2001 Infiniti Qx4 4wd Navigation White Fully Loaded 1 Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Infiniti QX60 Hybrid

Infiniti launched its seven-passenger JX crossover for the 2013 model year with the automaker's familiar 3.5-liter V6 as standard equipment. For 2014, the model was renamed the QX60, and a new variant packing a gasoline-electric hybrid powertrain joined the lineup. (For those interested in the family lineage, the new arrival is a mechanical twin to the Nissan Pathfinder Hybrid, which we took for a Quick Spin last year).
Hidden beneath the hood of the QX60 Hybrid is a supercharged, 2.5-liter inline four-cylinder engine, rated at 230 horsepower and 243 pound-feet of torque. The combustion engine is supplemented by a 15-kilowatt electric motor, fed by a small lithium-ion battery back (hidden under the rear cargo floor), which adds 20 hp and 29 lb-ft of torque to the mix. Added up, Infiniti rates the total system power at 250 hp and 243 lb-ft - numbers that fall just short of its combustion sibling (the 3.5-liter V6 in the QX60 is rated at 265 horsepower and 248 pound-feet of torque). The only gearbox is a continuously variable transmission that drives either the front or all four wheels, depending on what the buyer specs.
The 2014 QX60 Hybrid AWD starts at $46,500 (the green model commands a $3,000 premium over the gas-only model). A long list of factory options such as Roof Rails ($495), Theater package ($1,700), Deluxe Technology package ($6,050), illuminated kick plates ($440) and a Hybrid Premium package ($4,600) bumped our as-tested price to a healthy $60,780, including $995 for destination.

The yin and yang of the 2017 Infiniti Q50 Red Sport 400

When we first drove the Q50 Red Sport 400, Infiniti had the car out at a prepared slalom-and-cone course in a large, open parking lot. The car was stacked up against another Q50 without the Direct Adaptive Steer steer-by-wire system, and the course was designed to show that the DAS-equipped Red Sport 400 (it's a $1,000 option) required less steering input to master the same course. With all due respect to Infiniti, which is invested in this unfortunate system and has been working hard to revise it, the comparison doesn't make a lot of sense. The non-DAS Red Sport 400 has a steering ratio of 15:1 in RWD and 16.7:1 in AWD forms. The DAS system can vary between 12:1 and 32.9:1 in RWD and 11.8:1 to 32.3:1 in AWD flavors. At its extremes, the DAS system's ratio is vastly different than the fixed-ratio cars. So sure, with a super-quick steering ratio available, the DAS driver's going to do less work. It's all in the gearing. Does this mean it's better, that the steering feel is more natural, that it's easier to hustle quickly? The amount the driver saws at the wheel isn't an indication of that, necessarily. After a few days in a rear-drive Red Sport 400, I'm saying that the spooky disconnection between the driver and the front wheels would be a severe deficit to a driver on a real autocross course. It's not like the DAS system is choosing bad ratios within its range, it's just not supplying the feedback to make it enjoyable. Knowing what your front tires are up to is critical. I can hear you saying right now, "But what Q50 Red Sport 400 owners are going to autocross their cars?" Sure, but it was just a means to an end: showing off the DAS in a good light. And in that case, it probably did. The thing is, in isolation, not back-to-back with a non-DAS car with a slow steering ratio, the DAS system has the same issues it's always had: It simply doesn't feel natural. It doesn't feel intuitive. There doesn't seem to be any real advantage over a slightly quicker rack. I don't hear about people making buying decisions based on how much work they have to do sawing at the wheel, do you? So, that's one side of the Q50 coin – one that's hard to ignore if you're an enthusiast and steering feel is an important connection between you and the vehicle you just dropped a large hunk of change on, and will be spending a lot of your time in. The other is that there's a really compelling reason to drive a Red Sport 400: The 3.0-liter, twin-turbocharged V6 is a monster.

Toyota tops Kelley Blue Book's Resale Value Awards

Kelley Blue Book announced its annual Best Resale Value Award winners, and we weren't too surprised to see the list dominated by Japanese automakers - mainly Toyota and Honda. KBB hands out the awards based on the projected residual value of mostly all 2013 model year vehicles, and Toyota skated home with a number of awards including 10 of the 22 overall categories and having five of its products in the top 10 for models with best resale value. KBB's Best Resale Value Awards were announced in the same week as the ALG Residual Value Awards, and there were many similarities between both lists, especially when it came to Toyota.
To come up with its winners, KBB measures depreciation over the first five years of ownership, and looks for the cars it expects to hold its value the best after this time; on average, the report says the 2013 model year vehicles will lose 61.8 percent of its value in five years. Of the 22 categories, 15 slots were filled by Toyota, Honda and Nissan products, while the Camaro and Porsche (Cayenne and Panamera) each took home a pair of awards. If Toyota has anything to be upset about in this list of cars, it's that categories for Hybrid/Alternative Energy Car and Electric Vehicle went to the Ford Fusion and Chevrolet Volt, respectively.
The overall top 10 models for the best resale value in 2013 are, in alphabetical order: