SR20 Forum banner
1 - 20 of 68 Posts

·
the original 4-door SR20
Joined
·
590 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Well I know the discussions on how weak the numbers are on the Spec V in Sport Compact Mag. Well the Jan 02 issue of Motor trend shows the Spec V hitting 0-60 in 7.22 sec, and hitting the qt mil in 15.4 sec. Compared to SCC 7.8 sec and 15.8 qt mil that is quite a difference. I noticed that quite a few classic owners are unhappy with the performance of the great grandchild of the SE-R. Let's not hate, because it is one more weapon against the hords of civics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
I really dislike the would "hate" or "haters" When used to describe those of us who are dissapointed with the way the new SE-R has turned out. I realize it's the hip-hop culture slang way. But it's wrong and should stop. As far as the Honda hoards. Many of us were putting down our cash on brand new SE-Rs in 91-94 when most of you were still in Junior High School and then listened endlessly to "but it's just a Sentra?" I still hear it today!

It's just not accelleration numbers that dissapointed us. It's the total tacky package. You want one? Put your money were your mouth is and buy it! As for me the new best Nissan has a V6. It's the Altima V6 SE. And I will be putting my money were my mouth is next year.

Sorry to jump on my soapbox with the new guys thread. But it was a target of oppertunity. Welcome to the Board jamse-r! :D

edit: spelling
 

·
employment whiplash, NC
Joined
·
3,646 Posts
Yeah, I don't hate it. I'm just disappointed. I'm mostly disappointed Nissan didn't have the balls to go right at Honda and Toyota.

Am I so wrong in my thinking that this should be the best SE-R ever made? Is that so wild a dream? I am 1000% sure the Spec-V I drove at VIR last weekend was slower than my Classic was when it was stock (it's been less than a year since it was stock, I remember what it was like...).
 

·
LoSe-R
Joined
·
908 Posts
jamse-r said:
Well the Jan 02 issue of Motor trend shows the Spec V hitting 0-60 in 7.22 sec, and hitting the qt mil in 15.4 sec. Compared to SCC 7.8 sec and 15.8 qt mil that is quite a difference. I noticed that quite a few classic owners are unhappy with the performance of the great grandchild of the SE-R. Let's not hate, because it is one more weapon against the hords of civics.
dont hate? ha ha i dont relate!

anyways, motor trend is the same magazine that found 3.89 for the 911 turbo, that beast had an auto also that is simply hideous, ill never trust motor trend numbers. imho the new se-r is not as focused on performance. (excuse the pun its not intentional) the focus svt has a revvy 2 liter , a getrag 6 spd drool , drool (they make gearboxes for bimmers and porsches , correct me if i am wrong) and it looks like an understated well executed car. i cant recall if focus has limited slip, if not then that may skew my point.

same with the new civic si, i typically hate hondas but until i see some kid with a "hooked up" new si i sorta like that it seems as though the engineers knew what they were after. it has another silky smooth 2 liter wiht a claimed 160 hp which i am sure can be backed up ( unlike the se-r )considering it makes 200 in the rsx and 240 in s2000 and it pulled .9 gs according to automobile mag. This is more than the se-r did with its MASSIVE and admittedly gawdy rims. might i mention the si was boasting 15 inch wheels with innertube sidewalls!? Im sorta torn with honda, there is so much CRAP out there with hondas but at the same time honda makes some really racey cars, i.e. s2000 , integra Type R. these cars have largely impeccable reliability which does matter when you have to pay to fix it. i believe i would like honda more if it wasnt for the image they have adopted in the last few years in the aftermarket
 

·
boosting
Joined
·
1,454 Posts
no doubt its a cool car but with all the sick engines nissan has in japan they could have defin put a better motor in it but oh well. they choose the altima to be there new old se-r type car in my oppinion. i would buy a new altima over a new se-r in my oppinion.
Sean
 

·
the original 4-door SR20
Joined
·
590 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks for the reply!

I must say it is to early to tell. Who would have thought the focus would have this much aftermarket support. I know the new engine will be limited in NA department, but remember it does displace 2.5 liters. I would like to see it mated to a turbo or supercharger.

Black 93, I currently own a 91 SE-R and a 2000 ZX3. Yes the SVT Focus is mated to a six speed and has 170 at the crank. They are only going to make 7,500 of them. Supply and demand dictates price. So If you can find one for 18,000, more power to you. The new SI is quite impressive. It looks like the focus, and hits 135 top speed. Well I live in Germany, and out here top speed counts. Si's Qt mile of 16.0 for the 2002 is not what I expected for 18,000.

Last thing, it is a four door, and I do plan on buying on. 16,700 is what I am going to pay for the SPEC V, my good friend works at the Nissan dealer. SCC said it had the same exact times as the type-r in the slalom. To each his own.
 

·
LoSe-R
Joined
·
908 Posts
it irritates me that my friends always have something to commment about even though they are not in the market for even a used car. maybe i should take a hint :rolleyes: i look at these cars often direguarding price and just for performance. i think of the se-r as the brute... the front drive camaro... excellent value, good speed, but its seems to lack finesse, personally i will never own a civic so the si doesnt stand a chance. as for the focus, im not so sure, i need to hear more about it. do as you wish and im gonna think about keeping my mouth shut more often because my opinions arent always realistic. ill will likely never own any of these cars :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
I want to preface this post by saying that I have extremely limited experience with cars. My '03 Classic is the only car I've driven much (previously trucks). So I'm notr saying that I know anything =). I've had mine since early this past summer and have been to 5-6 autox's since. That said, after test driving an SE-R V-spec at the local dealer, my Classic (bone stock) felt like my girlfriend's '96 ford escort. After reading many of his posts, I repect MaddMatt's comments, but I am shocked by his statement that the V-spec felt slower that his stock Classic. I thought the shifting was fine (an area I've heard complaints about). I really only had two problems with it, not including the interior. First, I was hoping to go a bit smaller with the wheels for racing, but with the gearing so low already, I fear that smaller tire diameter would make this a problem. Second, there was a great deal of wheel hop shifting into second. Apart from this it seemed to be a very fast, tight car (especially for the $$). As I said, I have little to compare to, but I KNOW that thing was faster than my '93.
 

·
employment whiplash, NC
Joined
·
3,646 Posts
I repect MaddMatt's comments, but I am shocked by his statement that the V-spec felt slower that his stock Classic
OK, here's how I arrived at that conclusion. Back stright at VIR is approximately 1 mile long. You come out of an extremely tight right hander (Oak tree turn) and the track just disappears over the horizon. It goes down hill slightly and then back up and over a hill. At the low point of the back straight, in my Classic, stock (with AGXs) and street tires last year, I hit 100 mph at the dip. In Ben's new '02 Spec V (stock and on street tires) I hit 90 mph. Ben, who is a very good driver, could only muster 92 mph. I was 8 mph faster at that point in the track in my stock Classic than I was in a stock Spec V.

The torque of the QR engine is strong but decieving.
 

·
LoSe-R
Joined
·
908 Posts
torque is very decieving, it arrives early and is immediately felt. in a hp car ( se-r ) hp is introduced as the revs rise and as you tighten up. the torquey car may feel faster but hp is what counts * duck (dont bombard me with area under curve stuff i already know).


parson, you may be right but understand that seat of the pants is not objective. no matter what.

after studying dyno charts i bet that a classic is faster around a track because it spends more time in the revs while the spec v prob doesnt have much up top. 0-60 may belong to the spec v because 0-60 entails the whole revband including all the torque.

oh well you have just spent ~ 5 minutes reading this post that prob lacks any sort of cohesiveness. ( is that a word? )
 

·
employment whiplash, NC
Joined
·
3,646 Posts
torque is very decieving, it arrives early and is immediately felt. in a hp car ( se-r ) hp is introduced as the revs rise and as you tighten up. the torquey car may feel faster but hp is what counts * duck (dont bombard me with area under curve stuff i already know).
Torque is your friend, but horsepower is King. As for area under the curve, I wonder if the SR20 might have just as much as the QR due to it's ability to rev to 7500 rpms....

0-60 may belong to the spec v because 0-60 entails the whole revband including all the torque.
Perhaps, perhaps not. The Spec V requires a shift to 3rd for 60 mph, my '92 does not.

Raising the rev limit to 7 grand would be a night and day difference for the QR engine. I suspect it would kick my cars ass if that were the case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
487 Posts
Blah! I like the SpecV so far. No, it didn't feel as fast as my NX when it was stock (though it was probably the same) and the shifter felt like ass, but there were other things that I was impressed with. The car is very easy to drive, torque is fun! The LSD is great, the suspension is surprisingly stiff, I love the look. I'm going to reserve full judgement until I see some solid aftermarket support and we all see what the SpecV is really capable of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Son Of Skyline said:
Blah! I like the SpecV so far. No, it didn't feel as fast as my NX when it was stock (though it was probably the same) and the shifter felt like ass, but there were other things that I was impressed with. The car is very easy to drive, torque is fun! The LSD is great, the suspension is surprisingly stiff, I love the look. I'm going to reserve full judgement until I see some solid aftermarket support and we all see what the SpecV is really capable of.
Whats up Travis!:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
Ok, I feel the need to add my 2 cents. The spec V was designed to be a Type R killer. In that respect it has won. Mike Kojima described how it beat a Type R by a good measure on the track. I am positive that a stock classic/nx/200sx/se cannot beat a Type R on the track. So, I think we need to wait to see more results from some broken in Spec V's before we pass judgement.

I'm pretty optimistic about this car. It's based on the VQ series of engines, which are the best Nissan has made. Also, it has been confirmed that there are many ways that the engine is being backed up for emissions reasons. I foresee this engine going over the 200 whp mark with bolt ons.

]
Also, I think this engine will be easier to upgrade legally to turbo and even supercharging. So, it's really a wait and see. I'd love to be able to get one and see if I could design some stuff for it. That would definitely be this enginerd's dream.....:D ;) ;) :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
kpw97 said:
Ok, I feel the need to add my 2 cents. The spec V was designed to be a Type R killer. In that respect it has won. Mike Kojima described how it beat a Type R by a good measure on the track. I am positive that a stock classic/nx/200sx/se cannot beat a Type R on the track. So, I think we need to wait to see more results from some broken in Spec V's before we pass judgement.
Keep in mind that the Spec V that beat the Type R was a *very early* pre-production model. I don't believe it was anywhere near as toned down as the production model.



--ATP
 

·
employment whiplash, NC
Joined
·
3,646 Posts
Ok, I feel the need to add my 2 cents. The spec V was designed to be a Type R killer. In that respect it has won. Mike Kojima described how it beat a Type R by a good measure on the track.
OK, I'm only going to say this one more time:
There is no damn way the Spec-V I drove on track (a road course) would beat a Type R. No way. Forget it. End of story.

I don't know if Nissan gave Kojima a wheelbarrow full of money to say that or if that early SE-R he drove was a ringer, but I am absolutely positive that the Spec-V I drove at VIR couldn't keep up with Type-R. I have never been so sure about anything in my life.

The Spec-V handled quite a bit better than my Classic when stock, but my '92 was faster in a straight line. And the Type R is WAY faster.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,886 Posts
kpw97 said:
Ok, I feel the need to add my 2 cents. The spec V was designed to be a Type R killer. In that respect it has won.

How has it won? Its not as fast in the 1/4, and I doubt it is as fast as a Type R on a road course. Dont forget, the type R is the car to beat, and the detuned Spec V we got is no way near as fast as a type R.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
Kojima said it was faster in the road course. They didn't care about the quarter mile times. Read it for yourself....

http://www.se-r-list.org/archives/2001/2001-01/msg00286.html

Now, I'm not sure of how much it was detuned. But, it couldn't have been so much as to make it worse than an older stock classic. I don't trust all the new numbers comin out. I want to give it a little more time. I think that Kojima's description gives at least the short term potential of the car. Everyone has their own opinions........
 

·
employment whiplash, NC
Joined
·
3,646 Posts
Kojima said it was faster in the road course. They didn't care about the quarter mile times. Read it for yourself....

http://www.se-r-list.org/archives/2...1/msg00286.html
I flat out do not agree with anything in that post. It may have been a Type R killer back in January, but it is not anymore. Nissan MUST have de-tuned it. The one I drove could not beat any Type R in stright line acceleration, and the suspension felt softer to me than a stock Type R.

You guys have got to believe me here. Nissan has wussied up this car. It's now up to the individual enthusiast to make it respectable.
 

·
BOOSTIN PROTECH STYLE
Joined
·
1,397 Posts
Re: Thanks for the reply!

The only Reason why the Focus has so much aftermarket support is because of people like Sean Carlson or Turbo Joe Morgon. Those people who made a 1320 Monster out of a tube chassie car with a FOCUS Body. The Focus itself is not a very fast car even with Turbo Modification. But the aftermarket is still there. As for Nissan, I think Nissan is confused. If they actually listened to the Owners they would be a lot better off. What they need is to bring the Skylines with the Inline 6 Rb26dett, or the Silvias Over here. But they wont, partially because of the emissions laws. But I say if they can bring a WRX over here and the Lancer Evolutions, why in the hell can't they bring back the Silvias, SKylines, $upras ect. We need to put out a public outcry to see if we can change this. I'm pleased to state that the Classic still remains the best of the best of the SE-R.:D Just IMHO Ranting.:cool:

jamse-r said:
I must say it is to early to tell. Who would have thought the focus would have this much aftermarket support. I know the new engine will be limited in NA department, but remember it does displace 2.5 liters. I would like to see it mated to a turbo or supercharger.

Black 93, I currently own a 91 SE-R and a 2000 ZX3. Yes the SVT Focus is mated to a six speed and has 170 at the crank. They are only going to make 7,500 of them. Supply and demand dictates price. So If you can find one for 18,000, more power to you. The new SI is quite impressive. It looks like the focus, and hits 135 top speed. Well I live in Germany, and out here top speed counts. Si's Qt mile of 16.0 for the 2002 is not what I expected for 18,000.

Last thing, it is a four door, and I do plan on buying on. 16,700 is what I am going to pay for the SPEC V, my good friend works at the Nissan dealer. SCC said it had the same exact times as the type-r in the slalom. To each his own.
 
1 - 20 of 68 Posts
Top