GT-R - latest specs
21 - 40 of 44 Posts
Joined
·
14 Posts
I read on r35gtr.com this quote.
It will be superior to almost anything if it gets that weight! But, yes I am very skeptical.
Holiday Auto reported that the car should weigh in at 1390kg or 3058 pounds. The engine for the Nissan GTR had been decided once the car had finished testing. A VQ32DETT generating an estimated 480ps @ 7,200rpm, 58.0kg/m @ 5,200rpm. The transmission was chosen as well, a 7 speed Getrag sequential transmission, which is sure to be overpowering. The Nissan GTR will be a 2 door coupe, with 4 bucket seats(preferably Recaro).
It will be superior to almost anything if it gets that weight! But, yes I am very skeptical.
Holiday Auto reported that the car should weigh in at 1390kg or 3058 pounds. The engine for the Nissan GTR had been decided once the car had finished testing. A VQ32DETT generating an estimated 480ps @ 7,200rpm, 58.0kg/m @ 5,200rpm. The transmission was chosen as well, a 7 speed Getrag sequential transmission, which is sure to be overpowering. The Nissan GTR will be a 2 door coupe, with 4 bucket seats(preferably Recaro).
hmm.. getrag is an old school technology and they'll have something much more advanced. I don't thing get rag had torque splitting technology from left to right. I'll bet $5.99 that we'll have one for the new gt-r. With 3058 lbs, I'll be extremely happy, prancing around, throwing rose pedals, but I very much doubt it. Like I said, we can all hope
The 997 Turbo isn't exactly a lightweight, but we all know that. The thing is, while the Turbo is often hailed as Porsche's ultimate sports 911, it really isn't. It's more of a GT car. The Turbo models are actually pretty cushy and have lots of amenities. The 997 Turbo would likely have gone up quite a bit in weight were it not for the use of aluminum in a few crucial areas such as the doors. In fact, the lightweight materials keep the weight pretty much identical to the 996 Turbo. The true hardcore and lightweight 911s are the GT2 and GT3, although most of their weight savings come from offering less equipment than the Turbo(no awd, etc).
Rumors about the GT-R point to some body panels being carbon fiber(comewhat confirmed by care carbon on the GT-R Proto), and the rest being aluminum. That would give the GT-R a substantial head start over the 911, which uses mostly steel and just a bit of aluminum. I'll have to do more research, but I am curious as to whether Porsche's H6 is aluminum or iron block. If the latter is the case, then the GT-R's aluminum VQ powerplant should provide another weight advantage.
Another issue is that the 997 Turbo is using electronic awd for the first time. Not to say that Porsche is an amateur in the world of awd, but Nissan has had ATTESA-ETS/PRO for years. Nissan's greater experience means that not only can they make a better system, but also a lighter one. Who knows, maybe Nissan will surprise us by ditching ATTESA for e4wd(making the car mostly RWD), which weighs even less(less than half the wieght of ATTESA) and offers better response and no drivetrain loss.
The GT-R won't be too big of a car, either. With the FM platform, it's easy for Nissan to use different sizes. The GT-R will probably be shorter than the V35/V36 Skylines, but still a hair longer than the Z33 Fairlady Z. The mule and two concepts hint that the GT-R will be much wider than even the wide track CPV35 and Z33 FM variants.
Joined
·
39,216 Posts
I'm a big fan of the GT2 and GT3 because of the 'hardcore' mentality behind it. Yes, it may have less 'power' than the other models, but ever since I first saw one and read into it, I was impressed and kinda fell in love. I'd buy the GT2 or 3 over a 997 anyday.
Joined
·
14 Posts
All Porsches are great, but if you say you buy one over a 997 that just means you haven't driven a 997. The new 997 GT3 is extremely impressive being a N/A 415HP Boxer 6. I own both a 997 and 996 currently. My 997 is a "S" variant. A sleeper Porsche if you ask me. Looks very subtle until you get on it, 0-60mph in 3.9secs and 1/4 in 12.3 at 114MPH. Tested by two diff mags.
Porsche motors are aluminum for those who don't know.
I see the GT-R as a GT car as well, just like the 911 Turbos.
I think the GT-R should stay AWD, as that is its heritage and it shouldn't stray from that. Keep at what its good at. I wouldn't mind seeing variations of the GT-R, like a light weight RWD model (but still keep the AWD model).
Huh? The GT2 and GT3 are the most powerful models available, the GT2 leading the turbocharged 911 category, and the GT3 making the most power for the NA 911s.
The '997' is a chassis/generation desgnation, much like the use of R32, R33, R34 for the Skylines. The 997 will have GT2 and GT3 variants as well, each better than their 996 generation predecessors.
Latest Specs on the GT-R so far is engine capacities from 3.2-3.8 liter. The engine from what I can see will be VQ based, although a new engine may be possible as the new GT-R has been worked on since 2001, although it will probably have the basic block of the VQ with 80% or more new headwork done to it, which suggests that maybe the VQ35HR with TT and some more work done to it may be the new GT-R engine. Car should have FR transaxel, V6 twin turbo, front wheels driven by electric motors with Li-Ion batteries, 7-speed sequential box and new advanced electronic Super ATESSA system with each wheel controlled independently for torque, as well as for braking assist.
Joined
·
14 Posts
Very interesting, its a Hybrid?
That's just not true. I think I posted that on r35gtr.com, but that was two years ago, before the Proto and before I knew what I know now. It can't possibly have a weight of 3000 pounds without the use of CF and aluminum, no steel.
As vquick said the car will be much like the Z, and we have overlapped the bodies to see how closely they resemble each other, and the Proto with an engine right now would probably weigh in at 3000 pounds. Take away all the CF that won't make it into production, and you got yourself a car that weighs 3100-3200 pounds. If it does weigh something close to the Z then to counteract it the suspension must be extremely stiff, resulting in a very uncomfortable ride for many people. If I could I would make the GT-R short, small like a 2 seater sports car should be, low to the ground, light as a feather (what do you think they got Lotus for, they are probably working on weight while working out the suspension) and with a powerful TT V6. But that's just me ya know. :nunchuk:
In terms of overall body shape the New GT-R is quite similar to the Z. The only differences as you pointed out between the two is that the GT-R is more boxy in shape, versus the oval shape of the 350z. All Nissan coupes and Infiniti's share some similarity between each other, so I wouldn't expect the GT-R to be any different. If the below is 80% done, then the GT-R is very much similar to the 350z, albeit different because of the distinct boxiness of it. We could change the roofline a bit, change the headlights, change the spoiler, change the rims, remove CF, and have a close to final version of the GT-R. That's all that's left to do I think.
GTR Proto versus 350z
Sunday, November 6th, 2005
So it is been mentioned that the GTR Proto has some very similar lines to the Nissan 350z. I first noted the roofline was almost identical but it didnt work as well on the Proto for some reason. Talking with eTraxx in the www.350z-tech.com chat room he got the idea to overlay the profiles of the two cars and see how they really compare. The results are amazing. These two cars are much closer in looks that i think anyone previously imagined.
First we have the GTR side profile:
![]()
Next we have the 350z side profile:
![]()
And finally the overlaid version giving astonishing results:
![]()
There has been alot of discussion about a new platform, but what would be the reason for the new platform? It clearly would fit the Z chassis. Althought if a new platform is being developed for the GTR, I think we will see it cross into the other cars as well. This is obvious from a cost standpoint. If a new platform is designed specifically for the GTR and no other cars would use it, that would drive the cost of the GTR through the roof.
However, we must also note that this is still in prototype form, and they may have just taken an 350z and chopped it up to developed the Proto, which is very likely.
Interesting…
GTR Proto versus 350z
Sunday, November 6th, 2005
So it is been mentioned that the GTR Proto has some very similar lines to the Nissan 350z. I first noted the roofline was almost identical but it didnt work as well on the Proto for some reason. Talking with eTraxx in the www.350z-tech.com chat room he got the idea to overlay the profiles of the two cars and see how they really compare. The results are amazing. These two cars are much closer in looks that i think anyone previously imagined.
First we have the GTR side profile:
Next we have the 350z side profile:
And finally the overlaid version giving astonishing results:
There has been alot of discussion about a new platform, but what would be the reason for the new platform? It clearly would fit the Z chassis. Althought if a new platform is being developed for the GTR, I think we will see it cross into the other cars as well. This is obvious from a cost standpoint. If a new platform is designed specifically for the GTR and no other cars would use it, that would drive the cost of the GTR through the roof.
However, we must also note that this is still in prototype form, and they may have just taken an 350z and chopped it up to developed the Proto, which is very likely.
Interesting…
as i said previously, silhouette shapes do not make the cars similar. the GTR looks very little like the Z. a full 3-D walkaround of the GTR compared to the Z renders a very different experience for me.
indeed, there are overall similarities in the continuity of design across all of the Nissan sports cars. this gives Nissan an identity. yet the GTR is not akin in shape or form to the Z despite similar side profiles. the G35 looks very, very similar to the 350Z, with the GTR looking distinct from both.
when i see the GTR, i don't think of the Z ever. but my mind is not on the Z. i don't own a Z. and i'm not drawn to the Z. when i see the G35, i see lots of Z in it. but i don't get that vibe when i see the GTR. when i see the GTR, i think of the R34.
insofar as a new platform, that denotes engine and suspension mounting points. in the case of the Z and G, they share such mounting points. the GTR may very well have it's own proprietary suspension and engine mounting points --with requistie parts that are dedicated to the GTR only. as you suggest, this may or may not hold true. we shall see.
if you personally see a lot of Z car in the GTR, then go for it. i cannot take that away from you. but i just don't see it. the GTR is, for me, a vast departure in character and overall design from both the Z and the G.
indeed, there are overall similarities in the continuity of design across all of the Nissan sports cars. this gives Nissan an identity. yet the GTR is not akin in shape or form to the Z despite similar side profiles. the G35 looks very, very similar to the 350Z, with the GTR looking distinct from both.
when i see the GTR, i don't think of the Z ever. but my mind is not on the Z. i don't own a Z. and i'm not drawn to the Z. when i see the G35, i see lots of Z in it. but i don't get that vibe when i see the GTR. when i see the GTR, i think of the R34.
insofar as a new platform, that denotes engine and suspension mounting points. in the case of the Z and G, they share such mounting points. the GTR may very well have it's own proprietary suspension and engine mounting points --with requistie parts that are dedicated to the GTR only. as you suggest, this may or may not hold true. we shall see.
if you personally see a lot of Z car in the GTR, then go for it. i cannot take that away from you. but i just don't see it. the GTR is, for me, a vast departure in character and overall design from both the Z and the G.
I have to agree with Bonzelite, I don't see many if any similarities between the Z and the Proto that we saw in October last year. The only silhouette comparison that I've seen that has really looked plausible to me was the comparison between the "test-mule" spotted in Arizona and the rear profile of the Proto. I should hope that Nissan has a new platform for the GTR if it really is going to be as revolutionary as everyone is hoping.
the G and Z are closer in appearance. that is my whole point.
the point of contention is that the GTR and the Z are allegedly similar looking. and i am debating a case that they are not. the G and Z are FAR closer in appearance and cousins to each other than is the GTR.
sometimes, from a distance, i still will have a rare moment when i cannot tell if the car is a G or a Z, as the front ends of the cars are so similar, particularly the headlamps and roofline. the rooflines are extremely similar, with the G being longer of course. the G is, in my summation, a sort of sexed up version of the Z. a more sophisticated and expensive statement than the Z, yet very similar in appeal. one could have a personal dilemma between the two, in some cases.
the GTR is cut from the same cloth, indeed, and shares a side profile similarity only. but that is all it shares. the details and the sculpted body areas of the GTR from front to rear, from top to bottom, chart entirely new territory never before seen on the G or the Z. and this is completely intentional.
certainly, echoes of both the G and Z can be discerned in the GTR, but these are only fleeting in nature. this is my view. moreover, the GTR is far more akin to it's R-series predecessors, as this is clearly seen in the GTR's stance and bulk and manner of sculpture, with carried over heritage cues from GTR design ethos.
the point of contention is that the GTR and the Z are allegedly similar looking. and i am debating a case that they are not. the G and Z are FAR closer in appearance and cousins to each other than is the GTR.
sometimes, from a distance, i still will have a rare moment when i cannot tell if the car is a G or a Z, as the front ends of the cars are so similar, particularly the headlamps and roofline. the rooflines are extremely similar, with the G being longer of course. the G is, in my summation, a sort of sexed up version of the Z. a more sophisticated and expensive statement than the Z, yet very similar in appeal. one could have a personal dilemma between the two, in some cases.
the GTR is cut from the same cloth, indeed, and shares a side profile similarity only. but that is all it shares. the details and the sculpted body areas of the GTR from front to rear, from top to bottom, chart entirely new territory never before seen on the G or the Z. and this is completely intentional.
certainly, echoes of both the G and Z can be discerned in the GTR, but these are only fleeting in nature. this is my view. moreover, the GTR is far more akin to it's R-series predecessors, as this is clearly seen in the GTR's stance and bulk and manner of sculpture, with carried over heritage cues from GTR design ethos.
21 - 40 of 44 Posts
