Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

There's nothing groundbreaking in this update, I just thought I'd post up some of the article printed in one of the car mags on sale here in Japan. I'll attempt to post up all the relevent stuff and leave out any "could be's..." as much as possible.

headline.jpg

Here it is, confirmation of the next GT-Rs driveline... rear wheels driven by the VQ32DETT through a driveshaft, and the front wheels driven by an electric motor. Hi-tech...

gtre4wd.jpg

e-4WD... thats the replacement for ATESSA. Basically, the e-4WD system comes in the moment traction is lost in the rear wheels, with torque bias always to the rear. The timing, torque allowance etc is all finely tuned to assist cornering and turn-in. This really is the next phase of performance 4WD engineering. The front motor is supplied power by a Lithium battery which is recharged by a generator feeding off the VQ32DETT. My Japanese ability isn't that good, but I believe the motor-assisted turbos are fed from the Lithium battery aswell. Thats the pic of the Lithium battery above (the grey flat panel thing).

gtrmaterials.jpg

Sorry, the pics a little blurry, but here is a list of Carbon and Aluminium parts to be used in the next GT-R:

Carbon - Bonnet, Driveshaft, Rear diffuser and Seat frames

Aluminium - Roof, Suspension arms, Rear tailgate and Door panels.

Can anyone say "NSX"?

vq32dettpic1.jpg

Basically a pic of the GT500 engine, the next GT-R will have a slightly less peaky/powerful and more driveable version of this very engine.

gtrengine.jpg

Nissan/Nismo in colaboration with Cosworth tuned 3.2L V6 Twin Turbo with an estimated 470+ hp.

enginespec.jpg

The VQ32DETT compared to the (current) top of the line VQ35DE. The main VQ32DETT differences comprise of: 3.2L capacity, dry sump, twin throttle bodies, Twin motor-assisted (spool up) turbos, NDIS Direct Ignition and separate intake manifold for each cylinder bank.

And finally, a lame CG pic:

gtrpic.jpg

They're calling it "Hybrid Supersports" and a "V35 bodied GT-R Prototype" has been spotted testing at a closed session at Nurburgring in Germany. Thats what they're saying, I'll neither confirm or disconfirm the sighting, as no other mags have reported it (yet).

/Rezz

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/46487-the-next-gt-r-july-04-update/
Share on other sites

thanks Rezz,

I think that just confirms most of the rumours over the past year or so, the e4WD, electric motors at the wheels, VQ32DETT, and who could forget the assisted spooling turbos..

I'm interested in these electric motors at the wheels, and wondered if you have any input seeing your closer to the source. I read a recent article how Lexus maybe fitting these to the next GS models, the motor would make aprox 300kw + 150kw electric motors would be fitted to the front wheels. The benefit claimed is instant torque/power...WOW!

mesh: Haven't seen the KLAXON pics before, but they do seem a bit *too* chopped to be taken seriously... too much journalist input.

Notice how the final pic in my first post has 19 inch wheels? That was one of the changes that Nissan made when they spotted the GT-R at Nurburgring (old section).

actually, the more I look at the front end of the red GTR pic I posted, the moe it reminds me of the recent Audi Concept Car (I think it is called) RSR?? Hmmm! love the rest of it, not sure about the front end looks like it needs to point up a bit more rather than sloping down.

actually, the more I look at the front end of the red GTR pic I posted, the moe it reminds me of the recent Audi Concept Car (I think it is called) RSR?? Hmmm! love the rest of it, not sure about the front end looks like it needs to point up a bit more rather than sloping down.

Good spotting what a rip off from the Audi RSQ concept for the movie I Robot...

9243_I_Robot_Large.jpg

I was going to say it also looked similar to the B4 Asterope, with that colour scheme.

ks1_P101048812.jpg

i still thinks the next skyline needs round rear stove top like tail lights dammit, but ah well it aint like anyone will be complaining as its got just about everything else, amazing technology is going into it by the sounds of things, cant wait
Don't worry, judging by the reception the original 2001 GT-R Concept got (read: mostly bad, except a big thumbs up for the tail lights), theres no way Nissan are leaving them off the next GT-R! I can aaaaaaalmost assure you...
another one... :Bang:
Aaaaaargh! Can you delete that one? That one has been proven to be a backyard photochop by "nobody in paticular"... it looks like someone whos never seen a real GT-R before has just used whatever concept car pieces took their fancy and purt it together (although I wish I could use Photoshop like that...).
Aaaaaargh! Can you delete that one? That one has been proven to be a backyard photochop by "nobody in paticular"... it looks like someone whos never seen a real GT-R before has just used whatever concept car pieces took their fancy and purt it together (although I wish I could use Photoshop like that...).

done.

i want it to look scary to match the performance.

R34 GTR did that pretty well I think.. R33 and R32 looked visually at least a little tamer.

The concept post looks really just like a V35 squished a little. The V35 shape still doesn't really appeal. Too much 350z in the lines.

i want it to look scary to match the performance.  

R34 GTR did that pretty well I think.. R33 and R32 looked visually at least a little tamer.  

The concept post looks really just like a V35 squished a little. The V35 shape still doesn't really appeal. Too much 350z in the lines.

Yes i agree but looking at the maxima and 350z, pulsar nissan are really making their cars more smooth and round looking rather than having the sharper lines such as the r34. But yeh i also hope that the new skyline will have great looks to match all that performance and technology :boinkcar:

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...