Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

AWD more likely to stick to the road............4 points of traction means more resistance....therefore grip

and less power being transferd to more wheels also eases traction problems

GTR was designed to win races, it did that to an almost unprecedented ability.............

think bathurst.............aussie RWD cars spinning about in the wet while the GTR was lapping them.........

i hope that helped......................you better not be one of those 13 yearolds who think GTR's are crap cause they're not 'drift spec'

All GTR's have ATTESA E-TS, 4 wheel drive system consisting of a variable electronic torque-split transfer mechanism. This directs torque to the front drivetrain through a multiplate clutch.

The clamping force on the clutch can varie between 0-50% dependant on wheelspin sensors that measure slip in the rear wheels. GTR is basically rwd intil you accelerate hard and the ecu signals the front wheels kick in.

:)

GTR's are NOT AWD!!!

I know what your saying, but I think "AWD" has come to signify cars like the GT-R (and numerous others: Honda CR-V for instance) that have a bias to either front or back, and engage the other set of wheels depending on conditions. This is distinct from "4WD" which implies some sort of constant drive delivered to all wheels (nobody mention the 1% going to the R33 GT-R's front :) ).

LW.

In the "GT-R Memorial" book (Japanese publication chronicling the life of the GT-R) is says the GT-R is *4WD*. I understand what you guys say about AWD, but that term isn't used in conjuction with GT-Rs in Japan.

It's pretty simple, RWD has some disadvantages on track, the biggest being power on oversteer out of corners. 4WD was used in the GT-R simply to be able to get the power on ealier out of corners therefore reducing track times... and as what has already been stated, quicker lap times is what the GT-R is all about (without going to a MR platform for better weight distribution).

In the "GT-R Memorial" book (Japanese publication chronicling the life of the GT-R) is says the GT-R is *4WD*. I understand what you guys say about AWD, but that term isn't used in conjuction with GT-Rs in Japan.

The distinction has only really been made by the Australian motoring press (and marketers) in the last two or so years as Australia has seen an explosion in the 'soft-roader' market.

These terms are obviously location specific and rather fluid :)

LW.

The distinction has only really been made by the Australian motoring press (and marketers) in the last two or so years as Australia has seen an explosion in the 'soft-roader' market.

These terms are obviously location specific and rather fluid :)

LW.

Right, but the maker could've used any term to describe the drivetrain for their car, but decided on 4WD... why was that?
Right, but the maker could've used any term to describe the drivetrain for their car, but decided on 4WD... why was that?

Rezz, I am not disputing what you are saying, in fact I think the AWD/4WD distinction is pretty stupid because it means different things to different people. But rather than writing 'full time 4WD' or 'variable 4WD', the writers of motoring mags/papers now just use the 4WD and AWD respectively. Thus they have entered the Australian lexicon with particular meanings.

I imagine the distinction was originally made so that companies in Australia couldn't be sued for suggesting that their 'soft-roader' cars had real off-road ability (which, arguably, the 4WD tag might imply). By creating the new 'AWD' class, they have effectively tried to meld the idea of the safety of 4WD traction without the ability to go off-road (and perhaps also, the negative conetations attached to big offroaders re fuel, etc).

LW.

the writers of motoring mags/papers now just use the 4WD and AWD respectively. Thus they have entered the Australian lexicon with particular meanings.
Sorry mate, I don't live in Australia... and it's starting to show :)
Sorry mate, I don't live in Australia... and it's starting to show :)

No need to apologise -- as I said, its a stupid marketing driven distinction and is highly confusing (in fact, if I was a cynical bastard -- which I am -- I might suggest the confusion is intentional). Besides which, we all know Japan is the place to be ;)

LW.

"Off road" 4wd like Landcruisers etc don't have

That's funny, Toyota thinks it does:

Constant 4WD

When driving over dramatically different surfaces, confidence is inspired by the constant four-wheel drive. Any sudden emergencies, such as driving through a slippery surface, are more easily controlled with LandCruiser 100's constant 4WD.

Traction control is standard on all Sahara models to provide added grip off-road

think bathurst.............aussie RWD cars spinning about in the wet while the GTR was lapping them.........

Hi... ummm maybe you should watch Bathurst 1992...

Any difference between AWD and 4WD are purely a marketing terms.

The lower spec models (GTS-T, GT-T) are all RWD.  

Why did Nissan decide to make the GTR an AWD car?

because when they made a rwd prototype it was too fast. they added the wieght of 4wd to slow it down :)

No matter fulltime or part time...GT-Rs are still considered 4WD. In racing they are only allowed in 4WD class or over 2000cc turbo class with other cars or only GT-R class.

4WD and AWD is pretty much interchangable these days as mentioned lost due to marketting. In some Evo brochures from MMC sometimes it reads AWD but on the rear window of the car is says 4WD. Does it really matter these days!

"Off road" 4wd like Landcruisers etc don't have

toyota landcruisers have both part time 4wd and constant 4wd from late 90 on ( 80 series) the gxl and more upmarket saharas and gxvs have contant 4wd , the bottom of the range ( barn doors at the rear and vinyl seats , yuk) are still part time 4wd you have to select by moving a lever next to the normal gear lever .

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

    • Lamb roast on Saturday will be different 🥲
    • They are under bucket shims. Tomei provides a test shim kit and then any measurement of shim required. 
    • I always wondered how you were supposed to buy a set of 24 buckets and somehow magically have every single one of them yield exactly the desired clearance. I would have thought you'd need to assemble a cam with either 12 "sample" or "example" buckets of known top thickness (or a single such sample/example 12 times over!!) measure clearances at every valve, and then do the usual math to work out what the actual "shimness" of each bucket needed to be, before buying the required buckets to make up he thicknesses that you didn't have on hand.
    • I now seem to be limited in power due to my rev limit/hydraulic lifters in my built RB25. I'm looking into converting over to Tomei solid lifters. Question for anyone that has done the conversion. I was always under the impression that when using the Tomei solid lifter conversion, you would also require new valves (Longer or shorter stems, I can't remember which).  I don't know where I got this idea, as so far I see no mention of this in any of the Tomei documentation. It just states I need the Tomei solid buckets, solid lifter cams and upgraded springs. As my head is already built, all I would need is another set of 1000$ Kelford cams, 500$ buckets and about 4H hours of my time installing and I'm off to the races!?!? There's no way it's that simple, I must be missing something? 
    • I couldn't agree more. I should have started from the get-go with a NEO or solid bucket conversion. I started looking into converting over to solid lifters yesterday. Now for some reason I was always under the impression that when using the Tomei solid lifter conversion, you would also require new valves (Longer or shorter stems, I can't remember which).  But I see no mention of this on any of the Tomei documentation. It just states that I need the Tomei solid buckets, solid lifter cams and upgraded springs. As my head is already built, all I would need is another set of 1000$ Kelford cams, 500$ buckets and about 4H hours of my time installing and I'm off to the races!?!? There's no way it's that simple, I must be missing something? 
×
×
  • Create New...