I do agree that the brakes are sensitive, but things like brake feel take time to get used to. Jumping into a G35 after driving a different car is going to feel different. But 'feel' is something you have to get used to. That said, yes the brakes are sensitive, as are the brakes on the new E-class. But when I said great brakes, I meant the ability to stop the car quickly (that's what brakes do).

I didn't find the engine loud at all. In fact, I thought it very smooth. Yes there was some intake and exhaust roar, but I thought it was 'sporty'. I guess this is subjective as well. What might sound sporty to me, might sound loud to someone else. I think sports sedans should have a sporty sound. I don't classify the C240 as a sports sedan, which is why it doesn't have a lot of engine noise.

I felt the c240 engine anemic, especially with the auto tranny. I think even many people who own the car think so as well, judging by the numerous people who are pushing for the C230 sedan to come back. And when I am talking about engine power, I am talking about throughout the rev range, not just 0-60. I find the 2.6 v6 lacking in midrange, up hills, the tranny constantly requiring harsh double-downshifts. Again, this could be related to driving style as well.

It seems to me that you don't appreciate the characteristics of a true 'sports sedan'...which is fine. You would rather have a cushy ride, and smoother quiet engine than a 'sportier' sounding engine, and a tigher though harsher suspension. And you would probably condemn the arrival of the C230 sedan. I would favor anything bringing the true meaning of a 'sports sedan' to the MB lineup. And yes, if you are familiar with plus sizing and the affect a bigger tire with lower aspect ratio has on a car's handling, there is a BIG difference. Wheel size matched with tire type makes a HUGE handling difference.

 

I've read opinions here by people that have put lowering springs on their MB and didn't notice any worse of a ride. I'd classify suspensions in three rough categories - "harsh"= rides very firm and you feel every bump in the road (example- G35), "firm or taught"= has a firm feel, but also soaks up the bumps in the road, such as where expansion gaps have pushed up a ridge (example- C240) and "soft"= has soft feel and soaks up the bumps (example- Cadillac/large Buicks & Oldsmobiles). I am willing to accept a slightly firmer ride from lowering springs if I can keep most of the "soak up the bumps" aspect at the same time.

I'm assuming that when going to larger wheels, you are going to lower profile tires to keep the same outer circumference, yes? I wouldn't want to throw off my speedometer with other than factory tire outer circumference. I'd say the lower profile tires are the most important aspect of getting better handling (less sidewall flex) than necessarily having a whopping 1" larger wheel. I'd like to see a "blind" test where two sets of the same exact tire (except one set was 16" and the other was 17") were fitted to two identical cars, and the driver was asked to pick out which car had the 1" larger wheel judged by the handling of the car ALONE.

 

After we drove the G35, we went one exit up the interstate and drove the E320. Its brakes were NOT overly sensitive like the G's. The brakes on the E were better than those on my C. And I don't think that the OWNERS of G35's complaining about its brakes have just "jumped" into the G.

I don't equate a loud engine or exhaust with "sporty", but apparently those kids putting coffee can mufflers on their Civics do. I want an engine that gives me the acceleration I want without sounding strained, which is what the G35 sounded like.

See my previous post. I think you can have both a taught yet supple suspension. I think someone who has ever had one, which is what I feel I have in my C240, wouldn't be happy with the G35 for very long I drive a car with a "cushy" suspension. It's a company car - '98 Ford Crown Vic. I always felt it handled like Cadillacs I have a driven (soft). Nothing like my MB!

 

I've done this with a C240 loaner with OEM 16" versus my C320 with 17's and 225/45/17 and 245/40/17 tires and there is a big difference....a "whopping 1 inch" does make a difference.

Jim --- the people that are saying lowering doesn't affect ride quality are the ones that will say the G35 rides/handles great.

but you'll find out for yourself.

I DO think at least the front of the C240/320 needs lowering BTW

 

Come on guys, it all depends on what kind of driving you do as to what car you are going to prefer. I really doubt that all the major car magazines are wrong in their assessment of the G35. Road and track did a shootout style comparison and used a C320 sport which I think finished towards the back of the pack. But they noted that it was the best car for a long trip. A 240 wouldn't even be in the hunt with the cars they were testing. The magazines all noted the same things about the G35 like the brakes being sensitive, interior quality, etc, but still concluded it was a better car for what they like. If you put a 240 against a G35 on a track, or even twisty mountain roads, it would be ugly. But, if you commute, sit in traffic, and use it for daily transportation, the 240 is more comfortable. Even my 230 coupe is quieter and rides better. But that is true with the 3 series BMW also. After test driving a 325i, I decided that I really liked the ride and quietness of my coupe better than the BMW. If I lived in the mountains of North Carolina, I would have something that handles better than my coupe. But here in Atlanta, it is not something I need or even want. Stuff like brakes just take a week to get used to. It took me at least a week to get used to the controls on my coupe compared to my previous vehicle. Now they are 2nd nature. That is why the magazines usually do a week long test- it eliminates the distraction of the "newness factor".

 

I've heard several people mention that a C would ride poorly if it were on 18s. I'd like to totally refute that claim, as even w/ 18s our coupe feels fine (but maybe some of that has to do w/ the excellent Pilot Sport A/S tires)

Also w/ the G35 you can get better reliability, but throw durability out the window...

 

Andrew,
Cars are throw away items now. Durability past 100,000 miles means almost nothing to anyone buying this class of car. The Infiniti's first tune up is scheduled at 100,000 miles, so if it lasts that long, that is probably good enough for 99% of americans. Are you really going to keep your car more than 5 years and 100,000 miles? Heck, if they are as good as a Lexus, they will last 200,000 miles. I see 150,000 mile Lexus' go through the auction all the time, and still bring decent money. BTW, Atlanta has some of the best roads in the US, so while your 18's are fine here, don't take the car to Michigan

 

Good point... the 18s are fine most of the time on reasonable roads - but you hit a pot hole - watch out!

 

it's all personal opinion. whether you pick G35/skyline or the C-class. They both have similar quality. Some of the interior bit from both car are cheesy and on the other hand some of the bit from both car are very nice.

 

No you didn't. You compared tires with different sidewall height and tread width versus one another on cars that aren't identical. You also didn't do it "blind" - not knowing which car had which tires. Compare a set of 205/55/16's to a set of 205/55/17's, same make and compound, on identical cars, without knowing which car has which tire, and then tell me which car has the 16's and which has the 17's.

 

You must have never seen me on the road. Hehe.

 

geeez...ok fine....I'm telling you there IS a noticeable difference in what I compared !! I'm being honest...but whatever...just find out for yourself.

let me know if you find any decent prices on the Eibachs...$275 at TIRE RACK is about the best I've seen.

 

My brother was one of the first people on the reservation list for the G35 Coupe, once the dealer received the beta we were stunned! The exterior looked great, but the interior looked like it came out of a KIA. Grey plastic, you tap on it and it echoes back with its hollow shell! Dealer told us it was a "BETA". Production model should be much better right? First day it arrived at the dealer we went back to look, what we found out, it looked 100%
identical. That day we went to the BMW dealer and picked up the 330CI, with 2.9% APR, couldnt beat that...

 

I don't doubt it. I'm sure you did find the wider tires w/ lower profile ratio provided better handling. Just don't say it was that 1" bigger size wheel that made the difference. If you compared a set of 255/40/16's vs. a set of 205/60/17's, made with identical compounds, guess which would give better handling? (Hint- not the 17's)

Jim

 

Why would anyone in their right mind do that, though? The wider tires/lower profile are a result of the plus sizing. Fine, the 1" increase in the wheel allows for more sporty tires, but you're really arguing semantics.

Would it make you happier if Bagwell said that he noticed a difference in handling because of the wheel/tire combo? Geez.

 

Sounds like the Caddy CTS I test drove -- hideous gray dash and door trim parts in a beige interior -- cheap looking as dirt, IMO. That car will only sell to those who dig it's exterior styling...

 

No. I'm saying that, all other things being equal, there is no relavent difference in handling capabilites between a 16" and 17" tire/wheel combo, which is what has been claimed. Tires with wider tread and lower profiles do give improved handling over tires with narrow tread and tall sidewalls, which is what was proven by Bagwell's experience.
The point is that the C240 was gigged in this thread for having 1" smaller wheels than the G35. Now, going to the Infiniti website I see that the stock G35 sedan comes with P205/65R16 tires, with P215/55R17 as an option, so I guess the whole point was wrong to begin with. In fact, the 205/55/16's that come on the C240 have a lower profile and are "probably" better handling than the stock G35 tires that have the same treadwidth.

It would make me happy if people didn't make generalizations like 17" wheels/tires are "better handling" than 16" wheels/tires. There are TOO MANY variables, such as tread compounds, sidewall height and strength, and tread width.

 

I think the point being made is that plus sizing a wheel/tire generally produces better handling. Now when I say plus-sizing, I mean increasing the wheel diameter and using tires with lower profile.

I understand your argument saying that a 205/55/17 wheel/tire combo *might not* handle better than a 205/55/16 wheel/tire combo. But proper plus-sizing is increasing the wheel diameter while lowering the profile (to maintain the same overall diameter). So a 205/55/16 wheel/tire +1 would be something like a 215/45/17 wheel/tire combo which would handle better than the stock setup. If you use a 205/55/17 package, it would produce inaccuracies in your speedometer, odometer, cruise control, etc.

Also note, that the Infiniti G35's 205/65/16 tires are V-rated, while the 215/55/17 tires are W-rated. Both are higher performance/speed rated than a C240's H-rated tires.

 

try 15's you'll be able to "soak up more bumps"

 

Don't forget - if the tire compound isn't drastically improved by plus sizing, the increase in unsprung weight that often occurs with the bigger wheel is usually somewhat detrimental to handling.

- BT

 

Trench, don't wake these guys from their stupor! Just keep repeating to yourself, "Bigger wheel means better performance...bigger wheel means better performance...bigger wheel..."

 

One of the workers in my building (don't know who, yet) just bought a blood red G35 Coupe. Looks GREAT. I'll try to snag some pics, although s/he doesn't drive it every day.

 

I've seen a lot of G35s on the road. Just like the Toyota Matrix, they look sleak from a distance, but when you get up close, they are bulky IMO.

 

How can you compare a Matrix with G35? A Matrix looks like something a bunch of pre-school kids drew on the wall with crayons.

 

I test drove one of these cars a little while back. The steering wheel is small because it is a sports sedan (this was one of the things I liked about the car). I didn't care for the interior that much, the exterior looks nice, but sitting inside the car I felt like I was driving a bath tub. I'm 6' tall and still thought the car was too big, especially for Infiniti's smallest. You can chalk that one up to it being a Nissan.

From a purely driving standpoint, the engine power was pretty good, brakes were good, handling was good, and steering was direct. I would not rate anything excellent, but I drove my C32 to the dealer, so my results are somewhat skewed I'd still much rather have the BMW (330i), but there is a large cost difference.

The test drive showed me how refined the C32 can be. At full throttle, the car still accelerates more elegantly than the G35 at half.

Verdict: If I had $35k for a new car, I'd consider this vehicle.