Crown

A couple of months ago in the Drive magazine, there was an interview of the famous Walter Rerl ex Rally car champion and test pilot of Porsche.
Answering a question about the times of the GT-Rat the ring he said: I haven't drove yet a GT-R so I cannot comment on it. The only thing I can say is that I was driving a Ferrari Scuderia in the ring and while I was in the big straight I saw in my mirror the GT-R at a distance of 120 meters behind me. After 500 meters the GT-R was exactly behind the Ferrari. Scuderia as you know has 510PS and weights 1250 kg while the GT-R weights 1740kg and has a power of 480PS. As you understand it is not possible with such power to weight ratio to be as fast as that, and claim also those times at the ring.
In order for the GT-R to be that fast has to have an increase in the boost of the turbo having a power of 600PS. Only this way can be that fast...

Intesresting comment thanks!

Ziggy:

Intesresting comment thanks!

 Maybe that's the reason why Nissan says horsepowers "vary", so they can claim that a 600bhp version is still official.

for scuderia is dry weight.

sportauto supertest 430 scuderia weight is 1.402 kg. gtr-r in sportauto weight 1.762

Eunice:

Ziggy:

Intesresting comment thanks!

 Maybe that's the reason why Nissan says horsepowers "vary", so they can claim that a 600bhp version is still official.

 yeah but 120 hp is a massive variation. besides if they hold on to the "variation" argument concerning the hp then that means that Nissan could not claim to a specific ring time, after all, it varies  they could very easily then make sure the GTR they sent to claim the time had 600hp wile regular costumer cars has 480 or 500.

Well, after several test here in the US it was found that Nissan was underating the actual power of the GT-R.

...the only thing stopping you in all likelihood, is you!

Skyline GT-R vs Newton's Second Law of Motion...

"Does the Skyline GT-R defy the laws of physics... or just the laws of marketing?"

Chris Harris wrote a feature article comparing the Nissan GT-R in a group test with the 997.2 C2S PDK, the Audi R8 and the AM V8 4.7 Vantage. It's interesting to note his comment on the GT-R’s power-to-weight ratio:

"But you already know that the GT-R can do astonishing things with asphalt, that it conjures far more forward momentum than its 272bhp-per-tonne would suggest is possible and it changes direction so obediently you wonder if the quoted 1740kg kerb weight is a typographical blunder..."

This could be considered a reference to Newton's second law of motion whereby:

"The acceleration of an object as produced by a net force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the net force, in the same direction as the net force, and inversely proportional to the mass of the object."

Well, according to Nissan's second law of marketing, the GT-R engine produces a maximum power output of 473bhp (or 480PS) at 6400rpm, implying 272bhp/ton. Audi's impressive R8 generates an almost identical 265bhp/ton so, according to Newton, the performance from these two great icons should be almost identical. But in back-to-back comparisons, it's not even close...

However, in the GT-R's official specifications this maximum is defined 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.

Nissan-GTR-Official-Specifications_Link

This subtle footnote disclosure implies that the GT-R engine actually produces maximum "gross power output" of around 556bhp! So the GT-R, with an official curb weight of 1740kg, would appear to generate a power-to-weight ratio closer to 320bhp/ton!

That could also explain how Nissan can claim that the GT-R is quicker around the Nürburgring than a 997 Turbo with 298bhp/ton...

It's also worth noting the relative efficiency of the GT-R's six-speed GR6 dual-clutch transmission (developed alongside Borg Warner), which provides sequential gear changes with a clutch pack reportedly designed for a 150,000-mile life. Around the Nurburgring, the GT-R's gearbox is certainly reckoned to be worth a few seconds...

In any case, all due respect to Nissan for setting a great benchmark with the Skyline GT-R with a 556bhp twin-turbo V6 engine, a dual-clutch gearbox and remarkably competitive pricing.

Feedback from Japan reportedly suggested that, in the prevailing political climate, Nissan couldn't get away launching a new "Skyline GT-R" with 556bhp, but a "Nissan GT-R" with 473bhp and a 112mph speed limiter was deemed acceptable...

...so does the GT-R really defy the laws of physics, or just the laws of marketing?

 That makes so much sense it must be true...

SciFrog:

 That makes so much sense it must be true...

I hate to burst your bubble, but the figures quoted by all manufacturers these days are normally the net figures.

If you look at test reports of Detroit products in back-numbers of American car mags from about the 1970s or earlier, you'll see power outputs quoted as "SAE" or "gross" output figures.These were bench dyno power outputs for engines not driving their own ancillaries like DC dynamos or AC alternators, cooling fans, fuel pumps, etc..

These gross hp figures are no longer used because they were misleadingly flattering to those engines.

fritz

Boxster Coupe GTS:

This could be considered a reference to Newton's second law of motion whereby:

"The acceleration of an object as produced by a net force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the net force, in the same direction as the net force, and inversely proportional to the mass of the object."

Well, according to Nissan's second law of marketing, the GT-R engine produces a maximum power output of 473bhp (or 480PS) at 6400rpm, implying 272bhp/ton. Audi's impressive R8 generates an almost identical 265bhp/ton so, according to Newton, the performance from these two great icons should be almost identical. But in back-to-back comparisons, it's not even close.

No, actually according to Newton the Datsun will be faster because we don't live in a vacuum.

Comprende?

The feedback suggests is that Nissan decided to market the GT-R with their definition of an "estimated net power output" - based on 85% of the measured figure - to deliberately obfuscate the real power output of the engine...

This hypothesis certainly appears to be supported by:

1. feedback from GT-R customers' preliminary dyno tests
2. comparative performance of the Nissan GT-R in group tests
   (e.g. Chris Harris laps of the GT-R and GT2 around the Nurburgring)
3. Walter Rohrl's observation of the GT-R's performance vs the 430 Scuderia

The question is whether Nissan has engineered a car that produces a performance significantly out of line with the official power-to-weight ratio, or whether the power output is understated to tilt the performance comps and to appease domestic political considerations...

By way of comparison, you may recall that the a couple of years ago the Formula 1 teams agreed to equalise the power output of their engines. Each engine manufacturer provided data on power output and torque across the rev-range and the teams' engineers had a meeting to agree how the engines should be equalised. The teams agreed with the FIA on the proposed adjustments, allowing the FIA to impose a "freeze" on engine development.

So what was the only problem with the F1 engine freeze? Apparently not all the engine manufacturers provided completely accurate data on their engine's performance...

Boxster Coupe GTS:

The feedback suggests is that Nissan decided to market the GT-R with their definition of an "estimated net power output" - based on 85% of the measured figure - to deliberately obfuscate the real power output of the engine...

This hypothesis certainly appears to be supported by:

1. feedback from GT-R customers' preliminary dyno tests
2. comparative performance of the Nissan GT-R in group tests
   (e.g. Chris Harris laps of the GT-R and GT2 around the Nurburgring)
3. Walter Rohrl's observation of the GT-R's performance vs the 430 Scuderia

The question is whether Nissan has engineered a car that produces a performance significantly out of line with the official power-to-weight ratio, or whether the power output is understated to tilt the performance comps and to appease domestic political considerations...

By way of comparison, you may recall that the a couple of years ago the Formula 1 teams agreed to equalise the power output of their engines. Each engine manufacturer provided data on power output and torque across the rev-range and the teams' engineers had a meeting to agree how the engines should be equalised. The teams agreed with the FIA on the proposed adjustments, allowing the FIA to impose a "freeze" on engine development.

So what was the only problem with the F1 engine freeze? Apparently not all the engine manufacturers provided completely accurate data on their engine's performance...

 

And that also explains why corrupt Renault won two championchips

indeed shifting is ancient technology - so is a fuel burning engine..  I happen to like both :) 
_____________________________________________________________________
1986 BMW 325e 5spd 2.7L 121 hp (172 lb·ft) Le Mans Blau on Tan leather.
1986 BMW 325is 5spd 2.5L 168 hp (164 lb-ft) White on Tan leather (parted out) 
2005 Ford Focus S, 5spd 2.0L 136 hp (120lb-ft) CD silver on grey (sold)
1986 Porsche 944, 5spd 2.5L 150 hp (168lb-ft) champagne gold on grown leather. (sold)

Rohrl was only trying to prove that the Ring lap time claimed by Nissan cannot be done by a stock GTR. He used a Ferrari as an example in order not to implicate Porsche, even though this incident may be totally fictional. As for production GTRs, in Europe at least, they have been clocked at 4.0s for the 0-100 km/h dash and at 21.7s for the 0-1000 metres sprint. Very quick indeed but not Ferrari 430, let alone Scuderia, quick! Any conversation of vastly fluctuating power figures OF PRODUCTION GTR EXAMPLES is fictional at best. The test mules are a different story though. Either the time claimed by Nissan is laughable or these particular cars were far from stock production models.

Atzporsche:

Boxster Coupe GTS:

The feedback suggests is that Nissan decided to market the GT-R with their definition of an "estimated net power output" - based on 85% of the measured figure - to deliberately obfuscate the real power output of the engine...

This hypothesis certainly appears to be supported by:

1. feedback from GT-R customers' preliminary dyno tests
2. comparative performance of the Nissan GT-R in group tests
   (e.g. Chris Harris laps of the GT-R and GT2 around the Nurburgring)
3. Walter Rohrl's observation of the GT-R's performance vs the 430 Scuderia

The question is whether Nissan has engineered a car that produces a performance significantly out of line with the official power-to-weight ratio, or whether the power output is understated to tilt the performance comps and to appease domestic political considerations...

By way of comparison, you may recall that the a couple of years ago the Formula 1 teams agreed to equalise the power output of their engines. Each engine manufacturer provided data on power output and torque across the rev-range and the teams' engineers had a meeting to agree how the engines should be equalised. The teams agreed with the FIA on the proposed adjustments, allowing the FIA to impose a "freeze" on engine development.

So what was the only problem with the F1 engine freeze? Apparently not all the engine manufacturers provided completely accurate data on their engine's performance...

 

And that also explains why corrupt Renault won two championchips

The engine development was not limited when Renault won both championships.

A really weird thing about the engine development freeze is that the best engine of the 2006 (yes, the Renault engine) became one of the worst 18 months later.

REALZEUS:

Rohrl was only trying to prove that the Ring lap time claimed by Nissan cannot be done by a stock GTR. He used a Ferrari as an example in order not to implicate Porsche, even though this incident may be totally fictional. As for production GTRs, in Europe at least, they have been clocked at 4.0s for the 0-100 km/h dash and at 21.7s for the 0-1000 metres sprint. Very quick indeed but not Ferrari 430, let alone Scuderia, quick! Any conversation of vastly fluctuating power figures OF PRODUCTION GTR EXAMPLES is fictional at best. The test mules are a different story though. Either the time claimed by Nissan is laughable or these particular cars were far from stock production models.

So? The GT-R was faster on the Nurburgring than the Scuderia. Whie being 370kg heavier.

Porsche also said that the Turbo is 16 seconds quicker around the Nurburgring than the GT-R. That's not exactly the truth, now is it?

Boxster Coupe GTS:

The feedback suggests is that Nissan decided to market the GT-R with their definition of an "estimated net power output" - based on 85% of the measured figure - to deliberately obfuscate the real power output of the engine...

One factor which should rule out this theory is the fact that  -  to be "legit"  -  production engines of cars sold in countries applying the European Type Approval regulations have to have net power ouputs within a + / - 5% tolerance allowance of the figures declared in the Type approval documantation.

Any talk of "estimated net power outputs" smells of BS anyway. The net power output is measured on a test bench, and does not need to be "estimated".

fritz

Walter:

Atzporsche:

Boxster Coupe GTS:

The feedback suggests is that Nissan decided to market the GT-R with their definition of an "estimated net power output" - based on 85% of the measured figure - to deliberately obfuscate the real power output of the engine...

This hypothesis certainly appears to be supported by:

1. feedback from GT-R customers' preliminary dyno tests
2. comparative performance of the Nissan GT-R in group tests
   (e.g. Chris Harris laps of the GT-R and GT2 around the Nurburgring)
3. Walter Rohrl's observation of the GT-R's performance vs the 430 Scuderia

The question is whether Nissan has engineered a car that produces a performance significantly out of line with the official power-to-weight ratio, or whether the power output is understated to tilt the performance comps and to appease domestic political considerations...

By way of comparison, you may recall that the a couple of years ago the Formula 1 teams agreed to equalise the power output of their engines. Each engine manufacturer provided data on power output and torque across the rev-range and the teams' engineers had a meeting to agree how the engines should be equalised. The teams agreed with the FIA on the proposed adjustments, allowing the FIA to impose a "freeze" on engine development.

So what was the only problem with the F1 engine freeze? Apparently not all the engine manufacturers provided completely accurate data on their engine's performance...

 

And that also explains why corrupt Renault won two championchips

The engine development was not limited when Renault won both championships.

A really weird thing about the engine development freeze is that the best engine of the 2006 (yes, the Renault engine) became one of the worst 18 months later.

I got the info that the engine failure of schumacher in japan was because ferrari installed a new engine before engine freeze...so it was an investment for the future...

Walter:

REALZEUS:

Rohrl was only trying to prove that the Ring lap time claimed by Nissan cannot be done by a stock GTR. He used a Ferrari as an example in order not to implicate Porsche, even though this incident may be totally fictional. As for production GTRs, in Europe at least, they have been clocked at 4.0s for the 0-100 km/h dash and at 21.7s for the 0-1000 metres sprint. Very quick indeed but not Ferrari 430, let alone Scuderia, quick! Any conversation of vastly fluctuating power figures OF PRODUCTION GTR EXAMPLES is fictional at best. The test mules are a different story though. Either the time claimed by Nissan is laughable or these particular cars were far from stock production models.

So? The GT-R was faster on the Nurburgring than the Scuderia. Whie being 370kg heavier.

Porsche also said that the Turbo is 16 seconds quicker around the Nurburgring than the GT-R. That's not exactly the truth, now is it?

 

As I have said numerous times, Ring times indicate absolutely nothing. It's down to the driver and the conditions more than the car. The Ring is pothole filled and a racy car such as the Scuderia cannot perform to its maximum. In normal tracks the Scuderia is so much faster than the GTR that it is not even a contest (may I remind you that Alain Prost in lapped Vairano 2,5s quicker in the Scuderia compared the GTR and almost half a second quicker than the GT2).

 

Ferrari 430 Scuderia: Sport-Auto laps the Nurburgring in 7:39 mins...

Nissan GT-R: Toshio Suzuki laps the Nurburgring in 7:29 mins...

Audi R8 4.2 V8: Sport-Auto laps the Nurburgring in 8:04 min...

Porsche 997 GT2 vs Nissan GT-R: Nurburgring lap comparison by Chris Harris...

 Thanks for the vids! 

That last vid was so interesting. Loved it. THANKS!

08 PORSCHE Turbo Cabriolet, 06 Ferrari F430,  04 Durango HEMI,  04 Harley Davidson Screamin Eagle,  93 Harley Davidson Nostalgia

1987 RUF Porsche CTR 01 "Yellow Bird" laps the Nurburgring in 8:25 mins...

A classic Nurburgring video: Stefan Roser demonstrating the art of limit car control in the world famous 1987 RUF Porsche CTR 01 "Yellow Bird" over a sub-8:30 lap of the ‘ring...

The Ruf CTR Yellowbird became the fastest car in the world in 1987, ahead of both the Ferrari F40 and Porsche 959. The CTR "Yellow Bird" lapped the ring in 8:05 mins - an unprecedented road car lap-time back in 1987...

Based on a 1987 Porsche 911 Carrera, the CTR generated 469 HP and 408 lb-ft of torque thanks to a larger capacity and two huge turbos, but weighed only 2,535 lb. The 0-60 sprint took just 4.0 seconds, while the top speed was clocked at 212mph. In 1987 the CTR “Yellow Bird” cost around $223k, or around twice the price of a Lamborghini Countach...

This is one of the famous, if not the most,  Nurburgring Video.

Great driving style, huge talent

ONUR

09 Audi TTS Ibis

07 997 Carrera S / 05 M3 Coupe / 03 M3 Coupe / 96 M3 Coupe EVO (ALL BUT HISTORY)

Toshio Suzuki laps the Nurburgring in a Nissan GT-R in under 8 minutes, with a passenger...

Nissan GT-R: Interview with Kazutoshi Mizuno (program manager and chief engineer)

Q1) For such a high performance machine, the GT-R is a big car and heavy one. Tell us why that is?

Q2) So what is the best way to reduce weight from the R35 to make it perform better?

Q3) In your previous answer, you seemed to be telling us the parameters of 1700kgs weight and 485hp were set from the beginning of the project, is that correct?

Q4) Why did you opt for a V6 engine, instead of an engine with more cylinders?

Q5) What about the transaxle some competitors have seven or eight speeds, so why does the GT-R have only six?

Q6) The R34 had the HICAS rear wheel steering system. Why didn’t that make it onto the latest GT-R?

Q7) Is the increasing use of electronic control systems in performance cars a welcome trend, or does it reduce the enjoyment for the driver?

Q8) When you develop a car from scratch, there have to be compromises. What was the biggest compromise that affected the development of the GT-R?

Q9) Can diesels ever be a good thing in motorsports, and can electric road cars ever be fun to drive?

Q10) What are your thoughts about the need to reduce the environmental impact of motoring and motorsport?

Q11) There have been lots of rumours about future GT-R developments, including the Spec M version with more comfort. What can you tell us about that?

Q12) We know about your personal commitment and passion for the GT-R, but where does this passion come from. Were you inspired by cars as a boy, and which cars inspire you now?

Interview by PistonHead...

@Boxster Coupe GTS: Take a look here http://www.rennteam.com/forum/thread/20129725/Interviews_with_Kazutoshi_Mizuno/page1.html

--

Hm, couldn´t capture all he intended to get across. I find this video quite interesting as well, roughly 7:55 min. with obstacles:

Amazing video Ferdie - 7:55 with giving an interview in the same time! Stunning! And - -it seems to be so easy.... I wished I could do it underneath 10 minutes :-(

Great car by the way, somehow it looked more relaxed as it looks in a GT3?

For comparison purposes, here's a lap of the Ruf Porsche R Turbo (996 generation) around the Nurburgring...

...how about that for some relaxed driving?

NB: Do not try to emulate this driving technique around the Nurburgring in a diesel hire car... (unless you are Stefan Roser!)