Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

When the R35 GTR was released I had a feeling that the kilowatt figure of 353 at the engine was an understatement. I had a thought that the engine kilowatt figure was in actual fact the power at the wheels. If you go to http://www.gtrblog.com/ you can see one japanese owner had the GTR on a dyno and recorded a figure of 482ps at the hubs which equates to around 359kw at the wheels. I am claiming that the GTR is having 420-450kw at the engine. That is the reason why a car weighing more than 1.7 tonnes can do the quarter mile in 11.7 seconds and the 0-100 km dash in under 4 seconds, although the fast gearing also plays a role. Any thoughts on this by the forum members would be appreciated.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/198254-r35-horsepower-figures/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It wouldnt surprise me at all if the R35 GTR has more power than is stated. I doubt it would be as high as 420-450kw as with that sort of power it would be a flat 11 sec car. Im thinking more along the lines of 20-30kw increase, say 370-380kw. It will be interseting to see what sort of power atw it will deliver. with 353kw you would expect 270-280AWKW? I think anything over 290-300AWKW would equate to more than 353 FWKW.

I readily agree that it's disappointing that Nissan made the GTR so damn heavy. But, Nissan needed to compete somewhat with the likes of Porsche, and to have the same sort of previous generation GTR interior carry over is just not acceptable for the price they are demanding for a 'Nissan'. The interior is very well done IMO and distinct from other car makers, as is the exterior. Surely though, to strip 100kgs, Nissan would need to take out more than just the rear seats, replace some parts with carbon fibre and lose the adjustable suspension? The addition of a roll cage if they decide to go down that path will add more weight. Ideally, the GTR would be supreme if it lost 200kgs, but weight distribution would have to be taken into consideration. The V Spec and V Spec II models will be interesting. What's the anticipated weight loss anyone know?

Interior isnt the place to look when trying to reduce weight - its only made up of plastic, wiring and cloth material.

(R32 GTR)

Entire boot trimming = 3.4kg (the spare tyre weighs more than that)

Rear bumper = 4kg (most of that is the reverse lights + 2 brackets to hold it on)

Rear seats = 11.5kg (once again most of that is the metal bracing)

Dash = 6.2kg (you need that so cant save any weight there)

Wiring harness in the entire car would be lucky to be 15kg but that's also required.

It's funny seeing people at the drags remove just their back seat to try and go faster (you aren't gonna go much faster removing 11.5kg) when instead they could remove the passenger seat + rear seat (~25kg) and it would be the same equivalent weight of stripping out the entire interior + boot trimmings.

Weight savings need to be made from the engine, driveline and suspension by using cf where possible.

Edited by benm
I just wish it wasn't so bloody heavy, the older GT-R's were already heavy enough as it is. They should have made a concerted effort to avoid putting on any weight at the very least.

cant understand why so many are concerned with its weight. FFS it does an 11.3 qtr mile. What more do you need from a road car ???

cant understand why so many are concerned with its weight. FFS it does an 11.3 qtr mile. What more do you need from a road car ???

Actually it does an 11.6 with a clutch frying launch. No owner would launch like that repeatedly because you'll either fry your clutch or break your gearbox.

GT-Rs were heavy enough as it was; in tighter corners their weight could really be felt and could prove to be quite tricky to handle in some situations (mainly in a series of tight corners where the weight of the car is shifting from one side to the other and/or front to rear; and also when entering a corner hard under breaks, the front would could push wide because of the weight).

Even though Nissan seem to have engineered the car very well, imagine how much faster it would be had they kept the weight down.

Actually it does an 11.6 with a clutch frying launch. No owner would launch like that repeatedly because you'll either fry your clutch

You're expecting an AWD mid-11 second car to be gentle on clutches while launching?

You are kidding right?

There's just no pleasing some people!

Back on topic:

I would suspect a similar loss in power from the wheels to the engine as previous models (~80hp). Therefore, basing this assumption on an accurate 480hp at the wheels measurement, the GTR probably has about 560bhp (415kw at the flywheel).

Why do people think that drivetrain loss = 25%? It isn't proportional to the amount of power the car is making...

You're expecting an AWD mid-11 second car to be gentle on clutches while launching?

You are kidding right?

There's just no pleasing some people!

Back on topic:

I would suspect a similar loss in power from the wheels to the engine as previous models (~80hp). Therefore, basing this assumption on an accurate 480hp at the wheels measurement, the GTR probably has about 560bhp (415kw at the flywheel).

Why do people think that drivetrain loss = 25%? It isn't proportional to the amount of power the car is making...

No i was simply making the point that those fast times require a fair amount of revs which wears out the drivetrain. Is that so hard to accept?

Can no one see that if the car was lighter it would be faster? Whats the problem with keeping the weight of a car to a minimum?

No i was simply making the point that those fast times require a fair amount of revs which wears out the drivetrain. Is that so hard to accept?

:laughing-smiley-014: :laughing-smiley-014: :laughing-smiley-014: :laughing-smiley-014:

Fast quarter times require revs....? Thats some insightful stuff right there!

Can no one see that if the car was lighter it would be faster? Whats the problem with keeping the weight of a car to a minimum?

Lighter = compromise.

These cars have to have a modicum of luxury if they are going to be sold to people who can afford $100+k supercars, not boy racers who only care about 1/4 times.

Why aren't we innundated with Lotus Exige S's? Because not many people who can afford them, want to climb into a go-kart for a day-to-day grind, even if they do only weigh 800ish kg's and do 0-100 in under 4sec.

As said before, it does 11.6 down the quarter (so far) and 0-100 in 3.3, what more do you want???

Nissan Engineers aren't idiots, if they could save weight they would. Obviously though they have to keep in mind the marketing potential of things like adjustable suspension. It may be wank-factor, but wank-factor sells cars... just ask BMW.

Edited by Brockaz
:laughing-smiley-014: :laughing-smiley-014: :laughing-smiley-014: :laughing-smiley-014:

Fast quarter times require revs....? Thats some insightful stuff right there!

...

More revs means more drivetrain wear in an AWD car. Do you launch from high revs in your car? You'll be replacing your gearbox and clutch sooner rather than later just to get those really fast straight line times.

If the car was lighter, you would need less revs at launch to get equally fast times and your drivetrain would last longer. Are we clear now?

I run a Tripple plate OS Giken clutch and OS Giken gearbox... don't think I'll be replacing anything too soon.

If you bought a new R35 GTR for the SOLE reason that it does an 11.6 1/4 mile time, then 1. You're an idiot, and 2. You just forked out 100k+ for a car, 2k is nothing for a decent clutch.

Once again, what do you want from this car? A well-priced production supercar capable of being driven for hours on end without being annoying, or a stripped out drag car?

I wasn't referring to your specific car; it was a general and hypothetical statement.

The 0-100 and 1/4 mile times get quoted so often its ridiculous, i'm just pointing out the fact that you have to abuse the car to get those times. Once again, if the car was lighter then it would achieve those times without the need for mechanical abuse.

That is all I am saying on this subject because I've made my point. If the car was lighter it would be faster in every aspect, which is what you'd want for a car that is billed as a track car.

I'd like to see the rolling start figures in comparison to a 911 turbo or a C6Z06; I believe the weight of the car will play a big factor in the ingear acceleration tests.

Righteo.

If it made 600kw at 2000rpm you wouldn't have to push it much to do those times either. Maybe thats the answer...

You're right, lighter cars go faster. I'm sure this insight will be appreciated by the Nissan engineering team, they probably never thought of it....

Let me write it in caps for you:

THE LIGHTER THE CAR IS, THE MORE IS COMPROMISED!

I don't want an Exige interior/proportions, which doesn't have so much as a centre console or leg room fit for 2 midgets, and I'm sure those buying this car don't either.

Righteo.

If it made 600kw at 2000rpm you wouldn't have to push it much to do those times either. Maybe thats the answer...

You're right, lighter cars go faster. I'm sure this insight will be appreciated by the Nissan engineering team, they probably never thought of it....

Let me write it in caps for you:

THE LIGHTER THE CAR IS, THE MORE IS COMPROMISED!

I don't want an Exige interior/proportions, which doesn't have so much as a centre console or leg room fit for 2 midgets, and I'm sure those buying this car don't either.

Weight has no effect on top speed at all.

Yeah no way is any manufacturer going to make a light flagship car. Lambos, porker turbos etc etc etc they are all over 1500kg these days. Crash regs, interior sound deadening and electronics (safety, TCS, ABS, EDB, DSX etc etc etc) are simply heavy.

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

    • If you've only done the upper control arms on the rear, AND you have changed their length (by more than about 1mm) to set the camber you want, then you will definitely need/want to install traction arms also. Adjusting the camber arms on their own WILL introduce bump steer and make the car unpleasant to drive. Most owners have no idea that their car could behave infinitely better than what they put up with. I'm not entirely sure what the Stageas need, but I am thinking that unless you have massive front spring rates and pretty soft rear springs, you have waaaay too much rear bar. Oversteer city, in my estimation. Combined with possible excessive bump steer from maladjusted arms, that could be a recipe for nastiness. ATR43SS2 is not a highflow. It is an outright replacement turbo. It's a little bit bigger than the largest highflow profile that Tao does. Probably a solid 300rwkW turbo where the bigger highflows will be about 30-40rwkW less. Nevertheless, we're only talking about ~300 rwkW, which is well within the abilities of the stock ECu to run with a Nistune on board. I would do so without hesitation - and I will be doing so when I get my finger out and actually get the injectors and AFM installed. But, if you would prefer to drop a whole lot more money on the ECU side, then I suspect you're looking at Haltech. The Haltech fanbois here will all spout on about all the available engine protection you can have, that you can't have with the Nistune option. And they're right. But it doesn't really come for free either. You will spend more money on extra sensors and the like, plus the work to install them. If the engine was built and therefore represented a big investment to protect, then I'd say definitely do it. If you view the current (and forever into the future) shortage of replacement engines as something to prompt similar protection, then also, do it. If you see a destroyed RB25 as an opportunity to put in a Mercedes or other V12 (like I kinda do)... then your perception of the risk/reward might differ. These are good injectors. You can also get a "better" set of the same with more flow matching, for more $$. 1000cc is where you will want to be. You will need an R35 AFM and adapter tube if you want to stay with Nistuned stock ECU. Otherwise, if going Haltech, you can ignore. As for intercooler. Just about anything will do. You're only talking about ~300rwkW. Just put a big core in there. Be aware that return flows do add significant pressure drop and will cost power and will make the turbo work harder to achieve the same goals. If you can manage a proper crossflow, do it. I'm keeping my very good return flow because I'm only expecting to be in the ~250rwkW range, and will live with whatever outcome I get.
    • I have a heap that i have collected if you want some authentic ones still. Pm me if your interested!
    • Hey lads, reviving an old thread.  As an update, since the last time replied to this thread, ive done mostly suspension. Havent touched the motor except for maintenance. Though upon changing spark plugs, found out i had splitfires pre-installed! Updates: - Got me some stock airbox top cover and snorkel to fit onto the original intake. Should be free of defects - Bought a set of R34 GT-T brakes (not installed yet, going to rebuild + respray in champion blue + white 'Nissan' text) - Bought the last set of bilsteins from @Sydneykid and had them installed. Has been making some sounds on the rear but hopefully should be sorted out after this New Year break. - Regreased front caster rod bushings (poly bushes..) - Rear upper camber arms - Whiteline sway bars (BNF27Z 22mm + BNR11XXZ 24mm).  The rear sway bars are a bit short (ive read 50mm else where) but was still able to get them in.  Anyhows, I reckon suspension is sorted now. Maybe replace bushes (do have a set of front upper control arms from SK not installed yet) but should be okay for now. From now, I'm wanting to start working on the motor, drivetrain etc etc. Still debating on the order to go on and what to buy etc but: - ECU ( Haltech or Link ( Link states that it dont support A/T or AWD functions... Can anyone attest to this? ) - Highflow turbo ( ATR43ss2 ) - Intercooler ( Not decided yet, but cant find many good afoordable ones. Toshi says to opt for crossflow Japanese. Bit difficult this one, unless I get a returnflow Blitz from JJ? ) - Injectors ( Any recommendations ? I do have a nismo FPR ( Thanks SK ) ) - Seats - Tune by either Toshi or DVS To be fair, I did consider just keeping the stock turbo and nistuning it. Sat in a mates stock N, that had something like 200kw, and I reckon that felt more than enough. Maybe I should just go this route ahhaha. Too many choices.... Planning a trip down south, so wanting to just clean things up and make sure it gets to and from in one piece. Anything else specifically I should do before ? Cheers lads  
    • Must be for the car’s lucky charm 🤷🏽‍♂️ She runs fine, but it just seems to take about 1L less. Maybe I’ll have the oil sump dropped at some point to check if there is anything 
×
×
  • Create New...