Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

wow! that would have to be close to the most innacurate article on GTRs I've ever read. also it uses a 3 year old CG image of the next gen skyline in an article that doesn't even mention it? weird.

for the record, mitsubishi and subaru dont come anywhere near close to matching the electronic AWD system. They use mechanical full-time AWD systems that dont use a computer at all, rather just a centre diff that works much like a regular diff but transfers torque between front and rear during slippage. Its basically a system that allows for 2 different torque splits, not infinitely variable torque split like ATTESA.

but yes the article is a bit more marketing hype than actual facts. There was a few facts in there, concerning the skyline's dominance of the racing scene but to say that other cars like porsche and bmw are only now catching up to the skyline is a bit over the top. even the R34 GTR's technology is getting a bit dated now, but the new one should start a whole new era for the GTR :D

  • 4 weeks later...

^^ The new 997 Turbo has a clutch based torque control to the front wheels as per...

"Featuring PTM (Porsche Traction Management) the new system incorporates a clutch-based system which varies the amount of torque to the front wheels, regardless of wheel slip front and rear. This, according to Porsche, aids traction and the handling by redirecting the torque to control oversteer or understeer, thus resulting in far more neutral handling, as well as greatly improved performance in all weather conditions (as opposed to older AWD system which gave the Turbo stability under hard acceleration)"

Porsche claim 100ms time for to modulate power to the front.

cayenne-PTM2.jpg

Transfer case, hydraulic ram and pivot fork look familiar :bunny:

Edited by GeeTR

Haha i like the 2nd paragraph

which states: By 1996 the 2.0L engine was producing 160hp and the Skyline won more than 50 races in the next 3 years....

Sounds like a badly written Herald article, your brother doesn't live in Auckland or Hamilton does he?

lol took them that long huh.. 997, well, like i said b4, its not outdated if theres nothing better

1986 called and mentioned the Porsche 959. Dunno if they can really copy their own idea.

http://www.autozine.org/technical_school/t...tion_4wd_21.htm

1986 called and mentioned the Porsche 959. Dunno if they can really copy their own idea.

http://www.autozine.org/technical_school/t...tion_4wd_21.htm

Exacty! Nissan copied the idea from Porsche from the beginning! And not just the 4WD system either.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I myself AM TOTALLY UNPREPARED TO BELIEVE that the load is higher on the track than on the dyno. If it is not happening on the dyno, I cannot see it happening on the track. The difference you are seeing is because it is hot on the track, and I am pretty sure your tuner is not belting the crap out of it on teh dyno when it starts to get hot. The only way that being hot on the track can lead to real ping, that I can think of, is if you are getting more oil (from mist in the inlet tract, or going up past the oil control rings) reducing the effective octane rating of the fuel and causing ping that way. Yeah, nah. Look at this graph which I will helpfully show you zoomed back in. As an engineer, I look at the difference in viscocity at (in your case, 125°C) and say "they're all the same number". Even though those lines are not completely collapsed down onto each other, the oil grades you are talking about (40, 50 and 60) are teh top three lines (150, 220 and 320) and as far as I am concerned, there is not enough difference between them at that temperature to be meaningful. The viscosity of 60 at 125°C is teh same as 40 at 100°C. You should not operate it under high load at high temperature. That is purely because the only way they can achieve their emissions numbers is with thin-arse oil in it, so they have to tell you to put thin oil in it for the street. They know that no-one can drive the car & engine hard enough on the street to reach the operating regime that demands the actual correct oil that the engine needs on the track. And so they tell you to put that oil in for the track. Find a way to get more air into it, or, more likely, out of it. Or add a water spray for when it's hot. Or something.   As to the leak --- a small leak that cannot cause near catastrophic volume loss in a few seconds cannot cause a low pressure condition in the engine. If the leak is large enough to drop oil pressure, then you will only get one or two shots at it before the sump is drained.
    • So..... it's going to be a heater hose or other coolant hose at the rear of the head/plenum. Or it's going to be one of the welch plugs on the back of the motor, which is a motor out thing to fix.
    • The oil pressure sensor for logging, does it happen to be the one that was slowly breaking out of the oil block? If it is,I would be ignoring your logs. You had a leak at the sensor which would mean it can't read accurately. It's a small hole at the sensor, and you had a small hole just before it, meaning you could have lost significant pressure reading.   As for brakes, if it's just fluid getting old, you won't necessarily end up with air sitting in the line. Bleed a shit tonne of fluid through so you effectively replace it and go again. Oh and, pay close attention to the pressure gauge while on track!
    • I don't know it is due to that. It could just be due to load on track being more than a dyno. But it would be nice to rule it out. We're talking a fraction of a second of pulling ~1 degree of timing. So it's not a lot, but I'd rather it be 0... Thicker oil isn't really a "bandaid" if it's oil that is going to run at 125C, is it? It will be thicker at 100 and thus at 125, where the 40 weight may not be as thick as one may like for that use. I already have a big pump that has been ported. They (They in this instance being the guy that built my heads) port them so they flow more at lower RPM but have a bypass spring that I believe is ~70psi. I have seen 70psi of oil pressure up top in the past, before I knew I had this leak. I have a 25 row oil cooler that takes up all the space in the driver side guard. It is interesting that GM themselves recommend 0-30 oil for their Vette applications. Unless you take it to the track where the official word is to put 20-50w oil in there, then take that back out after your track day is done and return to 0-30.
    • Nice, looks great. Nice work getting the factory parts also. Never know when you'll need them.
×
×
  • Create New...