Re: Nissan Z, step aside

On Oct 24, 8:34 pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:53:18 -0400, "C. E. White"
>
> <cewhi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >Nissan's GT-R will include:
>
> >480 hp 3.8-liter twin-turbo V6
>
> That's a deal-breaker right there. Well, that and the price. :)
>
> Why deal with turbo lag, engine parts that glow bright orange after
> you drive your car and melt if you don't cool them down properly when
> you can just get a larger NA engine?

I was thinking something completely different; why would you have a
V-6 when both Nissan and Toyota in the past have had perfectly good
I-6 designs that they chose not to develop and/or replace with updated
versions of the same architecture.  Guess I have to buy a Bimmer to
get my fix of creamy smooth I-6 goodness (Ford pickup technically
qualifies but is not nearly as satisfying.)  Or find an old Supra that
hasn't been "Fast and Furioused" to death.  Or an original Z-car, or
Triumph TR-6... (I'd be happy with any, probably...)

Drive a VW with the 1.8T engine (I guess now it's a 2.0T) and you will
begin wor****pping at the Church of Forced Induction.  That sucker has
a torque curve that looks like my kitchen table.  It is, indeed, a
beautiful thing.  I hope my mom gets sick of my old car soon so I can
buy it back :)

Of course this new GT-R is going to never be im****ted to the US (case
in point, the previous Skyline GT-R) so any praises or complaints are
really academic at this point.

Also, to respond to the initial article - isn't the Z a little ****ky
to be considered a "s****ts car?"  I'd consider it a 2-person GT
myself.  It's a nice car, don't get me wrong, but it just doesn't push
my "s****ts car" buttons.

nate