Nissan GTR Assembly Line Detailing - Page 5

Setec Astronomy · 12-06-07, 04:49

What the heck is the matter with you guys? 300 HP isn't enough for you? 6.7 seconds zero-to-sixty? I remember some dark emission and fuel economy days when IIRC the fastest car you could buy in the US was a Rabbit GTI which couldn't even crack 10 seconds. Corvettes and F-bodies were equipped with "cross-port injected" 305's and couldn't get out of their own way, and Mustangs were still sporting an oil-cooled turbo 2.0 l I4 as the hot engine, and this was before anyone had even heard of a "carbon footprint". And you guys are complaining about this...sheesh!

SpoiledMan · 12-06-07, 05:24

Man, at 50k it just has to be better than it is to be a competitor. I wouldn't feel good at all dropping that kind of coin on the car when the TL is there missing only AWD (not needed here) and 15k cheaper.

Setec Astronomy · 12-06-07, 05:30

I wasn't judging it as a bargain...I was judging what you guys think is underpowered! We have incredible riches of horsepower available to us these days...a Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, or Hyundai Sonata can all be had with more horsepower than a '78 Firebird Trans Am 6.6 TA which was a pretty potent engine in its day and perhaps the apex of performance for the period (torque would be another issue...some day I will look that up). I hardly think we are looking at a future where a vanilla mainstream family sedan is putting out that kind of power-to-weight ratio. Anyway, enough thread-jacking.

SpoiledMan · 12-06-07, 06:14

How about this: Underpowered for it's placement/price. That work?

SpoiledMan · 12-06-07, 06:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurora40

That's what I thought you meant. I think many/most cars are spot sanded/buffed to fix defects. Nothing special about that.

I guess I don't get the GT-R? 470hp, 3,800 lbs, and $80k?

...and a place for 4 people to sit and AWD and... It's going to kick some *** at that price. Being turbo, it's just a few upgrades away from even more power.

Scottwax · 12-06-07, 06:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy

I thought the RL had something like 300 HP?

Doesn't have enough low end torque, plus when you drop $50,000+ in the catagory the RL competes in, a V8 should be standard. Low 15s is just not acceptable when everyone else is well into the 14s and even quicker.

Other than the lack of ooomph when you hit the gas, it is a really nice car. Killer stereo, very comfortable seats, etc.

brwill2005 · 12-06-07, 06:52

I do not even think Honda/Acura ever even made a V8; not sure though.

pt91 · 12-06-07, 06:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by brwill2005

I do not even think Honda/Acura ever even made a V8; not sure though.

they might skip the 8 and go to a v10 for the next generation nsx but the proto is ugly and the engine is in the wrong place.

SpoiledMan · 12-06-07, 07:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by pt91

they might skip the 8 and go to a v10 for the next generation nsx but the proto is ugly and the engine is in the wrong place.

And the scariest part about that is that they have been producing cars that are pretty close to what the proto's look like.

pt91 · 12-06-07, 07:09

on paper the gt-r is bound to do make exotic car makers take notice just like the nsx did in the early 90s. not as nce to look at but i am warming up to it.
honda is getting left behind unfortunately. maybe nissan will wake them up.

Picus · 12-06-07, 07:15

6.7s to 60 sounds underpowered to me Setec.

Setec Astronomy · 12-06-07, 08:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Picus

6.7s to 60 sounds underpowered to me Setec.

Eh...I'm just an old grumpy guy...