Mazda3 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Has anyone else noticed that the 2004 Nissan Sentra from profile looks just like a 1994 Pontiac Grand Am? OR is it just me? Either way...I am not really impressed with the Sentra. It looks...well, dull. There does not seem to be much thought put into the design, just kind of like a cheap econo box.
Cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
947 Posts
The current Sentra is the last of the old Nissans. I think the replacement will be styled like newer Nissans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
flat 4 said:
Has anyone else noticed that the 2004 Nissan Sentra from profile looks just like a 1994 Pontiac Grand Am? OR is it just me? Either way...I am not really impressed with the Sentra. It looks...well, dull. There does not seem to be much thought put into the design, just kind of like a cheap econo box.
Cheers.
I'm a Nissan guy so I'm biased but I think the Sentra V-spec is nice. I would never buy one because its got the rear beam suspension but other than that... its nice. Nissan builds the best engines. Plenty of low end torque not that Honduh B.S. where you have to drive it like you hate it to get any sort of power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
I took the Spec-V out for a test drive. And holy crap, what an engine. Power, right here, right now. Easily the best engine I tried under $30 K CDN. I still love it.

But, I felt that everything else about the car was second class. Styling, interior, handling, braking were all OK but there are several others cars in the class that are better than the Spec V. Of course, my 3 blows it away in these areas :D

I agree that Nissan will be re-doing the Sentra, they've had a ton of success with the make-overs of the Altima & Maxima. And the new 350Z has done OK.

Nissan's all about the horsepower, Mazda's all about the handling, Subaru's all about the AWD. Honda & Toyota? All about the :zzz:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
947 Posts
n1smo said:
I'm a Nissan guy so I'm biased but I think the Sentra V-spec is nice. I would never buy one because its got the rear beam suspension but other than that... its nice. Nissan builds the best engines. Plenty of low end torque not that Honduh B.S. where you have to drive it like you hate it to get any sort of power.
Oh my... Nissan builds the best engines? Name an I4 or V6 engine from Nissan and I'll give you a Honda engine that is better. And before you go and start complaining about torque, realize that torque is displacement related in normaly aspirated engines, so make sure you a comparing two engines with similar displacements. Oh one last thing, look at the entire torque curve, rather than just the peak number.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
LeeLee said:
n1smo said:
I'm a Nissan guy so I'm biased but I think the Sentra V-spec is nice. I would never buy one because its got the rear beam suspension but other than that... its nice. Nissan builds the best engines. Plenty of low end torque not that Honduh B.S. where you have to drive it like you hate it to get any sort of power.
Oh my... Nissan builds the best engines? Name an I4 or V6 engine from Nissan and I'll give you a Honda engine that is better. And before you go and start complaining about torque, realize that torque is displacement related in normaly aspirated engines, so make sure you a comparing two engines with similar displacements. Oh one last thing, look at the entire torque curve, rather than just the peak number.
LOL... The VQ is better than anything Honduh has. Its funny how you are talking about looking at the entire power curve and not just the peak numbers because thats exactly what Honduhs are all about. Look at the power curve of the VQ and you will realize just how good Nissan engines are. I'm talking about dyno'ed numbers.. go to forums.maxima.org and click on the dyno section and look at some of the sheets. My brother drives an Integra Type R and he has nothing on my Maxima SE. :p The only way you can drive a Honduh is to redline it so the second set of lobes kick in. I mean... you drove an Accord for crying out loud... you should know what I'm talking about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
Styling is a bit dull comparitively now but what really turned me away from the car was the interiors, Nissan in many cases is still working on making an attractive interior. Hopefully the new one will fix that because overall I like what Nissan is doing.

And the Nissan engines across the whole line are by and large better than anything Honda has going right now, bar none.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,344 Posts
Who cares about the Grand Am - it's all about the new GTO!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
744 Posts
LeeLee said:
Oh my... Nissan builds the best engines? Name an I4 or V6 engine from Nissan and I'll give you a Honda engine that is better. And before you go and start complaining about torque, realize that torque is displacement related in normaly aspirated engines, so make sure you a comparing two engines with similar displacements. Oh one last thing, look at the entire torque curve, rather than just the peak number.
You have really got to be kidding me about this! I really thought you were joking! I think that everyone in this forum agree that Honda has no power in their engines and Nissan has the most in its class with every class that it offers. Compare every Honda engine to the same class Nissan Engine and Honda gets stomped every time!

Honda Civic EX - Single Overhead Cam Inline 4 127 hp 114 lbft torque Displacement - 1668
Nissan Sentra 1.8L - Dual Overhead Cam Inline 4 126 hp 129 lbft torque Displacement - 1769

Winner - "Nissan Sentra 1.8L"

Honda Civic Si - Dual Overhead Cam Inline 4 160 hp 132 lbft torque Displacement - 1998
Nissan Sentra SE-R Vspec - Dual Overhead Cam Inline 4 175 hp 180 lbft torque Displacement - 2500

Winner - "Nissan Sentra SE-R Vspec"

Honda Accord EX - V6 240 hp 212 lbft torque
Nissan Altima 3.5 SE - V6 245 hp 246 lbft torque

Winner - "Nissan Altima 3.5 SE"

I can keep going and embarrass Acura against Infinity too, but this post is already getting too long. The reason that there are so many ways to sup up your Honda with aftermarket stuff is because it isn't suped up enuogh out of the factory. The Variable Valve timing that Honda uses screws them on torque so they can get better gas milage. Torque is all and everything and you will not understand this until you drive a car that matches horsepower and torque. Try Nissan's "Award Winning" V6 engine that is in all of their very good selling cars including the Altima, the Maxima, the Murano, the 350Z, the Infiniti G35, the Infiniti G35 Coupe, and the Infiniti I35. All I can say is when was the last time that a Honda engine was recognized for its power?

And finally, your diplacement remark is correct. If you go to Honda's website and compare cars, all Nissan engines have more displacement in the comaparable cars than Honda's do. So next time you try and slander anyone but Honda, get your facts straight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
Yeah if you've ever driven the Nissan V6 you'd know it was a nice smooth powerful engine. My dad's Pathfinder has one, it's a blast to step into.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,756 Posts
Nissan gets my props for the SR20DET and the VG30DETT.

All other nissan motors are poo, imo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
You can't compare

You can't directly compare the hp and torque from each car and accuratly designate a winner.

Proof is that in front of me I have wheels (canadian mag) and they tested the accord, altima and camry. Obviously the camry had the slowest time but the accord won (considering its lower hp/torque).

Accord 160hp/161torque --- 0-100 = 9.2sec --- 1/4mile = 16.7 @136
Altima 175hp/180torque --- 0-100 = 9.2sec --- 1/4 mile = 16.8 @ 135

So "mnemonicj" you really have to learn to actually Test the cars before "believing" one is faster then the other. Imagine if the honda had equal hp/torque how much faster it would be. Nissan is know to have very high HP/Torque but that's not all that matters! My friend's TL Type S can rape a Maxima!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
947 Posts
n1smo said:
LOL... The VQ is better than anything Honduh has. Its funny how you are talking about looking at the entire power curve and not just the peak numbers because thats exactly what Honduhs are all about. Look at the power curve of the VQ and you will realize just how good Nissan engines are. I'm talking about dyno'ed numbers.. go to forums.maxima.org and click on the dyno section and look at some of the sheets. My brother drives an Integra Type R and he has nothing on my Maxima SE. :p The only way you can drive a Honduh is to redline it so the second set of lobes kick in. I mean... you drove an Accord for crying out loud... you should know what I'm talking about.
The Integra Type R is all about handling, not about quarter-mile drag racing. If your driving enjoyment is measured only in a straight line, then the Integra Type R is a very poor vehicle for you and indeed the Maxima will be a better choice. But to those who actually enjoy driving around curves, the Integra Type R will be faster than a Maxima on road courses.

As for the VQ, there is nothing impressive about that truck engine. It's rough and unrefined. The output is on-par with other engines of similar displacement, nothing special about it. The 3.5L in the Acura MDX is a much smoother and more refined engine. And since you are so hung-up on low end torque, the Honda 3.5L has fater low-end torque band.

Besides, talking about crank torque is rather useless since it is wheel torque that accelerates a car. To get a true idea of how much "oomph" a car has, you must multiply the torque curve by the gearing. Aside from that, crank HP is a far more meaningful indicator of vehicle performance. Honda's J32 in the TL provides 270HP and accelerates the TL similarly quick as the Maxima.

Yes I did own and drive two Accords, and no those cars don't need to be reved to accelerate fast. Of course I am talking with someone who uses "Honduh" and thinks the Sentra Spec-V is a nice car... Our other car is a Sentra GXE and I took a look at a Spec-V before buying the Mazda3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
947 Posts
mnemonicj said:
You have really got to be kidding me about this! I really thought you were joking! I think that everyone in this forum agree that Honda has no power in their engines and Nissan has the most in its class with every class that it offers. Compare every Honda engine to the same class Nissan Engine and Honda gets stomped every time!
No. What was claimed is that Nissan makes the best engines and the challenge is that I can name a better Honda engine given any Nissan engine. What Honda or Nissan choose to equip their cars with is a different discussion.

In terms of 4-cylinder, I'll point to the S2000's 240HP F22, Civic Type-R's 220HP K20, or the TSX's 200HP K24. No Nissan I4 can match any of these I-4s from Honda.

In terms of V6, it's a bit tougher since Nissan chose a huge 3.5L truck engine with a lot of torque and power. Honda's 3.5L is down 5 on HP and torque, but has a fatter low end torque band and is far smoother and more refined. Of course, few normally aspirated V6, certainly none from Nissan, can match the sports-car performance of the 3.2L in the NSX. Heck, even the new TL's engine is impressive at 270HP, and I am sure the TL has more than enough wheel torque to satisfy - the acceleration numbers don't lie.

mnemonicj said:
Torque is all and everything and you will not understand this until you drive a car that matches horsepower and torque. Try Nissan's "Award Winning" V6 engine that is in all of their very good selling cars including the Altima, the Maxima, the Murano, the 350Z, the Infiniti G35, the Infiniti G35 Coupe, and the Infiniti I35. All I can say is when was the last time that a Honda engine was recognized for its power?

And finally, your diplacement remark is correct. If you go to Honda's website and compare cars, all Nissan engines have more displacement in the comaparable cars than Honda's do. So next time you try and slander anyone but Honda, get your facts straight.
Sigh... if you only had participated in the right discussion, you might have made a valid point or two. Or maybe not... since you insist that "Torque is all and everything..." Maybe you can explain to me why a VW TDI with 155lb-ft of torque reaches 60mph 5 seconds later than a Civic Si with the B16A that has only 111lb-ft of torque.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
744 Posts
LeeLee said:
Of course, few normally aspirated V6, certainly none from Nissan, can match the sports-car performance of the 3.2L in the NSX. Heck, even the new TL's engine is impressive at 270HP, and I am sure the TL has more than enough wheel torque to satisfy - the acceleration numbers don't lie.
The 2004 G35 Sedan beats 0-60 times of the TL, I have no doubt about that... why? Because it has more torque even though the TL has more HP. Horsepower is a function of torque and RPM, that is why torque matters, simple math.

Here's the numbers from Car and Driver.com

Acura TL 6-speed manual:
Zero to 60 mph 6.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 15.7 sec

Infiniti G35 Sedan 6-speed manual:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.9 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.4 sec

LeeLee said:
Sigh... if you only had participated in the right discussion, you might have made a valid point or two. Or maybe not... since you insist that "Torque is all and everything..." Maybe you can explain to me why a VW TDI with 155lb-ft of torque reaches 60mph 5 seconds later than a Civic Si with the B16A that has only 111lb-ft of torque.
Because diesel engines don't have the same RPM capabilities. Diesel is the only engine with low end torque that loses to a Honda. Honda engines are made for gas mileage, that is why they lower the low end torque. Barely anyone cares about torque, unless they know what they are talking about. They think horsepower is all the rage. Torque is what turns the wheel with more force to get a car going faster. Nissan's torque curve hits its peak sooner than Honda in an RPM curve and it stays longer. That is why Nissan beats Honda in almost all 0-60 tests. Honda needs the high RPMs to get its horsepower.

I do have to agree with you on the NSX. It is a very nice car and I do like it. I personally will never be able to afford one. I like the Mid-engine, rear wheel drive style and I like the look. The engine does not have a lot of torque, but if you get the RPMs High enough then you don't have a problem. You do have to agree with me on this, the Nissan 350Z is only 0.4 seconds slower (stated by Car and Driver) but costs 1/3rd the price. My brother is thinking of getting a used NSX (2000 or later) or a used Lotus Esprit. He has a 200 hp Delorean right now and he is getting bored with it.

Well LeeLee, how do you like your Mazda3? I am happy with mine. I got the Silver color because I like my car to look decent in the winter months. I had to get the manual transmission too. I don't think I will ever own an automatic again, it is too fun to drive a manual.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
744 Posts
Re: You can't compare

SyChO said:
You can't directly compare the hp and torque from each car and accuratly designate a winner.

Proof is that in front of me I have wheels (canadian mag) and they tested the accord, altima and camry. Obviously the camry had the slowest time but the accord won (considering its lower hp/torque).

Accord 160hp/161torque --- 0-100 = 9.2sec --- 1/4mile = 16.7 @136
Altima 175hp/180torque --- 0-100 = 9.2sec --- 1/4 mile = 16.8 @ 135

So "mnemonicj" you really have to learn to actually Test the cars before "believing" one is faster then the other. Imagine if the honda had equal hp/torque how much faster it would be. Nissan is know to have very high HP/Torque but that's not all that matters! My friend's TL Type S can rape a Maxima!
They must have been testing automatic transmissions, because even the Mazda3 can do 2 seconds better than that. :p

I agree, weight and gearing also make the difference. I have driven the 2003 Nissan Altima, but it was a V6. My girlfriend got one this past summer.

Now about the TL compared to the G35 Sedan since those cars are in the same class. I try to do comparasions of class, not just numbers. Notice that all of the comparasions I did earlier were in the same class. It isn't my fault that Honda and Acura like to choose smaller engines for the same class of cars. When I go car shopping, I also consider price where Nissan and Infiniti have more power for the dollar.

I have heard the new Maxima times are not great, something like 6.3 in the 0-60 because the wheels end up spinning too long at the start. The G35 sedan does beat the TL with less horsepower and more torque even though I have seen Car and Driver quote different numbers, the G35 always wins by at least .3 or .4 seconds in the 0-100 tests. Now Acura just needs to come out with an All wheel drive TL so we can race it against the All wheel drive G35 sedan that just came out. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
HP is a product of Torque so really yes Torque is the most important number in the end though cars with a super high RPM band can make that up with bigger HP numbers. Though in cases like that gearing is entirely critical to get the right performance out of those kinds of cars.

All things being the same I don't like having to rev the crap out of my motor to get anything out of it, thankfully the 3 isn't like that.

As far as the Nissan V-6, it's a smooth running motor, I can't fathom why you could say it's not, it doesn't exhibit any high RPM thrash and pulls smoothly throughout the band. Maybe because it actually has bit of motor noise is what you are describing. I know Honda motors are silent but not everyone wants to hear that sewing machine whipping away, some want to hear a motor surging beneath their vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
I wish Nissan the best, I really do. But as much as I like their big horsepower theme, they still have a ways to go before they'll earn my business. Sometimes it seems like they forego everything else for power. Case in point the Altima. Great car, almost had me wanting one until I sat inside. And lo and behold, Nissan's bane is still there. The interior in that $25K car looks like it cost them about $5 to make. Unbelievably cheap. I know everyone slams them for this but I just can't understand why they continue to use low grade materials. If they would just improve their interiors some, their last big criticism would be gone. And don't get me started on what they did to the poor Maxima. Can you say Fugly?

Anyway, on the Sentra, a quote from C&D comes to mind. "It never lets you forget you're driving a cheap car with a big engine." As you can tell, they didn't like it. I just read a Motor Trend article last month as well in which they reviewed the 04 SE-R. They said virtually everything was improved. . . and they still don't like it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
947 Posts
mnemonicj said:
The 2004 G35 Sedan beats 0-60 times of the TL, I have no doubt about that... why? Because it has more torque even though the TL has more HP. Horsepower is a function of torque and RPM, that is why torque matters, simple math.
The G35 has an advantage for a very simple reason: it is rear wheel drive. Traction is easier for a RWD car when you are drag racing. The numbers you posted seem a little odd for the 0-100 mph acceleration, because the TL numbers seem a little high. Maybe the TL suffers from a too-tall 3rd gear? Anyway, given how close the two cars are for 0-60 and the distinct traction advantage the G35 has, it just goes to show how capable the 3.2L in the TL is and how real those 270HP are.

I agree that torque matters, but not crank torque, because it is not crank torque that accelerates the car. Comparing crank torque between two cars is comparing apples to oranges because you are not taking into consideration the gearing. The shape of the torque curve gives you an idea of how peaky the engine is, but it doesn't tell you how fast the car is going to accelerate. However, given the HP curve and assuming that the gearing isn't horribly wrong, then you can get a very good idea of how the car is going to accelerate.

mnemonicj said:
Because diesel engines don't have the same RPM capabilities. Diesel is the only engine with low end torque that loses to a Honda. Honda engines are made for gas mileage, that is why they lower the low end torque. Barely anyone cares about torque, unless they know what they are talking about. They think horsepower is all the rage. Torque is what turns the wheel with more force to get a car going faster.
That's not true. Honda does not lower the low end torque on their engines. What they do is use as small an engine as they can get a way with and work their engines to breath better at high RPMs. This way you have an engine that is economical when driven slowly, and very powerful when driven fast. Sometimes this comes back and bite them in the @ss as they put in something that is simply too small: see Civic. As I've said before, crank torque output is displacement related, and if you check the dynos for any Honda engine, their torque output is similar to other engines of the same displacement at low to mid-RPMs, and maintain torque output better at higher RPMs. Torque is important, but not crank torque, because it is multiplied by the gearing into wheel torque, then divided by the wheel radius into forward thrust, which is the actual force accelerating the car.

mnemonicj said:
Nissan's torque curve hits its peak sooner than Honda in an RPM curve and it stays longer. That is why Nissan beats Honda in almost all 0-60 tests. Honda needs the high RPMs to get its horsepower.
Indeed if you want good 0-60 numbers, a good amount of low end torque is what you need to prevent bogging. However, for non-drag-racing performance, horse power is the only thing you care about. This is because assuming you have adequately optimized gearing, the engine producing higher HP gives you more wheel torque.

mnemonicj said:
Well LeeLee, how do you like your Mazda3? I am happy with mine. I got the Silver color because I like my car to look decent in the winter months. I had to get the manual transmission too. I don't think I will ever own an automatic again, it is too fun to drive a manual.
Ya, I like my 3 as well, it's been really good so far. There are some things which I don't like, a few rough edges here and there. Some times the suspension feels a little clunky when slowly driving over road imperfections, and the plastic used gets scoffed easy, which makes the interior look old fast. But I'll just have to be careful with it. 5-speed is where it's at :D This particular engine doesn't need a 6-speed but sometimes I wish for one just to have a lower crusing RPM. Maybe the fuel economy will be even better. But you are right, I probably will never buy a car in automatic if it is also available in manual. It's good to see that Mazda is building over 20% of the Mazda3s with both manual transmission and the bigger 2.3L engine.
 
1 - 20 of 90 Posts
Top