2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

[Tornado]

If Porsche was to say that the GT2 was faster than they could get the GT-R, I might have bought it (I say "might" because Porsche's claim has too many holes in it by itself). But everyone and their mother knows the GT-R at least no slower than the 911 Turbo.

 

[gator of kana]

I don't believe Porsche on this accusation so to see if they think the GT-R is a cheat, how about we look at this video

A race between the R35 GT-R, 911 GT2, 911 GT3RS, Keiichi Tsuchiya's owned NSX-R, and RSD360 Modena at Tsukuba

 

[McLaren]

Ok, 2 things.

1) The 'Ring does not show who's the best. I've said this a million times, and I would hope Porsche would have realized this by now. Hell, they should be happy that various magazines have already showed the GT2 beating the GT-R quite well. Perhaps, Porsche should go back to worrying about Lamborghini & Ferrari.

2) Best Motoring is easily one of the more poorly used sources to prove something. I'm not saying they're awful drivers or anything, but they have shown some terrible bias in the past.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Ok, 2 things.


2) Best Motoring is easily one of the more poorly used sources to prove something. I'm not saying they're awful drivers or anything, but they have shown some terrible bias in the past.

Not so much bias, it's just that all of these races are done in great fun, which leads to a lot of messing around and mistakes during the race. lots of times one of the drivers will show an example of something they find wrong with the car and stuff like that, which end costing them time and positions in the race.

They aren't very accurate representations of the car's performance, especially not in 5 short laps.

 

[niky]

And especially because in the videos I've seen, Best Motoring's start grid is done in reverse order, with the fastest car at the back of the pack. It takes some very creative (and wild) driving to push a slightly faster car to the front of the grid from the back... but a categorically faster car (witness the Lambo vs. NSX and others... where the two Lambos basically blew the doors off everything else) can do it with ease.

Great fun. Only their qualifying times have any meaning, and those are also suspect, because it's different drivers in each car.

---

On a GT-R related note:

Oh noes! The GT-R tranny breaks!

http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=25361

I was driving my gtr two weeks ago and I heard a loud noise coming from the rear. I turned immediately had my gtr towed to crown nissan st. petersburg fl. They didn't touch my car only called some techs from tennessee to look at the car and record the noise, 4 days later two guys from japan to download some info from the car then left. Then I get a call from the dealer to tell me the news, and they told me that the car was driven without vdc too much and nissan will not warranty the transmission which they said was destroyed, I asked them how much to fix it they told me 20k, no freaking way I will pay 20k on top of what i just paid for the car. I called the gtr number and also talked to nissan consumer affairs got nowhere, now the car is sitting at the dealer. I know we shouldn't launch the car but why own it if you cant use this function, don't sell a car that goes 0-60 in 3.4 sec if the only way you can achieve this speed is to void the warranty , false advertising. Here is the bad news people were fearing it has happened to me and Nissan has told me there are already three people in my shoes, if you are one of these people email me, we have got to get together on this. Just think if any of you guys have taken the vdc off just a few times you have already voided your warranty, good luck what a joke nissan.

waitaminute...

That should be... The GTR transmission breaks when you spank it, and I've been spanking it a lot!

http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=25361&view=findpost&p=361004

,
i launched the car 20 times in over 2 months that is about twice a week, the tranny went out 2 weeks after my last launch in driving in second gear. nissan did not even take down the tranny pan and told me the tranny was destroyed, i think it is the clutch or something minor a cheaper fix. I wouldn't be complaining for a fix that was one or two grand, but twenty come on. If the tranny was destroyed the car would not go through all the gears their is just a banging noise coming from the rear. What makes this suck is the only thing nissan wants to me about is how i drove the car with the vdc off, I also have a g35 which i take off the vdc almost every time i drive it and never had a problems. Vdc is only used for being stuck in the snow or mud well i live in florida no snow here. I did not modify the car in any way i used the function the car is sold with. SO IF YOU EATING A BAGEL AND IT ACCIDENTLY DROPS DOWN ON THE VDC BUTTON AND TURNS IT OFF WARRANTY VOIDED.

While it's contentious whether a manufacturer is required to cover damage resulting from over 20 drag launches in 2 months (reference E46 M3 launch control issues)... there is the question... why put the button on the dashboard if people are just going to push it?

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

And to be fair if they read the owners manual they would have known.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

And especially because in the videos I've seen, Best Motoring's start grid is done in reverse order, with the fastest car at the back of the pack. It takes some very creative (and wild) driving to push a slightly faster car to the front of the grid from the back... but a categorically faster car (witness the Lambo vs. NSX and others... where the two Lambos basically blew the doors off everything else) can do it with ease.

Great fun. Only their qualifying times have any meaning, and those are also suspect, because it's different drivers in each car.

---

On a GT-R related note:

Oh noes! The GT-R tranny breaks!

http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=25361



waitaminute...

That should be... The GTR transmission breaks when you spank it, and I've been spanking it a lot!

http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=25361&view=findpost&p=361004



While it's contentious whether a manufacturer is required to cover damage resulting from over 20 drag launches in 2 months (reference E46 M3 launch control issues)... there is the question... why put the button on the dashboard if people are just going to push it?

Well there you go, Nissan are as unreliable when pushed now as they were at Bathurst. Fast.......until they blow up. He's right- the driver. Regardless of how many times he did it, (he could have done it far less often over 5yrs and the same would happen) if the car can't do the advertised 0-100km/hr times without blowing the gearbox then it's not worth it.

 

[Scaff]

Well there you go, Nissan are as unreliable when pushed now as they were at Bathurst. Fast.......until they blow up. He's right- the driver. Regardless of how many times he did it, (he could have done it far less often over 5yrs and the same would happen) if the car can't do the advertised 0-100km/hr times without blowing the gearbox then it's not worth it.

You are I hope aware of how almost every single 0-60mph time is achieved!

You certainly don't do it by being gentle with the drive-train, to recreate manufacturers 0-60 time you would almost certainly have to flat-shift the car (keeping the throttle pinned wide open while changing up) which places huge strains on a drive-train.

If you have ever done it you will know exactly what kind of 'interesting' noise you get when you release the clutch.

I've 'figured' competitor cars when I worked for Renault and had plenty of cars snap drive-shafts and a few throw the gearbox in the bin after a day of 0-60 testing.

Drive a car from any manufacturer in this kind of way and suffer a drive-line fault and you can be pretty much certain they will not honour the warranty (and them finding out these days is not difficult).

You argument that just because a car can do it then it should be covered under warranty just does hold up to common sense. I could take my 3-series and never change out of first gear around town, the car can do it. However its not going to do it any good at all and BMW certainly wouldn't cover any damage I did under warranty.


Regards

Scaff

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

You are I hope aware of how almost every single 0-60mph time is achieved!

You certainly don't do it by being gentle with the drive-train, to recreate manufacturers 0-60 time you would almost certainly have to flat-shift the car (keeping the throttle pinned wide open while changing up) which places huge strains on a drive-train.

If you have ever done it you will know exactly what kind of 'interesting' noise you get when you release the clutch.

I've 'figured' competitor cars when I worked for Renault and had plenty of cars snap drive-shafts and a few throw the gearbox in the bin after a day of 0-60 testing.

Drive a car from any manufacturer in this kind of way and suffer a drive-line fault and you can be pretty much certain they will not honour the warranty (and them finding out these days is not difficult).

You argument that just because a car can do it then it should be covered under warranty just does hold up to common sense. I could take my 3-series and never change out of first gear around town, the car can do it. However its not going to do it any good at all and BMW certainly wouldn't cover any damage I did under warranty.


Regards

Scaff

Seemingly though this launch control is harder on the GTR's transmission than most normal cars with normal launches. You might have to flat shift (Except in the Corvette which reaches 100km/hr in 1st gear ), but you'd only lose a tenth or 2, I wonder how much time you lose without launch control in the GTR. Would the turbo spool up as quickly? Why give the car a feature that destroys it so quickly?

BTW, I wasn't arguing that because a car can do something you should and it should be held under warranty, but that waiting for a week or 2 (as it sounds like it takes with the GTR just to assess the problem) to get the problem fixed is a real pain.

 

[Jay]

Well there you go, Nissan are as unreliable when pushed now as they were at Bathurst.

The R32 GTR's that ran in ATCC Group A back in the early 90's were reliable and at Bathurst they had a issue or two but nothing out of the oridinary.

 

[homeforsummer]

Also, to be fair, there probably won't be many owners of your average family car who feel compelled to launch it to sixty regularly. Whereas GT-R owners are probably more likely the sort of drivers who might feel compelled to do flat out standing starts every so often. If a Nissan Micra ate it's transmission because the owner launched it off the line regularly, you'd probably say the owner was mistreating it. The GT-R is designed as a performance car so they should at least engineer it with hard driving in mind.

 

[the Interceptor]

Seemingly though this launch control is harder on the GTR's transmission than most normal cars with normal launches. You might have to flat shift (Except in the Corvette which reaches 100km/hr in 1st gear ), but you'd only lose a tenth or 2, I wonder how much time you lose without launch control in the GTR. Would the turbo spool up as quickly? Why give the car a feature that destroys it so quickly?

The problem lies within the GT-R having a launch control and being an AWD vehicle. The latter generates loads of grip at a launch, while the LC will make sure that none of the power is lost at too low revs, a slipping clutch or spinning tires. That however means that you reach the absolute maximum of stress on the drivetrain, so when you do it regularly, the gearbox or any other related part might give up. I don't see how this would be different with any other AWD car with LC, therefore, I think noone can blame the GT-R for it.

 

[gator of kana]

I don't care about the warranty on the transmission, if the transmission has the ability to do what it can do then that's good enough for me, I'll sure pay for any damage that I'll ever to the GT-R when I own one some day in the future, it's too good of a car to just leave it rusting its life away because I'm too cheap to pay $20K for the transmission. I see that we don't often talk about reliability but what's the difference with the GT-R and (let's say for example) Alfa Romeo, a lot of you say the GT-R is not worth it, but when it comes to Alfa Romeo you guys tolerate their unreliability.

 

[Scaff]

Seemingly though this launch control is harder on the GTR's transmission than most normal cars with normal launches. You might have to flat shift (Except in the Corvette which reaches 100km/hr in 1st gear ), but you'd only lose a tenth or 2, I wonder how much time you lose without launch control in the GTR. Would the turbo spool up as quickly? Why give the car a feature that destroys it so quickly?

I've highlighted the important word, seemingly, as without full knowledge of the case in hand (and a disgruntled owner is not exactly an unbiased commentator I'm sure you would agree) we don't know exactly what has gone on here.

Its also more than flat-shifting, to get a good launch for a 0-60 time also involves a good bit of abuse for the drive-train. The most common method being dial in a healthy dose of revs (which will of course vary from car to car) and then side-step off the clutch. No nice gentle blending of clutch and throttle, but a rapid and violent engagement of the drive-train. Every-time you do it you are putting huge stress on the clutch, flywheel, crank, gearbox and driveshafts, do it often enough and something will give.

BTW, I wasn't arguing that because a car can do something you should and it should be held under warranty, but that waiting for a week or 2 (as it sounds like it takes with the GTR just to assess the problem) to get the problem fixed is a real pain.

The tone of your post was most certainly a pop at Nissan (and the GT-R in particular) regarding overall reliability. Why else would you say this.....

Nissan are as unreliable when pushed now as they were at Bathurst

...when in reality they are no more or less prone to reliability issues than most other manufacturers, and racing is a totally different set of circumstances.

Also, to be fair, there probably won't be many owners of your average family car who feel compelled to launch it to sixty regularly. Whereas GT-R owners are probably more likely the sort of drivers who might feel compelled to do flat out standing starts every so often. If a Nissan Micra ate it's transmission because the owner launched it off the line regularly, you'd probably say the owner was mistreating it. The GT-R is designed as a performance car so they should at least engineer it with hard driving in mind.

A challenge, find me a single road car manufacturer who will warranty a car for track use (i.e. hard driving).

The simple truth here is we do not know enough about this case to discuss it with authority, it could well be argued that this is a defect (that alone does not mean it is a design flaw - a strong pattern would need to be established first), but it could be driver abuse.

To further illustrate that last point, we don't know if the driver in this case was launching the car from cold, if the transmission fluid was not warm and doing its job when these launches were carried out, then quite frankly you can have the best designed gearbox in the world, its still going to die.

I'm open to either situation here, which still doesn't change the fact that no manufacturer will cover this kind of thing under warranty; Ferrari's launch control is rumoured to eat clutches (I've heard dealers claim 3 - 4 launches for an Enzo will fry the clutch) and Ferrari will not even consider it to be premature wear and tear.


Regards

Scaff

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

I've highlighted the important word, seemingly, as without full knowledge of the case in hand (and a disgruntled owner is not exactly an unbiased commentator I'm sure you would agree) we don't know exactly what has gone on here.

That's why I used the word seemingly, I'm not trying to prove anything, merely commenting.

Its also more than flat-shifting, to get a good launch for a 0-60 time also involves a good bit of abuse for the drive-train. The most common method being dial in a healthy dose of revs (which will of course vary from car to car) and then side-step off the clutch. No nice gentle blending of clutch and throttle, but a rapid and violent engagement of the drive-train. Every-time you do it you are putting huge stress on the clutch, flywheel, crank, gearbox and driveshafts, do it often enough and something will give.

Yes, but the rate at which they do this can and will be judged.

The tone of your post was most certainly a pop at Nissan (and the GT-R in particular) regarding overall reliability. Why else would you say this.....


...when in reality they are no more or less prone to reliability issues than most other manufacturers, and racing is a totally different set of circumstances.



Regards

Scaff

No, I said that I don't expect them to cover it under warranty, the reliability concerns was certainly a pop at Nissan's GTR. As a GM man, it's my job to do such things isn't it?

They might be more prone to reliability issues. As I've head nothing so major as transmissions demolishing so readily in other cars of this class (eg. 911, Lambos, Corvettes, Ferraris), I'm banking on it that they'll be known as time bombs in years to come.

 

[mafia_boy]

1) The 'Ring does not show who's the best. I've said this a million times, and I would hope Porsche would have realized this by now. Hell, they should be happy that various magazines have already showed the GT2 beating the GT-R quite well. Perhaps, Porsche should go back to worrying about Lamborghini & Ferrari.

Ummm, sorry Reventon but I will definitely disagree about that fact. I've quoted that the GTR BEAT the 911 GT2 & 911T and at what track aswell in the Porsche accusing Nissan thread. For this thread, I think the YouTube videos will suffice instead of typing 2000 words.

At Rockingham:


At Anglesey:


On Fifth Gear w/ Bruno Senna driving:

 

[McLaren]

I don't care about the warranty on the transmission, if the transmission has the ability to do what it can do then that's good enough for me, I'll sure pay for any damage that I'll ever to the GT-R when I own one some day in the future, it's too good of a car to just leave it rusting its life away because I'm too cheap to pay $20K for the transmission. I see that we don't often talk about reliability but what's the difference with the GT-R and (let's say for example) Alfa Romeo, a lot of you say the GT-R is not worth it, but when it comes to Alfa Romeo you guys tolerate their unreliability.

Alfa's reliability issues were over a decade go. In this day and age, having issues like that is a no no. However, just because of the tranny story, I would never class the GT-R to be anywhere as unreliable as older Alfa Romeos.

Ummm, sorry Reventon but I will definitely disagree about that fact. I've quoted that the GTR BEAT the 911 GT2 & 911T and at what track aswell in the Porsche accusing Nissan thread. For this thread, I think the YouTube videos will suffice instead of typing 2000 words.

That's all fine and dandy, but I didn't say the GT2 beat it at every track ever, just that it has been shown it can in certain situations, and I never brought up the Turbo.

And because the GT-R has done better on the tracks you posted, though, does not mean it's the faster car overall. In retro spec, they're pretty much split down the line.

 

[mafia_boy]

I agree with that too Reventon. Depending on circuit it goes one way or another, but with the videos up there currently, on the tighter tracks I've noticed the Nissan has a slight advantage, Rockingham has a few more straights but nothing to help the Porka really.

I'd actually like to see them duke it out over here at Bathurst.....or over at Spa would be another good example, very fast tracks with a lot of turns that bring out the best in both brands. 👍

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

I agree with that too Reventon. Depending on circuit it goes one way or another, but with the videos up there currently, on the tighter tracks I've noticed the Nissan has a slight advantage, Rockingham has a few more straights but nothing to help the Porka really.

I'd actually like to see them duke it out over here at Bathurst.....or over at Spa would be another good example, very fast tracks with a lot of turns that bring out the best in both brands. 👍

Bathurst and the GT2 would win, it's got the torqqqqqque to get up the mountain and the POWAAAAAA down conrod straight. Spa, could be interesting, many corners are off camber there yes? That gives the GTR a good corner traction advantage, and the GT2 has all those nice straightaways.

Edit: Of course, I'm just making wild guesses here.

 

[Leonidae]

My theory is that most of these launches were made on drag strip. GT-R, being AWD (as mentioned before) was engineered to have wheelspin off the line to lessen the forces on the drivetrain on REGULAR ROAD SURFACE. On a sticky drag strip this doesn't happen, and as a result, something gives in faster than what one would expect. On regular road launches GT-R would be just fine, just like any other high-performance AWD cars.

 

[Tornado]

On regular road launches GT-R would be just fine, just like any other high-performance AWD cars.

Many other high-performance AWD cars also have transmission problems.

 

[Leonidae]

then, why do everyone raise such a ruckus about GT-R in particular if it doesn't differ from the issues other AWD supercars are having? Why not point at Lambo, Audi or Porsche or any other..? hell, for 80k+ I can understand that there's some issues, but if I pay twice or three times more, I expect to have that much more reliability

 

[homeforsummer]

then, why do everyone raise such a ruckus about GT-R in particular if it doesn't differ from the issues other AWD supercars are having? Why not point at Lambo, Audi or Porsche or any other..? hell, for 80k+ I can understand that there's some issues, but if I pay twice or three times more, I expect to have that much more reliability

I think the only reason people are documenting the problems more with the GT-R is that the majority of owners are the sort of people who'll try and exploit the car's performance, so are more likely to find problems like this than owners of high-performance Porsches, or the R8, etc, who are - let's face it - often poseurs. And nobody can see you posing if you race off the line

And to be fair, if you pay two or three times more, there's not a lot of evidence around to suggest either way whether a 911 GT2 is more or less reliable in similar conditions.

I haven't done much research on it admittedly, but I can't even remember the last time someone's Porsche went bang and I heard about it, yet we've already had a few problems with the GT-R. Maybe Nissan should be charging more for it and engineering it to suit the price.

A challenge, find me a single road car manufacturer who will warranty a car for track use (i.e. hard driving).

I had a think about this, and I was sure Lotus did.

After a bit of research, I'm semi-right. Looky here (.pdf file), on page 2

SPECIAL OPERATING CONDITIONS
If the car is subjected to one of the following “special operating conditions”, additional servicing is required...

Occasional circuit use, with repeated high rpm, wide throttle openings and high oil temperatures:

- Oil & Filter changes at 4,000 mi intervals or as required
- Inspect brake pads & discs at 4,000 mi intervals or as required
- Thorough safety check including wheels, tires, suspension, steering & brake systems

So it appears that occasional circuit use is warrantied (or at least, no specific comment about the above that warranty will be void), but...

Special Service & Preparation: The Lotus Elise is designed as a road going sports car. It is recognized that owners may wish to use the car occasionally on closed circuit tracks to experience the cars’ full range of dynamic capabilities. However, use of the car in a competitive manner, including timed runs or laps is not endorsed by Lotus, and the greater degree of wear and tear and the effects of increased stress on parts and components will not be covered by warranty.

So, the warranty does appear to cover track days (as long as the owner takes it upon themselves to stick to more rigid servicing conditions), but not timed motorsports. But, that's fair enough. Lotus expects their cars to be driven harder than your average road car, but warns that they will need extra servicing to keep the car the way it should be.

In my opinion, at least, giving GT-R drivers an actual function of their cars to use and then voiding the warranty if they use it, is irresponsible. Lotus saying that parts and components won't be covered if they use their cars in timed competition is completely fair.

 

[Tornado]

Do we know the circumstances surrounding what exactly will void the GT-R's warranty? Like, is it a set number of times or something like with BMW, or what?

 

[Scaff]

That's why I used the word seemingly, I'm not trying to prove anything, merely commenting.

No problem then.

Yes, but the rate at which they do this can and will be judged.

And untill that happens then its not a reliability issue is it, it's an isolated failure.

No, I said that I don't expect them to cover it under warranty, the reliability concerns was certainly a pop at Nissan's GTR. As a GM man, it's my job to do such things isn't it?

I which case I don't ever want to see you get defensive if someone takes a pop a GM products for reliability, after all they will only be doing their job.

They might be more prone to reliability issues. As I've head nothing so major as transmissions demolishing so readily in other cars of this class (eg. 911, Lambos, Corvettes, Ferraris), I'm banking on it that they'll be known as time bombs in years to come.

Here we go again with speculation.

I have heard off issues with three of the four marques you have mentioned. Lanbos and Ferrari's have long user histories of chronic short life clutches when used with launch control (3 - 4 uses and they are gone), I mentioned the Ferrari issue earlier. Vettes are know to throw driveshafts after prolonged sessions of hard launches, particularly when on sticky rubber at drag strips. Sticky rubber + rubbered in track surface = minimal wheelspin = far more stress on the drivetrain.

In none of these cases would I start to shout about reliability, mainly becuase I have an understanding of exactly what forces are being placed on the drive-train in situations like this.

If you ever get the chance take your car to a 'run what you brung' and actually launch it hard and throw in a few flat-shifts; then come back and tell me how long you expect the transmission to last if you keep doing it.

then, why do everyone raise such a ruckus about GT-R in particular if it doesn't differ from the issues other AWD supercars are having? Why not point at Lambo, Audi or Porsche or any other..? hell, for 80k+ I can understand that there's some issues, but if I pay twice or three times more, I expect to have that much more reliability

Have you not noticed that everyone raises a ruckus about the GT-R no matter what is said.

Personally I don't see this as actually being a wide-spread problem as of this moment, and the cars that have been involved are (for the most part) grey-imports (I know of one in Russia that has no service history at all) or abuse is suspected.

Its also misleading to claim that issues such as this do not affect other marques.....

Also, a little piece of advise. I'm a big e-gear fan. Lambo had the system down pat and it's alot of fun (it's built by ZF -- same as Ferrari). The car runs great (faster than a manual - unless you can shift in .15 seconds) and is pretty much bulletproof -- unless you use the launch function (about 5 times will cost you a new clutch - if your lucky - you may do more costly damage).

Source - http://www.lamborghini-talk.com/vbforum/f13/gallardo-clutch-question-6486/

....posted by a guy on his third Gallardo, and not a unique statement at all.

The clutch mechanisms in the F1 models have been known to give up the ghost within 5,000 miles of hard use.

Source - http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/car-reviews/car-and-driving/ferrari-360-2002271.html

I had a think about this, and I was sure Lotus did.

After a bit of research, I'm semi-right. Looky here (.pdf file), on page 2



So it appears that occasional circuit use is warrantied (or at least, no specific comment about the above that warranty will be void), but...



So, the warranty does appear to cover track days (as long as the owner takes it upon themselves to stick to more rigid servicing conditions), but not timed motorsports. But, that's fair enough. Lotus expects their cars to be driven harder than your average road car, but warns that they will need extra servicing to keep the car the way it should be.

In my opinion, at least, giving GT-R drivers an actual function of their cars to use and then voiding the warranty if they use it, is irresponsible. Lotus saying that parts and components won't be covered if they use their cars in timed competition is completely fair.

I believe you can also add Noble, Caterham, Radical and Atom to the list as well.

However what you will not find is a single large manufacturer offering this kind of warranty cover. The argument about it being a part of the function of the car could just as easily be applied to an M3, 911, F430, Gallardo, etc, etc. Yet they are no different in this regard.


This is a bit of an old atricle, but sums up teh attitude if a lot of manufactuers quite well.

evo spoke to a number of manufacturers to see where you stand if you indulge in a few trackdays. Subaru's UK importer, International Motors, was happy to help with our investigations and reassuringly stated that, 'Using a vehicle on track does not automatically invalidate the warranty.' However, IM also pointed out that abuse or misuse - whether on road or track - will invalidate the manufacturer's warranty.

Exactly what qualifies as 'abuse or misuse' isn't defined. There is also some ambiguity as to what sort of track event is acceptable under the terms of the warranty. IM stated, 'The event must be properly managed and marshalled and the driver of the vehicle must be competent to drive on a track and be under appropriate supervision or instruction.'

The message from Subaru seems to be that trackdays in themselves do not always mean that the warranty won't be honoured, but that individual cases will be investigated if there is a suspicion that the car has been abused. It's an approach echoed by Porsche. A spokesman from Porsche GB told us that trackday use doesn't necessarily invalidate the warranty, but if consumables such as brake discs crack early in the car's life they will look at how the car has been driven before carrying out a repair. Porsche distinguishes between failures that are caused by a manufacturing defect and those caused by abuse and act accordingly.

For those of you who think you're never going to be found out even if you do decide to hit the track, think again. Modern ECUs record virtually every detail of a car's use.

Porsches, for example, data log engine revs (including how many times the limiter has been hit), max speed reached, how many times PSM has been disabled, how many standing starts have been performed and a whole host of other information. Put simply, manufacturers know how you've driven your car and will be able to prove it if necessary.
Mitsubishi takes a more ruthless approach. A spokesman was quite categorical that any Evo VII used on track would no longer be covered under warranty. As the Evo VII is essentially a grey import, even when purchased through an official Mitsubishi dealer, it is not covered by a manufacturer's warranty. However, the UK importer treats it like any other Mitsubishi and sells it with a three-year unlimited mileage warranty. Track use makes this null and void, and once again the ECU and more conventional observation techniques are used to make a judgement on the car's use. Having said that, if you go to a Mitsubishi dealer with an electric window fault they're unlikely to turf you out of the door due to warped brakes.

BMW is also clear that trackdays invalidate its warranty. In the case of the M3 SMG, dealers can tell how often the fastest gearchange mode has been engaged (it wears parts of the transmission more quickly) so over-use could be classed as abuse. The launch control function is also logged by the ECU, so use it sparingly.

TVR takes a more realistic line. A spokesman said it had never turned anyone away who'd experienced problems on trackdays. Obviously, things like brake discs aren't covered, but if the car has been driven 'appropriately' (i.e. as a high performance road car, not a race car) TVR customers won't have to worry about invalidating their warranty.

Our findings suggest that the trackday issue is yet to be fully resolved. Manufacturers want to sell high performance derivatives but don't want to be caught out by countless claims for clutch or gearbox failure. But the truth is that more and more people are turning to trackdays in the light of increased congestion and the proliferation of speed cameras. Manufacturers may look to running officially supported, warranty-friendly trackdays, but until then be sure you know what your car maker's attitude is towards trackdays.

Source - http://www.evo.co.uk/news/evonews/32080/trackdays_warranty_killers.html

Keep in mind that this article is from back in 2002, with the growth of track days I don't personally see any of the manufacturers getting more lenient.



Regards (and sorry for the giant post)

Scaff

 

[mafia_boy]

Many other high-performance AWD cars also have transmission problems.

True, but for some strange reason, I hear about a lot more blown Lambo/Audi/Porsche/Subaru drivetrains than I do about the Lancer Evolution series. I know of people running 400-500hp+@wheels doing 11s & 10's on the 1/4 with earlier Evo's (2's, 3's & 4's) still running standard gearboxes.

And Scaff, don't worry about dissing GM's, I always pester N4HS about the inadequacies of the Holden/GM powerplants, especially when comparing six cylinder motors. There's heaps of Aussies like myself who aren't brainwashed with Ford or Holden.

 

[MustangSVT]

then, why do everyone raise such a ruckus about GT-R in particular if it doesn't differ from the issues other AWD supercars are having? Why not point at Lambo, Audi or Porsche or any other..? hell, for 80k+ I can understand that there's some issues, but if I pay twice or three times more, I expect to have that much more reliability

I can almost guarantee you that if you do a launch control thingy on the Gallardo 20 times in 2 months, it will most likely break (or break earlier). It is pretty abusing. Of course this is a guess on my part, but a reasonable guess I would say.

I also think that since the GT-R is so "popular" (in terms of news around it and such), issues and things like that are probably going to be more blown out of proportion than cars that are discussed less.

 

[///M-Spec]

And to be fair if they read the owners manual they would have known.

Everything in that list of exclusions is perfectly reasonable, EXCEPT for turning the VDC off. I am surprised and disappointed to learn about it.

Hmmm. Nissan puts a button in the car, that if you press, voids your warranty coverage. What a complete shame. I can't think of another manufacturer to pull a stunt like this.

I smell a class-action lawsuit in the making.



If I launch my car twice a week for two months, nothing will happen except that I will wear out my clutch prematurely. If I continue to do this for 2 years (over 200 launches), I will probably be looking at replacing the clutch. I would also expect to have some subframe parts or tranny and engine mounts wear out prematurely. At the worst, I may snap a half-shaft (though I seriously doubt it). If I take it in for a warranty claim, they may not cover the clutch, sub-frame or the mounts. Or they might. It depends on the tech who is looking at my car. But I would not expect to ever grenade my transmission even after 2 years of hard use.

Bottom line is that the car would be fine with 2 months of aggressive driving, and would need above average maint. with 2 years of aggressive driving. I would expect this to be the same for any performance car.

Shredding a transmission after 20 launches is complete bull****. Either the OP is lying about how many launches he's done on the car and how he has been using it, or Nissan has seriously under-spec'd the transmission. Given there is a place in the owner's manual for tranny replacements, I'm leaning towards the latter.

I don't care about the warranty on the transmission, if the transmission has the ability to do what it can do then that's good enough for me, I'll sure pay for any damage that I'll ever to the GT-R when I own one some day in the future, it's too good of a car to just leave it rusting its life away because I'm too cheap to pay $20K for the transmission. I see that we don't often talk about reliability but what's the difference with the GT-R and (let's say for example) Alfa Romeo, a lot of you say the GT-R is not worth it, but when it comes to Alfa Romeo you guys tolerate their unreliability.

You really don't have the faintest appreciation for how much money $20,000 is do you? Do you realize that in 2005 roughly 28% of households in the US report less than $25,000 a year income?

Do we know the circumstances surrounding what exactly will void the GT-R's warranty? Like, is it a set number of times or something like with BMW, or what?

It seems all you have to do is press a button on the dash labeled "VDC".

EDIT:

If you ever get the chance take your car to a 'run what you brung' and actually launch it hard and throw in a few flat-shifts; then come back and tell me how long you expect the transmission to last if you keep doing it.

Scaff, I appreciate your post and we see to eye on a lot of things, but I have to disagree with this one point. Between the 98-'2000 seasons I put roughly 100 hard launches on my E36 M3 (I lose track of exactly number of runs on that car) in a competition driving environment (SCCA Solo II) Well over half of those launches were on DOT-legal R compound tires. Now, none were done on concrete or a similarly coarse surface, but on parking lot asphalt with average debris.

My M3 had 78,000 miles on it when I trader her in on a second one and she didn't even need a new clutch yet.

Now I understand that the GT-R puts down twice the amount of torque my gutless US spec motor put out. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the transmission NOT to explode after just 20 launches.

EDIT2: I did a little thinking about this during my lunch break and revised some of the text to more reasonable levels, such as the number of hard launches I expect from an M3 before clutch failure.


M

 

[Scaff]

It will be interesting to see what the European warranty exclusions look like, as the bit about having to be serviced (and the strong implication that it must be done by Nissan) will not get passed EU law.

The VDC one is odd, but don't necessary think its indicative of an issue with the gearbox itself. I've had a good look around the web (can't be bothered with any real work today) and the only incidents I can find cover grey-imports, modified cars or dubious care on the part of the owner.

In the '20 launch' one I strongly suspect that they hooked the car up and it told them a very different story to that which the owner told.

Its also worth keeping in mind that a lot of warranty exclusions are used as a 'back stop' by manufacturers, and often cars that 'should' be excluded still have claims honoured. I suspect (but of course can't prove) that the VDC one allows Nissan to decline a warranty claim if they hook the car up and find the VDC was disabled and the car then 'hoooned' to death.


Regards

Scaff

 

[homeforsummer]

Source - http://www.evo.co.uk/news/evonews/32080/trackdays_warranty_killers.html

Keep in mind that this article is from back in 2002, with the growth of track days I don't personally see any of the manufacturers getting more lenient.

Interesting article, I remember reading it in Evo at the time. I agree that probably most mainstream manufacturers wouldn't honour a warranty if you took a car on track, but it does seem a bit strange for certain cars - M3 CSL, 360 CS, 911 GT3, Renault R26.R etc, all of which are purpose-designed track specials - if the manufacturer refused to cover their use on the track in the warranty.

I don't know if any of the manufacturers of these cars use the term "track day car/track special/etc" in any promotional material for the cars but if they do it's surely misadvertising if using the car in the purpose for which it was designed invalidates the warranty?

Anyway, I'm rambling. I'm certainly not saying that Nissan's ever said the GT-R was a track special (though pushing the tiresome 'Ring stuff all the time does make them look a bit hypocritical if something breaks under hard use) but I still think it's cheeky offering a performance function that invalidates the warranty when it's used. Why not just not offer the function and then not try and claim the car does a certain 0-60 time or whatever when the act of an owner trying to match it invalidates their warranty?...