Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: 2009 Nissan GT-R (R35)
Dieselstation Car Forums > The Cool Wall > Legacy Cool Wall > Frozen
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
GTR



PERFORMANCE
QUOTE
Nissan claims a top speed of 310 km/h (193 mph) and various sources have achieved 0-97 km/h (0-60 mph) times of between 3.2 and 3.8 seconds. Edmunds.com achieved a standing 1/4-mile time of 11.6 s at 190 km/h (118 mph) using the GT-R's launch control system. Edmunds also speculated that faster times may be achievable on better road conditions than provided by the runway which they used for the test.Car and Driver achieved a standing 1/4-mile time of 11.5 s at 200 km/h (124 mph). Evo magazine achieved a 0-100-0 mph time of 13.9 seconds, one tenth of a second quicker than a Corvette Z06 tested under identical conditions. AutoCar achieved a 0-100 MPH time of 8.5 seconds. With a lap time of 7:29 on standard Japanese market tires, the standard-spec GT-R is currently one of the fastest production cars ever to lap the Nurburgring circuit.
In various comparisons under different criteria, the GT-R has outperformed the Audi R8, Chevrolet Corvette Z06, BMW M3 E92, Lotus Elise, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X, the three current Porsche 911s (Carrera, Turbo & GT3), and the Subaru Impreza WRX STI.


DESIGN
QUOTE
Nissan chief creative officer, Shiro Nakamura, has likened the new GT-R to the eponymous giant robots of the Gundam series. Nakamura states: "The GT-R is unique because it is not simply a copy of a European-designed supercar, it had to really reflect Japanese culture." Specifically, Nakamura noted that the GT-R's square lines and vents were influenced by Gundam. Designers from Japan, America, and Europe contributed to the final GT-R shape.Polyphony Digital, creators of the Gran Turismo series of racing video games, were themselves involved in the development of the GT-R, having been contracted to design the GT-R's multifunction display.


AFTERMARKET TUNING
QUOTE
Despite early concerns about the difficulty of modification of the Nissan GT-R, a number of modifications have been released. The previously reported "untuneable" ECU has since been hacked by several tuning houses.

It has been reported that Nissan has given access to the car to select tuners. Central 20, MINE'S, MCR, HKS, and Top Secret have been seen testing modified GT-Rs with the former two having conducted tests at the Tsukuba Circuit.

In a review by Motor Trend editor Scott Kanemura, it was revealed that the GPS system fitted to the GT-R would remove the 180-kilometer per hour (112 mph) speed limiter when the car arrives at a race track, but only on tracks approved by Nissan. Aftermarket ECUs have been developed to bypass the speed limiter, in addition to stand-alone speed-limiter defeaters. However, Nissan confirmed the GPS check is not implemented in American models.


2009 NISSAN GT-R (R35)
Engine
# VR38DETT twin-turbocharged 3.8-liter V6.
# 480 hp @ 6,800 rpm. 430 lb-ft torque @ 3,200 - 5,200 rpm.
# Dual overhead camshafts with variable intake-valve timing.
# Cast aluminum cylinder block with high-endurance/low-friction plasma-sprayed bores.
# IHI twin turbochargers, one per cylinder bank.
# Pressurized lubrication system with thermostatically controlled cooling.

Drivetrain
# ATTESA ET-S All-Wheel Drive (AWD) with independent rear-mounted transaxle integrating transmission, differential and AWD transfer case.
# Rigid, lightweight carbon-composite driveshaft between engine and transaxle.
# Electronic traction control plus 1.5-way mechanically locking rear differential.
# Vehicle Dynamics Control (VDC-R) with three driver-selectable settings: Normal (for daily driving, controls brakes and engine output), R-Mode (for ultimate performance, utilizes AWD torque distribution for additional vehicle stability) and Off (driver does not want the help of the system).
# Hill Start Assist prevents rollback when starting on an incline. DisclaimerVDC-R cannot prevent accidents due to abrupt steering, carelessness, or dangerous driving techniques. Always drive safely.

Transmission
# 6-speed Dual Clutch Transmission with three driver-selectable modes: Normal (for maximum smoothness and efficiency), Snow (for gentler starting and shifting on slippery surfaces), and R mode (for maximum performance with fastest shifts).
# Fully automatic shifting or full sequential manual control via gearshift or steering wheel-mounted paddle shifters.
# Dual clutch design changes gears in less than 0.5 second (0.2 second in R mode).
# Downshift Rev Matching (DRM).
# Predictive pre-shift control (in R mode) based on throttle position, vehicle speed, braking and other information.

Wheels and Tires
# 20 x 9.5" (front) and 20 x 10.5" (rear) super-lightweight forged-aluminum wheels with Gunmetal Gray finish.
# Exclusively developed nitrogen-filled Bridgestone RE070A high-capacity run-flat summer tires, 255/40R20 front and 285/35R20 rear.
# Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS).
# Optional exclusively developed nitrogen-filled Dunlop run-flat all-season tires, 255/40R20 front and 285/35R20 rear (includes Bright Silver wheels).

Brakes
# Brembo 4-wheel disc brakes with 4-wheel Antilock Braking System (ABS), Brake Assist, Electronic Brakeforce Distribution and Preview Braking.
# Two-piece floating-rotor 15-inch front and rear discs with diamond-pattern internal ventilation.
# 6-piston front/4-piston rear monoblock calipers.

Steering
# Rack-and-pinion steering with vehicle-speed-sensitive power assist.
# 2.6 steering-wheel turns lock-to-lock.

Suspension
# 4-wheel independent suspension with Bilstein DampTronic system with three driver-selectable modes: Normal/Sport (for automatic electronic control of damping), Comfort (for maximum ride comfort), and R mode (engages maximum damping rate for high-performance cornering).
# Electronically controlled variable-rate shock absorbers. High-accuracy progressive-rate coil springs.
# Front double-wishbone/rear multi-link configuration with aluminum members and rigid aluminum subframes.
# Hollow front and rear stabilizer bars.

Body/Chassis
# Exclusive Premium Midship platform with jig-welded hybrid unibody.
# Aluminum hood, trunk and door skins. Die-cast aluminum door structures.
# Carbon-reinforced front crossmember/radiator support.

Exterior
# Wide-beam headlights with High Intensity Discharge (HID) low beams.
# LED taillights and brake lights.
# Dual heated power mirrors.
# Flush-mounted aluminum door handles.
# Body-color rear spoiler with integrated center high-mounted stop light.
# UV-reducing tinted glass. Audio/Navigation/Performance Monitor

Interior
# Digital Bose audio system with AM/FM/in-dash 6-CD changer and 11 speakers including dual subwoofers.
# HDD Music Box system, including hard drive with 9.4 GB for audio storage.
# MP3, WMA and DVD audio capable. In-dash Compact Flash card reader.
# HDD-based GPS navigation with touch screen.
# Driver-configurable performance monitor, developed with Sony Polyphony, with graphical readouts of vehicle data and driving data displayed on a total of 11 screens.
# 7-inch WVGA high-resolution color-LCD display for audio, navigation and performance monitor.
hexagone
yes, I voted uncool.
Mitlov
Frozen.

I love the brutal "yeah, an engineer designed the bodywork, not a designer, you got a problem with that?" looks. I love how it's dripping with technology, and how the oh-so-advanced drivetrain makes this thing seem more at home in a Neon Genesis Evangelion manga than in a car park with Corvettes and Porsches. And I love its utter un-pretentiousness.

EDIT:

QUOTE
Nissan chief creative officer, Shiro Nakamura, has likened the new GT-R to the eponymous giant robots of the Gundam series.


It's funny, I had been thinking that ever since it came out. Not Gundam specifically, but the whole giant-robot-anime thing. I think people who say this car is fast but lacks character are missing the point. It's absolutely dripping in character, just a fundamentally different sort of character than you see from Porsche or Ferrari or Chevrolet.
Razor
The best performance deal ever conceived, and one of the most brilliant overall cars ever. If there were rankings within Frozen, it would be towards the top. thumbs_up.gif
Marien
I have to see it in person to judge the looks of this car. But until then I'll give it a solid 'cool'.
4wheelfreak
It's cool to the extent that when I see the first one, I'll try to flag down the owner. But it is kept from frozen because the car itself does as much driving as the driver. To maximize its potential requires a lot less input from the driver than in, say, a Ferrari.
fiber optic
It's wicked performance is betrayed by it's hideous physique. In most instances I can overlook this and I guess I should here. Something about this car has always irked me and I can't put it into words. It gets a cool vote from me.
Phix
There really is something that just keeps me from loving this car.

Ever since they decided to split the GT-R from the Skyline range and make this... I just can't really bring myself to care about this car to the extent that I did with the older GTRs.

I mean.... with those you had the whole base model RWD R32, R33, R34... and then you had the GT-R's.... with this ... i'm just saying I don't really like this thing as its own 'model' range. It's missing the added character that its smaller brothers managed to give it.
Mitlov
QUOTE(Phix @ Jun 21 2008, 09:09 PM) *
There really is something that just keeps me from loving this car.

Ever since they decided to split the GT-R from the Skyline range and make this... I just can't really bring myself to care about this car to the extent that I did with the older GTRs.

I mean.... with those you had the whole base model RWD R32, R33, R34... and then you had the GT-R's.... with this ... i'm just saying I don't really like this thing as its own 'model' range. It's missing the added character that its smaller brothers managed to give it.


Let me make sure I understand your argument. The existence of the 328i makes the M3 cooler than it otherwise would be? The existence of the Lancer ES makes the EVO X cooler than it otherwise would be? In other words, you like your performance cars to be hopped-up versions of more pedestrian cars, not designed from the ground up?
moe
QUOTE(Mitlov @ Jun 22 2008, 08:21 AM) *
Let me make sure I understand your argument. The existence of the 328i makes the M3 cooler than it otherwise would be? The existence of the Lancer ES makes the EVO X cooler than it otherwise would be? In other words, you like your performance cars to be hopped-up versions of more pedestrian cars, not designed from the ground up?


That does kind of make sense. Without the 3-series, the M3 would be bland performance coupe, and without the Lancer the Evo would be another over-specced rice rocket. The fact that they had such humble origins really adds a lot to their appeal.

I'm really not sure what to vote. On one hand, we're looking one of the most capable performance cars of all-time, and at bargain price too. Something about it leaves me cold too...I guess I'll give it a frozen based on the fact that if I ever get to drive one, I'm sure it'll blow me away.

EDIT: I figured out what I don't like, I know this isn't the point, but it has ZERO sex appeal. Change my vote to cool please.
Razor
The thing about the Evo is, originally there was NO Lancer, there was only the Mitsubishi Evolution based directly off of the company's WRC cars. But yeah, that does make good sense. It gives the upgraded model the flagship feeling, in a way, even if it isn't (like, for BMW the M6 would technically be considered the flagship, but the M3 still feels top-of-the-line).
midnightdorifto
QUOTE(Razor @ Jun 22 2008, 06:14 AM) *
The thing about the Evo is, originally there was NO Lancer, there was only the Mitsubishi Evolution based directly off of the company's WRC cars. But yeah, that does make good sense. It gives the upgraded model the flagship feeling, in a way, even if it isn't (like, for BMW the M6 would technically be considered the flagship, but the M3 still feels top-of-the-line).

QUOTE(Wikipedia)
The Evolution I was introduced in 1992 to compete in the World Rally Championship. It used the 2.0 L turbocharged DOHC engine and 4WD drivetrain from the original Galant VR-4 in a Lancer chassis, and was sold in GSR and RS models.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancer_Evolution

The GT-R has been best described as a $80,000 cheat code. It weighs as much as a new CTS sedan (!), and, despite how unbelievably quick it is, setting low times to me on any track is akin to beating a video game on easy - sure, it makes you feel good inside, but there was no skill involved in doing so.

I would buy one of these as a daily driver for sure, and I am no less impressed by what they've accomplished here, but this just isn't a car that I would ever consider frozen. A solid cool for sheer numbers and engineering hours, but no more than that. Additionally, with all of the stipulations that Nissan has put on this car (restricted ECU, mandatory servicing after racing events [$$$$$$]) I just cannot in good conscience get into this car the way I could about the R34 or, even more so, the R32.
eraser_rx
from GTR to EVO....nice off topic....smile.gif
4wheelfreak
QUOTE(midnightdorifto @ Jun 23 2008, 08:14 AM) *
The GT-R has been best described as a $80,000 cheat code. It weighs as much as a new CTS sedan (!), and, despite how unbelievably quick it is, setting low times to me on any track is akin to beating a video game on easy - sure, it makes you feel good insde, but there was no skill involved in doing so.

That is exactly how I feel.
nismo
The front seats are two inches wider for only the american market.
Phix
QUOTE(Mitlov @ Jun 22 2008, 01:21 AM) *
Let me make sure I understand your argument. The existence of the 328i makes the M3 cooler than it otherwise would be? The existence of the Lancer ES makes the EVO X cooler than it otherwise would be? In other words, you like your performance cars to be hopped-up versions of more pedestrian cars, not designed from the ground up?

Yes.

I understand the idea and concept of 'character' and 'essence' is alien to you, Android, but tis' be my main point.
Uwe
The GT-R is for ESC sissies who need blinking lights on their dashboard in order to be fast. Uncool (and me not voting MJU is a flattery I'm not sure it deserves).
Mitlov
QUOTE(Uwe @ Jun 24 2008, 03:24 PM) *
The GT-R is for ESC sissies who need blinking lights on their dashboard in order to be fast. Uncool (and me not voting MJU is a flattery I'm not sure it deserves).


Did you mean to sound like a crotchety old man railing about "how things were different when I was a kid," or did it just pop out that way?
Uwe
I want to drive a car myself and not having some electronic systems done it. Doing a quick lap with that car is like making the first ascent of a mountain with the help of a helicopter. And don't get me started on the Ring laptime they claim they've done with a car in production state. This all smells of cheating and I don't like that.
Mitlov
QUOTE(Uwe @ Jun 25 2008, 12:38 AM) *
And don't get me started on the Ring laptime they claim they've done with a car in production state. This all smells of cheating and I don't like that.


Do you have ANY basis to say that the 'Ring car wasn't in production state? Every single test I've read or watched has commented on how surprisingly fast the GT-R is. Those electronics you hate so much? They work. So if you've got ANY evidence that Nissan was cheating on the Ring lap, besides the lap time itself, please say so.

Now, if by "cheating" you mean that the GT-R makes well more than the claimed 480 horsepower...that became a widely-accepted fact as soon as people started putting them on dynos.
Uwe
I don't know if you ever experienced what power to weight ratio really means but here is some food for thought: A Porsche Carrera GT has 2.3 kg/hp, the GT-R (according to the data given by Nissan) has 3.7 kg/hp. And the GT-R should have done a laptime only 2 seconds slower than a CGT with Walter Röhrl at the wheel, one of the best Ring drivers the world has ever seen?

My opinion on that is very explicit: NO FUCKING WAY!
Mitlov
QUOTE(Uwe @ Jun 25 2008, 08:41 AM) *
I don't know if you ever experienced what power to weight ratio really means but here is some food for thought: A Porsche Carrera GT has 2.3 kg/hp, the GT-R (according to the data given by Nissan) has 3.7 kg/hp. And the GT-R should have done a laptime only 2 seconds slower than a CGT with Walter Röhrl at the wheel, one of the best Ring drivers the world has ever seen?

My opinion on that is very explicit: NO FUCKING WAY!


I've been riding motorcycles for 11 years. I certainly have experienced vehicles with insanely-good power-to-weight ratios.

I also know that cars that don't look faster on paper OFTEN are. There's a whole lot more to speed on a twisty course than power and weight.
Synesthesia
This is the cool wall, so I don't give a damn about price or 'Ring laptimes. It's not I can buy it cheap, it's $70k versus $100k cheap. It's not substantially faster than it's competition, it's a couple of seconds faster around a 13 MILE TRACK. It doesn't offer a manual transmission, it's more computer than car (hill start assist!?). I don't particularly like the way it looks (as mentioned, it looks like it was designed by an engineer -- which I don't see as a positive) and as mentioned it has no sex appeal. Not cool.
Mitlov
QUOTE(Synesthesia @ Jun 25 2008, 10:12 AM) *
It's not substantially faster than it's competition,


Not that I disagree with the rest of your post, but if "its competition" involves similarly-priced cars, it really IS faster. Way faster. The GT-R is slightly cheaper than a base 911 Carrera or BMW 650i; a 911 Turbo is nearly twice the price of a GT-R. Of course, the GT-R doesn't compete image-wise and prestige-wise with ANY of those cars; it shares more in attitude with an EVO than anything else I can think of.

The Chevy Corvette Z06 is similar in price to a GT-R, and was 14 seconds slower. So that one is somewhat slower, but still pretty comparable. But the GT-R absolutely demolishes anything else in the $70k range.

This is what I used for lap time comparisons. I realize wikipedia isn't perfect, so if the information was inaccurate, I apologize: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschleife_fastest_lap_times
eraser_rx
by cheating, he means the traction and stability are corrected with computers, not by human foot or by steering work
Mitlov
QUOTE(eraser_rx @ Jun 25 2008, 03:24 PM) *
by cheating, he means the traction and stability are corrected with computers, not by human foot or by steering work


I understood him to mean that the GT-R that made the Nurburgring lap was a "ringer"--that it wasn't actually a production-spec GT-R. That's been a common accusation. Clarification, Uwe?
Uwe
QUOTE(Mitlov @ Jun 26 2008, 12:34 AM) *
I understood him to mean that the GT-R that made the Nurburgring lap was a "ringer"--that it wasn't actually a production-spec GT-R. That's been a common accusation. Clarification, Uwe?

That was exactly what I meant, Mitlov.

Only two more words on it. I actually have a car that has 3.5 kg/bhp and I actually have driven the Ring often enough. I have driven against people with cars that had a lot less than 3 kg/bhp and that were otherwise comparable. There is no way you can make that disadvantage up with some clever eStuff.

I will quit this discussion now because I think I've made my point clear enough. I'll wait until the real production car comes out and I am sure it will be fast but I'm sure as well it will be not as fast as Nissan wants to make us believe now.
Mitlov
The fact that the GT-R continually sparks this degree of anger and distrust among "old schoolers" and "purists" makes it even cooler in my mind...it's iconoclasm on four wheels.
midnightdorifto
QUOTE(Synesthesia @ Jun 25 2008, 09:12 AM) *
This is the cool wall, so I don't give a damn about price or 'Ring laptimes. It's not I can buy it cheap, it's $70k versus $100k cheap. It's not substantially faster than it's competition, it's a couple of seconds faster around a 13 MILE TRACK. It doesn't offer a manual transmission, it's more computer than car (hill start assist!?). I don't particularly like the way it looks (as mentioned, it looks like it was designed by an engineer -- which I don't see as a positive) and as mentioned it has no sex appeal. Not cool.

Damnit all, that was the one I was going to top my list with - no third pedal. That seals the deal for me.

QUOTE(Mitlov @ Jun 25 2008, 03:46 PM) *
The fact that the GT-R continually sparks this degree of anger and distrust among "old schoolers" and "purists" makes it even cooler in my mind...it's iconoclasm on four wheels.

Here's how this plays out in my mind:

This isn't like the big uproar of when they went to FI over carburetors, nor is it like when F1 went to V8s or lost the forced induction. To me, this is a baseball thing. When aluminum bats came out, they could drive the ball just a bit further and a bit harder than their wooden counterparts. Suddenly, every half-decent ball player out there looks like Hank Aaron, smashing the hell out of ball after ball. With a bigger sweet spot, and that *klang* noise they make, they simply were slightly superior to their wooden cousins. In essence, lesser players could prevail.

Yeah, the GT-R evens the playing field and can even make you and me look like Tom Kristensen. It's easy, its big, its fast, and every 14-year-old wants one. But for "old schoolers" and "purists" like me, well, hell, I still respect raw skill and talent over engineering prowess. Sure, its neat, its fun, and it can save my ham-fisted ass in a heartbeat when I actually begin to think that I am Tom Kristensen. But when I'm imagining myself sitting, watching a track day, I'll root for the guy who doesn't have more systems with acronyms for names than I can count on two hands. Don't get me wrong, I still voted cool because this is an engineering work of art, but it isn't anything really special.

The GT-R is the aluminum bat of cars - its a superior piece of equipment in terms of what it will do for you, but don't expect anyone else to respect any lap time you may (or may not, in Nissan's case) have earned. Again, at the end of the day, I'm rooting for the driver - not the car. Maybe that's personal preference, maybe I'm out-dated, maybe I should get a car with A/C and power windows and a working defroster and see what life is like with modern technology. But for me? Fun isn't an acronym.

EDIT: I'm talking about college ball here, folks. Real professionals still use wooden bats.
Mitlov
QUOTE(midnightdorifto @ Jun 25 2008, 09:46 PM) *
I still respect raw skill and talent over engineering prowess.


Engineering prowess is a fundamental part of performance cars. Engineering prowess is what separates a Porsche 911 from a Toyota Solara.

Shit, if it weren't for engineering prowess, this is what F1 would look like:



And this would be the WRC:

clarkma5
MJU. There aren't many cars that leave me colder.
midnightdorifto
QUOTE(Mitlov @ Jun 25 2008, 09:48 PM) *
Engineering prowess is a fundamental part of performance cars. Engineering prowess is what separates a Porsche 911 from a Toyota Solara.

Shit, if it weren't for engineering prowess, this is what F1 would look like:

And this would be the WRC:

You're missing the point. I gave the thing a cool because it was such a feat of engineering - if you're trying to peg me as a Luddite, you're way off the mark. But when it comes to my driving experience or racing, I can only get so excited about cars that take any form of technology that dumbs down the driving experience. And that's what the GT-R is - speed for idiots.

Most anyone can take a GT-R and be fast out of the box - and that might be just fine for you. Hell, I love going fast. But like I said before, this is beating a video game on easy - there is no challenge. This car will never be as rewarding as I prefer for just that fact.

And I most certainly don't subscribe to the fact that engineering prowess is a fundamental part of performance cars. I think back to the Cobras, Tigers, Elans, TVRs (sorry duke), Allards, Sevens, and GTI's (the Mk. 1) and am reminded that these weren't the most sophisticated cars of their day. I'll agree that it is extremely important and that frequently this reaching for the technological bleeding edge is a part of what the performance segment does, but I favor a philosophy of simplicity over a philosophy of sophistication.

Again, that's just my opinion, not dogging the fans of the GT-R.
Mitlov
QUOTE(midnightdorifto @ Jun 26 2008, 04:17 AM) *
And that's what the GT-R is - speed for idiots.
...
Again, that's just my opinion, not dogging the fans of the GT-R.


Of course you're not.
Synesthesia
Come on Miltov, drop it. He's not saying people who like the GT-R are idiots, he's just saying you can be an idiot and still go fast in a GT-R.
clarkma5
QUOTE(Synesthesia @ Jun 26 2008, 01:23 PM) *
Come on Miltov, drop it. He's not saying people who like the GT-R are idiots, he's just saying you can be an idiot and still go fast in a GT-R.


Exactly.
midnightdorifto
QUOTE(Mitlov @ Jun 26 2008, 06:28 AM) *
Of course you're not.


QUOTE(Synesthesia @ Jun 26 2008, 12:23 PM) *
Come on Miltov, drop it. He's not saying people who like the GT-R are idiots, he's just saying you can be an idiot and still go fast in a GT-R.

Thank you.
moe
I think Mitlov's blatant fanboyism for the GT-R will single handedly drive this car into MJU...tongue.gif

I still think it's ugly, and just a tad too soulless for my taste.
Mitlov
midnight,

Apologies for the misunderstanding.
midnightdorifto
QUOTE(Mitlov @ Jun 26 2008, 05:29 PM) *
midnight,

Apologies for the misunderstanding.

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.
nismo
I'm pretty underwhelmed with this car.

Plus, automatic only. Fuck that.
Phix
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....

darinzon
i think i'll have to drive it before i vote.
Mitlov
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.
clarkma5
The Cool Wall has nothing to do with what the cars are like to drive. It's all about gut reactions and perceptions.
Bjorn
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.
Mitlov
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.
moe
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.
clarkma5
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.
Bjorn
^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.
clarkma5
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).
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2018 Invision Power Services, Inc.