Talk:Nissan Skyline

Photos

I removed a couple of photos from certain sections, as there seems to be too many photos for some models and not very many for others. Was creating too much white space as well. Also, the ones i removed were of the same model, or close to, of photos already on the page for that generation. If people want to see what the cars look like in more detail, there are numerous search engines out there to do so!

Instead of eighty pics of each car model variation, perhaps photos of different models should take a priority. SkylineObsession (talk) 12:39, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

R34 Getrag 6-speed, Stronger?

Someone had mentioned, in the article, that the R34's 6-speed Getrag is stronger (i assume they mean stronger than the previous 5-speed). this is very incorrect. it is very much universally agreed upon that the Getrag 6-speed is considerably weaker than the R32/33 5-speed. i removed the word 'stronger' from the mention, not because i know that it is weaker, but simply because the claim in unsupported. Impreziv (talk) 07:21, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

incorrect: Getrag is stronger. R32 case is weak. R32&33 3rd gear is weak. R34 is much stronger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.68.240.66 (talk) 08:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

it is stronger. how many 1000bhp 33's use the oem box? none. even top secret fitted a 34 box to they 200mph r33. also plenty of 1000bhp rb30 engines 34's around with the oem box too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.71.124 (talk) 20:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

L20ET being claimed as first Japanese turbocharged engine

The 1980 Toyota MA42 Celica Supra was powered by the M-TUE, a turbocharged 145hp 2.0L SOHC 12 valve straight six derived from the 2000GT. Following Toyota's typical production runs, this means this 1980 model year was introduced between August and September 1979. If this article is going to claim that the Skyline's L20ET was Japan's first turbocharged production engine, we will need sources to verify the first month of production of this model Skyline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.162.220.157 (talk) 06:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

• please note, that in the Japanese market, cars do not follow "model years" like we do in North America. a car's "year" is EXACTLY its manufacture month/year. if you are talking about a 1980 Celica, it was made and delivered in 1980! Impreziv (talk) 07:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

RB30 Engine Transplants

What does anybody think about adding a section mentioning the trend for transplanting the RB30 engine into the Skyline? Banalt 20:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

• Not a bad idea, but the topic is covered more or less on the RB Engine page.. I'm not sure it's overly essential thus.Dread Specter 22:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

• It isnt really notable information. Refer to Wikipedia's guidelines on Notability. think about this in another context.. would it be worth mentioning in an article about Strawberrys, that some people like eating them with Whipping Cream? no, that kind of information isn't Encyclopedic. Impreziv (talk) 07:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

My uncle Lee has an R33GT-s skyline, he has constructed it so it goes much faster than most GTR standard versions. Many people choose to buy broken down and/or torn apart skylines just for the pure pleasure of knowing that it was you who did it. Take Jacob Modica with his BLITZ egnition sports engine. aparently he made that car from a template —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.133.104.147 (talk • contribs) 04:48, July 3, 2007

• Thanks for sharing.... Impreziv (talk) 07:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

GT-R's & non GT-R's

What is the deal with splitting up (in particular, R32, R33 and R34 sections) the short model summary's into GT-R and non GT-R models? This has been done with R33 and R34 but not the R32 section? For consistancy's sake should the R32 section have the GT-R models listed seperately too? (SkylineObsession 21:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC))

Information that don't make sense ; please review

"The names were brought into line with the home U.S. and Japanese markets with the launch of the FJR30 series in 1981". That part of the article reads like the skyline was introduced in the US with the dr30 series, which is false as far as I know ( No skyline were sold by nissan in the US).

Also, someone wrote that "the skyline was introduced in mainstream by Gran turismo", or so. That's not factual, so I'm removing it. I don't think there is any general consensus about that statement. Dread Specter 03:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• When I rewrote the R30 section earlier this month I extensively reworded that first line (and removed the false USA reference); it was actually meant to convey the fact that from the R30 series onwards the car was now universally known as the Nissan Skyline across all of the various export markets. For example in Australia and New Zealand, previous generations were sold as the Datsun 240K and Datsun 280C up until that point. Hope that helps your understanding of it. Decypher 05:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, definitely. Thanks for clarifying that information. Dread Specter 00:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

External links section

Apart from the potential size it could become i think informative websites and (Skyline) related car club websites should be both allowed in this section, and clubs should be allowed whether or not it is a localised club or not - some clubs can have a hard time attracting new members and having a link to their site on this would be invaluable.

However i think at the minimum the club should be officially incorporated or otherwise as a genuine car club, i can personally vouch for Skylines Downunder (skylinesdownunder.com) and Southern Skyline Enthusiasts (southernskylines.com) - both are incorporated and well established.

If fansites are included then the page will become redicuously long, i had my site in that section for a while (godzilla.netfirms.com) but won't be including it again for a number of reasons.

I just thought i'd bring this up as a few people seem to be cropping the list of external sites every now and then without (seemingly) too much thought behind it. User:SkylineObsession

• In my opinion, car club websites don't belong here. Let's not forget that wikipedia is, afterall, an encyclopedia. In a real encyclopedia, you wouldn't find any links to those kinds of website (even if there was enough room to put them), simply because the goal here is to inform the people about the car, and not to recruit them into car websites. Google can help people join car clubs, if they want to. And also, no matter how notorious skylines australia is, there isn't a single article about that forum, nor any mention of that forum anywhere in wikipedia ! That means that this forum doesn't qualify for notoriety I guess, and that also means that this link isn't needed, as are any other good websites that are forums, IMO... Let's try to prevent link overloading here, and keep the links to a useful minimum. That's at least what the template says (Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. )Dread Specter 03:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, but people can sometimes find out a lot more about their car by visiting a car club website so that itself should be reason enough for them to stay. But if you're really that aligned to the rules then perhaps a HUGE remove-all-the-inappropriate/personal-site-links mission should be undertaken, which would involve editing thousands of pages i suspect. User:SkylineObsession

• I agree with Dread Specter. Editors are seemingly unaware of Wikipedia:External links. There are search engines to find that stuff. I think the other non-forum links are also unnecessary. But if there are to be any external links they need to be of a certain quality. There was an under-construction website full of spelling errors that clearly didn't belong there. I don't think a motoring journalist's road test of a car belongs there either. JBSkyline is better, but I still think unnecessary. Also the ongoing edit war about the membership fee of certain UK clubs - for goodness sake! RB30DE 21:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

• Reason behind the edit war behind membership fees: If Wikipedia is going to direct people to a site that they have to pay to join, they have a right to know in my opinion Banalt 22:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

• May I also add that even thus the section was cleaned a while ago, an influx of new external links is being added, some of them totaly unnotorious, like Russia nismo club, or Sweden Skyline club. No offense intented here, but I don't think anyone cares about those sites, and certainly, no one who looks at the "Skyline" article in wikipedia will go visit the biggest nimso club in russia, or a skyline club in a country totaly unrelated to where this car was sold. Think about it. If you know nothing about a certain car, lets say a anssiN enilykS, will you go look on every single country's biggest forum, or you will go on a reputed, credible source of information, like the manifacturer's website ? and lets also try to get the big picture here. When you go on the Rx-7's entry in wiki, or the Supra's , or the Lancer Evo's, do you see links to all the cars clubs in every single country ? No. Same should be with the skyline.

That's my opinion. Dread Specter 21:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

• If there's a Enilyks club for a given country, there's obviously a Enilyks community, so what determines whether the community is valid for inclusion here? (I would tend to cull them all, but I know that's not sustainable, they will be re-added.) If it's based on Enilyks sales in a particular territory - the cars were not sold in North America, so those clubs should disappear - Singapore might be a more worthy inclusion on those grounds, but I know that won't be accepted by the masses either. Perhaps English language could be another criterion? Swedish link from Swedish wiki, Russian from Russian, etc. I expect the list will continue to grow/trim/grow/trim. Never mind. RB30DE 20:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• Right Banalt, I wasn't aware of that edit war, but I agree with you. It becomes some kind of publicity for that website to advertise it here. Dread Specter 02:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
• I don't think you'd find that sort of information in an encyclopaedia though, and paying membership fees for a car club is hardly exceptional, unreasonable, or notable. Most any sort of incorporated body will have fees, and at least one other club on the list also has fees. I think it's not an issue. I also think people will quickly discover any fees themselves when they investigate any given car club. RB30DE 20:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• I think you're right on your first message rb30, obviously, there are car clubs for any given country for a certain vehicle if even a small amount of them are available there. To a certain point, there can even be a car enthusiats club in a contry where that perticular vehicle isn't even sold ! So yes, there should definitely be restrictions on what kind of links should be put there. I think your solution is rather appropriate, that is, posting links that concern only english languge on the english wikipedia article. But there is also a notoriety problem with most of the links, and their revelencies are doubtful most of the time. I think that only skylines australia should be put there (I'm personally a member of GTRC, and I'm, canadian, but I think it is a known fact in the skyline community that skylines australia is THE benchmark in terms of information, and that's basically the only reason why any car clubs should be listed. Maybe this one should be kept and put as an external link, but I do think that the car club section has no valid reason to be there. Obviously, unaware editors will repetedly add links to x country's car club, but I do think that for the sake of the lenght of the article, those should be removed as they are added. At worst, keep the most notorious club form relevent countries (Canada, New Zeland, Australia, UK and Japan, namely) where a substancial amount of Skylines already are imported, and who have perticular information specefic to the country (i.e. GTRC's section "Legalese", about the laws applicable to skylines in canada specifically, for example). And I don't recall if it'S possible, but maybe a partial protection could be added to the external links section in order to prevent unaware users from adding new links everytime. As for the appropriateness of mentionning the entry fee for a certain car club, well in the present format of the section, it does seem adequate to me that this information be mentionned. Dread Specter 02:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• You raise another item that I think should be deleted - specific car importing laws for each country - that's not a property of the Nissan Skyline. If the entry fee is added - how about something restrained like "Club X - Fee Y"? (Previously there was stuff like "but you have to pay £25" or "the only free club in the UK".) RB30DE 07:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

• Agree with you on both terms. In the case importation laws section would be removed, it would be important to keep a few links in the external link section regarding this issue for certain countries (i.e. link to GTRC's legalese section), IMHO. Even thus this topic might not necesairly belong to an encyclopedia entry, it sure does belong to a "futher reading" topic, which is covered thoroughly on the major forums covering Skylines. This entry rather belongs to the different agencies responsible for vehicle regulations (i.e. Transport canada's page on wiki), rather than on the actual cars themselves. Dread Specter 05:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

• A link to Grey import vehicles would also help with replacing the stuff that's there now. RB30DE 06:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• I agree that links to clubs etc that aren't in english shouldn't be on the english version of this page. And perhaps Skyline clubs in countries where there are not many of them (USA?) probably don't need to be on here either. Really only clubs from the UK, New Zealand and Australia belong here i think (Japanese ones wouldn't be in english?). As far as i'm aware, New Zealand still has the second highest amount of Nissan Skylines in the world after Japan. Australia i think is third followed by the UK i assume. Skylines Downunder (NZ) was one of the first Skyline clubs out there and was the one used by Skylines Australia before they disbanded and formed SAU. Equally, Southern Skylines also used to be a part of Skylines Downunder until we disbanded from them and now we cover owners & fans of Skylines/Cefiro's/Laurels/Stagea's etc in the entire South Island of New Zealand (but still organise meets etc with SDU, we aren't a rivial club). SkylineObsession 07:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• OK there's a new UK Skyline club edit war going on, with Banalt at the helm again. [diff] He or she is replacing the link to the forum listed with a similar looking link that redirects to his/her forum. The correct link is: http://www.skyline-owners-club.com/. Banalt is replacing this with the misleading: skylineownersclub.com/. This link actually redirects to: skylineowners.com/forum/ which is the forum Banalt is pushing. The entry fee of the other club is now in the list. There's no reason to vandalise the page by replacing the link with a fake one. Please stop. RB30DE 06:44, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• I'll keep an eye out for him. I'll notify him to the admins, he's got an history of problematic edits. Also, the idea of a link to gray imports is very adquate. I'll start the changes now. Dread Specter 16:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ok, I apologise for misleading edits. I thought that I was actually reverting vandalism done by others believe it or not. Consider the matter closed. Also, somebody has removed the membership fee post as discussed and agreed with in an earlier post on here...... P.S Who says I'm affiliated with either? Banalt 17:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• In that case I apologise. I replaced the fee, not sure when that disappeared. RB30DE 09:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Fair enough mate, my fault really for not discussing on here before I changed it. All's well that ends well! Banalt 11:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Oh great, you guys came to be friends again, lol. Thanks banalt for resolving everything peacefully, I must admit I too thought you were doing "crooked" edits. Please confirm to me that you're not spamming the link to your own website thus, as I had added a warning on your talk page on that topic. Also, what do you guys think of the transition I made to gray imports ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dread Specter (talk • contribs) 23:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC).

• Gray Import section seems fine to me. I'm not the best person to ask though as I don't get involved with the importation side, I usually buy my imports as the second owner to save the headache of SVA etc. With the links, they did end up going to the other website but as you can see the URL's are ambiguous at best. As I said, poor editing on my part sorry. Banalt 11:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

V36 SKYLINE ISSUES

please do not delete the info about the V36 nissan skyline.

the car does have a 3.5L V6 with 315hp please do not remove

V36 SKYLINE In the timeline

why is this being deleted with the info on the v35 skyline for?

GT-R

The first GT-R Skyline appeared in February 1969. Called the PGC-10 internally, it used the 2.0 L <-- change the PGC 10 to KGC 10

Most overrated car in the history of automobiles CJW 70.26.11.45 00:00, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

who here actualy owns a skyline?User:spinnanz

I'm sure there are a lot, but GT-R? I highly doubt. 1698

I have an r33 gts25t, drove an r32 GTR a workmate owns, made my car feel so slow :( I'll have to post some pics in the article of thr r32 gtr next to a standard r32 so the differences can be seen User:spinnanz

I have an R32 GTS-4 Skyline. User:SkylineObsession

I also drive a Skyline Dread Specter 03:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I have one, too :) An R32 GT-R Space Turbo (talk) 20:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

How about a bit on model names the factory gave to Skylines in reference to adverts, like Ken-Mary (C110), Newman(R30). There was one called Jade and Hakosuka(c10)

I rem the Paul Newman edition R30, I donk know of the diff between it and the normal R30's. User:spinnanz

GT-R Turbos Stock & N1

I see there's a bit of changing going on with regard to GT-R turbos. I think that what is in the article now is not correct, but I'm not going to change it now. Specifically, according to my information, the R34 N1 turbo supports higher power than the R33 N1 turbo. Here's the information I have, if you have more information or different information, please contribute:

Stock Turbo

• R32 GT-R - Compressor A/R 0.42 Turbine A/R 0.48 Ceramic Turbine, Sleeve Bearing
• R33 GT-R - Compressor A/R 0.42 Turbine A/R 0.48 Ceramic Turbine, Ball(?) Bearing
• R34 GT-R - Compressor A/R 0.53 Turbine A/R 0.48 Steel Turbine, Ball Bearing

N1 Turbo

• R32 GT-R - Compressor A/R 0.42 Turbine A/R 0.64 Steel Turbine, Sleeve Bearing
• R33 GT-R - Compressor A/R 0.42 Turbine A/R 0.64 Steel Turbine, Sleeve Bearing
• R34 GT-R - Compressor A/R 0.53 Turbine A/R 0.64 Steel Turbine, Ball Bearing

All the compressor & turbine housings are identical externally (including size), apart from A/R markings. The difference are in the internal machining, the shape of the wheels, and the core. The standard R32 & R33 turbos have slightly different compressor characteristics, even though the A/R is the same. The N1 R32 & R33 turbos are identical, no changes made between models.

To further confuse thing, Nissan/Garrett produced another lot of turbos for Group A. I've got conflicting information about that. 210.0.100.153 10:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Most overrated car ever?

Most overrated car in the history of automobiles. Perhaps a tie with the Toyota Supra CJ DUB 18:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Do u have nothing better to do than pop ur POV all over the talk page? Put down some facts if u have something to say. --Preveen 13:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

The cars not overrated, it's just one of the best ever produced. - Ben

LOL. Sounds like POV to me ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^. Best ever produced? Man you guys really believe that don't you? CJ DUB 23:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Those opinions don't belong here. Keep them for yourself if they don't contribute to wikipedia. Thanks.Dread Specter 03:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I can understand why it can be abit of an overrated car. A lot of "ricer" fans see it as the ultimate and get a lot of kids prasing it in video games. And yes it is one of the best cars ever produced at an affordable price with similar performance to Euro sports cars - Ajax 11:54AM 4th April 07 (GTM)

Seems some people need to be reminded that this is not a forum, and only the discussions on improving the article are allowed and wanted. Thanks.Dread Specter

So Dread Specter, how would you "Clarify" this "Overratedness" of the Skyline? I see you have said you drive 1 yourself as do I and so if what I am saying is irrelevent then why is there a section on this and should it be deleted?- Ajax 5th April 07 (GTM)

It should not be deleted because no consensus has been reached on deleting this yet, and for the moment, this page serves as a reminder to those who would be tempted to open the subject again. To understand why your comments are irrelevent, please consult the talk page guidlines.I've left you the template on your page so you can understand better.Dread Specter 02:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

UK SALES FIGURES

Only 80 r34 were imported in uk from T to 53 plate

What has the number of how many cars were imported somwhere got to do with how good they are? if thet were the case the mazda MX5 is the best sports car in the world.

Question for the experts? Were there any Nissan Skylines(year or model) that were ever illegal in the US, if so what years and models? Please e-mail results to: silentkhaos9@earthlink.net or send to my wikipedia page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Silentkhaos9 or just post them up here on this Nissan Skyline wikipedia page, any are fine. Need to know for a school paper (Need info. as soon as possible, Paper due: May 2006) plus for my own knowledge. Thank you!

One of the fastest all-around cars in the world

"In 1999, a revised chassis and incremental updates to the GT-R model proved once and for all that the R34 was one of the fastest all-around cars in the world. It has held many track records and won many JGTC championships."

Im aware that the Skyline GTR's are fast cars, but saying its "One of the fastest all-round cars in the world" is a bit questionable. Fast, yes, but what about the likes of the Porsche 911? Also, a JGTC Skyline is extremely different from a road going Skyline. In America, if Ford said that the Ford Fusion could reach speeds over 180mph, they'd be lying. So the same should apply here.

Porsche 911 is a comparable car in performance. For example watch Best Motoring International Vol 2., Vol 3., unmodified 911s & 966s race unmodified GT-Rs amongst others. The sentence was "one of the fastest" not "the fastest" and it is. JGTC cars are restricted in output, some of the special edition Skylines are more powerful. 210.0.100.153 12:51, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

HAHAHA. No it's not. Skylines are overrated. Stock, showroom Porsche 911s are by leaps and bound superior performers to stock and BUYABLE Skylines (i.e. no one off or Z-tune nonsense). CJ DUB 02:45, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I enjoy the futility of arguing about cars on the internet. The Nurburgring production lap record was set by all the R32-34 GTRs upon their debut. The superior Porsche 911s could not match the GTRs speed, even with more horsepower to draw upon. It was a Porsche 966 that finally beat the R34 record. 210.0.100.153 06:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you all want to keep going? Or stop like you should? This is a talk page that contains article related discussion. This has obviously degraded into something else.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 18:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The Nordschleife is one of the measures of a sports car. Several times in recent history, a GT-R has been the fastest production car on the Ring. This (or other concrete measures) would qualify the statement. Otherwise perhaps it should be removed? 210.0.100.153 09:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Stop living in the past. The Skyline has rested on its laurels; the lap times you speak of were surpassed YEARS ago. Have a look here: 1. You can see that the best Skyline record was rapidly eclipsed by a Porsche 993 and a few years later by the Corvette C5/Z06, not the new one. CJ DUB 06:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't the GTR V Spec the fastest "all wheel drive" car around the nurburgring (not fastest RWD)? I'm not sure about the GT2 or the GT3, can someone clarify? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.99.233 (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

CJ doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, nor should he talk shit about cars he could never afford

Hey man, I'm just citing a page that lists about 15-20 automotive authorities that have tested cars on the Ring. I think they kinda know more than you. The Skyline records were surpassed soon after they were made. Since then there have been MUCH faster cars on the ringCJ DUB 14:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for sticking to facts and not opinions everyone... and please respect the "no personnal attacks" policy, even if you don't agree with someone, and rather remind that user to stick to useful content to wikipedia. Let's remember this is not a forum...

Thanks. Dread Specter 03:30, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The future in the United States = Press release

I dunno about you, but this looks to me like a copy/paste of a press release, which is a violation of Wikipedia rules? --293.xx.xxx.xx 07:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I think (and its only I THINK until I find it) this was an entry in an auto blog or summin. The facts are right, but I agree that its PROBABLY a copy and paste. I'll look for the source article. And If I find it, I'll see about editing the section. --Preveen 12:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

HR31 Skylines

I've edited the information regarding the R31 series skylines, in particular the redtop RB20DET motors. It seems many people don't know that there exists 3 distinctly different redtop RB20 variants;

-the early "NICS" motors which are identifiable by a NICS plate on the top of the intake, and the use of twelve small intake runners from the plenum to the cylinder head, leading to a butterfly plate which reduces effective port size at low revs for better response (basically closes off 6 runners). Tentatively I'd say these were 1986-late 1987 production.

-the later "ECCS" motors which adopt the ECCS system, as well as a new manifold with six much larger runners instead of 12 small ones, but still retains the butterfly plate. The turbocharger is slightly better than the NICS item, and the electronics slightly more sophisticated. My best guess is that the ECCS motors were from late 1987/early 1988 until production ended, my personal car, a 1988 HR31 GTS coupe, has the ECCS motor.

- RB20DET-R "ECCS" with a large T04(?) sized turbo on a stainless steel tube manifold, and a large front mounted intercooler. This motor was fitted to the limited Group A homologation production of the HR31 GTS-R, and made 210ps. It may or may not have different camshafts and other internal differences. It is possibly identifiable by the "RB20DET-R" intake manifold badge.

Please note the HR31 ECCS motor and the HCR32 ECCS motors are NOT the same, the block, head, intake manifolds, turbos, electronics and many other components are completely different.

seventhskyline@gmail.com

220.253.133.29 13:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the information, I had been wondering about that. The old ECCS thing is funny, it's a JECS board, which was a joint Nissan/Bosch venture. Was NICS a Nissan only effort? I found it strange that I used to have ECCS on a 1984 L20ET, and yet there were RBs later than that running on something else. It'd be nice to know the history behind the engine control. 210.0.100.153 23:11, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

GT-R Engine Confirmed?

GT-R Engine VQ36DETT

According to this, it is a 3.6L twin turbo. This front is quite different again from the Tokyo Auto Salon prototype, has some family resemblance to the BNR34 to my eyes. Still waiting for some different sources. Anyone else seen anything?

Also it's got a big Skyline badge between the signature afterburners. So perhaps it will be a Skyline after all? RB30DE 21:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I do believe I have seen those shots before, and I wouldn't be so quick to consider it accurate. Show an announcement from nissan stating such, or confirmations independent of this site and it would be worth noting. If it goes in the article for now be sure to note the fact that it is as of this moment simply as claim made by an independent web site.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 05:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

1952? 1955? 1957? Which is it?

Right now we have three conflicting years for the introduction of the Skyline. The model history says '52, the sidebar says '57 and '55. Can anyone shed some light into this? Bal00 00:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I found a source for 1955 so added that, in the absence of anything else. RB30DE 23:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Found [Nissan] themselves saying 1957 so changed it to that. RB30DE 07:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

DR30 Specs

Just wanted to point out that to the contrary, the DR30 in RS-X spec was available factory-intercooled. the lesser RS spec was not. However both versions did not use a blow-off-valve.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.38.209 (talk • contribs)

Attesa

Did the Skylines come out with the ATTESA system? Don't confuse this with the ATTESA E-TS system... I haven't looked through the article for Viscous yet however this showed up in search. I think Viscous diffs are used in ATTESA and electronically controlled ones used in ATTESA E-TS. --203.118.135.21 18:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC) (NzHamstar)

Also how come all the photos are from New Zealand lol... --203.118.135.21 18:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC) (NzHamstar)

becuause no one else posts up pictures and theres heaps of then in NZ, I work with 70 other people at my work and between us there is 2 r32 gts coups, 1 r32 gts25 sedan, 1 r32 GTR, 1 r33 gts25 coupe and 1 r33 gts25t seadn. Re the Q above, 4wd skylines use the attesa ETS system. User:spinnanz

Move engine & GT-R information?

This article is reasonably long now, and contains a fair bit of detail about the RB engines and the GT-Rs. How about moving some of the detail to Nissan RB engine & Nissan Skyline GT-R? Also Nismo GT-R Z-Tune is a bit of orphan, how about merging that into Nissan Skyline GT-R? RB30DE 22:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• I agree, the info that's specifically about the gtr should be moved to the specific page so the article can be lightened.Dread Specter 03:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

21/11/06 New Skyline released

GT Channel Auto News

Nissan Japan V36 Skyline (Japanese, needs Flash) RB30DE 03:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, added pictures onto the skyline timeline —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EDIT TYPER (talk • contribs) 2006-11-30T05:01:07.

No worries. I cocked up the first one, second hand, original Nissan Nissan Introduces All-New Skyline RB30DE 07:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Twice the page has been edited to remove V36 and replace it with G35. Yes it appears the car will be called an Infiniti G35 in the USA, but this page is about the Nissan Skyline, and it is called a V36. Refer to the Japanese Nissan site (Even just the URL). RB30DE 04:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

New Images

Many of the images that have just appeared are from here: http://www.nissan.co.jp/MUSEUM/SKYLINE/

I'm looking at FUC and I'm still unclear about whether these qualify as fair use or not. RB30DE 20:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair Use, Publicity Photos, Copyright Issues - I think they're probably OK, so long as they are tagged, and so long as they are not used when a free alternative exists. On a side note, the smaller image size (the images recently grew then shrank) displays and renders a lot better on my monitor (1024x768 default font size) RB30DE 21:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

New infoboxes

I've updated all the generations and the entire page with the new Infobox style that is in use on Automobile articles. I have left in all of the extra options (for example: length, height, weight, etc.). So please feel free to fill in all of the information. Thanks. ren0^talk 17:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism?

Not sure how Wikipedia handles plagiarism, but the Nissan Skyline article is near identical to this allexperts.com article: http://en.allexperts.com/e/n/ni/nissan_skyline.htm

Looks like someone at allexperts.com cut and paste. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.170.206.82 (talk) 23:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

It's a (slightly outdated) mirror. RB30DE 12:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Appearances in media

Can someone point me to the guidelines that necessitated the removal of the Skyline's appearances in media? The IMCDb doesn't have half the information that was posted here before... ~ Dusk Knight 05:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I've restored the media appearances. Based on the De Lorean DMC-12 featured article, I'd say it's fine to include this type of information.~ Dusk Knight 04:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

...but I am very sure what those at WikiProject Automobiles will tell you, a big automatic no, if you got anything to say, go have a mention to them about this, but I won't be surprised if that is a no answer. For the time being I have purged this list. Willirennen 23:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

External Links

This section has been cleaned out Per WP:EL. If anyone feels a link removed belongs, please explain. At the surface they all appear to violate WP:EL as community links or spam and should not be reinserted without discussion.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 20:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I beleive we should put a link back on to http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/forums.html, although not the all and end all of skylines the amount and quality of most information on the forum is a great resource to any owner or potential owner. membership is free.Davidnbyrne 05:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Do bear in mind there is a rule against forums being placed on the ext link. On teh above link, please refer to section 4, number 11 as this is about forums. Willirennen 16:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, the link is a link to a forum / fansite / community site and as a result is non acceptable under WP:EL, nor would it be acceptable as a reference in most cases. The only exception to this would be official recognition as a resource by either Nissan, or some recognized automotive bureau. --Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 19:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Can I suggest please a link to www.gtr.co.uk ? It is an information resource that has with it a combined News, Press Release, Owners Club and Forum element to it. It is a multi-disciplined website and should not be treated as just a forum. It is also officially recognised and endorsed by Nissan GB. It has remained a primary source of Nissan Skyline information for over a decade. Blow dog (talk) 14:43, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Different ATTESA driving computer in V-spec variants

I noticed that there was no mention of the most influential asset of the GT-R: the computer. It should be noted that several variants of the ATTESA ET-S active driving computer were produced by Nissan for the GT-R's active driving computer. It's no secret that there were incremental updates to the system with each new generation from BNR32 to BNR34, but V-spec packages received a slightly different version. For the BCNR33 and BNR34, ATTESA-ETS Pro was fitted to V-spec models. The primary differences between the ATTESA ET-S and ATTESA ET-S Pro were: increased (allegedly doubled) polling rate of driving condition data to the central computer, adjustments to the active centre differential's behavior under conditions of slip (they were adjusted to allow greater levels of slip and responded more quickly for more aggressive driving), control of new front and rear torque converters to adjust for each individual wheel (this one is unconfirmed for the BCNR33 and BNR32 generations), and support for wheel-independent anti-lock brakes.

Not much is known about how ATTESA ET-S was configured for V-spec packages in the R32 generation because of very low production quantities of said V-spec, and the R32 generation used mechanical triggers to poll the computer, whereas the R33 and R34 generations introduced fully computerized monitoring. The revised ET-S Pro was introduced with the BCNR33 in 1995, so I don't know what changes to the system were made for the BNR32 V-spec and N1. Cheers, --Setsunakute (talk) 07:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

  incorrect: "control of new front and rear torque converters to adjust for each individual wheel..."  R33&34 Vspec have "A-LSD" (active-LSD) but none have front torque converters or any type of active front diff. --bigD (talk) 07:17, 07 July 2010 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.68.240.66 (talk)  

New GTR

I'm pretty positive that the new GTR is already available for purchase in Japan, however, this article words it in a way that makes it seem like it hasent been released.Mkid1 (talk) 02:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

R34 platform?

any information on what platform the r34 uses? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.229.227.219 (talk) 05:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Why V35 and V36 are deleted ?????????

It is EXTREMELY UNREASONABLE. V35 and V36 ARE Skylines but not GT-R only. This is a topic for Skyline, not GT-R, so V35 and V36 should be added back !

those cars developed by nissan and infinti. they're not as pure as the GT-R's as the GT-R's are developed by nissan alone. the v35 and v36 are believed to be lacking the racing pedigree passed down through the years by the Skyline GT-R's.

R35 GTR Section

The Entire R35 Section needs to be deleted. The R35 GTR is no way connected to the current Skyline family. They are completely different models and should be treated as such.

But it is, for years the Sklyline GT-R was always Nissan's main techincal flagship. Anyways the Skyline name always comes hand in hand wit the GT-R badge - Darren —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.198.194 (talk) 18:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

...but that's the thing: the R35 GT-R is NOT A SKYLINE! Therefore it has no place in a Wikipedia article about Nissan Skylines. The Skyline GT-R is a Skyline - it is built from a Skyline, just like any other Skyline, which is not the case with the R35 GT-R because that car has NOTHING in common with the Skyline or Skyline GT-R aside from the letters "G," "T," and "R."

The people that call the GT-R a Skyline are largely ignorant of what the GT-R is and what a is Skyline. To do otherwise would be an argument from popularity. A brief mention should be made, but there should be no section regarding the R35 ANYWHERE on this article. Space Turbo (talk) 20:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I think the GT-R R35 has no relations (almost zero) with the Skyline, and the platforms are totally different, although they are built in the same factory.WKB(talk here/This is not Facebook nor Malaysia) 11:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

It is most definately part of the greater Skyline family (like the Laurel, Stagea and Cefiro), but you're right in that it shouldn't be on this page. Those who deny it has any relation at all to the Skyline are the ignorant ones (Nissan inclusive if need be). Round rear lights - Skyline(later models anyway). GT-R name - Skyline. Mind blowing performance - Skyline GT-R. Plus a whole lot of other references that i don't have time to mention. I'm NOT saying it IS a Skyline, merely the Skyline GT-R was basically its birthplace, even though it has branched off in a different direction. SkylineObsession (talk) 18:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

R32 'Godzilla'

In the R32 GT-R sub-section, it is mentioned that the car's victory at Bathurst (Australia) in '91 and '92 led Australia's motoring press to dub it 'Godzilla'.

This is wrong and misleading.

Wheels magazine reviewed the car in their July '89 edition. The cover was a shot of the R32 with the word 'Godzilla' above it. That is where the name came from. The GT-R's victories at Bathurst only prompted the Australian Touring Car authorities to ban it for being too competitive... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.109.5 (talk) 12:47, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

R33 GTS-R

This is a completely made up thing, which has never existed or would exist to this day. The only things I could find regarding this, were sales posts on various forums of R33 GTS-T's, with GT-R front end conversions or RB25DET to RB26DETT engine swaps. A few posts from June of 2015 have cited however, that a "GTS-R" is real and a very rare car, which everyone should sought after. I highly believe, that the Wikipedia article has been modified by the same person, looking to fool people about their car being worth more and trying therefore to justify the ridiculous asking price. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.93.105.187 (talk) 15:46, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

South Australian market?

Reference is made to the 'South Australian market' in the S54 section. Surely this was not restricted to South Australia? South Australia is a very small market, in fact less than half that of New Zealand (4.47 million vs 1.67 million). Should this be the 'Australian market' or was it confused with the South Africa market ? Terrybebb (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:39, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

The R32 S-Tune needs some elucidation on what it is

http://www.nismo.co.jp/Z-tune/data_e/1.html

It wasn't a production model, just a package of parts that Nismo Omori would install to an R32/R33/R34 Skyline GT-R that is now deprecated with the new demo cars developed. Some clarification in the R32 section would help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.232.97.20 (talk) 01:16, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

R33 GT-R section

That's a massive paragraph, and the formatting and punctuation on it are absolutely bizarre. Someone should revise it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zukriuchen (talk • contribs) 09:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Price

What is the price of r34 @2018. Nuwantha Tharindu (talk) 13:12, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a price guide, see WP:NOTCATALOGUE. 36.78.95.112 (talk) 12:27, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

"Guinness World Record" for "most skylines"?

This is a dubious claim, in the last paragraph for the lead-in. I don't delete such things without researching, but I can't find a single source that supports this claim. I'll leave this for a couple weeks with the tag, then delete it unless someone finds an actual Guinness verified record on the Guinness site to corroborate the claim.2600:8804:80:2280:809D:484A:71B:F5E (talk) 22:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Main image of is completely irrelevant and unrecognisable as a skyline, also ugly

Somebody deleted my comment because they got upset for some reason but with all logic the image should show the iconic R34 as I have repeatedly tried to change it to. Please stop coming up with frankly ridiculous reasons to reverse this. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 07:03, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

White V37

Blue R34 modified

Your first entry on the talk page is tell us to fuck ourselves and to suck dick. And you wonder why it got deleted? A quick look over your edit history on other articles shows that you have a lot of trouble accepting that other people have different opinions, that your opinion is the best in the land and that you can freely go against the consensus of every other editor because you are right and they are plainly wrong. Your school report card would say "doesn't play well with others".

But concentrating on this article. Clearly your favourite Skyline is the R34. Mine is the C10, closely followed by the R32. How would you feel if I insisted that we use a C10 image in the lead. And anybody who said anything different would get my reply "the C10 is only one that people recognise - it's the only one that is acceptable". Plainly I'd be speaking out my arse.

All this is just opinion - and we all have different opinions. So we have some policies to help us out. WP:CARPIX says the the image does not have to be tied to any particular version or generation. So, there is no "best" generation - because we all have different opinions. Instead we choose an image that is representative (not most representative because that's just opinion, but avoids modified vehicles, tuner versions and weird outlier versions), and is a decent image (in focus, decent lighting, avoids distracting backgrounds, etc).

The image of the V37 is a rather boring image with another similar coloured car in the background but at least shows the shape of the car well and is stock.

Your blue R34 image is a prettier image but the angle shows only the front well and we can barely see the shape of the side of the car (3/4 is better than mostly front on), has other cars in the background that are mildly distracting and is modified (aftermarket wheels, aftermarket mirrors, looks lowered). Pretty but not representative.  Stepho  talk  21:49, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I am finally unbanned from a completely ridiculous and frivolous ban but I'm gonna stop you right there. The R34 is not my favourite. It is just the one that obviously should be shown if you have any functioning logic centre in your brain. It's the iconic, representative image that every knows as Skyline and everyone thinks of when they hear Skyline. By everyone I mean the general public. What you changed it to is ridiculous most people don't even know what that is. Absolutely ridiculous that nobody changed that in 4 days but people change my normal image of a well known car instantly. The cars in the background are only distracting if you have extreme ADHD which most people don't. What you say is absurd and ridiculous, and please consult the talk page before changing to your preferred version. Otherwise it may lead to editwars. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 09:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Putting your diatribe aside, do you have some objective evidence that the R34 is the Skyline that everybody thinks of? I follow many car groups (Australian, US, UK, German, Japanese, etc) and I've never seen a group of random people agree on a favourite model of any car of any type, so I'd be very surprised if there is a default Skyline for the majority of people.  Stepho  talk  11:15, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Search Nissan Skyline and go to images lol. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 11:26, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Also I would like to add that you dismiss my changes due to being opinion based, I told you it is not my favourite skyline and that isn't why I chose it, and yet you continue to repeatedly change it to the one you said is your personal favourite. How hypocritical DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 11:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Thirdly you say my diatribe and yet your previous message was longer than the one I responded with. You can't stop being hypocritical, can you? DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 11:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

The WP habit is to add one more : when you reply to someone. It makes it easier to track who is replying to who.

Please be aware that I have not changed the image in recent months. See if you can find my name in the article history: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nissan_Skyline&curid=912205&action=history

Also be aware that I'm not particular keen on the images chosen by 101.128.112.21 (bland with distracting backgrounds).

Re diatribe: yeah, I do tend to go on a bit. Mostly because I try to address everything you mentioned.

As you suggested, I did a Google search of "Nissan Skyline" and clicked on "Images" and it turned up a mix of mostly R34, R33, R32. Inconclusive.

Also did a Google searches ("All", not "Images") on each generation and got these counts:

Search term	count
Nissan Skyline r32	9,370,000
Nissan Skyline r33	5,800,000
Nissan Skyline r34	9,720,000
Nissan Skyline r35	12,900,000
Nissan Skyline r36	348,000
Nissan Skyline r37	43,100

Google counts have all sorts of biases (results change according to your location, demographic and previous searches) but your appeal to Google implies we should use the R35. And of course WP:CARPIX says it doesn't matter anyway.

So, we're still in the "show me the proof" stage of why the R34 is the only one to consider. As per WP:FACT and WP:RS, we need a source that explicitly says the R34 is the one everybody thinks of (excepting people without a "functioning logic centre" of course). WP:SYN and WP:GOOGLE give tips on looking for explicit statements and avoiding synthesising results (eg from web search counts).  Stepho  talk  12:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer the R32. The R33 sedan is a great picture, no need to change it. To state that the R34 is somehow the iconic Skyline and the only picture which can be used is simply absurd.  Mr.choppers | ✎  14:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

See this is the thing it doesn't matter what you personally prefer. We established that@Mr.choppers DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 07:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

My apologies, I thought you were the one constantly altering the image. It is in fact some random ip. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 07:30, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

You need to work on your reading comprehension. I (and several others) are trying to tell you that your opinion regarding the R34 is just that - your opinion. What matters is having a good photo of an unmodified car. Now stop swapping photos and go do something useful.  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:20, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The hypocrisy is mind blowing. You npcs have such a retarded hivemind. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 10:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Silver R33 4-door front 3/4

Blue R34 rear 3/4

Some context would be nice - otherwise you're just unproductively venting and we can ignore you. Also, see WP:CIVIL.

I'm guessing that you don't like the silver 4-door image and prefer the blue R34 rear image.

Neither image is wonderful. The 4-door image has another car in the back that seriously subtracts from the quality of the image and is rather bland but it is otherwise okay. Beware that in much of Asia the 4-door is the more well known car and is as common as the 4-door Camry is in most western countries. Here in Australia we see mostly the 2-door as a grey market import but sometimes see the 4-door and even the occasional STAGEA wagon. All have pretty much the full range of boring vs go-fast bits from both the factory and the aftermarket.

For the blue rear image, 3/4 front images are preferred in lead images. Also, the dark top half of the car blends into the dark top half of the background and my eye keeps being drawn to that dark treetop instead of to the car. It is otherwise okay.  Stepho  talk  22:18, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

The R33 photo is perfectly acceptable. Bland is fine, we are not in the advertising business. Yes, it could be improved by a less cluttered background, but the R34 photo does not come close to the minimum requirements of WP:CARPIX. Also, one more uncivil outburst from David Malcolm and I will have him blocked.

For the ten thousandth time:

The main photo does not have to be of a specific generation. Not everyone thinks that the Fast and the Furious should dictate what makes a Skyline. The four-door sold in considerably larger numbers, but go and find a quality photo of a GT-R and we can discuss that. We have linked WP:CARPIX for you several times; read the guidelines and show that you have read it by making intelligible arguments or you will not get any traction. Last chance.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I didn't put a photo of a GTR because I got told that they can't be used because they have a seperate page. And who said anything about the fast and the furious?

Lastly, who made you king of wikipedia? DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 00:16, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

"The image selected for an article's top (lead) infobox does not need to show any particular version or generation of the vehicle, such as the latest, the last, the first, the best-selling, or any other. However, the image must be representative"

That thing is not representative. And according to the things you linked, the sales numbers are irrelevant so idk why you brought that up. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 00:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

You still have not given any reason for why the R33 is not representative, I was merely trying to guess at your reasoning. All we have is you referring to the R34 as iconic, which is merely your opinion. To people other than you, other generations of Skylines are iconic. You have to produce some sort of evidence why the main pic absolutely has to be an R34, especially for a low quality rear view like the one you are suggesting. I do agree with you, however, that the main photo shouldn't be a GT-R since those have their own page.  Mr.choppers | ✎  04:19, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

"That thing is not representative." By "thing" I take it you mean the 4-door sedan. It's not common in N.America and seen only in lower numbers in Australia but in Asia the 4-door Skyline is as common as the Camry. Remember that Wikipedia is an international encyclopaedia and that we must be careful to not express opinions that apply only to our own local area.  Stepho  talk  20:44, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

stepho why are you even in this DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 07:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Are you trying to tell me that I am not allowed to comment?  Stepho  talk  16:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

That specific R33 is not representative. Get a different R33 model and sure whatever but that thing is ridiculou.. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 07:56, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Look at the numbers at https://gtr-registry.com/en-r33-colours.php Add up the number of coupe models. Add up the number of sedan models. For the HR33 I added up 46767 sedans out 63726 total. For the ER33 it was 22524/28380. For the ENR33 2430/7476. For the ECR33 it was a rather low 2698/64256. For the BCNR33 it was a very low 416/16668. Totalling up the sedan was 74835/180506 or about 41% of all R33 models. How is that not significant?

Be careful not to project what you see in your local market as being representative world-wide. The Skyline 4-door sedan was used as a common family car throughout South East Asia. The same was true in my home of Australia during local production of the R30.  Stepho  talk  16:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

So I ummm have waded in and replaced the image with this image and then this image (the latter being the latest version), Lead images have always been the latest versions and I don't know why a fairly-unknown variant needs to be the main image (if anything I'd say the R34 is predominantly known over the rest)

I've since replaced it with the logo until we can agree on an image - I'd be happy to start an RFC if that would be preferred?, Many thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 17:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please start an RFC. I'm interested to see WP:CARPIX vs WP:IDONTLIKEIT.  Stepho  talk  21:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

I genuinely don't care about your statistics. The article looks better with the R34 if nothing else. If you disagree with that then you're lying to yourself and everyone else. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 06:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I agree with David, I changed it to the R32 GTR not just because it alone is an eye catching car, because it enhances the wow factor of the website, people don't want to see Renault dominated hybrid cars as the main image, yes I understand there are many more models of skylines, I am a nissan fan and own an R31 four door myself, you have to look at things rationally and realise that it's simple to understand an R34 in this case is a great option Barras suck L Ford (talk) 06:47, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

So your argument is WP:IDONTLIKEIT.  Stepho  talk  11:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

No. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 21:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Pre-RFC images

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Image 1

Image 2

Image 3

Image 4

Image 5

Image 6

Image 7

Image 8

@Mr.choppers, @Stepho-wrs, @DavidMalcolm1212112221, @Barras suck L Ford
Are there any images any of you would like to add to the pile before I start an RFC?, I'll start it either in the evening or tomorrow evening, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:10, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Not until I get off of work, but since Nissan Skyline GT-R is a standalone article it would be illogical to use a GT-R of any type for the main infobox at this page. Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

About the GT-R thing, that's absurd, the skyline GT-R is the same car as the Skyline. It's a trim level or badge. That would be like saying on the Holden Commodore article it cannot be a VE Commodore because there is a separate article for the VE Commodore (a series of the car). Stupid point, don't try and make it again. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 21:10, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

More about the GT-R thing, the sections for each generation of Skyline all feature GT-R images bar the R31 and V series. This is not the Skyline GT-R page, so why should they be allowed? That's the exact same thing as what you're saying so once again, ridiculous argument. Also once again, it's the SAME CAR. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 21:28, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I added Image 8, which is: a) the last non-Infiniti-based Skyline (note: a similar argument landed us on the VF infobox image at Holden Commodore); b) not a GT-R; c) a sedan, which makes up the majority of Skylines. However, the image quality might not be the best compared to the first 7 image. Andra Febrian (talk) 15:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mr.choppers - The images are all from the last few days or so where people have been adding them - Wasn't intentional to have them all as GTRs - I'll start an RFC tomorrow to give people a chance to add to the list

Many thanks Andra for your addition, –Davey2010^Talk 16:46, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Apologies Mr.choppers I had misread your comment - I agree with your point, as we have a GTR page it would therefore make sense to include a non-GTR image (I'll state this on the RFC too)

I also agree with Davids comments the GTR stuff really should be moved but thats another topic for another day. –Davey2010^Talk 22:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

You completely misinterpreted my comment. My point is that a GT-R is perfectly viable. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 10:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I hadn't - You believe it's the same car and that GTR images should still be here but you also made the comment " This is not the Skyline GT-R page, so why should they be allowed?" which is what I was agreeing with, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I would like to add that the actual visual appeal of the article should be considered, and image 4 is pretty ugly. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 21:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Note on pictures

Nissan Skyline GT-R is a standalone article, therefore it would be wrong to use a GT-R image for the infobox here. It would be like having a Renault 5 Turbo at Renault 5, or the Ford Supervan at Ford Transit. Those pictures should be removed from the discussion. Personally I don't think these two articles should be separate, but that's another discussion. You will notice a large number of "iconic" GT-R images in that article, though. As for looks, can we please just stick to the WP:CARPIX guidelines? That's how Wikipedia works. I include them here, too, so that we can stop having people just state WP:IDONTLIKEIT over and over again (sections specifically regarding the main infobox images are in bold):

1. Images shall enhance the article in which they are placed and must feature the subject of the article section near which they are placed.
2. The image subject—automobile, engine, or component—must be the center of the image's composition.
3. Use the "thumbnail" option for all images other than those inside infoboxes. In accordance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Images, do not specify the size of the thumbnail as this is specified in user preferences.
4. Always use free images, preferably uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Images of vehicles are seldom irreplaceable. Do not use "fair use" promotional images of vehicles (like ads and/or clear white backgrounds).
5. The image selected for an article's top (lead) infobox does not need to show any particular version or generation of the vehicle, such as the latest, the last, the first, the best-selling, or any other. However, the image must be representative; low-volume, obscure/unusual, or otherwise unrepresentative variants are generally not preferred for the lead infobox image. Vehicle production date is not a factor when determining the quality of an image and its suitability to illustrate the lead infobox.
6. Use images of cars in good, complete, clean, and original condition whenever possible. Avoid pictures of customized cars (e.g. incorrect wheels or other aftermarket components like bodykits or conversions for police or taxi applications) as they are not representative of the vehicle's factory specification (unless the text in context to the picture is dealing with the customization of the vehicle, such as the Ford Crown Victoria as a police interceptor or as a taxicab). The vehicle's hood should be closed unless the engine is also a focus of the picture and the text in context is referring to the engine.
7. The quality of an image is always more important than the quantity of images included—a gallery or a link to Wikimedia Commons is preferable to flooding an article with images.
8. The caption must clearly identify the vehicle. The year or model year (single year or range), model code, or any other relevant descriptor (for example, "pre-facelift" and "facelift") should be included in the image caption. If available, the trim level should also be included.
9. Infobox pictures shall depict the front ¾ (three-quarter) view from the height of an ordinary person.

Thank you.  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

No it would be like having a VF Commodore as the photo for Holden Commodore as they have separate articles. It's the same car. A Nissan GT-R is different to a Skyline, but a Skyline GT-R is a trim level of a Skyline. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 21:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes and no. The Skyline GT-R is part of the Skyline range and is therefore valid as a lead photo. But the situation differs from the Commodore. "VF" denotes a range of years, rather than a trim level. All other Commodore year ranges have specific articles, so no-one of them is singled out for special inclusion or exclusion based on having its own article. Whereas the Skyline GT-R trim level is treated a bit different to the other Skyline trim levels by having its own article. It would not be explicitly ruled out and we might choose a Skyline GT-R image - but it's a bit wasteful to display a grade that is already shown on its own article and a bit of variety would be more useful.

Heads up that my work is going to keep me very busy for the next week. I can respond on the weekend but might not respond at all during next week. I don't object to any RFCs starting.  Stepho  talk  21:37, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I understand what VF and GT-R are. I was saying it is the same in terms of having an article and being valid for the lead image. They both have separate articles, but they are a specific division of that car so they are therefore, that car. Just because there is an article for Skyline GT-R doesn't mean a Skyline GT-R isn't a Skyline.

. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 06:22, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

No, the Commodore VF is a branch of Holden Commodore, whereas the GT-R is treated as a separate tree (and sort of a holding cell for fanboi squabbles and dyno sheet entries and youtube quartermile videos). If I was to have my druthers, every generation of the Skyline would be a standalone (folding in GT-R content), with Nissan Skyline being a brief oversight article just like Holden Commodore. It would makes sense in many ways, and I would absolutely be in favor of having an R32 or R34 GT-R as the main picture there. If anyone else is in favor, perhaps we should consider such a split-and-merge?  Mr.choppers | ✎  12:47, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

That's ridiculous. A Skyline GT-R is literally a skyline. It's one of the submodels or trims or badges or whatever you want to call it. The model is Skyline. What about a GTST or a GTSR? Should they all have their own pages? What about an executive? It's the same car. The R35 GTR is not a skyline. Every other GT-R is a skyline, hence being called a Skyline GT-R and being part of the skyline range. You clearly know nothing about Nissan if you think they're different cars. DavidMalcolm1212112221 (talk) 11:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

DavidMalcolm, could you please take the time to read what people write? I have explained several times that I disagree with the Skyline GT-R being a separate article. I am not sure why or when this was decided on, but I think it was in error – however, as long as they are treated as separate it is illogical to have a GT-R as the main image for this article. My entire statement above is me suggesting that we merge Skyline with Skyline GT-R and separate them by generation instead. It is frankly very hard to discuss with a person who doesn't take the time to read others' comments and jumps to conclusions with such immediacy.  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

The R34 GT-R is now legal

R34 GT-Rs made in January 1999 are now legal to import to the United States as it is January 2024. The article should reflect this as soon as possible. GGUltima (talk) 01:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Why? Is importing it into the US more important than importing it into any other country?  Stepho  talk  04:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

"All other R34s will become legally importable starting in January 2024, since they become legally 25 years old."

I never once said the US is of greater importance. Under the tenth generation's category and then under "United States," it simply says all other R34s will become legal in January 2024. As it is now January, I figured the article should reflect that change. GGUltima (talk) 05:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I think it's too trivial an encyclopedia, and used imports are not very important in car articles. Andra Febrian (talk) 05:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)