Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

someone please explain to me a few things.

1) Why this R32 was a whisker away from lapping the ring faster than the BRAND NEW R35?..15 years ago!

2) Why is it a car that is more over 15 years old can do that?

and

3) What it says about the current car

7.38* -- 161.628 km/h -- Nissan GT-R, *company test driver Suzuki, www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=123066?tid=edmunds.il.home.photopanel..1.*#40

7.38.56 - 161.578 km/h -- Nissan R32 GT-R

http://youtube.com/watch?v=mqjnwbji13k
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ummmm, it tells me that the R32 was definately not Stock! :P

Here is a nice list:

http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?viewThrea...0&tID=10073

Looks like the same list you got it from infact!

Interesting that even the 1001hp Veyron is whipped by the R35

7:40 --- 161.217 km/h – Bugatti 16/4 Veyron, 1001 PS/1980 kg (Wheels magazine Australia, 12/05)

Though wheels were probably babying it.....

Edited by GTS4nMore
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/#findComment-3435019
Share on other sites

The honour roll: 10 fastest production cars at the Nordschleife (rounded to the nearest second):

Pagani Zonda F Clubsport: 7min 28sec

Porsche Carrera GT: 7:28

Porsche 997 GT 2: 7:32

Koenigsegg CCR: 7:34

Nissan GT-R prototype: 7:38

Mercedes SLR McLaren: 7:40

Porsche 911 Turbo: 7:40

Bugatti Veyron: 7:40

Corvette Z06: 7:42

Porsche 911 GT3: 7:42

i dont see no r32 there

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/#findComment-3435021
Share on other sites

aha...

the P901 Project (codename for R32 GTR from back in April 1987) was tweaked and tuned at Nurburgring to beat the Porsche 944 (sound familiar?)... and on the 10th of October 1988 it made a best time of 8 minutes 20 seconds... beating the Porsche which was timed at 8 minutes 45 seconds.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/#findComment-3435076
Share on other sites

The R33 GTR was the first production car to do sub 8mins. R32 got no where near it. But the sub 8min was never officially confirmed.

It was actually confirmed officially by nissan at the time. It's really only rumours recently (due to revised talk about skylines all over the net) disputing this fact doing the rounds that it wasn't officially confirmed.

I remember seeing it again recently on some sort of official Nissan literature and it's on the Nissan GTR launch website as well.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/#findComment-3435461
Share on other sites

Here is an interesting proposition though.

On A PURE POWER TO WEIGHT RATIO BASIS:

We have 1750 (odd kg) / 353 kw (flywheel) for the R35 - GTR which costs anywhere from 80,000 - 160,000 AUD new.

So we could assume (and yes this is the contentious part) that we have a drivetrain loss of approximately 15 %

So now we have 1750 Kg / 300 Kw (at the wheels) which yields 5.83 Kg per kilowatt (at the wheels)

The power required of an R32 GTR to meet this is 1500 Kg / 5.83 = 257.3 Kw (at the wheels)

Far as I know this figure should be pretty easily achievable (most probably on standard internals too). Further it could be done quite cheaply.

So forgetting the fact that most R32's are getting pretty tired and the fact that you would likely be KILLED on top speed (we have not compared drag ratios) as well as cornering and Braking (unless you have spent the time and money and have these covered too.

I reckon 260-280 awkw for an ol R32 is less than ~$15000 away (assuming engine don't go boom which it may).

Purchase price of $25,000 (we after a pretty good example). Total cost of R32 GTR @ 260+ awKW = $40,000 and surely this is a conservative estimate!

Something to think about anyway...

My point is, I suppose that an R32 GTR is STILL a performance bargain if you have the dedication (obsession?) to keep it in good nick.

A good 280 awkw R32 GTR vs stock R35 GTR drag is required!

i'm just jealus.. :P - I WANT ONE

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/#findComment-3446957
Share on other sites

yeah this r35 11.7 second quarter got me thinking how much do i need to do to get my 32 to beat it in a drag.

i was contempt in my belief that although only by a lil bit the 32 had the quickest quarter mile out of all the gtr's, then they had to go and bring in this new 1 and screw that up for me. Thanks Mr Nissan.

have to wait and see what a modified r35 can bust down the quarter and if its up to the challenge of the crazy times 32's have put down over the years

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/#findComment-3446983
Share on other sites

WTH.

That thing is ugly.

I don't even think you could call it a car.

Oh yes, it's a car alright.

All that from only 2.6 litres, without a turbo in sight either.

Ugly? Mmmm riiiight. That's the most important thing afterall, isn't it?

The ultimate track day weapon, bar none. not much good for taking the kids to school, or doing the shopping though. An R35 GTR would be fine for those duties.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/#findComment-3448182
Share on other sites

That thing is ugly. I don't even think you could call it a car.

So are R33s. But what invalidates the R33 GT-R's 7:59 "production car" time is the slicks, removal of speed limiter, and non-standard boost....not its looks.

It can be road registered in its country of origin. Its built in production volumes. Your dislike of it doesn't get rid of the facts.

Yes, there are plenty of countries where the car can't be road registered. But then, the Enzo and Veyron can't be road registered in Australia. The Porsche 959 couldn't be registered in the US. Yet the times they pull would still be considered valid.

Yes its a track day special. But then so is a M3 CSL or 911 GT3 RS etc and no-one would disregard their results just because they're "track day" specials.

Yes they're also very compromise on the road. But then again, so is your typical supercar like the Zonda, as Top Gear showed:

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZdU-d9RL0A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuI0OPavDn0

The Radical SR8 is the fastest road legal car around the Nordschleife that you can buy straight off the showroom floor, assuming you've got the balls to drive it that hard.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/190796-r32-vs-r35/#findComment-3452826
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...