Scoop! Letter From Car and Driver to Nissan Leaked to TTAC
Dear Nissan,
You may have noticed (we hope someone does) that BMW's M3 beat your GT-R in our recent "Vision Quest" comparo. We want to apologize for this. Please don't feel bad. The GT-R really is a great car, as witnessed by the fact that we rated it higher than the Porsche 911 Turbo. But as BMW is secretly our parent company, they demanded that their M3 win any and all comparisons. As we are contractually obligated to have a BMW win at least four comparisons a year, well, it was your turn.
We did give Nissan the inside back cover and wrote a nice one-year update on the Altima. There are also a couple of complimentary articles about the Infiniti G35xS and the FX50S. Oh and by the way, that FX50S is an impressive ride, but you really need to do something about the silly "bionic cheetah" moniker that you've attached to it.
Anyway, rest assured that we feel very badly about placing the GT-R behind the M3. Even though the M3 is slower in the quarter mile, 0-60 and around a track, the BMW does have a bigger back seat and more usable trunk space.
Again, please take solace in the fact that your GT-R totally demolished the Porsche 911 Turbo, which is a worthless car. By "worthless" we mean it's an OK enough car, but Porsche doesn't spend enough money advertising in our magazine. When was the last time you saw a two-page ad for a 911 or an inside cover ad for the Boxster? I wish we could stop covering their lame cars altogether, but they've weaseled themselves into an important position in the automotive industry with all of their performance, history and heritage. So try as we might, we can't ignore them.
Enough about the third-place finisher, the over-powered 911 Turbo. We are here to apologize for that first place finish awarded to the M3.
If we were really honest, the M3 wouldn't have been in the comparison. It's in a totally different class than your GT-R. The thing is, our comparo is the first in a new series with cars competing out of their league. We think our advertisers (that's you!) will love this new marketing plan. It will give prestige to the lower end cars. Next month, a Nissan Rogue will beat the Porsche Cayenne. Just think how Nissan salesmen all over the country will be able to promote the Rogue as the "SUV that beat the Cayenne!"
The month after that, the Nissan Sentra will win against the Lotus Exige. Of course, we need to keep our journalistic integrity. So we'll use the base Exige vs. the Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V. The little Lotus won't stand a chance. I mean have you seen the back seat in an Exige? No, you haven't, because there isn't one. The trunk? Tiny! Rear doors? Nada! The Nissan Sentra is obviously the superior car. A lot of automotive reporting outlets don't have the courage to compare an Exige to a Sentra, but we think it's time–once again– to put your money where our mouth is.
If you think about it, this will work out better for Nissan in the long run. The GT-R can withstand a second place finish to the benchmark BMW M3. (Sorry, we're contractually obligated to put the word "benchmark" at least once every time we write about BMW, and technically we are writing about them.) Anyway, as the first year supply of your GT-R is sold out, what do you care? It's not as if someone's going to say, I WAS going to buy a Maxima, but now that the GT-R got beat by a Bimmer I'll buy a high-mileage 3-Series.
Bottom line (our first and only concern): we're truly sorry for the second place finish to the M3. We wanted to write it as a tie, but the Germans have no sense of humor. (Just imagine if we'd written "Every other manufacturer should give up on building their own cars and just make GT-Rs instead.")
But we don't want this article to damage our mutually profitable relationship. And if you want to be mad at someone, have you seen what that "The Truth About Cars" web site is saying about the GT-R's record around the ‘ring? The nerve of some people. Adiosu!
Yours sincerely,
Car and Driver Magazine
More by Gary Powers
Comments
Join the conversation
The C&D article explains, in its introduction, quite clearly what the intent is. There are iconic sports cars in our world. Cars legendary for being the objects of desire, the benchmark of performance, the disruptors in many respects. These cars -- and there are very few of them -- include the Porsche 911 Turbo, the BMW M3, and the Corvette. With a new, iconic-before-it-even-got-here sports car on the landscape, C&D set out to see "where it fits" on this landscape. Thus the invitation to the Porsche 911 Turbo and BMW M3 (the article explains why the Corvette wasn't there). That's a very specific and, to the involved enthusiast, a very fascinating and interesting project. And that's what the comparo laid out: where each car stands in legendary-sports-car-dom. The Turbo is blindingly fast, gloriously luxurious and expensive; the GT-R is supercar-fast, easiest to go fast in and rough around the edges. The M3 is connected to the driver, telepathic in its responses, still pretty darn fast, and livable everyday; a whole greater than its parts. Et voilà. In calmer, more lucide moments, I humbly believe that most of use here would agree with the strenghts and positioning of each. Swervin, you make a very valid point about the cover headline, and indeed, that point is granted. But that is simply a function of the necessities of the marketplace, where the cover has to have something that draws -- witness the scantily-clad girls on the covers of lesser car rags. But where it counts, inside the magazine, in the article, C&D did -- and does -- a good job.
First I really do like the GTR. Second I probably would buy the M3 over it... as if that we're a choice I'd actually have to make! And third TAC has in my opinion shown the tendency to rank BMWs higher that other manufactures as well, so maybe you guys are just bitter.