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

    • The attached document is fine. I just downloaded & opened it.
    • Hello, sorry for being late to join the discussion, but my clock just died on me.   Ive tried to look at Michaels digital clock repair.docx and it doesnt work maybe the file has expired.   Please let me know if you can re upload it or take some youtube videos to show us how to get the clock installed? thanks
    • I thought that might be the case, thats what I'll start saving for. Thanks for the info 
    • Ps i found the below forum and it seems to be the same scenario Im dealing with. Going to check my ECU coolant temp wire tomorrow    From NICOclub forum: s1 RB25det flooding at start up Thu Apr 11, 2013 7:23 am I am completely lost on this. Car ran perfectly fine when I parked it at the end of the year. I took the engine out and painted the engine bay, and put a fuel cell with an inline walbro 255 instead of the in tank unit I had last year. After reinstalling everything, the engine floods when the fuel pump primes. if i pull the fuel pump fuse it'll start, and as soon as I put the fuse back in it starts running ridiculously rich. I checked the tps voltage, and its fine. Cleaned the maf as it had some dust from sitting on a shelf all winter, fuel pressure is correct while running, but wont fire until there is less than 5psi in the lines. The fuel lines are run correctly. I have found a few threads with the same problem but no actual explanation of what fixed it, the threads just ended. Any help would be appreciated. Rb25det s1 walbro255 fuel pump nismo fpr holset hx35 turbo fmic 3" exhaust freddy intake manifold q45tb q45 maf   Re: s1 RB25det flooding at start up Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:07 am No, I didn't. I found the problem though. There was a break in one of the ecu coolant temp sensor wires. Once it was repaired it fired right up with no problems. I would have never thought a non working coolant temp sensor would have caused such an issue.
    • Hi sorry late reply I didnt get a chance to take any pics (my mechanics on the other side of the city) but the plugs were fouled from being too rich. I noticed the MAF wasn't genuine, so I replaced it with a genuine green label unit. I also swapped in a different ignitor, but the issue remains. I've narrowed it down a bit now: - If I unplug and reconnect the fuel lines and install fresh spark plugs, the car starts right up and runs perfectly. Took it around the block with no issues - As soon as I shut it off and try to restart, it won't start again - Fuel pressure while cranking is steady around 40 psi, injectors have good spray, return line is clear, and the FPR vacuum is working. It just seems like it's getting flooded after the first start I unplugged coolant sensors to see if its related to ECU flooding but that didnt make a difference. Im thinking its related to this because this issue only started happening after fixing coolant leaks and replacing the bottom part of the stock manifolds coolant pipe. My mechanic took off the inlet to get to get to do these repairs. My mechanics actually just an old mate who's retired now so ill be taking it to a different mechanic who i know has exp with RBs to see if they find anything. If you have any ideas please send em lll give it a try. Ive tried other things like swapping the injectors, fuel rail, different fuel pressure regs, different ignitor, spark plugs, comp test and MAF but the same issue persists.
×
×
  • Create New...