They tesed the '05 Xterra. Specifically the 6-speed Off-Road 4x4 edition. They saw 0-60 in 7.3 secs. and the 1/4 mile in 15.88 at 85 mph!

It should have read "In the Apri 2005 issue they tested.........).

One more time. "in the April 2005 issue, they tested......"

Damn - that's more than 2 seconds faster than the fasted SC-5-spd 0-60 that I've ever seen (Also C&D at 9.4).

The best part is that's the exact model I'd go for, if I decide to got that route.

Well I'm sure that if you throw some nitrous oxide in there, you could get a faster 0-60 and quarter mile times...

and it was faster than the Porsche Cayenne S!!!

Their article was pretty positive. I really enjoyed the stabs they took against other SUVs.

Same magazine had a write up on the FJ... interesting stuff. It may be priced just below the X, but they compared it to a wannabe Xterra with some cute Element features - that's funny!

I tried finding it, but couldn't, anyone have a link????????????

They won't put it on their website until the magazine has been out for a while, so you'll need to buy the mag or wait a couple of weeks.

probably just wait, no need to waste money (trying to save up for the real thing ).

no way it is faster then the porsche cayenne S.

The Porsche website has the Cayenne at 8.5 to 60, the S at 6.8, and the turbo at 5.2.

Just go to Barnes and Noble and read for free, but when you do need to buy a book, return the favor with them.

Noobie001

Buy a cup of Java, that still helps the cause.

The V6 version goes 0-60 in 8.5 seconds, S version in 6.8 seconds. This per Porsche's website.

Look up about 4 posts.

What about the 5 spd automatic? Are there any speed figures on it?

link link link

PLEASE!!!

15.88 in the quarter is insane! That 265 horse is really moving those 4500 lbs.

those sound like great times!

Just got my April C&D today, and I found the C&D review overall to be a pretty positive. But they (all car mags.) NO matter how good a vehicle is, they always managed to find a thing or two that they don't like or care for.

Seems like C&D didn't really care for the OR blue interior. I'm still waiting to see a OR in person, I hope I find it livable. I think the steel gray is too light, and the desert too tan’ish it should have been more toward the taupe side.

I'm not sure I agree with them on the X’s body roll, but I've only test driven one SE.

All in all, the X is still holding the #1 slot on my fall buying list.

I think it would have been interesting to see how well, the X would have done in the same April issue on the mid-size SUV test.

That ugly thing is starting to grow on me.

Aw com'on she's beautiful, I liked the younger sister version from when I saw the first pix.

Chunky is in, thin is out!

Notin like having a PHAT ride!

Car And Driver Article:

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=9307

-Brendan

And another C&D piece:

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=19&article_id=9023

-Brendan

Somehow I don't remeber my test drive of the X having a lot of rolls on turns. But I drove the SE and not the OR. Brakes seem fine to me, although not as good as a sport car.

Any comments??

I'm under the impression the OR has thinner anti-roll bars to allow for more articulation. That could account for more body roll.
The 7.3 0-60 is almost unbelieveable... I wounder if they got a "massaged" ;-) X for the test (manufacturers have been known to do this), that or the final drive ratio for the OR is lower... 4.10's? the article states 3.56 but that may be for the automatic.
They noted an ave MPG of about 15. Ouch. they must had their feet on the skinny pedal a lot. Agree with the comments on the brakes though.

I drove the OR and an SE back to back and noticed dodging in and out of traffic that the OR rolled more.

I don't think this is correct. Go measure the sway bars and let us know. That would be a huge headache with 0 benefit, not to mention that when the X goes offroad and needs flex, those sway bars come off. I personally don't mind having the back one off permanently either.

I thought I read about the smaller antiroll bars it in some advert somewhere. I also noticed the OR rolled every so slightly more (but not unpleasantly so) than the S/SE but that can be due to other factors also.. such as higher center of gravity, more/softer tire sidewall, etc.
Comparing measurements is a great idea but I'm sure that someone out there must have the specs. A crude measurement of my front sway bar is about 105mm circumference so about 33.4mm diameter, unless my math is wrong??
Interesting that you run your rear sway bar off... I have always preferred the front disco'd, never touch the rear except to add longer links to keep the angle correct when adding lift.

As a rule you will always want to remove your rear sway bar at a trailhead, unless you always have it off.

The front sway bar is also disconnected if you know that you will be running a tough trail, say 3+ out of 5. I have driven with the front (and rear) off for a couple thousand miles just fine - but it is not recommended due to the body roll. You just don't drive it like a car when you are disconnected.

Unless you are towing, the rear sway bar can be left off indefinately. Just remember you will have more body roll and it isn't a Miata.

I should mentinon that my trail rig is--make that was-- a Jeep.