rev210

the words 'cheap' ,'reliable' & 'fast'. You can only choose 2 of the 3. As they say "the dream is dead, get a real job"

Agree. Several built motor R32's over east for sale at the moment.

grabbed this info to add... Holiday Auto has been hard at work putting together a 10 page article exploring the new GT-R’s engine, chassis, driveline and interior features, some of which is old news by now but included nonetheless. We’re told that Nissan was in fact looking at a V8 engine to use in the GT-R in its early stages of development but found that the VK45 from the Nissan President wasn’t an engine worthy of the ‘R’ in the GT-R’s badge. Although it could satisfy the power, torque and driveability deemed necessary for the GT-R, the way in which it delivered those attributes was more befitting of a large saloon than a GT car. There was also a status problem, the VK45 being associated with Nissan’s luxury sedan would cause problems with potential GT-R buyers who were looking for more exclusivity… well exclusivity is what they got. The VR38VETT Holiday Auto broke the news about the existence of a VR based GT-R engine last month, and since then has gone one further and given us a actual alphanumeric designation: VR38VETT. The VR38 is actually a recreation of the famed VRH35L V8 powering the R390 Le Mans car albeit in V6 form. A lot of knowledge gained from Group C and endurance racing has allowed Nissan to take the performance aspect of the GT-R that little bit further (over say, a VQ based engine) by taking the basic design of the VR38 and using it for the new GT-R’s V6 engine block and cylinder heads. A surprising feature of the twin turbo system is the ‘Integrated Exhaust Manifold Turbine’ where the exhaust manifold and turbo exhaust housing are formed as one piece. We’re told this is for weight saving, packaging and high response and was chosen over the more costly ‘motor assisted twin turbo system’ that was predicted way back in mid-2004. What all this has resulted in is an engine design that could be viewed as two 1.9L straight 3-cylinder DOHC turbo engines joined by a common crankshaft, with separate intake manifolds and throttle bodies for each bank. The intake manifold is actually the centerpiece of the engine bay, its intake runners being used as a design feature of the VR38VETT as shown in the CG mock up image shown below. Cosworth’s involvement in the GT-R’s engine development has been mentioned before on many occasions but until now there hasn’t been much information on what they’ve actually done. Holiday Auto tells us the GT-R’s aluminum engine block is a ‘monoblock’ design, meaning it doesn’t use sleeves inside each cylinder bore so that the pistons make direct contact with the block. Cosworth has also reduced the weight of the crankshaft, conrods and pistons to achieve maximum response and a free revving nature that belies its larger 3.8L capacity. It comes as a surprise too that the whole engine looks a lot shorter than what you would expect a 3.8L engine to be, its compact design and light weight being a major contributing factor in the cars overall balance. Many other parts such as the cam covers, timing chain cover, oil pan and a multitude of bolts, screws and washers are all made of magnesium. The GT-R will also use a semi-wet sump system which can handle higher g-forces over a traditional wet sump which start to suffer from ‘oil sloshing’ at around 1.8g. As pointed out in our previous article, the power delivery of the VR38VETT is extremely linear and does not drop off after hitting maximum power at 6,800rpm which was a big factor in proceeding with the development of an all new engine. From as little as 1,500rpm a powerful surge can be felt with - what seems like - all 480ps available with very little throttle application. It has been said that there are very few people with enough skill to drive the new GT-R at its limit, this limit being so high that a driver of average skill level would never be able to test the boundaries of the GT-R’s performance… this could possibly be an exaggeration on Holiday Auto’s part, but the point has been made clear: the new GT-R is every bit a Supercar.

No I heard it was 2500kgs and only has a briggs and stratton lawnmower engine!!!!!!!!

http://www.gtrnissan.com/ makes refference to the r33 sub 8minute for those interested

Great to have you on the forum, great to get your always pro-holden/V8/anti-skyline comments and opinions, like everyone you are entitled to your veiws As for the R33 GTR sub 8 minute time, that one is official and actually claimed by Nissan themselves, they even advertise it (something you don't do without something official time wise or five pages of disclaimer). The last place I saw it was on the new GTR site. But, hey if the idea of a GTR actually being a great car sickens you, then please tell us all about it, after all this is a skyline forum

Hi, just trying to point out that at speed the airbox gets air 'rammed' into the air box, they are designed to capture a positive pressure inside. They are also designed in this way with considerations similar to a plenum from memory, the volume of the air chamber in front of the panel filter. I think enlarging this volume might also be handy for larger power. Someone very clever may be able to explain this better. With the baffle box off and the connecting pipe (elbow going into the baffle box) just turned around to face forward, my old GTR didn't have any problems making 276rwkw with the bonnet down. It made that power very easy. I think it's great that you are out there giving the feedback of your tests, the more info we have the better. Top stuff mate

you might need some shims and you ought to get some new cam bearing studs/bolts but, otherwise no clearance issues if you are reffering to the tomei ones.

I can see your logic and I'd be inclined to think the same if you are using the baffle box. However ,how well cold air gets to the pods with the bonnet down and the effects of aerodynamics on pressure based feed will effect things very significantly. It really needs a test to be conclusive. Not a good idea in general to tune with the bonnet up, ok for initial curve but, you are missing a significant amount of road going resolution if you finished the tune bonnet up.

bonnet down on those tests? If not , we aren't anywhere.

You can't have a nitrous kit ,even without the bottle on the road legally in WA. If the police sight the fittings you are getting a sticker. Insurance will be null and void as well. hope that helps.

it's a special one. It has the very rare ceramic wheel feature and an inscription that says " please insert nitrous"

it wasn't the nitrous at fault of course. Go back to a stock turbo and punch 300hp worth of gas into it for the 9. Get some NUTS!

Sorry to say I have a 1997 series 1.5 not the M35. Good news about the satnav for perth people though.

Can't find the time for a stocker R34 GTR or Evo around the nurburgring but, given the old Cayman S (same motor) is 20 seconds slower than the stock 1995 R33 GTR around the ring (made worse by the fact that tyre technology has come a fair way since) I'd say the povo' boxter is going to have it's ass handed to it. Yes it handles and brakes well, just is underpowered. It needs some Ruff help or something, as you have barely got the oomph of a fairly stock gtst (not a fast car either). A friend owned the previous model of the Boxter S and it's impressive brakes and handling didn't make up for the faggy accelleration and the fact that his car spent an awfull lot of time being fixed at the dealers. I think I missed the point you are trying to make. How are you not keeping up with traffic? Clearly if you know how to drive you can reach and maintain the speed limit without behaving like a bus? I seem to manage in an old 7 seater deisel 4wd. Are you in Germany with a driveway onto the autobarhn? The Evo X seems to have plenty of torque for you anyway so it's all good

The golf is a girls car. compared to the evo and GTR it's a performance slug. The boxter is a posers car ( it has a bigger wanker/wannabe factor ) and it's a performance slug. The evo or GTR are both easy enough to drive every day like the other two and actually go. As for lack of torque to keep up with traffic for the Evo, that's utter rubbish if you are being remotely sensible. It's like 90% of the rest of the cars on the road ie: lancers, corollas and pulsars. Who cares if you beat everyone off the line at the lights, in some sort of " I'm not really trying to race you but, I am..." idiot fest. People who drive like that need to be put in a wheelie bin, set on fire and pushed into an unused mine shaft

As you initially asked, it is wise to listen 'only' to those who own or have owned a GTR to give a better picture of reality. I see some comments already that reflect a lack of actual experience. But like everything people have opinions and are entitled to them. I have owned a few skylines and I can confidently assert that out of all of them the R32 GTR was the car I loved to drive most. I miss it still and after trying to fool myself with a stagea for 3 months I'm getting another one. You don't spend money to 'save money' when it comes to performance cars. Ask yourself 'why' you spend the money in the first place and then go with it. It's the reason that matters most. So when you are ready bugger off the GTST and get the R33 GTR you really want.

Just remember to skip the pressure plate upgrade and you will be fine for pedal effort, thats what determines it.

Depending on what mods you do to the GTR , the clutch that Ross does at Auto clutch in Osborne Park is very good. If you are leaving the engine with mild 300rwkw-ish power then one of those centre sprung 8 puck metal/ceramic units with just a standard new pressure plate will work nicely. A mistake many make with the clutch is to upgrade the clamping force when the only issue is with the heat/friction capabillity of the clutch friction plate. The factory clamping pressure is quite reasonable, the GTR isn't a 3 pot pizza car afterall. A good chrome molly flywheel is also worth bunging in. It will at least reduce some of the strain on the gearbox shifts and keep the old clunker box syncros in slightly better shape as it increases accelleration. They are also a damn side stronger & harder faced than the cast iron stock flywheel so as to suit the more aggressive metal/ceramic friction material.

The compressor wheel is not the problem, both turbo's have a ceramic turbine wheel (the part the breaks).

aircon on this one at all?

If you are running a stock turbo or anything under 220rwkw (bonnet down) then there is no 'safety issue'.

A few guys I know have run low 13 and even high 12s with a standard R33 intercooler. Not R34 upgrades, on the stock turbo. Doesn't seem that useless to me? The r34 core is proven to flow efficiently to 220rwkw, so you can make over 200rwkw if you like. My last R34 intercooler cost me $80.

$200 on an R34 intercooler is very little money and still cheaper than a fmic, on a stock turbo or hiflow with power levels upto 220rwkw or so. So you can ask "why spend another $300 for cop bait, extra weight and more often than not, no extra performance?" Then again be a bolt on boy and follow the sheep? Who cares it's all good.

The answer is you can make 200rwkw on the stock unit. The R34 intercooler is a bolt in and will give you some more headroom for a tad more power. Water spray is not needed at all on the stock turbo unless you have some sustained thrashing involved but, none the less is of benifit to any size intercooler.