Crown

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-7UJKAhFI

So why under declare power figures? I guess they are using the 'under promise and over deliver' approach to impress customers.

skazzy:

So why under declare power figures? I guess they are using the 'under promise and over deliver' approach to impress customers.

 

To confuse the competition?

2005 997S Blk/Blk

skazzy:

So why under declare power figures? I guess they are using the 'under promise and over deliver' approach to impress customers.

 

Or to hide better things like its weight or give better laptimes than expected, by making you judge its performance en relation to a lower HP output.

skazzy:

So why under declare power figures? I guess they are using the 'under promise and over deliver' approach to impress customers.

 

who knows. It's Japan. They do many strange things. Remember the decades long gentlemen's Agreement between all the manufacturers not to produce a passenger engine with more than a stated 270hp.

Nissan advertises the new GT-R with 550 hp with a 0-100 kph (62 mph) performance figure of 2.8 seconds.

Keep in mind that we are talking about a car which costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.

For somebody who needs a fast as hell car for fun, the GT-R surely is a very interesting product. 

Still not sure about the reliability though, nothing comes for free in life.

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 997 Carrera GTS Cabriolet PDK, BMW X5M, BMW M3 Cab DKG, Mini Cooper S Countryman All4

It is GT-R policy

Gearbox not included lol.

indeed shifting is ancient technology - so is a fuel burning engine..  I happen to like both :) 

RC:

Keep in mind that we are talking about a car which costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.
 

It looks like it costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.  It looks ugly and cheap.

2005 997S Blk/Blk

Alan, those that I see on the road do not look cheap. The footprint is one of a serious racing machine. You can identify it immediately. 

RC:

Nissan advertises the new GT-R with 550 hp with a 0-100 kph (62 mph) performance figure of 2.8 seconds.

Keep in mind that we are talking about a car which costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.

For somebody who needs a fast as hell car for fun, the GT-R surely is a very interesting product. 

Still not sure about the reliability though, nothing comes for free in life.

2.8 secs!!!!! Blimey that's ridiculous!!!!

It looks a bit chubby but what a car though, what a car...

RC:

Nissan advertises the new GT-R with 550 hp with a 0-100 kph (62 mph) performance figure of 2.8 seconds.

Keep in mind that we are talking about a car which costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.

For somebody who needs a fast as hell car for fun, the GT-R surely is a very interesting product. 

Still not sure about the reliability though, nothing comes for free in life.

The question is, how many times can you get the car to hit 2.8s from 0 - 100 ? like you said, nothing comes for free

http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?/topic/64008-2012-transmission-takes-a-dump/

I agree with nick, it really does stand out. Its different and I like that, I also like its look.

Not so sure on the rear speaker being in between the rear seats though. The switches/plastics, again not so sure it's up  there with the Germans.

throt

"I didn't do it"

RC:

Keep in mind that we are talking about a car which costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.

Still not sure about the reliability though, nothing comes for free in life.

The old "Rule of 3's" in the car design world probably applies here:

- You can make it inexpensive and fast, but it probably will not be reliable.

- You can make it reliable and fast, but it probably will not be inexpensive.

- You can make it inexpensive and reliable, but it probably will not be fast.

With that out of the way, short of the early Godzilla imploding their gear boxes after too many Launch Control launches and a few electrical niggles sending the car into limp mode, the GT-R has been fairly reliable.

But god help me, there isn't a single line or angle on that car that even remotely approaches anything I would consider attractive or sexy. I've watched it on track in the FIA GT series and compared to the other cars in the field, the GT-R looks as if some Hot Rodder figured out how to get a copped and channeled armored car to go fast around a track.

Maybe they wanted an evolved look of a 49 Merc Coupe?

They are not the handgrenade many of you think they are. I know two people who own them for daily drivers. Thousands of miles and zero issues. Elegeant? No. Brutally fast? Yes.

Heist:

RC:

Keep in mind that we are talking about a car which costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.

Still not sure about the reliability though, nothing comes for free in life.

The old "Rule of 3's" in the car design world probably applies here:

- You can make it inexpensive and fast, but it probably will not be reliable.

- You can make it reliable and fast, but it probably will not be inexpensive.

- You can make it inexpensive and reliable, but it probably will not be fast.

 

Cheaper, better, faster; pick two.

JimFlat6:

They are not the handgrenade many of you think they are. I know two people who own them for daily drivers. Thousands of miles and zero issues. Elegeant? No. Brutally fast? Yes.

+1. I know a few people who use theirs as a DD, no issues at all.

BTW - That racing GTR does not have the same engine as the road car.

SoCal Alan:

RC:

Keep in mind that we are talking about a car which costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.
 

It looks like it costs half of what a 997 Turbo S costs.  It looks ugly and cheap.

It looks cheap but for half the money, I would still buy it.  If the reliability is the same as on the 997 Turbo S.

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 997 Carrera GTS Cabriolet PDK, BMW X5M, BMW M3 Cab DKG, Mini Cooper S Countryman All4

JimFlat6:

They are not the handgrenade many of you think they are. I know two people who own them for daily drivers. Thousands of miles and zero issues. Elegeant? No. Brutally fast? Yes.

No, the tranny is fine if used correctly (i.e. cool downs between aggressive runes). It was people mostly who did successive LC take-offs, they experienced the gearbox issue.

It is not Nissan's job to protect people from their own stupidity and personal accountability is of course at an all time low, but, they should have known this would cause a problem and installed a "lock out" feature. 

Although not their fault, it would have eschewed the negative publicity and murmurs on the web that befalled them when the transmissions started failing.

I like this Mizuno-san

He and his team have managed to bring a car to the market  that is faster than Ferrari and Porsche, the automotive aristocrats, at a fraction of the price. Even if there were some reliability problems initially his policy of continuous improvement must have ironed them out by now.

Style? It has the Japanese aesthetic which is fair enough and very honest, since it insists to carry its national style trademarks. Why imitate a foreign car? Maserati wouldn't style their cars like BMW and Porsche wouldn't do a Zonda.

"Form follows function"

For the GT-R to be so much cheaper than a Porsche, corners have to be cut. Cheaper and/or less durable construction/material will be used.

Can a GT-R go around a race track full speed all day? No, couple laps and the whole car needs to cool down or something WILL break. The transmission can't handle the stress, the brakes can't handle the weight, the other drive train components can't handle the work load. To put it simple, the car is under-engineered. It's a short distance sprinter, 100m dashes, damn fast one too, but it will be out of it's league past 100m.

Can a Porsche go around a race track full speed all day? Absolutely, and at the end of the day the driver will drive the car home, unlike a GT-R which will be on a flatbed. 911s now are pretty much bulletproof, nothing really breaks even if someone stress the hell out of the car. A Porsche is also a fast 100m sprinter, but it will also do 200m AND 400m without rest in between.

Whoopsy:

For the GT-R to be so much cheaper than a Porsche, corners have to be cut. Cheaper and/or less durable construction/material will be used.

Can a GT-R go around a race track full speed all day? No, couple laps and the whole car needs to cool down or something WILL break. The transmission can't handle the stress, the brakes can't handle the weight, the other drive train components can't handle the work load. To put it simple, the car is under-engineered. It's a short distance sprinter, 100m dashes, damn fast one too, but it will be out of it's league past 100m.

Can a Porsche go around a race track full speed all day? Absolutely, and at the end of the day the driver will drive the car home, unlike a GT-R which will be on a flatbed. 911s now are pretty much bulletproof, nothing really breaks even if someone stress the hell out of the car. A Porsche is also a fast 100m sprinter, but it will also do 200m AND 400m without rest in between.

For the price and heritage I would expect Porsche Turbo performance not to allow the GT-R to be even mentioned in the same context. We know that Porsche is the better piece of engineering but something from Nissan shouldn't come so close so as to force Porsche to give explanations.

"Form follows function"

...great video, thanks! 

Feb 29, 2008 5:05:55 PM

Boxster Coupe GTS:

According to Nissan, the GT-R engine produces maximum power output of 480PS or 473bhp at 6400rpm, implying 271bhp/tonne...

...but this maximum is described as "net power output", as follows:

*The engine power output values indicated in this catalog are all net power output values.
* Engine power output can be indicated as 'Net power output' or 'Gross power output'.
'Gross' values are estimations of power output of the engine alone. 'Net' values are estimations of when the engine is assembled onto the vehicle. For estimations of the same gasoline engines, 'Net' values are approximately 15% lower than 'Gross' values according to JAMA research.

...so that would imply that the GT-R engine produces maximum "gross power output" of 564PS or 556bhp!!!

...and given an official curb weight of 1740kg, that would represent a power/weight ratio of 319bhp/tonne!!!
...which could also explain why the GT-R is apparently quicker than a 997TT with 298bhp/tonne!

Extract from original Nissan GT-R press kit:

Boxster Coupe GTS:

...so that would imply that the GT-R engine produces maximum "gross power output" of 564PS or 556bhp!!!

...and given an official curb weight of 1740kg, that would represent a power/weight ratio of 319bhp/tonne!!!
...which could also explain why the GT-R is apparently quicker than a 997TT with 298bhp/tonne!

 

The power figures quoted by car manufacturers, including Porsche, in brochures, etc., nowadays are always the net figures. 

Gross power figures used to be quoted some years ago, particularly by American manufacturers, and designated as the SAE power output, since they were measured according to a Society of American Engineers standard. As the SAE standard did not allow for the power consumed by essential engine ancillaries, such as the alternator, it was less representative than the net figure, which the engine actually would produce at the flywheel in the car. The net (metric) horse power figures are expressed in PS, German for hp, as they are measured to a DIN standard. 

So this does not explain the GT-R's performance.

--

fritz

reginos:

 

For the price and heritage I would expect Porsche Turbo performance not to allow the GT-R to be even mentioned in the same context. We know that Porsche is the better piece of engineering but something from Nissan shouldn't come so close so as to force Porsche to give explanations.

What is the performance metric? Acceleration?

Porsche could have gone the GT-R way and shorten the gearing to produce amazing acceleration off the line at the sacrifice of high speed acceleration. Look at any acceleration graph/time, the 997 Turbo pretty much left the GT-R in the dust after triple digit speed. The shorter gearing in the GT-R comes back to bite it at speed.

Laps times? The 997 Turbo is a 5 yr old design and giving up at least 50hp if not more depending on who you ask on the GT-R. Is that a surprise that a ringer GT-R is faster? Even with the handicap, the 997 Turbo is still very competitive over a longer race. It may not stand a chance on 1 lap of the Ring, but have both cars do 10 laps and see who comes out on top. can the GT-R even survive 10 consecutive laps of the Ring?

I do have faith in Porsche in making the next Turbo the standard again. The 997 Turbo was the golden standard that every other manufacturers targeted to beat, it's was an honour to be the target, no matter the manufacturer.

Heck no one else even come close to build standard yet, the 911 once again top the chart for build quality and satisfaction of ownership. Another standard set by Porsche that others are trying to beat, including the new upstarts from Korea.

But give credit where credit is due, the GT-R was the pride of Japan on performance and it was THE standard to beat on the Japanese race circuit for many years. There is no shame in having a Nissan challenging the Porsche's performance, especially when the Nissan is the best Japanese can do.

The age old saying about buying German for reliable performance and buy Japanese for cheap thrills still stands.

reginos:

 

For the price and heritage I would expect Porsche Turbo performance not to allow the GT-R to be even mentioned in the same context. We know that Porsche is the better piece of engineering but something from Nissan shouldn't come so close so as to force Porsche to give explanations.

I have to agree on this one. The new 991 Turbo should, hopefully, take care of that but unfortunately there is already some sort of arrogance (or should I call it ignorance) at Porsche development regarding products like the GT-R, so I'm not sure if the new 991 Turbo will be able to wipe the floor with the GT-R, something I actually wished for. Not going to happen though I'm afraid.  The new GT-R is really a nice piece of development technology, despite it's weight. Now just imagine what would happen, if Nissan would offer a lightweight version for 30k EUR more but with 150-200 kg less weight ? The competition would be annihilated in any possible way. Nissan may get the crazy idea to offer a limited edition...  I can already see 0-100 kph in 2.5 seconds and 0-200 kph in 9.5 seconds, it would be a PR disaster for all super car manufacturers.

--

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 997 Carrera GTS Cabriolet PDK, BMW X5M, BMW M3 Cab DKG, Mini Cooper S Countryman All4

I see the weight of GT-R complained quite often.

However, according to Mizuno san the weight figure was part of the whole packaging from the very beginning of GT-R's design.

He explains "based on his experience with the relationship between the down force weight and tire patch grip of Group C race cars, the weight of GT-R has been predetermined to achieve optimal tire patch grip in a road car.  The light weight packaging simply could not provide enough grip without using softer tire compounds.  To achieve the maximum grip in all situation with NORMAL road tires, the GT-R's optimal weight for its tire compound has been determined without increasing the downforce that involved enormous drag coefficient."

First, I thought what a bullocks he's talking about, but the more I think about it, it makes more sense in a road car with road tires.  It's no wonder this car is so quick when it corners.

He does have a point.

Jean:

I see the weight of GT-R complained quite often.

However, according to Mizuno san the weight figure was part of the whole packaging from the very beginning of GT-R's design.

He explains "based on his experience with the relationship between the down force weight and tire patch grip of Group C race cars, the weight of GT-R has been predetermined to achieve optimal tire patch grip in a road car.  The light weight packaging simply could not provide enough grip without using softer tire compounds.  To achieve the maximum grip in all situation with NORMAL road tires, the GT-R's optimal weight for its tire compound has been determined without increasing the downforce that involved enormous drag coefficient."

First, I thought what a bullocks he's talking about, but the more I think about it, it makes more sense in a road car with road tires.  It's no wonder this car is so quick when it corners.

I suspect that your first thought was right, and that Mizuno-san was indeed talking a load of young male cattle. 

If tyres cannot build up enough grip because there is not enough weight on a given tyre patch, that is, the pressure (force[weight] per unit area) on that patch is too low, then the answer is surely to reduce the area of the tyre patch, not to increase the vehicle weight.  Apart from instances of ballast being used to alleviate problems resulting from poor suspension geometry or weight distribution, this is the first instance I remember hearing of where the weight of a car has been increased to improve its dynamic performance. 

fritz