Compare the2024 Infiniti QX50VS 2025 Genesis GV80

For enhanced safety, the front and rear seat shoulder belts of the Infiniti QX50 have pretensioners to tighten the seatbelts and eliminate dangerous slack in the event of a collision. The Genesis GV80 doesn’t offer pretensioners for its second-row seat belts.

The Infiniti QX50 has standard driver and front passenger side knee airbags mounted low on the dashboard. These airbags helps prevent the driver and front passenger from sliding under their seatbelts or the main frontal airbags; this keeps them better positioned during a collision for maximum protection. Knee airbags also help keep the legs from striking the dashboard, preventing knee and leg injuries in the case of a serious frontal collision. The GV80 doesn’t offer a front passenger side knee airbag.

Compared to metal, the QX50’s plastic fuel tank can withstand harder, more intrusive impacts without leaking; this decreases the possibility of fire. The Genesis GV80 has a metal gas tank.

Both the QX50 and the GV80 have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front and rear side-impact airbags, driver knee airbags, side-impact head airbags, height adjustable front shoulder belts, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, daytime running lights, lane departure warning systems, blind spot warning systems, rearview cameras, rear cross-path warning, available all wheel drive and around view monitors.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Infiniti QX50 is safer than the Genesis GV80:

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does side impact tests on new vehicles. In this test, which crashes the vehicle into a flat barrier at 38.5 MPH and into a post at 20 MPH, results indicate that the Infiniti QX50 is safer than the Genesis GV80:

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

A reliable vehicle saves its owner time, money and trouble. Nobody wants to be stranded or have to be without a vehicle while it’s being repaired. Consumer Reports rates the QX50’s reliability 14 points higher than the GV80.

From surveys of all its subscribers, Consumer Reports’ January 2024 Auto Issue reports that Infiniti vehicles are more reliable than Genesis vehicles. Consumer Reports ranks Infiniti 5 places higher in reliability than Genesis.

As tested in Motor Trend the Infiniti QX50 is faster than the GV80 2.5T 2.5 turbo 4-cylinder:

On the EPA test cycle the QX50 gets better mileage than the GV80:

In its Green Vehicle Guide, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rates the Infiniti QX50 higher (6 out of 10) than the Genesis GV80 (5). This means the QX50 produces up to 6.9 pounds less smog-producing pollutants than the GV80 every 15,000 miles.

The QX50 has a standard continuously variable transmission (CVT). With no “steps” between gears, it can keep the engine at the most efficient speed for fuel economy, or keep it at its peak horsepower indefinitely for maximum acceleration. The GV80 doesn’t offer a CVT.

The QX50 stops shorter than the GV80:

The QX50 has a standard easy tire fill system. When inflating the tires, the vehicle’s integrated tire pressure sensors keep track of the pressure as the tires fill and tell the driver when the tires are inflated to the proper pressure. The GV80 doesn’t offer vehicle monitored tire inflation.

Changing a flat tire near traffic can be dangerous and inconvenient. The run-flat tires standard on the QX50 can be driven up to 50 miles without any air pressure, allowing you to drive to a service station for a repair. The GV80 doesn’t offer run-flat tires.

The QX50 AWD handles at .84 G’s, while the GV80 Standard pulls only .79 G’s of cornering force in a Motor Trend skidpad test.

The QX50 AWD executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver quicker than the GV80 Standard (26.7 seconds @ .66 average G’s vs. 27.4 seconds @ .63 average G’s).

For better maneuverability, the QX50’s turning circle is 2.9 feet tighter than the GV80’s (36.4 feet vs. 39.3 feet).

For greater off-road capability the QX50 has a greater minimum ground clearance than the GV80 (8.6 vs. 8.1 inches), allowing the QX50 to travel over rougher terrain without being stopped or damaged.

The Infiniti QX50 may be more efficient, handle and accelerate better because it weighs about 650 to 900 pounds less than the Genesis GV80.

The QX50 is 10 inches shorter than the GV80, making the QX50 easier to handle, maneuver and park in tight spaces.

The QX50 has .8 inches more front headroom and .7 inches more rear headroom than the GV80.

The QX50 has a much larger cargo volume than the GV80 with its rear seat up (31.4 vs. 11.6 cubic feet).

A low lift-over cargo hatch design makes loading and unloading the QX50 easier. The QX50’s cargo hatch lift-over height is 26.6 inches, while the GV80’s liftover is 31.7 inches.

J.D. Power and Associates surveys of service recipients show that Infiniti service is better than Genesis. J.D. Power ranks Infiniti 9th in service department satisfaction (above the industry average). With a 26% lower rating, Genesis is ranked 23rd.

If the windows are left open on the QX50 the driver can close them all at the outside door handle. On a hot day the driver can lower the windows from a distance using the keyless remote. The driver of the GV80 can’t use the remote to operate the windows.

Consumer Reports rated the QX50’s headlight performance “Good,” a higher rating than the GV80’s headlights, which were rated “Fair.”

To help drivers see further while navigating curves, the QX50 Sensory/Autograph has standard adaptive headlights to illuminate around corners automatically by reading vehicle speed and steering wheel angle. The GV80 doesn’t offer cornering lights.

The QX50 is available in both front-wheel drive and four-wheel drive configurations. The GV80 doesn’t offer a two-wheel drive configuration.