Nissan Skyline 1500 Sporty Deluxe (1968)
Publication: Car Graphic
Format: Road Test
Date: October 1968
Author: “C/G Test Group” (uncredited)
Summary: Refined five-seat sedan, significantly improved roominess compared to the previous model, comfortable front seats, pleasant 4-speed floor shift, extremely economical fuel economy, unsatisfactory stopping power from disc/drum brakes, high fade resistance.
Road testing the Skyline 1500 Sporty Deluxe
The merger of Nissan and Prince raised concerns about the fate of the Skyline, a model that was produced in relatively small volumes, but the announcement of the redesigned Nissan Skyline (with the Prince emblem nowhere to be seen) has allowed enthusiasts to relax their furrowed eyebrows a bit. However, only a 1500cc Skyline has been released for now, and according to sources, problems with the development of the 2000GT have delayed its release until sometime this fall.
The car we tested this time, over a distance of 750km, was the 1500 Sporty Deluxe (694,000 yen), one of the four new models in the Skyline sedan series. However, it is “sporty” in name only, as there are no changes to the engine or chassis. Instead, it is merely focused on creating a sporty mood, and comes standard with a 4-speed floor shift, separate front seats, front disc brakes, and 6.15S-14 low-profile tires on 4.5J rims.
The new Skyline is 100mm longer in wheelbase, 135mm longer in overall length, 100mm wider, and 20mm lower in height compared to the previous model. It looks one size larger than its predecessor, and the major mechanical changes are that the front suspension has been changed from the previous double wishbone to a MacPherson strut type, which is the same as the Bluebird and Laurel, and the Deluxe model and above are equipped with disc brakes at the front. For the rear wheels, contrary to Nissan’s recent design philosophy of using all-wheel independent suspension, the good old (?) rigid axle and leaf springs are retained.
The engine is a Prince-developed G15 type 1483cc five-bearing 88ps/6600rpm four-cylinder with a crossflow aluminum head, which was introduced during the minor change in August last year, and has been slightly revised. The biggest modification is that the block has been tilted 12° to the left, which was done to share the block with the 1.8-liter Laurel (the G18 for the Laurel was also originally designed by Prince and is based on the G15 type).
The C/G testers’ first impressions was that that this engine is powerful, even at high speeds, and that the drivetrain is extremely quiet and smooth. This impression did not change by the end of the test. The SOHC engine has extremely high intake and exhaust efficiency, and in first and second gears, it can rev freely up to over 7000rpm. Valve gear bounce does not occur even at this speed. In actual driving, there are few opportunities and no point in using such engine speeds, but if you push it up to 6500rpm, it will reach 46km/h in first gear, 70km/h in second gear, and 120km/h in third gear.
For a family car, the engine is a rather high-speed type, and there is not much torque below 2000rpm, with the power coming on suddenly from around 2500-3000rpm. It is not inflexible, but in top gear below 50km/h (less than 1900rpm), it feels rather lifeless. Therefore, in the city, you will use third gear as much as top gear, but the gearbox is so easy to use that you will want to downshift even when it is not necessary. Although the gear ratios are not as close as those of the Laurel, they match the power characteristics well, and the handover from gear to gear is very good, making for smooth acceleration. The vertical shift lever is positioned closer to hand than in the Laurel, the movements are relatively short and precise, the synchro is powerful, and there was no crunching even during quick shifts during the acceleration tests. There is almost no gear noise, and it is noteworthy that third gear is as quiet as the direct-coupled top gear. This gearbox is one of the best features of the Skyline.
The power performance of the Skyline is at an absolutely impeccable level for a modern five-seater family sedan. As detailed in our test report on the Mazda Rotary Coupe published in last month’s issue, the C/G Test Group conducts full-scale dynamic testing using a variety of sensitive test equipment on the 5.5km circuit course at the Yatabe High-Speed Proving Ground. Top speed and acceleration are accurately measured using what is known as a fifth wheel, an excellent type of electric speedometer, in combination with a photocell. The Skyline’s best maximum speed measured by the fifth wheel was 152.0km/h, the average for the 400m section by photocell was 150.4km/h, and the average for the 5.5km circuit was 148.7km/h. The engine speed at 150km/h was about 5700rpm, leaving a small margin to the power peak of 6000rpm. Vibration and noise from the drivetrain were minimal. The vehicle’s directional stability is so good that it is even possible to let go of the wheel at these speeds, so there is no tension associated with high speeds. The vehicle weight during testing was 1,210kg, which includes the weight of two crew members, test equipment, and fuel.
0-400m acceleration is of academic interest for a family car like this, but we recorded an average of 19.4 seconds in both directions. The clutch has a normal pedal force of 10kg and a not-particularly-long stroke, so it engages smoothly and is easy to use even for beginners. Also, even when repeatedly performing racing starts, there was no sign of excessive slipping or burning.
Today, with the highway network being completed in various locations, a car that does not offer comfortable and safe cruising performance at 100km/h can be said to fail the requirements of modern life, even if it is a low-priced family car. In this respect, the Skyline rates above average. 100km/h is equivalent to about 3900rpm. The engine noise at that speed is still low enough that it is not bothersome, and the directional stability is excellent. Wind noise is very low (as long as the windows are closed; more on this later), acceleration in top gear tapers off as you exceed 100km/h, but it still responds clearly when you step on the gas, and exhaust noise is particularly low, even among Japanese cars, which are generally on the quieter side. It is especially good that the exhaust noise, which is pronounced in the Laurel, does not resonate inside the cabin, and the engine-mount isolation is also superior to the Laurel, so very little engine vibration reaches the cabin.
In today’s world, where traffic is both fast and congested, quick acceleration is a weapon of defense both in the city and on the highway. In this sense, the Skyline’s third gear provides sharp acceleration over a wide speed range, and the data shows that it should be taken advantage of frequently. For example, the acceleration time from 50 to 70km/h, which is the standard for overtaking in town, is 4.8 seconds in third gear, compared to 7.8 seconds in top gear. Also, the acceleration time from 80 to 100km/h, a range often used on the highway, is a swift 5.8 seconds in third gear, compared to 9.8 seconds in top gear. On the other hand, even in the low-speed acceleration range of 20 to 40km/h, the time in third gear was 5.4 seconds, which shows that the Skyline’s engine characteristics and gear ratios are well-balanced overall. It should be noted that the test Skyline’s speedometer was exceptionally accurate.
One of the pleasant surprises while testing the Skyline was its exceptionally good fuel economy. The C/G Test Group tests fuel economy at constant speeds in both directions over a 1km section at Yatabe, and uses the same methods to record practical fuel economy data on regular roads. On regular roads, the best result was 13.1km/l when driving on the Tokaido Line to Fujisawa at a constant speed of 60-80km/h, and 11.5km/l when driving on the Third Keihin Expressway at an average speed of 80-90km/h. Even more surprising was that even when driving at low speeds in Tokyo, where there are many traffic lights, we were unable to record a fuel economy worse than 8.1km/l. The overall average over the 741km test distance (including the harsh maximum-speed test of about 220km at Yatabe) was 9.5km/l. The fuel tank nominally holds 50 liters, but when we accidentally ran out of gas at Yatabe, we filled it up to the filler nozzle and found that it held 52.3 liters. The aluminum head has a compression ratio of 8.5, so regular gasoline is sufficient. The exceptionally good fuel economy was probably due to the test vehicle’s slightly lean air-fuel mixture. The proof of this was that even in hot weather, the car would not accelerate smoothly for about 1km after startup in the morning unless the choke was pulled out a little, the tailpipe was dry and free of soot, and there was almost no exhaust smell left behind when we drove away.
The Skyline’s braking performance was, in our opinion, unsatisfactory. It has 265mm discs in the front and 229cm leading/trailing shoe drums at the rear (previously duo-servo drums front and rear), with a vacuum servo available as an option (not fitted to the test car). Their consistency is a big improvement over the previous duo-servo drums, whose responses tended to be lopsided. However, for some reason, the absolute stopping power is weak. The pedal pressure is normal for an unservoed disc/drum system, and the stroke is moderate. It’s fine for normal use around town, but under full braking (in neutral, from 50km/h), no matter how you hard you apply the brakes, the reading on the accelerometer (used in conjunction with the UK-made Mintex U-tube brake tester and a Mintex Churchill brake tester) is extremely low. We couldn’t record a value above 0.78g. Increasing the pedal pressure only made the rear wheels lock earlier, and the braking distance actually increased. We weren’t able to confirm whether the front-to-rear brake balance was poor or the test vehicle was simply out of adjustment, but we hope it was the latter. Since the pedal pressure was deemed a little excessive at high speeds anyway, we don’t think owners would regret buying the optional vacuum servo (master back).
Starting last month, we have been conducting a brake fade test. We apply 0.5g braking from 100km/h to a stop, then immediately accelerate to 100km/h and brake again. This is repeated ten times in a row, at 1km intervals. If there is fade, the pedal pressure increases significantly. The test results showed that the Skyline’s brakes have satisfactory fade resistance, as the pedal pressure increased only slightly in the last two stops, and there was only a smell of burning pads. Also, the brakes make hardly any of the squealing that is common with discs.
The handling is just right for a practical family car. As you can imagine from the weight distribution of 55.7%/44.3%, which is quite nose-heavy, the car has strong understeer. The recirculating-ball steering has 3.8 turns from lock to lock, but the amount of free play is very small by Japanese car standards, so it is not as sluggish as you would expect from this figure. The steering is generally on the heavy side. In particular, the steering force when parking will feel quite heavy for today’s skinny-armed people who have been spoiled by the particularly light steering of Japanese cars. However, at high speeds, the moderate weight feels reassuring and is particularly favorable for beginners. Thanks in part to the nose-heavy design, the car has excellent directional stability at high speeds and is hardly affected by crosswinds.
It is difficult to explain why the ride seems as comfortable as it does. The performance of the suspension itself does not seem to be particularly good. It keeps the car flat on good roads like highways, but at a certain speed, it seems to resonate in sympathy with a series of small irregularities, causing considerable up-and-down vibration. However, in some cars, vibrations that the suspension cannot absorb are absorbed by the seats, and the passengers’ evaluation of the ride comfort is surprisingly good; the Skyline seems to be a classic example of this. The separate front seats in this car are exceptionally good for a Japanese-made car. They are well-shaped, and the cushions have just the right amount of firmness and “give,” which does help to make up for the suspension’s deficiencies.
The rigidity of the entire body is quite high, giving an impression of solidity even when driving on rough roads, and road noise is well suppressed. There is a lot of kickback in the steering.
Next, regarding the interior, we have already mentioned how good the seats are, but the relative positions of the steering wheel, pedals, gear lever, etc. in relation to the seats are also excellent, providing an ideal driving position for drivers ranging from 150cm to 180cm tall. Visibility is also good in all directions. Almost everyone who drove the car said it was very easy to drive, and that it quickly felt familiar, which is largely due to the excellent interior design that enables a natural driving position. The benefits of the 100mm longer wheelbase are most evident in the rear seats. The dimensions are generous, with little intrusion from the wheel arches, and a thick central cushion, so three people can ride comfortably. In the old Skyline, there was a big difference in ride comfort between the front and rear seats, but in the new model there is not much difference.
In terms of minor controls, one change that greatly disappointed us was the disappearance of the convenient lever that served as an all-in-one control for the lights, dimmer, and indicators, which had been on the right side of the steering column since the first Skyline in 1957. Drivers who have been familiar with the Skyline (and Skyline 2000GT, and Gloria) for a long time will despair at this retrograde step.
Moreover, the lever that replaced it is rather inconvenient compared to those in other Nissan models such as the Bluebird and Laurel, and can only be used for the blinkers (on the Bluebird and Laurel, if you pull the main switch on the dash one notch, you can switch between the high and low beams with the lever, which is convenient in town because you don’t have to reach over to the dash to dim them every time you stop at an intersection, etc.). On the other hand, there are many improvements over the previous Skyline, such as the two-speed wipers now being a parallel type rather than opposed, and no longer leave a triangular patch of unwiped water in the center of the windshield (the Bluebird and Laurel still have opposed-type wipers).
There are signs that a great deal of attention has been paid to interior safety. The backs of the front seats are thickly padded to ensure safety even if a rear-seat passenger is thrown forward and hits them, and the front seats are equipped as standard with removable headrests (fixed height) and two-point seat belts. The true effectiveness of the headrests will not be known until a rear-end collision occurs, but at least front passengers can travel in comfort while sleeping by reclining the seat, fastening the seat belt, and using the headrest as a pillow. However, installing the headrests makes it very difficult to open the rear doors or open and close the rear windows from the front seats. In general, the interior construction and finish seemed slightly better than that of the Bluebird or Laurel.
The Skyline is of course equipped with a fresh air ventilation system, with nozzles on both ends of the dash and at foot level, and the ram effect blows in air when driving, but it is not as powerful as the Bluebird’s, and even in town we often used the two-speed blower (operated by a small push button that feels like it might break at any time) to boost the airflow. Also, when driving on the highway, the wind blows in quite forcefully at first, but as the internal pressure increases it becomes almost ineffective, so you have to open the rear window a little to let the wind out, which naturally increases the noise. It seems that there is no car yet equipped with a complete ventilation system that allows you to drive on the highway with the windows completely closed on hot days.
All things considered, the new Skyline shows clear signs of significant improvement over the previous model, and for those who are not satisfied with the Bluebird 1300 but don’t need something the size of a Laurel, it will make a superb five-seater family car.