Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So are R33s. But what invalidates the R33 GT-R's 7:59 "production car" time is the slicks, removal of speed limiter, and non-standard boost....not its looks.

It can be road registered in its country of origin. Its built in production volumes. Your dislike of it doesn't get rid of the facts.

Yes, there are plenty of countries where the car can't be road registered. But then, the Enzo and Veyron can't be road registered in Australia. The Porsche 959 couldn't be registered in the US. Yet the times they pull would still be considered valid.

Yes its a track day special. But then so is a M3 CSL or 911 GT3 RS etc and no-one would disregard their results just because they're "track day" specials.

Yes they're also very compromise on the road. But then again, so is your typical supercar like the Zonda, as Top Gear showed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drhoArQAXDg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZdU-d9RL0A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuI0OPavDn0

The Radical SR8 is the fastest road legal car around the Nordschleife that you can buy straight off the showroom floor, assuming you've got the balls to drive it that hard.

Valid point, but you're taking this too seriously.

I wasn't saying the time was invalid, I was just saying, there are other factors that I'd personally take into account in my selection of car.

Performance would be up there, but looks, comfort etc would be relevant. (cost as well obviously lol.)

Who cares if it does a 6.55, the thing looks like a glorified go-kart.

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The ultimate track day weapon, bar none. not much good for taking the kids to school, or doing the shopping though. An R35 GTR would be fine for those duties.

lol.

Would rather an R35 GTR over that monstrosity. Yuck.

I wasn't saying the time was invalid, I was just saying, there are other factors that I'd personally take into account in my selection of car.

Oh, for sure. I'd never buy a Radical except for "toy" duties. Even with it street legal, can you imagine trying to drive it on a potholed Sydney road or over a speed hump?

Even then, I'd rather buy a Track Pack Ariel Atom instead. It may not be ultimately as quick, but it looks heaps cooler and has VTEC (yo). The Radical looks like an upside-down bathtub with wheels. The Atom looks like someone just took a small car and then got rid of everything extraneous.

So are R33s. But what invalidates the R33 GT-R's 7:59 "production car" time is the slicks, removal of speed limiter, and non-standard boost....not its looks.

Nissan claim the sub 8min officially, it was accepted at the time regardless of what we want to debate now.

Speed limiter wasn't included in the R33 GTR according to the country it got sold in (the Aussie R32s did not have it). It's not on slicks in that run either, boost is up for debate however it's not going to be more than the ceramic turbines can handle.

Speed limiter wasn't included in the R33 GTR according to the country it got sold in (the Aussie R32s did not have it). It's not on slicks in that run either, boost is up for debate however it's not going to be more than the ceramic turbines can handle.

What country was the R33 GT-R sold in officially, aside from Japan? Grey imports notwithstanding (and, if they are grey imports from Japan, then in "production trim" they would have the speed limiters intact).

I understood that it was on at least R-Comp semis for that run, which might have been available as a factory option on the car, and non standard boost (no matter how little the boost up) is still not production trim.

I also read somewhere that the car had a cage in it. More weight, but also more rigidity.

What country was the R33 GT-R sold in officially, aside from Japan? Grey imports notwithstanding (and, if they are grey imports from Japan, then in "production trim" they would have the speed limiters intact).

I understood that it was on at least R-Comp semis for that run, which might have been available as a factory option on the car, and non standard boost (no matter how little the boost up) is still not production trim.

I also read somewhere that the car had a cage in it. More weight, but also more rigidity.

How did you understand it was on Competition tyres? Actually suggestions of increased boost are really baseless as well, we can't really confirm or deny it (suggesting it was increased is based purely on the belief that it was for no other reason?). There is also no roll cage in the car (that you can see).

I think perhaps you are looking for possible reasons to invalidate the sub 8 min claim but, so far we are getting internet speculation, doesn't stand up especially when there is no evidence.

I mean I can understand if the argument is that Nissan are lie tellers and the other brands aren't, that I can accept and we can agree to disagree.

Now back to topic...

so out of the 32's the 33's and the 34's the 33 laped the ring fastest..... ?

if that is true... up yours boat calling fan boys >:P

either way, 33 > 32 >:D

33 GTR's sample data from the sensors at twice the rate of R32 GTR's, and have full electronically controlled solenoids to control steering as opposed to hydraulic R32 stuff. technologically if the R32 was a 386 (and it's ECU has about the same processing power) then the R33 is a Pentium 1.

That said, we're talking about GTRs. Driving an R33 GTSt is still like picking a retarded kid to give you a piggyback.

33 GTR's sample data from the sensors at twice the rate of R32 GTR's, and have full electronically controlled solenoids to control steering as opposed to hydraulic R32 stuff. technologically if the R32 was a 386 (and it's ECU has about the same processing power) then the R33 is a Pentium 1.

That said, we're talking about GTRs. Driving an R33 GTSt is still like picking a retarded kid to give you a piggyback.

HAHAHAHAHHAHA just made my day

so the fact that a stock r33 will beat a stock r32 over the 1/4 mile just shows that the retarded kid can run faster than the able bodied kid you chose.

as for saying that the r35 whipped a veyron isn't really true. 2 seconds after nearly 8 mins isn't much. and you would also have to look at all the details. was it the same driver? did the veyron driver go as hard as he could the whole time (like was he going full throttle down the straight and throwing caution to the wind). i am not disbuting that the new gtr isn't quick, i am more disbuting the time of the veyron.

Yes, there are plenty of countries where the car can't be road registered. But then, the Enzo and Veyron can't be road registered in Australia. The Porsche 959 couldn't be registered in the US. Yet the times they pull would still be considered valid.

Yes its a track day special. But then so is a M3 CSL or 911 GT3 RS etc and no-one would disregard their results just because they're "track day" specials.

well said *claps

It was actually confirmed officially by nissan at the time. It's really only rumours recently (due to revised talk about skylines all over the net) disputing this fact doing the rounds that it wasn't officially confirmed.

I remember seeing it again recently on some sort of official Nissan literature and it's on the Nissan GTR launch website as well.

THat is correct, It was an official time 20+ seconds faster than the R32. I cant remember (for the life of me), the time for the R34 though. maybe its on the offical site.

Hey... I didn't call your car fat. But now that you mention it :glare: my analogy was about the handling of an R33 GTSt compared to an R32 and R33 GTR.

Think of it as sibling rivalry :) All in good humour.

Anyone see the Top Gear ages ago, where the current supercars were compared to their 80's and 90's counterparts?

Long story short, the Enzo, Zonda and Carrera GT were blown out of the water by the Mclaren F1, XJ220 and F40 in terms of outright speed, and handling.

Reasoning is, current cars are loaded with ESC, yaw control, throttle assist, all the stuff to make it easier for the average mug to drive quickly, but at the cost of outright pace. Whereas the 80's cars would happily let you spear into a tree at mach 2.

Apply this to the GTR and the 32, and the gap in times isn't so much a reflection on power, but also on safety and other secondary criteria.

my 2c

Anyone see the Top Gear ages ago, where the current supercars were compared to their 80's and 90's counterparts?

Long story short, the Enzo, Zonda and Carrera GT were blown out of the water by the Mclaren F1, XJ220 and F40 in terms of outright speed, and handling.

Reasoning is, current cars are loaded with ESC, yaw control, throttle assist, all the stuff to make it easier for the average mug to drive quickly, but at the cost of outright pace. Whereas the 80's cars would happily let you spear into a tree at mach 2.

Apply this to the GTR and the 32, and the gap in times isn't so much a reflection on power, but also on safety and other secondary criteria.

my 2c

I haven't seen that episode. Only the one where they were comparing the same car heritage (ie. 300ZX vs 350Z) but of different eras. Is there a youtube link for this?

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...