Chesterfield

Its hardly complex to engage Launch Control, and as I have not seen any evidence of letters confirming that switching off VDC does not undermine the warranty, I can only go on the info printed in the manuals seen so far. If Nissan UK have confirmed that driving with VDC off is covered, have they mentioned anything about the Launch Control? Im not stating that Nissan "will" void the warranty for simply turning the VDC off, but just going by whats been printed in the manuals Ive seen. I suppose its a catch all. Although Im not a fan of Jay Leno - he did a spot with John Weiner, the Director of Product Planning at Nissan. Have a look at this video from the 6 minute mark onward. If Nissan didnt want people using the Launch Control, why the hell is one of their Directors stating that "we actually offer a launch mode in this car" and then going on to describe the dumping of 4500 rpm and resulting in "perfect launches every time you do this". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CmLT05qZ8Q Now is that supposed to be "perfect launches every time you do this, until the cogs get spat out" ? Having a Nissan Director spout on about a launch control system, then ducking out of fixing a transmission because someone used it "too much" doesnt seem like cricket to me. This may be a case of one bad egg and there is nothing to worry about, but pictures of shredded gears and stories of boxes not being honoured under warranty, whether exagerated or not, are enough to make me glad I kept my wallet shut some months ago. Im sure however if there does appear to be a gap in the market for stronger cogs, it wont be long until they are available from after market retailers..

There is a tardis on the roadster... Used it myself at JAE a couple of years ago.. I know what Martin is talking about.

Then why purposely state driving with the VDC off is not covered under warranty, rather than exclude the Launch Control (feature or not). The wording covers "driving" with VDC off, no mention of any harsh acceleration, spirited driving or otherwise. I would be very interested to see the reaction if something were to give way during normal driving with VDC off. Would this refusal of warranty repairs just be applicable to the use of Launch control while VDC is off, or would the claim be thrown out regardless as it was under VDC off conditions. If the car has the ability to switch the VDC off then surely the car should be able to be used in that condition. Lets remember we arent discussing the turning off of VDC by some underhand non disclosed sneaky method of ODB programming or combination of button presses and accelerator prods - there is a ruddy great switch on the centre console that has an "off" position. If its that important that the car not be driven with VDC off, you would have thought that turning it off would have been a little more complex than flicking a switch in the middle ofyour centre console.

That would certainly contradict the information printed in the booklets that have been seen in the states, though this may be confirmation of the normal interpretation of the wording in the booklet that turning the VDC off alone will not invalidate your warranty, but anything that breaks while VDC is off wont be covered. Though if that is the case, if you use the LC several times, but then the box gives way afterward while VDC is on, will the prior driving while VDC is off be cause to deny a warranty repair on an item that breaks during normal use? Its all very woolly to me, but I guess the best option is to leave the VDC switch alone if you dont have pockets deep enough to pay for a new transmission.

The point is that turning the VDC off DOES invalidate the warranty, The booklet states that driving the car while VDC is off is not a condition covered under warranty. So by that reckoning this is any driving with it off, not just restricted to Launch Control (not an advertised feature). The button may as well be rebadged as "warranty" if the wording in the booklet is to be taken on face value.

Ill bet these will not be warranty items too, meaning that the gearbox itself will be classed as a wear and tear item. As its apparently $20,000 in the US for a box, I dont expect we will see much change from £10k. I suppose its all rumour and speculation on how much the things will actually cost in the UK, but I do find it incredibly strange that we dont yet have official figures and pricing for servicing inervals and parts from Nissan on cars that some people have deposits on. I think the safe money is sitting tight until all these questions have been answered.

The advice is to turn the VDC off only if the car gets stuck in mud or snow. As driving with the VDC off invalidates the warranty, if someone were to get stuck in snow or mud, do they then have a choice. Abandon car, or lose warranty. Note that the disclaimer in the booklet does not refference Launch Control, just VDC. So if you wanted some sideways action, or you wanted to drive without VDC at a track, then you invalidate your warranty. Whats more, it appears from reading US forums that apparently the number of "launches" cannot be determined, and possibly just that VDC has been turned off at some point. As for cars not having issues with gearboxes that have not had the VDC turned off, that is correct, but if turning VDC off can result in a box being chewed through in just a few thousand miles, then how long wilkl the box last under "normal" conditions? There is a reason for having 7 boxes listed under "transmission system replacement log" and I dont think its just for those who dare disengage the VDC. I await news on the first "clutch" replacement on a car that has never been driven with VDC off with some anticipation. It will be interesting to see if the transmissions are now wear and tear items on cars used within the rules as now appear to be laid out. And more interestingly what the costs of such replacement items will be.

Do a few Launch controls in 430's or drive a Lambo hard, and you could be looking at a £5k clutch quite quickly - quite expensive. And it wont be under waranty. Do it in a GTR and it spits its cogs out? I could live with the clutch being a non warranty item, but the rest of the transmission? My personal opinion is that this "warranty not applicable if you drive with VDC off" is just a very easy way of getting out of claims for a chocolate gearbox. Lets not forget the hype that this car has had, its a GTR for petes sake, 7:29 on the ring headlines etc. But unless you drive it like miss daisy, you cant rely on your warranty. Is this a GTR or a Primera? One would assume that buyers of the GTR would not be buiying it for its shopping capacity.

If they are going to launch a car with a 0-60 time quoted as 3.4 but the only way this can be done is by using launch control, I would think it a little unfair to void peoples warranty for using launch control in order to have the car perform as advertised. Having said that, I dont see anywhere in Nissans own litterature that this 3.4 figure is quoted. I can see the clutch being wear and tear, but voiding the warranty on the transmission for using a feature of the car? Sounds like a chocolate gearbox to me. Reading the forums in the US, there are more and more of these transmission failures appearing. I would still be interested to hear peoples views on the second hand market for these cars. Would you buy one 18 months old? How would you know if the VDC had been turned off or not. You could be buying a car with a box about to let go, and effectively no warranty. As for running costs, there are more details appearing in the US as people go over the various milestones... With the habbit of rip off Britain, what do people reckon to the $1000 transmission fluid change at 6000 miles? http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php ... 2947&st=40

Very much doubt that the transmission and clutch will be done under warranty, which is bizzare given its an auto box. Manual box and the opportunity to ride the clutch, fine - but a car that changes gear itself? surely there should be some minimum lifespan. Also there is no "clutch" replacement. There are however 7 (yes seven) boxes within the service schedule book for "transmission assembly replacement". The running costs of this car are easily on par with the likes of Lambo/Ferrari, though you arent driving a Lambo/Ferrari. Clutch at £5000 from Lamborghini dealer for a gallardo isnt that bad considering its a £120,000 car. With "transmission replacements" i.e. not just the clutch as an available option, at a roumoured £9,000 from Nissan for a £55,000 car - its not lookig so rosy all of a sudden. Do Lambo/Ferrari void your warranty if you use their launch control?

There are even more worrying pieces of information circling in other areas too. Has anyone been given the full information from Nissan on how much a replacement "clutch" will be, and how often one may be needed? What about those whom have put deposits down? Do they know the servicing and maintenance costs yet? From what I can gether there are going to be some seriously heavy bills with this car. Perhaps much heavier than bills for similar items on £100k+ cars. Nothing confirmed yet, so just speculation, but incredibly worrying. What is quite concerning is that Nissan void the warranty if the Launch Control is used (well specifically if the VDC is turned off - but you have to do this to use Launch Control). Yet state its ok to turn VDC off to get out of snow or mud etc.. Creating a setup which allows the car to be launched from 4500rpm, does not constitute a device that allows the escape from snow or mud. Its been put there to get the car from 0-60 in 3.4, but if you do it you void your warranty. So they fit a car with Launch Control, and then deny the warranty claims from anyone that uses it. Gets them out of some very expensive repairs if the gearbox isnt all it needs to be. I can see many tears before bedtime with this car. On another note, lets say someone buys a GTR second hand after 18 months, and the car drops a cog... The owner then takes it to Nissan who discover that Launch control has been used, but before the driver took ownership of the vehicle... What then? My guess would be, "sorry Launch Control has been used so we cant honour the warranty". What does the owner do? Sue the previous owner? On what grounds? Does the car record WHEN Launch control was used, could it be proven that it was the original owner, and if yes, so what? Would you buy a second hand GTR with 18 months worth of warranty that you couldnt be sure existed or not? Or would you want to knock half the price of a new transmission off just to be at least some way covered? Depreciation might be fun if thats the case.

Stick a modification on the car like a bodykit and see what Direct Line do. Policy runs out end of December for me and there is more chance of me taking a pee in the Queens handbag than stopping with Direct Line.

Handy video that - I see it was fine for Kimi to shove webber wide at turn 1 (2.20 in that video) Its fine for Massa to shove Button wide at the same turn (2.34 in that video) Its fine for massa to dive into the pit lane exit and chevron area (3.29) Id agree that Hamiltons initial move made Kimi take a wider line into the corner, but this is nothing short of what happens at most starts. Its the actions of Kovalinen that force Kimi off though. If we are now handing out penalties for drivers forcing others wide at the first corner, then the Stewards at Spa must still be working their way through this mess: Its beyond a joke now as to how many blind eyes are turned whn its a red car in the wrong. My only interest in this sport now is to see if Hamilton can prevail against a clearly bias organisation. I have all my fingers and toes crossed for a win by Hamilton at the next race, and a DNF for Massa. Of course should that be on the cards, there will be some new invented rule brought in to stop the championship being decided before the last race.

I think this figure on the number of posts is probably about right too, as someone like yourself with only 70 ish will know, making 70 posts that are postive contributions is not something that is acheived overnight. It would take some people well over a year at their current posting rates to acheive 100+ posts, although they are valued members of the club, they may not necesarily have the time available to contribute as often. The policy change is to be used to ensure that the people allowed to sell their car for free have at least made some form of positive contribution. There is an ammount of money spent on hosting this site each year, and it would be unfair on those whom have contributed (be that in the form of donations, or positive posting contributions) to allow people whom have not made such contributions to utilise the forum for their own benefit.

Looking at the angle of the drive, its probably been reversed up, and hand brake applied, this may make it ride up when the footbrake is released upon parking. Still the wrong tyre size though.

And Hamilton was given a drive through for late braking, shoving Kimi wide was he....? Can anyone spot Hamilton and Kimi in this picture.... which Mclaren is leaning on him? Is Hamilton now being awarded penalties by proxy?

Tyre size is all ove the place like others have said. With 295 on the rear, then 40 is about the best profile, but even then the speedo will be slightly under reading (not good, espescially when it comes to cameras!). First thing you will need to do if you buy that is buy some tyres of the correct size.

or start two topics asking the same thing Its great when you see people who have never bothered to be part of the community before just appear from nowhere and use our free nature to sell the car. Post count ammended.

And electricity to run them. I dont think there is an industry that isnt feeling a bit of the pinch at present. Apparently pawn brokers, betting shops and cobblers are seeing an upturn in business. May have to open a pawn brokers.

Hi Jeffrey, This is for next year - September 2009

I dont know how many times I have to see "motorway cops" or something else similar and see someone stopped without a licence, insurance, tax or mot, get stopped. What punishment do they get... A ban! And this deters them how exactly? They havent got a licence. What about the chinese guy stopped in a recent episode, wife and kid in the car, and no licence. They impounded the car, and advised that he would have to pay £140 or something to get it back - he was stopped again by chance only a couple of hours later back behind the wheel. Sometimes they get fined too - but it doesnt take a genius with a calculator to work out that the fines and impound fees are cheaper than paying insurance, tax & MOT every year. Until there is a real detterent for people who drive illegally, it will still be a massive problem. Whos the mug for paying almost £2k a year to drive two cars legally, while illegal drivers get a few hundred quid fine at best?

Agreed Steve - this is nothing more than protection of GB margins. The product is exactly the same, indeed it has been sourced from the same "developer". Imports cannot be compared to Polo shirts sporting a three legged horse logo, or Nike baseball caps with the tick the wrong way round, They arent counterfeit goods that knock off Nigels are selling out the back of a van. They are a Nissan product, built in a Nissan factory, sourced from a Nissan Dealer (just one in Japan). So the only protection here is on the GB margins, and protection of its "rare" status to susatin the prices, nothing more at all. It will beinteresting how the release of the car in the UK at just the time when the economy is on its arse will affect the residuals too. Perhaps making us wait over a year for the same right hand drive cars with different languages on th buttons will turn out not to have been the best decision.

Couldnt find the keys to show a pottential buyer round the car? Muppet. If thats how hard he is trying to sell the car, offer him £7k, with that kind of attitude to selling, its probably the only offer he will get

As others have posted, the turbo kit at £5500 fitted is just half the story. Go above 350-75 and you will need to start looking at replacing lots of internal parts too, pistons, rods, bearings, the list just grows. Full 500bhp twin turbo, with internals and build you are looking at £10-12k at least. 640bhp, 700bhp - then you can say goodbye to probably £20k or more by the time you have finished. And with 500bhp+ in an engine as highly strung it will probably be a bit gash as a daily drive, espescially in the wet UK roads.

Not really bothered. Ive come to the conclusion that this government and police authorities have lost the plot when it comes to "reducing casualties". These cameras are invariably forward facing, leaving the most vunerable (and most likely to be involved in fatal accidents) group, the motorcyclist, unchecked. They are nothing more than a cash generation system. If they cover the entire road network in these, and nobody ever speeds again, they will be sat with millions of pounds worth of redundant assetts, and a massive funding hole to fill. As has been demonstrated over and over again, the fines imposed for driving without a license are often cheaper than paying for insurance and road tax in the first place. This is yet again, another nail in the coffin for the honest driver, and a green light for those that drive without the necessary documents/licenses. The establishments attitude toward cash generation from the motorist is becoming quite the joke now. I also wonder how they will cover entire areas with these systems while still abiding by the recommendation that cameras should only be placed in accident blackspots - or is that recommendation now to be thrown out in favour of higher revenue returns from these devices? This will certainly show beyond doubt that the cameras are certainly not to protect lives but generate cash instead.