Topic: Test Drive: 2012 Infiniti M35h

[Autos_Editor]

'The M35h is a very good, fuel-efficient sport sedan, but not the best hybrid your money can buy,' says Contributing Editor, Chris Chase.

Read More...

[JohnnyMac]

Well it would seem that this vehicle really didn't hit the mark.  I've always thought that people who can afford a $67,000 vehicle probably don't care as much about fuel economy.  Sure if you can offer all the stuff they are used to, performance, a refined sporty ride, a quite interior, and luxury appointments, and offer better fuel economy/less emissions then you will get some consideration.  But if you can't offer all the usual expectations first then you won't get the same consideration.  I think the upcoming Audi A6 diesel (coming to NA in the next year or two) will be the best in this regard.

[D70]

The M35h’s fuel consumption ratings, per Natural Resources Canada, are 7.5/6.1 L/100 km (city/highway). I came nowhere close to those numbers, but my tester’s real-world figure of 9.3 L/100 km was a solid result

My 11 year old car that seats 5

[Sir Osis of Liver]

2000 Olds Intrigue
3.5L, 215hp
0-60 8.1sec
9.2L/100km
Wouldn't pass current crash tests


2011 Infiniti M35h
hybrid, 360hp
0-60 5.7sec
9.3L/100km
Top safety pick by IIHS

Not an apples to apples comparison.
Based in the EPA ratings, driven the same way, the Infiniti should deliver better mileage.

[nlm]

2000 Olds Intrigue
3.5L, 215hp
0-60 8.1sec
9.2L/100km
Wouldn't pass current crash tests


2011 Infiniti M35h
hybrid, 360hp
0-60 5.7sec
9.3L/100km
Top safety pick by IIHS

Not an apples to apples comparison.

Same with the article's fuel consumption comparison of the Cayenne in the *summer* vs the M in the *fall*, vehicle weights and tire differences notwithstanding:
"the Cayenne Hybrid came a lot closer to its city consumption rating than this Infiniti did."

[hemusbull]

There should be different criteria for fuel efficiency in this price range, not the one we use for economy car. For example, 10% fuel effieciency to be matched with...10% lower price. Manufacturers have high enough profit margin in this luxury segment and hybrids in this class are relatively low percentage of all cars sold, so they can afford this 10% cut off. Otherwise, hybrid badge here doesn't make any economic sense IMO.

[chrischasescars]

2000 Olds Intrigue
3.5L, 215hp
0-60 8.1sec
9.2L/100km
Wouldn't pass current crash tests


2011 Infiniti M35h
hybrid, 360hp
0-60 5.7sec
9.3L/100km
Top safety pick by IIHS

Not an apples to apples comparison.

Same with the article's fuel consumption comparison of the Cayenne in the *summer* vs the M in the *fall*, vehicle weights and tire differences notwithstanding:
"the Cayenne Hybrid came a lot closer to its city consumption rating than this Infiniti did."

No, not the same. I put the fuel consumption differences into context, the main one being the prevailing weather, and traffic, conditions for both tests. I always explain that when I compare L/100 results for different vehicles.

[wing]

Hey this looks like the car in my driveway!  9.3 is pretty good, so far I'm getting 8, but let it run for 5 minutes this morning to get rid of the ice.

[Gwido]

Hey this looks like the car in my driveway!  9.3 is pretty good, so far I'm getting 8, but let it run for 5 minutes this morning to get rid of the ice.

Did you know an ice scraper can save you a lot of fuel? 

[nlm]

There should be different criteria for fuel efficiency in this price range, not the one we use for economy car. For example, 10% fuel effieciency to be matched with...10% lower price. Manufacturers have high enough profit margin in this luxury segment and hybrids in this class are relatively low percentage of all cars sold, so they can afford this 10% cut off. Otherwise, hybrid badge here doesn't make any economic sense IMO.

uh-huh. know what i would do then? - raise msrp by 11%. Price-related charges are more often than not borne by the consumer.

[SaskSpecV]

Nice review, Chris.  Even though I am most certainly a Nissan/Infiniti fan, the critques you leveled at this car (disjointed electric/gas integration, grabby brakes, relatively poor practicality) were described fairly.

I wonder about Infiniti's complete lack of priority when it comes to space/efficiency practicality in their vehicles.  For a mid-large size luxury sedan (the biggest in the Infiniti lineup), that trunk is tiny.  But I guess the other hybrid sedans are similar (Fusion, Altima, Camry, etc.), though as mentioned the regular M37 trunk isn't huge even without the battery back.   

I found the same thing with my buddy's 2010 FX35 - beautiful interior, but the interior seemed very cramped and the cargo space was awful for a CUV of that size.  Totally form over function.  The G37 and EX35 don't have a lot of interior/cargo space either, but as smaller vehicles I seem to cut them more slack.  I guess Infiniti thinks luxury buyers are more concerned with style/image than such mundane conerns as cargo capacity or interior volume - and they're probably right...

[CanuckS2K]

Nice review, Chris.  Even though I am most certainly a Nissan/Infiniti fan, the critques you leveled at this car (disjointed electric/gas integration, grabby brakes, relatively poor practicality) were described fairly.

I wonder about Infiniti's complete lack of priority when it comes to space/efficiency practicality in their vehicles.  For a mid-large size luxury sedan (the biggest in the Infiniti lineup), that trunk is tiny.  But I guess the other hybrid sedans are similar (Fusion, Altima, Camry, etc.), though as mentioned the regular M37 trunk isn't huge even without the battery back.   

I found the same thing with my buddy's 2010 FX35 - beautiful interior, but the interior seemed very cramped and the cargo space was awful for a CUV of that size.  Totally form over function.  The G37 and EX35 don't have a lot of interior/cargo space either, but as smaller vehicles I seem to cut them more slack.  I guess Infiniti thinks luxury buyers are more concerned with style/image than such mundane conerns as cargo capacity or interior volume - and they're probably right...

The G actually has more trunk space than the TL, 335i, S4, and IS350. 

[chrischasescars]

The G's trunk is barely bigger, volume-wise than a 1 Series', never mind the 3 Series; its trunk is 460 litres to the G's 382, and the A4's is 480 litres. TL = 371 litres, and the IS = 378.

The trunks in the G and TL drive me nuts. A large suitcase won't lay flat on the floor in either car. BMW and Audi trunks tend to be vast, and the seats fold, a feature that, IMO, is very conspicuous by its absence in the G and TL.

[bluelines]

I found the same thing with my buddy's 2010 FX35 - beautiful interior, but the interior seemed very cramped and the cargo space was awful for a CUV of that size.  Totally form over function.  The G37 and EX35 don't have a lot of interior/cargo space either, but as smaller vehicles I seem to cut them more slack.  I guess Infiniti thinks luxury buyers are more concerned with style/image than such mundane conerns as cargo capacity or interior volume - and they're probably right...

You really think the Infiniti interiors are beautiful? I find them very dated and cheesy - the automotive equivalent of furniture from The Brick. Last Infiniti I drove was a G37x, and I just found the ergonomics horrible. Hopefully the M and FX at least have a higher resolution screen and better quality switches than the G.

[SaskSpecV]

I found the same thing with my buddy's 2010 FX35 - beautiful interior, but the interior seemed very cramped and the cargo space was awful for a CUV of that size.  Totally form over function.  The G37 and EX35 don't have a lot of interior/cargo space either, but as smaller vehicles I seem to cut them more slack.  I guess Infiniti thinks luxury buyers are more concerned with style/image than such mundane conerns as cargo capacity or interior volume - and they're probably right...

You really think the Infiniti interiors are beautiful? I find them very dated and cheesy - the automotive equivalent of furniture from The Brick. Last Infiniti I drove was a G37x, and I just found the ergonomics horrible. Hopefully the M and FX at least have a higher resolution screen and better quality switches than the G.

I haven't sat in the G37, only the old G35 coupe.  I'd agree that interior isn't the greatest - nothing wrong with it at all, but not as nice as an interior from an equivalent Audi of the same era.  I think the 2010 FX interior is very nice though - very attractive, soft touch surfaces everywhere, leather is great, good switchgear, etc.  Is it better than an equivalent ML, X5, etc?  Probably not, but I thought the design & fit/finish were nicer than the interior of our other friend's (loaded) 335xi.  Not apples to apples, but it's not like Infiniti interiors are terrible. I couldn't get over the relative lack of space though in the FX.  It just felt somewhat claustrophobic inside, for what is an otherwise large vehicle.  Maybe the M is better in that regard.