gtr 0-60 in 3.5 seconds how?

[gt2russ]

Hi how does this car get from 0 to 60 so quick.I know its all computerised 4 wd advanced automatic.

But it weighs 1750kg and has only 485 bhp a lambo needs 600 bhp ish and weighs less has 4wd and does 0 to 60 slower

[Trommel]

The gearbox - it works brilliantly. Drive one and see.

[Herman Toothrot]

I must admit it's never really "computed" for me, it does seem too heavy and too little power even with clever four wheel drive. I guess really it is too heavy else the gear boxes wouldn't break, maybe thats why the V spec is all about weight loss? I remember the huge thread, but was it ever concluded if the 3.5sec was with the "void warantee" launch control on or off, as in 3.5 = void warantee so really in the real world its slower?

[Trommel]

Herman Toothrot said:

was it ever concluded if the 3.5sec was with the "void warantee" launch control on or off, as in 3.5 = void warantee so really in the real world its slower?

Launch control no longer has warranty implications and the advertised numbers have in any case been matched without using it (i.e. just stamping on the accelerator).

[Herman Toothrot]

Gazboy said:

The ratios will also make a difference:

LP640:

Gear Type 6-Speed Manual
Final Drive 2.53:1
1st Gear Ratio 3.091:1 (64mph)
2nd Gear Ratio 2.105:1 (94mph)
3rd Gear Ratio 1.565:1 (127mph)
4th Gear Ratio 1.241:1 (160mph)
5th Gear Ratio 1.065:1 (186mph)
6th Gear Ratio 0.939:1 (211mph)

GTR:

1st gear: 4.056 (39mph at 7000rpm)
2nd gear: 2.301 (68mph at 7000rpm)
3rd gear: 1.595 (98mph at 7000rpm)
4th gear: 1.248 (126mph at 7000rpm)
5th gear: 1.001 (147mph at 7000rpm)
6th gear: 0.796 (197mph at 7000rpm)

Rear end/final drive ratio: 3.700

Wow theose lambo ratios seem silly high, the GTR ratios look almost lie my MR2's with the addition of a 6th.

[Herman Toothrot]

Trommel said:

Herman Toothrot said:

was it ever concluded if the 3.5sec was with the "void warantee" launch control on or off, as in 3.5 = void warantee so really in the real world its slower?

Launch control no longer has warranty implications and the advertised numbers have in any case been matched without using it (i.e. just stamping on the accelerator).

Cool. It is very impressive, still just doesn't compute. To have that grip level to move that weight, that suddenly just makes me imagine big banging noises as gear boxes and drive shafts explode. I'd be scared launching something that fast if it weighed 1200kg, 1000kg i'd not be 100% comfortable with, 700kg would be ok and computes. I'd love to have a go in an STi typeR based Mutaya stripped to the bone for track use, that'd compute with 3.5 second 60's

[Trommel]

Herman Toothrot said:

Cool. It is very impressive, still just doesn't compute. To have that grip level to move that weight, that suddenly just makes me imagine big banging noises as gear boxes and drive shafts explode.

No different from anything else with a lot of grip (like an Impreza). 997 Turbos get to 60 in under 4 seconds, and aren't exactly lightweight. The Veyron also seems to manage pretty well (I've only heard of one breaking).

[WOTS A STAGEA]

Sorry dont understand half the posts here.
Loads of posts asking how or giving reasons why it cant do it when every article/road test say it does.
Remember the drive system is unlike any of the cars you use as examples and it is geared spot on for that 0-60 time.

As said before go in one you wont argue then. And yes I have been in one .

[paul_k]

Can I suggest buying one, running it in for 1200 miles getting it serviced and try it...

The acceleration in 2nd and 3rd on bumpy wet roads and incredible handling is what really blows me away.

[deviant]

Amazing that the GTR time includes a gear change in to 2nd!

How cruel do you have to be to get that 3.5 second time?
Will it let you do a traditional left foot on brake, right foot on throttle launch or do you just floor it and let the car figure out the rest?

[Mr E]

deviant said:

Amazing that the GTR time includes a gear change in to 2nd!

With a DSG type box, I guess that gearchange doesn't matter...

[Trommel]

deviant said:

do you just floor it and let the car figure out the rest?

Yes.

[300bhp/ton]

gt2russ said:

Hi how does this car get from 0 to 60 so quick.I know its all computerised 4 wd advanced automatic.

But it weighs 1750kg and has only 485 bhp a lambo needs 600 bhp ish and weighs less has 4wd and does 0 to 60 slower

Partly in the GTR's case its achieved buy nearly annihilating the drivetrain, hence all the talk about it in the past.

Put its certainly possible, its just about grip, traction and getting the power down. Many street driven drag cars are capable of 0-60mph in the 2.7 sec range and that's only using RWD, but it needs to be setup to do this.

Something like this will crack very low 0-60mph times and not always need huge HP to do it.

[300bhp/ton]

Gazboy said:

A live axel and wrinkle wall drag radials on a drag strip?

Lets see it do the same on a set of Goodyear Eagles on the road.

Yep, but was just trying to highlight that 0-60mph times don't really mean all that much and with the right setup they can be very low. The R35 just happens to have a good setup out of the factory.

Gazboy said:

Also the knackered drivetrain has been blown out of propoertion in a big way, nothing will survive abuse.

Well actually lots of things survive well, take that Mustang and 100's or 1000's more across the S are used most weeks of the year doing this will no ill affect. I think this is where the GTR's issue's stemmed from, the US guys expected it to last with the same kind of abuse. It doesn't take away how great the GTR is, just highlights different cultural expectations.

[300bhp/ton]

Gazboy said:

That's the key - cultural differences, though quite why the Americans thought you could launch a high-grip/high torque 4wd car repeatedly and thought it wouldn't break is beyond me. A Sapphire Cosworth 4x4 has the same box as a Griffith 500 but you wouldn't expect it to do 70 hard launches, actually it probably wouldn't survive in the Griff either.

Its not that they aren't as clever. Its just for the money they could potentially have bought a Viper, Vette, Shelby Mustang or somthing else 'home grown'

All carrying similar stats in the 1/4 mile to the GTR. All of the above could be taken most weekends of the year and thrashed yet need next to nothing to be done to them to keep them going. It's not unreasonable to think a car being pitched into this market should be able to be treated the same.

I know guys on US forums who take their every day road cars drag racing at the weekend and during the week (in the evenings). Many will run modifications and be quicker than a GTR down the strip. All require little maintenance. The worst offender is actually the 4th Gen Fbody (like my Camaro), GM fitted a weak ass 10 bolt axle which is quite easy to break compared to most American cars. However if it does break you can buy a stronger replacement for a little over $2k which is not a lot compared to repairing the GTR.

Don't get me wrong, I love the GTR (its in my profile on my wish list). But I do think Nissan totally passed on their market research for the US market.

It would be like selling a machine gun, but saying only use it on single fire mode.

They said here's a car that can crack 60 in 'x' sec and run a 'y' 1/4 mile. So the customer bought it and expected to be able to use it how it was advertised.

[300bhp/ton]

Gazboy said:

I don't seem to recall them advertising the stats with LC mode.

They did, although slightly indirectly and I suspect without really knowing the full extent.

A while back on the GTR main website, one of the press releases banged on about 3.5 sec 0-60mph times. I think it was the only place Nissan claimed performance figures at that time.

From this same official website they also had a download of a magazine article (Motor Trend or C&D, can't remember which..) where indeed they clocked the cited 0-60mph time. In the article it also had full details of how to use LC and activate it.

So yes, Nissan did advertise this performance and the use of LC and how to activate it. But I admit it's not clear cut.

Gazboy said:

Maybe Nissan did under estimate the American's mechanical sympathy, maybe they assumed the yanks would realise a hard launch in a 4wd will lunch something and treat it accordingly.

I'm sure Nissan are aware that you can take your daily driver Mustang to the quarter mile on a Friday night after work and do 50 runs, but it's 2wd so it will have some 'give' and won't be subject to the same shock-loading - quite simply if you use too much throttle you'll light up the rears.

Also why compromise a gear change/shift action for an industrial transmission when most cars (ie ROW) won't be doing 70 hard launches but will be driven on decent A roads. A bad gearshift can ruin a car - the SN95 Mustang I drove had a shift action like stirring a bucket of bricks, where as an MX5's change is an absolute joy. This does seem to be a reoccurring theme amongst homegrown American cars in European journalism.

I'll add that the mkiv Supra also has a bulletproof tranny but it also feels like it was lifted out of a truck (maybe it was) which again the Europeans considered it a bad thing but hey it'll survive a 1400bhp launch so the Americans are happy.

I agree such gearboxes are often sited as not great, although the after market caters heavily to fix most of these complaints. A nice quick shifter is usually $100-200 and takes a couple of hours to fit at home. Most guys interested in fast cars do this.

Modifying is and using the cars is just part of the American lifestyle and culture I guess.

In the UK its rather different, very few drag strips, all not that accessible and expensive to use. Roads not suitable for drag racing and a very small culture in modifying cars.

[Trommel]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1bHGaV-Lvw