Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Here are the specs!

Engine: VQ32DETT V6 Twin-Turbo with DIRECT INJECTION! (in colaboration with Cosworth!!!)

Power: 480ps (352kw!) @ 7200rpm

Torque: 58kg/m @ 4800rpm (don't know the conversion...)

Turbos: No confirmation on the size, although it's probably a couple of T-28 sized units. Get this: They have incorporated a

motor-assisted spool-up!!! Yes, no lag here!!! The death of the Supercharger maybe...?

Body: Steel moncoque with an Aluminium Spaceframe. Hints of Audi here...

Drive: 4WD... not sure of the final desicion on the gearbox though.

Here are the Pics...

The whole concept of the new GT-R is based on this years JGTC GT-R: Quad-cam V6 Twin-Turbo with the Aluminium spaceframe etc. From what I can gather, they've gone for ultimate weight distribution, with an engine that surpasses the RB26DETT in EVERY way.

There are pics flying around on the 'net already wich pretty much look like the finished product, except theyve added a few more vents around the place, in front of the rear wheel arches etc.

More details to come...

Cosworth have been involved with Nissan engine development since the 80's, they had a hand with the CA18DET-R in the Bluebird SSS-R homologation rally car, and again with the SR20DET in the Pulsar GTi-R. Right now, Cosworth has the VQ32DETT GT-R engine on its testbench. Nissan has sent the parts to Cosworth, and they've assembled it, and are conducting all the initial testing.

The mob who I'm getting all this info from, INSIST that the engine is a direct conversion of the current Skyline JGTC engine (which incidently is a VQ30DETT). Add an extra 200cc to it for whatever reason... all this leads to the question: Is the JGTC Skyline running Motor-assisted Turbos? And Direct Injection? Thats one of the major reasons why the VQ32DETT can put out big power, yet being in accordance with the Euro 4/5 emmissions laws.

The Bodywork. All the pics so far have indicated a very "subdued" look, without any spoilers and wings and things. Well, as far as I know, it's the actual bodywork itself, coupled with underbody diffusers and the like, that will give the new GT-R excellent down force. Right now, all those pics off the web, and in the magazines are "close" to what the final GT-R will look like, but NOBODY KNOWS FOR SURE. The front and rear end details are still in "Clay Model" stage, and nothing (as far as I know) has been decided on yet. All I know is that, there will be big bonnet vents, diffusers, and underbody aerodynamic aids.

The final GT-R pricing is estimated at around 8,000,000yen/car. Thats reasonable, if you take into account the engineering costs of the BNR32 GT-R, which topped out at around 10,500,000yen/car. And we all know Nissan lost alot of money making the R32 GT-R... hopefully they'll break even this time!

The R34 GT-R was late to show up, so the Japanese are expecting the same to happen here, and what they say is "early 2005".... shit. That could change though. (edit: Nissan Prez Carlos Ghosn put the new GT-R release date back to 2007 at the earliest... will let you know if this changes)

Disclaimer: All I'm reporting is what comes out here in Japan. Until know, I've seen or heard NOTHING about a possible V8 powered GT-R to be sold in the US. THATS NOT TO SAY THAT IT'S NOT TRUE!!! The Japanese won't be getting a V8 model (if there is one) so I guess that translates into bugger-all reporting of it here.

/Rezz

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/20719-the-new-gt-r/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Subaru has been saying for a while that they have eliminated Turbo lag, but can't find anywhere how they've actually done that.

Those specs sound pretty promising, but personally i'm hanging out for an absolute bahnstormer of a V8TT :) starting to look like wishful think tho :(

where'd u get the info if u don't mind me asking?

cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/20719-the-new-gt-r/#findComment-434413
Share on other sites

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

    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
    • Can you also make sure the invoices on the box (And none exist in the boxes) are below our import duty limits... I jest, there's nothing I need to actually purchase and order in. (Unless you can find me a rear diff carrier, brand new, for stupidly cheap, that is for a Toyota Landcruiser, HZJ105R GXL, 2000 year model...)  
×
×
  • Create New...