Re: 200Q vs Q45, 200Q vs S4/S6

[jem@milleredp.com (John Edward Miller)]

> I must admit that I found the Q45's ride to be okay, although perhaps a
> teeny bit willowy by comparison (and it had new OEM shocks installed just
> over 1k ago, too!).  The thing that really got me was the steering feel --
> or complete lack thereof -- and mushy brake pedal.  Frankly, the car
> reminded me of the land yachts my father used to drive when I was a kid ...
> not quite that bad, obviously, but definitely of the same character.  I
> certainly did like the motor, though...  ;^)
> 
> >The car always felt heavy, unresponsive and less-than-optimally
> >balanced.  Traction was appalling in anything but bone-dry conditions.
> 
> The person who owns this car lives in a house on the side of Mummy Mountain,
> in one of the more ritzy parts of town ... the driveway leaves the courtyard
> (with fountain, of course!) and curves up the hill and around back of the
> house to the garage.  It's also paved with cobblestones and in the rain,
> only the Merc 600 can make it up, probably due to its traction control ...
> the others spin their wheels and go nowhere.  My 200q, of course, romps up
> and down it at will, regardless of the weather.  :^)

Okay, I'll throw in my contribution on this (since at present we've got 
a '92 Q45), but only because there's a followup question:

The Q is very well screwed together, the general material quality is 
fabulous.  The engine is magnificent, hooked to a transmission set up 
to be infuriatingly lazy.  The suspension design is good if a little
quirky (front basically 300ZX), but the tuning is less than perfect.
Early cars came with Michelin XGT Vs; later cars got soft all-season
garbage; ours now wears bigger booties anyway (had SP8000s that worked
well, moved those to the SHO and put on Comp TA Zs - big, big mistake;
no stickier than the SP8000s but a lot noisier, shakier, and not very 
round.)

The car is grossly underbraked for its weight and speed potential 
(it will easily barge past its 145mph rated top) - front two-piston 
floating calipers on Maxima-size 10.5-inch discs, and little .30-inch 
thick solid rear rotors.  The earlier cars like ours had hair-trigger 
2.4-turn steering that's really too touchy for the car's size.  The 
driving position is not quite right, a little too long-arm/short-leg, 
but I fixed my biggest ergonomic frustration by modifying the gas 
pedal so that it doesn't sit quite so flat (my foot would make contact 
only at the very bottom of the pedal.)  Traction is no problem under 
any condition I've had to regularly deal with - even base Qs have a 
Ferguson viscous-clutch limited-slip differential - though the car 
has more than enough torque to play Dukes-Of-Hazzard.

Now, the question, having nothing to do with Infinitis: what is
different, in terms of mechanicals and underpinnings, between the 
200Q 20V and the later S4/S6? 

John.