997 TT beats GT-R at Ring. Nissan accused of cheating.
997 Turbo / GT22004–present Turbo discussion on the current model Porsche 911 Twin Turbo. Sponsored By SharkWerks, Inc
Welcome to 6SpeedOnline.com!
Welcome to 6SpeedOnline.com.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join 6SpeedOnline.com today!
Originally Posted by MotorAuthority There’s something very puzzling about Nissan’s all new GT-R supercar. Its official output figures read 480hp and 588Nm (434lb-ft) of torque and its mass registers at 1,723kg, but it can still outrun the 911 Turbo to 60mph even though the Porsche weighs in at a lower 1,633 and has a higher torque rating of 620Nm (457lb-ft).
Daryl Alison of JSpecConnect has now taken one of the first U.S.-delivered cars for a dyno run and compared with a 911 Turbo to find out what gives. You may recall that late last year, a GT-R in Japan was tested using a Dynapack dynamometer ( a dyno that connects to the actual wheel hubs of the car) and showed a peak output of 475hp at the hubs. Unfortunately, the credibility and accuracy of the test could never be confirmed.
The latest round of testing was done by the guys at Harman Motive in Torrance, California, and was completed using a Mustang MD-AWD-500-SE chassis dynamometer with rollers. A Dynapack dynamometer was also used for completeness.
On the Mustang dyno, the GT-R registered a peak output of 406hp at 6,400rpm and 560Nm (414lb-ft) of torque at 3,800rpm. Once you factor in the parasitic losses of the drivetrain, these numbers are fully in line with Nissan’s official figures. On the same dyno, the 997 Porsche 911 Turbo almost completely matched the GT-R. The power curves of the two cars looking almost identical.
The final check was done using the Dynapack dyno. Here the GT-R measured a peak output of 452hp and 606Nm (448lb-ft) of torque at the hubs, which is reasonable given the higher reading expected due to the elimination of the tires and several internal variations in the way power is calculated.
The final conclusion is that Nissan’s power figures are an accurate representation of the GT-Rs might, and as brilliant as the new twin-turbo V6 is equal credit must be given to the car’s new launch control system, dual-clutch gearbox and ATTESA-ETS AWD system as these are what help give the car its mystifying track times.
This ad is not displayed to registered and logged-in members. Register your free account today and become a member on 6SpeedOnline!
Sorry but there is no more credibility or usefulness out of various power curves of this car. It's pointless because the Nissan is the first car that comes with CVPD (CONTINOUSLY VARIABLE POWER DELIVERY).
>>>>>> http://www.rennteam.com/showthreaded...04&page=0&vc=1
Firstly we found that a japanese spec GT-R was quite noticeably quicker than a US-spec GT-R, also from within a batch of 12 US spec GT-Rs when lapped around Silverstone's GP circuit they were not all equal.
>>>>>>
Imagine that, buying this car is like getting into a lottery. To me, it's lies, excuses, explanations, and more lies. I think that unlike the Corvette and the Turbo, which have more or less evolutionary changes over the years and carefully studied, the Nissan GT-R is a totally different car from its previous versions. So much heavier and so different, and the engineering team under so much pressure to be cheap ("on a budget") and fast that they did not do their homework with longevity and reliability, and most importantly, engines not meeting specs are simply stuffed into the cars and sold as is.
I could sum up all the ink wasted on this car with one line: fast, but heavy and cheap, and unreliable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaeS4
__________________
Regards,
Can
Bilstein Coilover: To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. & To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
GIAC ECU Tune: To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Cargraphic Exhaust : To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nissan to Porsche: Put the GT-R down before you hurt yourself:
Nissan Motor Company Ltd. Global Communications
October 9, 2008
Statement
NISSAN GT-R TEST PROCEDURES
In light of comments made recently in the media concerning the testing of the Nissan GT-R, it is clear that there are some important facts that were not accurately represented.
Background
On September 24, 2007 the Nissan GT-R recorded a lap time of the Nordschleife circuit at Germany's Nurburgring of seven minutes and 38 seconds. This lap time was completed in weather conditions that the Nissan test team knew would not show the full potential of the car.
On April 17, 2008 the Nissan test team was back at the Nurburgring and recorded a new lap time of seven minutes and 29 seconds, several times.
For all testing at the Nurburgring and other circuits such as Sendai Highlands in Japan, the GT-R development team used production specification vehicles with production specification tires. These tests are part of the extensive performance and durability program undertaken before, during and after the commercial introduction of the GT-R.
The GT-R is a world-class supercar developed to be sold in multiple global markets. While specifications can differ across the various markets, the cars used to record both Nurburgring lap times were identical to the Japanese market production specification cars.
For the April 2008 test, the GT-R carried an additional 50kg of weight due to the Marelli data recorder and video camera equipment. In addition, the test was witnessed by 'Best Motoring' magazine from Japan who reported the test in their July 2008 issue, which included a DVD program of the session.
Nissan records the lap times around the Nurburgring using the same methodology and measuring locations as Sport Auto Magazine in Germany. Sport Auto Magazine provides the most consistent and objective measurement of lap times around the Nurburgring, allowing accurate comparisons between different vehicles.
In both timed lap sessions at the Nurburgring, chief test driver and professional racing driver, Toshio Suzuki was at the wheel. Suzuki has been the chief test driver on the GT-R program throughout the vehicle's development.
Tires
The GT-R offers two different tire choices for customers:
Bridgestone POTENZA RE070R
Dunlop SP SPORT 600 DSST CTT
For the tests conducted at the Nurburgring where the lap times of 7:38 and 7:29 were recorded, the Dunlop tires were used. The tires – which are designed for high performance driving in the dry and wet - used in the tests were identical to the production specification tires available to GT-R customers.
In June, 2008 Dunlop Japan issued a press release announcing that their tires had been used by Nissan to record the 7:29 lap time. The release can be accessed in Japanese and English at:
For any media interested in seeing the actual tires used at the test (7:29 lap time), they should contact the Public Relations Department at Sumitomo Rubber Industries, Ltd. in Japan.
Driving the GT-R
Consistent with industry benchmarking practices, we are aware that several auto makers have purchased the GT-R for their own testing and evaluation. Like all GT-R customers, we recommend that any auto maker buying a GT-R should follow the recommended run-in procedures, service schedules and maintenance to ensure the maximum performance from their car.
In addition, we offer performance driving courses for prospective and current GT-R owners to help them get the best performance from their car. We would welcome the opportunity to help any auto manufacturer with understanding the full capabilities of the GT-R.
Remarks
From Kazutoshi Mizuno, Chief Vehicle Engineer and Chief Product Specialist for GT-R:
"We have used circuits like the Nurburgring and Sendai extensively during the development of the GT-R. The fastest lap-time was never the objective but a simple parameter for us to measure the GT-R in a consistent way against other world class supercars."
"Testing a car with specialized parts such as unique tires or suspension has no meaning for us. The GT-R was designed from the start to be a supercar that could be driven anywhere, anytime and by anyone. For us, testing the car in standard production specification is far more relevant than creating a one-off vehicle that our customers cannot buy."
Conclusion
Due to the weather conditions at the Nurburgring, testing has now stopped and will resume around April 2009. Nissan will be back at the Nurburgring testing both the standard GT-R and upcoming additional models. We look forward to welcoming more members of the media to join us for these test sessions, consistent with our transparency at previous test sessions.
The GT-R/911 schoolyard scuffuffle continues, with Nissan looking at Porsche's test and basically saying "yer doin it wrong" to the German automaker. Chief engineer Kazutoshi Mizuno has graciously offered remedial driving classes to the driver for Porsche's lapping session where a GT-R was reportedly 25 seconds off Nissan's torrid time of 7 minutes, 29 seconds. Porsche had concluded that special tires must have been quietly fitted in a quest for 'Ring primacy. Porsche has yet to say anything other than "Ve don't sink zee car can do it in schtock form."
Not so, says Nissan. While a claim to the fastest production car on the Nürburgring might help prospective customers froth up some money, and owners are unlikely to try verifying the claim, Nissan is not interested in wasting time on one-offs, according to Mizuno. "For us, testing the car in standard production specification is far more relevant", says the engineer. The very tires that carried driver Toshio Suzuki on the 7:29 run are in the hands of Sumitomo, and Nissan would encourage interested parties to STFU and go look at the rolling stock. It seems Nissan thinks Porsche needs a little help figuring out the GT-R, to which the company will be happy to help. "We are aware that several automakers have purchased the GT-R for their own testing and evaluation," Nissan says in its most recent rebuttal, "we would welcome the opportunity to help any auto manufacturer with understanding the full capabilities of the GT-R.
^^ I'm just trying to prove a point that the GTR is BOTH under-rated and over-rated and is probably making about 540hp if not more, but COULD ALSO BE LESS. Here's another one from C&D.
__________________
Regards,
Can
Bilstein Coilover: To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. & To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
GIAC ECU Tune: To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Cargraphic Exhaust : To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Here are two examples of a GTR dyno test. First one is from Motor Trend where they estimated at least 507hp at the crank with 15% lost and 538hp with 20% lost, and that's at 430hp at the wheels. The second one was even higher at 457hp at the wheels which would translate to 571hp at the crank with 20% lost.
20% loss???? Other than completely ignoring Nissans claim of only ~10% loss, 20% loss is rediculous for todays sports cars.
Explain then why the GT-R cant trap much if any higher than a GT3 and M6 which have similar power to weight ratios as a GT-R at 480-500 hp.
This mythical hp hasnt shown up anywhere. So there is NO support for the GT-R losing 20% through the drivetrain whatsoever given that the DSG tranny, from the VW to the Veyron etc, have all proved to lose less through the drivetrain than a normal manual.
Like I said, Motortrend are morons. THE GT-R DOES NOT LOSE 20% THROUGH THE DRIVETRAIN.
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
Saying the mean GT-R trap is 120 is utter B.S., and for multiple reasons. There are still more 114,115,116's than anything 120 and over. The range below 120 (-7) is much greater than the range over 120 (+2) so the affect that 1 114 has on the average would take 3 times as many 122's to break even. The mean wil also decline as more people start to realize they cant use the LC without huge risk and lose 2-3 mph each on the trap speeds from launching manually. This is not possible and you wont find an average for the GT-R like that anywhere but the magazines, which are still likely to be 119, with the lies of 124 etc.
Your analogy with the Viper and Miata is pointless, because if the Miata is faster, they simply have a better driver than the viper. If there is a better driver in the GT-R than the GT2 (with an actual person, or in effort) then can this test be really considered as legit???
They say they tested the GT-R or REs too. Which are supposed to be several seconds slower than the Dunops that were tested at the ring, and all other tests vs the GT2 that I know of. So even using that logic, there is no way the GT-R should be matching the lap.
So back to reality where the drivers should be the same guy driving with the same effort. 10mph translates to 1 of 2 things. Very amateurish driving where the driver over brakes, corners slow in both cars and stabs the throttle on exit which would benefit the GT-R because you can stab earlier,but the GT2 would just walk it on the straight because no momentum is being used. Or simply the GT2 had an equal to much faster exit speed, which translated on the straight, but dogged it in other parts of the track. Either way translates to sloppy driving.
In my original post you responded too i asked for specific data. you have failed to provide that data, and have further made meaningless assumptions of how the driver was bad or he had a cold or something of that sort.
So aside from your meaningless assumptions about driver capabilities you agree with me then. now your assumptions of the driver being bad are just that assumptions seeing as how over all the GTR is faster in most instances it is put up against an comparable Porsche. anything said after this point is just excuses i hear. mind you most of the excuses are coming from your side.
as far as the mean trap is concerned here is a nice compilation of properly running/driven GTR's
Average trap for all these results = 119.833333 close enough to 120 id say. yes there are the occasional outliers but this is what would be considered good data as it is on neither extreme of the spectrum.
Are you looking at what you're reading??? This only moreso prooves the GT-R isnt any more than 480-500 hp. Because that's exactly what the TT makes. And the TT is faster accelerating, due to less weight.
This does not suggest 540-571 hp. And there is no trap speed that's actually been run that suggests it either.
Heck, even the modded GT-R's are only making 540-560 or so CRANK hp. So how then can a stock one make as much power as the modded ones??
Not only that, but a mustang dyno is ~5% less than a Dynojet, which would put the GT-R @ 427 awhp on a Dynojet. And going by an actualy decent drivetrain loss(15%), the car makes 502. And going by Nissans' claim even less.
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
See Evo and Car magazine for details.
Last edited by heavychevy; 10-09-2008 at 01:12 PM.
20% loss???? Other than completely ignoring Nissans claim of only ~10% loss, 20% loss is rediculous for todays sports cars.
Explain then why the GT-R cant trap much if any higher than a GT3 and M6 which have similar power to weight ratios as a GT-R at 480-500 hp.
This mythical hp hasnt shown up anywhere. So there is NO support for the GT-R losing 20% through the drivetrain whatsoever given that the DSG tranny, from the VW to the Veyron etc, have all proved to lose less through the drivetrain than a normal manual.
Like I said, Motortrend are morons. THE GT-R DOES NOT LOSE 20% THROUGH THE DRIVETRAIN.
A 10% lost is unrealistic especially for a AWD system. BMW's are probably one of the most efficient drivetrains out there and they usually have about 10 to 12 percent lost. There is no support for the GTR losing only 10% either, but the 20% lost is more logical due to the performance the GTR is capable of. In regards to the trap speed, i have no idea. Your guess is as good as mine. The 457whp results from one of the dyno test is probably the best proof that the GTR is way under-rated, at 15% loss means it's making 538hp at the crank.
In my original post you responded too i asked for specific data. you have failed to provide that data, and have further made meaningless assumptions of how the driver was bad or he had a cold or something of that sort.
So aside from your meaningless assumptions about driver capabilities you agree with me then. now your assumptions of the driver being bad are just that assumptions seeing as how over all the GTR is faster in most instances it is put up against an comparable Porsche. anything said after this point is just excuses i hear. mind you most of the excuses are coming from your side.
as far as the mean trap is concerned here is a nice compilation of properly running/driven GTR's
Average trap for all these results = 119.833333 close enough to 120 id say. yes there are the occasional outliers but this is what would be considered good data as it is on neither extreme of the spectrum.
Hammad
HAHAHAAHAHA, you went and found all the fastest trap speeds you could find, AND THEY STILL DIDNT ADD UP TO 120 MPH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just add the 114's and 115's in there and you already know what's going to happen. 117 or worse.
Thanks for making it easy for me to prove my point without having to link any threads, or do any searches.
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
Are you looking at what you're reading??? This only moreso prooves the GT-R isnt any more than 480-500 hp. Because that's exactly what the TT makes. And the TT is faster accelerating, due to less weight.
This does not suggest 540-571 hp. And there is no trap speed that's actually been run that suggests it either.
Heck, even the modded GT-R's are only making 540-560 or so CRANK hp. So how then can a stock one make as much power as the modded ones??
Not only that, but a mustang dyno is ~5% less than a Dynojet, which would put the GT-R @ 427 awhp on a Dynojet. And going by an actualy decent drivetrain loss(15%), the car makes 502. And going by Nissans' claim even less.
Yes i did see that, but i base it on this statement as well. And if you would've check the other two dyno test, the one from MotorTrend is 430 and the other is 457, again it is showing that it is much higher than what Nissan is claiming.
Quote:
The final check was done using the Dynapack dyno. Here the GT-R measured a peak output of 452hp and 606Nm (448lb-ft) of torque at the hubs, which is reasonable given the higher reading expected due to the elimination of the tires and several internal variations in the way power is calculated.
It's pointless because the Nissan is the first car that comes with CVPD (CONTINOUSLY VARIABLE POWER DELIVERY). 
To me, it's lies, excuses, explanations, and more lies. I think that unlike the Corvette and the Turbo, which have more or less evolutionary changes over the years and carefully studied, the Nissan GT-R is a totally different car from its previous versions. So much heavier and so different, and the engineering team under so much pressure to be cheap ("on a budget") and fast that they did not do their homework with longevity and reliability, and most importantly, engines not meeting specs are simply stuffed into the cars and sold as is.
Linear Mode
