c40carbon

Hi everyone,

As everyone already knows, it has been announced by Nissan that new GTR's 0-60 time is 3.5.
997tt's (with tip) 0-60 time is 3.4 by utilizing torque-braking (Build the boost by applying the brake and gas at the same time. When the boost builds, let go off the brake.)

Does anyone know if GTR's time (3.5) was achieved by the same (torque- breaking or some kind of launch control like M5) ?

ulysses

I am in love with the new GT-R, but the 0-60 and 1/4 mile just doesn't make any sense:

The F430 and 911 Turbo have the same Bhp, significantly lighter and higher torque than the GT-R. The 911tt is 4WD as well.


http://www.supercars.net/Comp?source...3842-2992-3429


Am I missing out something here or is Nissan making unrealistic claims?

Can someone enlighten?

ghotnit

I agree that the times are confusing but I watched a video on You Tube on how much of an advantage the DSG or dual clutch gives in acceleration. They were racing a Volkswagen with the DSG tranny against cars that had more power and the VW was consistently beating them fairly well by at least a couple of lengths. We will find out when the car is tested how fast it really is but it seems that the “DSG” type tranny is cutting the time because the shifting is so fast compared to the manual Porsche and it may be making up time on the Ferrari because of the better launch traction. Just my guess.
Check out this link to see the advantages of a DSG/Dual clutch tranny it'll amaze you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmMNRQ1GJ3o

anonymous_

If you read his post you will see that the times for the 997tt is with the Tiptronic S, which is a sequential and not manual gearbox, and the F430 is with the F1 sequential made with Ferrari F1 racing expertise. So I would bet they are on par with the DSG.

ghotnit

Yes, but after driving Tiptronic style cars, they do not shift like a manual. They actually shift pretty slow. They are still automatics that give you a bit of manual control and do not shift as fast as the DSG style tranny. Plus you still lose the same amount of power as you do in an auto tranny because you are still going through a viscous torque converter as opposed to the direct connection that a manual or DSG type tranny gives you. I know that there isn't a lot of time saved with the shifting because to 60 you probably have 1 shift and through the 1/4 mile you may have 2 or 3 shifts but if you launch better, save 1/2 a tenth with each shift (remember Nissan is claiming some really fast shift times) and get the power down quicker, it is posible to gain some time. Then again, it could be someting like the gear ratios. There are many ways to gain a tenth here and there to 60. Again, I was guessing as to why the times were lower in the GTR compared to lighter cars with the same power rating. We don't really know that they are. We will find out when the cars are tested.

sleepystarz

Hello everyone, first post I think?

I'm anxiously awaiting arrival of the new GT-R like most others on this forum and really hope the hype is real.

Just wanted to mention about the paddle-shift tranny. A Ferrari 575 maranello I ride in and have driven shifts at 100 milliseconds. Nissan is claiming 200 milliseconds for the GT-R. I will definately say the Ferrari is no BS and certainly feels like a 1/10 second shift Hearing the Ring video of the GT-R it does sound like somewhere around 2/10 second shift like they claimed. These paddle-shift trannys are really cool (esp. downshift rev matching). If you haven't experienced one yet, please don't pass judgement until doing so.

I'm still a big fan of traditional boxes and the joy of heel-toe but the new GT-R will be a fast tool for a wider audience at the track. I for one can't wait to see how she laps

Billy

TwiBlueG35

I feel strange also that GT-R is several hundreds pounds heavier than the Ferrari F430 and Porsche 911 Turbo and yet gets a similar 0-60mph time, AWD sure helps GT-R a bit for traction against the RWD F430, but 911 Turbo is also AWD but lighter with similar torque output. Weird. Have to see the other magazines testing out the car.

bonzelite

The R35's chassis and driveline act as one unit to:

1) balance weight distribution from front to rear

2) create literal downforce over each contact patch area of the front and rear tires by using the front engine and rear transaxle as weights to literally minimize rearward weight transfer normally encountered in traditional cars.

Under acceleration, then, the chassis does not hunker down onto the rear tires as in all other cars; both front or rear wheel drive cars experience rearward weight transfer under hard launching.

This effect is highly minimized in the R35's geometry.


The flat profile of the acceleration upon the chassis keeps ALL 4 tires in maximum contact with the pavement.

Add to this:

AWD
DSG

= very quick acceleration with maximum power to the ground = "physics defying" 0-60 times

smg944

its always come down to power to weight ratio. but with the right gearing, awd and all 0-60 can be moved around alot. look at the porsche compared to the others. significant power to weight difference but the 0-60 is great. however it does suffer on high speeds. i.e 1/4 mile trap speed. i dont doubt the gt-r will do 0-60 in 3.5s now the 1/4 trap speed is another story.

auto 997 turbo curb weight 3572 / 480 bhp = 7.44 lbs per hp 0-60 in 3.3s 1/4 in 11.6 @ 118

f1 f430 curb weight 3190 / 483 bhp = 6.60 lbs per hp 0-60 in 3.5s 1/4 in 11.7 @ 120

c6 z06 curb weight 3147 / 505 bhp = 6.23 lbs per hp 0-60 in 3.6s 1/4 in 11.8 @ 122

nissan gt-r curb weight 3800 / 480 bhp = 7.91 lbs per hp 0-60 3.5s? 1/4 in high 11's maybe 116 ish trap.

bonzelite

This argument has been made before and it's not entirely correct. I just said why in my prior post and you have ignored that.