2000Hawk

iTrader: (5)

Well lets say the car makes 480hp and you take away 13% for drivetrain loss that comes out to 417.6hp. Thats just about right if the drivetrain loss is in the 13% area, and to be honest this car wouldn't be fast with AWD. Thats what alot of people including the fanboys don't realzie. AWD is the center of what makes this car perform as great as it does. The Shelby GT500 comes in at around 4000lbs., puts out 500hp, and that car as a RWD is not that impressive. So what makes you think a GTR without AWD, 480HP, and all that weight is still going to perform that well. It will just fall into the same league as the GT500. Now im not trying to start a battle of lets see what they can do without this or that, im just stating my opinion that the source of real power in the GTR is the highly advanced AWD system.
-Joel

2000Hawk

iTrader: (5)

C'mon guys lets keep this **** on the test at hand, not about the performance of on or another company. Yeah we are all entitled to our own thoughts and opinions, but this is a site based around GM vehicles so their will be a bit of biased on it. IF you don't like it all i can say is the X is on the top right hand corner, click it if GM biased is to much for you to handle. Lets not let this thread be locked up as well.
-Joel

bboyferal

iTrader: (9)

The discussion would probably be fair and pleasant but the OP loves to "sell" the GTR instead of just talking about it.

I love how he says "true" to someone's post about this site's alleged GM bias, but he is okay with the fact that he is not only biased toward the GTR himself, but it's like he is the GTR's official spokesperson.

Semper91-RS

Just a protip, and having a GT500 in the family, it only makes a top of 460rwhp. And on top of that, thet GTR isn't simply an "AWD when slippage is detected" It's a rear wheel biased AWD system. Which, is rather unfair in a comparison to two standard rwd systems.

2000Hawk

iTrader: (5)

Well thr only reason i put it in the same league with the GT500 is because of th epower it makes and the weight. If the car didn't have AWD, it wouldn't be capable of putting down such great numbers. So is the reason i base it having similar 1/4 mile times to the GT500.

Yeah i don't understand their crying either, they come on a GM orientated site, and complain that we are GM biased. Yet they are on the GM site spilling the beans about an import, and they expect us to sit here and take it. Im just going to leave it at that, because obviously no matter what we will always be the "haters" in their eyes.
-Joel

dailydriver

...and not even so much there lately (the last 4 years or so).

ALL of you may know the myriad engine codes/combos/turbo setups for Honduhs, TOYZ, etc. much better than I ever will.
(SORRY, I did not grow up in the 'rice generation'! )
BUT, I've been intently following World Championship rallying (and the cars involved), as well as working at MANY U.S. Pro rallies, from before most of you were even born, so I know a 'little bit' about THAT form of motorsport.

dailydriver

I ask the same EXACT thing of the azzhat supporters of Japan's economy ONLY, over on bobistheoilguy.com.
So far (in over 2+years on there), I've NEVER recieved a response.
This shuts them up REAL quick!! (and the part that REALLY burns their import asses is when I tell them I get >30 mpg highway!! )

JD_AMG

I agree the GTR wouldn't be nearly as fast without the AWD, but the GT500 doesn't handle great because of its crappy suspension...

You've clearly never been to another forum. This is one of the least biased specific brand car forum out there.

mzoomora

iTrader: (36)

I think this just about sums it up, but without me, dailydriver or hydramatic having the be the ones saying it. The OP is a **** stirring douche to put it bluntly, and a blind idiotic one at that.

When I first came on this site I never even looked in these sections. I was almost always in the actual tech sections or the local sections. The one thing I noticed is that many of the people who are in these sections starting trouble either a- have no technical knowledge to give, b- have no Gen III/IV powered vehicle to apply it to, or c- have no life other than to stir **** on the internet. There are obvious exceptions to this but many of the biggest trouble makers we have fall into 2 or all 3 of those categories.

mzoomora

iTrader: (36)

Like has already been said, welcome to a GM based site. Sure there is going to be bias, but bias is better than trolls.

I agree. Try trolling on an import site spewing "Nothing but GM love" and see how quick the ban stick comes out. The fact that this same troll keeps coming back and lasts more than 1 hour or 1 post, whichever comes first, shows how much tolerance there is on this site- even from the mods.

Now if I were a mod.......

2000Hawk

iTrader: (5)

LMAO if you were a mod any thread or post that starts with Niss...Toy...Hon, or anything related to some form of import style would get that person banned in a heart beat.
-Joel

ChaseSS

iTrader: (17)

its not just that though, there is a new thread about the GTR every day. "GTR released new colors" or "Nissan announces GTR will come cool stickers" who freaking cares, the car HASN"T HIT OUR SHORES YET!!!!!!!! and then people complain 'people on this site are so biased' :stfu: I'm with zoom, this site is too fare to trolls who just come stir up **** and that kind of BS wouldn't be tolerated anywhere else on other sites for a second, especially on a import site had the situation been reversed

The Manalishi

iTrader: (3)

Can't speak about Japan but Europe uses a different method to figure out the octane rating so their numbers appear higher but in actuality they are the same. They do use less additives than we do except during the winter.

mzoomora

iTrader: (36)

Give me some credit here, I would only ban them if the TITLE of the THREAD started with Nis, Toy, Hon, etc, not just a single post.

OKcruising

ZOMG! TEH GTR FTMWF! *PWNZRD!* lulz!


*cough cough* Back here on this planet called Earth, too many things aren't adding up on the nismorocket.

1) Why is there such a great disparity between those 3 test vehicles with the given published stats?
2) Why is there such a great disparity between this magazine and other magazine test results?
3) Why has this car been vaporware at all the important local trackside functions? Where seeing IS believing? When I see it click a 124, then I'll believe, till then, bullshit.
4) Why is there such a reluctance towards a standardized test in general when it comes to this car?
5) Can I see a Fellows/Haywood/Millen matchup?
6) Going back to point 1; I'm going to *need* to see multiple sources confirming the weight wet curb weight, and modern SAE engine dyno test.

2000Hawk

iTrader: (5)

I knew it LOL But yeah i totally agree trolls in this site are given to much freedom sometimes. I believe the moment they even give off one war starting comment they should be banned immediately. And yeah there are to many damn threads about this damn car on a domestic site, i even flipped out when i saw threads like the ones CHASESS stated about what colors the car is coming in, when its coming, what new stupid little features the car has. This thread even though we believe the person who posted it may be one of our friends who has reincarnated as another, still has some good information because it was a comparison between cars. Obviously information between the magazines are going to vary, because of driver, the location, and different factors that play into the times.
-Joel

castillo

Taken from Supercars.net

A ps (Pferdestaerke) is 0.986 horsepower.

A Nissan spokesperson at the Geneva Autoshow confirm me that the 480ps are "at the wheels". At the crank the engine produces "at least 520ps".
520ps is about ~513hp

Have a look in the pinned thread "GT-R Lineupand Specifications" in the fine print down the bottom of the brochure it says this about the quoted power figure from Nissan Japan (480PS Horsepower):

"The engine power output values indicated in this catalog are all net power output values.
Engine power output can be indicated as 'Net power output' or 'Gross power output'. 'Gross' values are estimations of power output of the engine alone. 'Net' values are estimations of when the engine is assembled onto the vehicle. For estimations of the same gasoline engines, 'Net' values are approximately 15% lower than 'Gross' values according to JAMA research. "

Manufacturers use net hp to mean with all ancillaries attached i.e. intake, exhaust, alternator and accessories that would be attached when the engine is in the car. This is how SAE rates the engine. It is still measured at the crank. In the past engines were tested without these things attached and that was gross hp. It appears that Nissan understated the actual engine output but I wanted to clear up the difference between net hp and wheel hp as it is used by manufacturers.


-Stock GT-R Dynos at 460 awhp
http://2009gtr.blogspot.com/2008/03/...r-on-dyno.html
http://www.socalevo.net/index.php?op...&topic=57282.0
http://2009gtr.blogspot.com/2008/03/...sults-rre.html
NOTES: i dont know what gear this was done in, but it still has the limiter. I know this is the GT-R imported from japan and its probably using 93 octain.


-482 ps (475 hp) and 59.2 kg/m (428 ft-lbs) at the hubs.
http://minkara.carview.co.jp/userid/.../blog/c227132/
NOTES: Results will be printed in the 12/25 issue of Bestcar. Also said that the limiter came on in 4th gear so there should be more potential.


-480 PS (473bhp) (353 kW) at 6400rpm
We decided to try out BP Ultimate 102 unleaded, (which is still pump fuel).... 520 bhp @ 6,617
wheel bhp using ultimate 102 unleaded - 457.7bhp @ 6,507rpm


-419 HP 416 ft-lbs
http://blogs.cobbtuning.com/?p=212
NOTES: a) We use a Mustang AWD dyno b) Runs were made in 3rd gear due to the speed limiter coming on in 4th. c) We’re at ~4000 ft altitude here in SLC d) A 50/50 mix of 91 octane and 100 octane was used


A dyno is a tool. Thats it. Take all the numbers off any dyno with a grain of salt. To me +/- 20% or 30% is not off depending on the dyno, whos using it, the correction, etc. They are just numbers.

Dyno numbers- are JUST NUMBERS. SO DO NOT RACE DYNOS.

Remember these cars and these numbers were all done in 3rd gear because of the speed limiter.

The R35 GT-R makes about 520ps-550ps engine horsepower. Thats the number it takes a 3825.6 lb car to be faster than a lighter 997 Turbo.

2000Hawk

iTrader: (5)

No magazine puts down wheels horsepower in there stories, and no manufacturer gives your real wheel horsepower either because it will vary from dyno to dyno. IF the GTR is rated at 480BHP by the magazines, and its running numbers that make it like it has 513BHP than that means that these tests are bullshit. That means that this car in the test, and more than likely the one that played around at the 'ring are some ringers from the factory. And don't give us that DON'T RACE DYNOES bullshit, this isn't GTR.net (or whatever its called) or supraforums.com, because thats where you will find most of the dyno battles.
-Joel

The Manalishi

iTrader: (3)

What kind of idiot tests a car in third and then goes on the internet to a CAR forum and post numbers. I bet if I dynoed my car in third it would put down a really good number too. You FAIL. Get some real numbers and post those up.

castillo

They had to do it in 3rd, since there is a 112mph limiter on the car(Japan version)