The Nissan Skyline-9th Best Sportscar Of Alltime

[thrtytwo]

yeh ive been a long time fan of koenigsegg, would take one over a ferrari/lambo/buggati veyron any day , the CCGT is bombed

[wizlb]

I think the important ideal we have to understand and why the skyline was selected is this simple fact.

The skyline technology is over 20 years old and other car manufactures are still using that technology....BMW twin turbo; EVO, WRX and countless other my fingers are to tired to type but you get the ideal, RIGHT.

Did you guys know that the M3 and the M6 have carbon fibre roofs.

THE SKYLINE AND THE TUNER SHOPS THE WORLD OVER HAVE FOUND THERE PRODUCT LINES INCLUDED IN NEW CAR MANUFACTURES.

Just my opinion!

[scathing]

The skyline technology is over 20 years old and other car manufactures are still using that technology....BMW twin turbo; EVO, WRX and countless other my fingers are to tired to type but you get the ideal, RIGHT.

Uh, yeah....because Nissan invented twin turbocharging? Like no other car was twin turbocharged before the GT-R? Or do you mean twin turbocharging an inline 6, because its not like Toyota's 2JZ-GTE did that right? I can't think of any other twin turbo I6s off the top of my head, but I'd be quite surprised if the RB was the first.

And what have the Evo and WRX copied from the GT-R? The AWD drive train? The one Audi made famous with the Quattro almost a decade before an AWD GT-R was released? Or do you mean an active AWD system known as ATTESSA, that Nissan copied from the 959? Its not like they have the same engine or chassis configuration.

I'm not exactly sure what technology BMW, Mitsubishi and Subaru "copied" from the GT-R that Nissan didn't copy from someone else....so its hardly "Skyline technology".

Did you guys know that the M3 and the M6 have carbon fibre roofs.

THE SKYLINE AND THE TUNER SHOPS THE WORLD OVER HAVE FOUND THERE PRODUCT LINES INCLUDED IN NEW CAR MANUFACTURES.

So you're saying that no other race cars, by other manufacturers, have ever used exotic materials to lighten the roof and lower the centre of gravity?

Just my opinion!

No dispute there, since its certainly not fact.

[Beer Baron]

yeah I have to agree. that white F 430 GB looks a little tame next to the GT40. but what car wouldn't?

[Forged]

Forget the koenigsegg, it might hold some lap records and achieved 240mph but has never actually proven itself at Le Mons like the GT40, or any other famous endurance races.

I think we are forgetting these:

[sh@un]

hmmm.....petrodollars

[floody]

No skyline of any sort has any place in a sportscar list. It is not a sportscar, it is a sporting sedan, and that is a big distinction. Simple as that. And a GT-R is no supercar in stock form.

An MX5 is 10x the sportscar a Skyline will never be.

[funkymonkey]

is that 98 octane petrol that you're throwin on the fire there floody

*waits for angry angry response from 32line*

[Bumblebee]

Its built off a passenger car. How can it be a "supercar", which should have a bespoke platform?

The only true supercar made by a big Japanese car manufacturer is the NSX.

The R32 GTR wasnt built from a passenger platform.. it was built from the ground up as a pure race car... then they put plates on it and sold them off as street cars just so they could race it on the track legitamately... hence y they raped EVERYTHING that ever came across it on the track.. It was banned (rules changed to exclude it) from track in australia, europe and even in japan.

Nissan wasnt tryin to build a super fast street car with the R32 GTR... they built a race car with number plates... pure and simple

[funkymonkey]

The R32 GTR wasnt built from a passenger platform.. it was built from the ground up as a pure race car... then they put plates on it and sold them off as street cars just so they could race it on the track legitamately... hence y they raped EVERYTHING that ever came across it on the track.. It was banned (rules changed to exclude it) from track in australia, europe and even in japan.

Nissan wasnt tryin to build a super fast street car with the R32 GTR... they built a race car with number plates... pure and simple

actually all models from the ALSI in the 60's, thru to the C10's and the R30's n R31's and even the R32's thru to the R34 are designed as passenger cars first, then as the touring car race models.

R32 n/a coupe and 4 doors came out 4 or 5 months before the GTR, R33 sedans and coupes were out a whole year before the GTR's. etc etc. They're most definitely designed on a passenger car platform.

The 300zx and the Z series on the other hand are designed from the ground up to be sports cars.

And the rules weren't changed to exclude the GTR from racing, do a search on the forum, its a common misconception.

[thrtytwo]

haha if the Z was designed as the sports car not the GTR what happened there ?? i dont know facts but my impression is that the GTR WAS designed as the sports car, just because the NA models came out first doesnt mean the GTR wasnt in developement. plus in my eyes the 300zx was there attempt to compete with european supercars, look at the styling, and again i dont know facts but GTR's seem to be in a lot more racing situations that 300zx's dunno how it was back in early 90's though ?

basically i see the GTR as what was built as the real race car, for japan, not nescesarily to go head to head with 'supercars' (i dont see it as a supercar, its just better than a lot of them ) and the 300zx as there supercar attempt.

as i tried to say, this is just how i have percieved the cars, not based on fact or even opinion really. perception

but i wouldnt call a GTR a supercar, even if its better than a porsche or whatever from the same era.

[funkymonkey]

haha if the Z was designed as the sports car not the GTR what happened there ??

they're both sports cars, one was targetted at people who wanted a sporty looking cutting edge aesthetics based car, the other was a touring car based on a passenger car (as required by the racing rules of the time)... hence the GT badges, they competed in group A races, the silvias were also a touring car which competed in group C (or something like that).

its like if i asked you what is holden's flagship sports car... the commodore or the monaro... the monaro is right? but they still race the commodore platform in V8 supercars, not the monaro.

[Roy]

Think back to when the GTR was made. It was made to go Group A racing. So in order to have a car to race they needed to homologate a version of a car that was mass produced. So they built the R32 platform with a view that they wanted certain performance from it.

Half way through building it they realised that with the 4wd system they had designed (flogged off Porsche) that the car would not be competitive with a 2.0L. So they upped the capacity to suit the weight the car would race at, hence the under 2.6L. If they had of gone 3L they would have been slogged with the weight that the Supra was forced to carry....not a good thing.

So the GTR was built so Nissan could go racing with it in the Grp A series. Just like with the R31 series they homologated the R31 GTS-R...though for the R32 they had learnt that they needed more sophisticated supension etc if the car was to be competitive. They did built the mass produced R32 platform with a few elements that would make it more suitable for Grp A racing...wasnt a purpose built car

So the Grp A wasnt a putrpose built race car. In my view it had tailored technology thrown at it so that it wouls maximise the flexibility of the Grp A regs.

[Gts-t]

good thread, nothing but feelings has been hurt i feel it would be unfaithful not to throw my 5 cents in here

Im a big fan of sports cars modified to have supercar performance. Forget about silly top speeds, im thinking more like roy passing the F430. For us guys without 300k to 1m to smoke on a car, being able to build a car that can run faster around a given track than a much more expensive/supercar is very exciting. Whilst technically, on paper whatever they might not be supercars they are running faster, and at the end of the track day if the skyline was ahead of the supercar on lap times then u would have to say the skyline is the better car as it has achieved 1st position.

fwiw i feel the skyline is a SPORTS sedan, sporty enough to be called a SPORTS car. Its results in various motor SPORTS speaks for itself. And yes this is my opinion, not fact

Edited September 15, 2007 by 2630GTS

[funkymonkey]

surpised no one's posted this yet...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wm8d9X6LtCU

[wizlb]

Scathing

Listen Man

How old are the turbo from EVO, WRX or the BMW.

And the 959 is rear wheel drive correct.

This is what the car host were talking about how the Skyline had the technology many years ahead most other car manufactures.

So scathing

Tell me what other single turbo twin turbo car with 4wd or awd was out before the skyline that is close to being better then it from performance level.

Name it?

[BaysideBlue]

How old are the turbo from EVO, WRX or the BMW.

And the 959 is rear wheel drive correct.

This is what the car host were talking about how the Skyline had the technology many years ahead most other car manufactures.

So scathing

Tell me what other single turbo twin turbo car with 4wd or awd was out before the skyline that is close to being better then it from performance level.

Name it?

The short answer is PORSCHE 959 (NO its not rear drive). The Porsche 959 is a supercar manufactured by Porsche AG from 1986 to 1989, first as a Group B rally car and later as a road going vehicle designed to satisfy FIA homologation regulations requiring that a minimum number of street legal units be built. It is widely regarded as Porsche's first true supercar.

[scathing]

How old are the turbo from EVO, WRX or the BMW.

The Evo and WRX are newer than the GT-R, but both of them are arguably more aligned as road-homologated rally cars...which makes them more of a copy of the Audi Quattro than the GT-R.

The Evo's engine is a descendent of the Galant VR-4's engine, which was a production car back in the mid 80's and therefore predates the R32.

The BMW 2002 Turbo was out before the FI GT-R was.

Its not like Nissan invented turbocharging or was the first to come out with it on a road car, so just because the Evos and WRXs are turbocharged doesn't mean they copied the GT-R.

The original GT-R, the KPGC10, wasn't even forced induction. Or are you going to say that high strung NA engines (like Honda or BMW) are now copies of the Skyline too?

And the 959 is rear wheel drive correct.

Incorrect. A 5 second search of Google would have made you look less ignorant.

Its a well-known fact (and something a slightly deeper search online would have told you) that ATTESSA is Nissan's copy of the 959's drivetrain. Its not "Skyline technology" at all. Its "We want to be Porsche" technology.

Tell me what other single turbo twin turbo car with 4wd or awd was out before the skyline that is close to being better then it from performance level.

I'm going to assume we're talking stock for stock. Once you start modding, the only limit is the budget.

One of the Audi Quattro variants, for starters. And that car was released in 1980, so its 2 generations behind the R32 and so its performance should be considered accordingly.

The Audi RS2 was released soon after the R32 finished its production run, and was a vehicle Audi commissioned Porsche Engineering to "tune" where the donor vehicle had been around for ages.

Mitsubishi rallied the Galant VR-4 back in the late 80's before switching to the lighter and smaller Lancer platform. Probably not quite as quick, but not that slow and 1 generation older than the R32 (and also designed to rally, not circuit race). And certainly more the Lancer GSR's / Evo's forefather than the Nissan GT-R.

The Porsche 959 - nuff said.

The Bugatti EB110 was released in 1991, which is during the production period of the R32 but being a niche manufacturer building a supercar would have a far longer lead time. Performance-wise would defecate all over a R32.

If you want to go esoteric on the performance AWD (rather than offroad AWD), the Jensen FF was an AWD V8 NA coupe.

The GT-R isn't the be-all and end-all of the AWD turbo universe. Its not the alpha nor omega, since the 959 preceded it and the AYC / ACD setup of the current Evolution Lancers is technically superior to ATTESSA. Try taking off your blinders and take an unbiased look at the world.

Edited September 15, 2007 by scathing

[scathing]

This is what the car host were talking about how the Skyline had the technology many years ahead most other car manufactures.

Yes, the Skyline is indeed a trend-setter that they copied technology from other companies 20 years before some of its competitors did.

[Roy]

The GTR was, hell, still is a great thing. But as others have pointed out, the only thing revolutionary about it was its pricing and availability. Back in the day it was a lot cheaper then the 959, or any of the performance Audi quattros. . These days its far more accessible then the other European variants of the theme.

But the R32 GTR was just a solid car with some nice gear on it. It had a good awd system, good power for its day, good brakes for its day...blah, blah. I am with others in saying there wasnt anything all that radical, It was a good, well engineered car. LOL, it still got beat at Bathurst by a V8 VL Walkinshaw

Lotus, Renault and many others had been doing good things with turbos well before Nissan. Nissan picked up the pace with the Z18, onto the FJ20, RB20 and RB26. About the only thing you can give credit to Nissan for is the finds they gave garret to help develop ceramic ball bearing turbos to reduce the dreaded 80s turbo lag. Difference between Nissan and th Europeans was that generall the Europeans were usign smaller turbos for hits of torque, Nissan were using them to give small displacement motors plenty of bang. Ford built a better turbocharged 2.0L for a long time, and thinking about it. The Ford 2L in race trim was generally a match for the 2.6L twin turbo RB26 (albeit the 26 was in a heavier car)