Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

http://www.motorauthority.com/nissan-gt-r-...ance-model.html

While the GT-R SpecV is one of the fastest and best-handling cars currently in production, it’s safe to say that almost every car enthusiast on the planet was hoping Nissan would pull out something much more extreme for the special edition model. In the lead up to the car’s unveiling earlier this year, rumors of a 550hp (410kW) output and a 220lb (100kg) lighter kerb weight were building excitement everywhere.

Though the SpecV wasn’t a complete letdown, its 485hp (362kW) output – the same as the standard Series II GT-R – and 132lb (60kg) weight reduction certainly was. According to the car’s chief engineer, there was an important reason for this.

Speaking with Edmunds, Nissan engineer Kazutoshi Mizuno revealed that the SpecV is “not the high-performance version of the GT-R” and that another model is in the pipeline.

What Mizuno has in store is still anyone’s guess but one suggestion that’s gaining credence is Nissan will build a road-going ‘homologated’ version of its FIA GT1 race car. The storied ‘LM’ badge (short for LeMans) is expected to be revived for the “high-performance” GT-R and output is rumored to be set as high as 592hp (442kW) and 506lb-ft (685Nm) of torque.

Expect production of the car to be extremely limited as pricing will probably be set higher than even the SpecV, which at $161,800 in Japan, is already double the price of the standard GT-R.

This isn’t the only new GT-R model rumored to be in development. Nissan is also expected to launch a ‘M-Spec’ model, a softer version of the car targeted at luxury buyers seeking a performance vehicle.

If the Spec V isn't the high performance version, wouldn't that then just make it a stupidly overpriced car with expensive cosmetic mods?? Nissan are taking their customers for a ride, either with the false rumour, or with the Spec V...

yeah the specV pricing has me beat. I mean given the choice between one spec V or 2 'regular' R35s I'd much rather 2 GTRs. once nicely modded for track/tarmac rally use and one for street/daily use. perfect.

the spec V is nice, and I could understand a 30% or even a 50% premium over the standard model, but 100% is too much to stomach.

with the modifications the SpecV got over a base car, i guess it was always destined to be the "middle child" but i'm with Baron, it's certainly not "middle" pricing...

but at least from the reviews it does seem like there is a very noticeable difference in performance, and it sounds like the brakes are some of THE best going around, no matter how exotic a car you pick.

i think we'll be surprised by the Ring time, but yeah, SpecV always seemed to be a halfway house to something completely mental... can't wait! :)

Considering how much Nismo was trying to sell their parts for (which some parts are shared/similar ie exhaust), did we really expect anything less from Nissan themselves? I wonder how much the high performance GTR will be then... 100% over the Spec V!

I reckon pricing for the SpecV should be roughly in the same proportion as the Porsche 911 GT3 RS is to the standard GT3.

911 GT3 from EUR 106,000

911 GT3 RS EUR 129,000 (+22%)

The idea of an even higher-performing GTR is exciting, and with all the aftermarket tuning already possible for the standard car it is not that surprising that Nissan would be able to extract more from the R35.

If the Spec V isn't the high performance version, wouldn't that then just make it a stupidly overpriced car with expensive cosmetic mods?? Nissan are taking their customers for a ride, either with the false rumour, or with the Spec V...

Umm yep thats EXACTLY what the Vspec GTR is in its current form. jack all weight reduction and huge leap in price for a few Carbon parts thrown on oh and some suspension & other junk you won't notice over stock.

Have you seen the Vspec mag wheels? They are BUTT ugly.

I like the idea of a 590 HP GTR that would be exciting, of course its only just a rumor we'll have to wait to see what they really produce.

What, with lateral acceleration at 1.12g and braking over 2gs - you guys reckon that it's too expensive? what other car in that price range does that? Remember that if it comes to Australia, it will be cheaper than the 911 turbo. Remember that those brakes on the spec-V are the same as the Ferrari FXX - which isn't even a legal street car. There is no other street car on the planet with brakes that good. Have a think about that.

Remember that only 30 are made a month. Nissan is already losing money on the normal GTR. It is there Halo car. Business wise, it is stupid if they are losing money on the spec-V as well, since they are making only 30 a month.

People say that it's not as good as two GTR's put together eventhough it costs twice. But they forgetting the law of diminishing returns. Is the 911 turbo twice as good as the normal GTR? Is the Lambo LP540 3 times better than the normal GTR? Simple answer. NO

Put it simply the SpecV is obviously for those that want a GTR for the track. You won't see much better drag times or on road comfort, it's really for those that want to push it on the track, and for that you'd want the SpecV for the improvements that you can then mod upon.

Considering the brakes are around $50k to make is it really that surprising that it is so costly? The cost difference on other cars with cc vs normal brakes is similar but of course it looks worse when you have a cheaper base car to start with.

e.g. $15k Accent with $50k brakes would make the car 'worth' $65k but it wouldn't be worth the purchase. The question is how much do the changes make on the track, that's where the SpecV might make it all up. Let's face it, the R35 has been criticised as being too heavy and suffering brake fade so the handling mods, weight loss and brakes should help.

But they forgetting the law of diminishing returns.

good point.

the braking it seems is going to see the most benefit in track times by the looks of it, Ring times should be very interesting.

I remember reading years back actually that the plan was always to make the base model, a Spec V and a 3rd stripped out, caged racing version that was named back then as the EVO Spec.

But right now the Spec V seems as useless as the Nismo Club Spec in terms of gains for $$$ value.

Then again - the NUR spec R34's aren't exactly all they are cracked up to be either but people still seem to get a boner over them.

What, with lateral acceleration at 1.12g and braking over 2gs - you guys reckon that it's too expensive? what other car in that price range does that? Remember that if it comes to Australia, it will be cheaper than the 911 turbo. Remember that those brakes on the spec-V are the same as the Ferrari FXX - which isn't even a legal street car. There is no other street car on the planet with brakes that good. Have a think about that.

Remember that only 30 are made a month. Nissan is already losing money on the normal GTR. It is there Halo car. Business wise, it is stupid if they are losing money on the spec-V as well, since they are making only 30 a month.

People say that it's not as good as two GTR's put together eventhough it costs twice. But they forgetting the law of diminishing returns. Is the 911 turbo twice as good as the normal GTR? Is the Lambo LP540 3 times better than the normal GTR? Simple answer. NO

Agree on most points. However if you were spending twice the money, wouldn't you want a little ECU tune so you get 530 HP like the Cob accessport gives you. They can do it to the current car no problem.

If the brakes on the Vspec cost $50k year I can see why the costs jump so high. Just if I was buying a Vspec i'd prefur at least a little extra horses not just carbon and race brakes & suspension.

Still amazing value for money for the amount of car you get. And agree with the post above, the Vspec sounds like its really for the race track boys not everyday drivers that makes alot of sense.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...