|
|
12-13-2007, 10:29 AM | #133 | |
Captain
69
Rep 706
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-13-2007, 10:38 AM | #134 | ||
Major General
1153
Rep 8,027
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-13-2007, 11:26 AM | #135 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
207
Rep 1,864
Posts
Drives: F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Texas
iTrader: (2)
Garage List 2016 Porsche GT4 [0.00]
1999 Porsche Spec B ... [0.00] 2014 Ram 1500 Laram ... [0.00] 2007 Porsche GT3 RS [10.00] 2013 Tesla Model S 85 [0.00] |
Quote:
I imagine the the LF-A will be a near exotic, $100K+, compete with the R8/10, GT2, starter Lambo/Ferraris and upspec'd GT-R. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-13-2007, 12:11 PM | #136 |
Lieutenant General
612
Rep 10,407
Posts |
At sub 7:30 N'Ring times there is not a lot of competition from Porsche, Lamborghini, Ferrai nor Nissan. I also do not think many in the market for a Ferrari or Lamborghini would consider a Lexus no matter the N'Ring time. That being said I am sure the LF-A will be a brilliant car.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-13-2007, 12:16 PM | #137 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
207
Rep 1,864
Posts
Drives: F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Texas
iTrader: (2)
Garage List 2016 Porsche GT4 [0.00]
1999 Porsche Spec B ... [0.00] 2014 Ram 1500 Laram ... [0.00] 2007 Porsche GT3 RS [10.00] 2013 Tesla Model S 85 [0.00] |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-13-2007, 02:27 PM | #138 |
Major General
1153
Rep 8,027
Posts |
Actually I think you are missing my point. We all know the LF-A and IS-F are totally different machines and in the case of the LF-A Toyota are using all resources to make the car as good as possible but with the IS-F Toyota will make sure it's at least as good as the competition if not better.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-13-2007, 08:28 PM | #139 | |
Captain
69
Rep 706
Posts |
I just posted this in the Non-bmw car forum.
2009 Nissan GT-R vs. 2008 Porsche 911 Turbo:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...opanel..1.*#12 I like these part of the article. Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 07:54 AM | #140 | |
Major General
1153
Rep 8,027
Posts |
Quote:
Could it's awd system and gearbox make that much of a difference or are Nissan being misleading with their output figures. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 09:07 AM | #141 | |
Captain
20
Rep 658
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 10:25 AM | #142 | |
Captain
69
Rep 706
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 11:10 AM | #143 |
Expert Road Racer
59
Rep 1,329
Posts |
I've seen the first actual Japanese customer GT-R car dyno printout:
482 ps (475 hp) and 59.2 kg/m (428 ft-lbs) at the hubs, Dynapack chassis dyno, 4th gear pull , some type of limiter cut in. http://minkara.carview.co.jp/userid/.../blog/c227132/ if you can read Japanese, but no Japanese required to read the dyno screen shots. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 12:35 PM | #144 | |
Lieutenant General
612
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Now we know the whole story... I also just re-ran the power to weight vs. N'Ring lap time regression with 560 hp and found it to be outperforming the linear fit by a mere 1.7 seconds. Previously, we found in the regression thread that is was 25 seconds faster than the model predicted. If the car really had that good of a driver and tires as good as I expect they are the time is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING SPECIAL. Talk about dishonest and over-hyped.... That being said 560 hp for $70k is amazing and the car is darn fast. P.S. I think this is worthy of an main topic so I am going to re-post this! Last edited by swamp2; 12-14-2007 at 01:02 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2007, 12:50 PM | #145 |
Expert Road Racer
59
Rep 1,329
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-06-2008, 10:29 AM | #146 |
I love the ///M3, but I want 550hp ///M5
141
Rep 3,276
Posts
Drives: BMW330iE90
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NYC
|
im a hard core bmw m fan... but any car enthusiast would want this car... skyline has to be on everyones list.. and the look is growing on me, i realize it still is the same design as the concept (which i preferred better) if I have the money, i'd have the skyline gt-r as my sports car and m5 as my daily lol. I love m3, but that has gott to be the play boy car or some shit lol.
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-06-2008, 02:03 PM | #147 | |
Lieutenant
12
Rep 409
Posts |
Quote:
now that is fast, let's see if the time is validated |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-06-2008, 03:27 PM | #148 |
Captain
69
Rep 706
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-06-2008, 05:54 PM | #149 | |
Lieutenant General
612
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Gear/GT-R/M6/Overall % Advantage GT-R 1/4.056/3.99/4% 2/2.301/2.65/-11% 3/1.595/1.81/-10% 4.1.248/1.39/-8% 5/1.001/1.16/-12% 6/.796/1.0/-19% 7/-/.83 FD:3.7/3.62 What this means is that in all gears except 1st the torque multiplication is well in favor of the M6, the higher hp and higher redline should be in its favor as well. However, the actual torque produced by the GT-R is a large advantage for it. To really fully account for gearing you need to consider engine torque vs. rpm, gear ratios, final drive, losses and even tire size. When you do this you can compute accelerating torque and force at the rear wheels. At the end of the day this is the sole thing that accelerates a car. I updated the loss figures for the M6 and GT-R to be as follows (partly based on advice from Bruce A.) Item/M6/GT-R Trans/4%/4% Diff/2%/1% Axles/6%/3% Tire and aerodynamics losses remain per CarTest defaults. The force at the drive wheel then looks like this (1st figure below), again advantage is for the M6. For the acceleration simulations I have used shift times for SMG III at 150 ms (recent G-tech findings at m5board.com) and for the GT-R at 100 ms. I simply do not buy their quoted times of 200 ms for a dual clutch system. The updated performance simulations are shown below. The numbers for the M6 are too good, again meaning that the loss figures are probably a bit too low for both cars. Adding loss for the GT-R will slow it down and the figures below are close to stated values for 0-60 but still a bit slow for the 1/4 mi. More losses will bring the 1/4 mi figure into the 12's and move the trap even further away from test results. The conclusion still remains that the car is performing better than its power, weight, gearing, etc. dictate. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-06-2008, 08:03 PM | #150 |
Captain
20
Rep 658
Posts |
I don't want to have a big long debate on this, but the M6 seems to be much faster in simulation than whats been tested:
R&T: http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...data_panel.pdf C&D: http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...ecs-page3.html and the GTR seems to be slower. I have a feeling cartest isn't so good at simualting a car with launch control. |
Appreciate
0
|
02-06-2008, 08:15 PM | #151 | |
Lieutenant General
612
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|