R32 Was A Bigger Step Forward Than R35

[hitoriko]

while were on the subject why dont you compare f1 cars on the mid 80s and todays?

while the r35 will be a great car in its own right it hasn't made any giant leaps consider this when the r32 was released it was the japan flagship car it launched japanese motoring into the world stage, previously it was only the likes of Italy, USA, Germany etc.. that were recognised when this car hit the race track it was a kick up the ass to everyone to take notice that japan knew what it was doing! then you had the rx7 13b/t/tt, hondas VTEC, Mits EVO, Toyotas supra TT (which was the only real challenger in the TT arena with the r32) all these companys started pumping out awesome cars and since then i dont think anyone has done it better

I love japanese cars and i wouldn't buy any of those euro cars, the raw feel of the GTR is exactly what you want

but thas just me

[sh@un]

But the thing is, the 32 was compared to "supercars" of the time, although the term hardly existed in 1989. It wasn't until mclaren f1, jag xj220, bugatti eb110 etc came along in the 90s that people talked about supercars.

o rly?

the term supercar came about in the 60's for the Lamborghini Miura. the 1987 F40 not 'supercar' enough for ya?!- tell me how many cars since then have had a power-to-weight ratio of better than 440hp/tonne from the factory (and not forgetting it was the first road-legal production car to top 200mph)

Long live the R32 GTR

i'm sure it will, just as soon as that pesky bottom end is rebuilt ....

[sh@un]

The lower unsprung weight of the 35 would make it far superior in traction, for braking, for accelerating and for cornering

Gary, do you think the r35 will have lower unsprung weight, or just a lower relative weight?

how could it possibly have lower unsprung mass with wheels that are 4 inches bigger (and wider) and brakes that are 80mm greater in diameter front and rear, with bigger calipers?

[funkymonkey]

if you ask me the R32 was just the melting pot of a whole bunch of technological advancements Nissan had made in the time... HICAS, ATTESA, ECCS, RB's all were innovations that did not start with the R32.

By that theory the R35 is a much larger step in evolution than the old R32 GTR, as it features more innovations which were not found in any other model before it.

[scathing]

how could it possibly have lower unsprung mass with wheels that are 4 inches bigger (and wider) and brakes that are 80mm greater in diameter front and rear, with bigger calipers?

Aluminium suspension arms is about all I can think of. Those things count towards your unsprung weight, I believe. I read somewhere that the more inboard the suspension is mounted, the lower the effective unsprung mass (for the same actual mass of the components).

And yes, Nissan hasn't gone the ceramic brake route yet (according to Wheels). Since ceramic brakes tend to be 20% lighter, if they did go there they might have lighter brakes even though they're physically larger, or at least the same weight.

[Bumblebee]

rebuild the bottom end???

theres nothing wrong with mine

More innovations?? like what?

it doesnt have anything, that the other didnt have.. and what car had HICAS, ATTESA b4 the R32??? No1 as far as i knew

[Beer Baron]

There comparing the r35 to a koenigg (spelling?) which takes it to levels the r32 never got to.

In standard form there's nothing that special about an R32.

try telling that to people in 1989. you'd be laughed out of town. think back to what other makers were doing in 1989. then you have the GTR which could run 12 second quarters out of the box, run to 260km/h+, had great brakes, handling the whole package, and was amazingly tunable and versatile. In standard form a 32 GTR is a very exciting car.

[Beer Baron]

having said that the R35 is a very big leap forward. but these days we have cars like the veyron etc that are just out of this world. and other makers like porche, bmw etc have not been standing still either.

I think it's a big leap in packaging and marketing that's for sure. and in value for money too it's amazing. I would perhaps say it's an equally large leap forward for nissan sports cars.

[dangerous_daveo]

Well lets look back a wee bit.

Both cars nothing new that Nissan has ENTIRELY come up with themselfs. I mean, forms of the attessa system had already been around, 4ws nothing new , twin turbos nothing new, etc etc so thats the R32 out of the way. Sure it was a great car and that. Then this new thing. Same deal, whats that new about it? I mean for nissan its probably a big step forward, but they got the frenchies involved now. No doubt if it does well you will see a frenchie version come out fairly shortly after. Once again, not saying its a bad car, but I think by the time it actually gets out here its value for money isnt going to be all that good.

My oppinion at least.

[Sydneykid]

how could it possibly have lower unsprung mass with wheels that are 4 inches bigger (and wider) and brakes that are 80mm greater in diameter front and rear, with bigger calipers?

I haven't weighed the 35GTR stuff yet, obviously I have weighed the 32GTR stuff plenty of times. But I have weighed the V35 stuff and it is way lighter than the 34GTT, 33GTST and 32GTS stuff. Based on what the V35 stuff weighs I would say the 35GTR will have a similar advantage. There is some heavy stuff in a 32GTR, for a starter those front uprights are damn heavy. The alloy centres on the 35GTR rotors bring the weight down more than enough to compensate for the extra diameter, especially when you consider the actual pad swept radii.

So my guess would be a lower unsprung in total , but I have no doubt that the ratio of sprung to unsprung is far more favourable.

Cheers

Gary

[TurboX]

Interesting Nissan have taken the Porsche 928 Transaxel format to compensate for the poor (front biased) front to back weight ratio

which seems on face value to be one of the only negative aspects of the 2007 GTR.

The overall weight seems to be another issue but I suspect there will be a lighter more track oriented model later...

[Duncan]

lighter sure gary, but weaker too. those v35/z33 control arms are made of tin foil. I reckon anyone racing them will need plenty of spares.

[Sydneykid]

lighter sure gary, but weaker too. those v35/z33 control arms are made of tin foil. I reckon anyone racing them will need plenty of spares.

Why? You planning on running into one to test the relative (32 vs 35) strength

At least they have a ball joint on the top of the front uprights, no bush wear problem there.

How much caster do you want? Just pull the bottom frontwards and the top rearwards, no loss of drive shaft angle.

Big advantage.

Cheers

Gary

[scathing]

Interesting Nissan have taken the Porsche 928 Transaxel format to compensate for the poor (front biased) front to back weight ratio

which seems on face value to be one of the only negative aspects of the 2007 GTR.

What's wrong with a transaxle? A lot of exotica (like the new Maserati Gransport) as well as race cars (including Nissan's championship winning JGTC R34 and FairladyZ cars) run transaxles, so it can't be that bad a thing.

This is a genuine question. I have no idea what the cons are for locating your gearbox back there (especially if you're running something fly-by-wire and so you don't get the vaguaries of running long and convoluted cables back there) so I'd appreciate the input.

[funkymonkey]

it doesnt have anything, that the other didnt have.. and what car had HICAS, ATTESA b4 the R32??? No1 as far as i knew

HICAS - R31 skyline, a31 cefiro, s13 silvia

ATTESA - bluebird, mid4

all came well before the R32

the thing about Nissan's GTR's and other sports cars is that they give the same performance and technologies of more expensive exotic cars (like the porsche's or the audi's) at a much lower price bracket. the R32 GTR did it back in the day with the old porsche, and now the new GTR is doing the same.

What I meant with there being more innovations in the R35 is limited to the Nissan world. the R32 took a lot of concepts from other cars in Nissan's stables and basically sported the cream of the crop. The R35 on the other hand has been designed almost completely different to its stable mates... no other car in the Nissan stable has the same technology (although I'm sure if the GTR is a success then successive models will carry similar technologies).

[Sydneykid]

What's wrong with a transaxle? A lot of exotica (like the new Maserati Gransport) as well as race cars (including Nissan's championship winning JGTC R34 and FairladyZ cars) run transaxles, so it can't be that bad a thing.

This is a genuine question. I have no idea what the cons are for locating your gearbox back there (especially if you're running something fly-by-wire and so you don't get the vaguaries of running long and convoluted cables back there) so I'd appreciate the input.

There is really only one reason, to improve the weight distriibution. In a race situation the gearbox runs a bit cooler due to distance from the engine, particularly with 2 turbos right in front of it, one on each side. It is also an advantage, weight distribution wise, when you can run the transmission cooler at the rear together with its pump.

Cheers

Gary

[scathing]

There is really only one reason, to improve the weight distriibution.

In a race situation the gearbox runs a bit cooler due to distance from the engine, particularly with 2 turbos right in front of it, one on each side. It is also an advantage, weight distribution wise, when you can run the transmission cooler at the rear together with its pump.

So his "negative" isn't really a negative at all. It means Nissan can avoid blowing out the cost of the car by running a lot of exotic materials in the front end to bring the weight down while complying with modern crash safety requirements, while making the gearbox more durable due to its distance from a massive heat source.

[mesmerized]

i think you guys are pretty hard to please. correct me if i'm wrong, but the only production car that will be available in australia that has recorded a faster time around the nurburgring is a Porsche 997 GT2 2008... which costs how much??

and wasn't the 7.38 time done in what will be the base model gtr??

what will the new gtr have to do to be a 'bigger step forward'??

[MK2]

People have to remember the era that the R32GTR came out in, add to that the other cars running around at the time, the 300ZX, Supra, GTO, FD RX7 and NSX where as much a product of the super strong Japanese Yen as they where at the time cutting edge 'super cars'. Because the companies where just rolling in cash and there was massive amounts of money to be sunk into R&D, the good times where on and with a leading technology base to back it all up, you just ended up with all these cars which still shine today.

That late 80's and early 90's was something of a new wave in the automotive industry and it dropped off along with the value of the yen by the late 90's and it's easy to see how things didn't really go anywhere for quite some time. I mean just look at the engines for starters, lot of these where in service for a phenomenally long time considering they where in production performance cars. All your RB26's, SR20DET's, 13B's, 1JZ, 2JZ, 6G platform, etc, etc have been floating around for the better part of close to 20years with only a few little bits of bolt on technology along the way. It's a credit to the original designs that they where still being used for so long, however the sad part of that is the fact that they also stayed in service because there wasn't the money to develop a lot else.

As much as we sometimes loathe Renault, they really did drag Nissan's arse out of the fire, the company before that produced some awesome cars but they where going broke and the others where not exactly faring that great either, so they went back to making a lot of cars which where nowhere near as awe inspiring (good cars yes, but not a revolution) for the simple fact it takes a lot of money to make a car like that and what makes them the money is all these dull as shit family cars.

There is a distinct rumbling though from the Japanese car industry which I think is going to herald a 'second wave' so to speak.

The EVO, WRX and this new GTR are going to start something again as the economy is beginning to shape up after a bit of a beating, give it maybe another 3-4 years and I wouldn't doubt if such a revolution might come around again with some serious Jap iron rolling off the production lines.

[Sydneykid]

So his "negative" isn't really a negative at all. It means Nissan can avoid blowing out the cost of the car by running a lot of exotic materials in the front end to bring the weight down while complying with modern crash safety requirements, while making the gearbox more durable due to its distance from a massive heat source.

You got it, a car this fast, at this price is truly a bargain. It's only such good value for money because Nissan spent the time working out how to get the desired performance at a price that Nissan buyers could afford. It's easy to make performance when price is not a consideration, but when you accomplish it for a very reasonable target price, that's what impresses me.

Cheers

Gary