scathing

Its not a bad read. Since Clarkson and Hammond aren't 2/3 of the scribes for the print magazine you don't see as many Clarksonisms. I found this magazine on a newsagent stand at Hong Kong airport on my way home on Saturday, and seeing "F430 CS vs GT-R" on the cover I just had to buy it. Its not as bland as Motor/Wheels is. The Brits are allowed to get away with a lot more in the media than Australians (which is why Top Gear / Fifth Gear are so good and The Car Show / Drive TV are so shit). The writing style is quite good, although obviously the news isn't very relevant to us. I haven't read the whole thing yet (I spent most of my time sleeping after I read the GT-R article) so I'd consider a subscription. If you're into supercars and fast cars, I'd recommend evo magazine. Those guys campaign a 350Z in clubsport level motorsport, and their writers seem to be really well heeled. You read about their privately owned vehicles or long term loaners, and aside from the mundane stuff you also see Pagani Zondas, Porsche Carrera GTs, Lamborghini Murcielagos, etc. Not only that, they modify those cars. I remember reading the edition of evo when they took delivery of the Murci, and they had already lined up a Tubi exhaust for it.

From what I've heard, the Nurburgring isn't exactly a modern F1 circuit in terms of smoothness. Running an ultra-stiff suspension there would probably throw you off the road unless you had balls of steel. And yes, I do realise the current production car record for the track is owned by the , which is ultra stiff and looks like its getting airborne in places, but it also weighs about a third the weight of the GT-R. I would hope that Nissan tuned the car to be as quick as it can be in the places where the vast majority of its customers are going to be driving it, not quick on one circuit. And, if the car really is that harsh, what's to say that if they hadn't softened it out on such an old, bumpy, circuit that they could have squeezed a better laptime with more compliant suspension that maintained better road-to-tyre contact....but they chose to harden it so it would also run a reasonable laptime on modern circuits like Fuji Raceway?

When the 350Z was released, the exact same complaints were made about its ride. So they revised the suspension for the European models, with help from Nissan UK. Guess what happened? Those suspension revisions ended up in later model 350Zs internationally, and everyone concluded the car drove better on the road since it was absorbing bumps. On road loops the Euro-spec setup was quicker and more confidence inspiring, and made the car more enjoyable to drive. As always, the Japanese can't seem to tune suspension. They always assume "stiffer = better" when its not the case, especially not for a street car driven by ordinary people. A car with progressive handling is always quicker than something super sensitive unless you're a good driver (which most people are not). Considering the car in question is not the V-Spec or N1, I hope they do something about the suspension if its as bad as they say. If someone complains about a track-focused car being too harsh on the road but great on the track, I'd agree that they're nuts, but if you intend on living the GT-R as a "daily drivable supercar" then I'd rather it absorb bumps and maintain constant tyre contact with the road.

Its exactly what happens when people talk about the Z06 or the VE Commodore on here. Neither are bad cars, for the price and intended market. Hell, when the Veyron was released there were a whole bunch of SAU keyboard warriors saying how its shit and Skylines are better.

He loves GT-Rs (it made his list of the 50 Best Sports Cars Ever), but as another owner of this edition of Top Gear Magazine I can tell you its not his name on the byline.

Hey guys. Arranged another cruise for the weekend before Christmas. http://www.350z-tech.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=34061 This one is starting at a slightly more reasonable time. Its just occurred to me that the entire period might be double demerits with massive police presence, so I might call it off. However, if you are interested post up and we can see if people want to do a leisurely run, or maybe change our route to somewhere like Wollongong and hit the coast up for lunch. I can't make the weekend prior since I'm doing Kids Race Day.

If its compatible, and you're just after dampers, I can highly recommend the Koni Yellows. Before I put in Tein coilovers I ran OEM springs in my Z33 with Koni Yellows, and they were great. On full soft they're softer than stock. The car was a bit floaty but it rode so nicely, and since they adjust bound and rebound together with the valve when you stiffen them up you get better response everywhere. The rear adjustment valve is on the side of the strut, so all you have to do is jack up your car enough to get your arm between the tyre and the guard. A lot better than most dampers that have their adjustment thingy at the top, which in our cars means drilling through trim or pulling the strut out.

I'm kind of with SK on this. My definition of a "manual gearbox" is a a housing full of gears that has to be selected manually. Its not called a "manual clutch", so how the clutch is operated is irrelevant to the definition of the gearbox. It doesn't matter if it uses a torque converter either - how a gearbox does its thing is a matter of implementation, not definition. I'd call this kind of gearbox a "semi manual" since it gives the driver full control of when the gears are changed in the appropriate mode. If you look at most Euro "Tiptronics" those things will change gear for you when you reach a certain RPM in their "manual" mode, even without driver intervention, which in my books makes it "semi automatic" instead.

That raised middle and angular lights reminds me of the current Mercedes SLK. The light array looks like an S2000's. The boot lid looks like its off a 7 Series, and even after all this time still looks ugly. The rear quarter is very V35/V36 Skyline (and the rims are a direct copy).

Its funny how one person is going on about how he's a puppet for car manufacturer's, and then someone else saying he's anti car manufacturer. The guy's got no idea when it comes to cars (he reckons the Caparo T1 handles badly, even though the prototype was 9s faster around the TG test track than the next fastest car when you let a pro driver at it) but it is his job to be an entertainer. That's why Top Gear is so much more successful than Fifth Gear; people who don't like cars like watching it.

I wasn't referring to Clarkson's review of the Clio V6. I was referring to his review of the prototype Golf W12. The reviews of the Clio I were referring to are from evo in the UK, and Wheels / Motor in Australia. And why the f**k are you having a crack at me? I wasn't the one who brought up the Golf W12 either, I was responding to someone who thought it'd be his dream hatch. WHy don't you learn to read before you reply, since its quite clear you're quick to jump to conclusions but slow to comprehend. Oh yeah, and the constant bollocking Clarkson gave Rover (Britain's most mainstream car company) says "automotive lapdog", considering most of the employees blamed him personally for bankrupting the company with his constantly negative reviews. Not to mention his regular tirades against Vectras and most of the Vauxhall line-up.

Read my last post again. After the clarification I wasn't said that he was saying the transaxle was a negative either. Nor was I disputing that the high total weight of the car was bad either. I'd concur that 1700kg is just stupidly high, not that GT-Rs always haven't been heavy for their age. However, if you stick an engine somewhere that part of the car is going to weigh a shitload. Its not a negative of the GT-R, its basic physics. Now, if that location is the front of the car you need to stick something in the back to balance it out. Rather than a negative, why isn't the use of a transaxle considered a positive? Its a a cost-effective way of shifting some weight to the rear, low in the car to retain a low centre of gravity, and as SydneyKid says it brings engineering positives in terms of cooling to the table. Since the car has an electronically operated clutch and gear selector, you don't lose "feel" that you would in a cable operated gearbox / clutch vs a more solid mechanical linkage. Rather than "having to switch" to a transaxle, why isn't it viewed as "finally being able to use a transaxle thanks to advances in technology and reductions in the cost of making them"? What I'm saying is that how do you know they haven't always wanted to use a transaxle, but haven't been able to until now?

The total weight, I see, is a negative. "Having" to go to a transaxle to balance the weight distribution is, for me, not a negative. Who says they "had to" go to a transaxle to balance the weight distribution? With the front engine platform decided, the aforementioned weight is in the front of the car (and is there any other item that goes into a chassis that weighs as much as an engine and the ancillaries that must sit near it?). Something has to go in the back to offset the weight of the engine. What's to say that the use of a transaxle wasn't made early in the design phase and voluntarily (especially when an electronically operated gearbox was decided) to balance the weight, which gave the engineers more freedom with packaging everything else while retaining a near perfect weight distribution?

Here's a quick list, off the top of my head. FD RX-7. Hottest thing on 4 wheels to ever come out of Japan. R34 Skyline. Broad shouldered. Hunkered down. R32 GT-R. Aggressive S15 Silvia. It'd be hot even if it wasn't looked upon favourable coming on the back of the S14. V36 Skyline. Great lines, and a headlight design that doesn't look squished. Accord Euro. It looks classy. Ariel Atom. Form following function taken to the extreme. Aston Martin V8 Vantage. Its just horn. Mercedes Benz E Class. What a sophisticated luxury sedan should look like. Alfa Romeo GT. If it was RWD I'd have one over my Z33 BMW Z4 (roadster or coupe). The "extreme" styling actually works on this car. Seat Leon Cupra. One of the most aggressive looking hot hatches around. Dodge Viper. What can I say? Its like a match box car you can kill yourself in. Ford Mustang. Love the retro looks of the new one. Chrysler 300C. There might be more, but that's all I can think of right now.

The Foria looked like it got smacked with a sackful of ugly.

If you hit someone while driving a car you're not licensed to drive, expect to get reamed even harder in multiple ways when you have to pay that victim's medical expenses out of own pocket because you're not covered by CTP.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean you don't have to obey the rules. You can still drive sports cars, and there are plenty of quick sports cars out there that are totally street legal. If a footballer wants to wear boots with studs he can, but they're only allowed to be a certain length and he's not allowed to sharpen them up to spikes. Sure, a 2" long spike might provide better traction but they might also kill someone. The rules on modifying cars are no different. And, just like with a footballer, if you don't like the rules you don't have to play the game. As for your mate, his car wasn't street legal. Simple as that. Sure you get dickhead cops as well as cool cops, but his problem right now is passing emissions so its not a cop problem its a car problem. Your rant doesn't appear that he wasn't doing anything wrong and got in trouble, but he got caught doing something wrong and is now struggling to make it right.

Like syphillis? It looks like shit. The front end looks like a Pulsar. The rear quarter looks like a V35 sedan. Considering how nice the S15 looks, this eyesore should not be its successor. Japanese manufacturers should leave building ugly cars to Subaru.

The person who thought it was a good idea to paint a GT-R in pink can go eat a dick.

How has the VQ failed? The Nismo 380RS has a motorsport version of the engine that makes 400ps with no turbo. That's not bad in anyone's books. Z1 Auto in the States has just pulled 300rwhp out of a VQ35DE with relatively few modifications, which puts it awfully close to the 100hp/L NA target most "NA sports car OEMs" aim for. On the FI side, the standard VQ35DE in the V35/Z33 can make a reliable 300rwkW with a pair of turbos at 7psi. There are plenty of guys doing engine rebuilds making 400rwkW at under 1bar, and a high powered drag racer making 1300kW with a VQ. Nismo has raced, and won, the SuperGT championship with a VQ30DETT in its GT500 Skyline and FairladyZ's in the last few years.

So his "negative" isn't really a negative at all. It means Nissan can avoid blowing out the cost of the car by running a lot of exotic materials in the front end to bring the weight down while complying with modern crash safety requirements, while making the gearbox more durable due to its distance from a massive heat source.

What's wrong with a transaxle? A lot of exotica (like the new Maserati Gransport) as well as race cars (including Nissan's championship winning JGTC R34 and FairladyZ cars) run transaxles, so it can't be that bad a thing. This is a genuine question. I have no idea what the cons are for locating your gearbox back there (especially if you're running something fly-by-wire and so you don't get the vaguaries of running long and convoluted cables back there) so I'd appreciate the input.

What the f**k are you on about?

Aluminium suspension arms is about all I can think of. Those things count towards your unsprung weight, I believe. I read somewhere that the more inboard the suspension is mounted, the lower the effective unsprung mass (for the same actual mass of the components). And yes, Nissan hasn't gone the ceramic brake route yet (according to Wheels). Since ceramic brakes tend to be 20% lighter, if they did go there they might have lighter brakes even though they're physically larger, or at least the same weight.

The R35 is a successor to the R34, which is a beast of a car. But with 500ps, a lot of CF in the construction, and an almost racing-spec engine its more than just baby steps. However, the R32 replaced the R31....and that's like comparing Godiva chocolate to what's in the septic tank at a Mexican restaurant. So yes, the R32 was a much bigger step forward. <Flamesuit: ON>