Looks like the GT-R isn't so great after all...

[Disciple]

I hear ya man, I really do, and I'm not trying to say the GTR sux or whatever. But the fact is, Nissan programmed the LC into the GTR then expect people not to use it. That's a bit different than having an auto gearbox and doing neutral dumps - I'd be very suprised if your service center warrantied a claim after doing a neutral dump, but that's providing they can prove you did - with the GTR it's no problem. As far as Mitsubishi are concerned with LC on the EVO X, and this is from a Ralliart Dealer rep in Australia (might be different elsewhere) their stance is, "What LC?" I don't know if they'll warranty a claim as I haven't read any trans failures yet.

 

[thedguy]

I recall a magazine article testing drag launches in various AWD cars, they wanted to see which design was the best. I do believe they only tested 60' times or up to a very low speed as they only cared about traction off the line, not all out speed.

The old Skyline GT-R's were by far the fastest vs the evo VII and US spec WRX STi. It's designed to purposely let the rear wheels break loose on a hard launch before the front wheels engage, to save the tranny and diff, but it ended up out dragging the lighter and "just as powerful EVO's and WRX STi". Nice thing is, it's like the Evo X but it lets much cheaper to replace tires take the wear rather than the clutch(es)

Not sure how that helps this thread, but I thought I might throw it out there.

 

[the Interceptor]

If the manual doesn't mention it that doesn't make it an excuse. Nissan cannot be that naive as to not think that some internet videos would pop up on how to perform a LC start.

Agreed, but the thing is: if I see something on the internet they do with a product of mine, something which obviously is hard on the car, it should at least occur to me that I should take a look what the manual says about this. Given it doesn't, a look in the warranty manual whould tell you that shouldn't do that.

Like I said before, reviews only show veeeeery very small bits and pieces about the car, so things that are done in a review should not necessarily be done in real life.

I do agree with you that there has been wrongdoing by Nissan though. It has been Nissan people showing how LC works. On NAGTROC there's a GT-R owner who took his very GT-R on a spin with the dealer before he bought it. The dealer did LC starts with him for 4 times, without ever telling him about the dangers. The thing is that this owner solely bought the GT-R for acceleration runs. Now, he has quite a problem.
Things like these shouldn't have happened. I think you can't blaim the GT-R's transmission for going, neither can you blaim Nissan for excluding it from the warranty when LC is being used. What I do blaim is Nissan for not putting out a proper solution for this, may it be verbal or on paper. Also, I blame at least a portion of people for not looking into the manuals to check what's good and what's not. However, it's Nissan that should find a general solution for this. I think that the LC should be removed from the car. The 0-60 time can likely be archieved by optimised "normal" launches as well. Or given that this is a problem with the gearbox fluid, the manual should say that they only warrant the gearbox when you have it serviced after a certain number of launches.

 

[Dr.Kamiya]

It shouldn't. More powerful cars are supposed to have stronger gearboxs.

And how come no one's complaining about Lambos and Ferraris? Just about every magazine out there says you will fry a Murcie's clutch and possibly damage the transmission after just 3 full-bore standing start launches.

The point really is that when you have a very powerful car, you need to have a more responsible driver.

 

[Dr.Kamiya]

Actually what I think happened to nagtroc guy's car is a clutch failure, just as everyone's been expecting.

Except that with these fancy new DSG gearboxes that are supposedly "sealed for life", the dealer isn't able to repair the clutch, and thus has to send the entire gearbox over to the manufacturer (in Japan most likely) for the repair, and thus claiming that they have to change the entire gearbox. That's almost surely the reason why there's a "transmission replacement log" in the manual.

Download GTR manual from nagtroc: http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=23183

IIRC it's the same banana with the upcoming Porsche PDK 911s. The gearbox is sealed for life, so if you burn your clutch Porsche takes the entire gearbox back, and sends you another one while they repair yours to be sent off to someone else later on.

 

[prizrak]

I hear ya man, I really do, and I'm not trying to say the GTR sux or whatever. But the fact is, Nissan programmed the LC into the GTR then expect people not to use it. That's a bit different than having an auto gearbox and doing neutral dumps - I'd be very suprised if your service center warrantied a claim after doing a neutral dump, but that's providing they can prove you did - with the GTR it's no problem. As far as Mitsubishi are concerned with LC on the EVO X, and this is from a Ralliart Dealer rep in Australia (might be different elsewhere) their stance is, "What LC?" I don't know if they'll warranty a claim as I haven't read any trans failures yet.

My car is pretty recent I'm sure it has a blackbox similar to Nissan's. My understanding is that Mitsubishi does not warrant the DSG box on Evo X's at all so really you can do w/e you want . I think the main problem in this case is that there is no warning in the manual against that. It's a widely publicized feature that is wholly undocumented by Nissan (although that's kind of a hint). If there was a simple note in the manual/warranty stating that using LC more than like 3 times without going to the dealer for service will invalidate the warranty it would have saved Nissan and that particular guy alot of time and headache.

And how come no one's complaining about Lambos and Ferraris? Just about every magazine out there says you will fry a Murcie's clutch and possibly damage the transmission after just 3 full-bore standing start launches.

What does the manual say?

 

[Disciple]

Actually what I think happened to nagtroc guy's car is a clutch failure, just as everyone's been expecting.

Except that with these fancy new DSG gearboxes that are supposedly "sealed for life", the dealer isn't able to repair the clutch, and thus has to send the entire gearbox over to the manufacturer (in Japan most likely) for the repair, and thus claiming that they have to change the entire gearbox. That's almost surely the reason why there's a "transmission replacement log" in the manual.

Download GTR manual from nagtroc: http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=23183

IIRC it's the same banana with the upcoming Porsche PDK 911s. The gearbox is sealed for life, so if you burn your clutch Porsche takes the entire gearbox back, and sends you another one while they repair yours to be sent off to someone else later on.

I've said this in a number of previous posts. They're a sealed unit and when clutches give out, the whole transmission needs to be replaced. It was the same with the Golf DSG boxes for about a year after they came out before there were replacement clutches for the box.

recall a magazine article testing drag launches in various AWD cars, they wanted to see which design was the best. I do believe they only tested 60' times or up to a very low speed as they only cared about traction off the line, not all out speed.

The old Skyline GT-R's were by far the fastest vs the evo VII and US spec WRX STi. It's designed to purposely let the rear wheels break loose on a hard launch before the front wheels engage, to save the tranny and diff, but it ended up out dragging the lighter and "just as powerful EVO's and WRX STi". Nice thing is, it's like the Evo X but it lets much cheaper to replace tires take the wear rather than the clutch(es)

The new GTR will bang out 1.7 60ft times with LC on the drag strip. My EVO will do the same and it's a lot less powerful than the GTR. The GTRs AWD system is good in the way that it will allow for rear end slip before the front wheels grip as to reduce stress on the driveline and clutch (HAH!) The EVO and STi AWD systems do not and so will provide more initial grip as they're both a constant 50:50 torque split front:rear.

Agreed, but the thing is: if I see something on the internet they do with a product of mine, something which obviously is hard on the car, it should at least occur to me that I should take a look what the manual says about this. Given it doesn't, a look in the warranty manual whould tell you that shouldn't do that.

You said it yourself man...

I do agree with you that there has been wrongdoing by Nissan though.

Before it even gets to the fault of the customer (don't get me wrong, the guy who LC started 20 times in 2 weeks is a friggen ox head) It is Nissans fault for having the feature on the car, period. Nissan have to assume all its customers are completely inept at their own thinking processes, and are basically just retards.

My car is pretty recent I'm sure it has a blackbox similar to Nissan's. My understanding is that Mitsubishi does not warrant the DSG box on Evo X's at all so really you can do w/e you want .

Hang on, where did you hear that? Mitsubishi will definitely warrant a claim on their new SST gearbox. Having said that, if it's been thouroughly abused through LC starts etc you may have a battle on your hands, but in Australia, Ralliart encourage you to track the SST box and will still cover it even if it's been tracked.

 

[prizrak]

Hang on, where did you hear that? Mitsubishi will definitely warrant a claim on their new SST gearbox. Having said that, if it's been thouroughly abused through LC starts etc you may have a battle on your hands, but in Australia, Ralliart encourage you to track the SST box and will still cover it even if it's been tracked.

I will double check as I am not sure. I know an owner of an Evo X MR and one of my friends who knows her mentioned that to me, guessing he heard it from her. I'll ask her next time I see her to make sure though.

 

[vRS]

And I thought Ferrari's were fragile........

Sucks for the chap that has to fork out $20,000 for a new transmission.

 

[wooflepoof]

JCs Alfa line seems to work here: "A car made to be the best it can be....briefly"

 

[SuperStalin]

So, exactly how many 0-60 launches SHOULD a car be able to survive before
something is broken ( and then covered by the warranty ) ?

 

[bartboy9891]

JCs Alfa line seems to work here: "A car made to be the best it can be....briefly"

Great minds think alike
http://forums.finalgear.com/automot...heating-on-the-ring-30714/page-11/#post805055

So, exactly how many 0-60 launches SHOULD a car be able to survive before
something is broken ( and then covered by the warranty ) ?

With LC, not many. Without LC, I don't think anyone other than Nissan knows for sure. Though Nissan themselves claim the GT-R does 0-60mph in 3.6 or so seconds, and that was reportedly achieved without LC. So what I'm saying is that it looks like the car can perform quite well without the LC at all, and as thedguy and others have said, maybe the car doesn't really need it.

 

[MacGuffin]

And how come no one's complaining about Lambos and Ferraris? Just about every magazine out there says you will fry a Murcie's clutch and possibly damage the transmission after just 3 full-bore standing start launches.

The point really is that when you have a very powerful car, you need to have a more responsible driver.

That is indeed the point. Lambos, Ferraris and also Porsches aren't bought by Playstation kids

And I thought Ferrari's were fragile........

Sucks for the chap that has to fork out $20,000 for a new transmission.

Yes but Ferrari owners generally treat their cars better. You will hardly see them in testosterone-driven acceleration races. 0-60 races are about the stupidest and most useless thing on this planet.

But still better than a duel with guns, which obviously they are a substitute for

 

[Hidden_Hunter]

Yes but Ferrari owners generally treat their cars better. You will hardly see them in testosterone-driven acceleration races. 0-60 races are about the stupidest and most useless thing on this planet.

Plenty of them have been totalled by people doing exactly that. One not too long ago about 10 mins from here.

 

[MacGuffin]

Well, I cannot talk for your neighbourhood, only for what I experienced

But one thing is true: If you have people who only develop until they are 14 years old and only grow taller after that, it doesn't matter what car they drive - it will always end up broken very soon.

The reason why I cannot accept Nissan's refusal to pay for the damage, is because of their own hypocrisy: "Alright, we designed a car specifically for video gamers, had it even be partly designed by video gamers. But you cannot expect us to pay for the damage, when the car is used like in a video game."

 

[Hercules286]

The reason why I cannot accept Nissan's refusal to pay for the damage, is because of their own hypocrisy: "Alright, we designed a car specifically for video gamers, had it even be partly designed by video gamers. But you cannot expect us to pay for the damage, when the car is used like in a video game."

Where did they say that?

Oh wait nevermind, you're just assuming again.

 

[NooDle]

The reason why I cannot accept Nissan's refusal to pay for the damage, is because of their own hypocrisy: "Alright, we designed a car specifically for video gamers, had it even be partly designed by video gamers. But you cannot expect us to pay for the damage, when the car is used like in a video game."

I think that analogy takes things a bit too far...
They can't predict how stupid their customers will be, besides as soon as they make the car idiotproof, someone will turn out to be a "better" idiot

the solution should have been to never give them LC in the first place, it would have saved them alot of bad rep, and the car can still do 0-60 launches, just .2 of a second slower...

 

[MadCow809]

I know ppl who uses L/C on their SMG II / SMG III gearbox on a weekly basis, and even after a full year of hard launches, the clutch survived without the need of being replaced.

If somehow the clutch can not survive serveral hard launches, I will simply blame it on the car/manufacturer.

 

[MacGuffin]

I think that analogy takes things a bit too far...
They can't predict how stupid their customers will be, besides as soon as they make the car idiotproof, someone will turn out to be a "better" idiot

the solution should have been to never give them LC in the first place, it would have saved them alot of bad rep, and the car can still do 0-60 launches, just .2 of a second slower...

Well, I admit what I wrote is a bit sarcastic but from all I read and heard about the GT-R, it was developed with the Playstation generation in mind.

Anyway, another thing that interests me: Jeremy Clarkson says all GT-R's a re hand-crafted, so that the engine of one car doesn't fit to the gearbox of another car.

That is supposed to make repairs very, very expensive either way... because in the end that means they have so make spare parts specifically for the car you own.

 

[Disciple]

Well, I admit what I wrote is a bit sarcastic but from all I read and heard about the GT-R, it was developed with the Playstation generation in mind.

Anyway, another thing that interests me: Jeremy Clarkson says all GT-R's a re hand-crafted, so that the engine of one car doesn't fit to the gearbox of another car.

That is supposed to make repairs very, very expensive either way... because in the end that means they have so make spare parts specifically for the car you own.

Jeremy Clarkson also once said that an EVO can be one wheel drive.

Take anything he says with a grain of salt.