Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Porsche specs

power 357.9 kw / 480 bhp @ 6000 rpm

bhp/weight 302.84 bhp per weight

torque 620 nm / 457.3 ft lbs @ 1950 rpm

weight 1588 kg / 3500 lbs

top speed 310.6 kph / 193 mph

0 - 60 mph 3.6 seconds

0 - 1/4 mile 11.9 seconds

GT-R Specs

power 352.7 kw / 473 bhp @ 6400 rpm

bhp/weight 275.0 bhp per weight

torque 588.42 nm / 434 ft lbs @ 3200 to 5200rpm rpm

weight 1720 kg / 3792 lbs

top speed 310.6 kph / 193 mph

0 - 60 mph 3.5 seconds

0 - 1/4 mile 11.7 seconds

Me and my brother were talking about this yesterday. Now when you think about this in terms of 1/4 mile alone it comes down to power to weight really with two cars like this that are both 4wd. So unless nissan are fudging there 0-60 and 1/4mile times, how can it be so fast?

Could nissan be lying about the power output of the car?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/197442-how-is-the-r35-gt-r-so-fast/
Share on other sites

In a recent carpoint article Motor's David Morley managed 0-100kmh in 4.0 (and they said it would be hard to do much better), but they managed a 0-400m time of 12.1 while hitting the 180kmh limiter before they reached the 400m point. So it is definitely an 11 second car.

the numbers don't add up to me either, but then we don't know what revs the launch control launches from - maybe it launces from redline?

Me and my brother were talking about this yesterday. Now when you think about this in terms of 1/4 mile alone it comes down to power to weight really with two cars like this that are both 4wd.

No, acceleration times come down to power to weight and gearing. Its been discussed in this subforum before.

It's the gearbox. fast shifts are easy now.

Porsche has semi-auto gearbox option aswell...

No, acceleration times come down to power to weight and gearing. Its been discussed in this subforum before.

That forum really goes into no detail at all, just fools and there own opinions... gearing shmearing.. maybe if the cars were almost the same weight.. but they are approx 150kg difference.. thats like two cars racing 1 with 3 ppl in it the other with 1.

That and the Porsche are a manual box with a clutch. The GTR is DSG, it can change gears much quicker, which in turn will keep boost pressure between gearshifts and pull away.

Nope porsche 997 911 T offers a semi-auto box. the times i have quoted are from that semi-auto option which is the fastest porsche

witchcraft.

This makes the most sense to me.. im going to have to agree wit you.

I say its either not as fast as nissan claims, or there fudging the power figures.. its just not possible

Has anyone read the specs from the Official Nissan Global site ? Anyway the VR38 is indicated as a 'net' power figure (in car) of 480 hp or 353 kw. The footnote indicates that this is approx. 15% lower than the 'Gross' power (engine only). If this is correct the bhp is actually closer to 560 hp for engine only. Just thought I'd point this out as nobody seems to have mentioned this on any of the forums.

Cheers

The URL is http://press.nissan-global.com/PRESSKIT/NI...LISH/index.html

to check this out yourself in the specs part

Edited by BK
Has anyone read the specs from the Official Nissan Global site ? Anyway the VR38 is indicated as a 'net' power figure (in car) of 480 hp or 353 kw. The footnote indicates that this is approx. 15% lower than the 'Gross' power (engine only). If this is correct the bhp is actually closer to 560 hp for engine only. Just thought I'd point this out as nobody seems to have mentioned this on any of the forums.

Cheers

The URL is http://press.nissan-global.com/PRESSKIT/NI...LISH/index.html

to check this out yourself in the specs part

exactly, since when was the 32/33/34 GTR even remotely 280hp?

In car manufactures terms, doing quick times with massive hp isn't showcasing a company's ability. Doing Porsche beating times with "only" 480hp demonstrates one hell of a design.

I wouldn't be surprised if these cars did 420ish awhp straight from the factory.

Well gearing and power band can also have something to do with it, having said that i imagine the Porsche power band would be just as good if not better than the GTR.

But yes cans can be geared for acceleration or cruise. Not sure what the gearing difference is between them both.

Well gearing and power band can also have something to do with it, having said that i imagine the Porsche power band would be just as good if not better than the GTR.

The Top Gear article says the Porsche's engine is a little more flexible, probably because of the VGT since the displacement is about the same.

The Top Gear article says the Porsche's engine is a little more flexible, probably because of the VGT since the displacement is about the same.

I say this has alot to do with it

torque 620 nm / 457.3 ft lbs @ 1950 rpm

Dont get me wrong for bringing this article up, this car is practically my favourite car, its performance for the price and practicality of the car is truelly unmatched. The main reason im bringing it to light is because i believe that the car is actually making more power than nissan claim.

Remember in japan, although the gentlemens agreement has long since expired, car manufacturers are still urged not to create super powerful cars that can reach extreme speeds.

This is the first japanese car that truelly goes beyond the 206kw barrier

Porsche has semi-auto gearbox option aswell...

That forum really goes into no detail at all, just fools and there own opinions... gearing shmearing.. maybe if the cars were almost the same weight.. but they are approx 150kg difference.. thats like two cars racing 1 with 3 ppl in it the other with 1.

Nope porsche 997 911 T offers a semi-auto box. the times i have quoted are from that semi-auto option which is the fastest porsche

This makes the most sense to me.. im going to have to agree wit you.

I say its either not as fast as nissan claims, or there fudging the power figures.. its just not possible

Porsche doesn't offer a "semi-auto" box that you seem so certain of. Porsche offer a traditional 6 speed manual, and an AUTOMATIC gearbox in the 997 Turbo, as in, a slush box. It has "tiptronic" operation, but in no way is it even remotely similar to GTR's DSG gearbox, or for that matter Ferrari and other's paddle shift manuals.

The Porsche Turbo "tiptronic" is quicker accelerating from standstill than the manual yes, mainly due to the ability to load up the torque convertor, spooling the variable geaometry turbos whilst at standstill.

GTR's performance can partly be put down to the exceptionally quick shifts of DSG style boxes (it's actually pre-selected the next gear, and is just waiting for the shift paddle to be pulled to change). This would go someway toward achieving those times, but I'm still sceptical that they can be repeated in the real world.

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

    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
    • I know I have to get a wheel alignment but until then I just need to bring the rear tyres in a bit they're wearing to the belt on the inside and brand new on the outside edge. I did shorten the arms a bit but got it wrong now after a few klms the Slip and VDC lights come on. I'd just like to get it to a point where I can drive for another week or two before getting an alignment. I've had to pay a lot of other stuff recently so doing it myself is my only option 
×
×
  • Create New...