Toggle sidebar

NISSAN GT-R... official info!

C.R.Y. said:
the engine is good. i think it will be able to make at least 600awhp on stock turbos. theres a reason why it can weigh 3800lbs and hit 0-60 in 3.3, run mid 11s and trap 120. they make around 470awhp on the latest dyno test. but i doubt itll hold 1000hp on the stock block. not even rb26 were capable 1k unless built. they tend to be unreliable at anything over 600hp. the trans on this thing is what i really question.
Click to expand...
Definitely. As you pointed out, the recent dyno tests of the GT-R seem to indicate that the factory ratings are VERY underrated, which seems to help explain why it's so heavy but can move as quickly as it does. With the stock turbos only putting out 10 psi, there's definitely room for improvement (depending on how much the stock block can put up with, which is yet to be seen), though engineers seem to say that the GT-R could easily break the 600 hp barrier, though they've taken more precautions and have safeguarded the engine and ECU to prevent private tuners from messing with the car. Regarding the transmission, I'm sure they made it sturdy enough to handle launches with the stock power, though apparently once the ECU senses that any part of the transmission is getting too hot, it'll disable stuff like the launch control until it cools off so there's a smaller likelihood of something breaking.
dilla said:
the cayman's look horrible, btw... but the gt-r is about 15k more than a cayman, isnt it?? the z06's go for around 70 or so dont they??
Click to expand...
Well, the Cayman S has a base price of around $60k, so perhaps a 911 Carrera would've been a better example. Regardless, Z06s are also around $70k.
dilla said:
and also alot of car enthusiasts might have the whole american pride thing going on... maybe they'll only buy american, like the vipers, chargers, 300's, gtos and mustangs...
Click to expand...
Only if they're ignorant. If people were so into performance, then it would be hard to argue against such significant numbers. Otherwise, they'd just be buying the cars for their looks, which is only a portion of what makes a car great... and that would make them the opposite of car enthusiasts, if they dismiss an athletically superior vehicle because of what factory it comes from or who designed it. I'm not saying that owning a Viper/Charger/300/GTO/Mustang/Z06/whatever makes you ignorant, but if you refuse to give credit where it's due, then you're a moron.
 
i think if i had money lying around and bought an expensive car i'd go for looks a little more than performance... i honestly would not hit the 200+ mph these cars get.... most of them do 0-60 in under 4 os that's fast enough on the road where you cuold do a short burst of speed to kinda strut your car's stuff..

the gt-r is ugly, but i still like it.... but since aesthetics mean so much, i might just go for 6 series beemer or so... and of course everyone has their own taste so the 6 series could be ugly to someone..i would take one over the gt-r... but that's just me...
 
^^ i was being hypothetical... i dont see a new car of my own for a while... i think i'd have to get into med school to get one... :( oh well... it's something to work for i guess?
 
taste is indeed a subjective thing, and the GT-R isn't that pretty, but i'd hardly call a 6-series a good example of aesthetics. christ, that is one ugly car.
 
Here is some technical information about EVERYTHING of the GT-R:

http://press.nissan-global.com/PRESSKIT/NISSANGTR/0710/ENGLISH/index.html

I'd recommend giving it a look, since it has A LOT of info on the car, inside and out. I'd say it's more worth $70k than a Z06. They're both awesome competitors, but the technology accessible from the drivers' seat is simply amazing. Just look at the display screen and all of the different things you can view (navigation, boost, gear, mpg, lap times and so much extra stuff).
 
dont know if people know but the display looks familiar to gran turismos menus. thats because the guy who designed the gt series helped in making it.
 
^ One thing that I felt that is interesting about this car is all the gizmos. A lot of people seem to say that Nissan is crazy for selling a $70k+ car since people with that kind of money to burn are presumed to buy a more luxury-oriented car for that same money. Yes, it makes sense, but the interior of the GT-R is actually pretty high tech. Luxurious, definitely not, but there's A LOT of cool shit that is pretty useful and interesting. Plus compared to a $70k Z06, the Nissan's interior is more than decent. I can live without wood trim.
 
woodtrim has been dead to me for a while lol. but the interior is beautiful, and most of all functional. the thing is that alot of american consumers are ignorant. i bet if the gtr was badged as an infiniti they wouldnt have no problem buying it.
 
^ On the bright side, the Nissan badge might help prevent snobs from buying it. I feel that there are some rich people who just buy nice cars but wouldn't want a Nissan, even a $70k one, though a real car guy would know the car's heritage along with its capabilities and be more than happy to shell out $70k for a car that whoops on 95% of everything out there, regardless of the brand.
 
or they might gay it up like the evo X was.... did anyone read the motor trend article where they compared the X gsr with the IX GSR and the IX came away better in alot of performance categories?
 
dilla said:
or they might gay it up like the evo X was....
Click to expand...
Unlikely. The Evo was in desperate need of some safety upgrades that unfortunately add a ton of weight. Subaru had already taken such measures, which was why the GD Imprezas ('02-'07) were heavier than the GCs (older ones before the bugeyes), though nobody really knew the difference since we had never gotten a WRX before they made them safer and heavier.
dilla said:
did anyone read the motor trend article where they compared the X gsr with the IX GSR and the IX came away better in alot of performance categories?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I read it. As happy as I am to be an owner of a faster Evo IX, I have to be fair and still point out that as mentioned before, the Evo X is a lot safer, plus it handles better overall. It might be slower than the old Evo IX, but after a model year or two I'm sure Mitsubishi will crank up the juice. Plus, the next issue of Motor Trend compares the U.S.-spec versions of the Evo X and STI, and while the STI accelerates faster and stops shorter, the Evo puts out better handling numbers and wins overall objectively (based on their lap times at a racetrack in Fontana, California) and subjectively (the decision of the writers).
 
DeeezNuuuts83 said:
Unlikely. The Evo was in desperate need of some safety upgrades that unfortunately add a ton of weight. Subaru had already taken such measures, which was why the GD Imprezas ('02-'07) were heavier than the GCs (older ones before the bugeyes), though nobody really knew the difference since we had never gotten a WRX before they made them safer and heavier.

Yeah, I read it. As happy as I am to be an owner of a faster Evo IX, I have to be fair and still point out that as mentioned before, the Evo X is a lot safer, plus it handles better overall. It might be slower than the old Evo IX, but after a model year or two I'm sure Mitsubishi will crank up the juice. Plus, the next issue of Motor Trend compares the U.S.-spec versions of the Evo X and STI, and while the STI accelerates faster and stops shorter, the Evo puts out better handling numbers and wins overall objectively (based on their lap times at a racetrack in Fontana, California) and subjectively (the decision of the writers).
Click to expand...

the X maybe handle better, but isnt the IX's just really good? why not just master that and then also have the more power?

also, in that MT issue, it noted that the new impreza's new looks may have had something to do with the fact that toyota owns them now, whereas before it was....GM, i think?
 
dilla said:
the X maybe handle better, but isnt the IX's just really good?
Click to expand...
In terms of sheer handling numbers, the Evo X actually handles better, thanks to the electronic wizardry of the new S-AWC system, bigger wheels and stiffer chassis that offset the weight. That particular Motor Trend article you were referring to with the IX vs. the X just showed that the IX's lighter weight and quicker acceleration helped it outgun the X's handling capabilities on that particular track. A different track may tell a different story, depending on how many corners there, how tight those corners are, how many straights there are and how long those straights are.
dilla said:
why not just master that and then also have the more power?
Click to expand...
The X does have more power, and it's only the beginning. I've said this time and time again, the new engine is not even close to being completely unleashed. I'm not saying it's better than the 4G63 (as it's far too soon to say something like that), but there's plenty of muscle still left for future factory upgrades (better ECU tuning, more boost, larger turbo components, direct injection, etc.) to unveil.

Also... this is getting a little off-topic. Please continue any further Evo discussion in the Evo X thread.

GT-R!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Donate

Back in the day, we used to recieve donations sent as cash in fake birthday cards! Those were the days! I still have some of them, actually.

Now we have crypto.

Ethereum/EVM: 0x9c70214f34ea949095308dca827380295b201e80

Bitcoin: bc1qa5twnqsqm8jxrcxm2z9w6gts7syha8gasqacww

Solana: 8xePHrFwsduS7xU4XNjp2FRArTD7RFzmCQsjBaetE2y8

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 60 (members: 0, guests: 60)
Top Bottom
Back