2012 Nissan Nv2500 Hd S Cargo Van High Roof 4.0l V6 27k Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

A realistic approach to fixing Mitsubishi

There are going to be a lot of words written about what Nissan needs to do with Mitsubishi in the coming months and years in the interest of turning the brand around. After Nissan's purchase of a controlling stake in the diamond star brand, there's been more interest in Mitsubishi thanks to the potential of platform sharing and plenty of cash from Nissan-Renault to get the juices flowing again. But, while some have been doing their best to advocate for the return of the 3000GT, Evolution, and even the Starion - Many of these posts forget the reality of the market we live in today. As much as we like to look back fondly at the sports coupes of the '90s, a byproduct of the insane cash flows all the Japanese manufacturers had at the time, the reality of today puts a much greater emphasis on what is most-boring; Crossover SUVs, alongside mid-size and compact sedans. We do need to ask a fundamental question, how much Mitsubishi is enough to be able to continue to call the cars Mitsubishis? Aside from slight product revisions and reconfigurations, Mitsubishi (at least in North America) has been largely dependent on the same GS platform and 4B1 engines that date back to their long-time partnership with Chrysler (and Hyundai) in the mid '00s. Admittedly, the chassis and engines have served the company well, underpinning a wide variety of vehicles sold around the world, and seeing quite a few revisions to at least attempt to keep products competitive. But, the GS chassis is old, heavy, and severely out of date - and when matched to the underpowered 4B1 series engines - make for largely uncompetitive offerings in the market. While something like the Outlander Sport is indeed interesting compared to a Honda CR-V, it is by no means the smart choice in the segment. So, going forward, unless Mitsubishi has had a skunkworks of sorts developing their chassis and engine replacements over the past few years, what exactly are they planning to do for their bread-and-butter models? I think the straightforward answer is without a doubt the Nissan North America parts bin. With so many of their models selling well, and for the most part, are reasonably well-reviewed, it would be quite simple to adapt the chassis and powertrain to Mitsubishi's liking to create a high-volume alternative to what is currently available now.

Nissan ZEOD RC on track and from behind the wheel

The Nissan ZEOD RC hybrid racecar has had mixed success in its competition life. It was invented to do a completely electric, high-speed lap at the 24 Hours of Le Mans, which it was able to do in practice. However, when the big event actually came, the car lasted less than an hour before it had to bow out with transmission issues. Nissan hasn't completely given up on its experiment, though. The experience (and possibly some of the tech) is going to help with the GT-R LM racer next year, and now the ZEOD is getting its chance to see how it handles the Top Gear test track.
Unfortunately, it's not The Stig piloting the ZEOD; instead, the magazine's motoring editor Ollie Marriage is the lucky man for the job. The car's sharp shape seems to be a good metaphor for how it handles because it just seems to dart around the track. Its tiny, turbocharged 1.5-liter engine with 400 horsepower and two electric motors put out a claimed 750 horsepower, and that seems like plenty for the relatively short Top Gear course.
As usual of Top Gear, the cinematography here is fantastic, and a second video shows off a single lap of the course from around the car. It's amazing to watch, especially with its big screen constantly showing the camera view out of the rear. Scroll down to see both.

Suppliers love Toyota and Honda: Why that matters to you

You might think that a survey of automotive suppliers and their relationship with OEMs is the automotive equivalent of nerd prom. In some ways that's what the North American Automotive OEM-Supplier Working Relations Index (WRI) is. The study, the 17th annual conducted by Planning Perspectives Inc., is based on input from 652 salespeople from 108 Tier One suppliers, or, PPI points out, 40 of the top 50 automotive suppliers in North America. Suppliers to General Motors, Ford, FCA, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. But the results have consequences in terms of tens of millions of dollars for OEMs - and in the quality, technology, and cost of the next vehicle you buy. There are a couple of ways to look at the results of the WRI. One is, "So what else is new?" And the other is, "Damn! How did that happen?" The study looks at five relationship areas — OEM Supplier Relationship; OEM Communication; OEM Help; OEM Hindrance; Supplier Profit Opportunity — within six purchasing areas — Body-in-White; Chassis; Electrical/Electronics; Exterior; Interior; Powertrain. In the overall rankings, Toyota is on top for the 15 th time in 17 years, with a score of 328. Honda, the only company to best Toyota (in 2009 and 2010), comes in second, at 319. Those two companies, explains John Henke, president of PPI, have collaborative working arrangements with colleagues and suppliers alike built into the very fabric of their cultures. This, however, is not a situation where one can readily conclude it is about "Japanese companies," because the third company with headquarters on the island of Honshu, Nissan, came in dead last. This is the "How did that happen?" portion. The Nissan score of 203 puts it 125 points behind Toyota. There hasn't been a number that low since the then-Chrysler Corp. scored 187 in 2010, when the company was clawing its way out of the recession. Clearly, the suppliers don't feel particularly engaged by the buyers at Nissan. Henke explains that whether a company does well or not on the WRI is rather simple. All people do things based on what they're measured on. "If you're measured on taking 10% out of your annual buy, you immediately know how to do it. But if you're also measured on improving relations, suddenly there is a new dynamic as to what you can do to achieve both.