motor

philip · 08-29-2008, 05:57 PM

aughh, I guess this thread from May is why my great realization recently that the GT-R made more hp that is claimed was by that time old news.

At $70,000 this car is a bargin, the extra hp is just a bonus.

Too bad the GT-R does n't weigh 3000lbs and look like a F430.

79TA · 08-29-2008, 11:47 PM

Well, this and other GT-R threads before it.

philip · 08-30-2008, 10:14 AM

Ok just to repeat other threads before (since I'm sure its been mentioned) How about a factory GT-RS, a factory light weight version of the car. (or GT-NSXR) No, tuner aftermarket cars dont count, gotta be from the factory.

Really this car is almost perfect. Fast powerful inexpensive, probably since its Japanese it doesn't break much.

I can live with the looks, as that is subjective and tends to be fickle with time. But the weight is a real issue.

Imagine what this car could do with 600 or 800 less pounds. Aluminum, carbon fiber, and take lots of shite off that you dont need. Carpet, power windows, SAT Nav, radio delete, and the right sun visor.

ok Wikipedia says there's going to be something called a GT-R Spec V, but its only going to be 200 lbs lighter.

What I know about JDM could fit on the head of a pin.

RC45 · 08-30-2008, 10:33 AM

I think the big surprise to the market and user community might be how "soft" the stock components end up being.

The GT-R is a well built well matched setup, I think key being well-matched. Individual systems may work well together and be quite reliable at stock settings, but tuned they might prove to be fickle and unreliable - and this I think is why the Spec V and other factory options will carry a much higher price as the critical components get updated and beefed up.

And yes, 3900lbs is a lot of weight to pull around - especially for folks used to light weight Corvettes and Porsches.

philip · 08-30-2008, 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by RC45

And yes, 3900lbs is a lot of weight to pull around - especially for folks used to light weight Corvettes and Porsches.

Yes, exactly.

VTEC_YO · 09-04-2008, 08:04 PM

Well in one of the top gear reviews of the new r35, they were going on about how each block is hand built.. which may cause a slight vary in hp for each car.....but to be able to make the claimed hp at the wheels then at the flywheel is !!!!

graywolf624 · 09-04-2008, 08:42 PM

Well in one of the top gear reviews of the new r35, they were going on about how each block is hand built.. which may cause a slight vary in hp for each car.....

The response to that is that plenty of engines are made by hand: mercedes amgs, ferrari engines, oh and the Corvette Z06.. to name a few. None of these engines are off by that much.

79TA · 09-04-2008, 11:52 PM

Furthermore, it's not like the parts aren't machined. The workers assemble the engine parts . . . they don't forge them one by one by hand or anything.

HeilSvenska · 09-05-2008, 12:01 AM

Originally Posted by 79TA

they don't forge them one by hand or anything.

To an extent, Ferrari does. But I don't think that would change the power output, not by 40hp anyway. They all have the same mold, I'd assume.

Ferrari Engine production process 2, Automobilismo.it - YouTube

RC45 · 09-05-2008, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by HeilSvenska

To an extent, Ferrari does. But I don't think that would change the power output, not by 40hp anyway. They all have the same mold, I'd assume.

But then again all the surfaces that matter are machined to the same tollerances.

HeilSvenska · 09-05-2008, 01:44 AM

^Yup.

40hp difference due to the engine's being "handbuilt" is just bs.

Now it would make more sense if Nissan "accidentally" put the V-Spec engine in the 'Ring car due to some highly unlikely, but inevitable error.

philip · 09-05-2008, 05:58 PM

Does blueprinting an engine give you more hp or just more revs. Thats sort of handbuilding, polishing the intake?

RC45 · 09-05-2008, 09:05 PM

I understand the balancing of all the reciprocating components during the blueprinting process will allow all around better behaviour - smoother quicker revving, slight power improvement etc.

79TA · 09-05-2008, 09:13 PM

Most tolerances today are good enough from the factory that you can't do a huge amount with it. Check out how little Car and Driver were able to eak out of their Nissan 350Z's 3.5 litre.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ng+page-2.html

Balancing helps revs, reduces stress on the crank a bit, and helps efficiency a bit. For instance, my car's pistons and connecting rods all have identical bob weights (to the nearest gram I think.)

Also, this gets a more significant result from larger engines . . . the gain from a 6.6 litre is quite a bit larger (but given all other things equal, not proportionally larger due diminishing returns due to scaling) than what one would get from 3.8. I don't know how much the turbo could take advantage of the better tolerances and balance though. Building revs more quickly would be beneficial but that wouldn't make for a much larger peak.

RC45 · 09-05-2008, 09:28 PM

^^

If Car & Drivers engine building skills are anything as pathetic as their driving skills then would not pay too much attention to any results they got