Why is this Infiniti G35 quicker than the Mazda?

General Discussion
, , ,
1

I have two cars; an Infiniti G35 2011 Coupe, and a 2013 Mazda CX-9 AWD Grand Touring. Despite both cars having similar weights, similar HP, and similar Torque, the G35 is vastly quicker by about 2.5 seconds. There must be something I’m missing because I can’t wrap my head around it. Does 30 HP really reduce the 0-60 time by 2.3 seconds, even though it’s 500lbs heavier? That seems unlikely to me…

Here are the specs of each (gathered from information online, not personal recordings):

Infinit G35 2011 Coupe:
Weight: 4,830lbs
HP: 305 hp @ 7,000 rpm
Torque: 270 lb-ft @ 5,200 rpm
60 mph in 5.2 seconds

Mazda CX-9 2013:
Weight: 4,317lbs
Horsepower: 273hp @ 6,250 rpm
Torque: 270 lb-ft @ 4,250 rpm
60 mph in 7.5 seconds

2

Can you find the drag coefficients anywhere? I suspect those are different by a fair amount.

3

The G35 is geared for performance. Transmission and final drive ratios. Also, where’d you get the weight? I found 3600-4100 lbs.

2 Likes
4

Agree with @texases You have the weight wrong for the G35, it is more like 3650 lbs. 600 lbs will make a big difference. So will 32 hp. The 7 speed in the G35 automatic compared to the 6 speed in the CX helps, too. And how each car is “tuned” with gear ratios and final drives can make a big difference.

I own a sedan that weighs between the G35 and the CX9, makes 20 ft-lbs and 85 hp less than the G35, and is just as fast as 0 to 60. Wrap your head around that.

How is it you list 2011 as the year a G35 as the model? The 2011 year was a G37 with the larger 3.7 L engine and 328 hp.

5

A G35 doesn’t weight nearly as much as you think it does. You’re off about half a ton. Also by 2011. The G35 had become the G37 on account on it’s slightly enlarged engine. Thanks for coming to my TedTalk.

3 Likes
6

Own 2 vehicles that have a 2.3 second difference for the 0 to 60 time. That is a serious problem .

1 Like
7

Drag coefficient won’t affect quickness until you get up some speed. At lower speeds the number is very low.

Torque numbers might be similar, what’s the torque curve?

I suspect that Texas and Mustangman are correct on gearing and tuning.

1 Like
8

You’re right. I blame myself for searching for the wrong year model. I meant 07 not 11.

9

Yeah, the weight google was telling me was absolutely way (or weigh, heh) off. I don’t know how it was coming up with that number.

11

I have a Dodge Challenger, a Honda Odyssey, and a Mazda 3.

I couldn’t begin to tell you what their 0-60 times are, and don’t care.

I do care that they start every morning and afternoon.

Your mileage may vary, though.

1 Like
12

And obviously it does. I don’t find the original question about vehicle performance all that far out…considering this is a car forum…

Me, for example, if I had a Challenger, I’d want to know how it stacked up vs a Camaro or Mustang zero to 60, even though I’d never race it. I’d probably even take that information into account before I bought it if it’s V8 equipped and marketed as a performance/muscle car.

1 Like
13

My kid had a g25. Quite slow. Looked good. Didn’t keep it long.

1 Like
16

Yeah, they’re not quite as spicy as the G35s. Still nice cars, but not built for speed really.

17

I am not an Imbecile .

2 Likes
19

What makes a car feel “fast” is torque, especially at low RPMs, not maximum horsepower at high RPMs. That is why cars with relatively low HP ratings by today’s standards still felt “fast”. For example, Chrysler models from the 1990s with the 3.0L V-6 or 2.5L 4-cylinder. Both of these engines were rated at less than 150 HP, but they were optimized for torque at low RPMs for quick acceleration from a standstill.

20

Yep, torque, gear ratios, transmission shift points.
Hopping into my time machine and going back to the 40s and early 50s, common to order overdrive on manual transmission cars because they usually came with lower rearend gear ratios, hence better low speed acceleration, then OD kicks in when at cruising speed.