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

    • Get an inspection camera up there. 
    • Yeah, but look at the margin in viscosity between the 40 and the 60 at 125°C. It is not very large. It is the difference between 7 and 11 cP. Compare that to the viscosity at only 90°C. The viscosity axis is logarithmic. The numbers at 90 are ~15 and ~35. That is about half for the 40 wt oil and <half for the 60. You give up viscosity EXPONENTIALLY as temperature rises. Literally. That is why I declare thicker oil to be a bandaid, and a brittle one at that. Keep the oil temperature under about 110°C and you should be better off.   Having said all of that, which remains true as a general principle, if you have indeed lost enough oil from the sump that the pump was seeing slightly aerated oil, then all bets are off. That would of course cause oil pressure to collapse. And 35 psi is a collapse given what you were doing to the engine. Especially if the oil was that hot and viscosity had also collapsed. And I would put money on rod or main bearings being the source of the any noise that registered as knock. Hydraulic lifters should be able to cope with the hotter oil and lower pressure enough to prvent too much high frequency noise, although I am willing to admit it could be the source.
    • Thanks for the reply mate. Well I really hope its a hose then not engine out job
    • But.... the reason I want to run a 60 weight is so at 125C it has the same viscosity as a 40 weight at 100C. That's the whole reason. If the viscosity changes that much to drop oil pressure from 73psi to 36psi then that's another reason I should be running an oil that mimics the 40 weight at 100C. I have datalogs from the dyno with the oil pressure hitting 73psi at full throttle/high RPM. At the dyno the oil temp was around 100-105C. The pump has a 70psi internal relief spring. It will never go/can't go above 70psi. The GM recommendation of 6psi per 1000rpm is well under that... The oil sensor for logging in LS's is at the valley plate at the back of  the block/rear of where the heads are near the firewall. It's also where the knock sensors are which are notable for 'false knock'. I'm hoping I just didn't have enough oil up top causing some chatter instead of rods being sad (big hopium/copium I know) LS's definitely heat up the oil more than RB's do, the stock vettes for example will hit 300F(150C) in a lap or two and happily track for years and years. This is the same oil cooler that I had when I was in RB land, being the Setrab 25 row oil cooler HEL thing. I did think about putting a fan in there to pull air out more, though I don't know if that will actually help in huge load situations with lots of speed. I think when I had the auto cooler. The leak is where the block runs to the oil cooler lines, the OEM/Dash oil pressure sender is connected at that junction and is what broke. I'm actually quite curious to see how much oil in total capacity is actually left in the engine. As it currently stands I'm waiting on that bush to adapt the sender to it. The sump is still full (?) of oil and the lines and accusump have been drained, but the filter and block are off. I suspect there's maybe less than 1/2 the total capacity there should be in there. I have noticed in the past that topping up oil has improved oil pressure, as reported by the dash sensor. This is all extremely sketchy hence wanting to get it sorted out lol.
×
×
  • Create New...