997 TT beats GT-R at Ring. Nissan accused of cheating.
#2746
12-30-2008, 02:52 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 550 
If overdriven, anyone in any car can overheat tires in an hour. I don't think you could cord the tires or scrub through the pads in an hour on a normal road track (unless you were showboat drifting and not trying to drive fast).
In terms of heat/cooling, you need to be careful, as SCCA often allows mods in this area. Touring Class does not mean 100% stock. 996s for example are allowed to add oil and tranny coolers on a "free" basis. Maybe the GT-R would get a similar accommodation.
In terms of heat/cooling, you need to be careful, as SCCA often allows mods in this area. Touring Class does not mean 100% stock. 996s for example are allowed to add oil and tranny coolers on a "free" basis. Maybe the GT-R would get a similar accommodation.
Yes oil and tranny coolers are allowed, but you'll also have to realize that SCCA is is a driver oriented organization and AWD will be penalized heavily with more weight, possibly even the gearbox too.
#2748
12-30-2008, 04:10 PM
There is a good reason why the Cayman is not raced. Remember how well it placed at the 2007 24 hours of Nurburgring? If you don't remember, a Cayman placed 4th overall (the race was won buy a 997) and I believe 6th. Mysteriously, there were no Caymans in the 2008 race. Why? Porsche did not want the possibility of a Cayman showing up a 997, so they threatened to pull support from anyone who ran a Cayman along with a 997.
http://www.caymanclub.net/150991-post31.html
525HP engine, many parts taken from 996 race cars, others fabbed from scratch.
Also, all Porsche can do is NOT SUPPORT a race team-- they can't prevent you from buying a Cayman and using (part of) the chasis as the basis for a race car.
#2749
12-30-2008, 04:17 PM
The GT-R runs on relatively narrow tires compared to the Corvette's and Vipers of T1, that has a huge affect on how the tires are used up and how fast. Yes anyone can overdrive and overheat them but obviously it's harder to do on lighter cars with wider tires. And the suspensions are limited in scope so if you cant get enough stiness in the coils, you could easily cord a set of hoosiers.
Yes oil and tranny coolers are allowed, but you'll also have to realize that SCCA is is a driver oriented organization and AWD will be penalized heavily with more weight, possibly even the gearbox too.
Yes oil and tranny coolers are allowed, but you'll also have to realize that SCCA is is a driver oriented organization and AWD will be penalized heavily with more weight, possibly even the gearbox too.
Why would the AWD and tranny be penalized by a racing organization other than for being inherently better and faster? I assume they are not spiteful.
#2750
12-30-2008, 04:41 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 550 You could put wider tires on the GT-R. Also, although I'm sure you could find a racing compound that the GT-R would shred in an hour, that would be silly to run. There are many capable tires that would easily hold up.
Why would the AWD and tranny be penalized by a racing organization other than for being inherently better and faster? I assume they are not spiteful.
Why would the AWD and tranny be penalized by a racing organization other than for being inherently better and faster? I assume they are not spiteful.
And because, like I said, racing isn't about who can make the race the easiest. It's about determining the best driver/car combination. Besides AWD is only faster in adverse conditions which organizers have to include in their rule making.
#2751
12-30-2008, 05:12 PM
#2752
12-30-2008, 05:18 PM
#2753
12-30-2008, 05:25 PM
Umm, that car shares little with a stock Cayman:
http://www.caymanclub.net/150991-post31.html
525HP engine, many parts taken from 996 race cars, others fabbed from scratch.
Also, all Porsche can do is NOT SUPPORT a race team-- they can't prevent you from buying a Cayman and using (part of) the chasis as the basis for a race car.
http://www.caymanclub.net/150991-post31.html
525HP engine, many parts taken from 996 race cars, others fabbed from scratch.
Also, all Porsche can do is NOT SUPPORT a race team-- they can't prevent you from buying a Cayman and using (part of) the chasis as the basis for a race car.
#2755
12-30-2008, 05:46 PM
relax i was joking 
Wish it would come with a turbo engine tho and maybe AWD. Cool lil car.
Wish it would come with a turbo engine tho and maybe AWD. Cool lil car.
#2757
12-30-2008, 05:54 PM
For a girl's car, they sure don't seem to want to drive it. My wife and two daughters (who both drive) have no interest in driving my Cayman. I guess that's not a bad thing.
Last edited by USCCayman; 12-30-2008 at 06:19 PM.
#2758
12-30-2008, 06:00 PM
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/12/30/m...-r-horsepower/
So apparently, Motor Trend did another dyno test on a GTR and they're claiming that the power rating is accurate. Now if they can only get their hands on the GTR than ran 7:29 in The Ring.
Originally Posted by Autoblog
Last summer, Motor Trend estimated that the Nissan GT-R made at least 507-horsepower at the crank, which is quite a bit more than the manufacturer's official 480-horse rating. Now, MT decided to put to rest the firestorm it created by strapping yet another GT-R to a new type of dynamometer that's reportedly capable of calculating exact drivetrain losses, something that had previously been nothing more than an estimation. Three runs were conducted, and Godzilla delivered figures that were consistently within just a few percentage points of each other. So, what's the scoop?
According to MT, the average of those three separate dyno runs reveals that Nissan's supercar is delivering 485-horsepower @ 6050 rpm and 470 lb-ft @ 3800 rpm. That's nearly spot on for horsepower, but a good deal more torque at the crank than its official 430 lb-ft. -- we're not complaining. These tests also prove that there are indeed significant losses due to the GT-R's twin-clutch, all-wheel drive configuration, though that's also what helps launch the supercar from a dead-stop so quickly. Thanks for the tip, Franz!
According to MT, the average of those three separate dyno runs reveals that Nissan's supercar is delivering 485-horsepower @ 6050 rpm and 470 lb-ft @ 3800 rpm. That's nearly spot on for horsepower, but a good deal more torque at the crank than its official 430 lb-ft. -- we're not complaining. These tests also prove that there are indeed significant losses due to the GT-R's twin-clutch, all-wheel drive configuration, though that's also what helps launch the supercar from a dead-stop so quickly. Thanks for the tip, Franz!
So apparently, Motor Trend did another dyno test on a GTR and they're claiming that the power rating is accurate. Now if they can only get their hands on the GTR than ran 7:29 in The Ring.
#2759
12-30-2008, 06:55 PM
The GT-R, at 3900lbs, is just too heavy to go 50 minutes at a competitive pace at it's power levels. Heck, even much lighter race cars on slicks have to manage their tires for a sprint like that. The brakes could easily become an issue too.
The 1st Gen. CTS-V at 3800lbs could compete, but it isn't as fast, hence less tire/brake wear. Either way, the transitions will hurt it too.
Oh, Nissan "defined" a Supercar: 8.8lbs per hp or less, 186mph speed obtainable on public roads, sub 8min 'Ring time. I guess that makes the CTS-V 6M a super car too!
The 1st Gen. CTS-V at 3800lbs could compete, but it isn't as fast, hence less tire/brake wear. Either way, the transitions will hurt it too.
Oh, Nissan "defined" a Supercar: 8.8lbs per hp or less, 186mph speed obtainable on public roads, sub 8min 'Ring time. I guess that makes the CTS-V 6M a super car too!
Last edited by Deuuuce; 12-30-2008 at 06:57 PM.
#2760
12-30-2008, 10:23 PM
http://www.motorauthority.com/dyno-t...r-ratings.html
According to this article from MotorAuthority, the dyno test that was done by using a Hyper Power Dynamometer's DYNOmite, calculates a powertrain loss between 5% to 17%.
According to this article from MotorAuthority, the dyno test that was done by using a Hyper Power Dynamometer's DYNOmite, calculates a powertrain loss between 5% to 17%.
Originally Posted by MotorAuthority
Testing cars for power ratings is a tough and tricky business - accounting for different conditions, locations, equipment and techniques can make it tough to generalize results. And to make matters worse, there is often a lot of guesswork employed to get between real, delivered wheel horsepower and output at the crankshaft, or vice-versa. A recent test of Nissan's GT-R has answered some of the ongoing questions of how it performs so well, however, and taken a good bit of the fiction out of the process.
Rumors and reports from around the web have been claiming Nissan's stated figures for the GT-R's twin-turbo V6 are understated ever since it began its remarkable climb up the many performance charts. All-wheel drive and tons of rubber just couldn't make up for the massive power deficit, they claimed. But it turns out Nissan's claimed 473hp (353kW) figure isn't far from the truth at all, according to MotorTrend. The torque numbers are about 40lb-ft (54Nm), or roughly 9%, larger than Nissan's 434lb-ft (588Nm) rating, and could help explain a little of the car's low-end acceleration abilities.
The key to this latest round of testing is the use of Hyper Power Dynamometer's DYNOmite, which allows testing not just of engine output, but of powertrain drag. After a dyno pull, instead of ceasing to record data, the machine records the slow-down period, and measures the drag due to the car's powertrain, including engine, transmission and wheels.
The end result? As physics would suggest, the parasitic losses of the drivetrain increase with speed, varying from 23hp (17kW) at 50mph to 84hp (62kW) at 100mph. That works out to a real-world inefficiency ranging between 5-17%, depending on speed - quite good for an AWD car.
One thing to keep in mind, however, is that this is just one particular example of the car - power figures can and will vary from vehicle to vehicle. It will simply take time and repetition to see if these results are more or less representative of the general population of Nissan GT-Rs than previous tests. The method, however, is a definite improvement.
Testing cars for power ratings is a tough and tricky business - accounting for different conditions, locations, equipment and techniques can make it tough to generalize results. And to make matters worse, there is often a lot of guesswork employed to get between real, delivered wheel horsepower and output at the crankshaft, or vice-versa. A recent test of Nissan's GT-R has answered some of the ongoing questions of how it performs so well, however, and taken a good bit of the fiction out of the process.
Rumors and reports from around the web have been claiming Nissan's stated figures for the GT-R's twin-turbo V6 are understated ever since it began its remarkable climb up the many performance charts. All-wheel drive and tons of rubber just couldn't make up for the massive power deficit, they claimed. But it turns out Nissan's claimed 473hp (353kW) figure isn't far from the truth at all, according to MotorTrend. The torque numbers are about 40lb-ft (54Nm), or roughly 9%, larger than Nissan's 434lb-ft (588Nm) rating, and could help explain a little of the car's low-end acceleration abilities.
The key to this latest round of testing is the use of Hyper Power Dynamometer's DYNOmite, which allows testing not just of engine output, but of powertrain drag. After a dyno pull, instead of ceasing to record data, the machine records the slow-down period, and measures the drag due to the car's powertrain, including engine, transmission and wheels.
The end result? As physics would suggest, the parasitic losses of the drivetrain increase with speed, varying from 23hp (17kW) at 50mph to 84hp (62kW) at 100mph. That works out to a real-world inefficiency ranging between 5-17%, depending on speed - quite good for an AWD car.
One thing to keep in mind, however, is that this is just one particular example of the car - power figures can and will vary from vehicle to vehicle. It will simply take time and repetition to see if these results are more or less representative of the general population of Nissan GT-Rs than previous tests. The method, however, is a definite improvement.