LexFather

Doug, historically, Infiniti's over 60k simply die. I doubt this would be any different.
Heck, we don't even know how well their 50k M45 sells, without sales results.

Its a drop in the bucket. We both know at the higher the price, that BADGE becomes more important to people.

mmarshall

Well, there's Mr. Ghosn's cost cutting for you........the same mentality that put a Kia Rio spare tire assembly in the back of a $60,000 M45.

mmarshall

Thanks.

Why not go two whole hogs and get a Mercury Grand Marquis? Its road manners are even MORE like novocaine.

LexFather

Don't want to call my man bit out but we need a review on the GS460 WITH AAAS before we can come to such a conclusion.

No mag has reviewed a GS with it and they don't rag on the handling, really the steering effort. The M35/45 has a great sporty platform shared with the G35/37, FX and 350Z. Simply a great sporty platform.

mmarshall

Speak up, GS. I can't hear you over the turn-signal-flashers.

Thanks.

While I don't skimp on any of the full-length reviews I post, I'm certainly not going to do so on the special one I do every December for you guys.

doug_999

Mike
I think you are relating price with the car offered. The former Q45 was smaller than the M45 if I remember correctly - so in effect you could get more car for less money. Yes, the Q cost more (over $60K if I remember correctly) but that was not the reason it did not sell.

What will dictate this is how the dealers order the car. As you know, Japanese car dealers order for their region what they think people want. If all the M45xs arrive loaded yes, they may not move too many of them. Alas, I'm betting plenty will be in the $55-$57K range and do just fine for people looking for a V8 AWD Lux car.

marshmallo

I got MASSIVE sticker shock when I was pricing out the M45X and it came out
to 63K.

At that point I would get an LS460. True, it does not have AWD, but to
me choosing between a Lexus flagship and an Infiniti executive class car is a
no brainer.

I'd rather just wait until hell freezes over and Lexus offers AWD on one of
their V8 sedans.

LexFather

Q45 was dimensionally larger, 200 inches long to the M35/45 192 inches. While the M45x is not a true flagship, IMO it spanks the Q45 every single way possible.
I agree 55k-57k with some options is a good price, but I am sorry over 60k and its going to sit and sit and sit and sit on dealer lots.

mmarshall

Not even close, doug. The Q was longer, wider, and heavier than the M....a full-size car by today's standards, while the M is essentially mid-sized.

SICK correctly puts the Q length at around 200 inches.

doug_999

You know, you and Mike would be smart to get yourself a subscription to Car & Driver.

The fact that you both base the size of a car on its exterior dimensions is kind of scary. I sit INSIDE my cars where you might notice that the Q45 had 102 cubic feet of space vs. the M45 at 105.2 cubic feet of space.

I also know this cause I was looking at buying both cars and sat in both at the time and thought "damn, the M45 is bigger!" - oh I think I read it in C&D as well

You can look up the specs if you like - please note the Q45 did have more hip room - maybe that matters to you gals?

(ps - hope you take the above the way it was intended - and that's in good fun with a hint of smack for saying they were not even close in size....)

Gojirra99

I've sat inside both the M45 & Q45 & think the M45 feels at least as spacious inside.

LexFather

Dude, you were not specific. You didn't say interior at all. You said the Q45 you think is smaller. We both assumed exterior dimensions.

Sitting inside both, the M45 has more room to me, the curved roofline (not to mention its tall 58",taller than the LS/7/S) than the Q45, which I've driven, sat in front/back with 1 and 5 people. IMO, behind the drivers seat, they feel similar in dimensions.

KevinGS

Great review, Marshall.

Having had the M45 as a rental from Hertz, I can truly say that I was VERY impressed with the car. The interior was nice and roomy, the quirky interior grew on me, and the performance was top notch. It FELT fast, with a nice exhaust note. The GS430 by comparison has a narrow, cramped interior with a lackluster backseat, a horrible trunk openning, and a too-quiet exhaust note.

The ONLY issue I had with the car is that I could not get over those fugly taillights. And since the rest of the car is so nice, it irked me even more.

Besides that, the M45 is a very nice car, especially if you can find a used one at $30-40k. If I had the money, and I wasn't planning on modding the car, I'd MUCH rather have the M45 than the GS430/460. Modded, the GS looks much better (you know, lowered, on 20s).

S8B

Are you implying that Infiniti will never have a successful 60k+ car? Not trying to start anything here, but through most of your posts toward Infiniti's success, you seem to have very little faith in Infiniti's future

Let's leave the past in the...past. Ever since the introduction of the G35, Infiniti has catapulted itself into being a serious competitor to BMW & Lexus; history isn't hanging on Infiniti's shoulders.

mmarshall, excellent review. By far one of the most thorough & comprehensive review I have ever seen by a member of any forum

.

mmarshall

OK...no problem. (And, yes, I DO read Car and Driver...always has been one of my favorite mags. I've always liked Pat Bedard and his columns, though I don't drive, on the average, as aggressively as he does).


I'm aware of the comparison of the outside/inside dimensions between the M and Q. First, though, numbers alone don't always tell the story. Regardless of "cubic feet" dimensions, how much practical room you have for passengers and cargo will depend on many factors......shapes of the actual compartments themselves, height and slope of the roofline, intrusion of sunroof housings, shapes and height of the seats, seat-folding design, shape of the dash, etc..... take two cars of equal interior dimensions, and depending on the design, one could comfortably hold an NBA guy while the other would cramp a munchkin (I'm being facetious here but I think you get the point ). A good example of this is the contrast between the Ford Taurus (Five Hundred) and the Crown Victoria. The Taurus is substantially roomier inside, despite smaller exterior dimensions...the Crown Vic's dated, old-school design and RWD space inefficiency (despite the fact that cops and taxi drivers like it) clearly work against it.

That is why, during a review, I am careful to note the practical level of comfort, legroom, headroom, trunk space, etc.....that you actually have and experience (especially for a big heavy guy like me), not just the paper specs.
For example, in the M45 review, I noted that the trunk, while generally roomy, had a narrow and compromised opening because of the shape, slope and height of the roofline and trunk lid. That means that larger or bulky items may not go in very easily.

Last, though I'm generally not a fan of doing it this way, official vehicle size designations are determined by the EPA, based on interior dimensions, not exterior size.
They do it simply by numbers, without any concern about practicality......exactly the situation I try to avoid. That, for example, is why the Toyota Prius is classed by the EPA as a "mid-sized" car despite its compact outside dimensions......and why some cars are classd as "full-size" despite mid-sized outside dimensions. It's all a numbers game.....on paper. But, you, as the person who will be buying the car and driving it every day, will actually have to sit in the vehicle and check it out yourself.......many are the car buyers who have plunked down money for a car based on ads, and then had to trade it in or get rid of it early because they just couldn't get comfortable or carry what they wanted to.

And another consideration to take account of, when designing vehicles for space efficiency, particularly with small, low-powered cars with lots of practical room inside, is that owners can be tempted to fill up all the available interior space and add weight to the point that the engine, transmission, cooling system, suspension, tires, etc.....are strained and overloaded, especially on hills. That is why strict gross weight and payload limits are printed on the door jambs and in the Owners' Manuals, and are expected to be adhered to (though with most vehicles, of course, a small safety-margin is built in).

So, rest assured, doug, I don't rate a car's PRACTICAL size just by the amount of pavement it takes up.