, and finish. Meanwhile the transmission is crumbling to pieces and the electrical system is a moment away from failure. (VW, Audi especially, BMW w/iDrive)

I'll drive a tried-and-true domestic car, like a Buick or Cadillac, or Japanese mainstays like Lexus-Toyota or Infiniti-Nissan before I buy a German money pit.

Regarding Saab, keep in mind that GM has been adamant about improving initial and long-term quality. Saabs might feel cheap inside and carry the same level of fit and finish as a Chevy Impala, with all of the squeaks and rattles, but these days they ARE reliable cars.

-Jesda

Post by **reggiegsd** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

The big change at Mercedes seems to be with the change in the S-class in the late 80s / early 90s. I suspect the build quality suffered as they tried to control the sale prices of the cars. Kind of like the change in the Q when they dropped the G50.

In the past (Pre GM) Saabs were always quirky but went like stink when they were new. They never had Volvo's reputation for longevity. By 100K miles, they were used up. If GM can fix that, I would want one. I'm not holding my breath, GM can't do that with their own stuff.

Now that I've made all my ugly GM comments, as I'm typing this my wife is out driving new GMC Safari vans. She has 200K on the current Safari and is looking to change.

Post by **tkd_q45** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

German cars have a knack for making you feel like youre behind the wheel of something rock solid, with excellent handling, fit, and finish. Meanwhile the transmission is crumbling to pieces and the electrical system is a moment away from failure. (VW, Audi especially, BMW w/iDrive)

How true!

Post by **BadQ45t** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

To be clear reggie, there was not drop in "build quality" in the 2nd gen Q. It may have had a bit less HP, but it is one very solid car and is reliable, in fact much more reliable, than any first gen Q.

Post by **Jesda** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

I am inclined to agree. The 2nd-gen Q seems to enhance the vault-like bulletproof characteristic, and looks bulletproof too. When you see a 97 Q drive past, you wonder if some noble stateman is protected behind bulletproof glass. The interior of the 2nd-gen Q also looks nearly identical to the first Lexus LS400.

-Jesda

Post by **VimyJ** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

I've got 115k on my J. I trust it implicitly. What more could one want in a luxury car?

Post by **Mayhem_J30** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

This is even more fun when you compare the Quality graph with Customer service graph then Sales graph.http://www.nissaninfiniticlub....30139http://www.morgancom.com/AutoInfo0103MC.xls

Post by **tkd_q45** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

It is true that a 2nd Gen Q45 is more reliable/has fewer issues thatn the 1st Gen Q. The 2nd Gen Q is a good car. I think what many us of 1st Gen fans object to is that the 2nd Gen was a step backward in execution. It was an aready aging Nissan Cima. The 2nd Gen should have been an evolution of the 1st Gen, not a cheapend, recycled pre existing design. If you look at the 2nd Gen it a has SCREAMINGLY fake wood throughout. The plastic (once metal) door handles feel and are CHEAP. IMHO the Cima body style has less design merit than the 1st gen. These traits are unbecomming of a car that's trying to compete in the premium sedan market.

Now not comparing the 2nd gen to the first, the 2nd gen IS a nice car. I just think it was too painfully obvious to see the corners Nissan felt it needed to cut in order to meet the bottom line.

It's very similar when comparing the W124 E Class (88-95) to the W210 E Class (96-2002).

Post by **BadQ45t** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:40 pm

My doors are made of metal, I like the styling better than the first gen any day of the week, and I far prefer the layout of the interior. The only thing that I'd like back are the few HP that were lost, but if you actually compare a 96' with 4.5 liters and 278HP and the 4.1 liters with 266 HP the 97 has 64HP per liter while the 96 has only 61. I drove a 96 and 97 back-to-back and the 97 was better in every way IMHO and that is why I bought it. That said, it SHOULD have had the 340HP engine it from 1997 but it didn't.

Infiniti Quality

Infiniti Quality

Nissan Forums

Infiniti Forums

Datsun Forums

Technical Forums

Classifieds / Marketplace

Nissan Motorsports

General Forums