2025 Infiniti QX80 Ditches V8

by Matthew Guy

Published: March 6th, 2024

Pour another one out for the eight-cylinder engine. With the configuration departing from machines like the Ram half-ton pickup truck, Dodge Charger, and comprising only a relatively slim percentage of F-150 sales, it should be no surprise it is vanishing at some other brands as well.

Following the release of a few photos showing a camouflaged variant of its upcoming QX80 for the 2025 model year, Infiniti has now dropped details about its powertrain. At this rate there will be little left to learn when the thing is officially unveiled later this month. Nevertheless, the brand has announced its revamped halo SUV will be powered by a twin-turbo 3.5L V6 engine good for 450 horsepower and 515 lb-ft of torque.

Despite being on the receiving end of a two-cylinder lobotomy, those are increases of 50 horsepower and 102 lb-ft versus the current generation truck. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed – or someone finally locked the guy responsible for CVTs in a bathroom at Infiniti HQ – and a nine-speed automatic will be the transmission of choice. As is typical these days, the likes of active grille shutters will conspire to eke the best fuel economy possible out of this rig.

A newly available electronic air suspension and other technologies work together in an effort to adapt the SUV to a myriad of driving situations. Infiniti says the system is capable of constantly evaluating the vehicle's motions to reduce body motion, making for a better driving experience and more comfortable ride for the passengers. When parked, the air suspension can lower the QX80 in a bid to make it easier to load gear or simply clamber aboard the thing.

The new 2025 Infiniti QX80 will be revealed on March 20 via a livestream, followed by a display at the New York International Auto Show later in the month. We’ll have boots on the ground in the Big Apple, so stay tuned for images from the floor.

[Image: Infiniti]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

#Infiniti #QX80 #SUV #2025

Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 13 comments

The Oracle on Mar 06, 2024

The TT 3.5L is going to have an extremely impressive torque curve.

1 Reply
Mike on Mar 07, 2024

Bad move.
A v6 for qx80 sales , will do about the same as it for the expedition.
Expedition and Navigator sales are about a 1 to 3 1 to 4 ratio depending on quarter, compared to the 6 GM models.
Why dont manufacturers offer a v8 engine upgrade option? Let the marketplace decide, and pay up.
The new tundra comes to mind....

1 Reply

Recent Comments

Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?