Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If you hadn’t ordered one-- ages ago—there’s no way you can get one now anyway.  

Nissan has been pretty selective on who gets them, and they have no shortage of buyers.

I agree you wouldn’t buy one as a road car..
 

  • Like 1
  • 3 weeks later...

Do you know what positive confirmation bias is? 

Anyway the Track edition is $250k on road, Nismo is $330k

That's $80k for some (limited) extra power, carbon body bits, insane seats and different (IMHO awesome) interior.  Might sound a lot but then again resale on the nismo will likely be better when i sell.  I think it's more like $50k premium considering resale. 

i'm going to run this car in STOCKER classes this year...  I wanted the nismo as the ultimate factory GTR road car..  It would be great to reclaim some "stocker" CAMS track records again...  Btw my older (2009) GTR with bolt-ons, tune and slicks was much much much faster but that's besides the point, and modified classes.

FWIW the Nismo seems to have noticable turbo lag <4000rpm which you may have seen hinted at in some reviews.  Well i can confirm it's true -- will have to alter driving style accordingly.  The bigger turbos whilst yielding additional peak power for that 600hp headline number simply stifle lower RPM slingshot effect out of corners..  i was left waiting 1-2 seconds for power to come online.. a bit frustrating.  Maybe the bigger turbos will yeild more when we tune it eventually.

Anyway today in in the Nismo I ran 1:06.2 in traffic (with showroom tyres/brakes). However with AP racing j-hook rotors + agressive pads and robust fluid + R888R or Trofeo rubber on a clear track i think we can achive 1:03's- add a tune and slicks maybe i can beat my 1:00.8 GTR time from 2010.

The Nismo is an awesome car.  Is it 2x better than the original, no.  But there are diminishing returns when something is this good out ofthe box..  You pay an order of magnitude for a fraction improvement.

Anyway have you got one yet Dan?

Btw here is some video from today, shakedown on the factory tyres and brakes.  On saturday i will put some decent rotors/pads/fluid and r-spec tyres on, then  Sunday will be running at Eastern Creek if anyone wants to come for a chat.

 

  • Like 7

Shame there's no telemetry on that. Didn't look "that" laggy and you'd think given the engine size that lag wouldn't be an issue up to 600 or so HP so I'm guessing those turbos have a lot more love to give. Do you think a basic ALS setting on your tune (when it happens) would alleviate the lag? 

No I won't be buying one, I live in a regional area and whilst we're quite comfortable, in terms of expendable income as a percentage of total coming in, we're still not in metro wages here so I think a Nismo is hard to justify especially a I wouldn't track it. I'll be test driving a 35 in the next month or 2 though, just to finally put that idea to bed - as a weekender that is, not a track car. The Silvia is too much fun to get rid of and GTRs tend to be less capable and more expensive to run as track cars than many other platforms (S chassis/Evo in particular).

As you've said, is it worth twice as much? I'm doubtful, but for someone who wants a turn key package to compete in showroom catagories etc, it makes a lot of sense. With some basic upgrades it will be a weapon also (and I don't think people should get on their high horse about hur ur it's a 350k car and still needs R comps and different rotors and pads hur dur). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You’ll have to trust me seat of the pants-o-metre reveals lag.  It’s there..

makes sense given bigger turbos

The car is $299+ORC = $330k (the $350k price you see on carsales is attempted profiteering from an individual) I have heard of some asking even more.

I guess some collector might be interested who knows.
 
Re tyres/brakes - If you only do the odd track day you will not need to upgrade anything.  If you plan to track hard/regularly (as I am) then factor in rotors/pads/tyres—most guys running stocker GTR’s destroy the rotors and pads after 1-3 track days.  Ditto tyres.  Same goes for any car you plan to track.

This car will blow just about anything out of the water (assuming stock vs stock)—dunno where your more capable argument comes from I can’t think of a car that will pump out faster times off the factory floor (maybe a $500k Porsche?)-- depends on what your goals are I suppose.

You can go faster for much less, our race car does 55's around WP and cost 1/3 the price of the nismo.

Your last line was kind of my point. IF you want to build a car to go fast around a track, you'll do it much cheaper than the cost of the Nismo, if you want to buy a car that will be very capable straight out of the box with the vast majority of the hard work done, and don't mind paying for that then you have other options, including this. 

How were trans temps? Does it have a cooler/bigger trans pan etc? 

 

 

trans temps got to 125*c before i stopped, however it was a relatively cool day down there plus my first time in a GTR in 2-3 years (driving a bit soft lol)..  I suspect same cooler as stocker but i haven't checked..

17 minutes ago, LSX-438 said:

trans temps got to 125*c before i stopped, however it was a relatively cool day down there plus my first time in a GTR in 2-3 years (driving a bit soft lol)..  I suspect same cooler as stocker but i haven't checked..

Hopefully Nismo upgraded it, otherwise that'll be disappointing.

I usually do my own servicing Dan (replace all fluids every 5000km)

Nissan wouldnt be able to keep up, plus they are bound to using consumer grade consumables (rotors/pads/fluids) are you catching on with the programme of heavy track use yet?

I have been in IT for 25years, don't think i will need you either..

  • Like 1

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

    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...