import tuner can go **** themselves hardcore

[R4v3n]

Well in all fairness, their target crowd is kids right? So I'd assume they wouldn't be expecting anything less. Regardless though, angry letters won't change anything, but it feels soo good.

[SeVa-S13]

Mmmmmm, cheap therapy.Gotta love it.

[krazy skwerel]

Not sure what the Prelude being out before the S13 has to do with anything but ok...and I just picked a manufacturer. Nissan and Honda are pretty much the big two when it comes to ricer mags so it seemed appropriate. :|

I simply commented on the Prelude SI being out before the s13 because it seemed like in a previous post by toad that the si was made the same time as the s13. Upon reading it again I see that I was mistaken. Seva I was not pointing my comment torwards you. It just seems like Honda is the only company we compare with Nissan, excluding the occasional ae86 thread. :batman

[Bubba1]

Well, this was just one writer's opinion, so I'm not sure I'd condemn the entire magazine over one writer. Though I think letters to the editor are a great idea and fun. But cursing will likely label you a kid, and will less likely get your letter published. But this ricey mag does feature the 240sx a lot for a car that didn't sell particularly well.

But I like what DSSA said. Nissan did a poor job with the development of the 300zx. Nissan also blew it with their lack of 240sx marketing, and its motor choice for the US 240sx. Even the most hardcore Nissan afficionado will acknowkledge that the 240sx is a great body/chassis but has an underpowered stock motor stuffed in. And if you'll remember, the 300ZX swelled in size, weight, and price. And sales plummeted as a resuilt. I liked it but it was no longer the honest lightweight affordable sports car that made the 240Z so popular. So are the writer's remarks so far off? Not really. Do I care that the writer doesn't like the 240sx? Nope. Did I love my 240sx? You betcha.

[DSSA]

*Makes a wish for other people to read*Don't tell me that there was a market for little turbo rice-rockets, tell Nissan. A decade and half ago. Last I checked, I'm not in Nissan's marketing department, although that could be cool...

Quote »Oh, and Nissan was trying to be a succesful car manufacturer and make a profit by selling cars here in the U.S., NOT cater to ricers a decade in the future. And although I would love for my car to be faster, it just wasn't looked on as cost-effective most likely by Nissan at the time to sell Silvias and 180SXs. They weren't in that much of demand at the time. [/quote]

Perhaps if you don't want people to comment to you about Nissan's marketing failures, you shouldn't make statements like the above, directly relating to their marketing history.

"Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic, and so am I"?:eek:

[Megaseth]

Its been said the reason Nissan didnt bring the SR over here for the 240 was the fact that putting it in a car that weighed 2900lbs, with 205hp/203ft.bls torque, RWD and for a price tag of $22k, sales for the 300zx would be non-existant. think about it, a car that competes with the N/A version of Nissans top of the line sports car here for half the price. they wanted to push 300zx sales, so they stuck the underpowered KA in the 240 so the Z looked more appealing, despite the high price tag.

[Antyoo]

wow, that is a bold statement.

its really funny how they say tyhat the 300zx is 4000lbs, yet, did honda spit out anything that could even compair? how about the domestics?

to me, the Z cars have been the EPITOMY of the Jap sports car. they were expensive, powerful, great handling and had the looks.

as for the 240sx, its not as bad as the article is making it out to be.

the only thing it lost in comming to the US was the sr20. but was it changed to a fwd format? does the ka produce more torque than any honda?

both my celica and my 240sx are slower then some hondas, but to tell you the truth, i cant stand the idea of VTEC and the idea of tunning hondas. they always were the commuter's car and they always will be in my eyes.

and screw the snetra ser. i really dont like any new model jap cars other than the 350Z/G35. they have all switched to honda format. no low end power, what ever power/torque the engine has is about 1k from redline(which is around 7k or 8k). these so called "performance engines" suck. performance is not about getting really good gas milage when you are cruising. performance is not about having power that is only sometimes there

that is why i dont read any import mags, they are all full of ****.

btw, have any of you guys noticed that all sentra models have a solid rear suspension? everytime i see one i see a huge straight bar going from wheel to wheel

[Bubba1]

I'm sure that was part of the decision, but I also believe the cost of getting the SR motor to pass US specs would have raised the 240's selling price higher than what Nissan wanted it positioned. BMW proved you can have a blazing lower priced performance model that will not affect sales of the higher priced one if its marketed right (M3 versus M5). Hindsight is naturally 20/20 and unfortunately did not do their marketing homework on the 240sx or the 300ZX.

[Onizuka]

Who friggin cares, anyhow?

[DSSA]

wow, that is a bold statement.

its really funny how they say tyhat the 300zx is 4000lbs, yet, did honda spit out anything that could even compair? how about the domestics?

Yes, it was named the NSX.

End result of this is that it's great for some of you to be "brand loyal" but when it comes at the expense of the real world, then there's an issue.

Yes, I like my 240/SR, but I also realize the misgivings of the car. I'm not gonna sit here and blindly say "Oh! They're picking on *MY* car, and *MY* car is the best thing out there!!!"

The whole automotive world is out there..embrace it.

[R4v3n]

I thought the NSX was more of Hondas answer to the Skyline, not the 300z. I don't know much about them, but I have seen a few here in the states (sold by Acura). They list for like 90k too, thats more than double what a 300z went for, so I can't see the comparison.

Oh, and aren't 300zs 3500 pounds?

[dareo]

No no, the 300zx weighs in at 4000 pounds with a HUGE FAT IMPORT TUNER WRITER IN THE DRIVERS SEAT! Booya!

Imagine what would have happened if Nissan sold the 240SX here like they did in Japan, CA18DET to an SR20DET. With a turbo engine, and a choice between the normal suspension and a stiffer sport tuned suspension, the car would have sold like crazy. Who would have wanted a shoddy DSM over a turbo 240?Then the 240sx would be quite common today, with tons of parts, and our elite engine swaps wouldnt have much of a point. RB's would be cool still. Nissan either just didnt think americans liked turbos for whatever reason, or the emmisions could have had something to do with it. Who would buy a heavy 300zx with an SR20DET 200sx for sale instead? Would they have called it 200sx? Then what would become of the US FWD 200sx? The name would be changed to 2 door sentra. Oh and DSSM, you got some sweet cars.

[SeVa-S13]

Perhaps if you don't want people to comment to you about Nissan's marketing failures, you shouldn't make statements like the above, directly relating to their marketing history.

"Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic, and so am I"?:eek:

Why wouldn't I make statements about their marketing? That's what this whole discussion is about...people b1tching about no tyte SR20s and wondering why. I tried to offer an explanation. I don't care if you make comments about Nissan, I just found it funny that they were directed towards me. Swift. :thinker

Edit: Har! I now have phat Naws and teh bolt-ons!

[Bubba1]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by OneFastJ30 "]I thought the NSX was more of Hondas answer to the Skyline, not the 300z. I don't know much about them, but I have seen a few here in the states (sold by Acura). They list for like 90k too, thats more than double what a 300z went for, so I can't see the comparison."

The the NSX costs $90K NOW, but back in the mid 90's when Nissan still produced the 300zx TT, NSX prices were considerably lower and were not that far above the 300ZX TT prices.

[R4v3n]

I looked online and I saw that they listed for 60k turboed in the mid 1990s. Thats still alot more than the 300z that listed at just south of 40k.

[Bubba1]

I believe the base ZX was under 40K, but check the TT roadster. I think it retailed to closer to 50K (like $47.5K) with all the options.

[DSSA]

I looked online and I saw that they listed for 60k turboed in the mid 1990s. Thats still alot more than the 300z that listed at just south of 40k.

The NSX was never offered in turbo form.

They were 60K when they came out, and were usually lumped into tests with the 300ZX, 3000GT VR4, RX7 and the Supra.

The 300ZX when redesigned was touted as a great car by the automotive world. Soon after, the 3000GT VR4 (as in..a couple months later) came to our shores, and the technology of the 300ZX "paled in comparison". When the Supra was revised in 1993 (technically a 1993.5 model year) it quickly set the new bar for the Japanese "Super Car", and the 300ZX was already being called a "dated design".

I've never been a big fan of the 300ZX though. I'm not saying that they're a bad car, or putting them down in any way, shape or form, just find too many drawbacks with them to want to own one myself--then again, I kept my 3000GT VR4 for only about 4-5 months before selling it as well because it was too much of a tank.

I like the 240s, but as far as a company, Nissan doesn't do much for me. While the other other "big 4" Japanese companies brought over the 3000GT VR4, the Supra, the RX7, the NSX, etc., Nissan brought over the 240 in severly underpowered form, and has never graced our shores with their flagship like the other manufacturers mentioned above.

I seem to remember reading something in an automotive journal about the "Heads" at Nissan of Japan being asked why they never brought over the Skyline. They're answer was something to the effect of either "They don't deserve the car" or "We don't want them to have it".

Now, today, Mitsu has finally brought over the Evolution, Subaru--the WRX, Toyota seems to have some things in the works, but where is Nissan? The 350Z? .:oface

:moon , Nissan.

[SmithSR]

I like the 240s, but as far as a company, Nissan doesn't do much for me.

:rolleyes

You're yawning about the FM chassis?

The Z / G35 is a technological flop anyway, right?? I mean, compared to the SRT4 that you defend, and with your dsm-bias found in other posts, I can see why you'd make that kind of remark...

[cosmo]

I'm glad Nissan didn't bring the Sr over here. The 240 would be the most played out car on earth. Everywhere you'd look there would be a 240. It'd be worse than the Honda problem we have now.

Nevermind a turbo KA would kick an SR's *** anyday.

Yeah I said it, what!

[sideshow]

you guys need to get a hold of some autralian magazines, crazy cars plus english is allways good, those bastards have r34 skylines for project cars, but the magazine was like 7 buxi want a subscription but i cant find the magazine anywheres anymore i think it was called high performance imports or something along those lines, it was sweet

[Toad[^_^]]

I'm not talking about comparing it to a newer VTEC.

The acceleration performance of the S13 was equal to an 86 GTI for example (1.8 8V motor). And a lot of "luxury" cars of the same vintage would out accelerate one (so I'm not sure what other stock 4 cylinders the other guy in this thread is racing).

The biggest downfall (publicly) for these cars is exactly that as well--lack of power. I remember reading countless tests of various cars with the 240 involved, and each one having the same complaints. "Great Package, horribly low on power".

This same year (1989), DSM introduced the Talon/Eclipse/Laser with a 2.0 turbo motor. No market for a turbo car with decent power? Might want to check sales figures.

My point is that Nissan brought over a great chassis, just failed to realize that yes, Americans do like a bit of power as well. The 240 is a great car for the other aspects mentioned, however, it's painfully slow from the factory--which every write-up/review on the car I've ever read attests to as well. But then again, what does anyone else know?

Great men [and woman] do what they can with what they have.

Sure, I'd love a Dodge Viper or a Ferrari Enzo or something else that puts out more than 300hp stock, but then again, who really NEEDS all that power anyway? Half the fun is building the power yourself... The other half is enjoying it.

[Toad[^_^]]

The NSX was never offered in turbo form.

They were 60K when they came out, and were usually lumped into tests with the 300ZX, 3000GT VR4, RX7 and the Supra.

The 300ZX when redesigned was touted as a great car by the automotive world. Soon after, the 3000GT VR4 (as in..a couple months later) came to our shores, and the technology of the 300ZX "paled in comparison". When the Supra was revised in 1993 (technically a 1993.5 model year) it quickly set the new bar for the Japanese "Super Car", and the 300ZX was already being called a "dated design".

I've never been a big fan of the 300ZX though. I'm not saying that they're a bad car, or putting them down in any way, shape or form, just find too many drawbacks with them to want to own one myself--then again, I kept my 3000GT VR4 for only about 4-5 months before selling it as well because it was too much of a tank.

I like the 240s, but as far as a company, Nissan doesn't do much for me. While the other other "big 4" Japanese companies brought over the 3000GT VR4, the Supra, the RX7, the NSX, etc., Nissan brought over the 240 in severly underpowered form, and has never graced our shores with their flagship like the other manufacturers mentioned above.

I seem to remember reading something in an automotive journal about the "Heads" at Nissan of Japan being asked why they never brought over the Skyline. They're answer was something to the effect of either "They don't deserve the car" or "We don't want them to have it".

Now, today, Mitsu has finally brought over the Evolution, Subaru--the WRX, Toyota seems to have some things in the works, but where is Nissan? The 350Z? .:oface

:moon , Nissan.

Um... you left out Mazda... They... they're just in a slump. I know they're coming back soon... I hope...

[DSSA]

Um... you left out Mazda... They... they're just in a slump. I know they're coming back soon... I hope...

The RX8 looks somewhat interesting, and supposedly the FD motor will bolt right in.

[SeVa-S13]

Why would you do that? I don't know much about Mazda but I thought the TT 13b and new NA 13e put out about the same power? (One has 10 more hp, forgot which...) Although neither have any torque. Still cool cars.

[Toad[^_^]]

Why would you do that? I don't know much about Mazda but I thought the TT 13b and new NA 13e put out about the same power? (One has 10 more hp, forgot which...) Although neither have any torque. Still cool cars.

I likr'm all. Even yje famn Pontiacs. Has anyone seen the new GTO?Can you say over kill? Pontiac can. I won't buy it but I'll do the 24 hr test drive!

[SmithSR]

No, it's once again the lack of power and "mod-ability".

It's nice to see that you remember our discussion. I find it quite amusing that you still have your panties up in a bunch over it. What was that? 3 weeks ago now?

"DSM"-bias? No. What I know? Yes. Unlike, your sweet self, I'd prefer to know about something if I'm going spout off about it or make comparisons.

Lack of power and mod-ability? So you have just claimed that TT kits for the Z33 do not exist. What would you mod on the Z? You do not acknowledge the TT kits that are being built for the car? Lack of power? The factory Z and the G35 spank the Crossfire in power output (it's direct enemy in this market segment....v6 sport RWD). Perhaps you should hit the books, so you can "know something" if you're going to "spout off about it or make comparisons." You've just defied your own logic, by posting that there is a lack of mod-ability, when in fact there are a slew of mods for the FM chassis, and this trend will continue.

I'll tell you why I remember your previous comments: it's because you had no arguement and instantly decided to lob some insults in my direction, like a child. You call it what you want. The fact remains that you still can't prove the POSITION you took when you decided to back the SRT4 as a performance car. I welcome you to try to do it here.

I asked you to show specific proof that the SRT4 platform was better for performance(what you claim neon buyers are looking for) and then you decided to back out by splitting hairs by saying "sure, first you show me where i said anything like that." By claiming neon owners are looking for "performance"(your words), you side yourself with the idea that there is a performance benefit to FWD, and everybody here knows you cannot prove that point with facts. You had to split hairs by saying that you didn't say those exact words, BUT, that was your <position>. Since you are still not able to accept that your position is/was wrong, you continue with the childhood antics.

I see right through your comments because you start by insulting people when you are met with a differing viewpoint, and then you back off of your original position by hair splitting. This shows a shallow character. You failed to prove your point, and you like to insult people when they disagree with you. As I consider your words from your past posts, I think to myself that maybe it was a good move on your part to back down from your position on the SRT4, since you had no proof, no logic, and no thought put into your post other than how can you best insult somebody who disgrees with you.

Don't waste your time filling your mind with ideas that I don't know about an automobile when I talk about it. If you insist on bashing a moderator, perhaps you should go about it a little differently. OR, maybe not at all...?

[Megaseth]

DSSA, i just want to know where you found 3 VR4 Galants. ever since i found out about them, i have wanted one for a sleeper. I've seen like two or maybe three in my whole life. one was a nice white looking one driven by some mexicans outside Vato Zone. should have offered them like $500 or something for it.

[Bubba1]

DSSA, would you mind posting a pic of one of your VR4's? I think a lot of folks (well...me anyway) would like to see one.thanks

[DSSA]

Lack of power and mod-ability? So you have just claimed that TT kits for the Z33 do not exist. What would you mod on the Z? You do not acknowledge the TT kits that are being built for the car? Lack of power? The factory Z and the G35 spank the Crossfire in power output (it's direct enemy in this market segment....v6 sport RWD). Perhaps you should hit the books, so you can "know something" if you're going to "spout off about it or make comparisons." You've just defied your own logic, by posting that there is a lack of mod-ability, when in fact there are a slew of mods for the FM chassis, and this trend will continue.

This is rediculous. There are TT kits out for Chevy SB 350s too. Does that mean it's a great motor? I can easily build a turbo kit for a Rabbit GTI as well. So with that logic, Rabbit GTI=Z33?? When I consider a car's motor having good "mod-ability" I think of things such as the 2JZ, 4G63, SR20DET, Buick Turbo 6, RB26DETT, FD engines, etc.--those that you can effectively double and even triple output without practically redesigning the whole motor.

Quote » I'll tell you why I remember your previous comments: it's because you had no arguement and instantly decided to lob some insults in my direction, like a child. You call it what you want. The fact remains that you still can't prove the POSITION you took when you decided to back the SRT4 as a performance car. I welcome you to try to do it here.

I asked you to show specific proof that the SRT4 platform was better for performance(what you claim neon buyers are looking for) and then you decided to back out by splitting hairs by saying "sure, first you show me where i said anything like that." By claiming neon owners are looking for "performance"(your words), you side yourself with the idea that there is a performance benefit to FWD, and everybody here knows you cannot prove that point with facts. You had to split hairs by saying that you didn't say those exact words, BUT, that was your <position>. Since you are still not able to accept that your position is/was wrong, you continue with the childhood antics.

I see right through your comments because you start by insulting people when you are met with a differing viewpoint, and then you back off of your original position by hair splitting. This shows a shallow character. You failed to prove your point, and you like to insult people when they disagree with you. As I consider your words from your past posts, I think to myself that maybe it was a good move on your part to back down from your position on the SRT4, since you had no proof, no logic, and no thought put into your post other than how can you best insult somebody who disgrees with you.

Don't waste your time filling your mind with ideas that I don't know about an automobile when I talk about it. If you insist on bashing a moderator, perhaps you should go about it a little differently. OR, maybe not at all...? [/quote]

Perhaps, you might want to respond in that particular thread to that effect instead of (especially with you being a moderator) hi-jacking this one?

I see you declined to debate more there, now you bring it up here. Is it because quite a few other people in that thread were agreeing with what I said, and you felt as if it were a personal slam against you? This is the *internet*. No need to tie up a noose-knot just because someone doesn't agree with you.

To be perfectly honest, just because you have moderator status don't think I'm going to kiss your *** and treat you any differently than anyone else on this forum unless it has to do with violation of an establish rule. So stop acting like a child with a gun, and trying to hide behind your moderator status.

[DSSA]

DSSA, i just want to know where you found 3 VR4 Galants. ever since i found out about them, i have wanted one for a sleeper. I've seen like two or maybe three in my whole life. one was a nice white looking one driven by some mexicans outside Vato Zone. should have offered them like $500 or something for it.

Bubba/Megaseth,

Please PM me on this (I'd be glad to send pics, talk about the GVR4s, etc.) but I've already been somewhat at fault with turning this thread away from the initial conversation already.

Thanks

edit: I tried to PM you guys some info, however, it won't let me for some reason, and Bubba, your e-mail information is disabled.

Send me an e-mail @ [email protected] and I'll gladly send you out pics/info.

Here's an *OLD* video (about 3 years ago) of the one GVR4 I had, sold, now own again at a track up in northern PA (Beaver Springs). This was the 1st trip to the track for this car. GVR4 Test-n-Tune

The other car (hehe...can't really see it much in the video) is an older 5.0 Mustang that was modded with the usual bolt-ons.