Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Dead and Gone: Nissan IDx

      The Production Version of the Nissan IDx Has Reached A Dead End

    The Nissan IDx concepts received rave reviews from the press and public when they debuted at the Tokyo Motor Show in 2012. A modern interpretation of the iconic Datsun 510 from the 70's, the concepts were small, rear-drive coupes that could compete with the likes of the Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ. The past year or so saw reports of a production model possible arriving in 2016. But since then, Nissan hasn't said anything about them.

     

    The Truth About Cars reports that plans for a production version of IDx has been canned. Speaking with Pierre Loing, Vice President of Product Planning for Nissan North America, he explained that the company doesn't have a small enough rear-drive platform to do a production IDx. The 370Z was a possible candidate, but it was deemed too big.

     

    What about developing a new platform for the IDx?

     

    “Small, sporty cars are very attractive for consumers but not in huge numbers. To do them properly – in our case – you can’t rely on an existing rear-wheel drive platform, because its dimensions are for a much larger powertrain. So, for us, it would mean developing a different rear-wheel drive platform and then we are bumping into the same obstacles every other automaker has: the volumes of a small, sporty car are not enough to justify the investment,” said Loing.

     

    So while the dreams of a rear-drive IDx have been dashed, the design of the IDx could be transferred to a front-wheel drive based model.

     

    “I think we may still have some room (to add a retro-inspired car). We have a wide lineup.”

     

    Source: The Truth About Cars

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I thought that this was already decided upon a while ago.

     

    Its a shame. I liked the style of this car.

    13889876705077.jpg

     

    Considering Im into American Muscle Cars, I wouldnt mind owning something  styled like that.

    Its very unique and very retro, without actually being based on a previous car...yeah I know...its loosely based on a Nissan 510...its quite the head turner...is alls Im sayin', and I wouldnt mind be seeing driving one.

     

    ALSO, I could imagine this being drifted around Tokyo streets...or being the star in a re-boot of the Fast and Furious franchise.

    Yup...this car has/had the potential to turn the automotive enthusiast crowd on its head....its a shame that Nissan got cold feet.

     

    EDIT:

    I actually read the article carefully the second time around...and maybe a FWD model car might inherit its looks...because for Nissan/Renault...a unique RWD platform just for this vehicle is a tad too expensive to justify the possible low volume of sales...

     

    True...how can we argue with that?

    A possible partnership with another automaker?

    Who knows...alls I know its a shame...

    • Agree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Butt ugly to me. Glad I do not have to see these on the streets. Reminds me of something out of a poor animation movie.

    Well, Nissan has taken some styling cues from it already.

     

    The 3/4 window styling theme...

    2015_nissan_murano_12.jpg

     

    2016-nissan-maxima-side.jpg

     

    I like that styling theme.

    Call me nuts, but I like the messed up Maxima. It has all kinds of crazy about it, and I like it.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You need to give credit to Nissan for at least trying it out.  I am still waiting for a new Supra from Toyota.  If I was told to drive one either this or the Mini Cooper, then I would rather have driven one of these things instead of a Mini Cooper.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wasn't it Nissan's tag line 15 years ago, "Enjoy the ride"?  There is very little to enjoy in the auto industry these days.  These cars would have made an interesting business case to say the least.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Can't say I'm sad to see this thing canned as it looks hideous in my opinion. That being said you gotta had it to Nissan for going with this sort of design, it's certian eye-catching...or was anyway.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Visually I like what Nissan is doing lately, the Murano, the Maxima, I think they're both nice looking vehicles.  In particular that Murano is a huge improvement over the previous iteration.  Then again, I'm in that crazy minority that actually likes the Juke, too.  I don't much care for the Versa, note or sedan, Sentra is blah, Altima is okay, but not great, Pathfinder and Armada are alright, new Rogue is better, but not as good as what it could have been if the Murano is any indication, and the Rogue Select needs to go, it's just a sad, non-selling reminder of how bad the old Rogue looked.  I think these would have been interesting to have, it would have been a great addition to the lineup appearance-wise, and would have been something fun to offer from Nissan.  Hopefuly if they live on as a front-drive model instead they can still make them fun and catch some peoples' interest.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Those use cases will necessitate the purchase of something with a long range, like 300+. But even still, two hours at 11.5kW would put 50 - 70 miles of range back in the car. You might need to make one 10-minute DCFC stop if you had a really busy day, but otherwise, you could make it.
    • I can understand this, but then this is part of my daily life. With two kids with their own families and grandkids it is not uncommon for us to be out and about for the day, come home for a bit before heading out to help with the grandkids and their afterschool activities. Plus, with family that is living from both sides north and south of us, it would not be uncommon to drive 75 miles down south to deal with my wife's side of the family, see the nieces/nephews and then up north to my side to see folks and with both our parents in senior years with health issues, also moving back in forth. Course this is why Sun puts on about 15,000 miles a year on the SS. We all have different use cases.
    • That's all I'm worried about. I'm not going to spend a sht ton more money having a 19.2kW charger installed for the 1 day every 3 years I empty the battery, get home for 2 hours, and have to again drive enough that I couldn't make it back home...  
    • I could see settling on three charger rates, but definitely not one. A Bolt or Kia EV4 type vehicle simply does not need 19kW home charging.  It would be an excessive cost to retrofit a house and the number of buyers who actually use that rate would be pretty close to zero.  That would be like insisting that the Corolla has to have a 6.2 liter. It's excessive and doesn't fit the use case. Now, if we settled into 7.5kW, 11.5kW, and 19.4kW as a standard, that would probably achieve what you are proposing while still giving cost flexibility.  It would allow for entry-level EVs to get the lower cost / lower speed charger while allowing the larger vehicles or premium vehicles to have faster home charging.  For example, the EV6 could have a lower cost 7.5kW charger while the Genesis GV60 on the same platform could get the 11.5kW charger because it is a premium brand and higher cost vehicle.  Then any large EV with or near a 200kW battery could have the 19.4kW charger, but even then, unless it is a newly built house or a commercial fleet, it will still probably charge only at 11.5kW, as that's about the max that the vast majority of homes are wired to do.  Unless you're driving an EV with a 200kW battery to 10% every day, an 11.5kW charger can "fill" an EV to 80% overnight with room to spare, so most people (including me), won't want the extra expense of spending extra money just to say my EV charged faster while I slept.  Either way, it will be ready for me when I need to leave at 7 am.
    • @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell Thank you both, this is the kind of dialogue I feel the Auto buyers need to be made aware of and the various use cases in understanding as I feel most DO NOT really understand this and give into the FEAR Mongering of News Stories. While I still feel that everyone should have the same charging rate capabilities, I also understand both your points. I do feel that this will change electrical across the WORLD over time due to the need of charging.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings