CLK vs New Infiniti G35 Coupe
10-24-2002, 12:55 AM
#26
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 CLK 55 AMG Coupe ;)
Originally posted by Ted Baldwin
...............further perspective regarding CLK 320 vs Infinity G35. The G35 has a 6 cylinder engine, weighs less than the CLK, has 280HP and does 0-60 in 6.1 secs. This is same time as a CLK 430. The CLK 320 has 215HP, weighs more than the G35 and has a 0-60 time of 7.4 secs for the W209 and 6.9 secs for the W208. This means that the CLK 320 is slower than the G35 from 0-60 by 1.3 secs. This type of performance difference places the G35 and the CLK320 intotally different categories. It should be the G35 owner that should feel insulted by the comparison.
Ted
...............further perspective regarding CLK 320 vs Infinity G35. The G35 has a 6 cylinder engine, weighs less than the CLK, has 280HP and does 0-60 in 6.1 secs. This is same time as a CLK 430. The CLK 320 has 215HP, weighs more than the G35 and has a 0-60 time of 7.4 secs for the W209 and 6.9 secs for the W208. This means that the CLK 320 is slower than the G35 from 0-60 by 1.3 secs. This type of performance difference places the G35 and the CLK320 intotally different categories. It should be the G35 owner that should feel insulted by the comparison.
Ted
The G35 has the same proven Nissan engine as the new Z350 -- some HOT new car, giving Porsche and BMW Z3s and the new BMW Z4s a run for the money.
...just watch the waiting line of eager VALUE buyers.
10-25-2002, 09:42 AM
#28
Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C230K
I test drove a G35 before I bought my C230k. The G35 is a nice car and the rear looks fine to me. The lack of a manual shifter, and the dash design were a couple of the reasons I didn't consider it.
12-01-2002, 10:27 PM
#29
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 CLK 55 AMG Coupe ;)
Car of the Year for 2003: G35 Coupe and Sedan - Car & Driver!
...and another great review of the G35 Coupe from Road and Track:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/...eID=372&page=1
...and another great review of the G35 Coupe from Road and Track:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/...eID=372&page=1
12-02-2002, 01:38 AM
#30
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought I was probably the only person nuts enough to be cross-shopping between the CLK and the G35 till I saw this thread.
Someone earlier said the G35 wins hands down in every category, that's definitely not true. Right now the G35 and CLK are #1 and #2 on my purchase list for next spring, and their relative positions vary.
No question the G35 beats the CLK(320 at least) on raw performance and price. But there are a lot more things to consider. Originally I was also debating with an M3 in the mix (within $5k of the price as a CLK320). If you decided only by the graphs and stuff from Road & Track tests, obviously everyone would buy M3s, 911s, and G35s depending on their "means".
BUT --- What I finally realized is that I like the IDEA of very high performance more than I actually utilize it. Unless you are an avid street racer or are into mods or whatever, performance isn't the more important metric. If it were, I would say the M3 is the clear winner (over G35) for that crowd.
Where the CLK wins is in stats that are harder to quantify in a review. In my "CLK +" column would be things like styling, exclusivity, safety, resale value, safety, luxury.
I have three main issues with the G35C right now. Firstly, I definitely get the impression that Infiniti is going to stamp these things out as fast as they possibly can. This is definitely a mass-market car, just like the 350Z is intended as a mass-market sports car. This cuts both ways - its the reason the thing can be made less expensive than a CLK, but it also means that three years from now, you'll probably park next to yourself at the mall at least once.
Secondly, the G35C styling looks very cool now, but I don't think it will age as well as most MB styles. I think back to when I first saw models like the Mits 3000GT, or maybe the Audi TT, things that looked a little more aggressive and sportly. Now when I think about them I cringe a bit, they aren't exactly timeless. Not many Japanese designs are. I don't want to get stuck with a trendy car.
There are also some ergonomic issues with the G35 that the CLK does one better - dash console design, headroom, seat adjustments/comfort, are all a notch better on the CLK. Also cargo space, interior aesthetics, telemetrics, safety features, all go to the MB.
The places the G35 wins are well documented already - price, performance, better nav, better stereo head unit, available manual.
So on days where I'm feeling like "its insane to pay $50k for a car", the G35 is firmly in the lead. On days where I'm feeling like $15k isn't a big deal, I favor the CLK, and if I am really focused on performance numbers and who would win a drag race from a red light, I'd opt for the M3. All three are great cars, and just my luck to cross-shop three cars that are all relatively hard-to-get and tend to sell for MSRP
Good thread!
Someone earlier said the G35 wins hands down in every category, that's definitely not true. Right now the G35 and CLK are #1 and #2 on my purchase list for next spring, and their relative positions vary.
No question the G35 beats the CLK(320 at least) on raw performance and price. But there are a lot more things to consider. Originally I was also debating with an M3 in the mix (within $5k of the price as a CLK320). If you decided only by the graphs and stuff from Road & Track tests, obviously everyone would buy M3s, 911s, and G35s depending on their "means".
BUT --- What I finally realized is that I like the IDEA of very high performance more than I actually utilize it. Unless you are an avid street racer or are into mods or whatever, performance isn't the more important metric. If it were, I would say the M3 is the clear winner (over G35) for that crowd.
Where the CLK wins is in stats that are harder to quantify in a review. In my "CLK +" column would be things like styling, exclusivity, safety, resale value, safety, luxury.
I have three main issues with the G35C right now. Firstly, I definitely get the impression that Infiniti is going to stamp these things out as fast as they possibly can. This is definitely a mass-market car, just like the 350Z is intended as a mass-market sports car. This cuts both ways - its the reason the thing can be made less expensive than a CLK, but it also means that three years from now, you'll probably park next to yourself at the mall at least once.
Secondly, the G35C styling looks very cool now, but I don't think it will age as well as most MB styles. I think back to when I first saw models like the Mits 3000GT, or maybe the Audi TT, things that looked a little more aggressive and sportly. Now when I think about them I cringe a bit, they aren't exactly timeless. Not many Japanese designs are. I don't want to get stuck with a trendy car.
There are also some ergonomic issues with the G35 that the CLK does one better - dash console design, headroom, seat adjustments/comfort, are all a notch better on the CLK. Also cargo space, interior aesthetics, telemetrics, safety features, all go to the MB.
The places the G35 wins are well documented already - price, performance, better nav, better stereo head unit, available manual.
So on days where I'm feeling like "its insane to pay $50k for a car", the G35 is firmly in the lead. On days where I'm feeling like $15k isn't a big deal, I favor the CLK, and if I am really focused on performance numbers and who would win a drag race from a red light, I'd opt for the M3. All three are great cars, and just my luck to cross-shop three cars that are all relatively hard-to-get and tend to sell for MSRP
Good thread!
12-02-2002, 11:19 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 CLK 55 AMG Coupe ;)
Infinity has a generous warranty:
Manufacturer Warranty
Basic: 4 yr. / 60,000 mi.
Drivetrain: 6 yr. / 70,000 mi.
Roadside: 4 yr. / Unlimited mi.
Rust: 7 yr. / Unlimited mi.
Manufacturer Warranty
Basic: 4 yr. / 60,000 mi.
Drivetrain: 6 yr. / 70,000 mi.
Roadside: 4 yr. / Unlimited mi.
Rust: 7 yr. / Unlimited mi.
12-04-2002, 05:32 PM
#33
......I have a CLK so I am not a CLK basher. However I bought my CLk with the knowledge that It really needed to be moded. Without mods, the stock CLk is a nice car, but it is not really that different from other cars on the road except for exlusivity and high resle value. Whether these two factors are worth the extra $10,000, I am not sure. Even if you prefer the CLK over the infinity, this kind of conversation in an Mb forum is useful because it allows us Mb owners to see that other cars costing much less may compare quite fabvorably with Mb's and demand more from MB. For instance, from convesations such as in this thread I think that the furure of the 215HP CLK320 in the USA is dead. As exclusive as the CLk320 may be, not many male North American MB buyers will be buying the new W209 CLK 320 only to be overtaken on the road at will by not just infinity G35 but Honda Accords and Mitsubishi eclipses. Typically, Mb owners will just refuse to acknowldege anything right about another car other than MB, but the G35 vs CLK320 debate shows that this might be changing.
Ted
Ted
