TurboDoseBro

Hey guys I can no longer go so i have three sets of tickets if someone is looking for some http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110723778197

That's my point mate. That the suspension on the GTS-T is superior to the olden day trailing arms and struts. The engine I can't really comment. Really comes down to the characteristics and weight of it. Shorter wheelbaase. The Skyline chassis is lighter. So there is no reason for the GTS-T to not be able to beat or at least match the times of the Commo. I am comparing because they also ran in Group A racing with the R32 GTRs with the same rules that have not changed, much anyways, and managed to score a better time. RBNT you might as well stop looking at this thread or even posting in it. Your comments are more troll than any of mine. Just cause you own a GTR doesn't mean jack anymore.

I forgot where I read it but the R32 GTR was supposed to come out as RWD but they added AWD and the specific engine to enter into Group A. Maybe you guys already know, who knows. I'll post the article when I find it. I may be going around in loops sometimes but that's because you too are not listening to anything I'm saying as well. Accusing me of crap when opposing viewers (not gonna say who for the sake of humour) posts some crap about a fake car in a game out of nowhere and posting fake information too. Lets not turn this into a bitch fest please. I provided examples, reasoning, and videos with some of my posts which is fair to prove the point. I compare to these cars like Commodore VT etc because I don't see how the GTS-T cannot match or beat their lap times given roughly the same modifications and power therefore linking the achievements of those cars with that of the GTS-T. It's only logical. You keep comparing bread to apples or whatever you want to call it by comparing the R32 GTR to Evos and Lamborghinis which to tell you the truth run on very different AWD concepts and layouts. Yes I compared the GTS-T with an RX-7 one time (bread and oranges), but that was to show that even a car that weighs roughly the same as a a GTS-T driving 2 wheels and has a layout of FR (although weight distribution and different engine) seemed to only have the same problem with traction as the GTRs in WTA. Mind you 2WDs don't have the variation in technology and drive differences that AWD does. At the end of the day it's still 2 wheels spinning which are governed by an LSD. You guys then argued we will never achieve the level these tuning shops and teams will with their techonolgy and money. So I pointed out that none of the lap record holders in both tracks of Eastern Creek Raceway and Winton Raceway were AWD, even some actual examples of a GTS-T or equivalent beating a R32 GTR or equivalent in our SAU VIC lap record holders section. Then it loops back to the fact that they are limited in terms of rules and that the top record holders in WTA is an AWD Evo, so see top paragraph (still keep in mind that we are comparing R32s) for the answer again. Race tyres are a different story again. As for the fact that there are street driven GTRs that are faster than Group A R32 GTRs, it just proves my point in the last line of this post. Lets not forget what I myself admitted in the first few pages: A well advanced AWD system will beat RWD anytime.

What? Stepping up with some new concepts is considered trolling these days? Who made you captain of troll spotting? LOL More importantly in regards to the WTA lap times, they run on street tyres, not the slicks that the race cars do. Truely amazing machines. Which means that the 2WD competitors are indeed disadvantaged as grip becomes even more of an issue. There is the HKS GTR Supercar entered which I have no doubt will win but lets not forget we are comparing the R32s which are more simple. Sure the R32 GTR Group A time can be set tomorrow but that just proves that FR layouts do have a chance with race tyres. I'm just not gonna comment on the X1 until there is a real one. Too many posibilities leading to it not being as fast as it imaginarily claims.

LOL If you pulled your head out of your ass when reading that post you would know that I was talking specifically on Group A racing not this Group A vs V8 Supercar crap again. Yes God knows, you may have mentioned the X1 was theoretical but Nurburgring in 3 minutes? Come on mate wake up... The F1 lap record was somewhere in the 5 minute range. The X1 with only a few extra horses and maybe a few kilograms lighter will not shave off 2 minutes. It's nothing more than just a game and always will be. Regarding the lap times, a quick Google image search shows that the Gallardo is hardly less modified than a Group A GTR (http://www.velocetod...0/03/clip-1.jpg). In saying that, again this car's layout is a lot different to an FR or F4. Even then, the regulations probably require the car to be RWD. You really can't find a AWD car that's run in the low 1:3Xs mark in Eastern Creek Raceway. In regards to the Super Touring, again different class as you have mentioned time and time again. Note that the RWD times are set 10 years before. Easter Creek Raceway lap times stated: GT Sports Cars Peter Hackett Lamborghini Gallardo 1.32.8616 30/05/10 Group A Terry Ashwood Nissan Skyline GT-R 1.41.8511 04/09/10 V8 Supercars Mark Skaife Commodore VT 1:31.7301 28/03/99 Super Touring Cameron McLean BMW 320i 1:33.8642 07/06/98

Hi just popping in to say that the so called 'prototype car' Redbull X1 is not even a real car and nowhere does it say it's AWD. That argument wasn't even valid lol. It's nothing but a few graphics on Gran Turismo 5. I want to know why the GTS-T can't be faster than a Falcodore? It is every bit more advantageous. Looking at Group A lap records in Winton, the GTR is beaten by another Falcodore. Reference: http://www.wintonmot...id=17&Itemid=30 Infact none of which are lap record holders are AWD.

Alright guys, I'm all out LOL. :worship:

First of all, no I haven't driven a GTR. Don't even think I've been inside one. Also barely driven a GTS-T. R32 GTS25 is my daily. This thread was started on theory as mentioned in first post to compare the theory to the experiences and theories of yourselves. Here we are assuming a good consistent driver. Ofcourse better driver = better results. Yep sorry I roughly plotted the points on the graph to illustrate to rough differences between GTR and GTS-T from factory (One of the most variable factor). It was just a general figure pointing out that less weight overall = more coefficient of friction as there is less weight thrown on each tyre around the track. You guys really are making it difficult (which is good). Regarding the torque split controller which only one person replied to, and said that they would recommend the use of one, that would mean the AWD closed loop variable system is indeed obsolete and the traction circle does remain constant. If GTRs have such good turn ins and AWD systems are the be all and end all ultimate of an automobile's drivetrain, how did the V8 Supercar Commodore VT yes Commodore (with 4 doors and V8 and all) beat the Group A GTR's (with all it's advantages) lap record by more than 10 seconds? I mean this is approaching the modified production car overall lap records. Even for TA. You can't tell me that you can't make a GTS-T just as fast as a Commodore VT if not, faster. Dunno if the V8 Supercars or Group A had the carbon fibre body or not but either way the weight of a fully stripped GTS-T will still be roughly the same as a VT V8 Supercar.

Last time I checked in (~ 10 months ago) the RB25DE NEO was $1700.

Coefficient of grip and coefficient of friction are pretty much the same thing. It's like saying globes and bulbs. So if it is true then you are only suupporting my side of the argument. That a lighter car (GTS-T) doesn't need as much coefficient of grip on the tyres to go just as fast or faster than a heavier car (GTR). Sample calculation: For this we will assume the weight distributions of the GTS-T is 54F:46R and GTR is 58F:42R. Weight is also with driver. For simplicity we'll also assume the weight on both left and right sides are symmetrical. Weights are calculated according to a RB26 in each vehicle. So: GTS-T 54 : 46 1400 F = 756kg R = 644kg FL = 378kg (833.35lb) FR = 378kg RL = 322kg (709.89lb) RR = 322kg ---------------------------------------------------- GTR 58 : 42 1600 F = 928kg R = 627kg FL = 464kg (1022.95lb) FR = 464kg RL = 313.5kg (691.15lb) RR = 313.5kg So on the graph (in regards to each individual static tyre load): As you can see, not only does the GTR's coefficient of grip on the individual front and rear wheels differ significantly more than that of the GTS-T, the front wheels are also caught in the exponential fall of the coefficient of grip. This would increase understeer and narrow the traction circle for the front wheels. Where is your god now?

djr81 Are you messing with us? Not saying it's incorrect (or correct), first you say that the less load on a tyre the higher coefficient of grip but now you say with a torque split controller to put as much power to the front wheels as possible. So in a way, on top of the already understeering and front heavy R32 GTR, you give it more understeer? Well I take it back

No I didn't get owned actually. In the end, you guys ran outta arguments or couldn't answer your own statements This brng out the other question in the events of owning a GTR, would you install an AWD torque split controller? And if yes, what would you set it to on the track? Be honest. If no, why?

No, I'm saying they probably scrapped the AWD XF and invested the rest of the money into the creation of the RS200... (yes it did have a turbo as well as AWD)

It actually came out in the form of the RS200. Which is a lot better in terms of performance.

Did I just get owned in my own thread? I think I did . Thanks guys, gonna sell my Skyline and get a cheap 'run around' til i'm in the opens. Not much I can argue, I can already see oversteer is possible from the videos NISMO has posted, with limited grip levels even as an AWD from high power. Marc: Last time I checked the rules of Group A racing (just then), there was no rule on the compound of tyre you can run so I'm assuming that it was a modern day spec Group A GTR. Why did Ford scrap the AWD turbo Falcon? They released the XR6T anyways so I don't see why they wouldn't just release it as an AWD, surely it wouldn't cost that much more to develop unless a certain drivetrain works better for some cars? djr81: Not saying I don't believe you or anything but you're saying that the more static load a tyre has, the less grip it will have? It would at least make sense if the tyre's coefficient of grip decreased with decreased load because of the area of tyre patch. Is there an explanation? If given a weight heavy enough, would the coeffecient of friction become 0? (LOL logic) Or would it just asymptote? For your information I have read Carroll Smith's Drive To Win and am a big fan of his books. In regards to the GTSR comment, the G35/V35 is actually pretty much just as fast as a R32 GTR (Reference skip to 3:45 onwards), it's FR and it weighs more. Hows that work if AWD was so superior and modern?Iplen: Yeah it's true, Evos dominate the top places in TA because their AWD system is actually sophisticated with all the yaw controls etc, probably as developed as the R34 GTR system. Spoke to a few Evo owners and they said it was cheaper, and more reliable to track the Evo instead of a GTR. RBNT: But the GTS-T had you in terms of acceleration right? More wheels to spin = more drivetrain loss. What aero and tyres was he running compared to you? Who had a better lap time? (No I don't wanna hear excuses if you lost lol)

Yes very true. Is that even a real automobile? (As in produced and tested etc) This although I know you're intentionally doing to prove that in extreme cases AWD is preffered, but is comparing not just apples with oranges, but more accurately apples with beef. I could say hey, guess what, those top fuel dragsters are surprise surprise RWD. But from the not so extreme case, I honestly can't think of a car that is not AWD that can do 0-100km/h in less than 2.2 seconds (off topic).

Good old Marc with his prehistoric metaphors LOL If you look into the reference link, the touring Group A R32 GTR lap record in Eastern Creek Raceway was indeed set on 04/09/2010, where as the V8 Supercar record was set on 28/03/1999. Cost should not be a factor in this argument and I don't think it was back then. Back then the Skylines were just too advanced, but still fit in the same class as it was designed to. Sure racing categories have rules and all but last time I checked, TA didn't have that many, or enough to limit the cars potentials. This is where the 2WD RX-7s beat the AWD GTRs. Again going by your rules, this is comparing apples to oranges, so why can't someone make a GTS-T as fast as or similar to the RX-7? Surely it is possible. Well I mean, we wouldn't want to go to the trouble of building a GTS-T and a GTR just to see which one is faster. Would be damn well interesting though, but most likely not worth it. If I became a millionaire and all I definitely will keep this in mind. Very correct about the wet weather racing. I do believe that in wet weather where traction is very limited, the AWD system would help. However, this video proves something different: I like to belive that in the rain because of the lower friction, it narrows the traction circle so the limits of the car is shown earlier whether it be oversteer or understeer. It is shown that although the Evo had AWD, it wasn't advantageous in the wet weather (or at least noticable). Also taking a semi-wild guess here but in the rain maybe weight has a bigger advantage than a AWD system also displayed in the video.

You don't necessarily need the same amount of loadings on each tyre to match the cornering of the GTR. Lets put it this way with a case study. A heavier car will always need to brake at a longer distance from a corner, assuming same cars and road (because of momentum). So therefore every meter you brake later, you are ahead by. True? *true* so because the GTS-T with it's lighter body, and better weight distribution, it is more nimble throughout the corner and can carry more speed throughout the corner, the equation then becomes 'difference in braking distance' + 'distance increased from speed of cornering' = difference in corner exit distance. Also because the GTS-T is lighter it will accelerate quicker. The GTR will have longer braking distance and will not hold as much of the speed through cornering, but the corner exit acceleration will be great. Notice the GTS-T will have better corner exit speed, but the GTR will have better corner exit acceleration from being able to throttle earlier, but start at a lower speed. It will assuming the track is made of the same material all the way through. If I had to take anything correct from this thread, it would be concerning these statements towards the coefficients of grip and friction. Look at it this way to help you. Get a table with the same material all the way through. Now get a square rubber and run a side along the table. Now do it with less and more downward force. Notice the change in levels of grip? This is the load side of the equation. The coefficient of grip side stays the same because the rubber is always a rubber and the table is always a table so the coefficient of grip between the 2 is constant. Lets just leave that one. I just want to hear your opinions, experiences, theorys etc etc from you guys. Maybe noone has done it yet because they have the same concepts as you guys or have not taken it to the extreme, thinking that in the Skyline world, nothing goes past a GTR badge. The world's fastest automobiles are 2WD.

No amount of aero can slingshot a 2WD out of a corner like an AWD can, but you can have enough to go fast around a track with relatively high power, otherwise F1s would be out of business (~600kg, ~800hp). As you said, our cars will never be as refined as theirs, so lets look at V8 Supercars then? They are getting faster times than the GTRs back in the Bathurst days thanks to grip. If the AWD was so good (speaking specifically for the Skylines, especially earlier models), how could this happen? The V8 cars are larger and heavier. Most importantly FR as on topic. In the reference of Easter Creek Raceway, a touring Commodore VT (V8 supercar) has clocked a much faster lap than a touring Group A R32 GTR. Reference: http://www.eastern-c...lap_records.htm It's not as simple as same mods on both cars. Each modifications must be specific to each car. For example you would need a bigger/more angled wings on the GTS-T to compensate for the weight and grip disadvantage. Where the GTS-T will need to run wider tyres, the GTR probably doesn't due to it's AWD grip. Philosophy and marketing image? That is what time attack is for (World Time Attack Challenge, which I am most likely going to ), to promote the workshops, teams, and products, and maybe even gain more sponsorship. They wouldn't bother sending out a 'crappy 2WD' when they know AWD is going to win everytime. Mate, nothing is boring us (at least me anyways). I find all posts very interesting and have at least something to take away by the end of it (apart from the haters). So bring on the TL:DR whatever it is, if you have to. You mention traction circle, that is definitely something to consider. However, how can you use the front wheels to accelerate in a corner when you are already using them to their full potential turning?

First of all, very convincing views and videos. We certainly are discussing both versions modified in the long run. I definitely see an earlier throttle on AWDs, especially from the videos, however it may be neutral throttle, or slowly easing in the accelerator. The GTS-T would possibly be able to do that too with enough downforce. Very true on GTRs being selected for TA. If told me to provide a video of a GTS-T winning a TA right now I honestly couldn't do it. However, how do the JGTC cars end up being faster than the TA GTRs? Also there is an S15, yes I know, different car, but still FR traditional layout by Nissan and not one of those mid mounted FR cars too (eg. RX-7, S2000, Ferrari 599) entered in the World Time Attack challenge which does 55s in Tsukuba. Last time I checked, the HKS C230R Evo did it in 55s as well (AWD ofcourse). In the 2010 World Time Attack results, both R34 and R32 GTRs were defeated by the RX-7, although mid mounted FR, still a 2WD. I have also noticed the R32 GTRs in the videos retained almost stock aero parts. Here are the results derived from VIC SAU club of where FR has beaten AWD. These are lap records: Haunted Hills Modified GTR Anthony Snelling 97 GTR 57.92 Modified RWD Ryan Bell Nissan Sileighty 57.50 (Although not an R32, they have very similar shells, and has beat an R33 GTR) Winton Modified GTR Jack Blanas R33 GTR 01:33.46 Modified RWD Adam Newton R32 GTS-T 01:33.264 Bare in mind I have only stated 2 tracks out of the 5 on the site (these were the only 2 where a GTS-T or equivalent has scored a quicker lap time than a GTR). Reference: http://www.sauvic.com.au/lap_records By the way where is SydneyKid and all the other race GTS-Ts to give some insight?

That's because in a corner all 4 tyres will have different loadings. You never know what differences both cars are capable with aero parts and race tyres fitted on. As Mark said, on high speed corners, the GTS-T will have a big advantage over the GTR, and on low speed corners the GTR will have a big advantage over the GTS-T. Really? Would an 800kg Cortina corner twice as fast as a 1600kg Commodore? As said before, friction = coefficient of grip x load. The coefficient of grip will always stay constant, it's the load that it differs. So indeed, assuming same conditions, a tyre with with twice the load on it will have twice the grip. They definitely do make up for their weight, but to an extent. In the long run of modifications, the downforce from the aero parts, the grip from the race tyres, and the well engineered suspension will more than make up for the primitive AWD.

Sure exit speeds are one of the most important factors in the corner but you will end up with a higher exit speed if you can maximise as much of the corner speed as possible and maintain it to the end (assumng the correct racing lines). GTS-T can also run a wider tyre, all you gotta do it change it...and maybe after a few fender midifications. This is about the long run not just a pure GTS-T with an RB26. It is linear for that equation. Bare in mind that it doesn't account for the width of a tyre, sidewall flex, temperatures, etc etc. It's a general outlook that more weight = more grip assuming same circumstances. You haven't read the posts and understood it. "A well advanced AWD will beat a RWD in terms of potential (or anything really) anytime"I'm not back pedalling on anything. I said the R32 GTR AWD system is too primitive (not 'well advanced'). R34 onwards on the other hand, you would want the GTR because of it's independant wheel torque distribution ('well advanced') and it shows, because even though the R34 GTR is a lot heavier than a R32 GTR, they still manage to dominate by quite a lot. Iplen I also agree with you, except for the rallying comparison. Reason is that in rallying with all the different road surfaces, you will not achieve enough traction, unlike on a race track, therefore an AWD system is infact more beneficial.

You sure that's not a Hyundai Tiburon from the year 2000 plus hefty price tag?

Yes I agree that AWD will have the advantage of the corner exit, but wait, isn't that only 1/3 of the corner? What about braking? What about turning and maintaining that speed? You can't compare a MR or RR layout, they are very different to the traditional FR. Friction on tyres = coefficient of grip * mass, therefore less load on turning wheels from engine at back = less grip when turning, and especially when accelerating while doing so. Agreed 100% with wlspn. GTR isn't the be all and end all of Skylines. Guys, also don't get me wrong. A well advanced AWD will beat a RWD in terms of potential (or anything really) anytime. But in the case of R32s which were made well back in the days, I think it is more potent in the long run without the AWD. To all the guys saying 'this thread is shit' or 'school holidays bro' etc. Why don't you state why this is a stupid theory instead of just cursing? Surely I'm not the only one that's interested.

Although the post under you has pretty much rebutted all your arguements, the GTS-T will still be lighter in the front end and overall due to not having AWD driveshafts. If AWD was to reduce understeer and FWD = understeer don't you think driving the front wheels will give more understeer? That made so sense at all. AWD system will give you more traction but when you have everything engineered right, it's more of a hinderence. Drag is not a problem, if you wanted better drag you should have chose another car instead of a 0.4 Cd car. F1 cars have crazy drag but it's functional. Extra power will overcome it, and the RB26 will have no problem providing it. Even if the JGTC cars are regulated at RWD, they're still faster with the Skyline shell. Old ATTESSA is primitive. You can't even compare the R32 system to the R35 system. R32's ATTESSA only kicks in when there is a detection of difference in the rolling distance of the rear and front wheels where it sends 0-50% of the torque to the front axles. R35's AWD system controls all 4 wheels independently.