Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

woah! im on my uni breaks from mechatronics eng and physics still haunts me here LOL.

please dont make me get my books out.

lets put it this way, cars are approx 20-30% efficient. And in the worlds of todays technology, its not how much power u have, its how u put the power down that moves the car. i think we all can agree on that. just remember this..... NISSAN have NEVER overrated their power figures in performance cars.

sure the car will get from 0-100 in 3.3 but its doesn't necessary mean it will last more than 10 launch.

almost of japan workshop have been delivered their gtr's just give them a week or so to break in the engines before serious thrashing can begins on the dyno's.

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

force and energy ARE different things. that's why they have different names!
Force is just energy doing something... everything is energy, you, me, the tree, the rock, everything, yes. Even between the land and the ship.

If an unstoppable force meets an immovable object then the universe explodes.

The wall does get hotter, the person gets tired. Energy is conserved.

Force is just energy doing something... everything is energy, you, me, the tree, the rock, everything, yes. Even between the land and the ship.

from the well respected physics text, "Yuri the Guru's guide to the universe"?

Force is not Energy doing something. You've got it back to front. Energy (in physics) is a measure of Work done by an applied Force.

If an unstoppable force meets an immovable object then the universe explodes.

The wall does get hotter, the person gets tired. Energy is conserved.

who said anything about an unstoppable force? universe exploding? OK then...

energy is always conserved within or between systems. no argument there, but that's a different thing all together. Forces can be applied but do no Work with no Energy transferred, and that's what is happening. Force spent doing nothing = no Energy output. go lean against a wall for 5 minutes - you are applying a Force to it, but you won't get tired and the wall won't heat up from the force (ignoring the conduction of body heat - let's assume that the wall was at body temp beforehand). By leaning on the wall and imparting a Force, you've created a Potential Energy. you haven't transferred any Energy to the wall because you've done no Work on it.

almost of japan workshop have been delivered their gtr's just give them a week or so to break in the engines before serious thrashing can begins on the dyno's.

i guess mines and mcr didnt get that msg? didnt they take there cars straight from nissan to tsukaba?

Edited by rb26s13
GT-Rs were heavy enough as it was; in tighter corners their weight could really be felt and could prove to be quite tricky to handle in some situations (mainly in a series of tight corners where the weight of the car is shifting from one side to the other and/or front to rear; and also when entering a corner hard under breaks, the front would could push wide because of the weight).

Even though Nissan seem to have engineered the car very well, imagine how much faster it would be had they kept the weight down.

Bear in mind that Nissan have dumped their inline 6's. They are poorly balanced (weight-wise) compared the the VQ & VR engines and that's why they just want to understeer all day through tight bends.

Look at some of the JGTC examples: the GT500 Supra using an inline 4, or the R34 GTR with a VQ rather than an RB. At speed the more even weight distribution speaks for itself performance-wise. Look at the damn R35 gearbox. It's under the boot!

That said, the R35 is a bit of a fat sh!t.

yep the new engine, all alloy block , but without cylinder liners!! instead a o.15 plasma sprayed bore which they must be concerned about & want to keep an eye on i would say.

i will almost guarantee that one of the first rebuild mods will be to put liners in the bores. mind you it will effect weight balance by a few kilograms (but then again so do i)

I'm saying trim the weight back 100Kg or so and you guys are reading build a stripped out racecar the size of a lotus elise. :)

Are previous GTR's too uncomfortable and compromised? They weigh considerably less than the R35; yet i don't hear many complain about their structural integrity or the interior space. Nissan could have easily kept the weight of the car down; the only reason i can see for them to avoid doing this is cost since lighter weight and higher strength material would cost more. Bear in mind the new engine is probably a lot lighter than the RB series and i'm guessing most of the components in the driveline are also lighter and stronger. Which brings me back to my original question, where has the extra weight come from?

Supple leather

How the F&% do u guys no this kinda s$#%?!?!?! F%$# me... goddamn physics and energy and universes exploding and shit.. its just a car, a car that was never intended to be driven by any of you its a cruiser. The only reason its fast is for cred, so that people will want it, desire it. The only reason it carries the GT-R badge is for the same reason, desireability and credibilty. Its all marketing, Carlos Ghosn is a genious and he is in the progress of turning nissan around from bankruptcy. The name is just a name, this is not the GT-R of old, its simply not, it carries different design philosiphies. Its fat cus the target audience nissan has aimed the car at wants it to be like that. They want the comfort, hey want the awesome sound system and the sat nav and the heated seats and all that shit.

Excuse my spelling i never finished high school.

no such thing as an R35

you might be talking about the V35 ?

ummmmm okkaaay. there was this small car release recently. you may have heard of it. something like Nissan R35 GTR?!?

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

    • @666DAN sorry to bring you and old thread.     I've got my de+t done and it's all running great other than 1 small issue.    Car has remained auto with the na auto and tcm, I've used a stagea ecu with. NIstune board and everything is great other than my gear selection on the dash. It illuminates park, reverse, neutral, 3rd and 2nd when selected . But nothing when in  drive or what gear your in when you pop it into tiptronic. I'm sure there is maybe 1 wire in the ecu plug I need to move to rectify this. Do ya have any ideas?     Cheers man
    • Well I recently changed my rear axles and was thinking if I bumped anything, I have been driving the car for a while now though... But it has been raining today so everything is wet under the wheel arches. Brakes feel fine and can't hear any of the metal screamers, I had a squeak coming from one of the handbrake drums but that seems to have gone away a while ago. I was going down a hill when it lit up and I did feel the abs bite for a second and question why it did it?
    • Correct. Um. I dunno. I haven't cared enough about the way that the NA cars work to know for sure. But..... The 33/34 turbo manual cars have an electronic speed sensor in the gearbox that outputs a +/- (ie, sawtooth AC) voltage signal. That is connected to the speedo. The speedo then outputs a 0-5v square wave (ie, PWM) signal that the ECU (and any other CU on the bus) sees. The speed sensor is NOT directly connected to the ECU. So here's the problem. Your new ECU expects to see the PWM signal, but must somehow be getting a direct signal from the diff speed sensor. Which would suggest that the wiring of the NA car is not the same as the turbo cars. I think you will need to spend some time with (hopefully the wiring diagram for the car) and a multimeter to see what is connected to what. Then, presuming I am correct**, you would then want to separate the ECU speed signal input from the rest of the car's wiring, and probably either buy a speed signal converter, or build one using an arduino (or similar). That would take in the speed sensor signal and output a scaled (and suitably rearranged) signal for the ECU. ** We shouldn't presume that I am correct here, because there might be something else crazy going on. I don't think you could convert the speedo to be fed from the gearbox sensor, because the pulse rate from that sensor is probably different to the diff sensor and then the speedo would read wrongly. And this also wouldn't fix the ECU's problem either, because the ECU doesn't want to see the gearbox signal direct either (assuming that they are all on the same wiring, for some odd NA related reason, see above caveat!) Does this help? Probably not. Can you make it work? Almost certainly. With the above work. You should buy a handheld oscilloscope from Aliexpress so that you can view these signals directly. Connect up the probes and drive the car. Show photos of the screen when drving at known speeds and connected to different places, and we'll see what we can learn about it.
    • Assuming your brake pads are not worn right down, I'd add a little brake fluid. Is there any sign of a brake fluid leak?
    • Hello all,  I need of some help. On my drive home my handbrake light lit up and started flashing. When I got home I checked my handbrake sensor under the centre console and nothing seemed out of the ordinary. I have scanned my car via the consult port, no codes shown. Checked my brake fluid as well which is half full. Tried unplugging the brake master but it didn't change anything. Thoughts on what it could be? The master float doesn't seem to be stuck. My car is an 1998 ER34 sedan GT. No hicas but has ABS Photos below 👇🏾 
×
×
  • Create New...