Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys got into a bit of discussion with a mate the other day, we were talking about the R32 when it came into group A racing in Australia (the aussie touring car champs) and he said something about they raced with only 2wd engaged??

Can you guy confirm when and what types of racing they used 4wd or 2wd?

Cos I know they were outlawed in 1993 because they won 4 years straight and the only thing that could touch them was a sierra cosworth...

Did the R33 GTR compete in Australia? i.e. DTM, super touring or super GT?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/
Share on other sites

R33 is a funny one. Super GT didnt really exist, nor did Grp A. The Japanese did run 2L Touring Cars for a while much like the Europeans. The R33 did run at Le Mans etc

As for the R32 GTR being run in 2wd. For about 1 second off the line they used to launch in rwd before engaging awd. This was done to make the drivetrain more reliable by reducing the shock of awd launches. When racing they did not run variable awd like the road car with ATTESSA, instead they had switches in the car that allowed them to run a fixed amount of fwd depending on the prevailing track coditions.

And wasnt quite 4 years straight, in 1990 the R31 ran a bulk of the races in the SATCC, before the R32 took over late in the season for Richard to take the title. 91 ad 92 weres impler affaird in the SATCC and dont forget that in 1990 they were beaten at Bathurst by the VL Walkinshaw but simpler tasks in 91 and 92.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5214630
Share on other sites

R33 is a funny one. Super GT didnt really exist, nor did Grp A. The Japanese did run 2L Touring Cars for a while much like the Europeans. The R33 did run at Le Mans etc

As for the R32 GTR being run in 2wd. For about 1 second off the line they used to launch in rwd before engaging awd. This was done to make the drivetrain more reliable by reducing the shock of awd launches. When racing they did not run variable awd like the road car with ATTESSA, instead they had switches in the car that allowed them to run a fixed amount of fwd depending on the prevailing track coditions.

And wasnt quite 4 years straight, in 1990 the R31 ran a bulk of the races in the SATCC, before the R32 took over late in the season for Richard to take the title. 91 ad 92 weres impler affaird in the SATCC and dont forget that in 1990 they were beaten at Bathurst by the VL Walkinshaw but simpler tasks in 91 and 92.

Thanks for the reply man!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5214635
Share on other sites

gosh darn, sorry for not knowing something!

I bet you didn't know everthing at one point in your life too!

Over-reaction much? He was just clarifying a couple of points. If you're going to bitch that much about being corrected you better not need to be corrected.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5214661
Share on other sites

Over-reaction much? He was just clarifying a couple of points. If you're going to bitch that much about being corrected you better not need to be corrected.

Nah man i was referring to Marlin who said he cant wait for this thread to be buried on page 55...

i.e. EVERYONE knows this, im stupid for asking this.

Sorry lol

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5214672
Share on other sites

Shit, sorry for asking

FYI I searched here first, and searched "R32 GTR in motorsport" and "R32 GTR ATCC" on Google, didn't come up with much, but i missed thes:

http://www.thegodzilla.com/race-history-of-the-godzilla.php

Thanks anyway.

Note to self: Don't post an even slightly vague question in this section again for fear of getting shot lol

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5214821
Share on other sites

Nah man i was referring to Marlin who said he cant wait for this thread to be buried on page 55...

i.e. EVERYONE knows this, im stupid for asking this.

Sorry lol

Sorry mate, I read the posts in sequence and thought that's what you were referring to. No worries.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5215218
Share on other sites

R33 is a funny one. Super GT didnt really exist, nor did Grp A. The Japanese did run 2L Touring Cars for a while much like the Europeans. The R33 did run at Le Mans etc

As for the R32 GTR being run in 2wd. For about 1 second off the line they used to launch in rwd before engaging awd. This was done to make the drivetrain more reliable by reducing the shock of awd launches. When racing they did not run variable awd like the road car with ATTESSA, instead they had switches in the car that allowed them to run a fixed amount of fwd depending on the prevailing track coditions.

And wasnt quite 4 years straight, in 1990 the R31 ran a bulk of the races in the SATCC, before the R32 took over late in the season for Richard to take the title. 91 ad 92 weres impler affaird in the SATCC and dont forget that in 1990 they were beaten at Bathurst by the VL Walkinshaw but simpler tasks in 91 and 92.

Yeah but to be fair the 1990 R32 was very short on development. Have a look at the photos of the thing in practice at Bathurst & the nuts wheel alignments that is was running. (Only one car that year by the way. Skaife wrecked it at Adelaide AGP not long after) By all accounts it was a horrible thing to drive at Bathurst that year.

Also take with a vary large grain of salt anything that was said at the time about the engineering/competitiveness/operation of the GT-R's or for that matter most of the Group A cars. I for one don't even vaguely believe the tiny horsepower outputs claimed by Gibson Motorsports for the Rb26.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216177
Share on other sites

Yeah but to be fair the 1990 R32 was very short on development. Have a look at the photos of the thing in practice at Bathurst & the nuts wheel alignments that is was running. (Only one car that year by the way. Skaife wrecked it at Adelaide AGP not long after) By all accounts it was a horrible thing to drive at Bathurst that year.

Also take with a vary large grain of salt anything that was said at the time about the engineering/competitiveness/operation of the GT-R's or for that matter most of the Group A cars. I for one don't even vaguely believe the tiny horsepower outputs claimed by Gibson Motorsports for the Rb26.

What were they claiming?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216186
Share on other sites

Yeah but to be fair the 1990 R32 was very short on development. Have a look at the photos of the thing in practice at Bathurst & the nuts wheel alignments that is was running. (Only one car that year by the way. Skaife wrecked it at Adelaide AGP not long after) By all accounts it was a horrible thing to drive at Bathurst that year.

Also take with a vary large grain of salt anything that was said at the time about the engineering/competitiveness/operation of the GT-R's or for that matter most of the Group A cars. I for one don't even vaguely believe the tiny horsepower outputs claimed by Gibson Motorsports for the Rb26.

I can tell you from a recent dyno run the R32 GIO car is only running about 315AWKW's at 1bar........the R31 was about 320RWKW's at 1.6bar.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216238
Share on other sites

From memory (A dodgy one at that) the original number was about 600hp. Then it reduced to something like 480 when the boost retrictions were put in place. But hell you can get near on 400 horepower out of a stock RB26 on pump fuel with stock ceramic turbos - hence my scepticism.

Also:

Hey guys got into a bit of discussion with a mate the other day, we were talking about the R32 when it came into group A racing in Australia (the aussie touring car champs) and he said something about they raced with only 2wd engaged??

Sort of reading between the lines I formed the impression that the GMS cars didn't use the ATTESSA system much and bascially ran (after the start line 2WD mode) in fixed 4WD, rather than varying the torque split. You will note on the old videos the commentators banging on about the GT-R starts which did appear to be better than the other cars - something that is hard to reconcile with a 2WD start.

Cos I know they were outlawed in 1993 because they won 4 years straight and the only thing that could touch them was a sierra cosworth...

All turbo cars were outlawed at the end of 1992. Basically Group A was a dead category and it needed replacing. They went to V8's (Although the BMW's were still ok for 1993) hence no turbos. To say the GT-R were banned is just a bit of Nissan merketing hype, really.

Did the R33 GTR compete in Australia? i.e. DTM, super touring or super GT?

DTM = German Touring Car Championship.

Super Touring = Two Litre atmo cars. (Nissan ran a thing called a Primera? in England & I think Steve Richards was their test driver for a while. Can't remember if Gary Rodgers ran one over here, though.)

Super GT = Japanese formula.

So, no. No R33's ran at any high level sport circuit sport in Australia - well none that I can remember anyway.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216282
Share on other sites

Sort of reading between the lines I formed the impression that the GMS cars didn't use the ATTESSA system much and bascially ran (after the start line 2WD mode) in fixed 4WD, rather than varying the torque split.

The torque split was controlled from within the car. I am pretty sure that as tyre's go off in the rear you would dial(0,1,2 on the switch) on more front split to compensate for the oversteer.

In the picture it's the black box just behind the shifter on the tunnel with the switch and small LCD screen.

P.S. turbo x-trail......doesn't offend me....the last time I looked I thought that forums were used to get info as well!...lol

post-37023-1273039187_thumb.jpg

Edited by Jetwreck
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216514
Share on other sites

The torque split was controlled from within the car. I am pretty sure that as tyre's go off in the rear you would dial(0,1,2 on the switch) on more front split to compensate for the oversteer.

In the picture it's the black box just behind the shifter on the tunnel with the switch and small LCD screen.

Again from memory it was:

0: 2WD start

1: Normal running

2: P!ssing down raining ie torque forward.

I just sort of got the impression (Maybe wrongly) that for a given setting the torque bias was fixed.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216581
Share on other sites

P.S. turbo x-trail......doesn't offend me....the last time I looked I thought that forums were used to get info as well!...lol

Yeah so did I!

Fairs fair, if i did a better search I might've found it my info, but searching R32 GTR on here is pretty ambiguous lol

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216598
Share on other sites

The R32s did not run ceramic turbos. Nissan did a run of 800 GTRs to homologate things like turbos etc. They were plain bearing steel wheeled turbos. You see them floating around from time to time and referred to, funnily enough as Grp A turbos. Doubt they are original items bu probably the same spec turbo.

When Stev Richards returned from being a test and development driver in the UK he ran the Primera run bay Garry Rogers, i believe it was the old Matt Neal Team Dynamics chassis. Though may have been a facoty car from the uK?!?!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216607
Share on other sites

I can tell you from a recent dyno run the R32 GIO car is only running about 315AWKW's at 1bar........the R31 was about 320RWKW's at 1.6bar.
From memory (A dodgy one at that) the original number was about 600hp. Then it reduced to something like 480 when the boost retrictions were put in place. But hell you can get near on 400 horepower out of a stock RB26 on pump fuel with stock ceramic turbos - hence my scepticism.

Also:

Sort of reading between the lines I formed the impression that the GMS cars didn't use the ATTESSA system much and bascially ran (after the start line 2WD mode) in fixed 4WD, rather than varying the torque split. You will note on the old videos the commentators banging on about the GT-R starts which did appear to be better than the other cars - something that is hard to reconcile with a 2WD start.

So true - The 91/92 vid's i have here has the GTR shooting out of the hole a bit better.

One such example is the GIO car in 1991

Well over a car length before turn 1 :(

Certainly as Craig said above with his dyno results... if it was indeed fulltime 4WD as we kinda suspect, then 315awkw would be very close to 600hp as opposed to 480hp!

Actually... Craig is yours with or "without" the restrictors?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319281-r32-gtr/#findComment-5216628
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

    • This has clearly gone off on quite a tangent but the suggestion was "go standalone because you probably aren't going to stop at just exhaust + a mild tune and manual boost controller", not "buy a standalone purely for a boost controller". If the scope does in fact stop creeping at an EBC then sure, buy an EVC7 or Profec or whatever else people like to run and stop there. And I have yet to see any kind of aftermarket boost control that is more complicated than a PID controller with some accounting for edge cases. Control system theory is an incredibly vast field yet somehow we always end up back at some variant of a PID controller, maybe with some work done to linearize things. I have done quite a lot, but I don't care to indulge in those pissing matches, hence posting primary sources. I deal with people quite frequently that scream and shout about how their opinion matters more because they've shipped more x or y, it doesn't change the reality of the data they're trying to disagree with. Arguing that the source material is wrong is an entirely separate point and while my experience obviously doesn't matter here I've rarely seen factory service manuals be incorrect about something. It's not some random poorly documented internal software tool that is constantly being patched to barely work. It's also not that hard to just read the Japanese and double check translations either. Especially in automotive parts most of it is loanwords anyways.
    • If you are keeping the current calipers you need to keep the current disc as the spacing of the caliper determines the disc diameter. Have you trial fitted the GTS brakes fit on a GTSt hub or is this forward planning? There could be differences in caliper mount spacing, backing plate and even hub shape that could cause an issue.
    • Hi there I have a r33 gts with 4 stud small brakes, I'm going to convert to 5 stud but keep the small brakes, what size rotor would I need?
    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
×
×
  • Create New...