Which Has More Potential In The Long Run?

[TurboDoseBro]

What? Stepping up with some new concepts is considered trolling these days? Who made you captain of troll spotting? LOL

More importantly in regards to the WTA lap times, they run on street tyres, not the slicks that the race cars do. Truely amazing machines. Which means that the 2WD competitors are indeed disadvantaged as grip becomes even more of an issue. There is the HKS GTR Supercar entered which I have no doubt will win but lets not forget we are comparing the R32s which are more simple. Sure the R32 GTR Group A time can be set tomorrow but that just proves that FR layouts do have a chance with race tyres.

I'm just not gonna comment on the X1 until there is a real one. Too many posibilities leading to it not being as fast as it imaginarily claims.

Edited May 29, 2011 by TyresBro

[mad082]

the mods might as well close this thread. it is just trolling now since you use small amounts of info dodgily put together to prove your point, while all the real world examples show that you are wrong.

the simple fact is that if rwd was faster, then the r32 GTR would've been RWD and not AWD. nissan designed the GTR to win the group A championships. if RWD was better they wouldn't have invented the ATESSA system.

[GTRPowa]

Ignore the tards man. Anyone who is ignorant enough to call the end of a thread is a retard, since the forum is designed for open discussion. I'm not into lots of things on this forum, I don't run around crying death of a thread like a child. They just have nothing better to do.

Depending on how much power you're putting down, factoring in grip etc, then yes there is a good chance that in favouring conditions a GTS-T could beat a GTR. The first guy who opposed you had my head shaking from the moment I started reading his reply.

There's nothing wrong with doing a project car to see what you can make of it, eitherway it would be a fun ride!

And you never know, it can probably turn out to be a beastly machine, the same way the RB26/30 is now. I'm sure many uneducated fools cried for the death of the thread where the engine was conceived, but here we are now.

Godspeed.

[mad082]

i called an end to the thread because everytime someone posts factual information he ignores 99% of it and comes back with crap, like comparing an AWD car from 1 racing category to a RWD from a different racing category with totally different regulations. then he just keeps going back to that comparison. if this thread was being discussed intelligently then i wouldn't mind, however since it is just a few of us posting factual information and the OP posting his one comparison over and over, there is no point continuing.

[TurboDoseBro]

I forgot where I read it but the R32 GTR was supposed to come out as RWD but they added AWD and the specific engine to enter into Group A. Maybe you guys already know, who knows. I'll post the article when I find it.

I may be going around in loops sometimes but that's because you too are not listening to anything I'm saying as well. Accusing me of crap when opposing viewers (not gonna say who for the sake of humour) posts some crap about a fake car in a game out of nowhere and posting fake information too. Lets not turn this into a bitch fest please. I provided examples, reasoning, and videos with some of my posts which is fair to prove the point.

I compare to these cars like Commodore VT etc because I don't see how the GTS-T cannot match or beat their lap times given roughly the same modifications and power therefore linking the achievements of those cars with that of the GTS-T. It's only logical. You keep comparing bread to apples or whatever you want to call it by comparing the R32 GTR to Evos and Lamborghinis which to tell you the truth run on very different AWD concepts and layouts. Yes I compared the GTS-T with an RX-7 one time (bread and oranges), but that was to show that even a car that weighs roughly the same as a a GTS-T driving 2 wheels and has a layout of FR (although weight distribution and different engine) seemed to only have the same problem with traction as the GTRs in WTA. Mind you 2WDs don't have the variation in technology and drive differences that AWD does. At the end of the day it's still 2 wheels spinning which are governed by an LSD.

You guys then argued we will never achieve the level these tuning shops and teams will with their techonolgy and money. So I pointed out that none of the lap record holders in both tracks of Eastern Creek Raceway and Winton Raceway were AWD, even some actual examples of a GTS-T or equivalent beating a R32 GTR or equivalent in our SAU VIC lap record holders section. Then it loops back to the fact that they are limited in terms of rules and that the top record holders in WTA is an AWD Evo, so see top paragraph (still keep in mind that we are comparing R32s) for the answer again. Race tyres are a different story again.

As for the fact that there are street driven GTRs that are faster than Group A R32 GTRs, it just proves my point in the last line of this post.

Lets not forget what I myself admitted in the first few pages: A well advanced AWD system will beat RWD anytime.

Edited May 29, 2011 by TyresBro

[djr81]

I forgot where I read it but the R32 GTR was supposed to come out as RWD but they added AWD and the specific engine to enter into Group A. Maybe you guys already know, who knows. I'll post the article when I find it.

They "added" four wheel drive because the Group A regulations dictated a tyre width that badly compromised traction even on a 2 litre turbo motor - witness the Sierras & their struggles with rear tyres. When I say added I mean it was integral to the R32 GTR concept from the start. Which is to say it wasnt added at all. The motor was orginally to be a 2.4 litre but calcucations showed that the car would weigh enough to let it fall into the next engine capacity group upwards. So it went to 2.6 litres.

I may be going around in loops sometimes but that's because you too are not listening to anything I'm saying as well. Accusing me of crap when opposing viewers (not gonna say who for the sake of humour) posts some crap about a fake car in a game out of nowhere and posting fake information too. Lets not turn this into a bitch fest please. I provided examples, reasoning, and videos with some of my posts which is fair to prove the point.

I compare to these cars like Commodore VT etc because I don't see how the GTS-T cannot match or beat their lap times given roughly the same modifications and power therefore linking the achievements of those cars with that of the GTS-T. It's only logical. You keep comparing bread to apples or whatever you want to call it by comparing the R32 GTR to Evos and Lamborghinis which to tell you the truth run on very different AWD concepts and layouts. Yes I compared the GTS-T with an RX-7 one time (bread and oranges), but that was to show that even a car that weighs roughly the same as a a GTS-T driving 2 wheels and has a layout of FR (although weight distribution and different engine) seemed to only have the same problem with traction as the GTRs in WTA. Mind you 2WDs don't have the variation in technology and drive differences that AWD does. At the end of the day it's still 2 wheels spinning which are governed by an LSD.

You guys then argued we will never achieve the level these tuning shops and teams will with their techonolgy and money. So I pointed out that none of the lap record holders in both tracks of Eastern Creek Raceway and Winton Raceway were AWD, even some actual examples of a GTS-T or equivalent beating a R32 GTR or equivalent in our SAU VIC lap record holders section. Then it loops back to the fact that they are limited in terms of rules and that the top record holders in WTA is an AWD Evo, so see top paragraph (still keep in mind that we are comparing R32s) for the answer again. Race tyres are a different story again.

As for the fact that there are street driven GTRs that are faster than Group A R32 GTRs, it just proves my point in the last line of this post.

Lets not forget what I myself admitted in the first few pages: A well advanced AWD system will beat RWD anytime.

Why are you even trying to compare a VT to a R32 GTST. What about them is in anyway similar? Lets see:

Motor V8 versus turbo 6

Suspension. McPherson struts & semi trailing arm IRS versus wishbones.

Two doors versus four.

One is a family car the other is a pretend sports car.

If you want a quick front engined, rear wheel drive track car just go and buy an RX7. Everyone else does.

As for the Group A GTR no one is going to put such a historic and valuable car at risk by attempting to set a lap time just to impress an internet troll somewhere.

[BoyWhoCriedWolf]

oh gawd, stop feeding it mang

[djr81]

oh gawd, stop feeding it mang

But, but he makes such compelling arguments.

[iplen]

Still..?

[BoyWhoCriedWolf]

yes Ian

we might need to use fire

[iplen]

Everyone in the world knows that every car that isn't a GTR may as well have not been built, and that everyone who doesn't like GTRs for track days is an idiot

[TurboDoseBro]

They "added" four wheel drive because the Group A regulations dictated a tyre width that badly compromised traction even on a 2 litre turbo motor - witness the Sierras & their struggles with rear tyres. When I say added I mean it was integral to the R32 GTR concept from the start. Which is to say it wasnt added at all. The motor was orginally to be a 2.4 litre but calcucations showed that the car would weigh enough to let it fall into the next engine capacity group upwards. So it went to 2.6 litres.

Why are you even trying to compare a VT to a R32 GTST. What about them is in anyway similar? Lets see:

Motor V8 versus turbo 6

Suspension. McPherson struts & semi trailing arm IRS versus wishbones.

Two doors versus four.

One is a family car the other is a pretend sports car.

If you want a quick front engined, rear wheel drive track car just go and buy an RX7. Everyone else does.

As for the Group A GTR no one is going to put such a historic and valuable car at risk by attempting to set a lap time just to impress an internet troll somewhere.

That's my point mate. That the suspension on the GTS-T is superior to the olden day trailing arms and struts. The engine I can't really comment. Really comes down to the characteristics and weight of it. Shorter wheelbaase. The Skyline chassis is lighter. So there is no reason for the GTS-T to not be able to beat or at least match the times of the Commo. I am comparing because they also ran in Group A racing with the R32 GTRs with the same rules that have not changed, much anyways, and managed to score a better time.

RBNT you might as well stop looking at this thread or even posting in it. Your comments are more troll than any of mine. Just cause you own a GTR doesn't mean jack anymore.

Edited May 30, 2011 by TyresBro

[zebra]

*now i'm in over my head with something I said.....*

[BoyWhoCriedWolf]

That's my point mate. That the suspension on the GTS-T is superior to the olden day trailing arms and struts. The engine I can't really comment. Really comes down to the characteristics and weight of it. Shorter wheelbaase. The Skyline chassis is lighter. So there is no reason for the GTS-T to not be able to beat or at least match the times of the Commo. I am comparing because they also ran in Group A racing with the R32 GTRs with the same rules that have not changed, much anyways, and managed to score a better time.

RBNT you might as well stop looking at this thread or even posting in it. Your comments are more troll than any of mine. Just cause you own a GTR doesn't mean jack anymore.

No dickhead, if you read one of my initial posts you might understand.

Real world experience from owning and driving both vehicles on the track. Not a fucking graph that mspaint helped me with.

[sinistaGTR]

I wonder why all the top tuning companys in Japan use the gtr for there time attack cars...fark have seen any gtst's smashing out in the top ten

[djr81]

That's my point mate. That the suspension on the GTS-T is superior to the olden day trailing arms and struts. The engine I can't really comment. Really comes down to the characteristics and weight of it. Shorter wheelbaase. The Skyline chassis is lighter. So there is no reason for the GTS-T to not be able to beat or at least match the times of the Commo. I am comparing because they also ran in Group A racing with the R32 GTRs with the same rules that have not changed, much anyways, and managed to score a better time.

RBNT you might as well stop looking at this thread or even posting in it. Your comments are more troll than any of mine. Just cause you own a GTR doesn't mean jack anymore.

Sorry but this thread is long gone.

Just to tidy up for others who may for their own perverted reasons be amused by the troll action on here.

You say the GTST suspension is superior. How? How does the roll camber compensation play such an important part after you have normalised it for track width and roll couple? Just interested is all. Would like to hear your thoughts on the matter.

The GTST never ran in Gooup A.

The various front engined rear wheel drives that Nissan campaigned lost out every time at Bathurst to the Commodores.

Group A cars & regulations changed massively from 85 (earlier overseas) to 92. At the end they werent Group A rules anyway they were modified locally to even the field. Technically the GTR never ran under pure Group A rules in Australia.

Your only correct point is to say the GTST is lighter than a Commodore. Which it bloody well ought to be given how much smaller it is.

Anyway just because you cant afford a GTR dont bother talking up a GTST as a contender.

Random movie quote:

I could have been a contender. I could have been somebody.

[Darmanin10]

thread was too long too read so i came in here and decided to post this

There is a reason top tuning companies like Mines, HKS, Top secret only modify GTR's

These companies know more than you.

[Nee-san]

Sorry to revive this thread,

djr81, I think your PM inbox may be full, I tried to send you a message and it says you can't receive any more.

Cheers,

Mitch.

[joeyjoejoejuniorshabadoo]

thread was too long too read so i came in here and decided to post this

There is a reason top tuning companies like Mines, HKS, Top secret only modify GTR's

These companies know more than you.

Err is that reason "because they don't"

[r32line]

There is a reason all the JGTC and GT class Skylines are all RWD, I'm sure it's from the fact that from long term modification, the AWD system is no longer needed. If you look at the statistics, the GTS-T is already 110kg lighter than the GTR (standard eninges), and whatever you can do to the GTR you can do to the GTS-T.

Now before anyone starts flaming, I'm not hating on the GTRs but I dare you guys to prove me wrong on this.

Next...