is it as unreliable and problematic as it's being made out to be?

dang... i didnt know that getrags were made in china. :rofl2:

yah, hitachi and all sorts of asian parts it seems.

indeed! :iagree: and political crap in the background like how consumer reports and all the other shitty car mags publish crap about some cars. :ugh2:

does it catch fire like other eurpean cars? :icon17: MINI recently recalled like 100K of their turbo cooper-s's. and ever mind the number of previous gen MINI's catching fire on its own.

In short, NO! There were a lot of unjustified complaints from some either overzealous or just plain inexperienced/misinformed owners as it related to a few issues like rough cold-shifting or faint noise. Sort of like the threads we see about the clutch idle noise or shudder that pop up around here. We all know it's normal, but a lot of people don't. Just multiply the complaints ten fold and you get an idea of what's going on.

That's not to say there aren't legitimate problems with some... but it's along the lines of the "normal" distribution of failure. No better or no worse than the 6MT in the 370 I'd say as far as reliability goes if you were to consider the scale.

Honestly, if the transmission exhibited the exact same charactersitics as it does but it was manufactured by Tremec (the normal supplier of the Mustang transmissions) it wouldn't have been blown out of proportion like it is. The main stink is that it's a transmission built in China by a German company in a Mustang... even though the Tremecs are built in Mexico. China is the key word.

Yeah Getrag has facilities all over the world. Really, everyone does these days. And quality isn't necessarily about where a product is produced, it's about the quality control procedures in place at each particular facility. Yeah there are factories in China that make counterfeit toothpaste, but there are also factories that build super high tech, quality stuff.

Anyways, when you look at the different manufacturers and suppliers and rivalries with an objective viewpoint you really realize that what it comes down to is everybody is fvcking everybody... there is so much overlap across brands, even rival brands, that it's hard to say "well A is better than B" because A and B are both built out of the same stuff. And in many cases B helped A develop some special part that A uses to beat B with on the track. :icon17:

Think about the level of sharing these days... you've got Ford licensing technology to Nissan that they use to build the GT-R with... GM licenses technology to Ferrari for the suspension on the 458. Saab/Subaru have shared platforms. Toyota/GM have shared hybrid technology... And they all share common suppliers! It goes on and on and on and on... Everybody's fvcking everybody! :icon17:

The good kind of fvck, btw. ;)

:icon14:

nissan used ford technology to build the gtr?

Yes, Nissan licenses a technology called Plasma Transferred Wire Arc which was patented by Ford to build the engines. It replaces traditional cylinder sleeves with a coating of iron and iron oxide. The GT-R is the first car to use it in production and the 2011 GT500 is the second.

If you really dig, there is a LOT of sharing. Whether it be direct from manufacturer to manufacturer like in this case, or through a common supplier like in others.

I know. I'm actually rather surprised by all the sharing going on. I wonder why a car company would help a competitor out by sharing its technology. I doubt they would make that much profit from the licensing agreement.

I'm sure a lot of it is economies of scale, especially in the case of joint platform projects like we've seen from Subaru/Toyota, GM/Toyota, Ford/Mazda.

Plus, if you can play off of the expertise of competitors and work together through a combination of competition and cooperation (let's call it "coopetition") you help ensure the viability of the industry because you both working in a collective and competitive fashion to build a better product.

I'm sure in the case of the GT-R Nissan engineers shared their real-world experience with Ford as part of the licensing agreement... and what do you know... Ford decides 2011 was the right time to apply it to the Mustang. Both manufacturers win and in the end the consumer wins.

:tup:

If you think about it most industries are like that. In investment management I share a lot of knowledge and ideas with competitors. It makes us better and in the end our clients win.

When you think about it, they don't really lose anything either. There's not a lot of people choosing the gtr over the gt500 because of the technique used on the cylinder walls...not to mention Nissan subsidizing r&d costs is always a huge benefit.