Nissan GT-R.. 500kms and initial thoughts

[adamr]

awesome car!!!!!!!!! congrats, your 335i looks really nice too ...

[BMW-videos.com]

The GTR is nice, but i'm sure it will not be anywhere near as fast as advertised. For what it is it will surely be fast, but beating most cars around a road course? Yeah right.

[hellrotm]

Is your 335i manual?

If so do you miss that in the GT-R?

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by BMW-videos.com

The GTR is nice, but i'm sure it will not be anywhere near as fast as advertised. For what it is it will surely be fast, but beating most cars around a road course? Yeah right.

You're kidding, right?

Pretty much all the tests so far (including those involving privately owned examples) show the GT-R as laying waste to pretty much everything else out there on a road course. This is extraordinary, since if you ignore the outstanding launch control the car won't stay with a Turbo Porsche or Z06 in a straight line. The last test I read (in Car & Driver) had the piggiest GT-R I've ever read about - significantly slower than the Porsche it was tested against (in a straight line) - but it still ruled out on the road course. Get real. The Skylines have been legends for at least a couple of decades, mostly for the handling.

Bruce

[BMW-videos.com]

Skylines legends? Is that somekind of silly joke? Legends of what, some secluded races in Japan with no international competition? There was a skyline in ALMS in the past that got destroyed. One lap of america DESTROYED. Some biased magazine articles with STILLEN ( a nissan driver) is some of the worst biased road coursing i've ever seen. It's almost blatantly obvious, AS PER THE OLD NISSAN GTR NRING times, that the new times just as the old 1/4 and nring times are nothing but a FARCE. Yeah sure, outbeat all those cars maybe with 550-600hp? The nissan GTR out slaloms an enzo? RIGHT. Give it some time and the nissan GTR will start looking like the legendary lie of its past. Give credit where its due for the awesome computer, the price, and its AWD system but jeez.

Lamborghini Superleggera
7:46 --- 159.14 km/h -- Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera, 522 PS/1528 kg (sport auto 09/07)
7:46.29 159.14 km/h -- Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera, 522 PS/1500 kg (Auto Italy 09/07)
Nissan GTR
7:35* -- 159.86 km/h -- Nissan GT-R, 473 PS/1724 kg (*mfr. estimation) http://www.motortrend.com/future/spi...08_nissan_gt_r
7.38* -- 161.63 km/h -- Nissan R35 GT-R, *company test driver Suzuki, slick cut tyres, track partially wet
7:44* -- 159.83 km/h -- Nissan GT-R, 473 PS/1724 kg *company chief engineer Kazutoshi Mizuno,


Independent Tests for the Nissan GTR
7:50 --- 157.79 km/h -- Nissan GT-R, 480 PS/1750 kg, Hrst von Saurma, partially wet track (sport auto 12/07)
7:55 --- 156.17 km/h -- Nissan GT-R, 473 PS/1724 kg (autoweek)

[footie]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

You're kidding, right?

Pretty much all the tests so far (including those involving privately owned examples) show the GT-R as laying waste to pretty much everything else out there on a road course. This is extraordinary, since if you ignore the outstanding launch control the car won't stay with a Turbo Porsche or Z06 in a straight line. The last test I read (in Car & Driver) had the piggiest GT-R I've ever read about - significantly slower than the Porsche it was tested against (in a straight line) - but it still ruled out on the road course. Get real. The Skylines have been legends for at least a couple of decades, mostly for the handling.

Bruce

+1.

The ability is without question and though there is quite a few equally brilliant cars which are as good or even better the fact remains that all of them cost at least twice as much and in many cases many more times than that. Forget it's race heritage as almost all of these examples are rwd and bare little with the road versions which carry the same name.

As for it's slalom speeds, yeah it is quicker than an Enzo and you shouldn't be that surprised by that, mid-engined cars usually aren't as good as front engined motors for direction changes and believe it or not fwd cars usually are the best of the lot in a slalom. Also the wider it is the harder it is to maintain a decent speed as the centre of the car is father from the cones.

I don't know but I think when SportAuto get to retest the GTR on the ring you may find that if track conditions are favorable the GTR will perform as expected.

[rick berry]

One of my friends had money down on a GTR. The dealer contacted him and said that they will now be taking BIDS from those who had deposits down for the alloted cars. My friend said no way. Going to now get an Audi R8 or Merc Black Series sedan. He has the money, but doesn't want to wast it. The GtR is still a Nissan.

[BMW-videos.com]

Without question? The GTR times are getting slower and slower as time goes by. Wait for the production GTR's to come out with further disappointment. To think a 3800+ pound pig is going to turn corners faster than a car weighing around 3100 pounds is a joke, all wheel drive or not.

Many of these tests are on stock tires, tires that will be changed out sooner or later ESPECIALLY on a track. There's a good reason a lot of the porsche track guys convert their all wheel drive cars to rear wheel. Less weight, and with race compound tires this supposed advantage begins to go down. What is it about this GTR that is going to make it destroy its AWD lambo and audi r8 counterparts? I think the idea that four wheel drive makes you corner better is a huge misconception, now acceleration out of the turns is a whole different story as all wheel drive would help prevent wheel spin.

With great R-compound tires wheel spin is probably severely limited and a good setup car with less weight would most likely destroy a GTR out of the turn. How do the GTR times make any sense, computer aides? It's fast yes, but no way it's that fast. I'll belive it when they start destroying everyone on the road course.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by BMW-videos.com

Without question? The GTR times are getting slower and slower as time goes by. Wait for the production GTR's to come out with further disappointment. To think a 3800+ pound pig is going to turn corners faster than a car weighing around 3100 pounds is a joke, all wheel drive or not.

First of all, as more tests are done, GT-R times are getting both slower and faster, as you'd expect. The 7:29 done at the 'Ring on production sneakers was pretty recent, as a for instance. In general, the car has never been as quick as the Porsche Turbo in a straight line, but has always been quicker around a road course. Always.

Second, the GT-R has been in continuous production since last fall, and has been for sale since December. Just not in this country or in Europe.

Third, although weight is a factor, traction and balance are of far greater importance in determining sheer speed through a corner.

Originally Posted by BMW-videos.com

Many of these tests are on stock tires, tires that will be changed out sooner or later ESPECIALLY on a track. There's a good reason a lot of the porsche track guys convert their all wheel drive cars to rear wheel. Less weight, and with race compound tires this supposed advantage begins to go down. What is it about this GTR that is going to make it destroy its AWD lambo and audi r8 counterparts? I think the idea that four wheel drive makes you corner better is a huge misconception, now acceleration out of the turns is a whole different story as all wheel drive would help prevent wheel spin.

Without rancor, it's clear you haven't done any significant time on a race track. Actual speed through a corner is less important than your ability to accelerate away from that corner. Furthermore, greater "stick" nets less than you probably think. Pulling a 10% higher G number through a turn nets you about 5% more speed through that turn, as a rule of thumb.

Originally Posted by BMW-videos.com

With great R-compound tires wheel spin is probably severely limited and a good setup car with less weight would most likely destroy a GTR out of the turn. How do the GTR times make any sense, computer aides? It's fast yes, but no way it's that fast. I'll belive it when they start destroying everyone on the road course.

Where have you been? GT-Rs have been destroying everyone on road courses since they came out. The worst performing GT-R I've ever read about is in the current Car & Driver. There was clearly something wrong, as it was down about 10% in power compared to its rating, and thus ran the standing quarter mile in 12.6 seconds at 111 mph. Tested against a Z06 (11.9 @ 124), Porsche GT2 (11.8 @ 121) and ACR Viper (11.8 @ 126), it was clearly bog slow. Yet at Buttonwillow Raceway, it ran a 2:01.1, marginally quicker than the Z06 (2:01.7) and slower than the GT2 (1:59.7). The ACR Viper destroyed everybody at 1:55.7, as you'd expect if you're aware of how serious ACR cars are, beginning with those incredibly quick Neons back in the '90s.

My one point of concern about the car is some of the inconsistent performance - in a straight line, at least. Car & Driver has tested cars with quarter mile trap speeds from 111 mph to 124+ mph, which is a ridiculous variation.

I'm not a major fan of the car, and have no wish to buy one, but giving the car its due is all I care about in this context. You seem to have a major axe to grind here.

Bruce

[BMW-videos.com]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

First of all, as more tests are done, GT-R times are getting both slower and faster, as you'd expect. The 7:29 done at the 'Ring on production sneakers was pretty recent, as a for instance. In general, the car has never been as quick as the Porsche Turbo in a straight line, but has always been quicker around a road course. Always.

Second, the GT-R has been in continuous production since last fall, and has been for sale since December. Just not in this country or in Europe.

Third, although weight is a factor, traction and balance are of far greater importance in determining sheer speed through a corner.



Without rancor, it's clear you haven't done any significant time on a race track. Actual speed through a corner is less important than your ability to accelerate away from that corner. Furthermore, greater "stick" nets less than you probably think. Pulling a 10% higher G number through a turn nets you about 5% more speed through that turn, as a rule of thumb.



Where have you been? GT-Rs have been destroying everyone on road courses since they came out. The worst performing GT-R I've ever read about is in the current Car & Driver. There was clearly something wrong, as it was down about 10% in power compared to its rating, and thus ran the standing quarter mile in 12.6 seconds at 111 mph. Tested against a Z06 (11.9 @ 124), Porsche GT2 (11.8 @ 121) and ACR Viper (11.8 @ 126), it was clearly bog slow. Yet at Buttonwillow Raceway, it ran a 2:01.1, marginally quicker than the Z06 (2:01.7) and slower than the GT2 (1:59.7). The ACR Viper destroyed everybody at 1:55.7, as you'd expect if you're aware of how serious ACR cars are, beginning with those incredibly quick Neons back in the '90s.

My one point of concern about the car is some of the inconsistent performance - in a straight line, at least. Car & Driver has tested cars with quarter mile trap speeds from 111 mph to 124+ mph, which is a ridiculous variation.

I'm not a major fan of the car, and have no wish to buy one, but giving the car its due is all I care about in this context. You seem to have a major axe to grind here.

Bruce

I'm just curious, are you trying to tell me that all wheel drive cars handle better than rear wheel drive cars? That they have better steering and control around a corner?

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by BMW-videos.com

I'm just curious, are you trying to tell me that all wheel drive cars handle better than rear wheel drive cars? That they have better steering and control around a corner?

No. Not mentioned.

[Davinhci]

awesome man!

[BMW-videos.com]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

First of all, as more tests are done, GT-R times are getting both slower and faster, as you'd expect. The 7:29 done at the 'Ring on production sneakers was pretty recent, as a for instance. In general, the car has never been as quick as the Porsche Turbo in a straight line, but has always been quicker around a road course. Always.

Second, the GT-R has been in continuous production since last fall, and has been for sale since December. Just not in this country or in Europe.

Third, although weight is a factor, traction and balance are of far greater importance in determining sheer speed through a corner.



Without rancor, it's clear you haven't done any significant time on a race track. Actual speed through a corner is less important than your ability to accelerate away from that corner. Furthermore, greater "stick" nets less than you probably think. Pulling a 10% higher G number through a turn nets you about 5% more speed through that turn, as a rule of thumb.



Where have you been? GT-Rs have been destroying everyone on road courses since they came out. The worst performing GT-R I've ever read about is in the current Car & Driver. There was clearly something wrong, as it was down about 10% in power compared to its rating, and thus ran the standing quarter mile in 12.6 seconds at 111 mph. Tested against a Z06 (11.9 @ 124), Porsche GT2 (11.8 @ 121) and ACR Viper (11.8 @ 126), it was clearly bog slow. Yet at Buttonwillow Raceway, it ran a 2:01.1, marginally quicker than the Z06 (2:01.7) and slower than the GT2 (1:59.7). The ACR Viper destroyed everybody at 1:55.7, as you'd expect if you're aware of how serious ACR cars are, beginning with those incredibly quick Neons back in the '90s.

My one point of concern about the car is some of the inconsistent performance - in a straight line, at least. Car & Driver has tested cars with quarter mile trap speeds from 111 mph to 124+ mph, which is a ridiculous variation.

I'm not a major fan of the car, and have no wish to buy one, but giving the car its due is all I care about in this context. You seem to have a major axe to grind here.

Bruce

Well then because you're the almighty race genius. Please enlighten me on where you learned this, "Actual speed through a corner is less important than your ability to accelerate away from that corner. Furthermore, greater "stick" nets less than you probably think." I found it pretty interesting considering tires are known to have won races, especially Michelin in competitive motorsport. Does greater "stick" not improve acceleration out of a corner dramatically, especially in a torquey rwd car?

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by BMW-videos.com

Well then because you're the almighty race genius. Please enlighten me on where you learned this, "Actual speed through a corner is less important than your ability to accelerate away from that corner. Furthermore, greater "stick" nets less than you probably think." I found it pretty interesting considering tires are known to have won races, especially Michelin in competitive motorsport. Does greater "stick" not improve acceleration out of a corner dramatically, especially in a torquey rwd car?

Again without rancor, my comments were in regard to how you make fast lap times. It's the awd ability to accelerate away from the apex better than a 2wd car that makes for the good lap times, not any actual improvement in cornering.

However, now that I'm thinking about it, my earlier agreement that awd doesn't actually improve cornering needs to be amended a bit. Thinking about friction circles, it's clear that a well-balanced awd car may do a little better than a 2wd car under certain circumstances (meaning cornering under power).

I was specific with my comment in regard to greater stick. Again, a 10% improvement in stick (lateral G) gives you only about a 5% improvement in actual speed at that point. Therefore, minor differences in stick around tight corners provide very little total advantage, although in long, high-speed sweepers the gummy sneakers can make for a significant difference.

Of course, greater stick provides for earlier and stronger acceleration away from the apex, regardless of which wheels are driven, so we are in agreement there.

In regard to your acerbic comment, I am clearly far from being a race genius (not even in the same zip code), but with a number of years and a few thousand track miles in my dossier, I probably am a track genius as far as you're concerned if you don't have similar experience. You're new on the forum, so you should be aware that there are a number of contributors here who could probably blow me into the weeds on any given track in any given car.

In others words, try and back off a little, tough guy. This is one of the more knowledgeable forums of this genre that you'll find.

Lastly, what is it with you and the GT-R? The car has already been tested to hell and back, enough to show its warts as well as attributes, and although it's pretty quick in a straight line (not amazingly so), it's clearly a track fiend - hence the hyperbole.

You sound angry about the car. Why?

Bruce

[BMW-videos.com]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Again without rancor, my comments were in regard to how you make fast lap times. It's the awd ability to accelerate away from the apex better than a 2wd car that makes for the good lap times, not any actual improvement in cornering.

However, now that I'm thinking about it, my earlier agreement that awd doesn't actually improve cornering needs to be amended a bit. Thinking about friction circles, it's clear that a well-balanced awd car may do a little better than a 2wd car under certain circumstances (meaning cornering under power).

I was specific with my comment in regard to greater stick. Again, a 10% improvement in stick (lateral G) gives you only about a 5% improvement in actual speed at that point. Therefore, minor differences in stick around tight corners provide very little total advantage, although in long, high-speed sweepers the gummy sneakers can make for a significant difference.

Of course, greater stick provides for earlier and stronger acceleration away from the apex, regardless of which wheels are driven, so we are in agreement there.

In regard to your acerbic comment, I am clearly far from being a race genius (not even in the same zip code), but with a number of years and a few thousand track miles in my dossier, I probably am a track genius as far as you're concerned if you don't have similar experience. You're new on the forum, so you should be aware that there are a number of contributors here who could probably blow me into the weeds on any given track in any given car.

In others words, try and back off a little, tough guy. This is one of the more knowledgeable forums of this genre that you'll find.

Lastly, what is it with you and the GT-R? The car has already been tested to hell and back, enough to show its warts as well as attributes, and although it's pretty quick in a straight line (not amazingly so), it's clearly a track fiend - hence the hyperbole.

You sound angry about the car. Why?

Bruce

It's simple I feel many of these times are blown out of proportion. 7:29 on the nring come on, the specifications don't come anywhere near to adding up. It all feels and looks like a blatant lie, similar to the old skylines. Not to mention the first review I read is with a supremely biased nissan race car driver steve millen. I just think we're seeing extreme success in nissan marketing, and very much feel they're hiding a lot of details from the general public. It feels like a big farce and a misrepresentation, this is my qualm. I sincerely feel the production GTR's will arrive at the track and be slaughtered by c6 z06's and GT2's, hell I bet c5 z06's will give them a run for the money, possibly being slightly edged out. While what I think is insignificant, it becomes rather tiresome to see the amount of nissan GTR trolls all over forums proclaiming the GTR as the king of the car world, godzilla, a legend blah blah, what a joke. I do not buy it

[BMW-videos.com]

Here we can get some perspective. Compare both videos.

NISSAN GTR

CORVETTE ZR-1
http://www.vette-videos.com/2009-Cor...aT8eHaWKI.html

There's no way the GTR is faster on the straight, so we can collect some time differences to see if that GTR is doctored. You can try and use the map or more accurate visual cues.

[footie]

Originally Posted by BMW-videos.com

It's simple I feel many of these times are blown out of proportion. 7:29 on the nring come on, the specifications don't come anywhere near to adding up. It all feels and looks like a blatant lie, similar to the old skylines. Not to mention the first review I read is with a supremely biased nissan race car driver steve millen. I just think we're seeing extreme success in nissan marketing, and very much feel they're hiding a lot of details from the general public. It feels like a big farce and a misrepresentation, this is my qualm. I sincerely feel the production GTR's will arrive at the track and be slaughtered by c6 z06's and GT2's, hell I bet c5 z06's will give them a run for the money, possibly being slightly edged out. While what I think is insignificant, it becomes rather tiresome to see the amount of nissan GTR trolls all over forums proclaiming the GTR as the king of the car world, godzilla, a legend blah blah, what a joke. I do not buy it

My guess is that the GTR has near perfect chassis balance. That means it can braking later and enter the corner at a higher speed than most of it's competitors without upsetting the chassis and causing oversteer. I doubt it's actual corner speed is any different because this is determined more by tyre width and overall weight though it's awd transmission will allow it to exit the corner quicker than most rwd cars simply because of the extra traction that allows for sooner application of throttle. So will they (GT2 and Z06) may have better acceleration from a rolling start they can't get the power on soon enough to post better trap speeds at the end of most normal track straights. This is why the GTR is like Bruce says 'a track star'.

The same can be said for the R8, it too posts quicker times than many of it's competitors on more normal length tracks but it lack of outright grunt stops it from getting near these same rivals on the ring where topspeed plays as much a part in a decent lap time as handling ability. We know how much quicker the GTR is compared to an R8 in acceleration up to speeds in excess of 150mph so basing my opinion on this I would say that any of the GTRs with the exception of the one tested by Car & Driver would be capable of getting very close to the 7:35 time in the hands of the Nissan test driver.

It's up to you whether you believe that the cars which have been tested to date are stock or not, whether they are only producing their quoted 480hp is irrelevant, what important is if these earlier examples are what will be expected when customer cars arrive.

[BMW-videos.com]

I tried to calculate the time from the moment each car entered the turn to the bridge on the straight. This is obviously not perfectly acurate but this time i'll start from the first flag to teh bridge.

It's very difficult to know the entrance speed of both cars or how fast they're going at the flag because the nissan video has no mph.

[footie]

Originally Posted by BMW-videos.com

Here we can get some perspective. Compare both videos.

NISSAN GTR

CORVETTE ZR-1
http://www.vette-videos.com/2009-Cor...aT8eHaWKI.html

There's no way the GTR is faster on the straight, so we can collect some time differences to see if that GTR is doctored. You can try and use the map or more accurate visual cues.

I matched both videos up side by side and their digit clocks both run identically and on the long final straight at the kink (Antoniusbuche) the ZR1 peaked at 178mph, the GTR peaked at 272km/h (170mph). So while the ZR1 was quicker overall and was clearly quicker in between the corners but I don't believe it was any quicker in the corners themselves, if I am right then making up 12 seconds simply in acceleration alone is also consistent with what the R8 is slower than the competitors which can't get the better of it else where.

[BMW-videos.com]

GTR
str8 bridge
6:48:70-7:18:40 29.7

ZR-1
str8 bridge
6:36:0-7:05 29

GTR
flag bridge
6:54:76-7:18:40 23.64

ZR-1
flag bridge
6:42:2-7:05.8 23.6

So the GTR that ran a 7:29 is perhaps even faster on the straight then the ZR-1?

Screw it, everyone should just quit manufacturing cars.. Nissan is faster or as fast on the straights with 480hp as even a freaking 620hp vette.

[BMW-videos.com]

Originally Posted by footie

I matched both videos up side by side and their digit clocks both run identically and on the long final straight at the kink (Antoniusbuche) the ZR1 peaked at 178mph, the GTR peaked at 272km/h (170mph). So while the ZR1 was quicker overall and was clearly quicker in between the corners but I don't believe it was any quicker in the corners themselves, if I am right then making up 12 seconds simply in acceleration alone is also consistent with what the R8 is slower than the competitors which can't get the better of it else where.

Nice how'd you get the speed of the gtr. R8 is one of my favorite cars by the way, can't wait for the TDI twin-turbo diesel v10 Saw it live at sebring. Perhaps I should get a vetter quality version of the video so I can read the damn tach

[BMW-videos.com]

"
At start of straightaway:

ZR1: 6.36
GTR: 6.48 Difference= 12 seconds

To the end of the straight where the bridge crosses
Times:
ZR1: 7.05
GTR: 7.18

Time to run back stretch:
ZR1: 29 seconds (ZR1 reaches near 180mph and holds back)
GTR: 30 seconds
"

Um, RIGHT? 480hp goes a long way in this GTR.