Re: Driven: 2011 Nissan GT-R
Re: Driven: 2011 Nissan GT-R
Wednesday 6th April 2011

Driven: 2011 Nissan GT-R

Godzilla gets a makeover for 2011; we see if he's still as purdy as ever...



The headlines for the 2011 Nissan GT-R run thusly: Its power has been upped from 478bhp to 523bhp and its torque is up 18lb ft to 451lb ft. Godzilla is now even more fleet of foot, therefore, with that extra power combining with a new launch control system to catapult the GT-R from 0-62mph in 3.0secs flat, and on to 196mph.

The thing, as anybody who has read a tabloid newspaper will tell you, is that headlines rarely tell the whole story. And so it is with the revised Nissan GT-R, because you really need to delve deep into the minutiae of the changes from 2010 to 2011 to understand why the GT-R feels so different. In short, the revisions to the GT-R are much more expansive than a few more horses for the VR38DETT and a nice new red engine cover.


For starters, that top speed is helped by a drag coefficient that drops from 0.27 to 0.26. Which doesn't sound like that much until you take into account the fact that downforce has actually increased by 10 per cent.

This is achieved by a gently redesigned front bumper now has twin 'rectifier fins' that help increase front downforce by around 10 per cent as well as improving airflow to the radiator and reducing air resistance. At the back, meanwhile, there's a new rear bumper with a lower centre of gravity and an LED fog lamp integrated into an extended rear diffuser (the fog lamp doesn't do anything for the aero, by the way, but the diffuser does help both with downforce and with cooling.

As for the actual chassis, the springs, dampers and anti-roll bars have been tweaked, while the front caster angle has been increased. At the rear, a free-piston shock absorber has been developed to help provide more responsive damping and a smoother ride. Larger brakes, a new compound for the Dunlops and lighter, more rigid Rays wheels complete the dynamic tweaks.

After the first few miles, and in isolation (ie without an older model for direct comparison), the difference between old and new is hard to discern. But, much as with the tweaks to the overall looks of the car, the changes gradually mount up to make a noticeable difference.


Basically, the raft of minor-ish adjustments boils down to two main changes; more pace and a new-found measure of refinement. As well as being faster, the engine is now smoother and more linear in its power delivery. It's no naturally aspirated M car or Ferrari, and there's still that rushing burst of forward motion when the turbos spool up to full operating speed (it wouldn't be a GT-R without that), but it's more controlled, more manageable - and easier to drive faster as a result.

Likewise the suspension, which used to bludgeon the road into submission the faster you went, now seems to actually work with the road. You're not going to confuse its ride quality with that of a hydropneumatic Citroen, but there's a certain amount of fluidity to the way the GT-R controls its body and suppresses lumps and bumps that definitely wasn't there before.


It's all a bit hard to define really; it's almost as if the 'maturity' and 'refinement' dials have been turned up by 5 per cent, overlaying the raw, technological turbo nutter character of the GT-R but without diluting it.

I suppose the best example of this is the drivetrain. Below 6mph, the car is now two-wheel drive, so turning out of junctions, or executing a quick three-point turn, no longer elicits a series of graunches and squawks from the differential, but the driveline still grumbles and shunts, especially if you're bumbling along at suburban speeds but have the car in full manual mode.

The 2011 GT-R is very much version 1.1 of the R35 GT-R concept, an evolutionary refinement that smoothes off the edges rather than marking any significant change in the car's ethos. It might be more presentable, more manageable (and a little more capable) but it's still the implacably rapid, hi-tech monster that it always has been. And thank goodness for that.



Author
Discussion

Zed Ed

Original Poster:

1,163 posts

212 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
But at a price.....

Richie200

2,013 posts

238 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
Zed Ed said:
But at a price.....
Considerably cheaper than anything else at this end of the performance car market; price has jumped from £59,400 to £69,950. That's a £10,550 price increase - or 18%.


gumsie

680 posts

238 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
What do I love about this car? The fact that it can scare the bejeezus out of much more expensive, exotic and prestigious machinery.
I still wouldn't buy one though. Too coarse, but DANG! what an achievement.

Zed Ed

Original Poster:

1,163 posts

212 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
Richie200 said:
Considerably cheaper than anything else at this end of the performance car market; price has jumped from £59,400 to £69,950. That's a £10,550 price increase - or 18%.
bit more than that, with the first 09 cars at £55k ish

chazwozza

979 posts

215 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
Never noticed it before but I like the aggressiveness of the wing going over the front wheels, looks purposeful

J-P

4,422 posts

235 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
Riggers said:
In short, the revisions to the GT-R are much more expensive than a few more horses for the VR38DETT and a nice new red engine cover.
Riggers - did you mean "extensive"? As I'm sure that the changes were more expensive than a few horses and a new engine cover wink

Edited by J-P on Wednesday 6th April 08:24

george h

14,714 posts

193 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
I don't know if it's just me but the GTR leaves me feeling cold. I would much rather have something less capable, but is more of an event to drive it.

Prof Prolapse

16,163 posts

219 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
gumsie said:
What do I love about this car? The fact that it can scare the bejeezus out of much more expensive, exotic and prestigious machinery.
I still wouldn't buy one though. Too coarse, but DANG! what an achievement.
"Dang"? We don't take kindly to your kind 'round these parts.. This here's a hootnanny not a hoedown. etc.

Anyway, impressive technical exercise agreed. Visually, very little presence or soul though.

Fittster

20,120 posts

242 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
First person to use the expression playstation to describe the car is a pratt.


vrooom

3,763 posts

296 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
what about it's weight issue, it is nearly 2 tonne car.

DayTrader

776 posts

196 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
vrooom said:
what about it's weight issue, it is nearly 2 tonne car.
...that does 0-60 in 3 seconds and is faster round the Nurburgring than Enzo's, Carrera GT's, Zonda's...hardly an issue?!

g3org3y

22,462 posts

220 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
0-62 in 3.0 sec!? Wasn't the McLaren F1 3.2?

So this can launch to 60 quicker despite a significantly worse power/weight ratio (GTRs are known to be heavy)? Must have a hell of a launch control system.

Any idea what the servicing schedule is like, quite frequent iirc?

Epic car though. 8)

P9UNK

120 posts

187 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
It is great to see cars like this but for me these precision machines are the very definition of 'clinical'... still amazing piece of kit none-the-less.

Monkeylegend

29,226 posts

260 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
Fittster said:
First person to use the expression playstation to describe the car is a pratt.
That would be you then wink

Only one "t" in prat.

P9UNK

120 posts

187 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
george h said:
I don't know if it's just me but the GTR leaves me feeling cold. I would much rather have something less capable, but is more of an event to drive it.
I agree, they are amazing in one way but this would be the last car I would get into at a COTY event, which no doubt it would be at. I drove the previous incarnation and it felt numb compared to the Elise I owned, but hugely capable of course. Each to their own and a great alternative to the typical super car I guess.

glm1977

200 posts

190 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
DayTrader said:
vrooom said:
what about it's weight issue, it is nearly 2 tonne car.
...that does 0-60 in 3 seconds and is faster round the Nurburgring than Enzo's, Carrera GT's, Zonda's...hardly an issue?!
If I recall correctly, the engineers at Nissan wanted the weight in order to get a high level of grip at lower speeds - as aero downforce on road car at low speed is hard to achieve, so they use the weight to compensate. Please correct if wrong, but pretty sure that is what Kazutoshi Mizuno said when interviewed by PH a while back.

And as said, its obviously not an issue and works....

LuS1fer

43,508 posts

274 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
Phenomenally capable, I'm sure - but employing a stylist would have helped its cause. A pretty car can be forgiven a multitude of shortfalls, a utensil can't.

Gio G

2,995 posts

238 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
Still surprises me how such a big car, has very limited rear seats. Would appeal to many more, if you can sit a 10 year old in the back..

scampbird

332 posts

311 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
Here we go with the usual PH bh fest from a bunch of badge obsessed snobs, most of which probably haven't driven the car.

Lil' Joe

1,548 posts

215 months

Wednesday 6th April 2011
quotequote all
glm1977 said:
DayTrader said:
vrooom said:
what about it's weight issue, it is nearly 2 tonne car.
...that does 0-60 in 3 seconds and is faster round the Nurburgring than Enzo's, Carrera GT's, Zonda's...hardly an issue?!
If I recall correctly, the engineers at Nissan wanted the weight in order to get a high level of grip at lower speeds - as aero downforce on road car at low speed is hard to achieve, so they use the weight to compensate. Please correct if wrong, but pretty sure that is what Kazutoshi Mizuno said when interviewed by PH a while back.

And as said, its obviously not an issue and works....
Yes, that's right. He said the only way to get closest to an F1 car's downforce through fast and slow direction changes was to have a car that weighs 1700kgs, hence pressing more of the tyre's contact patch into the road more of the time.

Or something like that anyway, I'm sure someone can give a more detailed answer from his PH interview but that's how I read it.
smile