Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

10 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
> 2009 Nissan GT-R (R35), The New Generation of GT-R
2009 NISSAN GT-R (R35)
Good or Bad
Frozen [ 22 ] ** [35.48%]
Cool [ 20 ] ** [32.26%]
Uncool [ 15 ] ** [24.19%]
MJU [ 5 ] ** [8.06%]
Total Votes: 62
  
Phix
post Jul 1 2008, 08:51 AM
Post #41


Banned
******

Group: Members
Posts: 11,268
Joined: 6-December 04
From: Ontario, Canada
Member No.: 1,208
Car: N/A



QUOTE(midnightdorifto @ Jun 27 2008, 12:24 AM) *
I'm just happy to see you still have emotions, kimosabe. Raspberry.gif

And like I said before, I think the GT-R is a cool car. But it will never be frozen in my book.

....sure, until his emotion chip goes out of control and Geordi has to remove it for his own good....

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
darinzon
post Jul 1 2008, 12:34 PM
Post #42


/ hell0
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,661
Joined: 16-May 05
From: Sherman
Member No.: 1,681
Car: College



i think i'll have to drive it before i vote.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mitlov
post Jul 1 2008, 12:44 PM
Post #43


Halfabusa lover
*****

Group: Banned
Posts: 5,339
Joined: 4-March 05
From: Ashland, OR
Member No.: 1,525



QUOTE(darinzon @ Jul 1 2008, 01:34 PM) *
i think i'll have to drive it before i vote.


What is this "withholding judgment until you have firsthand experience" idea you speak of? Clearly you are new to the internet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Jul 1 2008, 12:55 PM
Post #44


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



The Cool Wall has nothing to do with what the cars are like to drive. It's all about gut reactions and perceptions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bjorn
post Jul 4 2008, 06:32 AM
Post #45


Race Driver
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,587
Joined: 2-October 07
From: Canada
Member No.: 4,080
Car: 2009 Subaru Legacy



Its definitely not on my list of dream cars.

I respect what it can do, I think it is an achievement, but to use a top gear analogy, it feels like a white good. Too engineered. Saying that however the 911 is probably just as engineered, and I don't think that about it at all (except maybe the Turbo...).

Going back to what Uwe said about power to weight, I understand his argument, but from my understanding the GT-Rs electronics allow you to have a much higher than normal corner speed, which could give a super crazy time, which could explain the discrepancy. Although I have never driven a GT-R or driven on a real life 'ring, so I don't know how much of a difference a higher than expected corner speed would make to a lap time.

I would like to see what kind of time a GT-R could set with out computer assistance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mitlov
post Jul 4 2008, 10:14 AM
Post #46


Halfabusa lover
*****

Group: Banned
Posts: 5,339
Joined: 4-March 05
From: Ashland, OR
Member No.: 1,525



Not to mention the Uwe's power-to-weight argument is based upon the claimed horsepower, which most people agree is significantly lower than the actual power output. This certainly isn't the first time that a manufacturer published significantly lower than real power numbers. I think they did it with old Mustangs? Something like that.

And it's not just preproduction cars that have more than the claimed HP. Production R35s have already been on sale in Japan for a while now. If there was a major difference in performance between preproduction and production, we'd know by now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moe
post Jul 4 2008, 10:52 AM
Post #47


Posting God
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,365
Joined: 30-January 05
From: Dubai
Member No.: 1,451
Car: '13 Toyota 86



I think they had an article somewhere. It's actually putting out 100hp than they claim. Also, if TopGear is to be believed, the Shelbys put out less than they claim.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Jul 4 2008, 11:02 AM
Post #48


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



The Top Gear dyno tested rear wheel horsepower and then compared it to the SAE crank #'s. Totally stupid. The Shelby's output at the rear wheels was within accepted drivetrain loss percentages.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bjorn
post Jul 4 2008, 11:02 AM
Post #49


Race Driver
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,587
Joined: 2-October 07
From: Canada
Member No.: 4,080
Car: 2009 Subaru Legacy



^wasn't the whole TG thing a mix up of crank and wheel power? I thought it actually had 500bhp at the crank.

For the record, I wasn't trying to disagree with Uwe, given his experience with the 'ring i put a lot of stock in what he has to say about the times people are able to post there, I was just trying to present a reason why the times may have seemed beyond what the power to weight would suggest. Personally I have stopped putting a lot of stock in ring times, since so many manufacturers now rely on a stonking great time to prove the worthiness of their product. I find the whole thing kinda trite and wouldn't put fudging the numbers past a manufacturer.

EDIT. I do think its kinda pointless to argue that the car which did the official lap had more than the claimed 480bhp, since I don't believe the "GT-R makes more power than claimed" story has been widely proven yet. I could be wrong though...I personally was under the impression it was being propagated by some people who took early delivery in Japan.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Jul 4 2008, 11:10 AM
Post #50


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



Well I don't think they're fudging numbers but there's a lot of other factors at work. For instance, when the ZR-1 recently set a 7:26 on the 'ring, the article I read said that GM went for a rolling start instead of a standing start and the test driver said that "a few corners could've been better". So that's like...how do you really compare car vs. car when they're using different starts, when the drivers are different, when the weather's different? Every manufacturer goes out and runs their cars and gets the best time they can but maybe one manufacturer's doing a little better or worse out there than their competitors, or using a slightly different methodology. Makes the whole comparison of 'ring times that are within a few seconds of each other pretty silly (of course, if there's 30 seconds between a pair of cars, then you can probably take that as meaning something).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Uwe
post Jul 4 2008, 12:21 PM
Post #51


Pit Mechanic
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,582
Joined: 13-February 05
From: Germany
Member No.: 1,485
Car: Caterham Seven



Sport Auto uses a rolling start as well.

Clarkma, you're right. The weather, the driver, the tires, all this make a great impact and a few seconds up and down won't change the impression a car makes while a difference of 30 seconds certainly does. I like to take the Sport Auto lap times as comparison chart because it is always the same driver, we'll get sector times, cornering speeds and G forces and he will report in detail how the car behaves and if there were extraordinary circumstances like cold weather which gives more power to the engine but reduces the tire grip. He isn't the fastest driver on the Ring but in general he tries to drive as coherently as he can and professionals who are faster nevertheless confirm what he has to say about a car.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mitlov
post Nov 20 2008, 09:59 AM
Post #52


Halfabusa lover
*****

Group: Banned
Posts: 5,339
Joined: 4-March 05
From: Ashland, OR
Member No.: 1,525



Someone please change my vote from frozen to MJU.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Nov 20 2008, 12:51 PM
Post #53


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



Done
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moe
post Dec 7 2008, 07:14 AM
Post #54


Posting God
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,365
Joined: 30-January 05
From: Dubai
Member No.: 1,451
Car: '13 Toyota 86



QUOTE(Mitlov @ Nov 20 2008, 08:59 PM) *
Someone please change my vote from frozen to MJU.


I'll second that, except mine was originally cool.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Dec 7 2008, 12:49 PM
Post #55


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



QUOTE(moethepaki @ Dec 7 2008, 07:14 AM) *
I'll second that, except mine was originally cool.

Cool to MJU, done.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dukenukem
post Dec 7 2008, 08:42 PM
Post #56


**Snuggles**
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 14,251
Joined: 13-November 03
From: Dallas, TX
Member No.: 166
Car: 2006 Subaru WRX STI



I saw my first R35 GTR in person and it is HUUGE. Doesn't look nearly as ugly in person but damn its big.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moe
post Dec 7 2008, 09:25 PM
Post #57


Posting God
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,365
Joined: 30-January 05
From: Dubai
Member No.: 1,451
Car: '13 Toyota 86



QUOTE(dukenukem @ Dec 8 2008, 07:42 AM) *
I saw my first R35 GTR in person and it is HUUGE. Doesn't look nearly as ugly in person but damn its big.


That's most of why I find it so horrendous looking. I saw one parked next to a Bentley Continental GT, and it still looked massive.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
maxima302
post Dec 7 2008, 10:23 PM
Post #58


Pit Mechanic
***

Group: Members
Posts: 624
Joined: 18-May 07
Member No.: 3,886
Car: 09 Infiniti M45 S | W124 Mercedes E420



They are huge cars for sure!

Being probably one of the few ppl here who has driven an R35, I give it a cool... but only by a little bit. Its a "cool" idea, concept, executed by a great amount of technology. And it is impressively capable. But its not really that exciting to drive unless your on a track. I haven't driven it on a track, just around town a bit (got to bring one home overnight since I live just around the corner from the office). Around town, its really just another car. You don't sit super low to the ground, it doesn't sound exotic, nor does it smell Italian. But when you punch it, its a whole different story... the thing is scary fast, and you can get into a whole bunch of trouble very quickly with it!! Hoepfully I'll get some more time behind the wheel, but after just a short period, I'm not sold. For that amount of money, I'd probably either buy an NSX, Elise, or save up for a 355 GTB.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mitlov
post Dec 8 2008, 08:25 AM
Post #59


Halfabusa lover
*****

Group: Banned
Posts: 5,339
Joined: 4-March 05
From: Ashland, OR
Member No.: 1,525



QUOTE(maxima302 @ Dec 7 2008, 10:23 PM) *
you can get into a whole bunch of trouble very quickly with it!!


And that's just the transmission repair costs! wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
maxima302
post Dec 8 2008, 05:49 PM
Post #60


Pit Mechanic
***

Group: Members
Posts: 624
Joined: 18-May 07
Member No.: 3,886
Car: 09 Infiniti M45 S | W124 Mercedes E420



I heard we were taking launch control off of future models!! I believe in less than half of the BS that has been posted on the web about it though...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

10 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Closed TopicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd September 2017 - 07:20 PM