RE: 2012 GT-R To Shave 8 Secs From 'Ring Lap-Time?
Discussion
I would nefer have japcrap datsun as it drives itslef and is onyl for peeple who cant drive lol iw ould have porsh or Lambo they have no playstation electronical bits and can pull girls in clubs LOL
Still not buying the deliberately making it heavy line though. Maybe something is still lost in translation.
Still not buying the deliberately making it heavy line though. Maybe something is still lost in translation.
PhillipM said:
Unfortunately for your theory, reality and packaging constraints get in the way.
No car builder in their right mind is going to add 400kg of floor to bring the CoG down, even on shear cost grounds, not only that, but because it would have a massive effect on the overall traction and weight of other systems on the car, and bigger brakes and suspension members, giving more unsprung weight, increased damper fade, etc, etc
The explanation given for the car weight was pure marketing BS.
The only BS is this text above here ^^ No car builder in their right mind is going to add 400kg of floor to bring the CoG down, even on shear cost grounds, not only that, but because it would have a massive effect on the overall traction and weight of other systems on the car, and bigger brakes and suspension members, giving more unsprung weight, increased damper fade, etc, etc
The explanation given for the car weight was pure marketing BS.
coyft said:
The current game from all mainstream car makers is to maximise performance through the effective use of technology. The list is endless Audi R8, BMW M5, Porsche GT2, Ferrari 458, Lamborghini Aventador, McLaren MP4 12-C, the list is endless. WHichever way you cut and dice it, Nissan are the clear leaders, they have absolutely trounced ALL the competition if you measure it on a £ per performance basis. Hats off to them.
All the above cars are fine, they have every right to be what they are.The problem is just the attitudes of those numpties who only want cars built and designed one way and one way only.
Trommel said:
I would nefer have japcrap datsun as it drives itslef and is onyl for peeple who cant drive lol iw ould have porsh or Lambo they have no playstation electronical bits and can pull girls in clubs LOL
Still not buying the deliberately making it heavy line though. Maybe something is still lost in translation.
There's a lot to say for pulling girls in clubs my friend.Still not buying the deliberately making it heavy line though. Maybe something is still lost in translation.
scorcher said:
Instead of throwing more power at it ,I reckon it would be a better car if they put it on a diet and shaved about 300kgs off of it.
Indeed, however the "The GT-R is a two door coupe with a very big boot. Use your journalistic skill to imagine what might be next." statement strongly implies to me that they are considering making a convertible version, so in reality they are probably going to ADD 300kg... 
CoupeCrazy said:
Sorry but you appear to be talking mythical pot of gold at the end of the rainbow non-sense here.
A pair of tyres already doing its best to provide laterial grip will leave very little for corner exit, there is no more traction to find yourself.
Move some of the traction load to the front tyres as the turn straightens up, and you'll find that all four tyres have greater potential. The limit is higher, but the danger is still there if you go past that limit.
All this talk about purity and reward are journalistic babble and just an attempt to undermine the approach that Nissan took to get maximise performance in various conditions.
What tosh.A pair of tyres already doing its best to provide laterial grip will leave very little for corner exit, there is no more traction to find yourself.
Move some of the traction load to the front tyres as the turn straightens up, and you'll find that all four tyres have greater potential. The limit is higher, but the danger is still there if you go past that limit.
All this talk about purity and reward are journalistic babble and just an attempt to undermine the approach that Nissan took to get maximise performance in various conditions.
You brought up the subject of adding cut slicks or electronics/4wd to improve performance.
I merely pointed out that exploiting the potential increase in performance that the former provides requires a certain degree of driver skill.
I won't dispute that, all other things being equal, 4wd would give more performance - and would never seek to "undermine the approach Nissan took". Their approach is valid and has produced a formidable car. It just isn't one that works for or excites me.
Are you regretting having ordered/bought a GT-R now it's apparent not everyone loves them?
[quote]
Even then, your GT-R vs hot-hatch explanation doesn't wash either, the load curves of the tyres may well mean that even if the hatchback has more weight transfer, so for a given tyre size the hatch may well generate just as much cornering grip even with the inside rear wheel dangling in the air, simply because it can benefit from a higher friction co-efficient from the tyres
[/quote]
Why do people like you keep regurgitati g the same internet crap?
tyre curves are unknown for all practical purposes, but the understanding is maximum net grip is obtained when tyres are LOADED equally. This could be skinny 175 tyres or 275 tyres, you set up the chassis the best you can to minimise the difference between inner and outer tyre loadings.
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.
Even then, your GT-R vs hot-hatch explanation doesn't wash either, the load curves of the tyres may well mean that even if the hatchback has more weight transfer, so for a given tyre size the hatch may well generate just as much cornering grip even with the inside rear wheel dangling in the air, simply because it can benefit from a higher friction co-efficient from the tyres
Edited by PhillipM on Wednesday 26th October 18:02
[/quote]
Why do people like you keep regurgitati g the same internet crap?
tyre curves are unknown for all practical purposes, but the understanding is maximum net grip is obtained when tyres are LOADED equally. This could be skinny 175 tyres or 275 tyres, you set up the chassis the best you can to minimise the difference between inner and outer tyre loadings.
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.
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 its funny you assume GTR ownership is on the strength of what snobs think of them. You wouldnt be aspiring to 'extract' performance from a kart if the media and press did not make it the done thing to do as a car enthuast.
And its funny you assume GTR ownership is on the strength of what snobs think of them. You wouldnt be aspiring to 'extract' performance from a kart if the media and press did not make it the done thing to do as a car enthuast.
LooneyTunes said:
What tosh.
You brought up the subject of adding cut slicks or electronics/4wd to improve performance.
I merely pointed out that exploiting the potential increase in performance that the former provides requires a certain degree of driver skill.
I won't dispute that, all other things being equal, 4wd would give more performance - and would never seek to "undermine the approach Nissan took". Their approach is valid and has produced a formidable car. It just isn't one that works for or excites me.
Are you regretting having ordered/bought a GT-R now it's apparent not everyone loves them?
You brought up the subject of adding cut slicks or electronics/4wd to improve performance.
I merely pointed out that exploiting the potential increase in performance that the former provides requires a certain degree of driver skill.
I won't dispute that, all other things being equal, 4wd would give more performance - and would never seek to "undermine the approach Nissan took". Their approach is valid and has produced a formidable car. It just isn't one that works for or excites me.
Are you regretting having ordered/bought a GT-R now it's apparent not everyone loves them?
LooneyTunes said:
Fine if you're a child of the video game generation: nail the gas and let the system sort out the mess you've created. There are, however, a few of us left out there who like a little more involvement beyond just choosing the lines.
Yup, here's the elektrikery sorting the mess out - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgtBEoDXGuEand even with TC on, it looked pretty twitchy to me.
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.
My bet? Not very long.
CoupeCrazy said:
All this talk about purity and reward are journalistic babble and just an attempt to undermine the approach that Nissan took to get maximise performance in various conditions.
That is a brilliant statement!I would suggest the vast majority of people who post these "car drives itself" type of responses are probably like me and would s
t their pants at the slightest sign of lost traction mid corner at speed and would be very grateful of said driver aids to save their pride and joy going backwards into farmer giles backyard!The GTR has a switch on the dashboard to turn these features off for those driving gods out there, be my guest (not in mine though) lol!
I thought that lateral grip was inversely proportional to weight, whereby (irrespective of height of CoG) the more weight on a wheel or an axle, the more centrifugal force the rubber had "to fight against" in a corner, therefore reducing the speed at which said wheel/axle started sliding.
I thought that weight was only useful for longitudinal traction so weight had to be a compromise between lat grip and traction, in other words that adding weight (and I don't refer to downforce, I mean actual mass) was a bad thing for lateral grip.
Can someone with good knowledge of car dynamics correct me please ?
I thought that weight was only useful for longitudinal traction so weight had to be a compromise between lat grip and traction, in other words that adding weight (and I don't refer to downforce, I mean actual mass) was a bad thing for lateral grip.
Can someone with good knowledge of car dynamics correct me please ?
CoupeCrazy said:
Guvernator said:
To be honest I've always taken this as nothing more than marketing BS too. The whole world and his dog know that less weight is better than more weight. For him to make a statement like that is contrary to all established car dynamics theory. Judging by that, F1 cars should all weigh 3 tonnes as they would go around corners quicker. I really can't believe someone of his standing would make a statement like that and expect it to be taken seriously but some people obviously fell for it. The GTR is a quick car despite it's relatively heavy weight, not because of it.
Sorry I missed this post earlier.The tyre's grip potential changes because of weight and load transfer. The maximum amount of grip from a pair of tyres is when they are equallity loaded.
Take the GTR, it weighs 1700+ kilos, yet has a center of gravity height of 18 inches, and a track width of 62 inches that means the difference between inner and outer tyre load is not as extreme as say a 1200 kg hot hatch with a 22 inch CoG and a average 58 inch track.
Moreover so, a light car with a high CoG during cornering can quite easily completely unload the inside tyre - an unloaded tyre is useless.
Less net grip.
My understanding from that piece on how the GTR came about was that it was designed from the 4 tyre contact patches up, with the goal of keeping the tyre grip-to-load ratio at the maximum possible at all times. Consequently every design descision made on the car was linked back to its effect on the grip-to-load ratio.
All being equal, a car that can make use of the maximum possible grip-to-load ratio at all times is going to be faster than one that doesn't.
Apply that optimum grip-to-load ratio to a 2+2 GT road car (so no big aero) with 275 bhp/ton and you end up with the GTR, which explains why its so unconventionally quick given it's relative heft.
Bloody clever imo!
And yes you can apply the same theories to a smaller or larger car, but I doubt there's much room either side of the GTR that would be practical.
peter450 said:
PhillipM said:
Get over yourself.
Dangerous is it?
Hands up if anyone that read my post just died in a grip-related accident, no? Oh well.
Well if there dead, that might be hard to do.....Dangerous is it?
Hands up if anyone that read my post just died in a grip-related accident, no? Oh well.
Edited by PhillipM on Wednesday 26th October 16:52
To all... It's not pure etc theorists. If that car had a badge from Ferrari(or any other manufacturer of that ilk) on the nose of it, there would be sticky spots on your trousers.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff