G35 Coupe

I just looked at the drawings for the new G35 Coupe:eek: they will have out by the end of the year and all I can say is SA-WEEET it looks a hundred times better then the sedan, and by the end of the year nismo will be in full swing and they will have all sorts of goodies for it I'm sure. Man I can't wait to see it in production:D hopefully it will be in my price range and maybe I will pick one up.

the autoshow chick said it would be based off the skyline, but the drawings look nothing like it, in fact ,the drawings are alot uglier than hte jdm pictures of the newest skyline. I hope the white peepo dont fuck this one up, it is very important to me

Actualy it is the Skyline (or at least the American version of it) I think the G35 looks just like the new Skyline exept for a few minor details. I am sure they won't stray to far away from the original because that would cost more money to develop and we all know how much of a tight wad the auto industry can be.

Originally posted by gdalton
and we all know how much of a tight wad the auto industry can be.
It's a matter of keeping costs down. The 'tight wad' american public will let a coupld grand sway their car buying decision. So car companies need to find way to save money to make their cars cheaper. :rolleyes:

What exactly is a G35 coupe? Is it the same car as the proposed U.S. bound conceptual GT-R? Or are they two different cars built on the same chassis? Hopefully it's the latter of the two...

...My reasoning:

1. G35 sedan ~> 330i
2. G35 coupe ~> 330ci
3. ?35 GT-R ~> M3

I'm not saying that the Infinitis are equal to or better than the BMWs, just that they could possibly be good competitors in performance.

Is this what you all have seen?

http://thehollywoodextra.com/G35/2003%20G35%20Coupe.jpg

that is what i was worried about, just look at it compared to a skyline, its nothing like it. They are catering way too much to the USDM public buyers on this one. I even heard they are gonna stick a 8 cylinder piece of shit in to that. :(

What I don't understand is the blind ignorant hatred of the V8. Why would a V8 be sooooo bad? Sure it would hurt the feel if it was some low rpm low compression mid 80's type slug. But the addition of cylinders sure doesn't insure dissaster. Last time I checked there was a lot more V8 and V10 F1 winners than V6's. If we are talking "essense" or theory, the V6 was always considered the poorest choice for a sports car because of the difficulty in harmonics control. I think it was Ferrari that said that V6 had no place in their cars. I know, no one sticks to their virtues forever.

Yes, I grew up and still drive V8's but this is not my reason for writing. BMW even gave in to installing a V8 into its M3 race car. Porsche has even considered a V8 recently. Less cubic inches per cube simply allows the engine to rev more easily so to divide the same size motor by more cylinders usually leads to more rpm, more hp and actually less low rpm torque. The I6's are actually the torque monsters out there and fundamentally a great truck engine because of this.

No NASCAR stories here, just fundamental physics. Just don't give us a nose heavy lazy engine of any configuration.

I totally agree with what you are saying, but I think BingBingMa's referrence to his hatred of a "V-8 Skyline" is not simply because V-8s are bad, but in Japanese vehicles, V-8s generally terminate any possibility of factory forced induction, namely turbochargers. The Japanese automakers tend to stick to 6-cylinder twin-turbos, or V-8s. The only OEM twin-turbocharged V-8s we know are rare prototype racers. Furthermore, once you've got a V-8, most of us are stuck with it's characteristics, since twin-turbocharging an originally naturally aspirated engine is extremely costly. But if the factory produced a twin-turbo V-6/I-6, most of us would grab at the chance since it only takes minimal tweaking to locate hundreds of extra horsepower.

not only due to the fact of the cost effectiveness of twinturbo on a stock v8, if they factory guys try to cram such a large engine into the car, the space, and consequently the ability to modify the existing engine will be severely limited. Since i have never seen the exact size of the 4.5 litre v8 they r dropping in the usdm "skyline" (term used loosely). There is the lingering doubt that turbocahrgers might not even fit without extensive modification, meaning that it will not be simply a bolt on. This both effects performance and greatly increases variability on the actual quality of the install. Also, if teh engine is really big, every single mod put in might require an engine lift, and with the complex as hell japanese wiring in all their cars, trying to improve the 8 cylinder skyline will simply be a pain in the ass

8 cylinders are not bad, but they are big, heavy, and stubborn to modify, and it will be hard to make a v8 stock car your own.

A few of you keep referring to the new G35 as some sort of 'disgrace' to the Skyline name; I have a problem with this. The most revered name associated with this lineage of cars is not the Skyline, but the GT-R. There have always lesser Skyline GT models available in both sedan and coupe form. And so what if Nissan decided to push the appearances of the next Skyline GT and GT-R away from each other? It makes the GT-R all the more unique, while simultaneously bringing some more recognition to the user friendly GT. The GT is pretty much its own car now, rather than just a "non-GT-R Skyline". The performance figures and reviews are yielding impressive results, and there seems to be flagship sports car room for the U.S. bound GT-R at the top of the Nissan food chain, in the near future.

So let's appreciate the G35/Skyline GT for what it is rather than what it isn't. We will have to wait and see what Carlos Ghosn has in store for us with a production GT-R. But as we can identify hinting from the GT-R Concept, it will stay true to GT-R characteristics with traditional round taillamps, bulging fenders, promised all-wheel-drive, and a choice powerplant. If the U.S. does get the VK45DE, it won't be such a big deal. After all, it IS an IRL motor.

sadly, morpheus speaks truth, although these words are the harbringer of inmeasureable disparity, the distinction must be made. THe fact must be realized that those of us trapped in the great land of america must wait indefinitely for the arrival of the one savior. <sob>

Here ya go!
beauty aint she...
http://www2.freshalloy.com/site/cars/infiniti/g35/coupe/photos/photos_001.jpg
http://www2.freshalloy.com/site/cars/infiniti/g35/coupe/photos/photos_003.jpg
http://www2.freshalloy.com/site/cars/infiniti/g35/coupe/photos/photos_004.jpg 2003 Infiniti G35

Configuration:
Two door sports coupe
Rear wheel drive
Model:
Base, Sport
Engine:
3.5L V-6 (Est. 280 bhp)
0-60 mph:
Est. 6.3 sec. (6 speed mt)
Base pricing:
Est. $31,000

From: www.freshalloy.com

Can any of you lucky guys/girls that were able to attend the NY Auto Show shead some light on the coupes back seat? I was most impressed with back seat room in the sedan during my test drive, but really desire the performance of the coupe. It gives up 5 inches in WB from sedan, correct? How does this correlate with the useable room? Did they have to "trim" the backseat lower pad, because this was something the dealership was proud of in the G35 vs. G20 sedans back seats to give the illusion of more room? I'm mostly interested in room for children, so would also be interested in subjective opinions.

Any photos?
Any numbers on hip to knee room?
Or just a comparison to commonly found cars already on the market (ie: BMW3, Accord coupe, Mustang, or CLK)

TIA