My opinions: on M45 compared to a G35 sedan.

Forum for Infiniti M35 and M45, and Nissan Fuga owners.
User avatar
szh
Moderator
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

My opinions: on M45 compared to a G35 sedan.

Postby szh » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Folks, I had the opportunity to drive and compare my M45 (1800 miles) to the loaner G35 sedan (5500 miles) that the dealer gave me when I went in for an oil change and transmission programming reset yesterday.

With all due respect to the G35 (an awesome car in its own way) and their owners here, I have to say that I am very glad that I have the M45 and not the G35 we initially went in to buy. For the reasons I am about to go into here.

So, IMHO, if you are considering buying a G35 sedan, please take a few minutes and a deep breath and negotiate a deal on the M45 instead. They are close enough in price (with the deals that Infiniti dealers are giving on the M45) that you will be better off.

(As an aside, the G35 coupe may be better in some regards than the G35 sedan, but I suspect that some of my comments may apply anyway.)
  • Interior. Hands down, the M45 is easily way better. The interior has far more of a luxury feel and look. The leather is better, there is far less plastic, far less "high tech gizmo" feel. The shifter is more robust, the seats are wider and longer (i.e., more comfortable), the controls and knobs and switches feel rugged rather than flimsy.
  • Driving. The M45 engine is smo-o-o-ooth! At 5k to 6k rpm, the G35 engine sounds noisy and raucous (!) compared to the M45. The revs on the M45 climb easier and the engine sound in the cabin is muted. Vibration is lower. Just a smooth rise in revs and speed when you press the accelerator (do get the transmission re-programming done - on both cars - before you compare). The transmission shifts without any jarring feel - the extra weight of the M45 may have something to do with that.
  • Acceleration. Very comparable, but the M45 felt stronger and faster, particularly when the speeds built up over 100 mph. I know that these cars have similar acceleration numbers, but the M45 felt like it was reaching its goals more easily and without any strain. Sorta like "you wanna accelerate? okay, let's roll!" rather then the G35's "you wanna what? groan!" kind of response.
  • Brakes. Close call! The G35 seemed a bit more precise and the M45 feel was a bit more mushy. But they both stopped very well. This is one area where the nod would go to the G35, but not enough to make me want it instead.
  • Handling. The M45 is sportier than the G35 sedan - on highways and curves. I felt more in control, without bumps on the highway causing unusual changes or twitchiness in the driving line. The tires on the M45 are grippier (Bridgestone Turanza 235/45-18 in a WR) compared to the G35 (Goodyear Eagle RS-A in a 215/??-17). The steering is "lighter" on the G35, but buffers the road feel too much. The M45 steering wheel does take more effort to turn than the G35, more than my 1995 Q45 or my wife's Acura 2.2 CL, but the fact that my wife does not mind it, means to me that this is not an issue!
  • Visibility. Surprisingly good in both cars, but the G35 is smaller and easier to see around. So the nod goes there, but not by a lot. I am 5' 10", and am able to adjust the seats on the M45 to compensate accordingly. My wife at 5' 5" did not like my 1995 Q45 ("too big"), but finds the M45 size just fine!
So ... I am convinced that Infiniti has a hit in the M45! Sales could and should be higher! They are not advertising and pushing it all - relying on the G35 to bring in the revenue - and I think that this is a mistake. IMHO, the Infiniti dealers need to be told to ask all potential G35 buyers to take a test drive in the M45 as well and then make up their minds.

Z


User avatar
rydwhite
Posts: 3272
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 3:43 am
Car: 2003 G35 Coupe
Contact:

Postby rydwhite » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

If I was going to buy a sedan, I would have choosen the M over the G. But, I wanted a coupe, so it was a no-brainer. I haven't driven the M, but from everything I have seen and heard, they are a helluva car. The G sedan is nice, but it isn't quite a luxury car, whereas the M is a luxury along with the Q. The interior is the biggest example. The G interior is nicer than many near luxury cars, but it is no comparison to a luxury car interior. As for the handling and acceleration, I can't comment, because I have yet to drive an M unfortunaetly. But, I have driven the G coupe and sedan. The coupe handles better and has better acceleration in my opinion. So, I don't know how that would compare to the M.

Well, that is all I have to say. I really want to take an M for a drive though. I'm hoping that maybe a few years down the road I can pick a used one up to compliment my G coupe for a good price. I would like to do some upgrade and mods to the G and would like a nice everyday driver such as the M.

User avatar
szh
Moderator
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Postby szh » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Hi, Rydwhite.

I agree with your observations on the G35 Coupe, for sure. When we went in to buy a car, I had already told my wife that I would consider the Coupe but did not like the idea of getting the Sedan. Of course, if the price on the M had not been right, I would be driving a G35 Sedan right now - there were no Coupes to be had, and they were dealing on the Sedan. Plus, the G35 Sedan is more practical with a 5 year son to be carted around! :)

BTW, please don't get me wrong about my comments here. I like the G35 a lot and it was definitely the car we went in to get! It is just that the M45 beckoned and the price was right. After a test drive, and checking out the inside, we were both hooked! :D

Z

User avatar
rydwhite
Posts: 3272
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 3:43 am
Car: 2003 G35 Coupe
Contact:

Postby rydwhite » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

No offense taken.

I just don't think that it is a fair comparison when the M is a class above the G. But with that said, the deals that you can get an M for now are basically the same as the G. So, I guess then for the money, a comparison is fair. I think it would be a no-brainer to get the M over the G sedan if they were basically evenly priced with the same options, well, unless someone is just dead set against the styling of the M, which I am not. The more I see the M, the more I like it.

dezm45
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2003 1:08 am

Postby dezm45 » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Z, nice write-up !!!

Actually, when I first starting looking, the G35 WAS on my list, but I never really researched it. I figured I was just going to get another Acura, or maybe even a 3 series, or a Jag. The whole time I was looking, I was basically looking for the MOST car for the LEAST amount of money ! The 'Deal' is important to me, of course, I have to LIKE the car as well -- that's why I figured I'd be in a 2003 TL (they were discounting pretty much), or I'd just wait for the 2004, and probably pay STICKER (which everyone IS right now, so, I'm glad I didn't).

It wasn't until I saw an AD for the M45, next to the AD for a G35 that I even FOUND OUT about the M ... I had gone up to the dealership to drive the G, when I saw the M and said to myself 'How are they selling this car so CHEAP' ??? Well, I had no idea, but I'll never forget when I walked in to the dealership and saw the Emerald Mist with Willow sitting on the showroom floor. I was like 'WOW' this car is beautiful - and then I saw the sticker on it .. $46,355 !! Of course, they show the one with EVERYTHING that you can never afford ! Here I was, looking to get another $30,000 - $35,000 car and I fall in love with this 'boat' as I called it when I first saw it ! I was always a sucker for 'big' luxury cars. But I said, there's no WAY I can afford to drive THIS car .. surely, THIS one isn't on the 'lease deal' anyway so I basically ruled the car out. I left the dealership and started to do some research. I go back about a week later and see the G again. I decide to test drive the M instead. Knowing I can't afford it, I did have the guy run the numbers anyway, just for kicks, and he was only going to sell it to me AT INVOICE (wasn't giving me that $3000 rebate) and the payments were in the HIGH $500/mo range with CONSIDERABLE $$ due at signing. I was upset, but figured I'd never be getting this car anyway. So I forgot about the M for a while.

I continue to see these deals in the paper for the M, but I know that dealership isn't gonna do the deal, so I go elsewhere. A few of the dealers in the area are running the same lease deal, but it's on the 'base' model with just the C&C package. I go to the other dealer and the deal is on a 'base' M, so they're not gonna give me the real nice one for that price, so we start talking about the G. That's when the guy tells me he can get me in a G for about the same price as his BEST deal on the M, and I'm like .. WHY would I pay the same, actually a little more the way I wanted it configured for a G, when I can have the M, for almost the same ? Well, it didn't matter, because this guy backed out on his deal and didn't have the Emerald Mist anyway, and told me the deal was only good on cars that were IN STOCK. Then he tells me his deal on the G the way I want it is gonna be like $475 a month anyway, and his best deal on the 'base' M is like $450 now... so I left, and forgot about the M, again .

(man this is long .. sorry !)

So, like another few weeks go by, and I give ONE more dealer a shot. They had JUST opened, so I figured, what the hell - let's see if they'll make a crazy deal. And ... that's exactly what happened ! They truly called me bluff and actually appreciated that I had done all my homework and had all my information ON PAPER, AND, they didn't even have the car -- they got one for me, the EXACT one I first fell in love with at the 'rip-off' dealer, for WELL over $125 LESS per month, and LESS due at signing. I could NOT believe it !! Now, I knew this was an extremely rare opportunity and I HAD to take it, so I did - and I'm enjoying the HELL out of my M45 EVERYDAY, and I'm glad I didn't settle for ANYTHING else !!!

User avatar
szh
Moderator
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Postby szh » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

rydwhite wrote:No offense taken.

I just don't think that it is a fair comparison when the M is a class above the G. But with that said, the deals that you can get an M for now are basically the same as the G. So, I guess then for the money, a comparison is fair. I think it would be a no-brainer to get the M over the G sedan if they were basically evenly priced with the same options, well, unless someone is just dead set against the styling of the M, which I am not. The more I see the M, the more I like it.


I agree entirely with your comments! If the price difference were higher, then this comparison would definitely be unfair. But, given that it is possible to get an M45 for pretty much the same price (or a tad higher) as a loaded G35, then this comparison is worth making.

And that is the only reason I posted! Just to get people who are considering the G35 as a purchase to look at an M45 as well! Clearly, in the lower end of the cost spectrum, the G35 will ultimately be lower than the M45, so it will still come down on that side of the fence for some people, but many might end up surprising themselves as I did! :)

Z

User avatar
greg_atlanta
Posts: 1104
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 4:37 pm
Car: 2008 G35 Journey Sedan, silver/black (no sunroof), 1992 Q45 (in a past life)

Postby greg_atlanta » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

G35 sedan would be my next car if it weren't for the annoying seat controls which dig into your right thigh.

Tried cloth sedan without seat controls but seats are so flat and lifeless (plus gets dirty too easy).

I'm waiting for next generation G35.

User avatar
Stu Segal
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 4:32 pm
Car: G35 Coupe, Silver, Aero / '06 C6 6.0L
Contact:

Postby Stu Segal » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

I enjoyed reading your comparison.

I own a G35 Coupe, and have thought that what I really want is a G45 Coupe - and now that I read your comments I'm really hoping Infiniti finds a way to squeeze the 4.5 into the G coupe.

Thanks for the interesting insights.

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 » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

I have to agree with most of the comments regarding the interiors. The M45 feels more luxurious and more upscale. However, the G35 interior (to me) is better looking and much cleaner in arrangement.

I just cant stand that high-centered crammed pod with all the controls slammed into it. Its so Acura-like and annoying to use. I like informative LCDs, but I dont want to rely on them just to change the station.

The controls on the G35 seem layed out in a way that is much more like the original Q45. Climate on top, radio on bottom.

-Jesda

vq35de
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri May 16, 2003 4:20 pm
Car: G35 Sedan Leather 6MT

M45 vs. G35

Postby vq35de » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Two words:

Manual Transmission

'Nuff Said

Sean

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

Postby maxnix » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Personally, I think Infiniti has the best dash designs on the market presently. The M/Q45 dash gets it exactly right with the display sandwiched between the vents, so they can all be useful. Look at most of the German cars to see how not to do it. The G35 dash is a triumph of design also.

In fact, I think the G35 has a great interior of quality materials. Very well laid out and executed. While the M45 is definitely more luxurious, and has more of the amenities I like, the black only dash in the M is a killer with the lighter interiors. The G is definitely the more modern and agile chassis. While the 6MT is about as fast as the M, the M will do it effortlessly. Love the current classic M, but can't wait to drive the new one with the updated suspension. Now if they would just get rid of the Teana Japanese-economy-car like upkick in the C window and put in a proper one like the G50 has.

User avatar
szh
Moderator
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: M45 vs. G35

Postby szh » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

vq35de wrote:Two words:

Manual Transmission

'Nuff Said

Sean


Agreed! I wish there was a manual option on the M45. Regardless, the auto is so smooth and effortless, I do not miss manual shifting a lot! :)

Z

User avatar
szh
Moderator
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Postby szh » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Stu Segal wrote:I enjoyed reading your comparison.

I own a G35 Coupe, and have thought that what I really want is a G45 Coupe - and now that I read your comments I'm really hoping Infiniti finds a way to squeeze the 4.5 into the G coupe.

Thanks for the interesting insights.


Thanks, Stu!

If you look at the relative dimensions (interior and exterior) of the G and M, you will see many similarities - often, the numbers are just a tenth of an inch apart! I consider the M45 is the G35 with a V-8 ... IMHO! So I do not think a G45 is needed - unless they make a coupe version with a manual transmission! :D

Z

User avatar
szh
Moderator
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Postby szh » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Jesda wrote:I have to agree with most of the comments regarding the interiors. The M45 feels more luxurious and more upscale. However, the G35 interior (to me) is better looking and much cleaner in arrangement.

I just cant stand that high-centered crammed pod with all the controls slammed into it. Its so Acura-like and annoying to use. I like informative LCDs, but I dont want to rely on them just to change the station.

The controls on the G35 seem layed out in a way that is much more like the original Q45. Climate on top, radio on bottom.


The thing that I did not like about the G35 (and it is completely an individual, personal issue, agreed!) was the way the information is spread all over the place. The "bar" (with a compass, for cryin' out loud!) across the top of the dash, information all over the center console, etc., makes for a very busy feel. I am hooked on the LCD method now!

On the M45 (and the new Q45), you would be surprised how well the center LCD display makes use of the primary radio and climate control - both are shown at the same time and it is totally easy to change these two major functions when needed. The steering wheel mounted access to the radio functions is a welcome addition!

Frankly, going from my 1995 Q45 to the M45 was an easy transition from the controls perspective!

Z

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

Postby maxnix » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

I think Infiniti got it spatially right and pretty much functionally right in integrating the LCD display in the Q/M45 dash. I prefer it to the pop-up display in the G35 NAV pack. But I definitely think the extra $700 for intelligent cruise control in the M is a waste of funds. On familiar routes, the disapppearing NAV screen might even be desirable on the G since it serves no other purpose.__________________Brian1995 Q45 & Q45t & 2000 Q45

Discover the power of the button!

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 » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Sometimes, the old way is better. Big easy knobs keep your eyes on the road. Somehow, around the mid 90s, auto makers went from knobs to sliders, then sliders to electronic buttons, and now hokey joysticks, touch screens, and displays.

Its like makers of aftermarket sound systems (think crappy displays, pretty colors, and crappy controls) are influencing auto makers.

User avatar
Altiman94
Posts: 5895
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2003 12:13 pm
Car: Paintball, cars, outdoor sports
Contact:

Postby Altiman94 » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

I haven't driven either a m45, g35 coupe or sedan, but out of the 3, I like the G35 sedan the best. I dig the looks, so im purely basing my decision on outward appearances. I would have to drive all 3 for about a week each to make a fair comparison.

User avatar
szh
Moderator
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Postby szh » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

I guess from an external looks perspective, I would pick the G35 Coupe first (two door sporty look), the M45 a very close second (unique styling that continues to grow on me - you cannot mistake the car) and the G35 Sedan last. Not because the Sedan is a bad looker - not at all! - but because the other two set a higher standard when it comes to styling! :)

Z

User avatar
szh
Moderator
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Postby szh » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Jesda wrote:Sometimes, the old way is better. Big easy knobs keep your eyes on the road. Somehow, around the mid 90s, auto makers went from knobs to sliders, then sliders to electronic buttons, and now hokey joysticks, touch screens, and displays.

Its like makers of aftermarket sound systems (think crappy displays, pretty colors, and crappy controls) are influencing auto makers.


Hmmm ... one point I would emphasize is that the LCD on the stock M45 is not a touch-screen. You still have to rotate the knobs (temp, volume, etc.) or push buttons (station selectors, etc.) to make things happen. The LCD screen is merely an informative display of the result of the performing the operations desired.

Z

User avatar
rydwhite
Posts: 3272
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 3:43 am
Car: 2003 G35 Coupe
Contact:

Postby rydwhite » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

szhosain wrote:I guess from an external looks perspective, I would pick the G35 Coupe first (two door sporty look), the M45 a very close second (unique styling that continues to grow on me - you cannot mistake the car) and the G35 Sedan last. Not because the Sedan is a bad looker - not at all! - but because the other two set a higher standard when it comes to styling! :)

Z


I agree completely. The G coupe sits lower than the sedan and looks a little more muscular. The more I see the M, the better the car looks to me. It really does stand out. The G sedan is nice, but it looks rather tall compared to the coupe and not as muscular as the coupe or the M. I prefer the car to look muscular as you can tell. But that is just my preference.

vq35de
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri May 16, 2003 4:20 pm
Car: G35 Sedan Leather 6MT

Postby vq35de » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

yes, the M45 wins hands down as far as features go.

But take a 29,000 6MT G35 sedan like mine, throw in that extra 5-10 grand the M45 would have cost, mix well, and voila: 325 whp NA or 400 whp FI with handling upgrades to match. That is my route.

M owners, you have a beautiful car, but you know what? 90% of the time I am in my G, the radio is off, A/C is off and the windows are down. I only use cruise control on my way to and from work. So all those features are pretty much useless to me and I already have all the safety features.

The only thing I wish I had would be the telescoping steering wheel available on the M and Q.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 69935
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 72 240Z RB25, 63 Bluebird RHD, 63 NL320, 67 WRL411, 67 SPL311, 68 510 SR, 73 240Z, 77 620 SR20, 89 Pao, 98 S14, 11 LS460L, 12 Titan CC 4x4.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Re: My opinions: on M45 compared to a G35 sedan.

Postby AZhitman » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

szhosain wrote:[*]Brakes. Close call! The G35 seemed a bit more precise and the M45 feel was a bit more mushy. But they both stopped very well. This is one area where the nod would go to the G35, but not enough to make me want it instead.


Not a hard call there. The G35 has been tested at 111 feet from 60-0, and ranks as the BEST stopping distance EVER returned by a sedan. Further, it stops 3 feet shorter than a Z06, and a full carlength shorter than the Viper.

I concur with all of the above comparisons - I'd own an M in a flat second if I had the funds...

There's the matter of Infiniti not advertising the M - According to an "inside source", the car was INTENTIONALLY kept under the radar, for several reasons.

dezm45
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2003 1:08 am

Postby dezm45 » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Az, now that you mentioned it, you gotta tell us WHY the car was intentionally kept under the radar !!! Who is the 'inside source' ???

Inquiring minds WANT TO KNOW !

User avatar
Megaseth
Posts: 3863
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 5:00 pm
Car: 2002 Pathfinder SE
Contact:

Postby Megaseth » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

I cant wait to get out of college and get one. I fell in love with the M when i saw it. its a mean looking car with the bawls to back it up. i like the G, but the M just has that VIP look like the Q. mmm, super black M45, here i come.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 69935
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 72 240Z RB25, 63 Bluebird RHD, 63 NL320, 67 WRL411, 67 SPL311, 68 510 SR, 73 240Z, 77 620 SR20, 89 Pao, 98 S14, 11 LS460L, 12 Titan CC 4x4.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Postby AZhitman » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

It was never intended to be introduced in the US market. The JDM model was already out, but Nissan had lots of time before the car that was to fill that platform in the US (the Fugu) was ready for production. It wasn't the direction Nissan wanted to take, and didn't represent the "image" they wanted to show for the US market... Therefore, it was a stopgap measure for an 18-month production run.

That's why you'll never see a print or TV ad for the M.

It's too bad, because it's a FAR better car than most people will ever know. It'll be the 1990 Q45 of the 21st century.

User avatar
lessthanjakejohn
Posts: 4105
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 6:39 am

Postby lessthanjakejohn » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

greg, what do you mean never see a print ad?>

I see ads for the M45 often in R&T, C&D, MT...

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 69935
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 72 240Z RB25, 63 Bluebird RHD, 63 NL320, 67 WRL411, 67 SPL311, 68 510 SR, 73 240Z, 77 620 SR20, 89 Pao, 98 S14, 11 LS460L, 12 Titan CC 4x4.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Postby AZhitman » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

R U sure?

User avatar
rydwhite
Posts: 3272
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 3:43 am
Car: 2003 G35 Coupe
Contact:

Postby rydwhite » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

What about the little muscle car video? That seems like advertisement for the US.

User avatar
sultan
Posts: 1804
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:40 am

Postby sultan » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

AZhitman wrote:R U sure?


i'm 100% sure. the most recent Motor Trend (GTO on cover) has this ad on page 60-61. other magazines also have ads for the M.

isn't it Fuga, not Fugu?

User avatar
rydwhite
Posts: 3272
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 3:43 am
Car: 2003 G35 Coupe
Contact:

Postby rydwhite » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:41 am

Well there it is. I've seen that add too.


Return to “Infiniti M35 and M45 Forum”