RE: 2012 GT-R To Shave 8 Secs From 'Ring Lap-Time?
Discussion
CoupeCrazy said:
Im sure Mizuno san and his team got it right when it cornered at over 1 g consistenly. A figure that many lighter cars fail to acheive.
Now if you'd said 2g... BUT it is impressive for a heavy coupe.CoupeCrazy said:
You keep droning on about requiring effort to get performance, but you havent never driven a Gtr yet feel qualified to conclude that it requires no effort, try a full throttle exit mid corner at high laterial G, it will bite like any 'pure' car. This is where you talking tosh, I couldnt care less about the subjective differences between it and whatever bmw or 7 you rate so highly.
And you speak from experience I expect in terms of it biting?PS - please point out where I said it required no effort.
CoupeCrazy said:
And its funny you assume GTR ownership is on the strength of what snobs think of them.
In English?ApexJimi said:
I challenge you to drive a GTR as though you were on a video game - we can all take bets how long you stay on the black stuff.
With respect, you've never seen me play video games. You'd get VERY bored.Never...
...has one thread
...seen so much bulls
t
...spouted by so many
...armchair enthusiasts.
And of course, everyone can design a car that can do "the ring" in under 5 minutes flat. I mean if the GT-R is so crap, it must be so easy to design something 1000% better in every way!
That's your homework assignment.
Hand the prototypes in by Monday or it's detention.
...has one thread
...seen so much bulls
t...spouted by so many
...armchair enthusiasts.
And of course, everyone can design a car that can do "the ring" in under 5 minutes flat. I mean if the GT-R is so crap, it must be so easy to design something 1000% better in every way!
That's your homework assignment.
Hand the prototypes in by Monday or it's detention.
PhillipM said:
More weight on each corner = less grip, not more, contrary to what many seem to think.
LOL.Grip is a direct result of downward force applied to the tyre, it is friction after all.
Think about it, downforce lets you corner faster because you applying more vertical load to the tyres, having net lift does not give you more "grip"
A high grip-to-weight and power ratio results in a fast car. The GTR has an extremely high grip-to-weight ratio and a good power-to-weight ratio. Ego, it's a very fast car around a track.
Good grip and power is what gets you round a track quickly.
Good grip and power is what gets you round a track quickly.
Edited by dvs_dave on Wednesday 26th October 22:07
luke g28 said:
LOL.
Grip is a direct result of downward force applied to the tyre, it is friction after all.
Think about it, downforce lets you corner faster because you applying more vertical load to the tyres, having net lift does not give you more "grip"
See, what you are assuming is grip, I would define as either friction or traction, 'grip' is a relative term.Grip is a direct result of downward force applied to the tyre, it is friction after all.
Think about it, downforce lets you corner faster because you applying more vertical load to the tyres, having net lift does not give you more "grip"
I.E. - You pick up a small box in your hands, you've gripped the box. You pick up a big heavy box in the same hands - so producing the same amount of force - and when you slip and drop it on your toes, then you'd probably say you lost your grip. Even though it was the same amount as you applied to the other box.
dvs_dave said:
Semantics. You're being deliberatly obtuse.
I don't think so. PhillipM just highlights that many people here clearly confuse lateral grip with (longitudinal) traction, which are very different and have opposite reactions to weight, ie added weight increases traction (the one you mainly use beyond the apex) but decrease lateral grip (the one you use around a corner but mainly up to the apex)As for downforce, it's like "free" weight, the benefits without the penalty (well apart from drag through the air).
dvs_dave said:
Semantics. You're being deliberatly obtuse.
And you pair aren't?Anyone that believes that Nissan stuck a few hundred kilos of weight on the car for more 'grip' needs their head checking, because the only time that would be of a benefit is if it was towing something, where outright traction is the issue.
For the car itself, relative traction is the issue, which is what 99% of the planet refers to as grip.
LooneyTunes said:
ApexJimi said:
I challenge you to drive a GTR as though you were on a video game - we can all take bets how long you stay on the black stuff.
With respect, you've never seen me play video games. You'd get VERY bored.LooneyTunes said:
nail the gas and let the system sort out the mess you've created
I have posted a video showing this quite clearly not to be the case.Edited by ApexJimi on Wednesday 26th October 22:48
Forget the actual weight.
The amount of tyre grip/traction/friction/whatever available per kg of weight and downforce of the car is the key.
Nissan engineers (from their racing programs) obviously know the ground pressure required for optimum traction across a tyre's contact patch. They then decided to build the GTR based around this number and keeping it as close to it's optimum at all times.
Nobody is saying that they deliberately added weight to it, but for the car to be practical and fit the design brief of a practical 2+2 with minimal aero, it just so happens that the GTR ends up weighing what it does to maintain the optimum tyre traction per unit of weight/downforce.
The GTR has a very high "traction to weight ratio" making it quicker round a track than its "power to weight ratio" alone would suggest.
Why isn't this being understood?
The amount of tyre grip/traction/friction/whatever available per kg of weight and downforce of the car is the key.
Nissan engineers (from their racing programs) obviously know the ground pressure required for optimum traction across a tyre's contact patch. They then decided to build the GTR based around this number and keeping it as close to it's optimum at all times.
Nobody is saying that they deliberately added weight to it, but for the car to be practical and fit the design brief of a practical 2+2 with minimal aero, it just so happens that the GTR ends up weighing what it does to maintain the optimum tyre traction per unit of weight/downforce.
The GTR has a very high "traction to weight ratio" making it quicker round a track than its "power to weight ratio" alone would suggest.
Why isn't this being understood?
I drove a GTR (not the 2011 model) a couple of weeks and I can certainly confirm that extra weight has a very detrimental effect on speed, with the extra weight of the instructor it was considerably slower than it would have been without, although that may have been more down to him telling me when to brake and short shift!
However when I dropped it down to 3rd round a 50mph ish corner, got my line slightly wrong and booted it, it felt far more composed that the F430 and Lambo Balboni I'd been driving before, again a speeds I'd describe as sportingly for a track, i.e. nowhere near as hard as I'd attempt in my own car! The F430 and Lambo felt good because they made you drive properly or punished you, the GTR felt good (better IMO) because it just went where you wanted it to with out that slighly scary feeling of weight tranfer you get in Ferrari's, before I presume (but would like to actually find out) they weight up and dig in like my S2000 does.
However when I dropped it down to 3rd round a 50mph ish corner, got my line slightly wrong and booted it, it felt far more composed that the F430 and Lambo Balboni I'd been driving before, again a speeds I'd describe as sportingly for a track, i.e. nowhere near as hard as I'd attempt in my own car! The F430 and Lambo felt good because they made you drive properly or punished you, the GTR felt good (better IMO) because it just went where you wanted it to with out that slighly scary feeling of weight tranfer you get in Ferrari's, before I presume (but would like to actually find out) they weight up and dig in like my S2000 does.
Charge99 said:
I can certainly confirm that extra weight has a very detrimental effect on speed, with the extra weight of the instructor it was considerably slower than it would have been without
It's the opposite - the heavier the car, the less the extra weight affects the power-to-weight ratio. Look how passengers slow down things like Caterhams.Johnboy Mac said:
Simply because it's a Nissan, sad but true. If it was a Porsche, Lotus or BMW not word of doubt would cast.
Go Nissan, go!
Not really, I'd love one, but every tire traction plot I've ever seen generates lower and lower friction co-efficients when the weight/load increases...Go Nissan, go!
Trommel said:
Hellbound said:
There's a lot to say for pulling girls in clubs my friend.
Indeed, especially when you don't have to resort to putting your car keys on the bar.I am curious to see how other companies (chevrolet) will counter this.
There is no doubt, in my mind, that the supercharged corvette, record setting ring lap was a publicity stunt, partially aimed at nissan. Why else would they put a GM engineer in the seat, instead of a professional driver?.
I am not trying to put either vehicle down, or say one is better than the other. I kind of like the competition, and it does push cars to new heights
There is no doubt, in my mind, that the supercharged corvette, record setting ring lap was a publicity stunt, partially aimed at nissan. Why else would they put a GM engineer in the seat, instead of a professional driver?.
I am not trying to put either vehicle down, or say one is better than the other. I kind of like the competition, and it does push cars to new heights
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff