Nissan Armada on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Meet the Nissan GT-R test driver responsible for 'Ring tuning

Ever wonder what it's like to be a manufacturer's development driver at the Nürburgring? We imagine it's pretty cool. After all, you get to spend your days zooming about the greatest racetrack on the planet in a vehicle that is usually months or more away from consumers. For Hiroyoshi Kato, whose actual title is Technical Meister, life is even better than your typical development driver, because he spends his days wringing out the Nissan GT-R Nismo around the Green Hell.
Kato-san has a long history with both Nissan and the Ring. He had a major hand in the development of the R32, R33 and R34 Skyline GT-Rs, having first come to the Ring nearly three decades ago.
His experience with the Nismo, though, is different than the other vehicles he's contributed to. As he explains it, there are real racers on hand to test the car on the track, like Formula One reserve driver Sébastien Buemi. Instead, Kato focuses on the track-to-road balance. Still, he has some truly interesting insights on the car and the track, including his surprise at turning a sub-eight-minute lap in his first outing. That, along with a few other things (one of which is an R34 being hustled about), make this a must-watch video from Nissan.

A realistic approach to fixing Mitsubishi

There are going to be a lot of words written about what Nissan needs to do with Mitsubishi in the coming months and years in the interest of turning the brand around. After Nissan's purchase of a controlling stake in the diamond star brand, there's been more interest in Mitsubishi thanks to the potential of platform sharing and plenty of cash from Nissan-Renault to get the juices flowing again. But, while some have been doing their best to advocate for the return of the 3000GT, Evolution, and even the Starion - Many of these posts forget the reality of the market we live in today. As much as we like to look back fondly at the sports coupes of the '90s, a byproduct of the insane cash flows all the Japanese manufacturers had at the time, the reality of today puts a much greater emphasis on what is most-boring; Crossover SUVs, alongside mid-size and compact sedans. We do need to ask a fundamental question, how much Mitsubishi is enough to be able to continue to call the cars Mitsubishis? Aside from slight product revisions and reconfigurations, Mitsubishi (at least in North America) has been largely dependent on the same GS platform and 4B1 engines that date back to their long-time partnership with Chrysler (and Hyundai) in the mid '00s. Admittedly, the chassis and engines have served the company well, underpinning a wide variety of vehicles sold around the world, and seeing quite a few revisions to at least attempt to keep products competitive. But, the GS chassis is old, heavy, and severely out of date - and when matched to the underpowered 4B1 series engines - make for largely uncompetitive offerings in the market. While something like the Outlander Sport is indeed interesting compared to a Honda CR-V, it is by no means the smart choice in the segment. So, going forward, unless Mitsubishi has had a skunkworks of sorts developing their chassis and engine replacements over the past few years, what exactly are they planning to do for their bread-and-butter models? I think the straightforward answer is without a doubt the Nissan North America parts bin. With so many of their models selling well, and for the most part, are reasonably well-reviewed, it would be quite simple to adapt the chassis and powertrain to Mitsubishi's liking to create a high-volume alternative to what is currently available now.

Chrysler, Nissan minivans earn 'dire' crash test results, says IIHS [w/video]

First introduced in 2012, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's small-overlap frontal crash test has become the bane of many auto engineers' existence. It's a particularly steep design challenge because it forces just 25 percent of a vehicle's front end to take the brunt of a 40-mile-per-hour impact. The newly released results of four family-minded minivans underscore just how difficult the crash test is: only one scored an Acceptable rating, and the other three did very poorly. The 2008-2015 Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan, plus the 2011-2015 Nissan Quest, all received Poor ratings in the test, the IIHS' lowest possible score. The three of them showed significant crash intrusion into the driver's area. The dummy in the Nissan actually had to be cut out of the vehicle, with an IIHS spokesperson remarking, "the structure collapsed like a house of cards." In the Fiat Chrysler Automobile vans, the steering wheels moved out of the way, making the airbag less effective and letting the driver's head hit the dashboard. While it was not actually crashed, the agency is also giving the 2009-12 Volkswagen Routan a Poor score because it shares a structure with the FCA models. The newly released results of four minivans underscore just how difficult the small-offset crash test is. The refreshed 2015 Toyota Sienna (shown), conversely, earned an Acceptable rating and is also a Top Safety Pick+ because of its optional forward collision warning and automatic braking system. While the crash test dummy moved around during the impact more than the agency would have liked, sensors showed a low risk of injuries. The IIHS tested the Honda Odyssey last year, and it earned a Good overall score, the agency's best ranking. It's also a Top Safety Pick+ vehicle. The only member of the minivan segment left to test is the latest Kia Sedona, and the Institute is reportedly waiting a little longer for Kia to make changes to improve the model's performance. When reached for comment, Nissan spokesperson Steve Yaeger provided Autoblog with the following statement: "Nissan is committed to vehicle safety and believes that consumers should have information about crash protection so they can make educated buying decisions. Nissan is proud of the 2014 Quest's "good" rating in the IIHS front moderate overlap and side impact tests as well as a "good" head restraint rating.