Quote:
Originally Posted by nuTinmuch
If I was buying a car today all I can tell you is that I wouldn't be visiting a Nissan showroom. That isn't because they don't make good cars, it's because as of right now they are behind the competition.
What do you think is so innovative about Nissan? I'm curious. The GT-R? Because the Evo X is basically technologically identical. The Leaf? Because while I don't have the same hate everyone else does for electric cars, it isn't exactly a leap forward in technology (if it was you'd see more of them on the road).
Likewise, I don't give two ***** about a car being a true "sports car." I don't care. I don't care at all. And really, the reality is that anyone who trashes a car for the sole reason of "it isn't a TRUE sports car" is... well, the nicest thing I can say is silly.
All I care about is fun. What car offers me fun? If I walk into a Ford showroom I can find cars that I can afford that are fun.
If I walk into a Nissan showroom I can find fun, too. But I can't afford it or it is outdated.
Also -- I don't get this racing legacy talk. What does it matter? If we are comparing Nissan and Ford, then Ford likely even wins there.
|
Explain to me "behind the competition"? Last time I checked, getting 38mpg on a 2.5L gas engine is pretty good. And amongst the 4 cylinder mid size, it's been tested to be the fastest along with the Accord. VVEL is still a technological marvel few companies can produce. Getting something like that to operate effectively at 7500rpm is impressive. 350hp from a 3.7 liter engine without the use of direct injection is also unheard of. Sure Porsche engines of similar displacement are pushing 400hp, but again, $80k+ and direct injection. The car wasn't made to compete with the Mustangs and Camaro's in the world, it was the Cayman S. The only thing comparable is the price range. The Juke is selling damn well, they created that market. Your comment about the Evo X having the same tech as the GTR is crap. Last time I checked, the Evo dual clutch tranny didn't last long when power was boosted. the AWD systems are similar, but I would still venture to say that Nissan's electronic diffs react much faster. Aero on the GTR is in a league of it's own, and how is it the GTR achieves similar mpg and makes 250 more hp? 500hp EVO's have been tested against the GTR, they lost. The Leaf, I don't care for, but it's been around longer than any other full electric car. First to market also means first to age. The Titan and Armada are laughable compared to competition, but the Frontier is still competitive with the Tacoma. Outside of that, there aren't any small truck options. Pathfinder is brand new, it's gotten good reviews. Engine is a bit long in the tooth though. The Quest is a good Minivan, but ugly as sin and massive. The Versa is terrible looking, but I wouldn't say it's a bad car, consumers agree, and they are buying them. They do get 40mpg. Sentra gets 39, it's refreshed, again, it wasn't considered crap when reviewed. There are things about Nissan that need updated. V6's do need refreshed, but they are still competitive. The Maxima faired well in it's last comparo and the only things they really complained about was rear seat space and trunk space.
Ford has it's sour apples. The Flex and the Expedition come to mind. The Taurus doesn't sell all that well and the entire Lincoln brand is a sinking ship they are finally trying to save. They made the 13' GT500, an engine so under matched by it's chassis and tires that are woefully inadequate. Last time I looked, it was owned repeatedly by the ZL1, the car it was supposed to stomp to the ground. Their super special Boss got it's @ss handed by the Camaro 1LE at VIR. A car that is 200lbs heavier, longer gearing, and less horsepower.
I can go on and on about each car manufacturer and their issues. I do not believe you are correct when you say Nissan as a company is "behind the competition".