Drew Dowdell

I just realized what you were replying to when quoting the 3.5 V6. Yes, that is true they have the 3.5, but they still don't have as many engine choices as the main competition. In the Sonata and Optima, there are a range of 4-cylinder engines with or without direct injection, with or without turbos, with or without hybrids. In the Camry, there is the base 4, the hybrid, and the V6. The Fusion... I'm not even sure anymore, but they have a bunch. The Altima is limited to one 4-cylinder, one V6, one transmission.

Again, for the other viewers out there, driving the 300c feels like driving an S550 with a budget interior. As far as the engine goes, there is no difference in smoothness or refinement.... and the 300c gets me over 30mpg highway.

I guess I'm not too worried about missing Paris so far this year.

I've driven a 300 w/ the new V6...it was fine. I haven't driven one w/ a Hemi, definitely want to....but the rentals are V6s. I like pushrod V8s and OHC V8s...have a lot of experience w/ the classic Ford 5.0 engine and more recently the Northstar for an OHC engine. GM and Chrysler went to DOHC for their V6s, so why not for the V8s? It's just curious because both companies have built OHC V8s, but still build pushrod ones. There are rental 300c out there, I've had them. They are my favorite long distance rental. GM and Chrysler went to DOHC for their V6s because they needed to consolidate engine lines, it had less to do with the valvetrain layout and more to do with having multiple V6es in the same power range. You might as well ask "Why doesn't GM build 2.8 liter or 3.0 liter V6es anymore?" They've consolidated completely around the 3.6 as the 2.8 is gone and the 3.0 will be gone soon. If/When the 4.3 V6 finally dies, GM will have 1 V6 corporate wide. The 3900 was a perfectly competent engine that was both efficient and smooth... smother than the 3.6 even. The only thing it didn't do was produce 300+ horsepower... but it was so small externally, GM could have put it in a Cruze if it wanted. The reasoning is simple. You can fit a 5.3 liter pushrod engine into the same space you have to shoehorn a 3.6 DOHC into. You can put a 7.0 pushrod into the space a 5.0 liter DOHC barely fits.

SOHC has no tangible benefits over pushrod in a V engine. You get none of the additional breathing available from a DOHC engine yet you get most of the complexity and additional friction, and you lose packaging flexibility and ability to increase displacement. At best, you get slightly more flexibility with variable valve timing, but not enough to make a noticeable difference. GM and Chrysler still make pushrod V8s, and their pushrod V8s are still among the most respected. You've driven a 300c right? I drove one back to back with an S550.... there is basically no difference in power, delivery, NVH....

Riiiight... How about all the Crown Vic taxis, etc w/ hundreds of thousands of miles or the Merc Taxis in Europe w/ hundreds of thousands of miles? Or Ford F-series trucks from the last 15 years? Those are all OHC engines... Mercedes Cabs (when not diesel), Crown Vics and F-150s are SOHC not DOHC..... and there is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar less advantage to SOHC almost to the point of "why bother? just make it a pushrod and increase the displacement" The Crown Vic with its "superior" SOHC V8 never ever ever exceeded the performance of the 1996 LT-1 pushrod.

The interior is much nicer in person than in photos, there are small details that I just can't capture.... it does feel slightly more upscale than your regular mid-sizer.

No no... I was questioning your implication that a DOHC V8 was smoother than a Rolls 6.7 liter pushrod.

38 - 31 = 7mpg. NYC Towncars rarely use every last cubic foot of their trunk space. The Altima's trunk space while smaller is flat floor, square sides and large opening, perfect for big square luggage. My implication was that the trunk in the Altima and the back seats were plenty big to pull off executive airport run duty. I was not implying they were the same size.

Is there a more hotly contested automotive segment than the mid-size family sedan market? Every year it seems there is a new darling in this slot and after this year’s media dominance by the Kia Optima and Hyundai Sonata, Nissan has released its answer to the duo from Korea. Nissan knows that gas prices are foremost on American’s minds these days and with weight being the biggest enemy of fuel economy, responded by dropping the weight on the already light-weight Altima by 80 lbs. while increasing interior space in nearly every dimension. This, combined with some aggressively frugal “gear” ratios in the Altima’s CVT transmission and the addition of direct injection to the 4-cylinder allows for an impressive 38mpg highway and 27 mpg city. They achieved this number without resorting to hybrid technology or turbo chargers. This leads me to believe there is more fuel economy to found in this platform is Nissan decides to start including any or all of those technologies in the Altima. During the IMPA test days, I drove a 2013 Nissan Altima 2.5 SL. Inside, the Altima has a simple yet handsome interior that feels light and airy even in the charcoal color I sampled. The front seats are excellent and would feel at home in a sports luxury car. The instrument panel gauges have an attractive 3D depth to them and look like an expensive watch; pictures don’t do justice here. Unfortunately, Nissan equipped the Altima with a poorly located foot activated parking brake that I kept catching my sneaker on. The Altima is still a car with a low entry price point, so much of the dash and door panels are made up of hard plastic, but Nissan disguises it well and a few of the controls are in an odd location just above the driver’s left knee, but otherwise the layout is simple and straight forward. Nissan just took over the NYC Taxi cab market with their NV200 but the Altima’s rear seat room felt so huge and the trunk is even larger, that they could aim for the Town Car market with this car as well.In normal city driving, the CVT keeps the 2.5 liter 4-cylinder low in the RPM band, ostensibly for fuel economy reasons, but the other hidden reason for this is that the 2.5 gets rather unrefined the higher it climbs in RPM. This isn’t my first run-in with Nissan 4-cylinders making quite a racket, and I suspect the reason Nissan has gotten away with a rather unrefined 4-cylinder for so long is due to their excellent CVT transmissions keeping the engine calm. Over the road, you can feel the lightness of the platform in the corners. Cornering is sharp, but the car feels slightly nose heavy. Noise isolation was another sore spot for me with excess tire and engine noise intruding into the cabin. Nissan’s 2013 Altima has all of the basics down to take on the Hyundai Sonata and Kia Optima as well as the Accord and Camry, but some work to refine the engine and additional power train choices would make it a stronger contender in this competitive market. The full gallery of pictures from the IMPA Test days is located here and will continue to be built as quick drive reviews are added: Year: 2013 Make: Nissan Model: Altima Trim: 2.5 SL Engine: 2.5 Liter 4-cylinder with Direct Injection Driveline: Front wheel drive, Constantly-Variable Transmission Horsepower @ RPM: 182 @ 6000 RPM Torque @ RPM: 180 @ 4000 RPM Fuel Economy: City/Highway: 27/38 Location of Manufacture: Smyrna & Decherd, Tennessee and Canton, Mississippi Base Price: $21,500 Est. As Tested Price: $29,920 Drew Dowdell is Managing Editor of CheersandGears.com and can be reached at [email protected] or on twitter as @cheersngears View full article

BV and I met up for the 2012 Fall Oldsmobile show at the 7-Springs resort.... he took some great pictures of all cars at the show, but there is one in particular that is going to be written up in an article as a "modern classic", I'm hoping you'll enjoy.

How do you like the car? I still haven't been able to drive one.

Yeah, the early Saturns always had an Olds look to them, IMO... I'm sure it was intentional... and they kept the look right up until Olds died.

It is just a "feel" that gives familiarity.....just enough of a look that you can see a family resemblance..... like the way you can go '92 Toronado - '81 Toronado - '66 Toronado - '36 Cord 810. Sure, there are vast differences in the cars, but there is enough similarity there to see where things came from.

True, but then for 15K I would expect an integrated Instrument cluster. This one looks like it will easily break off if a person hit it just right with their hand. Na, that's just the styling kick that Chevy is on right now. It is like the one in the Chevy Sonic, but without the C&G logo on the tach,

Smoother then the Rolls 6.7?

Even the last cutlass supreme coupe and sedan had "the look". I always saw it as being a bit cross-eyed, but that clearly never bothered me.

It's all about HP/L yo! that's what Honda ricer boys told me is best!