Godzilla (as they call it) Vs whatever it seems

[LeonOfTheDead]

and also with a such amount of power, even a little difference in air temperature or pressure con affect by some percentages the value of the power, and so the risk to obtain less than 1001 hp comes up again

[2ndclasscitizen]

Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead

a gt-r is pretty a standard car for a lot of reasons (from an engineering point of view).

Not really. Plasma-lined cylinder bores, transfer case-less active AWD, DSG gearbox, and on and on and on.

Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead

imo, they can be pretty sure about how much power the engines will have, without the need to add so much power just "to be sure".

Not without blueprinting and dynoing every engine they make they can't. Which was my point.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen

Not really. Plasma-lined cylinder bores, transfer case-less active AWD, DSG gearbox, and on and on and on.

these stuff are all already existing, while the dsg for the veyron was the first with 7 gears, and such a torque to handle, and it's a real engineering task to dissipate that amount of heat generated by the powertrain with 13 radiators in a car relatively small. avoiding the car to take off is another big problem, stopping it at 400 km/h is another one, avoiding all the mechanisms to destroy themselves for the power and torque, the same for brakes and tires...that was my point.
what you quote are stuff i would call "mechanical technology" that is to say tasks of construction or production matters. but imo the GT-R simply use, maybe first time on a "production car", already existing technology for other applications

Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen

Not without blueprinting and dynoing every engine they make they can't. Which was my point.

that would be only another test, but if an engine developed a certain power, if the process of building it doesn't have some problems (machineries supposed to built the engine are electronically controlled so you can know if there was some problem) there aren't reasons to say other engines built by the same machineries develop different powers. and i'm pretty sure almost every engine is tested (as for any other mobile parts) just to see if it works before to mount it on the car. in this way you can reduce the researching area if you find any problem.

[Kitdy]

Originally Posted by Ferrer

I don't care what time does the GT-R get. I still can't like it.

What's your issue with it?

[Ferrer]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

What's your issue with it?

It doesn't look good, it's not elegant, it has no flair. It's a computer on wheels.

Oh and it has a stupid gearbox, weights too much, and I don't want four wheel drive.

[kingofthering]

Originally Posted by Ferrer

It doesn't look good, it's not elegant, it has no flair. It's a computer on wheels.

Oh and it has a stupid gearbox, weights too much, and I don't want four wheel drive.

I'm sure they said the same thing about the Audi Quattro coupe when it first came out.

[70cuda88]

Originally Posted by Ferrer

It doesn't look good, it's not elegant, it has no flair. It's a computer on wheels.

Oh and it has a stupid gearbox, weights too much, and I don't want four wheel drive.

i agree with 4 out of 7 dentists on this one

[2ndclasscitizen]

Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead

these stuff are all already existing, while the dsg for the veyron was the first with 7 gears, and such a torque to handle, and it's a real engineering task to dissipate that amount of heat generated by the powertrain with 13 radiators in a car relatively small. avoiding the car to take off is another big problem, stopping it at 400 km/h is another one, avoiding all the mechanisms to destroy themselves for the power and torque, the same for brakes and tires...that was my point.
what you quote are stuff i would call "mechanical technology" that is to say tasks of construction or production matters. but imo the GT-R simply use, maybe first time on a "production car", already existing technology for other applications

There's nothing really advanced and ground breaking about the engineering in the Veyron. It's all fairly standard stuff, just built bigger and tougher. Having lots of radiators isn't an amazing technical feat. Aerodynamics have been around for a long time.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen

There's nothing really advanced and ground breaking about the engineering in the Veyron. It's all fairly standard stuff, just built bigger and tougher. Having lots of radiators isn't an amazing technical feat. Aerodynamics have been around for a long time.

are you kidding me?
do you think it's normal to have thirteen radiators on a car? the heat developed from a powertrain good for over 1000 hp isn't just 5 times bigger than what a 200 hp golf gti can produce. and it's not only more in quantity but also in its "power", so more dangerous. even the radiator of the steering begins to be an issue, all that weight and power are not so easy to handle in a roundabout as it could seems. example: ferrari was considering to use a KTM radiator for the steering of the v12 cars to bring down costs. so not a very small radiator, and they aren't so heavy, powerful or AWD (up to now).
the aerodynamics of a car isn't that of a plane, but the Veyron' shape and the speed it can achieve make it more similar to a plane (well, to a wing to say the truth) than to a car at high speed, so it wasn't something already seen. and automakers are still having problems of vibrations and noises at speed higher than 300 km/h, btw.
developing a gearbox good for that torque isn't usual, since the standards required from this car aren't those of a tunned mercedes or of a race car, first of all, quality issues would destroy the marque since the car costs so much money. then the only dsg previously avaible was the one you could find in the quoted golf...not very similar cars.
there were also no tires good for this kind of speed-acceleration-weight, and just to give you an example they employed the B.Engineering Edonis, which was of course lighter and less powerful, but it stressed the tires more than "standard" supercars.
all this problems raised the weight, so all was then even more stressing for the parts just engineered, and the process was to start again.
i am not a fan of the veyron, but vw's engineers are not so fools to need 5 years to develop that car. as an example, Riccardo, the producer of the gearbox, used to have 70 engineers just to develop the veyron's trasmission.
saying the veyron is just a bigger supercar is like to say every car is like it's predecessor just a little nicer-faster-etc

[2ndclasscitizen]

But none of that technology is break-through, it's just been engineered bigger and stronger. A radiator is not advanced engineering, nor is having a lot of them. Active aerodynamics were first explored on F1 years ago.

[whiteballz]

I have to agree with 2ndCC, yes its cool that they built stuff stronger, but its all been done in smaller scale before - and 70 people on just the 'box? No wonder the f*cking thing costs so much.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen

But none of that technology is break-through, it's just been engineered bigger and stronger. A radiator is not advanced engineering, nor is having a lot of them. Active aerodynamics were first explored on F1 years ago.

who did mention active aero?!

Originally Posted by whiteballz

I have to agree with 2ndCC, yes its cool that they built stuff stronger, but its all been done in smaller scale before - and 70 people on just the 'box? No wonder the f*cking thing costs so much.

it costs that much because of more than 70 people working on a very difficult project. probably a wrong one, since it was a marketing idea, but nearly perfectly executed.

the car may not be perfect, this is not my point, what I am saying is that the EXECUTION of the project is excellent, from the engineering point of view, because, i am talking about engineering, not simply about a car. and i'm beginning to think you don't have sufficient insight on the subject. I'm not doubting your knowledge about cars at all, it could be perfect, but it does not pertain to the argument.

Knowledge about cars =/= knowledge about engineering.

[2ndclasscitizen]

Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead

the car may not be perfect, this is not my point, what I am saying is that the EXECUTION of the project is excellent, from the engineering point of view, because, i am talking about engineering, not simply about a car. and i'm beginning to think you don't have sufficient insight on the subject. I'm not doubting your knowledge about cars at all, it could be perfect, but it does not pertain to the argument.

Knowledge about cars =/= knowledge about engineering.

Pull your head out of your arse. You're opinion of engineering seems to be being able to make things stronger is more advanced engineering than being able to develop new technologies.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen

Pull your head out of your arse. You're opinion of engineering seems to be being able to make things stronger is more advanced engineering than being able to develop new technologies.

thank you for you kind words.
my opinions, based on what I have learned in my engineering career up to now, would not be swayed by your "arguments" since they aren't different from so many others i have already heard, and typical of who doesn't know what he is talking about, as Murphy said.
i hoped to have an interesting and technical conversation with someone, but it seems you were the wrong individual. at first i would've liked to know about your technical and/or engineering background, if any, but this was before you started to make shallow, childish and, in the end, offensive comments.

[NSXType-R]

Well one way to settle the argument would be to put the GT-R on a dyno and figure out how much real wheel hp it has.

Or rip the engine out of the bay and see how much it puts out.

It already does 0-60 in about 3.5 seconds, give or take.

I find it hard to believe too, doing the Nurburgring in that time. But since it already does 0-60 in that time, I don't have much to doubt.