Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  SS8_Gohan said:
With regards to SEVS, that strictly with regards to private imports? Nissan OZ will be able to sell it here earlier than 2 years after Japan yeah?

Be careful what you wish for.

If Nissan of Australia release the GT-R straight away, that completely eliminates any possibility of a SEVS workshop getting approval to import, meaning no cheap imports!

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The price estimate is the first thing to laugh at and even if the price as quoted is true the list of people wanting one will drive the price up even more.

If Nissan bring the car in it will have be in the $200,000 if full volume or they will bring in as per Mitsubishi did with the EVO to keep price down.

The car has to be sold in Japan for 18 months to allow the car to come in under RAWS or as a New Vehicle under SEVS.

After the R32 GT-R do you think Nissan will make the same mistake twice......

  Big Rizza said:
If Nissan of Australia release the GT-R straight away, that completely eliminates any possibility of a SEVS workshop getting approval to import, meaning no cheap imports!

But it will have full dealer support, and it means that the car will be able to compete in the mainstream magazines' PCOTY, BFYB, etc to really rub it in the face of the locals and the Euros.

And if I could afford the upcoming GT-R when it comes out, I'd rather have it brand new with genuine double digit figures on the odo than a slightly used one.

  someonestolecc said:
Nice but needs to be less pit bullish. It's lost the sleek bullet feel you get from a 34 - although it could be because of the magazine aspect.

The R34 was sleek? I think we may have different definitions of the word "sleek".... :(

Anyway, I read an interview on another site (if I can find the source I will) and they said that they didn't want the car to look like an ultra-aerodynamic mobile ramp like other supercars (specifically something like a Ferrari or Lamborghini).

The GT-R is meant to be a wide shouldered, tough looking car. Its meant to look like a bruising pitbull or doberman rather than a greyhound or a whippet. That's the look they want the car to have, which is why it doesn't look like a space ship.

  SS8_Gohan said:
it doesn't share anything with the current V35 Skyline (chasis wise) - there won't be a lower spec model, as there has never been with any other GTR.

That's in regards to say single turbo etc, it's going to be a Nissan GTR - how can you have a single turbo Nissan GTR? From the Skyline line-up, yes, GTS-T, GT-T - but this is not a Skyline.

:( Umm have a closer look at the rear of the car... It has a gigantic skyline logo on it.... Thats why I speculated the possibility of say maybe a GT-t.

Up until now all I've heard from Nissan and the media that they are two different models from here on out... but the photo says otherwise.... just my little observation....

Will be interesting to see the power the jap tuners get out of it 1500hp :ermm:

for it's price it will be in competition with all the euro exotics (considering you could buy 5 for a lambo) and way out of any other Japanese manufactures league.

It will be THE car to own

Hmm.

I somehow reckon this is a fake. The fact that it has SKYLINE written across the back throws me off... EVERYTHING ive read, even when the pres of nissan spoke he said "this will NOT be a skyline, it will be a GTR"

I like the front, very TVR Sagaris. The rears a little high and the wing is gay, but thats probably just the photos.

I find it interesting that a magazine has photos / information about this car even before the GTR Proto website has reopened

-> http://www.gtrproto.com/

Also, anyone notice the "?" in the title?

Finally, as far as i've read reliable information, this car is being released by nissan WORLDWIDE. This includes Japan, Europe, America and Australia. It will be a worldwide supercar. Two firsts for a skyline, being a supercar and being world wide sold (neither of which it has been before)

You guys think its hot in those crummy photos. Wait till you see it in the real flesh. I reckon I'd be picking up my jaw off the ground!

Kudos to Nissan, a car worth waiting for! Well... its been a long time though.

Also I wouldn't comapre it to the 997 Turbo. The Porsche is double the price, so you'd expect it to be better.

why do people keep comparing the GTR with a porsche, this cars gonna blow the porsche away in looks and performance.

you seen one porsche you seem them all, they have had the same boring shape for all those years each time just upping the hp up a bit, do a few cosmetic changes and call it a new model

  R33TOM said:
why do people keep comparing the GTR with a porsche

Because Porsche constantly set the benchmark for sportscar handling and performance

  R33TOM said:
this cars gonna blow the porsche away in looks and performance.

Looks are subjective and you can make up your own mind there. But performance is less so. The GTR would not outperform a 997 911 Turbo stock vs. stock. The 911 has more power, less weight, and a better weight distrobution for straight line stuff. Plus the rear engine plus all-wheel-drive gives the Porsche unparallelled traction out of corners. And the lower centre of gravity and low inertial for the front wheels gives it potentially better handling character. The smaller frontal area and superior aerodynamics give it better top end.

However, from a price point of view, the GT-R would be competing with the Porsche Cayman (13.X second 1/4 mile), which indeed it would out perform from a raw numbers point of view. But could it match the feel and passion of a Cayman?

  R33TOM said:
you seen one porsche you seem them all

Perhaps you aren't paying enough attention - the difference between one generation to the next is always under the skin.

  R33TOM said:
they have had the same boring shape for all those years each time just upping the hp up a bit, do a few cosmetic changes and call it a new model

Again, you aren't paying enough attention. If you for an instant think the differences between the 993 and 996 models are purely cosmetic, with only a small hp increase, then you are sorely mistaken...

The Porsche 911 sets the benchmark for sportscar performance. Surely to even be compared to the flagship turbo model, with an asking price around half of what the Porsche is, should be one of the greatest compliments the GTR could recieve? It doesn't need to beat the Porsche - merely to get near it at half the price will make the GT-R special enough for me!

  Quote
However, from a price point of view, the GT-R would be competing with the Porsche Cayman (13.X second 1/4 mile), which indeed it would out perform from a raw numbers point of view. But could it match the feel and passion of a Cayman?

Umm are you joking?

The Porsche Cayman is a compromised model to suit those wanting more than the Boxter and that cannot afford a 991. The only reason that car is there is too fill holes in the marketing department!!

I recall Top Gear bagging it because whilst it was smooth and did things alright that it did indeed lack the Passion you so speak of.

Point to point around the Top Gear test track my money is on the new GTR eating the Cayman, and the presenters making a general point thats way more generous and encouraging than the Cayman.

Nissan has a problem, Skylines are not sold worldwide. So they HAVE to keep the GTR away from the Skyline name. Otherwise they will have people asking for the “other models” of Skyline. The economics of it are such that if you do one model you might as well do a selection of the rest.

The real problem for Nissan in Australia is the R32GTR bombed, big time, they forgot it was a “hero” car. The idea being that you don’t make a lot of money selling the “hero” car by itself, you make the money selling the lower spec models that live of the hero’s name. So if they sell the GTR as the “hero” Skyline then they need the other models to make the money.

Let’s face it we all know Nissan in Australia should drop the front wheel drive Maxima and sell Skylines instead. Then, and only then, does a Skyline GTR makes sense.

I don’t really want to go into a Nissan dealer to buy a GTR, or get it serviced, and have to wait in line behind some low life with a Tiiga. That’s why Toyota has Lexus, Honda has Acura, Nissan has Infinity, Subaru have designated STi dealers and Mitsubishi have Raliart dealerships to sell Evo’s.

Nissan has a problem if they want to sell GTR’s in Australia, and based on past experiences, they have no idea how to solve it. I know, but they won’t be asking me.

:laugh: cheers :D

Edited by Sydneykid
  CONRAD said:
Umm are you joking?

The Porsche Cayman is a compromised model to suit those wanting more than the Boxter and that cannot afford a 991. The only reason that car is there is too fill holes in the marketing department!!

I recall Top Gear bagging it because whilst it was smooth and did things alright that it did indeed lack the Passion you so speak of.

Point to point around the Top Gear test track my money is on the new GTR eating the Cayman, and the presenters making a general point thats way more generous and encouraging than the Cayman.

Agreed the Cayman doesn't have the passion of the 911. But still, I doubt the GT-R will match the steering feel and feedback that the Cayman will give. The Cayman will feel more like a sportscar than the GT-R.

And I already said that on raw performance the GT-R would be faster than the Cayman, so a giant fat balding overly-cynical Brittish git driving hamfistedly around an airport doesn't prove much. >_< Even less telling would be if a short white toothed daytime television hosting Hamster were to do it instead :(

(P.S. I am the Stig)

Edited by Big Rizza

Back when Porsche first developed the current shape they announced that this was the best design model for drag co-efficency and I recall thinking ATT "one day most sports cars will have to have this shape to at least compete" and if you look at alot of the faster cars they do follow that design concept, sure they differ because they have to and if I had to say "the new GTR looks like" (just from that one pic) it would be the Vanquish.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...