Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

You think they didn't do the same thing last time???

They probably did in the past aswel, but dont forget - 112,000 in 1989 or 1990 isnt comparable to the 150k they are asking for now. That will definatly change the end sale results

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

that's what i've been trying to tell people when they said "well the R32 didn't sell very well did..." blah

$107k (i think it was) was A LOT to splash on a car back in the early 90's.

And think how many $100k+ cars are on the roads these days.

Nissan OZ will sell out of their alotment of GTR's (whatever it happens to be) and i'm sure Nissan will make a profit from these cars worldwide. I think they've created something too good not be taken up by the enthusiasts worldwide, plus i think the fact that this is the first GTR to be sold everywhere is going to help a lot.

350 is 231 stock, why does TT kit make such a small diff ? only to 280 :S ??

No, no. That power's based on modifying the 206kW version (which makes around 155rwkW) not the new HR engine, and the TT kits make 280kW at the tyres (so more like 320kW at the flywheel). Bear in mind that its only running about 7-8psi to make that power, so the turbos aren't even being stressed. The car is amazingly responsive while still delivering a bucketload of power.

The other thing to note is that the stock bottom end for the VQ35DE (which none of the turbo kits modify) only takes around 300rwkW before snapping a rod or gudgeon pin, which is why most of the kits are tuned to only make 280rwkW for extra reliability. Rebuilding the bottom end and leaving the fuel system stock will see you to around 310rwkW "reliably" (about 340rwkW is the absolute limit of the pump on a dyno, where the fuel isn't sloshing around) If you're willing to sink big dollars and rebuild the engine with headwork and do the fuel system, the turbines will support 500kW at the flywheel at 16psi.

There aren't any kits available for the HR engine yet, but with the popularity of the 350Z and the G35 in the States its only a matter of time before companies do. And with their revised bottom end, they'll probably make upwards of 300rwkW at half a bar.

Under new management there's gonna be defined breakups in the lineup so the different models don't overlap too much into each other's customer base. From a performance point of view... if you can' afford a GTR, your next best option is supposed to be a Z33 350Z.... after that if you want a "luxury spec" sports car... think IS300 style) then you got for the V35 350GT. If you want something cheaper get a 250GT. Cheaper than that you buy a March

I agree with Amir that there are holes in the market that Nissan needs to plug, especially with their resurgence. They need to bring people into the brand at an entry point, and right now they've got nothing.

Firstly there needs to be a hot hatch to contend in this very competitive and popular market. Ford, GM, VAG, Renault, Peugeot, Honda etc can't all be wrong. Where's the new Pulsar SSS? Most marketers know its easier to retain a customer than it is to get them, which is why they try to pick up customers early in their car buying "career".

Then there needs to be a Silvia replacement. They need to build a smaller, more affordable, RWD sports car to stick it to the WRX and Integra. This entry model "pure sports car" is what attracts younger people (or people going through a mid life crisis and so want something fun while having to afford two cars) to the brand.

I think that the market, especially the international market, could support a vehicle higher in the price range than the Z33 / V35 but well below the GT-R. Just like Porsche stuck the Cayman between the Boxster and the 911, Nissan needs to put a sports car between the 350GT and the GT-R. The Skyline and 350Z are seeing massive props internationally by motoring journos (aside from Clarkson, of course), and my international colleagues I talk to about cars quite like it too.

If they can build something as competitive a bit higher up in the price range, but with more turbo, I'd say it would have a good job of succeeding.

Something along the lines of..

Nissan GTR

450Z - VK45DE w/ATTESSA (please).

V36 Skyline GTT - VQ37HR TT.

V36 Skyline GTT4 - VQ35HR TT w/ATTESSA.

V36 Skyline GTS370 - VQ37HR.

V36 Skyline GTS350 - VQ35HR.

V36 Skyline GTS4 - VQ35HR w/ATTESSA.

350Z.

V36 Skyline GTS250 - VQ25HR.

Firstly there needs to be a hot hatch to contend in this very competitive and popular market. Ford, GM, VAG, Renault, Peugeot, Honda etc can't all be wrong. Where's the new Pulsar SSS? Most marketers know its easier to retain a customer than it is to get them, which is why they try to pick up customers early in their car buying "career".

From memory there's currently a hot hatch turbo pulsar in development based on the march/tiida platform. was at the tokyo motorshow last year I think as a concept. White n black and horny looking. So I'm pretty sure Nissan's aware of this shortfall.

But the fact is the new GTR is gay! How much does it weigh? How many tricky driver aids does it have....it doesnt even have a clutch! Not for me. Give me a poverty pack rwd version without the electric tooth brushes and a nice alloy V6 with some huffers. Try to get the thing in under 1400kgs (light by todays standards) and you would still have an overweight POS...but better then an obese POS that has electric everything. Whatever happened to sports cars being driven by people that liked punting cars along...anyway...off to keep saving for a 2002 GT3RS or the single remain Espirit GT1 :(

I can't see them dumbing down tthe new GTR, it's supposed to be a hero car, releasing a GTR-lite version would make it less god-like.

Still, they can always use the things they've developed to bring out a 4 door SKYLINE badged version, that looks a little more pedestrian.

Sure, making it a 4 door would mean a complete redesign, but it'd be more about modifying the current plans than starting from scratch, and turf out all the driver aids, add in a small single turbo'd engine and you've got a bang for your buck motor that could compete with the 4 door market, in either 2wd or 4wd segments.

The problem would be the chassis code though. It couldn't be R35, or else it's just a 4 door GTR, it's got nothing to do with the R34, and anything else just isn't skyline, and R34.5 sounds crap.

anyway, as long as they emphasise the skyline part, they can differentiate it from the GTR. Lose the fancy gadgets, add in a 6 speed transaxle, square up the appearance and it's a whole different car for a whole different market, and because of its more basic tech package, it's a fair bit cheaper too.

Firstly there needs to be a hot hatch to contend in this very competitive and popular market. Ford, GM, VAG, Renault, Peugeot, Honda etc can't all be wrong. Where's the new Pulsar SSS? Most marketers know its easier to retain a customer than it is to get them, which is why they try to pick up customers early in their car buying "career".

001.jpg

002.jpg

003.jpg

Something along the lines of..

Nissan GTR

450Z - VK45DE w/ATTESSA (please).

V36 Skyline GTT - VQ37HR TT.

V36 Skyline GTT4 - VQ35HR TT w/ATTESSA.

V36 Skyline GTS370 - VQ37HR.

V36 Skyline GTS350 - VQ35HR.

V36 Skyline GTS4 - VQ35HR w/ATTESSA.

350Z.

V36 Skyline GTS250 - VQ25HR.

even thats too much

i say:

GTR

v36 skyline gts450 vk45de - like the hsv calais, big, executive type car

v36 skyline gtt vq37hr tt

v36 skyline gt4 vq37hr with attessa

v36 skyline gts350 vq35hr

350z

v36 skyline gts250 vq25hr

but ive got a feeling that with all this work that was done with the new gtr, that surely something else is coming along - maybe it is the new hot pulsar sss, maybe it is a v36 based turbo to fill the 'gap' that we've been talking about...

Should there be an R35 GTT?

No.

/thread

so true, if you have a GTR you will understand why the name 'skyline' has been raped so badly by gts and crap gts-ts (i admit there are some very nice examples out there too so dont get me wrong), that the name skyline no longer applies to the GTR.

dream cars will always be dream cars to %98 of the population but for the 2% that can afford it, or the people who cant and wait until they are 20 years old and can afford, the car is more special

f**k all this, just gimme the golf gti concept...

mr config with w8 engy....... dont remember if it had a pair of huffers or not.. but damm.. that thing would be the z car for this generation.

dsg, w8, light wieght.. shit would own allot of much more expensive brands... hard to control but furrrrn..

and yes.. i now i used the words.. golf.. or gti... in the same sentence as fun.. and meant it... but admit it.. the concept would be the new club racer.

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

    • This is the other log file, if only we had exhaust manifold pressure - would understand what's going on a bit better   Can you take a screenshot of your wastegate setup in the Kebabtech?   Engine Functions --> Boost Control (looks like this):  
    • You just need a datalogger of some sort. A handheld oscilloscope could do it, because it will make the trace visible on screen, so you can look at the peak, or whatever you need to look at. And there are cheap USB voltage loggers available too. You could get a 2 channel one and press a button to feed voltage to the second channel at points that you want to check the sensor voltage, when you knew what the guage was saying, for example.
    • it's not the issue with making power, it's the issue with controlling boost, and this isn't the first time I've seen a 6Boost having issue with controlling boost down low.   The boost control here looks interesting.   Looking at your logs, looks like it's set to open loop boost control strategy (which is fine). We can see VCT being kept on till about 6600RPM (no issue with that). Ignition timing (I'm assuming this is E85, seems within reason too, nothing too low, causing hot EGTS and boost spiking). There's about 15 degrees of advance when your boost shoots up, however can't be this as the timing isn't single digits. I'm assuming there's no EMAP data, as I wasn't able to find it in the logs. We can see your tuner sets the WG DC to 0% after 4300RPM, trying to control boost.   My thoughts, what frequency is your wastegate set to?  AND why aren't you using both ports for better control?
    • While that sounds reasonable, this is definitely a boost control problem, but the real question is why are you having the boost control problem? Which is why I pondered the idea that there's a problem at ~4000rpm related to head flow. In that instance, you are not yet under boost control - it's still ramping up and the wastegate is yet to gain authority. So, I'm thinking that if the wastegate is not yet open enough to execute control, but the compressor has somehow managed ot make a lot of flow, and the intake side of the head doesn't flow as well as the exhaust side (more on that later), then presto, high MAP (read that as boost overshoot). I have a number of further thoughts. I use butterfly valves in industrial applications ALL THE TIME. They have a very non-linear flow curve. That is to say that there is a linear-ish region in the middle of their opening range, where a 1% change in opening will cause a reasonably similar change in flow rate, from one place to another. So, maybe between 30% open and 60% open, that 1% change in opening gives you a similar 2% change in flow. (That 2% is pulled out of my bum, and is 2% of the maximum flow capacity of the valve, not 2% of the flow that happens to be going through the valve at that moment). That means that at 30% open, a 1% change in opening will give you a larger relative flow increase (relative to the flow going through the valve right then) compared to the same increment in opening giving you the same increment in flow in outright flow units. But at 60% opening, that extra 2% of max flow is relatively less than 1/2 the increase at 30% opening. Does that make sense? It doesn't matter if it doesn't because it's not the main point anyway. Below and above the linear-ish range in the middle, the opening-flow curve becomes quite...curved. Here's a typical butterfy valve flow curve. Note that there is a very low slope at the bottom end, quite steep linear-ish slope in the middle, then it rolls off to a low slope at the top. This curve shows the "gain" that you get from a butterfly valve as a function of opening%. Note the massive spike in the curve at 30%. That's the point I was making above that could be hard to understand. So here's the point I'm trying to make. I don't know if a butterfly valve is actually a good candiate for a wastegate. A poppet valve of some sort has a very linear flow curve as a function of opening %. It can't be anyelse but linear. It moves linearly and the flow area increases linearly with opening %. I can't find a useful enough CV curve for a poppet valve that you could compare against the one I showed for the butterfly, but you can pretty much imagine that it will not have that lazy, slow increase in flow as it comes off the seat. It will start flowing straight away and increase flow very noticeably with every increase in opening%. So, in your application, you're coming up onto boost, the wastegate is closed. Boost ramps up quite quickly, because that's really what we want, and all of a sudden it is approaching target boost and the thing needs to open. So it starts opening, and ... bugger all flow. And it opens some more, and bugger all more flow. And all the while time is passing, boost is overshooting further, and then finally the WG opens to the point where the curve starts to slope upwards and it gains authority amd the overshoot is brought under control and goes away, but now the bloody thing is too open and it has to go back the other way and that's hy you get that bathtub curve in your boost plot. My position here is that the straight gate is perhaps not teh good idea it looks like. It might work fine in some cases, and it might struggle in others. Now, back to the head flow. I worry that the pissy little NA Neo inlet ports, coupled with the not-very-aggressive Neo turbo cam, mean that the inlet side is simply not matched to the slightly ported exhaust side coupled with somewhat longer duration cam. And that is not even beginning to address the possibility that the overlap/relative timing of those two mismatched cams might make that all the worse at around 4000rpm, and not be quite so bad at high rpm. I would be dropping in at least a 260 cam in the inlet, if not larger, see what happens. I'd also be thinking very hard about pulling the straight gate off, banging a normal gate on there and letting it vent to the wild, just as an experiment.
    • Not a problem at all Lithium, I appreciate your help regardless. I've pulled a small part of a log where the target pressure was 28psi and it spiked to 36.4psi. I've only just begun using Data Log Viewer so if I'm sending this in the wrong format let me know.
×
×
  • Create New...