theres no way if that car is released that it's going to look like that, lol.
I do hope for quad circular lights though.
theres no way if that car is released that it's going to look like that, lol.
I do hope for quad circular lights though.
In reply to kanaric:
That would be a major improvement, but still needs a facelift. Or maybe drop.
I didn't think the Toyburu twins were really killing it in the sales department. Does the world really need a competitor from Nissan? What platform would it go onto? I thought Nissan-Renault was all about having just a few platforms to build all their car/SUV/etc offerings from. So is this going to be a platform mate to the 370Z?
In reply to pres589:
Its Datsun, how many times have they ever made any berkeleying sense? 
In reply to yamaha:
Honestly, this just seems like one of those things where Nissan could stand up and say "look how edgy we are! No, really, come on now!". They can also say that they studied the market and did proof of concept but the accounting just doesn't make sense.
What might be nice is a 370Z based "lightweight" with the engine out of that Sentra Nismo they're also showing. But I don't see them bothering. They're probably better off making the Altima and Sentra and whatever minivan they sell these days into better and more profitable products.
I like the looks. It's, umm... different. Ugly, but in a cool way.
Nissan really needs to get over their obsession with CVT's though. 
SilverFleet wrote: I like the looks. It's, umm... different.
the CVT focus is probably directly related to the "an electric version of every model" they promised but then found the market too soft to do....I think they'd like to have more electric options than the leaf, and I suspect the CVT is part of that plan.
racerdave600 wrote: If it does only show up with a CVT, then it would be almost useless to anyone wanting to use it any other way than as the latest poser car.
I have to wonder - if a CVT had a track mode that would go between peak torque and peak horsepower depending on throttle position, how bad would it be to drive in anger? While I haven't driven a CVT equipped car, most of the complaints I've heard about them sound as if they could be resolved by a better control strategy.
In reply to MadScientistMatt:
My biggest gripe is the "Making alot of noise without actually going anywhere quickly" They're getting better, but still not there
pres589 wrote: Does the world really need a competitor from Nissan?
Does teh world really need a competitor for any class of car? Once one kind of car is made, why shoudl any other manufacturer make something similar?
Do you remember when these small notchback coupes/2 door sedans were available from every import manufacturer (and a couple domestics?). I for one miss the days of a wide choice of small, 3 box coupes/sedans.
MadScientistMatt wrote: I have to wonder - if a CVT had a track mode that would go between peak torque and peak horsepower depending on throttle position, how bad would it be to drive in anger? While I haven't driven a CVT equipped car, most of the complaints I've heard about them sound as if they could be resolved by a better control strategy.
CVTs are the fastest transmissions. They're also the least fun and create the worst engine noises.
Let's face it, they are not making this car for car guys, they are selling to the young college grads who are not interested in driving and the less input they have to do while driving, the happier they are. My 17 year old son has friends that could care less about getting their license and only want to play with their phone and video games. A CVT just means they have less distractions( no trans shifts :)). Seriously, my wife has an 08 pathfinder with the CVT and it can be entertaining to put it in the manual shift mode. You just have to learn to time them right as there is a small delay when you up or down shift. Still, with a car like that, I would want 2.5L at least and a third pedal, but I guess that makes me an old timer.
Yep this..
reminds me of this..
Subaru sold 6000 BRZ's and Toyota a bit over 14,000 FRS's through September. That's just in the US. I can't imagine it would make sense for Nissan to completely ignore this market.
In reply to mazdeuce:
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. How dare you bring facts into this conversation!?!? 
mazdeuce wrote: Subaru sold 6000 BRZ's and Toyota a bit over 14,000 FRS's through September. That's just in the US. I can't imagine it would make sense for Nissan to completely ignore this market.
why the difference between the Suby and the Toyota?
mad_machine wrote:mazdeuce wrote: Subaru sold 6000 BRZ's and Toyota a bit over 14,000 FRS's through September. That's just in the US. I can't imagine it would make sense for Nissan to completely ignore this market.why the difference between the Suby and the Toyota?
I believe the disparity of sales is an agreed-upon split based on production capability. Also keep in mind the relative size of each companies distribution power.
On a more subject note, I bought Scion because Subary was going to be close to 5K more by the time they got done and I have always dislike their dealership here in London. They have the attitude that you are lucky that they let you buy their cars. Course that could just be my perception.
The Scions are a bit cheaper and I for one think they look a bit better. I know that sounds odd since they are 99% the same car but those very subtle differences sway me toward the Scion.
"Do you remember when these small notchback coupes/2 door sedans were available from every import manufacturer (and a couple domestics?). I for one miss the days of a wide choice of small, 3 box coupes/sedans."
This, and RWD,too. Datsun 510,Toyota Corollla, Rx-2,3,4, etc.
From what I read the yota has a slightly different suspension setup that makes it a bit more tail happy. The subaru turns a little better times around large tracks because of this. That is just from a few magazine articles so no personal knowledge there.
OK, to be fair, I let this settle in my mind for a few days.
I have to admit to being a bit of an analog person in a digital world, so perhaps I am less than embracing to radical change.
Cars are all starting to look the same due to the efficiency and safety requirements.
Car companies have actually started to use old designs in an effort to differentiate themselves.
Perhaps this new out of the box design is a way forward.
Can't say that I would buy one, but then I am a Ludite.
M
It does not look bad, the issue I have is the area between the bottom of the window line and the bottom of the door all the way around the car is just way too large.
After thinking this over, I think this car could be a homerun (sale wise) if it gets produced. If they market, and price it to the young (less than 25) techno/urban hipsters that thing could sell very well. The styling is edgy (like the original Audi TT), but not girly (un-like the original Audi TT). The CVT transmission is perfect for the modern kids who don't give a E36 M3 about driving, and the small engine/single transmission choice will leave plenty of room in the budget to load the car full of the useless gadgets kids love.
The styling is questionable, but maybe it's no so offensive in real life. It sure is trying hard. If it has something to back that up, that can be OK. But with a CVT, this makes it a poseur-mobile. I don't buy poseur-mobiles.
And I like CVT's. For an appliance, I prefer a CVT over a classic auto anytime. It's smoother, more intuitive, more efficient, faster and get better MPG's. But it has ZERO sporting pretention.
Is it a BRZ/FRS rival? No. Would I buy one? Hell no. But I also know, I don't represent the general buying public.
I like the looks, I just hope they keep the 1.6 turbo and throw in a manual trans (or at the least a twin clutch manu-matic, ie GTR). Best looking thing to come from Nissan in a while!
Oh, and I think it has an early 70's Celica look, too...and that is definitely a good thing.
You'll need to log in to post.
