MT: GTR makes 507 hp... at least! / Edmunds: GTR Road Trip / TG: EvoX vs GTR

[toffytofik]

1. MOTOR TREND: 2009 Nissan GT-R Makes 507 Horsepower... at least!

Originally Posted by gtrblog.com In an attempt to clear up the murky picture the world has about the Nissan GT-R’s actual power Motor Trend have embarked on a campaign to measure it using the best methods they know armed with a fresh production-ready US spec R35 GT-R. On a Dynojet inertia dyno the car made an average of 430.6 hp at 6700 rpm and 425.3 lb-ft of torque at 3900 rpm which equates to at the very least 507hp at the engine if not as much as 570hp at the engine. Next on their agenda is to get the GT-R on a nice flat runway to test acceleration, braking and handling performance.

Link: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0803_2009_nissan_gt_r_dyno_test

Well, as expected...



2. Edmunds Inside Line: Nissan GTR Road Trip

Here's the deal. There are only seven U.S.-spec GT-Rs on American soil and we're taking one on the road. We've got a new gas credit card, a white 2009 Nissan GT-R and three days to cover as many miles as we can. Nissan made us agree to just two rules: 1) The Edmunds' Inside Line office in Santa Monica, California is the starting line. 2) The car makes it to Reno, Nevada in one piece. But here's the question. Where should we go? We'll be blogging from the road, complete with photos and video. It'll be like you're riding along with us in the year's hottest car. The adventure will last three days. We also promised Nissan the car would be returned to its engineers early the morning of Saturday March 29th... Scott Oldham, Inside Line Editor in Chief

Link: http://blogs.edmunds.com/Straightlin...anGT-RRoadTrip (note it's a blog, so you should read it from the bottom of the page and then click "previous page" for the next (newer) page)



3. Top Gear: Talkin' about an Evolution - EvoX vs GTR (by Matt Master)



Link: http://www.topgear.com/content/featu...ries/12/1.html


Enjoy reading guys! (if you're somehow interested in this GTR-related stuff of course )

[yg60m]

Thanks mate

[styla21]

How did I know that this would be your topic, Toffy
I give you points for obviously being a passionate GT-R fan, but being cool about it and not a fanboy.

I'm not suprised at the comment that the car produces 507 hp - upto 570 hp at the crank! Something had to explain the concesus of astonishment at this cars performance!!

[graywolf624]

I'm not suprised at the comment that the car produces 507 hp - upto 570 hp at the crank! Something had to explain the concesus of astonishment at this cars performance!!

Actually this dyno raises even more questions. 430 doesnt seem to indicate 570 unless theres something really wrong.

Why does it raise more questions? A Z06 pulls on a dyno.. you guessed it.. more then 430. In fact 450 bhp.
http://www.z06vette.com/forums/f70/0...7lb-tq-110018/
First dyno was :
452.17whp/421.16 lb-tq
Second dyno was 456.72whp/427.22 lb-tq
Last dyno was 437.27whp/402.55lb-tq
(Just one example of about 100 easily found through google or by talking to a corvette guy.


A base C6 pulls 390 bhp. Now granted awd loses more through the driveline, but this would prove the z06 has more bhp and is lighter.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by graywolf624 A base C6 pulls 390 bhp. Now granted awd loses more through the driveline, but this would prove the z06 has more bhp and is lighter.

Nothing is wrong at all. The C5/C6 drive train is well docmented and well known to have a loss of approx 18%.

The AWD system with its various bits and pieces WILL consume more power along the way - there is nothing left to debate about C5/C6 drivetrain loss.

[graywolf624]

Nothing is wrong at all. The C5/C6 drive train is well docmented and well known to have a loss of approx 18%. The AWD system with its various bits and pieces WILL consume more power along the way - there is nothing left to debate about C5/C6 drivetrain loss.

I think you missed my point. Half the magazines have concluded that the Nissan is way faster then the Z06 (in the 1/4). Here we have a dyno resulting in a rwhp way below what a vette has. Now granted numbers always vary greatly dyno to dyno, but I think we can safely say the RWHP of the GTR is not significantly higher then the Z06. Yet it weights some 700 lbs more. That is the part that makes no sense.

The drive train loss makes perfect sense- well within limits at least. Id say 570 bhp doesn't make much sense but the rest of the numbers do. Its the comparative dyno that raises the WTF flag.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by graywolf624 I think you missed my point. Half the magazines have concluded that the Nissan is way faster then the Z06 (in the 1/4). Here we have a dyno resulting in a rwhp way below what a vette has. Now granted numbers always vary greatly dyno to dyno, but I think we can safely say the RWHP of the GTR is not significantly higher then the Z06. Yet it weights some 700 lbs more. That is the part that makes no sense. The drive train loss makes perfect sense. Its the comparative dyno that raises the WTF flag.

Not at all.

Remember, the drive train loss measured, is on a static dyno. It is possible that during operational conditions, the complex nature of the GT-R drivetrain might mean the drivetrain loss varies between some maximum and some minimum amount as the active components take charge.

Unlike a static mechanical system that the GM produc has, where the "lockup" condition of the drivetrain components on the dyno is the same as on the road.

So on the dyno, only 440hp of the available 500++++ HP gets through, but at other times perhaps more of those crank HP get through to the ground.

And then when they do get there, the ultra sticky tyres are able to make use of them instantly.

There is no doubt that technical wizardy and sticky tyres allow the beached whale to be faster than we think it should be - and I think the finl proof will be in the pudding when tyres begin to go off and of some heat soak limits the available power - we will start to see the GT-R behave the way we would expect.

[toffytofik]

Originally Posted by styla21 How did I know that this would be your topic, Toffy I give you points for obviously being a passionate GT-R fan, but being cool about it and not a fanboy.

Oh, thank you, sir!


Just finished reading Edmunds blog, hell they decided to buy one! LOL

And now here's the best part. We're buying one. That's right Edmunds' Inside Line is buying a new GT-R. We've ordered a white one. A white GT-R Premium with a black interior, the optional floor mats and iPod jack. We're even paying for it with our own money, no freebies on this one, and should take delivery in July. Then it will do a years duty in our long term test fleet and see weekly updates on our long term test blog. So there's more GT-R durability testing to be done, and we're looking forward to it. Hey, it's a tough job, but somebody's got to do it.

Looks like they really enjoyed playing with that 3800 lbs toy!

[graywolf624]

Unlike a static mechanical system that the GM produc has, where the "lockup" condition of the drivetrain components on the dyno is the same as on the road.

Not to argue too much here, but the nissan doesnt actively bias torque laterally. Their diff essentially acts the same as gms. While we could expect some increase in bhp off a dyno from both cars actually, your talking drastic swings here. This would not (with some exceptions) be indicative of say car and drivers acceleration times.

As for tires, yes they drastically help. Though take a look at the times from road and track again and you see the car roasted once it passes a certain mph. Then we have a test by c and d where it goes light years faster. Theres no arguement the nissan has more grip off the line. The questions come in from the z06 having higher terminal velocity at the end of straights in c and ds test, the dynos showing the z06 having greater bhp, and the z06 being equal in all but a skid pad test. Is it possible for the z06 to still be significantly slower given these static tests? Yes. Is it likely? Hells no.

Edit: Straight line discussion only here folks.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by graywolf624 Not to argue too much here, but the nissan doesnt actively bias torque laterally. Their diff essentially acts the same as gms. While we could expect some increase in bhp off a dyno from both cars actually, your talking drastic swings here. This would not (with some exceptions) be indicative of say car and drivers acceleration times. As for tires, yes they drastically help. Though take a look at the times from road and track again and you see the car roasted once it passes a certain mph. Then we have a test by c and d where it goes light years faster. Theres no arguement the nissan has more grip off the line. The questions come in from the z06 having higher terminal velocity at the end of straights in c and ds test, the dynos showing the z06 having greater bhp, and the z06 being equal in all but a skid pad test. Is it possible for the z06 to still be slower given these static tests? Yes. Is it likely? Hells no.

Yeah - I used the term "lockup" in the context of the entire drivetarin systme allowing power to be routed away from the psinning tyres, not specificaly laterally in the LSD components. I was struggling to find a term for what I was trying to explain hehe

Essentially, I wonder if on the road under load, the GT-R might not let more power though to the ground at certain times, compaired to other times, and tht you cannot simulate this on the dyno perhaps.

Just an idea.

Anyway, in this context an engne dyno is needed hehe. Maybe Edmunds will allow the enging to ripped out of their white car and be engine dynoed

[graywolf624]

Essentially, I wonder if on the road under load, the GT-R might not let more power though to the ground at certain times, compaired to other times, and tht you cannot simulate this on the dyno perhaps.

It's possible but raises the question why dont we see the same on the 911? AWD certainly aids off the line, Id expect the z06 to lose 0-60. That being said I've seen very little historical evidence that shows gains where grip is not an issue (say 2nd gear and up).

Note: Again still in a straight line only discussion here folks.

[enzoferrari]

[madpony]

I think the key here is this is not a straight up awd system we're talking about here. It favors the back until the back needs help much like the r8 this allows it to as rc said maximize it's power at different times off a dyno where on a dyno it might not know what to do. This is an amazingly engineered piece of technology designed to tear up the road and track not a dyno.

[graywolf624]

favors the back until the back needs help much like the r8 this allows it to as rc said maximize it's power at different times off a dyno where on a dyno it might not know what to do. This is an amazingly engineered piece of technology designed to tear up the road and track not a dyno.

Did I stutter when I said it doesnt have active torque biasing? The system in the car is no more or less advanced then the 911. And your not going to see that much real world diff dyno to track in terms of bhp. The simple reality is, shifting the power through the system does not historically make enough of a difference to justify the difference in performance to dyno.
Also the road and track times had a mph quarter trap speed of 117-118 mph.. Lower then the z06, and what we would expect given this dyno.

[madpony]

So when they said on 5th gear that normally 100% of the power is at the rear, but at moments it gets shifted around to all four, that was misinformation?