Nissan Violet Hardtop 1600SSS-E (1973)
Publication: Car Graphic
Format: Road Test
Date: April 1973
Author: “C/G Test Group” (uncredited)
Summary: Bluebird 510 in new clothes. Equipped with electronic fuel injection. Engine improved but still rough and noisy when revved up. Excellent 5-speed gearbox. A bit high geared overall. Handling is on the dull side. Nice, luxurious cabin. Brakes prone to fade.
Road testing the Violet Hardtop 1600SSS-E
Nissan’s new 1.5-liter-class Violet series was announced in January, and we featured an overview and brief road impression in last month’s issue. This time, we went to the Yatabe test course to conduct a full test of the car’s top speed, acceleration, and other performance characteristics. The test car was the same as before, the highest-end and highest-performance version in the series, the Hardtop 1600SSS-E (840,000 yen for delivery in Tokyo).
The Violet’s body design keeps up with current trends in domestic passenger-car styling, with an abundance of curves and sculpted surfaces that seems almost unnecessary. However, the majority of its engine, transmission, and chassis components are inherited from the old 510-type Bluebird (production of which ended at the end of last year), and shared with the current Bluebird U (610). This makes it essentially an old car with a new body, so to speak–and in that sense, like the Mitsubishi Lancer we tested at the same time, it lacks a certain freshness. However, most new models these days are born with this kind of background, and while they may not offer anything especially groundbreaking, we can expect more refinement than in the past in details such as chassis tuning, soundproofing, vibration-proofing, and interior layout. For car manufacturers, this is also a safer, lower-risk method of developing new models.
In the case of the Violet Hardtop 1600SSS-E, the engine is essentially the same L16 type SOHC four-cylinder with Bosch electronically controlled fuel injection that is used in the Bluebird U 1600SSS-E. The suspension is also borrowed from the Bluebird U, with MacPherson struts and coil springs in the front, and semi-trailing arms with coil springs in the rear. The only new component designed specifically for this model is the standard 5-speed gearbox. Except for the sporty SSS series, all Violet models (two- and four-door sedans and hardtops) use a rigid rear axle suspended by semi-elliptical leaf springs. This is in fact the biggest difference from the old 510, and we plan to cover that version in a separate test drive report soon.
The 1595cc four-cylinder engine has the same output figures as the Bluebird U 1600SSS-E, producing 115ps/6200rpm and a maximum torque of 14.6kgm/4400rpm, but the compression ratio is 0.5 lower at 9.0, making it possible to use regular gasoline. Thanks to the electronic fuel injection, which automatically determines the mixture according to the ambient temperature, cooling water temperature, manifold vacuum, etc., cold starts are extremely easy. Even on cold early mornings when the temperature is around freezing, the engine wakes up obediently with just a moment of cranking, quickly settling into its somewhat rough idle around 700rpm. However, it is slow to warm up; only after waiting about four minutes with the throttle gently depressed and the engine at about 2000rpm does the needle on the water temperature gauge begin to move. On the other hand, there is almost no hesitation or jerking even if one drives off immediately, and in that case, the engine warms up fully in about three minutes.
Nissan’s L-series engine has been singled out for being particularly bad among the domestic manufacturers’ generally rough four-cylinder units, but when combined with the Violet body, it is greatly improved in this respect. At low and medium engine speeds, it can now be said that its quietness and smoothness are at normal levels. This is probably the result of repeated improvements to the engine itself, as well as the attention paid to soundproofing and vibration-proofing of the engine mounts, firewall, and floor. However, at higher engine speeds, it remains as noisy and rough as ever. This becomes clear at 4000rpm and above, and it even feels psychologically tiresome once it exceeds 5000rpm. The rev counter is scaled up to 8000rpm, with the yellow zone starting from 6500rpm and red from 7000rpm, but the practical limit is 6000rpm at most. The relatively tall gearing, for a 1.6-liter practical car, gives more than enough practical performance if you only use up to 5000rpm in each gear, which is a big relief. The engine pulls easily to 7000rpm in the lower three gears, where the maximum speeds are 53km/h in first gear, 90km/h in second, and 141km/h in third. Therefore, even if the driver keeps the revs limited to 5000rpm, it is still possible to reach 38km/h in first gear, 64km/h in second gear, and 100km/h in third gear, so there is no problem leading the flow of traffic at a brisk pace.
Compared to the premium-fuel 1.6-liter fuel-injected unit in the Bluebird U, the Violet’s regular-fuel unit seemed a bit less punchy at high speeds. This was demonstrated by the fact that, while the Violet’s acceleration times were 0.2 seconds faster than the U from 0-50m, and 0.1 seconds faster from 0-100m, the cars were tied for 0-200m, and the Violet fell 0.1 second behind from 0-400m, and 0.4 seconds behind from 0-1000m. Since the cars’ overall gearing is nearly identical, the Violet’s 20kg lighter weight gives it an advantage at the start, but the difference in top-end power becomes apparent when pushing each gear to the limit before upshifting. The Violet’s top speed in the flying kilometer was also significantly lower, at 165.1km/h compared to the U’s 172.4km/h. In direct fourth gear, the U revved to 6300rpm and reached 172km/h, while the Violet managed only 163km/h at 6150rpm. The test car’s speedometer was surprisingly lenient, passing the 180km/h mark long before it reached its fourth-gear maximum, and by the time it reached its top speed in fifth, the needle was wandering off the scale.
The 5-speed gearbox that is paired with this engine was newly designed for the Violet, and is standard on the SSS-E. It can also be selected as an option for the SSS with twin SU carburetors. The ratios are 3.382 / 2.013 / 1.312 / 1.000 / 0.854, which are slightly wider than the 3.321 / 2.077 / 1.308 / 1.000 / 0.864 of the U, but combined with the engine’s flat torque characteristics, you don’t actually need five gears. The top three gears are particularly close to one other, so when driving on normal public roads, you may even wonder which gear to use. Even if you decide to be lazy and just shift from first to third to fifth, it still runs quite well.
The shift pattern has second through fifth gears arranged in an H-shape, with first gear to the left and down, a difficult-looking shift pattern found in rear-engined Porsches up to the 2.2 liter 911, and in the current VW-Porsche 914. In practice, this layout is easier than it appears. First gear is used only for starting from rest, while fifth gear can be used frequently in the city, and in that sense, it can be said to be rather convenient. To prevent inexperienced drivers from shifting left and up into reverse instead of first by mistake, the gate on the left requires the driver to push the lever against a strong spring, and a warning buzzer sounds when the gear lever goes into reverse. Abandoning a tradition of the Bluebird SSS, the gearbox uses a normal balk-ring synchro instead of the former Porsche type, but its capacity is sufficient for the 115ps output, and the synchro could not be beaten during the acceleration tests. The lever movement is not too large, and the feel is crisp and pleasant. The gear change on the test car was a bit stiff and heavy, but this was probably because it was still practically a brand-new car.
The handling is typical of Nissan cars: settled and stable, but generally rather dull and sluggish. Still, anyone switching from the old 510 will likely feel that the steering response has become noticeably more precise. In the past, no matter how much you turned the steering wheel, the car would resist turning in obediently, displaying excessive understeer (partly because the rear tires gripped so well). This has been reduced in the Violet, so that the more you turn the wheel, the more the front end follows. However, the steering has nearly 10cm of free play (including purely mechanical play) around the center position, so that when driving straight, turning the wheel slightly left or right produces almost no reaction from the car. Then, if you continue to turn the wheel, it suddenly responds right where the play ends, which can be quite a surprise. Even so, compared to the Lancer we tested at the same time, the feel is looser and much more vague.
Despite the improvements, the Violet’s chassis remains characterized by strong understeer. In the pylon slalom, after a few turns, the amplitude of front-end push became too large and the car could no longer turn cleanly, so we had to consciously lift off the throttle to tuck in the nose and nudge the tail out, just as if it were a front-wheel-drive car, to regain control. On the other hand, if you apply excess power and break the tail loose, the ultimate cornering limit is high, which is the strength of the independent rear suspension. But in that case, even with the quick steering, which has a relatively fast ratio and 3.3 turns lock to lock, you have to make frantic corrections to stay on course, and the roll angles are large. This looks impressively dramatic from the outside, and the driver is certainly working hard, but the results are slower than the Lancer, which seems to run more smoothly and gradually through the pylons.
The test car was fitted with optional radial tires (Bridgestone Super Speed Radial 20 165SR-13 in this case), and while the ride was much firmer compared to the standard bias-ply tires (Bridgestone Super Speed 5 6.45S-13-4PR) of the test car in last month’s issue, we couldn’t think of any particular advantages. On dry roads, at least, there likely won’t be much difference. The wheels are 4.5J x 13 for the SSS series (4J x 13 for other Violets), and this has probably helped to improve handling compared to the 510, but rather than saying it has improved, it should again be said that it has become “normal.” It seems that Nissan’s engineers interpret the deliberately insensitive handling “character” of the Cedric/Gloria, Fairlady Z, Skyline, Laurel, Bluebird U, and Sunny 1400, a feeling akin to steering a large ship, as being particularly well-suited to ordinary drivers.
In last month’s road impression, the Violet’s brakes held up well even after a series of very tough downhill runs. At Yatabe, however, our “0-100-0” fade test proved to be too much for them. In this test, we accelerate from a standstill to 100km/h, hit the brakes with the equivalent of 0.5g deceleration, accelerate again as soon as we stop, and repeat the cycle ten times. From around the fifth stop, brake pedal pressure increased sharply, a burning smell filled the interior, and white smoke billowed out from the wheel wells. By the tenth stop, the brake pedal pressure started to reduce again, but by then, the braking distances were hopelessly long. The amount of nose dive during sudden braking, however, was very small.
By the standards of recent Nissan cars, the interior is relatively straightforward. The instrument panel, based on an oval theme, is somewhat reminiscent of the Toyota Celica, and the six gauges, large and small, lined up across it are covered by a single sheet of non-reflective glass. This layout is much easier to use than the gloomy designs where each gauge seems to be hiding in the depths of a deep cave. The leather-rimmed steering wheel is also pleasing to the hands, but the overall feeling of the cabin is somewhat cramped because the surrounding controls, scuttle, windowsills, and waistline are too high for the relatively low seating position, forcing you to crane your neck as if you’re sitting in a bathtub. This effect was especially noticeable because the accompanying Lancer boasted a higher seat and a wider field of vision.
In terms of secondary controls, the heater/ventilation system stands out as excellent. Not only can a large amount of cool air be brought in from the eyelet-shaped vents on both sides of the dash, but the heater can also be finely adjusted in three stages to balance the cool air at face level, making it very comfortable. The ram effect caused by the wind is not sensitive to changes in vehicle speed, so there is no need to fiddle with the temperature control lever. To switch on the lights, you pull the knob on the bottom right of the dash one notch, and then use the lever on the steering column to switch between the parking lights and headlights, operate the high and low beams, and so on. This is a convenient system, especially since the main switch is located quite far away.
Fuel consumption was a middling 7.4km/l over the 500km test distance, including the tough testing at Yatabe. In crowded city streets, it averaged around 6.5-7km/l. Constant-speed fuel economy was not particularly impressive either, but in any case, it is unlikely to get any worse in such situations. In normal driving, unless you are driving extremely quickly, it should be possible to take advantage of the characteristics of the electronically controlled fuel injection, which cuts off the fuel supply when the throttle is closed, and once you get used to it, you should be able to drive quite economically.
After the test, our impression of the Violet remained in our minds only in a very vague form. It is a faithful successor to the Bluebird 510, a scaled-down version of the Bluebird U, and, in short, a contemporary Nissan compact car. So, if a current Nissan owner were to switch from their car into this one, they would probably think, “ah, just as I expected,” and if it were someone’s very first time driving this kind of car, they might come to understand that this is what a normal car is like. That, presumably, is exactly what the designers of the Violet had in mind.
Postscript: Story Photos
