Talk:Nissan Silvia

Possible Country Split for S15?
The info on the S15 is starting to get crowded, should it be broken into country segments? Japan, Austrailia, and New Zealand? It would allow for easier reading and for more information to be posted dealing with the individual differences between the different countries versions of the S15. The differences are a bit more numerous then what is already posted.

Tiger 20:31, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Anything that isn't about a car badged "Silvia" doesn't belong in this article anyway - that should all be in Nissan 200SX. &mdash; AKADriver &#x260E;  13:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

S15 Hardtop
"There was also a convertible variant of the Silvia, called the Varietta, featuring a folding hardtop, the first for a Japanese car."

Shouldn't the first be the 3000GT Spyders? Those things had folding hardtop. --211.72.233.5 05:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't know if the 3000GT Spyder was first, either, but it did predate the Varietta by a few years. Good catch.  That statement is gone. &mdash; AKADriver &#x260E; 05:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * According to the Nissan press release, here, the Varietta "featur(es) the first fully opening power metal top on a domestic convertible". Domestic in this case being Japan.  As I understand it, the 3000GT Spyder was not sold in Japan.  The Spyder conversion was done in America.  Tiger 17:16, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Wingo - can we end this?
Look, the headlight shapes don't match at all, Wingo doesn't have the S15's character line that runs from the rear to the front wheel. Wingo is just supposed to be a "generic import car", and if the folks at Pixar were trying to make him a Silvia they failed. Can we drop it? Admittedly, I don't like "in popular culture" sections in automotive articles to begin with (unless it's a car with a serious impact on popular culture, such as a VW Beetle). A cartoon character with no more than passing resemblance doesn't warrant a mention. &mdash; AKADriver &#x260E; 16:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Your trained eye is not a valid argument for stating he is not a Silvia S15. You need sources to confirm this. Besides, all this just makes you sound like a sock puppet for T1g4h, who has already stopped changing him to Honda Civic.Hondasaregood 16:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * There are no sources to state it is a Silvia, either. You need sources to confirm that it is.  That is valid ground to remove the statement, considering my untrained eye (I'm not an automotive designer by trade) can tell the difference.  And no, I'm not a sock puppet, I've been registered as an editor for over a year with an established history of editing Nissan-related articles. &mdash; AKADriver &#x260E; 14:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding some more reason to this debate. Note, by the way, that T1g4h only gave up because he was tired of talking to a brick wall (his words, not mine). I feel much the same way (though I've only been observing/commenting, mostly). Someone needs to put an end to this silliness. Policy has been brought up multiple times by multiple editors, but has received no response. Last week, Isotope23 gave an ultimatum of sorts concerning The Delinquent Road Hazards, which I'm content to wait on for now, as I'm not sure how best to rewrite the article myself. There are multiple articles involved in this edit war that need to be handled the same way, though. --Fru1tbat 15:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

about the silvia S16
Well on the article it says that there was a rumor on the internet that the s16 was meant to be produced, but it was mistaken for the prototype car, the Nissan AZEAL. well actually thats wrong... cuz lookin at the nissan AZEAL it dosent look at all like the S platform cars nissan had produced before... but thats not all lookin over the internet there is a pic of the REAL silvia s16 new version apparently taken from a magazine in japan... with a sr20vet and some other stuff... so as a huge fan of Nissan cars (specialy the silvia/240sx model) i would apreciate a lot if someone (with better english than mine) could or would correct it... —The preceding --Rodrigovivom 03:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)comment was added by 200.11.57.32 (talk) 16:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

Cleaning Up
I went through and improved the grammatical errors and removed instances of colloquialisms. I also removed inappropriate diction and corrected the inconsistency in the first section dealing with "majority" and "most." The overall tone of this article lacks concrete substance.

It is recommended this article be watched for potential reversions to its incorrect and poorly-written state.

170.35.224.64 20:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply from the 'cleaned'
-- I believe you were referring to my writing; I tried my best to avoid colloquialisms. "Sticker price" is a colloquialism, just so you know -- and "humdrum" is a dictionary word. Careful!

Kajifox 10:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Pictures
This article would benefit from the inclusion of more pictures and info bars to meet Wikipedia standards. 170.35.224.64 22:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Redtop and Blacktop in s13
Can someone insert the differences (turbocharger and valvecover color) in these engines and the years they were offered, respectively, to the s13 section? 170.35.224.64 22:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * That information belongs in the '180SX' page as the "black top" SR20DET was found in the 180SX from years 1994-98, and only the "redtop" was found in cars badged as 'Silvia'.


 * There is also a "redtop" SR20DE, to be found in the Autech tuned Spec S S15, where the standard rocker cover color for both the SR20DET and SR20DE for the S15 were black.


 * Tiger 05:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

no, the redtop was in the silvia and 180sx until 93. in 94 the silvia changed to the s14 chassis, 180sx continued, but switched to black top engine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.129.54 (talk) 10:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Cleaned up a little more.
The rewriting of my initial work has resulted in a lot of context splits and double-ups, so I'm working through a number of them. Kinda wish it hadn't been gone through for "grammar", too, as that seems to have broken it a bit more, but I suppose I'm being picky, this is Wiki. Kajifox 11:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup needed (again)
I have not edited an article or contributed anything to Wikipedia in quite a while partly due to users that like to "babysit" the articles they work on, preventing corrections and stubbornly reverting the content every time a change is made.

I see an instance of that occurring here as most of the corrections made prior to the current version by myself and others have been replaced with the original grammar and punctuation mistakes. A quick look over the article and the discussion page makes it abundantly clear why Wikipedia can never be considered a viable source of factual information concerning certain subjects; There seems to be a jumble of conflicting views regarding not only the content but the style and presentation thereof. This seems to be effectively preventing any totally correct version of this article from being present on this site.

The comment from one of the above users requesting more meaningless banter and less technical information was good for a laugh, but I suggest that at the very least links to off-site resources that are able to maintain a more concrete source of data be permanently included.

With pity and disgust,

170.35.224.64 19:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * A diff between your last edit and the current version shows an overall improvement in capitalization and puncutation.  The letters in model codes (S13) and alphanumeric model names (180SX) should be capitalized.  I don't know what you're complaining about; the only edit wars and "babysitting" to have taken place with this article revolve around an unsourced statement about a minor character from a film. &mdash; AKADriver &#x260E; 21:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I seem to think he's referring to my going through and removing such things as "sticker price"! Which I must confess is the only thing I can remember off the top of my head. This article's improved hugely since I rewrote the portion of the article on early Silvias, I'm extraordinarily happy to see people contributing so much. It's a nice thing to provide a seed and see that which you couldn't provide build up around the outside -- People who insist their over-prosaic modifications must stay, however... Suffice to say that I wasn't the one that removed the majority of that "cleanup", in the end (though admittedly I took credit for it). Kajifox (talk) 00:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I think the article Nissan 200SX should be merged with this article as at the moment Nissan 200SX is pretty much just a block from Nissan Silvia which has been copied and pasted with a couple of bits being added/deleted. Unless someone can clean up the Nissan 200SX article enough to warrant its own article it should maybe have its own section somewhere in this article.Cstubbies (talk) 22:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The Nissan 200SX article should not be merged, it should be specified by market and cleaned the hell up. In Australia, the 200SX was a Silvia rebadge after S13 (starting with S14), but in the US it was S10 to S12 and then Pulsar-chassied stuff -- In the UK it was different again. Suppose I'll have to go through later. Kajifox (talk) 00:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree, it should be expanded and cleaned up, not merged in. Mergers are just lazy-man cleanup in cases like this.--  Oni Ookami Alfador Talk 02:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thats great if someone will clean it up. Ill change the tags for itCstubbies (talk) 11:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * merger would make the whole thing even more confusing. Merge to what? Silvia, 200SX, 240SX or 180SX? Original Siliva CSP311 is a hard top coupe body on a Fairlady CP311 chassis. Rest are "S platform" but can't include all "S" chassis codes as the S30 and S130 are 240Z's and not anything to do with SX---/Silvia/Gazelle. It's in a mess because Nissan marketing and branding worldwide made it a mess. Also some people have very misinformed private agendas like S12 section 'CA18DET's DOHC head design was also later utilized in the "RB" engine series"' when the RB20DE 24valve DOHC was in production before the CA - they think the own a "baby skyline" and want to tell the world. All wide angle 4 valve heads (unlike narrow angle LZ race engines) are traceable back to Prince S20.Skyshack (talk) 23:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think the topics should be merged. This is talking about the S13 and S14 240SX. The S13 and S14 Silvia was not released in North America. This would make the topics highly confusing and innaccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.157.95.228 (talk) 18:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Do not merge. B14 is also a 200SX. "Nissan reintroduced the 200SX nameplate in North America to designate a two-door version of the Nissan Sentra (B14 chassis, a front wheel drive car), known in Japan and Mexico as Lucino"96.48.21.159 (talk) 04:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Merging is a ridiculous proposal and a lazy way out of tidying this up. It would be much more informative to everyone if we just make sure all the articles are tidy and accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.26.20.45 (talk) 02:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

If these were merged, I would be even more confused. I already have trouble differentiating the countless kouki zenki floopi slappi swaps and conversions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.62.162.53 (talk) 06:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

There are still huge errors in this page.

The S13 booted/trunk Silvia coupe was never sold in Europe. The European 200SX was the fastback/hatch RS13 which in Japan was 180SX. Skyshack (talk) 17:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

S10 chassis details
I owned an S10-chassis 200SX in the late '80s and have edited its section a bit. The car had the same engine and transmission as the Datsun 510 that everyone knows and loves. The manual transmission was a 5-speed dogleg box (reverse up and left, first down and left), not a 4-speed as the call-out to the right originally stated. Front suspension was the same as the 510, but the rear suspension used leaf springs and a live axle rather than the IRS of the 510. Handling was markedly worse because of this. I'd love to find a reference to that to avoid being called out for original research, but haven't been able to find one yet. Gribbles (talk) 16:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

It states at the start of article that the Gazelle in Japan was only available in the Hatchback form, this is wrong as I own a notchback Gazelle here in Sendai - Japan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.135.11.203 (talk) 11:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

S12 Reference
We have been cleaning this up since I initially wrote this section back in the earlier days of Wikipedia, although I instituted a major revision in 2008 to correct a good lot of inaccuracies and illegibility. Since then, myself and other staff at Club-S12 have kept a duplication of the content on our site, and we have periodically refreshed the information as the integrity of the section has been skewed. Today I instituted yet another major revision, adding in sections for a special edition of the chassis and the motorsports history of the chassis (properly clarified with verified facts). I have updated our remote mirror of this content and it will be maintained as usual. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to contact us at admins@club-S12.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by S12-Info (talk • contribs) 01:04, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Name
Why is the name "Silvia" a source of confusion? "Sylvia" is from Latin, and is the female form of "Sylvester", which is related to forested areas. Seems plausible to me; Japanese carmakers seemed perfectly willing to use names that didn't make much sense if they sounded good. Corolla, Camry, Celica, Starion, why not "Silvia" as well? A species of warbler seems unlikely, more like a happy coincidence. AnnaGoFast (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)