2008 Nissan GT-R

[2000VR-4]

Sorry Mitch I gotta disagree. The mid siction (roof and doors) is pure V35 and the drive train is based on the 3.5 V6 in said V35, the awd system is based on the M35. Sounds similar IMO to previous gtr's engine based on gtst and awd based on other models???

IMHO I think the reason it is being released as a seperate model is simply to hide the fact it is already an old car. They are about to release the V37 model Skylines in Japan and the GTR is based around V35. Just my thoughts.

 

[2000VR-4]

Good news is, that it seems to me that Nissan AU will bring them in under RWS thats why they are limiting it to 100 cars in the first year. And waiting till the model is 18months old. That means we can also bring them in at the same time If Nissan is asking upwards of $120k I am sure we can bring in a 18month old car for around the $70k mark

 

[SiliconAngel]

Except Nissan will cry foul and sue you into the ground and the federal govt will fine yo ass and crush the car...

I thought Nissan wasn't going to release ANY more Skylines? I thought that was the point of the GTR? I thought they'd killed the whole line with the 350Z, and the GTR was their compromise? Or am I grossly misinformed?

 

[2000VR-4]

Except Nissan will cry foul and sue you into the ground and the federal govt will fine yo ass and crush the car...

I thought Nissan wasn't going to release ANY more Skylines? I thought that was the point of the GTR? I thought they'd killed the whole line with the 350Z, and the GTR was their compromise? Or am I grossly misinformed?

I dont think so. Nissan Australia has said it will be selling the GTR in a batch of 100 and not until 2009.
Raws rules state that you can only bring in 100 cars and the particular model has to be atleast 18 months old.
Is it just coincidence that the GTR will be 18 months old by the middle of 2009??? And they are limiting it to 100 cars????
If a vehical is listed on the RAWS then anyone with a RAWS can bring it in.

 

[Guest]

the 350Z is not a skyline replacement, its a new model in the 'fairlady' series... ie 240Z, 300zx, etc..

the skyline is continuing on in the V35/36, and soon V37 models.

i understand what you are saying jason, but again.. the whole chassis is different, whereas the R32-4 was basically a coupe with wider panels, and AWD.

Jason - with the new GTR, whilst it shares similarities, how could it not? theres no point remaking the wheel when you have a very good platform to come from, and besides, if it DIDN'T look like a V35/350Z, etc.. it probably wouldn't be liked as much.


the engine being similar (its actually NOT very similar at all, the new HR version that the GTR adopts is 80% brand new over the older series V6's nissan made, in an attempt to make it higher, and quicker revving) is a bit like holden/HSV. holden use a 6.0L L96 in their commodores, and the HSV clubsport, GTS, etc.. uses a 6.0L (or is it 6.2L now?) LS2 in the HSV... doesnt make it a commodore though does it?

also.. the AWD was never taken from other platforms, the GTR was the original 'owner' of the ATESSA system.. that was basically what made the GTR the figure it is today... the refined engine, and the almighty ATESSA system brought us the 'R32 Godzilla', and now they just keep refining this 'monster'

i think we need to agree to disagree, but as i said, i understand your arguement, i just look at it from a different perspective.. i guess owning a skyline, and researching it deeply, gives me a different view.

 

[2000VR-4]

Agreed.............. or should that be Disagreed ????

 

[SiliconAngel]

the 350Z is not a skyline replacement, its a new model in the 'fairlady' series... ie 240Z, 300zx, etc..

the skyline is continuing on in the V35/36, and soon V37 models.

I just remember seeing the interviews with Nissan's CEO and other promotional material at the time of the 350Z launch, where they said there would be no more Skylines and the 350Z was bringing a number of platforms into a single vehicle that would be the basis for all of Nissan's future performance vehicle sales. Then a couple of years after that there was 'talk' of a GTR, and now we're seeing it. But that's my memory of Nissan's official position at the time - sorry no hard facts to back it up, its just what I remember.

Its is a bit like holden/HSV. holden use a 6.0L L96 in their commodores, and the HSV clubsport, GTS, etc.. uses a 6.0L (or is it 6.2L now?) LS2 in the HSV... doesnt make it a commodore though does it?

Um...... yes? *smiles innocently*

 

[leebutts]

Lots of official pics released....

Christ it looks good in black *swoons*

the "multi function display" as they are calling it looks cool too.

cheers

Lee

 

[Guest]

black is hoooooooooot!!

285/35ZRF20's.... yum.

 

[Nash]

You can buy one via J-Spec today !

http://www.j-spec.com.au/list/index.php?ID=11877


Well a 2007 model

 

[2000VR-4]

Auto???

 

[VR-04-TT]

There's an awesome article in the latest wheels mag where the GTR set a new nurburgring record for a stock car. 7.38!!! The fastest before that I think was 7.46. Either way, it's farkin fast!!!!

 

[Guest]

Auto???

that's all they come as... 6spd DSG box, i'd have one in an instant!

 

[2000VR-4]

BOO. ya need a burnout pedal.

 

[Fred]

^^^ i agree i'm sick of all the good cars being auto nowadays....Grrr.

 

[Guest]

i reckon you'd struggle to get 1080mm of tread width spinning even WITH a clutch.

how can you not like the DSG box, gear changes in under 0.2 seconds, thats insanely fast!

 

[2000VR-4]

I have seen some killer autos on Top Gear that shift down under decelleration, now thats an auto I could like.
I hate the big kick down when ya nail it from say... 50k's like exiting a 'round about. Auto's just aren't for me in a performance car.

 

[bradc]

that is what is so good about tiptronic boxes, they do actually listen to you in some cars and hold onto gears, like the VR-4.

I would argue that DSG's aren't auto's anyway. They don't have a torque converter. They are a manual with an automated clutch (and they happen to change gear bloody quickly)

 

[2000VR-4]

IMHO, the car industry is just trying to save bucks by talking up a product we dont need. The automatic was invented for lazy/old people so you didn't have to worry about gear changes. Its design was that useless old drivers can tootle along the road in top gear and not blow shit up by staying in 2nd (as I have seen lol). It also encourages those who "cant" drive a manual into the market. How many times have you heard someone say "I cant drive a manual" It shits me no end.
If I want an auto I want to put it in "D" and drive. If I want a manual I want a clutch.
The industry big wigs are trying to sell us on autos so they only have to offer 1 trans across the entire range. This works twofold in their favor by saving on developing manuals and on warrenty work on abused clutchs/boxs and so on.
I think it will be a very sad day indeed when the manual is looked fondly upon as a thing of the past

 

[bradc]

true yes, and I personally think there is no better feeling than coming up to a corner, grabbing the gear shifter and pulling it from 3rd down to the left into 2nd, but realistically most people out there in normal day to day driving don't need a manual.