OK, for those of you who aren't aware, EVO and CAR magazines, both coming from the UK, are popular worldwide. Pointless to question the integrity of the source of the article, but go ahead if you feel you have an argument there. The point of me quoting the article is to show, not from a "skyline guru" or "skyline fanboy" but a regular car tester and automotive journalist, that the technology employed by Nissan in 1989, 14 years ago, was and still is superior. TomsMR2, you seem to think that the car is incapable of turning quickly, and therefore would lose to your MR2 in an auto-x race. Again, my point of taking the time to quote the article was to give everybody here a glimpse into the handling dynamics(and the high praise given) which you seem to be questioning.
True, it is not a head to head with an MR2. That result in my mind is a foregone conclusion anyways.
Notice the comments in this thread questioning the handling prowess of the Skyline. Those comments were the reason for my posting the article excerpt. Not to shove it in your face and be rude about it, but rather to point out that those who have driven the car, and at 9/10 or 10/10 have put down on paper and in publication that the technology used by Nissan on a 14 year old car is superior to many MANY modern designs.
If my little "Skyline > mr2" comment rubbed any of you gentlemen the wrong way, then buck up man, and trade up to a Nissan.

have a nice day all.
BTW, the complete article goes on to give 4-1/2 stars to the R32, being lightest and most "nimble", "tossable" ....4 stars to the heavier, somewhat bulky R33, R34.