New 510 concept (Nissan IDx)

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

I know this isn't in the same ballpark but it gave me a woody when it was shown.

Pretty sure I had that Hot Wheels car back in 66!

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Dimman

The 'lightly' is meant to be inflammatory.

Shh... Don't tell anyone.


Reality is, in automotive platform sharing terms, it IS lightly modified. But on a relative scale. The best example being the Nissan FM chassis architecture, whereas the Z, G coupe, G Sedan, Murano, FX, and the smaller Infiniti SUV are the same platform. The difference between a BRZ and an Impreza is about the same as a G coupe and G sedan. People seem to have little trouble accepting the G relationship, but the stretch between an EX35 and 350Z or BRZ and Impreza is flat out impossible to some people. To the unenlightened the name is more important than the engineering.

And I get a kick out of people using irrelevant facts to prove a point. Different CoG and clearance proves different chassis is fucking hilarious logic.

I'll stop now, though.



Heh...

So you honestly believe the difference between a BRZ and Impreza is "about the same" as the difference between a G35 coupe and sedan?

Wow I expected more from you for some reason.

I used to own a 350z. You should look up the list of compatible parts between the G35 coupe and sedan, and compare that to the Impreza and BRZ. It's not even close to being the same.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

So you honestly believe the difference between a BRZ and Impreza is "about the same" as the difference between a G35 coupe and sedan?

Wow I expected more from you for some reason.

I used to own a 350z. You should look up the list of compatible parts between the G35 coupe and sedan, and compare that to the Impreza and BRZ. It's not even close to being the same.

I think you misunderstand the platform sharing comparison. It's not exclusively about parts interchange, but primary component groups. Power train, structural parts such as major stampings of the unibody, suspension, brakes, all share core engineering. Because of product differentiation and specialization they are obviously not going to be exactly the same, but the expensive components have all been designed for multiple uses with minimum of changes. Or in the twins' case, adopted as best they could from preexisting architecture.

These are not ground up 'clean sheet' cars. They are a brilliant execution of parts-bin engineering.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Dimman

I think you misunderstand the platform sharing comparison. It's not exclusively about parts interchange, but primary component groups. Power train, structural parts such as major stampings of the unibody, suspension, brakes, all share core engineering. Because of product differentiation and specialization they are obviously not going to be exactly the same, but the expensive components have all been designed for multiple uses with minimum of changes. Or in the twins' case, adopted as best they could from preexisting architecture.

These are not ground up 'clean sheet' cars. They are a brilliant execution of parts-bin engineering.

The G35 coupe and sedan are a LOT closer in terms of "major component groups" than the BRZ and Impreza. It's not really a close comparison. All of the major components from the engine to suspension to interior are direct swaps in a G35 coupe and sedan, whereas virtually nothing would be a direct swap in the major component groups of a BRZ and Impreza. It's really a bad comparison and I'll just leave it at that.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

The G35 coupe and sedan are a LOT closer in terms of "major component groups" than the BRZ and Impreza. It's not really a close comparison. All of the major components from the engine to suspension to interior are direct swaps in a G35 coupe and sedan, whereas virtually nothing would be a direct swap in the major component groups of a BRZ and Impreza. It's really a bad comparison and I'll just leave it at that.

Analogy fails me sometimes, I guess. There is a line between oversimplification and too much detail. Primary point is that the BRZ and Impreza are the same chassis architecture and share many components. The BRZ is directly based on the Impreza. The Nissan FM example is to demonstrate the range of what shared chassis architecture entails. It covers the 350Z all the way to the FX45. All the same platform. The BRZ and Impreza are far closer to each other than the Z and FX. The G coupe/sedan is to emphasize the sharing in a more obvious way than the Z/FX.

You cannot 'prove' a chassis is different because, for example, an FA20 cannot swap into an AWD Impreza. Why? Because the differences are part of the modular aspect, and there are less critical/expensive parts to allow for easy changes. As an example, you cannot take a 1JZGTE from a TT Mk3 Supra and directly swap it into a 7MGTE Mk3 Supra. They are different engines and require different engine mounts, bell housing, piping layout, etc... But they are the exact same chassis, let alone shared platforms. The same types of changes allow for differences within a platform with minimal engineering changes because the flexibility is designed in.



Does this show what I'm talking about a bit better? Chassis sharing isn't disproved by 'this one or two parts do not fit' arguments. The G example was perhaps an oversimplification failure on my part.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Analogy fails me sometimes, I guess. There is a line between oversimplification and too much detail. Primary point is that the BRZ and Impreza are the same chassis architecture and share many components. The BRZ is directly based on the Impreza. The Nissan FM example is to demonstrate the range of what shared chassis architecture entails. It covers the 350Z all the way to the FX45. All the same platform. The BRZ and Impreza are far closer to each other than the Z and FX. The G coupe/sedan is to emphasize the sharing in a more obvious way than the Z/FX.

You cannot 'prove' a chassis is different because, for example, an FA20 cannot swap into an AWD Impreza. Why? Because the differences are part of the modular aspect, and there are less critical/expensive parts to allow for easy changes. As an example, you cannot take a 1JZGTE from a TT Mk3 Supra and directly swap it into a 7MGTE Mk3 Supra. They are different engines and require different engine mounts, bell housing, piping layout, etc... But they are the exact same chassis, let alone shared platforms. The same types of changes allow for differences within a platform with minimal engineering changes because the flexibility is designed in.



Does this show what I'm talking about a bit better? Chassis sharing isn't disproved by 'this one or two parts do not fit' arguments. The G example was perhaps an oversimplification failure on my part.

You seem to have a way of overgeneralizing.

You can't make a statement like this:

Originally Posted by Dimman

The difference between a BRZ and an Impreza is about the same as a G coupe and G sedan.

And then ignore the fact that the major components of a G35 sedan and coupe are literally direct swaps or identical.

On your mk3 Supra example, the engine might not be a direct swap, but I would imagine that the suspension, brakes, interiors, and virtually everything else would be. By definition, that makes those Supras (and the G35 sedan and coupe) much closer than, say, a BRZ and Impreza where no major parts swap over or were even engineered to work in the other car.

Your other statement:

Originally Posted by Dimman

Sorry Canuck-noob. Mildly modified Impreza platform it is.

Is also overgeneralizing, to put it kindly.

If it makes you feel any better, I'd hardly call the FX35 a "mildly modified" 350z FM platform either.

[Dimman]

@DarkSunrise

Originally Posted by Dimman

The 'lightly' is meant to be inflammatory.

^ You missed this one. It's a bit relevant. Heh...

And I'm not sure you are fully grasping what I'm saying with regards to the FM.

This oversimplification seems required when 'proof' of not being correct on chassis sharing is offered by way of ground clearance and CoG figures, for fuck sakes...

So the explanation ends up: FM shared chassis = all these cars. Most similar of compared shared chassis Nissans to BRZ/Impreza are G Coupe/G Sedan. Exact, no. But out of the examples, the best.

Onto the Supra example, of course the rest of the parts are the same. That is the point. It's the exact same car, yet there are parts that don't direct swap. This reinforces what I've explained with regards to chassis architecture and shared platforms. If identical vehicles have different not direct swap engines, does that make it less the same because a G Sedan and G Coupe do direct swap?

The FX35 isn't a mildly modified 350Z FM, they were designed from the beginning to share parts, a platform.
The design requirements for the FM were dictated, and always are, by the heaviest intended design and all optional components. This is one of the reasons the 350Z isn't as light as it could be. So in actuality the 350Z sort of IS a lightly modified FX45 with the V8 and AWD. But the primary architecture is shared. This is the same thing with the BRZ and Impreza, only less extreme. Same motor family, suspension architecture, brake architecture, structure of the floor pan and unibody architecture, blah, blah, blah...

The whole point of this was to refute the 'not an Impreza based car' claim. It unquestionably is Impreza based and we've known this for 5 years.

Some related reading by 'Chubby Cheddar':

http://m.caranddriver.com/columns/pl...ummies-feature

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Sideways&Smiling

The FR-S/BRZ/GT86 is succeeding by being inexpensively made out of the existing Impreza platform and, honestly, probably being given a sticker price $5k above what it really should be, considering the power, features, etc., because there is nothing else out there similar to it at the moment, which lets them get away with it...

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Ya manufacturers suck for wanting to stay in business and not cater to a percentage of buyers about 6 decimal points on the wrong side of zero.
Impreza Platform????

Originally Posted by Dimman

@DarkSunrise

The whole point of this was to refute the 'not an Impreza based car' claim. It unquestionably is Impreza based and we've known this for 5 years.

Hey guys I think you agree and are caught up in the semantics of things!
I also think I caused a shit storm by posing a question in close relation to a statement. Sideways made a broad sweeping statement about the manufacturers that I took offense to and felt compelled to make a comment (in my not uncommon sarcastic manner).
Unfortunately I also included a question within that comment as I did not understand what was meant by the phrase "made out of the existing Impreza platform" since this sounded like they were running them side by side and just swapping bodies. As far as I knew it was "based" on the platform but did not use much of the same actual parts. This question was obviously taken to be part of my response to the other comment and taken as sarcasm as well.
Then of course Dim had to make his Canuk noob comment and I gave a too brief response.
Then Sideways clarified his statement, I retracted my comment and you guys ran with the ball even though the play was done!
There is no doubt that it is "based" on the platform not "made out of" and even though nobody can agree on the wording I think we are all on the same page!
To risk sounding like a stereotypical "Canuck" , sorry for causing the confusion!

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Dimman

@DarkSunrise

^ You missed this one. It's a bit relevant. Heh...

And I'm not sure you are fully grasping what I'm saying with regards to the FM.

This oversimplification seems required when 'proof' of not being correct on chassis sharing is offered by way of ground clearance and CoG figures, for fuck sakes...

So the explanation ends up: FM shared chassis = all these cars. Most similar of compared shared chassis Nissans to BRZ/Impreza are G Coupe/G Sedan. Exact, no. But out of the examples, the best.

Onto the Supra example, of course the rest of the parts are the same. That is the point. It's the exact same car, yet there are parts that don't direct swap. This reinforces what I've explained with regards to chassis architecture and shared platforms. If identical vehicles have different not direct swap engines, does that make it less the same because a G Sedan and G Coupe do direct swap?

The FX35 isn't a mildly modified 350Z FM, they were designed from the beginning to share parts, a platform.
The design requirements for the FM were dictated, and always are, by the heaviest intended design and all optional components. This is one of the reasons the 350Z isn't as light as it could be. So in actuality the 350Z sort of IS a lightly modified FX45 with the V8 and AWD. But the primary architecture is shared. This is the same thing with the BRZ and Impreza, only less extreme. Same motor family, suspension architecture, brake architecture, structure of the floor pan and unibody architecture, blah, blah, blah...

The whole point of this was to refute the 'not an Impreza based car' claim. It unquestionably is Impreza based and we've known this for 5 years.

Some related reading by 'Chubby Cheddar':

http://m.caranddriver.com/columns/pl...ummies-feature

Everyone understands that when Subaru started designing the BRZ, they started working off a shortened Impreza chassis. I wrote that in my first post, so I'm not sure who you're debating with on that point.

The main issue was your statement about the BRZ being a lightly modified Impreza chassis, which I understand you've now abandoned. Although you do overgeneralize again saying

Originally Posted by Dimman

So in actuality the 350Z sort of IS a lightly modified FX45 with the V8 and AWD.

If you honestly view an AWD V8 FX45 as a "lightly modified" 350z FM chassis, then I can see how we'd be at ends on this (and a lot of other points).

On your third point, if you still think that the differences between a BRZ and Impreza are about the same as a G35 coupe and sedan despite the wholesale compatibility of nearly everything in the latter and next to nothing in the former, then I doubt I'm going to get through to you on this either. As I've said before, you can't say the two are about the same when on one, the majority of fundamental parts are the same or swap over (engine, engine location/mounts, suspension, interior), and on the other, 90% of the parts are incompatible. That makes no sense.

But as Tcoat says, maybe it comes down to semantics and how you use the words "about the same" and "lightly modified".

[bcj]

Now it can be reveled:
BRZ is an Imprezza
FRS is a G35

Got it.

[gravitylover]

I'm gonna hold out hope for that Kia Stinger.

[xuimod]

The Nissan IDX looks hideous. And the Kia Stinger looks kind of meh.

I think the Twins will be better than either of those by a significant margin. Toyota/Subaru put so much more R&D into the Twins than either Nissan with the IDX or the Kia Stinger I think (the IDX shares the same chassis as the Nissan Cube???.... lololol. That's going to turn out great).

I doubt the Kia Stinger will even be produced because the market for sub $25k 2+2's is limited. Btw, in a higher price bracket, the Lexus RC is a fairly new 2+2. Those look really nice.

Hopefully Honda/Acura can bring a new 2+2 to the table.

[daiheadjai]

I don't really care for the IDx (idk...)
But I hope the Kia makes it - I think the Hyundai Genesis Coupe played a role in bringing love back to relatively-cheap RWD coupes, so I'd love to see Kia continue that thread.

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by xuimod

(the IDX shares the same chassis as the Nissan Cube???.... lololol.).

According to who?