How To Save Nissan
- Lachlan Palmer
- Aug 4
- 8 min read
It's no real surprise that Nissan has fallen on hard times in the last couple of years. However, it very much was a surprise to hear that one of the big Japanese car companies was looking at a buyout from Honda earlier this year. I mean, even though there's a lot of issues at Nissan at the moment, they're still one of the biggest, most recognizable car companies in the world.
We won't get into all of the background reasons that Nissan might be struggling in this blog post (i.e. Carlos Ghosn, the Takata airbag recall, the French influence, reliability concerns, etc.), but we do want to talk about a couple of ways that we would fix Nissan if we were in charge, that might have some congruity with the aforementioned failures.
So, how deeply is Nissan in the shit?
Well, as mechanics and car enthusiasts, we can assure you that we don't have the mental capacity or the youthful exuberance to go through absolutely all of the financial documentation and explain how an almost 100 year old company with a market cap of $11.5B, and with annual revenue over $100B, can trash it into the barriers so hard. What we can tell you is what we've seen and heard when talking to people and when working on cars.
As Warren Buffett say's, "only invest in what you understand", and boy howdy, do us mechanics know what the underside of a shitbox looks like.
Without beating around the bush any further, there are a couple of key things that we think Nissan is mucking up as a business. The reliability (and je ne sais quoi... French-ness), the model lineup, the design language, and the features.
Now, we'll try to give just a couple of examples as to why each of these matter, and might even do a bit of a deep dive at a later date, and then we'll focus on what we think Nissan could do to save themselves before someone else has to.
First and foremost, the reliability.
We have been around the block a few times (and Lachlan even worked at Nissan for some time), and, without realizing, most people could categorize Nissan products into two groups, "BFI" and "AD". Or more appropriately, "before French influence" and "approaching death".
On a whole, the general French-ness of a car isn't actually the problem here at all. In fact, for us, the general French-ness of a car is usually a redeeming feature.
Citroen, Peugeot, Renault, and Alpine all make some incredibly quirky, experimental cars. In fact, if you asked at least one of our masochistic mechanics of their dream garage, fairly high on that list would be an Alpine A110 (old or new), a Citroen DS, SM, 2CV or H van, a Renault Espace F1 and event a Peugeot 504.
The problem with the French influence on Nissan is that the traditional values and reputation of these companies seem so vastly diverging that the collaboration (and subsequent muddled remains) of this deal only lead to Renault's becoming slightly easier to work on and Nissan's becoming bland boxes of disappointment wrapped in excessive repair times, catastrophic waits for parts and reliability so sub-par that they extended transmission warranties to 10 years.
For example, almost all other Japanese manufacturers design engines with some sense of serviceability (the ability to change or replace components easily) in mind while, in the early 2000's, Nissan started using engines like the MR18 and the QR series where changing service items (such as spark plugs) require the removal of the intake manifold.
The transmission issue in particular is a great example of where Nissan's reliability has been since the early 2000's. Nissan's CVT (constantly variable transmission) was a groundbreaking improvement for the time. Advertised as having massive improvements on fuel economy and being smoother than a regular automatic, they're the perfect transmission for a commuter car when they work.
Whether Nissan in particular was just too quick to the CVT trend, or they failed to look at the use cases of their vehicles properly, the failure rate on these transmissions was so high that people reported replacing them entirely every 60,000km.
On top of this, Nissan put these transmissions into some of their larger vehicles as well (such as the Pathfinder and X-Trail) which caused even more excessive failure rates.
Now, on the topic of Nissan models, I would challenge you to name any Nissan model right now that isn't the X-Trail. Sure, you might eventually remember the Patrol or the Z, or maybe even the Leaf, but the point is their model lineup, design language, and naming structure is severely lacking.
See, the R51 Nissan Pathfinder was a true 4WD, based on the Navara. It had a 2.5L or 3L turbo diesel, a number of petrol powered options and, most importantly a true automatic or manual transmission mated to a 4WD transfer case.
Comparatively, the R52 Pathfinder was a beige flavored, melted plastic looking SUV/crossover with the super problematic CVT, an overly complicated V6 engine crammed into the engine bay the wrong way, and an AWD system that couldn't manage to pull a toboggan down a snow covered hill.
Don't even get us started on the interiors as well. Someone in our little family has a 2020 370Z, and somehow the interior (and its functions) wouldn't feel entirely out of place circa. 2007, right before the financial crisis.
And even though the current Nissan Z is a much more appealing offering, there no compensating for the fact it's essentially a facelift of a facelift of a car that started production in 2002.
Currently on sale, Nissan has the Juke, Qashqai, X-Trail, Pathfinder, Patrol, Navara and Z. Of which almost none would entertain even a notice unless it crashed face first into the side of you.
The issues here are that none of these cars have any truly unique identifying features and almost all of them feel outdated, cheap, or technologically repressed. The 370Z was on sale until just a couple of years ago, and while this was one of the only truly unique looking cars, it didn't even come with Apple CarPlay until a the new model was released in 2022.
Other than the Nissan Z, the most common defining styling cue is that their cars look like a takeaway container that got left in the hot box a bit too long. A kind of melted plastic over 4 hour old lasagna version of styling that amounts the same level of care as 4-hour-old-hot-box-lasagna deserves.
So how does all of this complaining relate to how we would fix Nissan situation? How would we fix the model lineup, the reliability (and je ne sais quoi... French-ness), the design language and the features?
Well, on Doug Demuro's "This Car Pod", the topic of how to stay relevant against the onslaught of Chinese manufacturers came up, and the answer was essentially "be quirky".
It's not something that we agree with entirely, but it's in the right vein. A lot of these Chinese manufacturers are dumping billions of dollars into research and development in the area of classic commuter cars.
The current MG ZST has an awful lot in common with a Qashqai and starts at $23,990 driveaway. Yeah, it might not be the most reliable or inspiring car long term, but neither is the Qashqai, which is $15,000 more expensive and has a stupid name that no one can say.
For the longest time, Nissan was well known for making cheap, massively capable and super reliable off-roaders and sports cars like the Silvia, Skyline, Stagea, Terrano, Pathfinder and Patrol. And so many car enthusiasts think this is where Nissan needs to be looking.
We think the answer is different. Nissan's halo cars were always the Silvia and Skyline, but those models have never sold well. They are the brand identity that the everyday cars follow, and what we need from Nissan is more of the super charismatic, fun to drive, cheap to run, reliable cars of old.
Nameplates like the Pulsar SSS, the NX Coupe, the S-Cargo, Figaro and the Pao are all great examples of what made Nissan a great brand. Cheap, fun to drive, quirky looking and, most importantly, cheap.
Sure, the last generation of the Pulsar didn't sell well. But that wasn't because people didn't want another Pulsar, it's because the Pulsar became an ugly, beige little corporate clone of the Renault Clio. It got fat, unreliable, uninspired and cheap.
Heck, as far as we're concerned, a modern Nissan Tiida hatch would be a great start. Because, as much as the Tiida, was a dog ugly excuse for a low market, entry level car, it's also been ultra-reliable and unforgettable. Even if the fact it's so unforgettable is because of how ugly it is, it's a conversation starter.
If we were in charge of Nissan today, that's where our focus would lie.
First and foremost, the reliability and serviceability. Accept that you make cheap cars and use durable cheap materials and powertrains instead of trying to act upmarket. All of the cheapest cars in the 90's had the most comfortable seats and we would wonder if it's because they were focused on materials that would last and feel good instead of picking materials that looked like premium materials.
Change up the model line-up. There's a million different mid-sized SUV/CUV/crossover pieces of garbage on the market today, and almost exclusively, the Juke, Qashqai and Pathfinder are not on anyone's radar.
There are almost no notable newer hatchbacks that aren't a Toyota Corolla, Chinese or European, and all of those have their drawbacks (the Corolla's being that it's boring and kind of overpriced). The old school Pulsar, Micra and Tiida are what we would consider bringing back, and we'd only be comfortable with a maximum of two of those to start.
They need to be slightly quirky, good (or ugly) to look at and surprisingly fun to drive. They need Apple CarPlay and radar cruise control, but not a CVT. They need a punchy, or zippy attitude around town, but not faux leather and soft touch dashboards.
After that, both the Patrol and the Z need a refresh and they need to fulfill the expectations of those nameplates. The 'all luxury petrol V8 rolling mortgage' that constitutes the current patrol has been around since I was an apprentice, and it doesn't fill any of the needs that the older Patrols did. It can't tow as well as a diesel, it's terrible on fuel, it's neither rugged or memorable and, worst of all, it's too expensive to take off road without worrying about putting a scratch on it.
It seemed like Nissan was trying to make a Range Rover competitor without ever asking if Nissan should be the one making Range Rover competitor.
The simple fact of the matter is that Nissan may never get out of this hole. They likely won't change their ways that much, and recovering a reputation of reliability when they've spent the last 20 years trashing it will take time. The question is, how much time.
In Colin Chapman's words regarding Lotus, they always strive to 'simplify and add lightness'. For Nissan, their new internal moto should be 'simplify and add character'.
If you have any questions about this blog post, would like a second opinion from a mechanic or would like to find an honest mechanic in Brisbane, check out Kashy here.