Too early for GT500 vs '07 Skyline GTR?

[syr74]

Alright guys, you want to know why Ford has gone to an OHC/3-valve per cylinder setup on the "standard" modular V-8's? Pull up a chair, but be willing to listen a while, because there are several reasons.

First of all, the idea of a 3-valve engine is not especially new at Ford, they played around with a 3-valve version of a heavily modified 427ci V-8 for possible GT40 duty back in the late 60's, and a SOHC/3-valve modular V-8 has been on the drawing board for the modular V-8 lineup since it's debut, which is going on 15 years for those who are counting.

But, what are the advantages to a SOHC/3-valve V-8?

1: Torque, and lots of it, all over the rpm band too. The 3-valve OHC design is unique in this respect, as it makes torque like a 2-valve, pushrod V-8 but in a multi-valve, OHC design. For those who know DOHC engines well, this says a lot. The 3-valve SOHC typically breathes better than even a 2-valve SOHC unit and makes a case for possibly even being just a bit torquier than comparable 2-valve pushord designs down low.

For reference, and for those unfamiliar with these things, DOHC/4-valve designs typically breath really well and make good peak hp, but give up a lot in the low end torque department. A 3-valve SOHC breathes almost as well as a 4-valve DOHC design does, but still makes torque like a pushrod design. Neat trick huh?

2: 3-valve engines have proven to be very clean from an emissions standpoint, it is simply inherent in the design itself. This was a big reason for Mercedes going the 3-valve route, and of course for Ford as well.

3: The design barely costs more than a SOHC/2-valve, all the while providing much of the benefit of a DOHC/4-valve and some things, like good low end torque, that the typical DOHC/4-valve cannot muster.

Sorry to go off topic, but that should end this little side trip for everyone.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by k3smostwanted

is there anyone on my side that feels that the new $70k GTR will out perform the GT500???

For my vote, no. Let me explain why.

First of all, the GTR weight advantage discussed in this thread is something I can only find a source for within this thread. The GT500 will weigh in at about 3,800lbs acording to Ford making the car about 300lbs heavier than the typical 05 Mustang GT. The Infiniti G35 coupe weighs in at barely north of 3,500lbs in 6m, rwd trim.

The transition this platform is making to get to "GTR" status seems unlikely to shed any weight, and the addition of turbos and awd necessary to make that transition would seem likely to make that figure edge northward at least a bit even if weight saving changes are made elsewhere. My bet,whatever "lightweight" rumours might or might not be the GTR will weigh at least what the GT500 does when rubber actually meets the road.

Second, the GT500 is going to pack a serious amount more hp and torque than will the GTR, Nissan enthusiasts prayers for otherwise not withstanding. 475hp has become an "at least" rated hp figure for the GT500 at this point, and SVT has indicated that the tradition of under-rating will continue with this car. Put simply, whatever the GT500 will bring to the party it will be more than 475 actual hp. The 450hp rumours floating for the GTR are on the rosy side of things, and everyone knows it.

Nissan has expressed concern over rocking the hp boat within certain markets where the GTR will be sold and has even hinted that hp will be closer to 400 than 450 in interviews in order to not cause problems. One thing Nissan made certain is that nothing remotely like 500hp is coming in this car and that means the GT500 will have a pretty serious hp advantage and an almost certainly ridiculous advantage in terms of torque.

What does this mean? Any GTR handling advantage had better be pretty large as the Nissan obviously cannot depend on a weight advantage verses the GT500 and the Nissan is going to give up serious power to the Ford. Also note tha the GT500's brakes are massive and well designed as well, no GTR advantage to be had here either.

Last, the GTR will likely be depending on it's awd for any serious handling advantage when compared to the GT500 as the basic chassis it shares with the 350Z does not post significantly better handling numbers than an 05 Mustang GT wearing all-season tires. The latest Motor tend Comparo shoes an Enthusiast model 350Z posting a 67.8mph slalom to the Mustang GT's 65.4mph run. 2mph in the slalom is not insignificant until you take a few other things into consideration. First of these should be that I picked the comparo that offered what is essentially the largest advantage in measured handling for the Nissan I could find. (when comparing a 17" tired 350Z to a Mustang GT that is...no Track models). In other words, this is about as good as it gets for the Z car.

Sharp eyed observers might also notice that the Z weighs about 300lb less than the Mustang GT it is running against and has a roughly 4 inch shorter wheelbase than does the Mustang. The two above advantages are not things that are going to translate over to the larger upcoming GTR. Also, an interesting qoute by the MT staff referred to the fact that the 350Z wasn't light, and didn't possess lazer-like reflexes, but did exactly what it was told. Ironically, this sounds a lot like the statement R&T made regarding the GT500 which prompted you to criticize it's agility. Just curious, but do you expect a longer wheelbase, heavier curb weight, and awd to somehow make this car more nimble?

Thumb through your favorite magazines for info on the more comparable, in weight and size, G35 coupe and what you'll find is that the Inifniti tends to slalom eerily close to an 05 Mustang GT and typically runs the skidpad within a hair of what a Mustang can muster as well. The G35 tends to turn in the high .8x range even nipping .90 on occasion, the Mustang GT tends to run in the high .8x range. The G35 does have a longer wheelbase than the Mustang, which obviously sacrifices slalom speed but almost certainly gains some skidpad in the process.

The one thing that I have yet to find is anything that would indicate a large, inherent overall handling advantage for the GTR based on known chassis characteristics. Every review of the GT500 thus far has indicated that handling is fantastic. I fully expect awd to make a difference and give the GTR a noticeable edge in terms of handling, but I expect it to be a good bit smaller than do the Nissan fanboys on this site and not nearly enough to overcome a serious GT500 acceleration advantage in most situations.

No, the GT500 wont handle like a Z06 Vette, but I expect it to put a standard C6 on the trailer which should be enough IMO, combined with the relatively large power advantage, to make the GT500 faster on all but the twistiest or roughest of tracks when compared to the GTR. Godzilla be damned...Kong lives.

[k3smostwanted]

Originally Posted by syr74

For my vote, no. Let me explain why.

First of all, the GTR weight advantage discussed in this thread is something I can only find a source for within this thread. The GT500 will weigh in at about 3,800lbs acording to Ford making the car about 300lbs heavier than the typical 05 Mustang GT. The Infiniti G35 coupe weighs in at barely north of 3,500lbs in 6m, rwd trim.

The transition this platform is making to get to "GTR" status seems unlikely to shed any weight, and the addition of turbos and awd necessary to make that transition would seem likely to make that figure edge northward at least a bit even if weight saving changes are made elsewhere. My bet,whatever "lightweight" rumours might or might not be the GTR will weigh at least what the GT500 does when rubber actually meets the road.

the Infiniti G35 is loaded with extra weight for factory leather/heated seats and other luxurious things that make it weigh substantially more. the GTR will be rumored to be alot of CF much like the Special Edition R34 Skylines if i am not mistaken. reguardless the GTR will not may much more if more at all than the 350Z which last time i checked weighed in at around 3300-3400lbs. like i have said a couple times in this thread already, the GTR will use a new electronic motor assisted AWD system. it will cut back alot on weight in comparison to standard AWD set-ups. who said it was going to have turbos? the motor being used still hasnt been confirmed. the most popular rumor seems to be the VQ32DETT assisted by Cosworth but there have also been rumors of TT V8's and a naturally aspirated V8.

Second, the GT500 is going to pack a serious amount more hp and torque than will the GTR, Nissan enthusiasts prayers for otherwise not withstanding.

and you know this because you talked to Mr. Nissan himself, eh? you dont know how much power it is going to pack, you just assume that the Ford V8 will pack more power and torque but i doubt this will be the case. Nissan is designing this car to compete with the Z06 vette and other cars of the class, so i doubt they think they can get away with a mere 400hp in comparison to the vettes 500+hp. trust me...they want the GTR to sell, not sit on a showroom floor. i have pin-pointed some information straight out of an official representative of Nissan Corp. that states that 500hp is a good number to prepare for the new GTR.

Nissan has expressed concern over rocking the hp boat within certain markets where the GTR will be sold and has even hinted that hp will be closer to 400 than 450 in interviews in order to not cause problems.

i would like to see proof of where you read this...as i said in the previous paragraph, i have supporting proof in my previous posts in this same thread. you might want to go back and brush up...

What does this mean? Any GTR handling advantage had better be pretty large as the Nissan obviously cannot depend on a weight advantage verses the GT500 and the Nissan is going to give up serious power to the Ford. Also note tha the GT500's brakes are massive and well designed as well, no GTR advantage to be had here either.

the GTR still may have an advantage in weight...i like i said in the very first paragraph, Nissan is taking extra measures to assure that the GTR will not weigh in at more than the current 350Z/G35. it also had AWD which will in general help the car stick much better to the road. so there is one advantage...not to mention aerodynamics, shorter wheel base, etc.

Last, the GTR will likely be depending on it's awd for any serious handling advantage when compared to the GT500 as the basic chassis it shares with the 350Z does not post significantly better handling numbers than an 05 Mustang GT wearing all-season tires. The latest Motor tend Comparo shoes an Enthusiast model 350Z posting a 67.8mph slalom to the Mustang GT's 65.4mph run. 2mph in the slalom is not insignificant until you take a few other things into consideration. First of these should be that I picked the comparo that offered what is essentially the largest advantage in measured handling for the Nissan I could find. (when comparing a 17" tired 350Z to a Mustang GT that is...no Track models). In other words, this is about as good as it gets for the Z car.

you must forget that the similarity in chassis between the 350Z and GTR is where the similarities will end. totally new suspension will be in need to cooperate with the new E-AWD system. so this whole paragraph is irrelevant. comparing the 350Z to the new GTR would be like comparing the Infiniti J30 to the Nissan 300zx ...one of the cars are and was built for a different level of performance. im sure i could sit down and think of many other comparisons like this between different manufacturers but that is the first that came to mind.

Just curious, but do you expect a longer wheelbase, heavier curb weight, and awd to somehow make this car more nimble?

how about a exotic sports car like suspension in comparison to the 350Z's mere sporty suspension? i really would appreciate it if you would stop comparing the 350Z to the GTR...do you really think Nissan would charge people an extra $40K for something that performs the same as the miniscule $30k sporty coupe???

Every review of the GT500 thus far has indicated that handling is fantastic.

in comparison to what??? if they werent comparing it to the GTR, their opinion is worthless.

I fully expect awd to make a difference and give the GTR a noticeable edge in terms of handling, but I expect it to be a good bit smaller than do the Nissan fanboys on this site and not nearly enough to overcome a serious GT500 acceleration advantage in most situations.

yeah, i doubt it will be that much faster in the 1/4 mile than the GT500. this is why people will be buying a $70k sports car instead of a $40k muscle car. cars made for 2 totally different purposes will thus serve 2 totally different purposes.

Godzilla be damned...Kong lives.

this statement pretty much sums up your whole argument...

[fairladyz_gt-r]

Originally Posted by k3smostwanted

the Infiniti G35 is loaded with extra weight for factory leather/heated seats and other luxurious things that make it weigh substantially more. the GTR will be rumored to be alot of CF much like the Special Edition R34 Skylines if i am not mistaken. reguardless the GTR will not may much more if more at all than the 350Z which last time i checked weighed in at around 3300-3400lbs. like i have said a couple times in this thread already, the GTR will use a new electronic motor assisted AWD system. it will cut back alot on weight in comparison to standard AWD set-ups. who said it was going to have turbos? the motor being used still hasnt been confirmed. the most popular rumor seems to be the VQ32DETT assisted by Cosworth but there have also been rumors of TT V8's and a naturally aspirated V8.



and you know this because you talked to Mr. Nissan himself, eh? you dont know how much power it is going to pack, you just assume that the Ford V8 will pack more power and torque but i doubt this will be the case. Nissan is designing this car to compete with the Z06 vette and other cars of the class, so i doubt they think they can get away with a mere 400hp in comparison to the vettes 500+hp. trust me...they want the GTR to sell, not sit on a showroom floor. i have pin-pointed some information straight out of an official representative of Nissan Corp. that states that 500hp is a good number to prepare for the new GTR.

i would like to see proof of where you read this...as i said in the previous paragraph, i have supporting proof in my previous posts in this same thread. you might want to go back and brush up...


the GTR still may have an advantage in weight...i like i said in the very first paragraph, Nissan is taking extra measures to assure that the GTR will not weigh in at more than the current 350Z/G35. it also had AWD which will in general help the car stick much better to the road. so there is one advantage...not to mention aerodynamics, shorter wheel base, etc.

you must forget that the similarity in chassis between the 350Z and GTR is where the similarities will end. totally new suspension will be in need to cooperate with the new E-AWD system. so this whole paragraph is irrelevant. comparing the 350Z to the new GTR would be like comparing the Infiniti J30 to the Nissan 300zx ...one of the cars are and was built for a different level of performance. im sure i could sit down and think of many other comparisons like this between different manufacturers but that is the first that came to mind.



how about a exotic sports car like suspension in comparison to the 350Z's mere sporty suspension? i really would appreciate it if you would stop comparing the 350Z to the GTR...do you really think Nissan would charge people an extra $40K for something that performs the same as the miniscule $30k sporty coupe???


in comparison to what??? if they werent comparing it to the GTR, their opinion is worthless.

yeah, i doubt it will be that much faster in the 1/4 mile than the GT500. this is why people will be buying a $70k sports car instead of a $40k muscle car. cars made for 2 totally different purposes will thus serve 2 totally different purposes.

this statement pretty much sums up your whole argument...

Just let me add some more...

The new GT-R is not using the current Z33/V35's chassis, they are using the new FM chassis (front midship). so they are two different car. Until now no one has yet test drive it yet except ppl inside nissan so plz don't say things u don't know, say only what they had already told us

[jcsaleen]

All I care about is RB or VQ - I really want another RB but I really don't think its going to happen.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by k3smostwanted

the Infiniti G35 is loaded with extra weight for factory leather/heated seats and other luxurious things that make it weigh substantially more. the GTR will be rumored to be alot of CF much like the Special Edition R34 Skylines if i am not mistaken. reguardless the GTR will not may much more if more at all than the 350Z which last time i checked weighed in at around 3300-3400lbs. like i have said a couple times in this thread already, the GTR will use a new electronic motor assisted AWD system. it will cut back alot on weight in comparison to standard AWD set-ups. who said it was going to have turbos? the motor being used still hasnt been confirmed. the most popular rumor seems to be the VQ32DETT assisted by Cosworth but there have also been rumors of TT V8's and a naturally aspirated V8.


and you know this because you talked to Mr. Nissan himself, eh? you dont know how much power it is going to pack, you just assume that the Ford V8 will pack more power and torque but i doubt this will be the case. Nissan is designing this car to compete with the Z06 vette and other cars of the class, so i doubt they think they can get away with a mere 400hp in comparison to the vettes 500+hp. trust me...they want the GTR to sell, not sit on a showroom floor. i have pin-pointed some information straight out of an official representative of Nissan Corp. that states that 500hp is a good number to prepare for the new GTR.

i would like to see proof of where you read this...as i said in the previous paragraph, i have supporting proof in my previous posts in this same thread. you might want to go back and brush up...


the GTR still may have an advantage in weight...i like i said in the very first paragraph, Nissan is taking extra measures to assure that the GTR will not weigh in at more than the current 350Z/G35. it also had AWD which will in general help the car stick much better to the road. so there is one advantage...not to mention aerodynamics, shorter wheel base, etc.

you must forget that the similarity in chassis between the 350Z and GTR is where the similarities will end. totally new suspension will be in need to cooperate with the new E-AWD system. so this whole paragraph is irrelevant. comparing the 350Z to the new GTR would be like comparing the Infiniti J30 to the Nissan 300zx ...one of the cars are and was built for a different level of performance. im sure i could sit down and think of many other comparisons like this between different manufacturers but that is the first that came to mind.



how about a exotic sports car like suspension in comparison to the 350Z's mere sporty suspension? i really would appreciate it if you would stop comparing the 350Z to the GTR...do you really think Nissan would charge people an extra $40K for something that performs the same as the miniscule $30k sporty coupe???


in comparison to what??? if they werent comparing it to the GTR, their opinion is worthless.

yeah, i doubt it will be that much faster in the 1/4 mile than the GT500. this is why people will be buying a $70k sports car instead of a $40k muscle car. cars made for 2 totally different purposes will thus serve 2 totally different purposes.

this statement pretty much sums up your whole argument...

Alright, first of all you can dream about carbon fiber and hybrid awd somehow magically turning a 3,800lb car into a 3,300lb one if you wish, but simple logic tells us otherwise. A standard 350Z with manual transmissions weighs in at over 3,300 lbs when the truth is told. They can weigh a good bit more than that when you add amenities and larger wheels, and carbon fibre or not in the latest Import Racer Mag article regarding The GTR (titled something ridiculous like "Holy Hell:, 400hp") Nissan mentioned that this car would be more luxurious than former GTR's. In other words, all those amenities that add heft to the G35 you mentioned are going right into this car. When you consider that this car is larger than the 350Z as well......3300lbs is just not happening.

And yes, there have been rumours of a possible V-8 instead of a twin turbo 6, etc. As of late however, rumours stress a falling out with Cosworth and mags like Edmunds, Autoweek, Motor Trend, and Import Racer have all most recently reported that an inline-6 seems most likely by far at this point (virtually certain even) and that the hp number will be something like 400. That many people all guessing the exact same thing without somebody planting a bug in their ear.....yeah right.

A few sources have played with the 450hp number, but it is so few in number compared to those reporting less, and so against what Carlos Ghosn said in a speech (as reported by Edmunds) and what the Nissan powers that be inicated in that ridiculous "Holy Hell: 400hp" article, that they can pretty safely be summed up to speculation. That is four magazines, one speech by the CEO of Nissan, and on article interviewing people in the know from Nissan all disagreeing with your pipe-dream 500hp number and strangely agreeing almost lock step with one another. Guess which info I'm going with?

As for my sources, the Edmunds article is from May 23rd, the Import Racer magazine the "Holy Hell" article can be found in is on sale now (can't miss it, look for the only magazine willing to make a big deal out of a near 100k Japanese car making 400hp), and the Motor trend is also on sale now. For reference, the "Holy Hell" article in Import Racer is where Nissan states emphatically that something near 400hp will be it as they don't want to cause problems in some markets (most likely the japanese market). I do expect that the car to be slightly under-rated in keeping with tradition, but if the car is rated at 400hp actual hp will be below 450 without doubt....there is a limit to under-rating. Also, that same article is where Nissan officials state that the interior will be more "luxurious" than previous GTR's. That sure sounds like added weight to me in a car that is larger overall than even the G35 coupe...forget the 350Z. But, to answer your question about hpl no, I didn't talk to Mr. Nissan, the people listed above did.

As for my GT500 info, I get most of it from "The Mustang Source .com", which is by far the most reliable source for upcoming Mustang info anywhere. Of course, I base this assumption on goofy things like the fact that the owner of the site sat between SVT head Hau Tai Tang and Shelby himself at dinner before the NYIAS GT500 unveiling. But, I could see how he could be out of the loop anyway.

Now, lets discuss your sources, since you brought up the subject and as a mod should set an example. First of all, you earlier stated that the GT-R would be a "detuned race car" but that the GT500 was essentially just a muscled-up street thug. Well, I hate to burst your bubble but in actuality the GT500 really is a detuned race car but I have as yet to see any car race in which Nissan was claiming to run a version of the upcoming GT-R's suspension setup. According to SVT and Ford the GT500's suspension is essentially a street-tuned version of what underpins the very successful Grand Am cup Mustang race car. And actually, development of the GT500's suspension on a race track in a competitive series was part of the reason Ford wanted to run grand Am Cup to begin with. Your source for the info stating the GTR's race bred roots and the Mustang lack of racing pedigree was?

Back to hard facts....you know the Grand Am Cup car, the Mustang that regularly thumps 911's, M3's, and Cadillac CTS V-Series sedans running in the same class. And for those out of the know these cars are not tube framed wannabe's, these are converted street cars running race-spec versions of the factory suspensions. That Grand Am Cup car also gives up some hp and a large amount of torque to the GT500, which essentially means that whatever the Grand Am cup car does to the 911, M3, etc...the GT500 should handily to to their street counterparts. when you consider the production-based underpinnings that these cars use. None too shabby for a car mostly designed to go in a straight line wouldn't you say? roflmao

Also, I will gladly stop comparing the GTR to the 350Z when Nissan decides to not base the GT-R on a modified, however heavily, version of that car's chassis. As for your question basically asking wether or not I think Nissan would be willing to under-deliver in terms of hp on a 80k car....where it applies to the Skyline absolutely. The Skyline has always been about handling and it's tuner following, but never about earth shattering power. Even when taking under-rating into consideration the Skyline has just never been a wonder from a hp standpoint in stock trim. An about 400hp car in this generation would signify roughly a 100hp jump over last generation, several cars that cost less than a Skyline have seriously outpowered it in stock trim in the past and nothing indicates this will change now with the new car.

The closer a race track gets to an autocross course, the more advantage the Skyline will have when compared to the GT500. The Nissan's awd will ad an advantage, but not the enormous one indicated in this thread. The GT500 will absolutely thrash the Nissan in terms of sheerpower and nothing but sheer conjecture or wishful thinking indicates otherwise. And, in spite of the fact that the live rear-axle doesn't wow the import crowd on the spec sheet, it works.....and it works very well indeed. To qoute Car and Driver "The GT500's handling is awesome. Turn in was precise and corners accurate and linear. With the new Mustang's elongated wheelbase the big engine's heft is carried mainly between the axles and understeer is minimal".

Or, how about the fact that Car and Driver also mentioned that the ride was still excellent and the car possibly quieter than the standard Mustang GT when cruising. If Nissan resorts to the same kind of ride that makes the Track Model 350Z such a buckboard on rough roads to improve handling further I will be very unimpressed, especially considering that this is a GT.

Again, as the roads get rougher, wetter, or more autcross-like in nature the GTR will gain an advantage. The smoother the road, and the longer the straights, the faster the GT500 is going to get. That awd system had better be beyond magical to overcome what is likely to be a near 100 or more hp disadvantage, and a serious torque disadvantage too, against a car that weighs about the same and that has already proven it can outhandle an E46 M3 on a race track with less hp than the production version will have.

[k3smostwanted]

Originally Posted by jcsaleen

All I care about is RB or VQ - I really want another RB but I really don't think its going to happen.

yeah i doubt it, the RB engine is outdated and the new VQ is a much better engine overall. trust me, im sure the tunability is just a good as the RB and might even be better. when engines get outdated, they get replaced by something newer and more updated. Nissan will use the better engine. life goes on...

i am pretty sure they are offering a VQ30DET as we speak to Japan in teh Gloria or some other cars over there.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by fairladyz_gt-r

Just let me add some more...

The new GT-R is not using the current Z33/V35's chassis, they are using the new FM chassis (front midship). so they are two different car. Until now no one has yet test drive it yet except ppl inside nissan so plz don't say things u don't know, say only what they had already told us

Actually, my understanding is that Nissan is calling this "new" chassis FR-L. I know that the current V35 chassis is often referred to as FM and it is a front-midship design, but the chassis code for the GTR will indeed be FR-L. However, a heavily modified version of what underpins the Skyline is still a heavily modified version of what underpins the Skyline no matter how you say it. So, who is it that knows again?

[k3smostwanted]

Originally Posted by syr74

Alright, first of all you can dream about carbon fiber and hybrid awd somehow magically turning a 3,800lb car into a 3,300lb one if you wish, but simple logic tells us otherwise. A standard 350Z with manual transmissions weighs in at over 3,300 lbs when the truth is know. They can weigh a good bit more than that when you dd amenities and larger wheels, and carbon fibre or not in the latest Import Racer Mag article regarding The GTR (titled something ridiculous like "Holy Hell:, 400hp") Nissan mentioned that this car would be more luxurious and that they had previously used cheaper interior bits and features than some might expect in these cars. In other words, all those amenities that add heft to the G35 you mentioned are going right into this car. When you consider that this car is larger than the 350Z as well......3300lbs is just not happening.

And yes, there have been rumours of a possible V-8 instead of a twin turbo 6, etc. As of late however, rumours stress a falling out with Cosworth and mags like Edmunds, Autoweek, Motor Trend, and Import Racer have all most recently reported that an inline-6 seems most likely by far at this point (virtually certain even) and that the hp number will be something like 400. That many people all guessing the exact same thing.....yeah right. A few sources have played with the 450hp number, but it is so few in number, and so against what Carlos Ghosn said in a speech (as reported by Edmunds) and what the Nissan powers that be inicated in that ridiculous "Holy Hell: 400hp" article they can pretty safely be summed up to speculation. That is five magazines, one speech by the CEO of Nissan, and on article interviewing a Nissan insider all disagreeing with your pipe-dream 500hp number and strangely agreeing almosy lock step with one another. Guess which info I'm going with?

As for my sources, the Edmunds article is from May 23rd, the Import Racer magazine the "Holy Hell" article can be found in is on sale now (can't miss it, look for the only magazine willing to make a big deal out of a near 100k Japanese car making 400hp), and the Motor trend is also on sale now. For reference, the "Holy Hell" article in Import Racer is where Nissan states emphatically that something near 400hp will be it as they don't want to cause problems in some markets (most likely the japanese market). I expect the car to be slightly under-rated, but if the car is rated at 400hp actual hp will be below 450 without doubt. That same article is where Nissan officials state that the interior will be more "luxurious". Sounds like added weight to me. So, in a nutshell no, I didn't talk to Mr. Nissan, they did....lol

As for my GT500 info, I get most of it from "The Mustang Source .com", which is by far the most reliable source for upcoming Mustang info anywhere. Of course, I base this assumption on goofy things like the fact that the owner of the site actually sat between SVT head Hau Tai Tang and Shelby himself at dinner before the NYIAS GT500 unveiling. But, I could see how he could be out of the loop.

Now, lets discuss your sources, since you brought up the subject and as a mod should set an example. First of all, earlier you stated that the GT-R would be a "detuned race car", but that the GT500 was essentially just a muscled-up street thug. Well, hate to burst your bubble but in actuality the GT500 really is a detuned race car, but I have yet to see any car race claiming to run a version of the upcoming GT-R's suspension setup. You see, according to SVT and Ford the GT500's suspension is essentially a sreet tuned version of what underpins the very successful Grand Am cup race car. And actually, development of this suspension was part of the reason Ford wanted to run grand Am cup. Your source for the info staing otherwise was?

But back to facts....you know the car, the Mustang that regularly thumps 911's, M3's, and Cadillac CTS V-Series sedans running in the same class. And, these are not tube framed wannabe's, these are converted street cars running slightly modified versions of factory suspensions. That Grand Am cup car also gives up some hp and a large amount of torque to the GT500, which essentially means that whatever the Grand Am cup car does to the 911, M3, etc...the GT500 should handily to to their street counterparts considering the production-based underpinnings these cars use. None too shabby for a car mostly designed to go in a straight line wouldn't you say. roflmao

Also, I will gladly stop comparing the GTR to the 350Z when Nissan decides to not base the GT-R on a modified, however heavily, version of that car's chassis. As for your question basically asking wether or nopt I think Nissan would be willing to under-deliver on a 80k car.....in terms of hp and where it applies to the Skyline...absolutely. The Skyline has always been about handling and it's tuner following. Even when taking under-rating into consideration the Skyline has never been a wonder from a hp standpoint in stock trim. An about 400hp car in this generation would signify roughly a 100hp jump over last generation, several cars that cost less than a Skyline have seriously outpowered it in stock trim, nothing indicates this will change now.

The closer a race track gets to an autocross course, the more advantage the Skyline will have. In terms of power the GT500 is simply going to walk all over the Skyline, and nothing but sheer conjecture or wishful thinking indicates otherwise. And, in spite of the fact that the live rear-axle doesn't wow the import crowd on the spec sheet, it works. And, it works very well indeed. To qoute Car and Driver "The GT500's handling is awesome. Turn in was precise and corners accurate and linear. With the new Mustang's elongated wheelbase the big engine's heft is carried mainly between the axles and understeer is minimal".

Or, how about the fact that Car and Driver also mentioned that the ride was still excellent and the car possibly quieter than the standard Mustang GT when cruising. If Nissan resorts to the same kind of ride that makes the Track Model 350Z such a buckboard on rough roads to improve handling further I will be very unimpressed, especially considering that this is a GT.

Like I said before, as the roads get rougher, wetter, or more autcross-like in nature the GTR will gain an advantage. The smoother the road, and the longer the straights, the faster the GT500 is going to get. That awd system had better be beyond magical to overcome what is likely to be a near 100 or more hp disadvantage, and a serious torque disadvantage too, against a car that weighs about the same and that has already proven it can outhandle an E46 M3 on a race track with less hp than the production version will have.

look, i really didnt read all of this because i know i have read the facts out of magazines and other credible sources. I am only defending the GTR from anti-nissan enthusiasts. i personally am not a nissan fan-boy and i dont like where they are going with the car. i am simply bringing facts that i have learned over the past months. all my argument rests in the previous 8 pages. i would just be repeating myself all over again if i sat here and explained every comment and how you have no idea what the car is going to be like. we have speculations from magazine articles that tend to be very vague. the only info i have seen out of Goshn mouth is that it will be less than 500hp, this doesnt mean that it isnt going to be 499hp. also, nissan has a knack for underrating their cars a great amount to avoid the higher tax charges and what not in some countries. i have also read and directed an article that i have in a magazine from the Nissan director in charge of design that says it will have 500hp+ to be competitive with its competition.

we will have to wait until all of these speculations come to life. as of right now you comparing a car that has a solid basis of informations supplied by Ford against a car that Nissan seems to be keeping under wraps as long as possible. if you want to keep up and argument for a few more pages about something that doesnt exist be my guest but the bottom line is we will have to wait to give the GTR a fair argument.

if you really think a $40k re-designed $25k car is going to compete with brand new, all new technology, $70k sports car....you may want to re-think your position.

all i can say is that if this holds true...Nissan engineers and designers are a bunch of morons for attempting to rip people off. I am sure this won't happen because we all know, if a manufacturer wants to sell cars, they have to build the car to compete or exceed the standard. for $70k it better perform better than an BMW M3 but not a good as a Porshe 911 Twin Turbo. Nissan doesnt have a strong exotic like sports car background so they will have to build the car to perform that much better to get any chance of selling this car the way they want to sell it. a little common sense will lead you to believe that the GT500 wont have quite the performance as the GTR.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by k3smostwanted

Nissan doesnt have a strong exotic like sports car background so they will have to build the car to perform that much better to get any chance of selling this car the way they want to sell it. a little common sense will lead you to believe that the GT500 wont have quite the performance as the GTR.

You mean the same way a 35k 350Z Track model outperforms a 25k Mustang GT? Oh wait, that's right, it doesn't. A big price tag and a GTR badge don't make a car faster even if it should. In a straight line the GT500 will humble the GTR (the Nissan might edge the Shelby to 60 due to awd....look for the laws of physics to make it all downshill for the GTR from there.) Ther GTR will have an edge in handling, but the race track will have to cater to the GTR to turn that into a win.

You are basing your conslusions on a heritage, a price tag, and the idea that Nissan feels pressure to over-perform. I am basing mine on power and knowledge about the GT500's chassis and suspension. To put it bluntly, you are saying that the GTR will be able to outrun wholesale a E46 BMW M3 that has been infused with roughly 100 more hp and an even greater increase in torque. In light of the fact that the GT500's supension setup has claimed several race track victories over E46 M3's in a car with closer to 400hp than the GT500's 475+ this is an accurate summation.

I have read all that you have said, but I just don't see it.

[k3smostwanted]

Originally Posted by syr74

(the Nissan might edge the Shelby to 60 due to awd....look for the laws of physics to make it all downshill for the GTR from there.) Ther GTR will have an edge in handling, but the race track will have to cater to the GTR to turn that into a win.

and you so sure of this because you have driven both cars, correct? look the bottom line is that we dont know anything about the GTR except speculations. we all know how car manufacturers like to tell us one thing and do another. this keeps other manufactuers from successfully getting a head start on a new idea. its called strategy and getting a head start...and this is what Nissan as been doing for decades.

and about your little physics logic...that is where you are wrong. if you have been reading and knew anything about the new speculations of the new GTR you would have noticed the new AWD system that is unlike any other. this must be the 10th time i have talked about this. drivetrain loss, weight, and all of the other downfalls of a normal AWD system do not apply to this new AWD system. i refuse to repeat myself once again...i have talked about it several times in this thread so just look back or do a little browsing.

You are basing your conslusions on a heritage, a price tag, and the idea that Nissan feels pressure to over-perform. I am basing mine on power and knowledge about the GT500's chassis and suspension.

which has no certain relevance because you are not comparing it to anything, let alone the new GTR. any number you bring into play of the GT500 will not mean anything because we know nothing about the GTR for sure. like i said in an earlier post before this thread was brought back, we will have to re-evaluate this discussion when we have some basic information about the GTR. some of you seem to get on a high horse to brag about the GT500 and what magazine articles say about it. well, those same people have nothing to compare it too. so these points and opinions have no validity when trying to argue that it is going to be better or on par as the GTR.

To put it bluntly, you are saying that the GTR will be able to outrun wholesale a E46 BMW M3 that has been infused with roughly 100 more hp and an even greater increase in torque. In light of the fact that the GT500's supension setup has claimed several race track victories over E46 M3's in a car with closer to 400hp than the GT500's 475+ this is an accurate summation.

no, i said it should...beings we are have a discussion on no apparent data. all we have is speculations. so my speculation is just a good as the next person. i would speculate that the GTR will have better performance than an E46 M3 and less performance than a Porshe 911 Twin Turbo. i used simple logic to come to these terms...simple logic being, if a car built for the same purpose as another with a different price tag. depending on that certain price tag it should be better or worse. our automotive industry revolves around this theory and logical way of thinking.

I have read all that you have said, but I just don't see it.

And I feel the same...If you would feel free to open up a new thread after the New York Auto Show that debuts the new GTR, I would be more than happy to further discuss this debate with you and whoever else feels that I am out of my mind. As for right now, this topic has been beaten to death for 9 pages. I feel that anything you have to say, I can combat with quotes from previous posts of my own. Feel free to post and then go back and read my comments in an earlier posts because I am almost positive anything i say would just be repetitive. You have no basis for a good argument for the simple fact that we "KNOW" asbolutely nothing about the new GTR.

[TatII]

well i don't really have much to say but syr74 stated that the cobra has a history of being underated from the factory. well the same can be said about a GTR. a car that weights 3500lbs and runs a 12.9 in the 1/4 can no way make only 276hp. most GTR are dynoing around 300whp stock. so just because nissan decides to rate it at 475 hp doesn't mean its actually goin to be only 475hp. they just rating it there so that insurance would be easier on the wallet.

and also almost any RB26 powered GTR will beat a E46 M3 stock for stock. the R33's official lap time on the ring is 8:01 second driven by Kurosawa. and hte unofficial lap time for the R34 is around 7:57 seconds. the E46 M3 can't even come close to breaking the 8 minute barrier and not even the M3 CSL can break the 8 minute barrier. the E46 is just too heavy for the race track to be really fast. even a Z33 350Z track model will lap just as fast as the M. and the RB powered GTR's will run circles around it. remember the car is very underated so the M3 won't even have a top end advantage over it. the Z33 350Z weights 3200lbs. and the 18 inch alloys made by rays engineering is actually lighter then the 17 inch alloys used for the base model.

[kman10587]

and about your little physics logic...that is where you are wrong. if you have been reading and knew anything about the new speculations of the new GTR you would have noticed the new AWD system that is unlike any other. this must be the 10th time i have talked about this. drivetrain loss, weight, and all of the other downfalls of a normal AWD system do not apply to this new AWD system. i refuse to repeat myself once again...i have talked about it several times in this thread so just look back or do a little browsing.

I'm a big fan of all-wheel-drive (in fact, I just bought a new Impreza 2.5 RS, I'll have pics in my sig soon), and I know quite a bit about it, and this just sounds wrong to me. There is no such thing as a free lunch; if you want the added traction of sending power to all four wheels, there must be some sort of drawback. There may be no additional drivetrain loss, but those advanced electric motors are still taking up weight, and they're certainly adding to the cost of the car. And even though Nissan has used them on other cars before over in Japan, I doubt they'll be without a few glitches at first. No matter which way you cut it, when traction isn't an issue, all-wheel-drive is doing jack shit for you. (Disclaimer: I am not in any way, shape, or form defending the Mustang or bashing the Nissan; I'm just replying to one individual comment that caught my eye.)

[k3smostwanted]

Originally Posted by kman10587

I'm a big fan of all-wheel-drive (in fact, I just bought a new Impreza 2.5 RS, I'll have pics in my sig soon), and I know quite a bit about it, and this just sounds wrong to me. There is no such thing as a free lunch; if you want the added traction of sending power to all four wheels, there must be some sort of drawback. There may be no additional drivetrain loss, but those advanced electric motors are still taking up weight, and they're certainly adding to the cost of the car. And even though Nissan has used them on other cars before over in Japan, I doubt they'll be without a few glitches at first. No matter which way you cut it, when traction isn't an issue, all-wheel-drive is doing jack shit for you. (Disclaimer: I am not in any way, shape, or form defending the Mustang or bashing the Nissan; I'm just replying to one individual comment that caught my eye.)

yes, you have a point but this is the beauty of Electronic AWD. it can easily be monitored by a computer much like the Acura RL and Anti-Lock Brake Systems. it only is activated when needed or at the push of a button. the only draw-back i see is cost and the weight. but the weight of it is so insignificant that removing the spare tire could make up for the weight of the electronic motors. the cost...who cars? anyone spending $75k on a car isnt going to care if it was a few grand cheaper. as for gliches, we will have to wait and see. we cant say there will be and we cant say there wont be...

you have to remember the advantages are much stronger than the disadvantage of adding an extra 50lbs worth of electronic motors. with an electronic AWD system instead of your standard Mechanical, you do not think there will be some easy way to easily switch off the system while testing top speed?

i remember reading that it will be a very complex system that actually can enable the car to add more power to the front right wheel than left or vise-versa.

so once again, to repeat what i have already said...the downfalls of this system are GREATLY overcome by the positives of the system. of course, if you want AWD you have to make some sacrifices but in this case the sacrifices or very minute that it will only help the car in every sense of the term performance.

negatives:
-it will probably add a little weight to the car (not enough to even consider a disadvantage)
-it is technological advanced so gliches may be a problem that nissan will have to fix
-it made add a little more to the already high price tag (chipping in a few extra grand isnt going to hurt anyones pocket that already has the money to spend on the car)

positives:
-no drivetrain loss
-can be switched on and off for different types of driving where a RWD car would have an advantage
-can transfer more power between sides of the car
-all advantages of a standard AWD system
-its lighter than a standard AWD system
-etc

[syr74]

Originally Posted by k3smostwanted

and you so sure of this because you have driven both cars, correct? look the bottom line is that we dont know anything about the GTR except speculations. we all know how car manufacturers like to tell us one thing and do another. this keeps other manufactuers from successfully getting a head start on a new idea. its called strategy and getting a head start...and this is what Nissan as been doing for decades.

and about your little physics logic...that is where you are wrong. if you have been reading and knew anything about the new speculations of the new GTR you would have noticed the new AWD system that is unlike any other. this must be the 10th time i have talked about this. drivetrain loss, weight, and all of the other downfalls of a normal AWD system do not apply to this new AWD system. i refuse to repeat myself once again...i have talked about it several times in this thread so just look back or do a little browsing.


which has no certain relevance because you are not comparing it to anything, let alone the new GTR. any number you bring into play of the GT500 will not mean anything because we know nothing about the GTR for sure. like i said in an earlier post before this thread was brought back, we will have to re-evaluate this discussion when we have some basic information about the GTR. some of you seem to get on a high horse to brag about the GT500 and what magazine articles say about it. well, those same people have nothing to compare it too. so these points and opinions have no validity when trying to argue that it is going to be better or on par as the GTR.

no, i said it should...beings we are have a discussion on no apparent data. all we have is speculations. so my speculation is just a good as the next person. i would speculate that the GTR will have better performance than an E46 M3 and less performance than a Porshe 911 Twin Turbo. i used simple logic to come to these terms...simple logic being, if a car built for the same purpose as another with a different price tag. depending on that certain price tag it should be better or worse. our automotive industry revolves around this theory and logical way of thinking.

And I feel the same...If you would feel free to open up a new thread after the New York Auto Show that debuts the new GTR, I would be more than happy to further discuss this debate with you and whoever else feels that I am out of my mind. As for right now, this topic has been beaten to death for 9 pages. I feel that anything you have to say, I can combat with quotes from previous posts of my own. Feel free to post and then go back and read my comments in an earlier posts because I am almost positive anything i say would just be repetitive. You have no basis for a good argument for the simple fact that we "KNOW" asbolutely nothing about the new GTR.

Actually, I find it kind of ironic that you claim "we" know nothing about the GTR so any assumptions I make are pointless, but then you point out characteristics of the cars upcoming awd system as fact. You state definatively that parasitic loss, weight gain and all the other issues that go along with awd don't apply here, but if "we" know nothing about the GTR how do you know this? It becomes more ironic with each post, as you readily cite how any theories I may draw are baseless due to a lack of info, but then always seem to point out how obvious it is that the GTR will be the faster car based on info we know. Not trying to start a ruckus, but which is it?

That said, I read all the posts in this thread, and can only surmise from your statements that you find your argument so compelling I must have missed it to disagree. I indeed read it, and I indeed disagree anyway. This awd system may well be better than some or most others, but it will still have drawbacks, because there really is no free lunch in this world as somebody else stated.

The awd system may not add as much weight as the typical awd system, but it will add weight simply due to the fact that more equipment is needed to drive four wheels than two. Parasitic drag may be minimized, but driving four wheels absolutely creates more parasitic drag than driving two so there will be more of this as well when compared to an awd car. 9to be fair you own up to this somewhat in your most recent post)

My conclusions and assumptions are based on what we have seen from Nissan recently, what we have seen from Nissan in regard to the GTR specifically through history, and what we know about the upcoming model and what we can surmise from conjecture. Anything anybody says is conjecture, but that would be the point of this thread, now wouldn't it?