Nissan Refuses To Replace “abused” Gt-r Transmission

[GearHead]

The word coming from one disgruntled American R35 GT-R owner is that Nissan has refused to replace a damaged GT-R transmission “due to abuse”. The unhappy owner has recently relayed his dealings with an American Nissan dealership as he attempts to have his destroyed GT-R transmission covered under warranty.

Nissan however claims that the black-box computer has registered “excessive” driving with the VDC (Vehicle Dynamic Control) switched off, which must be done in order to use the Launch Control function, which voids the warranty as stated in the handbook.

Now you can be certain there’s more to both sides of this argument. Of interest though is that Nissan has endowed the GT-R with a Launch Control function that seemingly voids the warranty if you choose to use it. What point is a 3.4 second 0-100km/h sprint time if the only way to achieve it is by voiding your warranty?

What’s not mentioned is how many times the VDC was switched off or Launch Control was used but the repair bill is reportedly in the vicinity of USD$20,000 (which suggests a completely cactus ‘box). Tuning Garages across Japan have been working with the GT-R for some time now and at this stage, to our knowledge, only MCR have come forward to say they’ve had gearbox issues, and that’s after some very hefty track use and more power than standard.

It will be very interesting to see how this one plays out. Should the usage of an included factory option be responsible for voiding your warranty? If not, where’s the line in the sand that differentiates ‘expected’ from ‘excessive’ use?

Keep an eye on the thread over at NAGTROC to keep abreast of this evolving situation.

Source : http://www.themotorreport.com.au/9975/niss...r-transmission/

[Mean Green z28]

I posted the actual forum thread about the guy's experience with Nissan in the other thread about the GT-R. VDC in this case does NOT mean Vehicle Dynamic control; in this case it is Vehicle Differential Control and is only supposed to be turned off if you're stuck in mud/snow and to rock the car to get it out ... this is a lame ass attempt at trying to void warranties. If a car came with Launch control and it required disabling the VDC to access it, AND a big part of their advertising was this function and level of performance, it should be covered under warranty. It's not like the owner has to go under the hood and swap out a wiring harness plug to activate it, it's right there on the damn center console and activated in like 2-3 seconds. They either need to warranty this f**kup of theirs or disable the whole function by a dealer recall program, or offer to buy the cars back (like Mazda did with the RX7 Autos) and disable this in future production and start advertising the 4+ sec. 0-60 times that's possible without Launch control.

[GearHead]

While going through the original thread in the nissan GTR forum i found this link which talks about MCR's experience with the new gearbox..

Word is getting around the traps that the transmission in the famously destructive R35 GT-R may be wearing out faster than expected. MCR, one of the lucky Japanese tuning houses to have a GT-R, has reported that initial inspections are showing unexpected signs of wear in the transmission; raising fears that the GT-R is not as flawless as we’d all hoped.

Perhaps if it were a more expensive car, the gearbox would be less likely to shoot out random cogs and cut your leg off at the knee. Not that it’s going to do that.

MCR’s inspection has lead them to conclude that the transmission’s lifespan—at least if used as heavily as they do—may be no longer than 12 months if the engine’s power is tweaked. Of course, with the V-Spec model on the way, we may soon see a stronger gearbox available.

source: http://www.themotorreport.com.au/4464/the-...-r-has-a-fault/

Edited October 17, 2008 by GearHead

[dinosh]

This should be the reason on the delaying of the launch of the V-spec.