Looks like Nissan isn't devoid of car enthusiasts

A General Discussion forum for cars and other topics, and a great place to introduce yourself if you are new to NICO!
User avatar
krash
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:43 am
Car: 1993 Nissan 240sx Convertible
Location: Memphis, TN
Contact:

Post

Car and Driver interviews Nissan's chief product specialist for the GTR and Nismo programs. His answers to the questions are a nice surprise and maybe a small glimmer of hope that the Nissan we know and love isn't dead at all.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/takes-one- ... yline-r32/


User avatar
themadscientist
Posts: 26254
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 3:30 pm
Car: R32 GTR, DR30 RS Turbo, BRZ, Lunchbox, NSR50 Sportster 883 Iron
Location: Staring down at you with disdain from the spooky mountaintop castle.

Post

C/D: In photos, your engine looks very stock.
HT: That’s important to me! The washer-fluid bottle looks stock, but it’s a cold-air intake box. The turbochargers’ pipes look like rubber, but I put aluminum inside them. I have an active limited-slip differential from the R34.
Wait, what? Oh hell, this guy is all up in my playbook playing mind games with folks. That's what I'm trying to do with my GT-R and FC. I want the R looking externally stock. I want the FC so low down I can pop the hood and play innocent.

User avatar
krash
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:43 am
Car: 1993 Nissan 240sx Convertible
Location: Memphis, TN
Contact:

Post

yea that was awesome, same reason I'm throwing an SR manifold and heatsheild on my KA. "whaaat no man I'm not turbo, see look its all stock."

User avatar
MinisterofDOOM
Moderator
Posts: 30928
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 5:51 pm
Car: 1962 Corvair Monza
1961 Corvair Lakewood
1974 Unimog 404
1997 Pathfinder XE
2005 Lincoln LS8
Former:
1995 Q45t
1993 Maxima GXE
1995 Ranger XL 2.3
1984 Coupe DeVille
Location: The middle of nowhere.

Post

Great to read about. Just another demonstration of what's wrong with modern Nissan, though.

If you look at Ford's SVT, Chrylser's SRT, GM's Corvette/Cadillac team, you see a brand-wide application of performance tech and knowledge.

If you look at Nissan, you see the GTR. And that's it. The GTR, in the grand scheme of things, is completely meaningless. Meaningless as a car, meaningless as a Nissan, meaningless as a product. Because it's an isolated, wholely separate product that might as well be its own brand. There's no trickle-down. There's no sharing of design research. Nissan builds the GTR, and Nissan builds everything else. They are parallel product lines that never cross. The GTR sees continuous, DRAMATIC evolution and improvement every model year. None of that goes ANYWHERE. None of that serves any useful purpose. The GTR is a waste.

You can get a Fiesta ST, or a Focus ST, or a Shelby Mustang, or a Raptor F150.
You can get a ZR1 Corvette, or a ZL1 Camaro, or a V-series Cadillac.
You can get an SRT 300C, or SRT Cherokee, or an SRT Ram and for a while even an SRT version of the single worst compact car since the Tempo (Caliber, in case you were wondering).
You can get a GTR, or...a Juke? A Juke with Nismo stickers? A Murano? A...CVT? A GTR or nothing, basically.

Nissan keeps this talented engineer locked up in a tower building meaningless halo cars instead of infusing the rest of their brand with his genius.

User avatar
krash
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:43 am
Car: 1993 Nissan 240sx Convertible
Location: Memphis, TN
Contact:

Post

Yea, pretty unfortunate. The Z and the GTR are in their own little world.... and then you have the other idiots that want to put a CVT on the IDx.

User avatar
Bubba1
Moderator
Posts: 16082
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS

Post

MinisterofDOOM wrote:Great to read about. Just another demonstration of what's wrong with modern Nissan, though.

If you look at Ford's SVT, Chrylser's SRT, GM's Corvette/Cadillac team, you see a brand-wide application of performance tech and knowledge.

If you look at Nissan, you see the GTR. And that's it. The GTR, in the grand scheme of things, is completely meaningless. Meaningless as a car, meaningless as a Nissan, meaningless as a product. Because it's an isolated, wholely separate product that might as well be its own brand. There's no trickle-down. There's no sharing of design research. Nissan builds the GTR, and Nissan builds everything else. They are parallel product lines that never cross. The GTR sees continuous, DRAMATIC evolution and improvement every model year. None of that goes ANYWHERE. None of that serves any useful purpose. The GTR is a waste.

You can get a Fiesta ST, or a Focus ST, or a Shelby Mustang, or a Raptor F150.
You can get a ZR1 Corvette, or a ZL1 Camaro, or a V-series Cadillac.
You can get an SRT 300C, or SRT Cherokee, or an SRT Ram and for a while even an SRT version of the single worst compact car since the Tempo (Caliber, in case you were wondering).
You can get a GTR, or...a Juke? A Juke with Nismo stickers? A Murano? A...CVT? A GTR or nothing, basically.

Nissan keeps this talented engineer locked up in a tower building meaningless halo cars instead of infusing the rest of their brand with his genius.
^ :yesnod Clearly having a car enthusiast in that position is desireable. Unfortunately that means very little when his bosses instruct him to build a boring car with FWD and CVT and then instruct their marketing team to try to convince the market that it's sporty.


Return to “General Chat”