2005 Nissan 350z Enthusiast Coupe 2-door 3.5l -- 66k Miles -- Attract Attention on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Nissan's Le Mans prototype V6 to power next GT-R

You can debate all you want about whether racing has any relevance to road cars. And while you're doing that, Nissan will be getting the most out of its GT-R LM Nismo. In fact, the latest reports indicate that the Japanese automaker will use the engine (or some version thereof) in the next-generation GT-R. The Nissan GT-R LM Nismo, for those who may have missed it, is the company's radical attempt to take on the Audis, Porsches and Toyotas of the top-tier LMP1 class in the FIA World Endurance Championship. And to do so at its flagship event, the 24 Hours of Le Mans. Only unlike its rivals, it's not a mid-engined, all-wheel-drive design; both the engine and the driven wheels are at the front end. That engine, however, isn't actually all that radical. It's a 3.0-liter twin-turbo V6 producing 550 horsepower. Potent, but nothing earth-shattering. In fact it's not far off from the 545-hp 3.8-liter unit in the current production GT-R. And according to Top Gear, in speaking with the racing program's director Ben Bowlby, it will be essentially the same engine that will power the next road-going GT-R. Now if you're thinking that something's missing here, you're right: the GT-R LM Nismo packs a lot more than 550 horses. It actually has over 1,250 on tap. The remaining 700 hp are kicked in by the electric component of the racing prototype's hybrid powertrain. The next GT-R is widely expected to incorporate hybrid technology as well, but it won't be good for 700 hp all on its own. And it will almost certainly be driving all four wheels like the current version. Related Video:

Nissan's dismal 2019: Where does Japan's struggling brand go from here?

Auto sales have gradually slowed from their peak during the boom years that followed the global recession, but Nissan's rapid decline stood out even in a year when few high-volume manufacturers had much to be excited about.  Of the "Japanese 3," Nissan's 2019 performance was by far the most troubling. Through November, when the company last posted its global sales figures, its volumes were down 8 percent compared to 2019. Here in the United States, its full-year numbers were down 9.9% in an industry that slid just a hair more than 2 percent overall.  Meanwhile, Honda managed a slight increase in U.S. sales (0.2%) and Toyota, much like the industry in general, finished the year down approximately 2%. Like Nissan, Honda and Toyota have remained committed to cars — including compact and midsize sedans — and have a comprehensive portfolio of offerings in the key SUV and crossover segments.   On paper, Nissan's lineup checks all the right boxes. From the subcompact Kicks up to the Armada, it has something for sale in virtually every possible nook and cranny of the people-mover segment, but almost all of these trucks (and trucklets) took a beating in 2019. Only the baby Kicks managed to improve on its 2018 sales, which isn't saying a whole lot, considering it was barely sold in 2018 to begin with.  In fact, the bonus volume contributed by Kicks helps obscure just how poorly some of Nissan's key offerings performed last year. Combined Rogue and Rogue Sport sales slid 15%; Murano was down more than 18%; the Pathfinder and Armada managed to pace the general industry, dropping 2.8 and 1.9%, respectively, but the astute reader will note at this point that we've yet to single out any bright spots. The news was even worse on the truck side. Frontier was down 9.1%. Titan? Down 37.5%. Crossovers and SUVs are selling. Trucks, even from import brands, are also selling. Toyota's mid-size Tacoma was up in 2019; both it and the full-size Tundra still more than tripled the volume of their Nissan competitors. Further muddying the waters, Honda managed its year-over-year volume increase without selling a full-sized pickup at all.  What, then, is Nissan's problem? To borrow an oft-used phrase, "It's the product, stupid." The most striking evidence of this issue is the Rogue, which competes in the compact crossover segment — a collection of vehicles that essentially sell themselves.

DC fast charging not as damaging to EV batteries as expected

As convenient as DC fast charging is, there have been lots of warnings that repeated dumping of so many electrons into an electric vehicle's battery pack in such a short time would reduce the battery's life. While everyone agrees that DC fast charging does have some effect on battery life, it may not be as bad as previously expected. Over on SimanaitisSays, Dennis Simanaitis, writes about a recent presentation by Matt Shirk of the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) called DC Fast, Wireless, And Conductive Charging Evaluation Projects (PDF) that describes an ongoing test of four 2012 Nissan Leaf EVs that are being charged in two pairs of two. One pair only recharges from 50-kW DC fast chargers, which the other two sip from 3.3-kW Level 2 chargers exclusively. Otherwise, the cars are operated pretty much the same: climate is automatically set to 72 degrees, are driven on public roads around Phoenix, AZ and have the same set of dedicated drivers is rotated through the four cars. "Degradation depends more on the miles traveled than on the nature of recharging." What's most interesting are the charts on page seven of Shirk's presentation (click the image above to enlarge), which show the energy capacity of each of the four vehicles. When they were new, the four batteries were each tested to measure their energy capacity and given a 0 capacity loss baseline. They were then tested at 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 and 40,000 miles, and at each point, the DC-only EVs had roughly the same amount of battery loss as the Level 2 test subjects. The DC cars did lose a bit more at each test, but only around a 25-percent overall loss after 40k, compared to 23 percent for the Level 2 cars. Simanaitis' takeaway is that, "INL data suggest that the amount of degradation depends more on the miles traveled than on the nature of recharging." The tests are part of the INLs' Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity work and a final report is forthcoming. These initial numbers from IPL do mesh with other research into DC fast charging, though. Mitsubishi said daily fast charging wouldn't really hurt the battery in the i-MiEV and MIT tests of a Fisker Karma battery showed just 10-percent loss over 1,500 rapid charge-discharge cycles.