|
|
12-14-2007, 05:55 PM | #23 | |
Reincarnated
245
Rep 4,227
Posts |
Quote:
Nissan isn't the only manufacturer that does it. As for the time. It is still very special. Do you not consider the CGT or Koenigsegg time special?
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 05:55 PM | #24 |
Moderator
7515
Rep 19,368
Posts |
560hp is amazing for a production 3.8L motor. The tuners sill still have plenty of room to work though, just like they do with the Porsche H6. Now whether the new GTR V6 will take upwards of 1000hp on stock internals like the old Nissan RB26DETT remains to be seen. But I am sure we will see 700hp, 800hp, probably even 900hp from the tuners within a year, even if they have to rebuild the motor from the bottom up to get there.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 06:13 PM | #25 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
+1 on lucids last post as well. Both nicely stated, honest and important. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 06:52 PM | #26 |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Stop hatin people.
Let's not get carried away here. This is from one source only so far, nobody even knows what the article says and how credible and reliable it is. What if it's an early prototype of a chip being tested on the GTR. It wasn't that long ago when you Swamp doubted the ISF and right away called it being over-rated even after i posted a dyno test done by Automobilemag confirming the hp ratings to be correct. And to keep calling it over hyped is just ridiculous, stop hatin. The whole hyped about the GTR is it's performance not the hp figures. The performance figures where out way before the hp figures came out. So far ony one mag has confirmed the 0-60, lets wait and see if the peformance live up to what they're publishing.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 07:11 PM | #27 | |
Conspicuous consumption
99
Rep 1,183
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 07:12 PM | #28 | |
Conspicuous consumption
99
Rep 1,183
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 07:27 PM | #29 | ||
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Another article from MotorAuthority:
Article from Nagtroc:http://www.nagtroc.com/forums/R35-Dyno-t20782.html
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 07:35 PM | #30 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
See my previous comments about why I fully agree the GT-R is a special car despite this dishonesty. Last edited by swamp2; 12-15-2007 at 01:37 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 07:36 PM | #31 | |
Conspicuous consumption
99
Rep 1,183
Posts |
Quote:
This is the badge blinded rubbish that makes the serious BMW enthusiast shudder. BMW once again finds it's new target market and adds more fuel to the BMW poseur jokes within industry. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 07:42 PM | #32 | |
Brigadier General
401
Rep 3,288
Posts |
Quote:
The GTR will definitely have a presence on the road. And I was worried that because of that presence I would feel paranoid or pressured if owning one that someone would either be jealous enough to actually harm the car or that they would constantly try to prove themselves against it on the road. Obviously the latter is resolvable with a throttle blip, but after the 100th time I'm sure it would get annoying. My bottom line question is.. when driving a car around town, which car would you be more cautious and careful with? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 07:46 PM | #33 |
Reincarnated
245
Rep 4,227
Posts |
+1, not a fan of those statements by Champagne.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 08:27 PM | #34 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Let's not keep going back to the IS-F. The simulations with the incorrect final drive pointed to a very likely under-rating of the IS-F. The revised simulation with the correct FD as well as the actual performance numbers still points to a potential under-rating. Bruce A's simulations also pointed to a potential under-rating of the IS-F. If it is under-rated it is slight, 5-20 hp. Get over it. Let me be perfectly clear on this one. The GT-R is under-rated, period. There is simply no way it can achieve the numbers it has at its stated power and weight figures. The regression analysis shows it, 1/4 simulation times show it and the dyno now shows it as well. Even accounting for jworms good point about the specific dyno type there is still no way the resulting dyno numbers are consistent with a stated 480 crank hp. How much evidence do you need exaclty? Last edited by swamp2; 12-15-2007 at 01:38 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 08:34 PM | #35 |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
+1. I'll jump on that bandwagon as well. I would own a Nissan, I loved the little Sentra SE-R version when it came out and challenged the incumbent GTI. Of course the GT-R is just a bit different than that... The 350Z is pretty darn nice looking and performing as well.
Without some further explanation, Champ, you are looking like a blind, brand loyalist. If you would not own a Nissan just because of it's status, that is certainly your right, but to deny the massive delivery that is the GT-R or to think that the BMW name means it is a "superior" car is really a bit over the top. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 08:35 PM | #36 |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Let's put this in perspective.
Enzo: Carrera GT: GTR:
0 - ¼ mile 11.3 seconds 11.4 seconds 11.5 seconds est. 0 - 60 mph 3.4 seconds 3.9 seconds 3.5 seconds est. 0 - 100 mph 6.5 seconds 7.1 seconds 8.0 seconds est. Horsepower 660hp 612hp 580hp est. If this performance figures are over-hyped, then what the hell are we going to call other cars that performs less than these numbers, regardless of price. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 08:44 PM | #37 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
NO ONE IS SAYING THE CARS PERFORMANCE IS OVER-RATED OR OVER-HYPED. Furthermore anyone who would say the the price to performance ratio is over-hyped would simply have to be insane. Carlos, the Nissan CEO, is probably correct in that this car's price to performance ratio is absolutely untouchable. What is over-hyped is peoples false beliefs that Nissan has re-invented the sports car with some physics defying capabilities, i.e. that it can do what has been observed and claimed with its claimed power. My estimate is that the car has 520 crank hp. minimum. Lastly I would adjust your table above for the GT-R to read 1/4 mi. in 11.7 s (est) as I have seen that figure, but am not sure if it has been obtained. I would also decide if you are going to quote manufacturers claimed hp or a reasonable estimate of hp. Those numbers are IMO, 480 and 520 (min, est.) respectively. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 09:57 PM | #38 | |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Quote:
http://www.dynapack.com/dynapack.html |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 10:00 PM | #39 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
To me, the jury is pretty much still out on this one. I read that Edmunds thing and thought that the 911 Turbo's superior acceleration at high speed seemed about right, given similar power and lighter weight (although aerodynamics gets more important than HP/weight as speeds rise). Then I thought about slightly better GT-R performance against the six-speed 911 turbo in the quarter and thought OK, that trans has got to be worth something against an old-fashioned six-speed, right? Even the Tiptronic kicks the six-speed's butt, right? So what the hell, here comes that dumbed down Quarter, Jr. program again. I find some specs out on the net (4.05 first gear etc., 3.70 final drive, 480 HP etc.), plug in the best traction number (Quarter, Jr. don't know nuthin 'bout no all wheel drive stuff), and at 3970 pounds with a launch at 2800 rpm (who knows?), the thing runs an 11.69 at 120 flat. That suggests (to me) that it may be making around 492 HP (or about 2.5% higher than rated) given a 121 MPH quoted pass by Nissan - assuming they ran it with full tank and a 170 pound hot-shoe aboard. With a 120 pound anorexic hot-shoe or 50 pounds less than a full tank, we get an 11.64 @ 120.5, so hell, we're down in the weeds here as far as Nissan being cute on power ratings goes. Yeah, I know, there's that sterling 'Ring time, but hey, that 7.38 is only two seconds up on Rorhl's best pass in the 911, right? Plus pretty much everybody (including Edmunds) says that the GT-R is simply mahvelous (dahling!) in the twisties compared to the Porsche. We know Rorhl is an effing genius behind the wheel, but Nissan probably isn't going to put Ghosn's wife behind the wheel for a time this important, either. I think the jury is still deliberating, and we'll see after the car is in general hands, but I'm beginning to think we have the genuine article here - no cheating, or if cheating, at least only a smidge. Bruce Last edited by bruce.augenstein@comcast.; 12-14-2007 at 10:09 PM.. Reason: Spelling |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 10:38 PM | #40 |
MacroRisk
109
Rep 2,523
Posts |
Yep - in part to placate the Japanese authorities who dislike these hot cars (well, the modder crowd that gets them and then boosts 'em even higher).
__________________
Just thinking of something not so witty ///M3 E92 '09 Jerez Black | 6MT | Ext Fox Red | Tech | Prem | 19s |Heated Seats | iPod |Smartphone | Euro Deliv June 09 Sold: 540iT / 530i / 323i |
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 11:31 PM | #41 | |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-15-2007, 12:00 AM | #42 |
Major General
374
Rep 8,033
Posts |
Why not? What's wrong with owning a Nissan? I've owned two 300ZXs, and they were great sports cars. They were much more fun to drive than my current BMW 325ci. The BMW name itself does not add anything to the experience. I guess you wouldn't want to own a twin turbo Supra either since that's a Toyota. How about a Corvette? That's made by GM. So, that's probably not good enough either.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-15-2007, 01:50 AM | #43 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Conclusion: Quarter Jr. software is not a very reliable judge of a AWD + rear tranmissioned vehicle since it misses out on a significant amount of loss the car will have. Underestimating the drivetrain loss by only 5% (using the rough but reasonable estimate that RWD total drivetrain loss is approx. 15% and AWD is approx. 20%) could make Quarter Jr. underestimate the under-rating of the car by that same 5% of the vehicles total power or about 25 hp. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-15-2007, 02:22 AM | #44 |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Many of the folks on the power to weight vs. N'Ring regression thread and others on the thread about the 7:38 time as well. Many believed without a shred of skepticism that the 7:38 time and the amount the GT-R was an outlier in the regression analysis were points to simply be discarded. Not to mention Nissan fanboys all over other forums all over the internet.
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|