MT M45 review:An outrage!!

Forum for Infiniti M35 and M45, and Nissan Fuga owners.
User avatar
PalmerWMD
Posts: 17693
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 3:14 pm
Car: 2004 350Z

MT M45 review:An outrage!!

Postby PalmerWMD » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

May '03 MT issue has a comparison between the M45 and the "improved" Lincon LS V8.

The Lincoln won it!:eek:

Despite the M45 being a FULL SECOND faster 0-60!Despite its better warranty!!Bigger fuel tank.Much more comrpehensive equipment (18 inch wheels, nav system etcetc)Much better braking!!

Instead they spent a thrid of their M45 coverage about not liking the exterior looks (eye of beholder), claiming the Interior is not as good as the LS's.

I think the "author" forgot that thats almost the same interior as in the Q which all car magazines including this one have praised before!Supposedly the LS won cuz it was so much lighter (90 lbs):rolleyes and better handling (was slower in slalom and much weaker brakes)!

The only thing that's the same was the price they were close (the M45 was 2 grand less!)The M45's quality is so much greater too, I been in an LS before and its not all that....

Other than price the LS isn't really in the M45 class at all but the M45 equals or betters sedans costing 30,000 <more>.

This is an outrage and as blatant a work of "testing" dishonesty I have ever seen!

Anyone know MT's email address so we can give them a piece of our mind?

Fred..:mad:


User avatar
Eswift
Posts: 1194
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 4:48 pm
Car: should be obvious enough
Contact:

Postby Eswift » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

the LS interior is just a botched combination of mustang and ford ranger interior trim pieces!

at least car and driver ranked the infiniti one peg ahead of the lincoln, which clutched with a death grip onto last place. maybe because it didnt belong.

i am satisfied that the mercedes and the the aging bimmer came out ahead, but not about the jaguar ahead of the infiniti.

the M45 suspension does need a bit of improvement if it wants to tackle bavaria and the 5 series.

no matter how much sauce (electronics) you ladle onto a rancid pork chop (M45 suspension), itll never turn out right.

18 in wheels cannot alone correct for a suspension geometry that is optimized for a different car.

hopefully, both MT and infiniti will read this.

MT should apologize for their blatant testing dishonesty, but infiniti should also aplogise to its customer base for not quite making the car as sporty as it deserves.

PS: infiniti better not think that pricing a car 2k less than its crappiest competitor is going be OK. instead, actually make an attempt to dethrown the best competition. maybe offer a sport version that isnt so numb of a car.

about M45 commercials: if you put a VLSD, traction control, and ABS on a dodge charger, the M45 wouldnt fair quite so well in comparison.

maybe not too far from ladles of sauce ("brains") on a rancid pork chop (muscle car) after all.

i cringe to think of sales numbers for this car.

User avatar
PalmerWMD
Posts: 17693
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 3:14 pm
Car: 2004 350Z

Postby PalmerWMD » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Rancid Pork chop:eek:

Wash your mouth with sope right now.

Fred..:nono

User avatar
Eswift
Posts: 1194
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 4:48 pm
Car: should be obvious enough
Contact:

Postby Eswift » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

what? the cars got wonderful control systems and a few well-monitored feeback loops, which surely optimize the current setup.

but what if, and believe me, this is purely hypothetical:

what if nissan actually optimized the mechanical aspects and geometry of the suspension to befit a sport sedan, which it is supposed to be, is it not?

then ladled on some nice control systems: ta da! an actual bavaria-beater!

User avatar
Eswift
Posts: 1194
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 4:48 pm
Car: should be obvious enough
Contact:

Postby Eswift » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

i guess i am just sour that the apparent J30 replacement didnt live up to any of my expectations, besides raw power.

well, i guess itll make a good used car, just like the J30.

thank you, rabid depreciation!

911/Q45
Posts: 1376
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:10 pm
Car: Autos, Fitness

Postby 911/Q45 » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

http://www.motortrend.com, click on the contact us box at the bottom of the home page and select MT editor.

User avatar
maxnix
Posts: 22606
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 8:11 pm
Car: 1995 Q45, 1995 Q45t, 2000 Q45

Take MT seriously? No way!

Postby maxnix » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

MT is a waste of time. Kind of like what Tom Cahill would be like with Alzheimers if he were still alive.

Tom Cahill? The car tester for Popular Mechanics who originated the 0-60 mph standard since that was the speed limit for most highways (pre Interstate) at the time. A totally superflous standard now. Like cabin noise at 60 mph.

Unless you drive in New England, I suppose.

He also judged trunks by having his setter pose in them (when the trunk was open and the car parked of course).

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 70234
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 72 240Z RB25, 63 Bluebird RHD, 63 NL320, 67 WRL411, 67 SPL311, 68 510 SR, 77 620 SR20, 89 Pao, 97 D21, 98 S14, 11 LS460L, 12 Titan 4x4.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Postby AZhitman » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

I'll be writing to them for sure. A used M45 will likely be Quella's replacement.

PtM03m45
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 5:28 pm
Contact:

Postby PtM03m45 » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Listen I know that these reviews can be very frustrating for allot of us. Infiniti has been down so long that it will take awhile to get the brand back up. The G35 sedan and coupe helped us, but there is still a stigma on the brand. This impacts the way these weak kneed writers review on a car. Almost like they know what they are going to write before they even get in the car.One thing we will always have to live with is the stigma "Infiniti is just a Nissan" Just like the Lexus guys will always be a toyota and a Acura will always be a Honda. But a Mercedes....well thats a Mercedes. And a BMW well is a BMW. These two companies have such strong brand presence thay could probably make a crappy car that still would not get bad reviews. These jack a$$ writers would still find something nice about it. But a Jap car? Lets face it we live in a very discriminating nation. German cars mean power and allot of our rich crummy society would never lower them selves to a Lexus, Acura or a Infiniti <sarcasm>. But me I'm better than all that, I could care a less if the car was made by the gay designer, engines built in africa, and assembled on rainbow island!! I could give a damn where it all comes from. If you have a great product, real true knowledgable people will buy it.So I guess where I'm going with all this is don't worry what others think, especially ignorant reviewers that prey on the negatives. We are all Infiniti people and we know we are in that special society that carries no bias, knows true automobile design and performance and is proud of what we drive!!I should be president huh

baco99
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 12:46 pm
Contact:

Postby baco99 » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

i think the exterior styling of the M takes some getting used to, but the LS is just so boring!

User avatar
90Q45blue
Posts: 3432
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2002 8:25 am
Car: 2006 Honda Accord EX-L
Contact:

Postby 90Q45blue » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Oh my God! They actually compared an M45 to a freakin Lincoln! and it won!???

I mean when you see someone driving an LS how many of you turn your heads to look and think "wow, damn nice car"? Probably not many. BUT...how many of you see an M45 and want to drool or at least take a second or third look. It's an Infiniti man, a head-turner.

Nick :mad:

User avatar
Q45Viper
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 5:40 am

Postby Q45Viper » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Hmmm, methinks lot's of Ford advertising in MT, not so much Infiniti, money talks! MT notorius over the years for this. Remember the early 90's the Chevy Caprice barge that got car of the year! I pay no opinion to their opinions, I do listen to Car and Driver, Road and Track and Autoweek. Automobile is also a waste.

User avatar
Jeff Williams
Posts: 3394
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 4:17 am
Car: 1994 Q45t, 2000 I30t, 2004 M45, 71, 72, 73, 82 & 2000 Corvettes
Contact:

Postby Jeff Williams » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Car & Driver did the same thing, with its comparo of the M45. I think it was 2 months ago. I don't remember if the Lincoln was in the test, but I do remember the M45 belw away the competition in all the performance tests. I recall Infiniti being hammered for rear passenger space, just like the I-30 was hammered in 2000.

Although we are a little biased, I drove the LS, before I settled on the I30 for my wife. 2 things I did not like:

1. I could not see out of the rear-view mirror (I am 6'-3", and the rear headrests, and the roof console blocked 75% of the rear-view mirror.

2. The I30 felt stronger.

3. The Infiniti was $8,000.00 less.

4. The LS is a Ford.

O. K. 4 things!

User avatar
90Q45blue
Posts: 3432
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2002 8:25 am
Car: 2006 Honda Accord EX-L
Contact:

Postby 90Q45blue » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Jeff Williams wrote: recall Infiniti being hammered for rear passenger space, just like the I-30 was hammered in 2000.


That's because, IMO, Infiniti is and always has been a driver's dealership. The cars are built for the driver to enjoy.

Nick :)

User avatar
Eswift
Posts: 1194
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 4:48 pm
Car: should be obvious enough
Contact:

Postby Eswift » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

for future reference, EVO is the definitive general automobile magazine.

MattB
Posts: 1298
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 3:07 am
Car: 2001 Infiniti I30A
Contact:

Postby MattB » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Eswift wrote:i guess i am just sour that the apparent J30 replacement didnt live up to any of my expectations, besides raw power.

well, i guess itll make a good used car, just like the J30.

thank you, rabid depreciation!


I don't really think it was a J30 replacement, more of a stopgap between the G35/I35 and Q45. The J30 was targeted more at the Acura Legend.

User avatar
Jason B
Posts: 622
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:51 am
Contact:

Postby Jason B » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

A top executive admits Infiniti miscalculated the M45 launch. Infiniti already had won a massive media presence launching the G35 and FX45, and figured that word-of-mouth would sell the M45. Wrong.

"We knew the G35 and FX45 would draw attention to Infiniti, and thought that the M45 would do fine with just print ads and store traffic," says Jed Connelly, Nissan North America Inc. senior vice president of sales and marketing. "But people didn't know enough about the M45 to switch from whatever they were shopping for initially."

To adjust, Infiniti is relaunching the M45 with spot TV ads on cable and on Sunday morning network news programs. Connelly declined to give the cost of the relaunch.

Too little too late if you ask me.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 70234
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 72 240Z RB25, 63 Bluebird RHD, 63 NL320, 67 WRL411, 67 SPL311, 68 510 SR, 77 620 SR20, 89 Pao, 97 D21, 98 S14, 11 LS460L, 12 Titan 4x4.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Postby AZhitman » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Actually, I see the M45 as the modern incarnation of the 90-93 Q45.

I have very little interest in the new Q. IMO, the new M more closely matches the spirit of the early Qs inside and out.

User avatar
Jason B
Posts: 622
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:51 am
Contact:

Postby Jason B » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

It's a shame the are fully redesigning the M45 next year. That is going to really hurt resale. They should at least let it stick around a few years before the redesign.

Sneak preview here:


User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 70234
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 72 240Z RB25, 63 Bluebird RHD, 63 NL320, 67 WRL411, 67 SPL311, 68 510 SR, 77 620 SR20, 89 Pao, 97 D21, 98 S14, 11 LS460L, 12 Titan 4x4.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Postby AZhitman » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Hurt resale = Happy Hitman.

Considering my car was 53K new in 95, and the new M is 45K now, in three years I SHOULD be able to swing buying one.

User avatar
Jason B
Posts: 622
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:51 am
Contact:

Postby Jason B » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

That is is good point. Hold out and you can get one for a STEAL! Good car/quality/reliabilty...

Great picture here:


User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 70234
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 72 240Z RB25, 63 Bluebird RHD, 63 NL320, 67 WRL411, 67 SPL311, 68 510 SR, 77 620 SR20, 89 Pao, 97 D21, 98 S14, 11 LS460L, 12 Titan 4x4.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Postby AZhitman » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

p.s. Jed Conelly (and his crew) are idiots.

Like I've always said - You advertise the hell out of your top-end stuff, then let the curious find out about the lower-end offerings on their own.

Worked for Honda and Toyota for 20 years.

User avatar
Jason B
Posts: 622
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:51 am
Contact:

Postby Jason B » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

AZhitman wrote:p.s. Jed Conelly (and his crew) are idiots.

Like I've always said - You advertise the hell out of your top-end stuff, then let the curious find out about the lower-end offerings on their own.

Worked for Honda and Toyota for 20 years.


TRUE!

I find this funny:

"A top executive admits Infiniti miscalculated the M45 launch. Infiniti already had won a massive media presence launching the G35 and FX45, and figured that word-of-mouth would sell the M45. Wrong."

Word of mouth? They are thinking from 20 years ago.

don85259
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 5:09 pm
Car: computer games, fast cars, etc.

I've test driven the M45...

Postby don85259 » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

and besides not being impressed with the styling, I wanted to know where the extra 70 ponies were from my 98 Q45. It felt faster, don't get me wrong, it just didn't feel as fast as I thought 340 horses would get me. The body style is probably the worst of the new Infiniti bodystyles of recent times. When I drove it, not one person glanced at it. It is not an eye turner.

I thought it was too expensive for what it is. Of course, nowadays I think all cars are too expensive. $30,000 for a Nissan or Honda is simply highway robbery.

Q45 = $40,000. M45 = $35,000.I35 = $30,000.G35 = $25,000.

I paid $37,000 for my current Q45 nearly 5 years ago, brand new. Today they are pushing to $60,000 and more. I'll put it this way...few people's income have kept pace. I love it but it is now out of my league. The M45s are pushing over $50,000.

MattB
Posts: 1298
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 3:07 am
Car: 2001 Infiniti I30A
Contact:

Postby MattB » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

I personally like the M45 a lot. If it depreciates hugely, I might be able to afford one in a few years to replace my 1995 G20t (first car).

User avatar
Jesda
Posts: 39627
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 1:50 pm
Car: BMW 328 vert, Cadillac Seville STS F55 Magneride
Location: THE D
Contact:

Postby Jesda » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

Jason B wrote:It's a shame the are fully redesigning the M45 next year.


Thank goodness! Low resale is how I got my Q. Low resale is how a soon-to-be-laid-off-and-collecting-unemployment college student like me will soon get an M45!

Plus, the profile of the M45 is too weird for me, without a spoiler at least.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 70234
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 72 240Z RB25, 63 Bluebird RHD, 63 NL320, 67 WRL411, 67 SPL311, 68 510 SR, 77 620 SR20, 89 Pao, 97 D21, 98 S14, 11 LS460L, 12 Titan 4x4.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Re: I've test driven the M45...

Postby AZhitman » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

don85259 wrote:I thought it was too expensive for what it is. Of course, nowadays I think all cars are too expensive. $30,000 for a Nissan or Honda is simply highway robbery.

I paid $37,000 for my current Q45 nearly 5 years ago, brand new. Today they are pushing to $60,000 and more. I'll put it this way...few people's income have kept pace. I love it but it is now out of my league. The M45s are pushing over $50,000.


Actually the M is selling for around $42K and a new Q can be had for under $50. And if you consider a 95 Q BRAND NEW in late 94 cost over $50K, how can today's prices be that bad?

User avatar
Jeff Williams
Posts: 3394
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 4:17 am
Car: 1994 Q45t, 2000 I30t, 2004 M45, 71, 72, 73, 82 & 2000 Corvettes
Contact:

Postby Jeff Williams » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

My wife likes the new Q, I like the M. I think it has something to do with curves, and straight lines.

The resale shouldn't be any worse than the Q, although, it does have a price advantage, right off the bat.

My 2000 I30t has kept its value, fairly well. It has depreciated 40%, over the last 42 months. I have kept ahead of the depreciation, from day one.

I am glad I didn't get the 1999 Q45t that was in the showroom, for $52,000.00 I would still owe over $30,000.00 for the car, and be sick.

I'll go with the 5 year old M45, for under $20,000.00 in about 4 years. Until the, I will put another 100,000 miles on the '94, then I'll pick up a 2 year old G35 Coupe for the little woman, and drive the '00 I30t.

Sounds like a good plan, if I can stand to go back to a FWD V6 for a couple of years. That will be the tough part.

don85259
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 5:09 pm
Car: computer games, fast cars, etc.

I understand your point...

Postby don85259 » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

AZhitman wrote:Actually the M is selling for around $42K and a new Q can be had for under $50. And if you consider a 95 Q BRAND NEW in late 94 cost over $50K, how can today's prices be that bad?


I understand your point, although right now you cannot buy a Q for under $50k. Best price I can find is $52,545 at carsdirect.com for the base model, and I would prefer the premium model ($62,145), which is more comparable to my current Q. The stripped M45 is $40,345 but that does not include any options. Adding the wood package (so it least it looks something like my current interior) and the premium package with chrome wheels and a roof (like my Q45 has) brings you up to $44,795. Too much for what it is.

Even the base model Q45 is a full $15,000 more than what I paid for my 1998 Q five years ago, yet per capita incomes or real household incomes have not kept this pace. I was making $50k then and $60k now annually, and I'm one of the lucky ones.

In addition, the residuals have now been lowered on all of the lease deals. I'm paying $660 a month for my Q45 which is fairly cheap for what it is. Today, to lease a Q will run you well into the 900s. I, like many Americans, can't afford that.

These are my points. I'm not singling out Infiniti. ALL CARS ARE INSANELY EXPENSIVE NOW, and it is out of whack with the reality that most Americans are dealing with. Increased unemployment, more layoffs, etc. this is not a good time. Anything decent now is $30,000 or more and that is just too much money for a lot of people. My parent's house in 1974 was only $16,000. Today, cars cost two and three times as much. I remember when a Cadillac was $10,000. Sheesh...not any more.

Maybe I'm just resentful of the fact that I probably will not be able to afford another Q45. For the same price as what I paid for my Q, I will be forced into a G35. Not a bad car but not the same. A step backwards.

--don

User avatar
PalmerWMD
Posts: 17693
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 3:14 pm
Car: 2004 350Z

Re: I've test driven the M45...

Postby PalmerWMD » Sat May 10, 2003 12:22 pm

don85259 wrote:I paid $37,000 for my current Q45 nearly 5 years ago, brand new. Today they are pushing to $60,000 and more. I'll put it this way...few people's income have kept pace. I love it but it is now out of my league. The M45s are pushing over $50,000.


Don, I respectfully disagree.Teh M45's can eb had on the low 40's.As for Q prices in adjusted dollars, they are actullay lower than the 92/93 and much lower than 94/95 (90/+91 were sold articficially low to get market share)

Fred..:)


Return to “Infiniti M35 and M45 Forum”