Sport Auto Super Test of ZR1

[henk4]

The German magazine has tested the ZR1 and is very pleased with the car. Their only criticism relates to the very direct steering around the center point. This they consider to be working very well on smooth surfaces, but is also given as the reason why the Ring Lap time ended with a slightly disappointing 7.38. According to Sport Auto the steering has problems in coping with the undulating surface of the Ring, making the car difficult to handle. The realised time is a long way off the 7.26 that GM managed to do last year. (and to heat up the discussion, 7.38 is exactly the time a certain Japanese car managed in the hand of the same tester)

[LeonOfTheDead]

What a wonderful world, isn't it?
So basically once again only the supercars with a carbon fiber exotic eventually lapped the Ring under the 7:30 mark.

[PRC777]

"The[y] realised time is a long way off the 7.26 that GM managed to do last year. (and to heat up the discussion, 7.38 is exactly the time a certain Japanese car managed in the hand of the same tester)"



Possibly favoritism for their German cars?

[2ndclasscitizen]

"The[y] realised time is a long way off the 7.26 that GM managed to do last year. (and to heat up the discussion, 7.38 is exactly the time a certain Japanese car managed in the hand of the same tester)"



Possibly favoritism for their German cars?

Because an American car set the same time as a Japanese one?

[Ferrer]

What about living with it everyday Pieter?

[PRC777]

Because an American car set the same time as a Japanese one?

...that were both driven by what could've been a German driver?
Alas, I am just speculating. According to Henk's thread, GM had tested the car and had recieved a lower lap time. I'm just saying that the journalist could've been a little biased. Chillax.:o

[LeonOfTheDead]

Right now all the cars involved in this war, the Beetle GT2, the Plastic ZR1 and the LOL-GT-R, have been tested by independent drivers and achieved higher lap times.

[Ferrer]

Right now all the cars involved in this war, the Beetle GT2, the Plastic ZR1 and the LOL-GT-R, have been tested by independent drivers and achieved higher lap times.
The Datsun has a go faster version that hasn't been tested yet, has it?

[LeonOfTheDead]

The Datsun has a go faster version that hasn't been tested yet, has it?

the Vspec? I don't think it has been tested actually, still the lap time under the 7:30 mark was achieved with the standard car.

[henk4]

What about living with it everyday Pieter?

have to wait for the diesel version...;)

[Kitdy]

The German magazine has tested the ZR1 and is very pleased with the car. Their only criticism relates to the very direct steering around the center point.

How the hell can you win? So many car reviewers complain of dead on centre steering feel and then the ZR1 addresses this and is criticized?

I think that is kinda bullshit.

I don't really see the lap time as disappointing.

[henk4]

How the hell can you win? So many car reviewers complain of dead on centre steering feel and then the ZR1 addresses this and is criticized?

I think that is kinda bullshit.

I don't really see the lap time as disappointing.
It is not bullshit, they explain what the consequences are. It works very well on smooth surfaces, but it is slightly counterproductive on rougher tracks. That's all.
As far as the laptime is concerned, it always rather depends on the weather of the day. 7.38 is also just one second faster than a Ferrari Scuderia.
I just posted it to show that factory times are not always achievable. In case of the GTR many people would call the factory car a "ringer" (how appropriate), but so far I have not seen such a remark in the context of the ZR1........

[Kitdy]

It is not bullshit, they explain what the consequences are. It works very well on smooth surfaces, but it is slightly counterproductive on rougher tracks. That's all.
As far as the laptime is concerned, it always rather depends on the weather of the day. 7.38 is also just one second faster than a Ferrari Scuderia.
I just posted it to show that factory times are not always achievable. In case of the GTR many people would call the factory car a "ringer" (how appropriate), but so far I have not seen such a remark in the context of the ZR1........

My point was that it's a bit paradoxical; the journalists bitch about lack of on centre feel then get it and bitch about it some more. It also seems as though it cost laptime but maybe not driving enjoyment? And truthfully, what's more important? I think I'd prefer a direct on centre steering feel anyways, and if it doesn't get the best laptimes who cares?

The Scuderia is more of a track car than the ZR1 and although it's down on power, it costs what, three times as much as the Corvette in North America? So the horsepower advantage that the Corvette has can be made up by all the fancy gadgetry, mid-engine design, and more advanced suspension set up of the much more expensive Ferrari.

Concerning the lack of ringer claims for the ZR1 while they existed for the GT-R, as I recall, Nissan has a precedent of using ringers (or a suspicion of using ringers) for lap times and thus suspicion was not unreasonably put on them when they produced the lap time that the GT-R put out, especially considering it's power output and weight.

Full disclosure, I prefer the ZR1 over the GT-R but damn I still like the GT-R and respect the hell outta it. Just were I to have one in my garage I'd take the lighter, non-turbocharged Chevy.

Throw in a Scuderia though, and I think I'd risk being perceived as a badge whore and take it over the ZR1 and GT-R. No less, all three are exceptional machines.

Are you sure you aren't letting your bias enter into your analysis henk? Your lack of appreciation of basically any American vehicle is well known.

[wwgkd]

My point was that it's a bit paradoxical; the journalists bitch about lack of on centre feel then get it and bitch about it some more. It also seems as though it cost laptime but maybe not driving enjoyment? And truthfully, what's more important? I think I'd prefer a direct on centre steering feel anyways, and if it doesn't get the best laptimes who cares?

The Scuderia is more of a track car than the ZR1 and although it's down on power, it costs what, three times as much as the Corvette in North America? So the horsepower advantage that the Corvette has can be made up by all the fancy gadgetry, mid-engine design, and more advanced suspension set up of the much more expensive Ferrari.

Concerning the lack of ringer claims for the ZR1 while they existed for the GT-R, as I recall, Nissan has a precedent of using ringers (or a suspicion of using ringers) for lap times and thus suspicion was not unreasonably put on them when they produced the lap time that the GT-R put out, especially considering it's power output and weight.

Full disclosure, I prefer the ZR1 over the GT-R but damn I still like the GT-R and respect the hell outta it. Just were I to have one in my garage I'd take the lighter, non-turbocharged Chevy.

Throw in a Scuderia though, and I think I'd risk being perceived as a badge whore and take it over the ZR1 and GT-R. No less, all three are exceptional machines.

Are you sure you aren't letting your bias enter into your analysis henk? Your lack of appreciation of basically any American vehicle is well known.

I think another part of the ringer issue was that the GT-R was the first in the new breed of ring wars to post times, and if you look at the cars specs it seems highly improbably. The ZR1 on the other hand has a much better power to weight so it seems more believeable.

Also, ACR FTW. That is all.

[Kitdy]

I think another part of the ringer issue was that the GT-R was the first in the new breed of ring wars to post times, and if you look at the cars specs it seems highly improbably. The ZR1 on the other hand has a much better power to weight so it seems more believeable.

Also, ACR FTW. That is all.

Yeah you raise a good point - I think I said the second point in a different way.

I guess it's fitting that a Jeep driver would take the supercar with the truck engine, isn't it?

[wwgkd]

Yeah you raise a good point - I think I said the second point in a different way.

I guess it's fitting that a Jeep driver would take the supercar with the truck engine, isn't it?

lol. Never thought of it that way.

[Kitdy]

lol. Never thought of it that way.

You just imagine that engine in your Jeep, along with the adjustable wing that the ACR has gleaming proudly off the rear end of your whip.

[wwgkd]

You just imagine that engine in your Jeep, along with the adjustable wing that the ACR has gleaming proudly off the rear end of your whip.

You think you're joking but years ago I measured my jeep to see if there was any possible way it could fit in the engine bay or behind the drivers seat. Sadly no. Guess I have to stick with the 5.7 hemi.

[Kitdy]

You think you're joking but years ago I measured my jeep to see if there was any possible way it could fit in the engine bay or behind the drivers seat. Sadly no. Guess I have to stick with the 5.7 hemi.

What model and year is your Jeep anyways?

[Guibo]

How the hell can you win? So many car reviewers complain of dead on centre steering feel and then the ZR1 addresses this and is criticized?

They have improved the steering, but that does not mean it is yet the equal of rivals. The criticism raised by Sport Auto isn't just about the feel (read on)...


My point was that it's a bit paradoxical; the journalists bitch about lack of on centre feel then get it and bitch about it some more. It also seems as though it cost laptime but maybe not driving enjoyment? And truthfully, what's more important? I think I'd prefer a direct on centre steering feel anyways, and if it doesn't get the best laptimes who cares?

The Scuderia is more of a track car than the ZR1 and although it's down on power, it costs what, three times as much as the Corvette in North America? So the horsepower advantage that the Corvette has can be made up by all the fancy gadgetry, mid-engine design, and more advanced suspension set up of the much more expensive Ferrari.

Throw in a Scuderia though, and I think I'd risk being perceived as a badge whore and take it over the ZR1 and GT-R. No less, all three are exceptional machines.

One other thing about the Scuderia is that it has better aero development than the ZR1, which produces too much lift, and it's not well balanced front to rear.
The very fast steering of the ZR1 was beneficial on the Hockenheim club circuit; here it was easy to use the steering to control the rear end sliding, and as a result, the ZR1 posted a very excellent lap time of just 1:09.7. Hockenheim is smooth, flat, with good sightlines and safe run-off areas.
The faster Nurburgring has undulations, bumps, crests that coincide with turns, and much less runoff area. Here, you need a car that is stable, that instills supreme confidence. The ZR1's quick steering, which was an asset on the Hockenheim club circuit, now becomes a liability. It adds to the nervousness of the car, and consequently, less confidence for the driver to push as hard as he might otherwise. Combined with the uneven lift of the ZR1, and it becomes even more clear why it would not be faster; Sport Auto noted the ZR1 getting airborne in places and it was not balanced when it landed.

This is what people who were calling Nissan cheaters failed to realize: the Nordschleife is not like any other track. There's a whole littany of reasons as to why the GT-R might be more optimized for this track compared to other cars.

And no, you would not necessarily be a badge whore to pick the Scuderia over the ZR1 and GT-R.

As for bias in Sport Auto, it's perfectly possible. Their chief test driver for the supertests is a known Porsche fan, and their parent company Motor Presse is located in Stuttgart...

[henk4]

Are you sure you aren't letting your bias enter into your analysis henk? Your lack of appreciation of basically any American vehicle is well known.

Read my first post again. I explained that SA was very happy with the car apart from this steering issue. It is not MY analysis.

As far as the bias of the tester is concerned, Von Saurma has done more than 20 supertests with different Porsche models, so he knows that car very well. He may have problems with the ZR1 but that would also be valid for the GTR.

[Ferrer]

The Scuderia is more of a track car than the ZR1 and although it's down on power, it costs what, three times as much as the Corvette in North America? So the horsepower advantage that the Corvette has can be made up by all the fancy gadgetry, mid-engine design, and more advanced suspension set up of the much more expensive Ferrari.
The Corvette ZR1 isn't that cheap. At most the 430 Scuderia can be 50% more expensive, I think.

[henk4]

I think another part of the ringer issue was that the GT-R was the first in the new breed of ring wars to post times, and if you look at the cars specs it seems highly improbably. The ZR1 on the other hand has a much better power to weight so it seems more believeable.

Also, ACR FTW. That is all.

What I intended to say is that every time a new GTR laptime was announced there were those who did not believe it.
The factory (Magnussen) Z06 time was also not realised in the SA supertest and that now happened again with the ZR1 time. So continuing the good spirit of mistrust, I will call the GM factory cars "ringers":)
And I think the GTR has proven that power to weight ratio is not the only thing that matters to achieve credible lap times.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Here I say it again, carbon fiber chassis. period.

[CapnBoost]

The specV has not been tested at the nurburgring. Nissan has been accused of using ringers, but no one (that i know of) has produced any evidence. GM itself was under fire when the "fastest four door sedan" was tested at the ring with what appears to be a roll cage.

As a result of having more rubber and less weight than the GTR, as well as the magneto-rheological suspension the ZR-1 posts a peak of about 1.6G (compared to 1.45G for the GTR) That being said, the GTR handles the faster corners better which lead to it's comparable times.

[LeonOfTheDead]

GM itself was under fire when the "fastest four door sedan" was tested at the ring with what appears to be a roll cage.

Thatw as because the lap time was achieved during the testing of the car.
Perhaps there was even the 70 kg ballast to simulate the passenger, as it usually is in endurance tests done at the Ring.
Do you remember if the roll cage was as large as the whole cabin, only the front seats or perhaps even just around the driver'

[CapnBoost]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/05/ctsv_greenhell.jpg (http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/cadillacctsvring2.jpg)

Click for hueg picture. Other critics have claimed that the suspension may not be stock, given how compressed it appears at the bottom of the hill. The GM blog claims that it's a harness bar, installed for driver safety and in such a manner as not to enhance structural rigidity. But then, there is no third party to confirm... The sparco evo seat on the passenger side is probably not stock either.

HvS tests with a helmet and the car's passive restraints.


You just imagine that engine in your Jeep, along with the adjustable wing that the ACR has gleaming proudly off the rear end of your whip.

Jeep Wrangler Viper swap (http://www.burnsvilleoffroad.com/Articles/05_11_06c.aspx)

[RacingManiac]

considering the car was at the bottom of a dip and in mid-corner, I'd say the suspension looks about normal....this is not a race car, nor does the suspension is designed for supporting downforce....find a pic of it cresting one of the many humps at Nordschleife I am sure you'll see tons of droop travel....

What was GM's claim for that car though(as in did they say its completely bone stock show room car?)? Its not unusual for a development car, even one thats basically production spec, to have safety equipment installed. 99% of the road car will never do this kind of driving, but for the tester/engineer, its their job to push a car on track, they need any safety they can get...a 4, 5 or 6point harness cannot be mounted without a bar behind the seat installed anyway, so its plausible to be a harness bar....

[CapnBoost]

I don't intend to suggest that it isn't plausible. But I do think that it's unreasonable for a manufacturer (or fans of a manufacturer) to claim that another company is fielding ringers when your own cars are pictured with non-stock parts clearly visible.

[G35COUPE]

I want a GTR in my drive way. That is all. :)

[G35COUPE]

Oh, i went to my secret track last weekend, with my little beast (G-35 Coupe). I flogged a Ford Mustang GT very soundly on my secret track. :)

[cmcpokey]

Oh, i went to my secret track last weekend, with my little beast (G-35 Coupe). I flogged a Ford Mustang GT very soundly on my secret track. :)

1. What does this have to do with anything.
2. I want to see what this "secret track" thing is.
3. I still don't believe you have a G35 (no hyphen)

[LotusLocost]

1. What does this have to do with anything.
2. I want to see what this "secret track" thing is.
3. I still don't believe you have a G35 (no hyphen)

It's all imaginary.
Didn't you have a little "Hobbes" in your childhood?

[LeonOfTheDead]

The role cage in the picture of the CTS-V looks one of those usually used while testing those cars on the RIng, and they are meant to protect the driver while not adding anything to the car if not weight, exactly because they are testing and developing the car, and they need accurate data on the actual product, not a tuned car.

That doesn't mean everything else is ok though.

[wwgkd]

What model and year is your Jeep anyways?

'94 wrangler. Getting to be old, but soon it will be a classic, so it's all good.


The role cage in the picture of the CTS-V looks one of those usually used while testing those cars on the RIng, and they are meant to protect the driver while not adding anything to the car if not weight, exactly because they are testing and developing the car, and they need accurate data on the actual product, not a tuned car.

That doesn't mean everything else is ok though.

I'd have to agree with the first part of that. I also don't see the critticism of the suspension. Given where the picture was taken I'd be surprised if the suspension wasn't pretty squat, doesn't mean it's modified. And if sparco seats took serious time off your laps instead of just giving you a little more support on long track sessions then those pills sold on the internet really will make you a foot longer and hottie123 really is a lonely explaymate just wanting money to come visit you. :rolleyes:

I think what most of the ringer claims come down to is that many people don't understand the difference between a factory supported effort with the track reserved for weeks at a time with expert drivers who are very familiar with the car and some guy who works for a magazine that decides to take a lap or two in a new car. It doesn't surprise me at all that people have trouble matching the factory times, especially on a track as long and complex as the 'ring.

[LeonOfTheDead]

I think what most of the ringer claims come down to is that many people don't understand the difference between a factory supported effort with the track reserved for weeks at a time with expert drivers who are very familiar with the car and some guy who works for a magazine that decides to take a lap or two in a new car. It doesn't surprise me at all that people have trouble matching the factory times, especially on a track as long and complex as the 'ring.

Horst Von Saurma is not only a well known journalist, but also a damn good driver. He took the Porsche Carrera GT a the 7:.30 mark for the first time, and lapped the Ring in I think 7:08 in a Donkevoort D8 a few years ago.
iirc he also regularly takes part in the races on the Ring, like the 24 hours.

[wwgkd]

Horst Von Saurma is not only a well known journalist, but also a damn good driver. He took the Porsche Carrera GT a the 7:.30 mark for the first time, and lapped the Ring in I think 7:08 in a Donkevoort D8 a few years ago.
iirc he also regularly takes part in the races on the Ring, like the 24 hours.

True, I guess I should have been clearer on what I meant. There are some excellent drivers who are familiar with the track working for magazines, but they don't have the time and support that the factory efforts do, nor are they as familiar with the cars. Von Saurma hasn't spent the last couple of years driving a ZR1 or GT-R for a living, and that makes pretty big a difference in your comfort level and driving ability in any given car.

[Badsight]

isnt the ZR1 stil a live rear axel ?

the Nord not being a perfect surface is why the Nord is a good indicator of real world user freindlyness

[Badsight]

And I think the GTR has proven that power to weight ratio is not the only thing that matters to achieve credible lap times.

i thought the head GTR engineer came out as saying the 7.27 was done on cut slicks ?!?!

ive read porsche engineers claim that for the weight of the GTR , it must have around 550 Hp to be doing a 7.27

of course , having very sorted confidence inspiring handeling can make up for a lot

[Ferrer]

isnt the ZR1 stil a live rear axel ?
No.

(5c)

[Kitdy]

No.

(5c)

Semi-elliptical transverse leaf springs I think.

[kingofthering]

i thought the head GTR engineer came out as saying the 7.27 was done on cut slicks ?!?!



No, that was a mistranslation/misunderstanding.

[clutch-monkey]

No, that was a mistranslation/misunderstanding.

yeah iirc you can't even get slicks or even semi slicks in wheels of that spec yet.

[culver]

isnt the ZR1 stil a live rear axel ?

the Nord not being a perfect surface is why the Nord is a good indicator of real world user freindlyness

To add to what others have said, no, it hasn't had a rigid axle since the C2 came out in 1963. The misconception comes about because the Corvette does use leaf springs (front and rear). People hear "leaf springs" and automatically assume Hotchkiss drive, rigid axle supported by leaf springs. The Corvette has a long-short double A arm setup (the C2-C3 used a trailing and lateral link setup, the C4 used multi-link). However, GM uses a very cleaver leaf spring setup. The mounting of the leaf spring as used by GM was used at least by Fiat prior to use on the Corvette. However, the fiberglass spring on the Corvette is arguably the most advanced non-active spring used on any road car. It is far more advanced than a steal coil spring. It also cost more so few cars use it.

Still, sadly for GM PR guys everywhere, every one here's leaf spring and their imaginations do the rest.

For reference, the last American car (not truck) to use a leaf spring live axle setup was some Chrysler car that died in the 1980s and was initially released in the 1970s.

[culver]

Semi-elliptical transverse leaf springs I think.

Not semi-elliptic at all. They are constant crossectional area.
Hyperco Corvette High Performance and Racing Composite Leaf Springs (http://www.hrpworld.com/index.cfm?form_cat_id=572,504,587&action=category)

[Badsight]

thanks for the info!

[Guibo]

ive read porsche engineers claim that for the weight of the GTR , it must have around 550 Hp to be doing a 7.27

Even 550 hp still wouldn't make any sense. Porsche have been discredited on this issue.

[G35COUPE]

Even 550 hp still wouldn't make any sense. Porsche have been discredited on this issue.

We will never know how the GTR does what it does with so much weight around its love handles.

Here is a New York Times article which tried to answer the same questions in futility.


How Much Power Does the Nissan GT-R Really Have? - Wheels Blog - NYTimes.com (http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/how-much-power-does-the-nissan-gt-r-really-have/)

One day, we hope Nissan will fess up and tell us how such a heavy car is able to do what few cars its weight, cannot do. May the Holy Spirit rule the soul of Nissan and make them confess to the mysteries of the GTR.

[henk4]

We will never know how the GTR does what it does with so much weight around its love handles.

Here is a New York Times article which tried to answer the same questions in futility.


How Much Power Does the Nissan GT-R Really Have? - Wheels Blog - NYTimes.com (http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/how-much-power-does-the-nissan-gt-r-really-have/)

One day, we hope Nissan will fess up and tell us how such a heavy car is able to do what few cars its weight, cannot do. May the Holy Spirit rule the soul of Nissan and make them confess to the mysteries of the GTR.

At least it prevents Nissan getting claims about less than stated horsepower. As far as the NYT piece is concerned, the 1/4 mile is not only algebra, it also relates to how effective the power can be transferred to the wheels. In the case of the GTR the AWD system could be very helpful.
The writer also seems to forget that the Nuerburgring is over 20 km long. So a difference of 13 seconds over such a long stretch is not such a big deal. (and recalling from memory, the difference in the Sport Auto test between de ZO6 and the GTR was only 6 seconds.)

[P4g4nite]

We will never know how the GTR does what it does with so much weight around its love handles.

Here is a New York Times article which tried to answer the same questions in futility.


How Much Power Does the Nissan GT-R Really Have? - Wheels Blog - NYTimes.com (http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/how-much-power-does-the-nissan-gt-r-really-have/)

One day, we hope Nissan will fess up and tell us how such a heavy car is able to do what few cars its weight, cannot do. May the Holy Spirit rule the soul of Nissan and make them confess to the mysteries of the GTR.

That article could have been written my MonaroCountry, "every GTR is a ringer!!", It reads a lot like a pride hurt American telling us "awww they only won because they don't play fair..".

I see this happening again and again when I read American car reviews, the attempt to define performance with two numbers; power and lateral grip.

Here's an American test of the ZR1 and GTR
YouTube- ZR1 Smokes GT-R: Chevy Corvette ZR1 vs. Nissan GT-R

Drag strip, slalom, skidpan and a very smooth, flat and well maintained track. And the ZR1 beats it at all these tests, I have a feeling that the Z06 would too. But Evo mag had tested both cars and the GTR was 3 seconds faster than the Z06 around the 1.8Mile West circuit at Bedford. In fact the GTR is just behind the Enzo and in front of the Gallardo Superleggera.

What is it that every European reporter says about Corvettes? That they handle perfectly smooth tarmac tracks as well as anything in the world but once conditions get a bit rough a Corvette doesn't do so well, a GTR doesn't have that problem.

[P4g4nite]

At least it prevents Nissan getting claims about less than stated horsepower. As far as the NYT piece is concerned, the 1/4 mile is not only algebra, it also relates to how effective the power can be transferred to the wheels. In the case of the GTR the AWD system could be very helpful.
In addition to the 4WD, the GTR's DSG provides nearly instant shifts compared to the relatively agricultural action of an American V8 manual gearbox.

[Ferrer]

What is it that every European reporter says about Corvettes? That they handle perfectly smooth tarmac tracks as well as anything in the world but once conditions get a bit rough a Corvette doesn't do so well, a GTR doesn't have that problem.
And that's far more important than any performance stats/numbers/times.

[G35COUPE]

In addition to the 4WD, the GTR's DSG provides nearly instant shifts compared to the relatively agricultural action of an American V8 manual gearbox.


lol :D

[Matra et Alpine]

My "new best friend" runs a Corvette on the 'Ring running on bioethanol.
( SO forgive me a little SPAMmin )
Freddy Ritschl at Arrow Performance in Breidscheid has an insight the rest of us lack -- and because of time I wasn't able to experiecne it this time out, but did share the F1 track with him. If anyone wants to see or experience the E85 powered vette then drop me a PM as I don't want ot put contact details in public.

Backed up the opinion many hold and expressed here....
WHen it's smooth like the F1 circuit the pwoer of the 'Vette ( his is 500+hp ) can make up for the cornering. BUT on the 'Ring it is much more difficult.

In his workshop he held up two parts recently upgraded where he said the problem lay ... the transverse leaf spring !! You can't set it up well enough with it's limitations.
Even the new competition leaf can't stop it pitching --- THIS input from a driver who has many years and thousands of laps under his belt.

But does look and sound great ... and I personally loved the bio smell -- very reminiscent of Castrol-R :) :)


EDIT: OK So I started watching that video on the Zr-1 and the GT-R and had to stop after the first real "fact" was presented and they gushed about hte "amazing ZR-1"
The numbers ? THe power and torque .... a quick mental math and the GT-R is 70% of the quoted power and 93% of the torque.
The ZR-1 is 79% power and only 82% of the torque.
So to get all "gushy" about the ZR-1 is clear evidence of bias and I refuse to then follow the rest of the cr@p.
ESPECIALLY when you consider the 2 v 4wd comparison of power nad torque is fraight with even MORE variations !!
Sadly fans will hear the NUMBERS and the "gush" on the ZR-1 power/torque and from that moment on love the rest of the video. Me ? I switched off ... if an journo can't do simple math and communicate it well then they don't deserve any recogntino or payment :)

[LeonOfTheDead]

I don't get it, we keep saying the Corvette is fast only on smooth and perfect tracks, while the GT-R can handle every surface, but they were equally fast on the Ring officially, and equally slow when driven by third parties.

[culver]

What is it that every European reporter says about Corvettes? That they handle perfectly smooth tarmac tracks as well as anything in the world but once conditions get a bit rough a Corvette doesn't do so well, a GTR doesn't have that problem.

They may say it but it isn't true. Also, so long as the GTR is automatic only I would have no interest in one. I like my three pedals.

[culver]

My "new best friend" runs a Corvette on the 'Ring running on bioethanol.
( SO forgive me a little SPAMmin )
Freddy Ritschl at Arrow Performance in Breidscheid has an insight the rest of us lack -- and because of time I wasn't able to experiecne it this time out, but did share the F1 track with him. If anyone wants to see or experience the E85 powered vette then drop me a PM as I don't want ot put contact details in public.

Backed up the opinion many hold and expressed here....
WHen it's smooth like the F1 circuit the pwoer of the 'Vette ( his is 500+hp ) can make up for the cornering. BUT on the 'Ring it is much more difficult.

In his workshop he held up two parts recently upgraded where he said the problem lay ... the transverse leaf spring !! You can't set it up well enough with it's limitations.
Even the new competition leaf can't stop it pitching --- THIS input from a driver who has many years and thousands of laps under his belt.

But does look and sound great ... and I personally loved the bio smell -- very reminiscent of Castrol-R :) :)


EDIT: OK So I started watching that video on the Zr-1 and the GT-R and had to stop after the first real "fact" was presented and they gushed about hte "amazing ZR-1"
The numbers ? THe power and torque .... a quick mental math and the GT-R is 70% of the quoted power and 93% of the torque.
The ZR-1 is 79% power and only 82% of the torque.
So to get all "gushy" about the ZR-1 is clear evidence of bias and I refuse to then follow the rest of the cr@p.
ESPECIALLY when you consider the 2 v 4wd comparison of power nad torque is fraight with even MORE variations !!
Sadly fans will hear the NUMBERS and the "gush" on the ZR-1 power/torque and from that moment on love the rest of the video. Me ? I switched off ... if an journo can't do simple math and communicate it well then they don't deserve any recogntino or payment :)

Is the issue really with the spring or simply that he can't get the spring rates he wants given the very limited selection of transverse leaf springs on the market. I have never heard a credible explanation as to why the fact that the spring is a transverse leaf spring would cause a problem. I've heard lots of people say the car was better after switching to coil overs but that ignores the potential benefits of different dampers and/or different spring rates.

[culver]

lol :D

For reference the G35 manual transmission I drove (first year G35 sedan) wasn't as good as the C6 transmission. That's not so much a C6 compliment as it was condemnation of the very lousy G35 box.

[RacingManiac]

Might be wheel travel related? The car may lack wheel travel would make it more "choppy" on uneven ground.....

[culver]

Might be wheel travel related? The car may lack wheel travel would make it more "choppy" on uneven ground.....

I don't think the springs limit the wheel travel in the Corvette. I think the dampers contain the bump stops.

[Matra et Alpine]

^^^ yes, but remember the North Loop has a few places where torque is the winner and other places where handling wins out.
So by upping power, the 'Vette can be tuned up and stiffened up to make it fast .. but (and I can quote from the drivers mouth) it leaps around on a few of the corners and rises and needs balls of steel :)

THe comparions of these two highlights that in 20km different cars will be fast in some areas and slower in others. So these two come close ( if we are going to at least read past some of the BS :) )

So if it is a lovely smooth track and straights and especially uphill straings ) then the 'Vette's a good'un. NOW take that to "real road" conditions and how many sections of open road can we drive on where we can take a car to it's max in a straight line ?
Nope, real roads ( and most tracks ) are twisty, bumpy and no big long straights.

The 'Vette is the ideal car for the US market where there ARE big long straight sectons of roads and gentle sweepers with few other cars to slow you down ! Freddy's car is modified and set up to handle the 'RIng and did not do so good on the F1 track.
Another point, do you want a car you need to change for different conditions or in the case of the GT-R a car with smarts and electronics that tries to do that "on the fly" ?

Personally I'd have neither !! The GT-R is a dreadnoght class where we all want to ride Sunseekers :)

WHat we need now for the 'Ring is the kind of car tracking the WRC ahs used for the last few yuears to see in real time and in comparison. This years 24h at the 'RIng had GPS enabled tracking on ALL the cars and it was damn good for keeping up with the race activitiy.


EDIT: re coilovers ... there are many more choices available and MANY manufacturers who can build custom springs for coilovers. Als varibale platform enables easy adjustment of the psring itself to have pre-compression etc etc. None of this is "easy" or perhaps even possible given the leaf construction. I'd bet if hundreds of cars had leaf springs then there woudl be more options. As it is it's a vry limiting design and does NOT offer as much adjustment. Hence why all the race COrvettes run coils

[LeonOfTheDead]

So why the GT-R performed so bad on TG track then?
Not absolutely bad, but it was 2 seconds slower than other cars it beat or equaled on the Ring. I think the GT-R is very set up for the Ring too.
Any other track times with other cars times?

Not that I'm very interested in flaming another debate, just curious.
No wait, I actually don't care.

[clutch-monkey]

No wait, I actually don't care.
+1
all i know is that if forced to choose, i'd have the ZR-1, for reasons not (entirely) related to speed, and irrelevant to it's 'ring time.

[Ferrer]

They may say it but it isn't true. Also, so long as the GTR is automatic only I would have no interest in one. I like my three pedals.
Everyone who is interested in driving does.

+1
all i know is that if forced to choose, i'd have the ZR-1, for reasons not (entirely) related to speed, and irrelevant to it's 'ring time.
Seconded.

[Matra et Alpine]

So why the GT-R performed so bad on TG track then? ........ 'Not that I'm very interested in flaming another debate, just curious.
As long as we can keep a debate going and AVOID the "flame" nonsense then it's healthy :)
Curiosity == good !!

WOW ... coming 14th is now BAD ? !.19ish is pretty good for a standard car I'd say :)
Especially when you look at the prices and read usability of the competition around it.
I'd actually expected it to do worse. It's no lightweight. It's 4WD and it was a dry level tarmac track.

Oh and for me if forced to chose between these two ( 2 which I don't consider the best btw :) ) then I'd NOT chose the GT-R ... It's not got any soul in real life, it's lardy arsed and NOTHING about it inspires. At least a 'Vette sounds and looks evil :)

[clutch-monkey]

Oh and for me if forced to chose between these two ( 2 which I don't consider the best btw :) ) then I'd NOT chose the GT-R ... It's not got any soul in real life, it's lardy arsed and NOTHING about it inspires. At least a 'Vette sounds and looks evil :)

sounds like it's got a few evil tendencies up it's sleeves too with what you were saying about handling on the leaf springs. i like my cars with a few vices :)

[Ferrer]

They're not vices, they are character. ;)

[LeonOfTheDead]

As long as we can keep a debate going and AVOID the "flame" nonsense then it's healthy :)
Curiosity == good !!

WOW ... coming 14th is now BAD ? !.19ish is pretty good for a standard car I'd say :)
Especially when you look at the prices and read usability of the competition around it.
I'd actually expected it to do worse. It's no lightweight. It's 4WD and it was a dry level tarmac track.

The time isn't bad, but it isn't as fast as the supercars it supposedly beat at the Ring with their official time. It's very fast being as fast as a Scuderia with about the same power but more weight, but 2 seconds off say the Zonda on a short track, while on the 20 kg German track they should be (according to Nissan) equally fast.

Surely an extreme set up on a supercar could prevent it for achieving a good time on the Ring with its tormented surface, even when Chouraqui tested all his exotics there the Koenigsegg was slower than the others mainly because of its set up, too stiff.

[Matra et Alpine]

The problem is "could" is maybe right :)
But we'll never know !!

Power and gearing on the MUCH longer straight sectons of the 'Ring coudl easily take 5-10 seconds off laps. Also, the TG lap is a short lap and so the stresses on the tyres and the brakes are in relatively short bursts. the 'RIng is a differnet beast and thus there are really too many variables to ensure one time on one track means a time on another. Same for all tracks. Best you can do s about SIMILAR tracks ... but the 'Ring is unique :)

[roosterjuicer]

Nope, real roads ( and most tracks ) are twisty, bumpy and no big long straights.


Not in America my friend. we probably have more straight, smooth, long roads here than we have twisties.

especially in my neck of the woods. I think the most "handling" my car does is on this new roundabout they put in up the street (which is probably a good thing).:D

[G35COUPE]

Lets remember that the GTR is a V-6. Just about its other competitors are V-8s. And the GTR being as heavy as it is, still spanks or comes close to spanking its competitors. This should be food for thought.:)

[f6fhellcat13]

The GTR, with its unhyphenated V6, is turbocharged, as I'm sure you've been told many times when you've brought up the exact same point. Thus you cannot compare it accurately to the performance of a naturally aspirated V8.

[culver]

Lets remember that the GTR is a V-6. Just about its other competitors are V-8s. And the GTR being as heavy as it is, still spanks or comes close to spanking its competitors. This should be food for thought.:)

It's a 3.8L twin turbo V6. That's not exactly a small displacement motor and the turbos do a lot to add power. If it's like Nissan's other V6s it's a very well behaved but heavy motor. I think the NA VQ motors are around 460lbs. This one is likely every bit as heavy as the motor in the ZR1.

[Guibo]

The time isn't bad, but it isn't as fast as the supercars it supposedly beat at the Ring with their official time. It's very fast being as fast as a Scuderia with about the same power but more weight, but 2 seconds off say the Zonda on a short track, while on the 20 kg German track they should be (according to Nissan) equally fast.

Surely an extreme set up on a supercar could prevent it for achieving a good time on the Ring with its tormented surface, even when Chouraqui tested all his exotics there the Koenigsegg was slower than the others mainly because of its set up, too stiff.
Take a look at this lap chart, and pay close attention to the tightest turn and the fastest turn, a high speed kink:
http://www.autozeitung.de/sites/default/files/images/image/tracktest_strecke.jpg
When TopGear tested the Zonda F convertible and the Veyron in their mag, they noted that a tight, twisting course would make the Veyron's mass much more apparent. The GT-R is not different in this regard. There are plenty of test commentaries indicating it likes fast, sweeping tracks.
And there is simply no way The Stig can be as familiar and comfortable with the GT-R as Suzuki. If you watch his in-car lap video, it's very messy. He fights understeer and oversteer sometimes in the same corner, and nearly stuffs it in a couple of places. Whereas Suzuki uses oversteer to point the car and invoke the AWD system for the best drive out of corners.

On the other hand, we don't have any test of the Zonda being driven in the same conditions as the GT-R (development driver with 100% commitment, good weather, and thousands of laps). The 'Ring is also a momentum track and not as hard on brakes as other tracks; there are long sections that allow the brakes to cool.
The Koenigsegg was also slower because its power delivery was so savage, with power arriving between 7-8k rpm. This is also the problem with looking at peak power and torque figures, with no regard as to how smoothly the power can be applied.

I've heard it mentioned elsewhere (not confirmed by anyone of real authority) that on the bumpy 'Ring, the weight of the GT-R and minimal lift keeps its tires firmly planted where lighter cars with quite a bit of lift (like the ZR1) and stiff suspension can be knocked about rather viciously. Sport Auto mentions something to this effect. Those tiny corrections, getting the ZR1 back to the ideal line, they add up over the course of a long lap. This also affects a driver's confidence, because if he knows of a bumpy section coming up, the fastest and safest way may be to take the section with a slight trailing throttle and reduced speed. If the GT-R, which handles bumps much better, can take the same section flat out, then guess which car has the higher power/wt ratio for more of the time through that section.
This is not to say that the ZR1 is slow. Nobody is saying the ZR1 is slow. It's just that the 'Ring offers up unique challenges that few people understand. Some Ferrari drivers who have taken their Scuderias on the 'Ring can understand how their car doesn't perform as well as expected: in some places with lots of compression where ground clearance is an issue, the Scuderia runs out of it, so instead of gripping and turning, it's skating nervously.

[Guibo]

In addition to the 4WD, the GTR's DSG provides nearly instant shifts compared to the relatively agricultural action of an American V8 manual gearbox.
Indeed. And "in between" shifts, it's still sending power to the wheels where in the manual car, the power/wt is briefly ZERO. With the effect of drag, a Corvette is momentarily losing speed where the GT-R continues to accelerate. In this chart, it's apparent that the Z06 is losing valuable tenths on each gearshift.
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/61/006soa.th.jpg (http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/61/006soa.jpg)

If you move the Z06's acceleration curve over to account for the gearshift (as might happen were it equipped with DCT), you'd see the Z06 could hit 130 mph about a second faster. And this is just 3 shifts. Imagine how many shifts take place over a single lap of the Nurburgring...

FWIW, Road & Track has the Panamera Turbo w/PDK equaling the Z06's 1/4 mile time. Same power, but it weighs 655kg more.

[2ndclasscitizen]

So why the GT-R performed so bad on TG track then?
Not absolutely bad, but it was 2 seconds slower than other cars it beat or equaled on the Ring. I think the GT-R is very set up for the Ring too.

IIRC it was an early import, so it may have been belting up against the 180km/h limiter.

[P4g4nite]

They may say it but it isn't true.
I don't get to drive these cars so I have to find a source who has that I can trust, Evo mag drove the Z06 back to back with Porsche, Lambo, Audi, Jag etc, through Europe and on trackdays and delivered this verdict repeatedly. One of owners who lent the Evo team his own Z06 later replaced it with a GTR.


And that's far more important than any performance stats/numbers/times.Enjoyment is everything. Look at the MX-5, one of the most successful cars ever and certainly one of the most loved and it gets very modest performance figures.

[P4g4nite]

So why the GT-R performed so bad on TG track then?
Not absolutely bad, but it was 2 seconds slower than other cars it beat or equaled on the Ring. I think the GT-R is very set up for the Ring too.
The GTR did very well on Evo's test track, way ahead of the Z06 and just behind the Enzo.

[P4g4nite]

Indeed. And "in between" shifts, it's still sending power to the wheels where in the manual car, the power/wt is briefly ZERO. With the effect of drag, a Corvette is momentarily losing speed where the GT-R continues to accelerate. In this chart, it's apparent that the Z06 is losing valuable tenths on each gearshift.
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/61/006soa.th.jpg (http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/61/006soa.jpg)

If you move the Z06's acceleration curve over to account for the gearshift (as might happen were it equipped with DCT), you'd see the Z06 could hit 130 mph about a second faster. And this is just 3 shifts. Imagine how many shifts take place over a single lap of the Nurburgring...

FWIW, Road & Track has the Panamera Turbo w/PDK equaling the Z06's 1/4 mile time. Same power, but it weighs 655kg more.

It really does seem that with the Z06 that the engine, rather than being one excellent element of a great package, is doing almost all the work.

It's like Pamela Anderson's tits, not attached to an excess of talent but more than capable of creating a star on their own.


Also, have you seen the numbers on the updated Porsche Turbo? 0-100kays in 3.2s with the PDK. Now that's a strong engine/gearbox combo.

[Guibo]

Also, have you seen the numbers on the updated Porsche Turbo? 0-100kays in 3.2s with the PDK. Now that's a strong engine/gearbox combo.
Yes, it's very quick. The Boxster S w/PDK is not far off from what the old 500-hp Viper SRT-10 was doing in the 1/4 mile. Recall that when Porsche were singing the virtues of the PDK system, they rolled out some 'Ring times for the 997.2 Carrera S, with the PDK-equipped car being 8 seconds faster than the manual. No doubt the gearbox is a huge reason why the new Turbo is 10 seconds faster on the 'Ring than the old, as Porsche claims; which makes it very close to or faster than the CGT and GT2 despite the old hp/wt nugget...oops.

[Ferrer]

Enjoyment is everything. Look at the MX-5, one of the most successful cars ever and certainly one of the most loved and it gets very modest performance figures.
And it's even more in the open road where you're not going to reach a million miles an hour or pull 6 g in every corner.

[RacingManiac]

I don't think the springs limit the wheel travel in the Corvette. I think the dampers contain the bump stops.


I don't mean the spring is the issue of it, it might just be how it is designed kinematically, if you just lack wheel travel period(droop or jounce), you are going to run into trouble when road start getting undulating. You can setup your spring, damper to optimize for ride and handling, but once you have to start dealing with gross motion you will run out of travel a lot quicker.

Again I don't know what GTR vs ZR1 are like in that department, but it could be part of it....

[G35COUPE]

It's a 3.8L twin turbo V6. That's not exactly a small displacement motor and the turbos do a lot to add power. If it's like Nissan's other V6s it's a very well behaved but heavy motor. I think the NA VQ motors are around 460lbs. This one is likely every bit as heavy as the motor in the ZR1.

The ZR1 is not naturally aspirated. I beleive it is a supercharged V8. The GTR is a turbo charged V6. For all intent and purposes, the GTR is taking a lot more stress per cylinder volume than a ZR1. In my book, that is significant and commendable.

3.8L is a really tiny displacement figure for any road going super performance vehicle. The ZR1 has over 6.0L of displacement, and yet is only capable of etching out a small lead over the GTR which has 3.8L. In my opinion, the ZR1 is relatively inefficient when compared to the GTR. And in fact, its lighter weight when compared to the GTR, given the ZR1's larger engine displacement and power output over that of the GTR, should suggest that the ZR1 is a significantly inefficient machine compared to the GTR.

What if Nissan decided to add a V8 to the GTR, which i doubt they will ever do? They could literally blow away a ZR1 without any questions. Nissan is bent on making their V6 perform as well or better than 95% of V8 engines out there. Only other company in my weak memory, that is doing the same thing, is Porsche. There maybe others out there---I don't know.

It takes a hell of confidence to put a V6 in competition with tons of V8 out there. In essence, Nissan is claiming an almost bullet proof engine. This is not the first time they have done such a thing before. You may want to check out their RB26 DETT engine.

[G35COUPE]

This is also the problem with looking at peak power and torque figures, with no regard as to how smoothly the power can be applied.



Excellent comment, and excellent analysis. I found this out for myself on my "secret track". While i was eager to add more power to my G, i ran into the problem of how to deliver the power smoothly in the most challenging twists and turns. So, I backed off any thoughts of adding superchargers or turbos, because I knew they would create a new set of challenges and handling issues as it relates to power delivery. I am happy with NA modifications which allow my current OEM suspension to remain relevant, at least for now. I have sacrificed max power for sensible track power.

On a track, power delivery, transmission response, suspension balance, is king. Max horsepower and max torque is absolute rubbish on a track, if it can't be delivered in a way that takes full advantage of a car's existing handling capabilities.

And your argument about bumps and undulations is also excellent and 100% right. At speeds, on a track with impressive bumps or a small potholes, loosing the car gets even easier. I once experienced it and since then, I am careful with bumps and potholes at speeds on curves and turns---they look benign at slow speeds, but at high speeds, they can be a death trap.

[P4g4nite]

I found this out for myself on my "secret track". While i was eager to add more power to my G...G35, don't take this the wrong way but, reading your posts is like being slapped by a soggy dildo.

[Matra et Alpine]

^^^^^^^^^ 'cept it doesn't even list Alpine's "supercar" :) (sic.) :)

[culver]

The ZR1 is not naturally aspirated. I beleive it is a supercharged V8. The GTR is a turbo charged V6. For all intent and purposes, the GTR is taking a lot more stress per cylinder volume than a ZR1. In my book, that is significant and commendable.

3.8L is a really tiny displacement figure for any road going super performance vehicle. The ZR1 has over 5.0L of displacement, and yet is only capable of etching out a small lead over the GTR which has 3.8L. In my opinion, the ZR1 is relatively inefficient when compared to the GTR. And in fact, its lighter weight when compared to the GTR, given the ZR1's larger engine displacement and power output over that of the GTR, should suggest that the ZR1 is a significantly inefficient machine compared to the GTR.

What if Nissan decided to add a V8 to the GTR, which i doubt they will ever do? They could literally blow away a ZR1 without any questions. Nissan is bent on making their V6 perform as well or better than 95% of V8 engines out there. Only other company in my weak memory, that is doing the same thing, is Porsche. There maybe others out there---I don't know.

It takes a hell of confidence to put a V6 in competition with tons of V8 out there. In essence, Nissan is claiming an almost bullet proof engine. This is not the first time they have done such a thing before. You may want to check out their RB26 DETT engine.

Yes, the ZR1 motor is SC'ed. However, I suspect it is still lighter than the 3.8L Nissan motor once the turbos are added. The Nissan V6s aren't very light. The comment about stress per cylinder volume is irrelevant but if it makes you happy sure.

Your efficiency comments are off base. The ZR1 motor delivers more power for what is likely to be a lighter and more compact overall package. It also returns better mileage but that's not a fair comparison given that the Corvette is a smaller, lighter car. However, your claims of efficiency are based on a false premise that Hp/L is a measure of efficiency. A gas turbine has no displacement so it much have really good Hp/L.

If Nissan wanted to add a V8.... call me when they do. If GM wanted to add a V16 to the Corvette with a JATO pack strapped to the roof... It's nice that Nissan decided to play fair and use a V6. GM decided to play fair and used a 2 valve pushrod motor. Porsche decided to play fair and stick the motor out the back and use a 6 pot. Lotus was really trying to play fair back when they used a turbo I4 in the Esprit. What's Ferrari thinking with all this V12 cheating?

It's a good thing the motor is so durable... now about the transmission. And no, I'm not interested in old Skyline motors that like a Supra motor could be turboed to an inch of their lives yet be totally undrivable.

[culver]

Excellent comment, and excellent analysis. I found this out for myself on my "secret track". While i was eager to add more power to my G, i ran into the problem of how to deliver the power smoothly in the most challenging twists and turns. So, I backed off any thoughts of adding superchargers or turbos, because I knew they would create a new set of challenges and handling issues as it relates to power delivery. I am happy with NA modifications which allow my current OEM suspension to remain relevant, at least for now. I have sacrificed max power for sensible track power.

On a track, power delivery, transmission response, suspension balance, is king. Max horsepower and max torque is absolute rubbish on a track, if it can't be delivered in a way that takes full advantage of a car's existing handling capabilities.

And your argument about bumps and undulations is also excellent and 100% right. At speeds, on a track with impressive bumps or a small potholes, loosing the car gets even easier. I once experienced it and since then, I am careful with bumps and potholes at speeds on curves and turns---they look benign at slow speeds, but at high speeds, they can be a death trap.

Perhaps you could pull the V6 and replace it with an LS3 V8. It would reduce the weight over the nose of the car AND deliver more power (~420 vs ~250-300).

[Ferrer]

If Nissan wanted to add a V8.... call me when they do. If GM wanted to add a V16 to the Corvette with a JATO pack strapped to the roof... It's nice that Nissan decided to play fair and use a V6. GM decided to play fair and used a 2 valve pushrod motor. Porsche decided to play fair and stick the motor out the back and use a 6 pot. Lotus was really trying to play fair back when they used a turbo I4 in the Esprit. What's Ferrari thinking with all this V12 cheating?
That made me laugh. :)

[RacingManiac]

so what will be the option code for the JATO rocket? OMFG1337 pack? lol

[culver]

so what will be the option code for the JATO rocket? OMFG1337 pack? lol

XR-2300, not the XR-2200 (a muffler bracket)

[clutch-monkey]

The Nissan V6s aren't very light.

the new ones are alright, the VQ35de weighs less than the SR20det and a bit less than the Ls1, but i guess the GTR's engine had to be reinforced.. still, it's gotta be better than the RB series

[henk4]

If Nissan wanted to add a V8.... call me when they do.
What's your number?
The GT1 version of the GTR that was tested this season in FIA-GT races (some of them) has a naturally aspirated V8 and only RWD.....(determined by the rules, the Ford GTs that are running also come without the supercharger and the Corvettes will use the LS6 engine....)

[G35COUPE]

G35, don't take this the wrong way but, reading your posts is like being slapped by a soggy dildo.

What is a dildo and why do you feel that way? Are dildos supposed to be soggy or is this some sort of automotive literary expression? :confused:

[G35COUPE]

Yes, the ZR1 motor is SC'ed. However, I suspect it is still lighter than the 3.8L Nissan motor once the turbos are added. The Nissan V6s aren't very light. The comment about stress per cylinder volume is irrelevant but if it makes you happy sure.

I once provided an analysis of HP/L for various brands of cars on these forums. American muscle cars had the least amount of HP/L because of their large combustion volumes. German muscle cars relatively had the most HP/L. And so, to ignore the effect of stress on an engine, is impractical as far as design is concerned. Why would anyone build an engine and then ignore the ability of the engine to handle stress, which translates to engine reliability?

While i don't know which engine is heavier, i would expect Nissan to re-inforce their 3.8L engine far more than GM would re-inforce their ZR 1 engine since the HP/L of a GTR which equates to stress, is greater than the HP/L for the ZR1. This re-inforcement would probably account for the GTR's weight. An engine is simply a controlled bomb/explosion. To ask so much from a smaller engine than a larger one, should not be ignored.


Your efficiency comments are off base. The ZR1 motor delivers more power for what is likely to be a lighter and more compact overall package. It also returns better mileage but that's not a fair comparison given that the Corvette is a smaller, lighter car. However, your claims of efficiency are based on a false premise that Hp/L is a measure of efficiency. A gas turbine has no displacement so it much have really good Hp/L.


The ZR1 does not provide better gas mileage than the GTR.

http://autos.yahoo.com/2010_chevrolet_corvette/

http://autos.yahoo.com/2010_nissan_gt_r/

Hp/L is one of several measures of an engines relative efficiency. While it is not primarily important in most regards, it somewhat says a lot about the confidence the engine designers may have with their engines.



If Nissan wanted to add a V8.... call me when they do. If GM wanted to add a V16 to the Corvette with a JATO pack strapped to the roof... It's nice that Nissan decided to play fair and use a V6. GM decided to play fair and used a 2 valve pushrod motor. Porsche decided to play fair and stick the motor out the back and use a 6 pot. Lotus was really trying to play fair back when they used a turbo I4 in the Esprit. What's Ferrari thinking with all this V12 cheating?

Nissans GT series GTR is a naturally aspirated V8. Their road version GTR is a twin turbo V6.


It's a good thing the motor is so durable... now about the transmission. And no, I'm not interested in old Skyline motors that like a Supra motor could be turboed to an inch of their lives yet be totally undrivable.


I will be the first to tell you that Nissan has failed for many years to produce a winning transmission. This is Nissan's weakness---it is not as much of a weakness of design as much as it is a weakness of function---their seems to be a dysfunction between the true purpose of some Nissan cars relative to the way the same cars are actually used---this is what i think causes the transmission failures in some Nissan brands. Just about all their car engines will outlive their transmissions 2 to 1. I know because all my cars are of Nissan origin.

[clutch-monkey]

I once provided an analysis of HP/L for various brands of cars on these forums. American muscle cars had the least amount of HP/L because of their large combustion volumes. German muscle cars relatively had the most HP/L. And so, to ignore the effect of stress on an engine, is impractical as far as design is concerned. Why would anyone build an engine and then ignore the ability of the engine to handle stress, which translates to engine reliability?

While i don't know which engine is heavier, i would expect Nissan to re-inforce their 3.8L engine far more than GM would re-inforce their ZR 1 engine since the HP/L of a GTR which equates to stress, is greater than the HP/L for the ZR1. This re-inforcement would probably account for the GTR's weight. An engine is simply a controlled bomb/explosion. To ask so much from a smaller engine than a larger one, should not be ignored.




The ZR1 does not provide better gas mileage than the GTR.

2010 Chevrolet Corvette | New Chevrolet Sports Cars - Yahoo! Autos (http://autos.yahoo.com/2010_chevrolet_corvette/)

2010 Nissan GT-R | New Nissan Sports Cars - Yahoo! Autos (http://autos.yahoo.com/2010_nissan_gt_r/)

Hp/L is one of several measures of an engines relative efficiency. While it is not primarily important in most regards, it somewhat says a lot about the confidence the engine designers may have with their engines.


it might be me
but i still don't see how hp/L is in any way relevant, unless someone is making an argument that american engines will last longer because they're unstressed
someone summarise this post

[G35COUPE]

it might be me
but i still don't see how hp/L is in any way relevant, unless someone is making an argument that american engines will last longer because they're unstressed
someone summarise this post

You are technically correct, as far as I am concerned. Less HP/L should translate to less stress and hopefully longer engine life. However, when one throws in the quality of material used in the engine design, the technique used to forge the engine block and components, and the general ergonomics and layout of the engine components, suddenly, longevity of an engine even with less HP/L comes into question.

These factors I have stated, among many other factors, may be partly responsible for the larger displacement of american muscle car engines. HP/L can be argued to be testament to quality of material used in the engine design, the technique used to forge the engine block, and the general ergonomics and layout of the engine components. All of these, among many other factors, may add up to engine reliability and engine longevity.

[clutch-monkey]

not dredging up another GTR vs world etc thread.

but goddamn!
Accident: Don't do what I did.... - GT-R Register - Official Nissan Skyline and GTR Owners Club forum (http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/127250-accident-dont-do-what-i-did.html)

looks like it will be a few years before parts prices drop, when more GTR's are in circulation. first post on page two is food for thought.

[henk4]

not dredging up another GTR vs world etc thread.

but goddamn!
Accident: Don't do what I did.... - GT-R Register - Official Nissan Skyline and GTR Owners Club forum (http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/127250-accident-dont-do-what-i-did.html)

looks like it will be a few years before parts prices drop, when more GTR's are in circulation. first post on page two is food for thought.

so the message is: Keep your distance....a concept which some of us may already be familiar with anyway.

[clutch-monkey]

accidents happen though. i'm assuming UK insurance companies will just love this, to jack up their already insane fees..

[henk4]

accidents happen though. i'm assuming UK insurance companies will just love this, to jack up their already insane fees..

well, 7 or 8 years ago I did something similarly stupid with my then Xantia, it required replacement of the front bumper and grille, the grids around the twin fans and some plasticky work. It would have set me down for about 6000 Euros, (now about 5400 pounds), so I let it how it was, just accepting a lower trade-in price several years later. So don't solely blame the GTR for this. Similar repairs for a Ferrari or a Porsche will most likely cost you the same sort of money. And yes, the insurance companies love this sort of stuff.

[clutch-monkey]

you're saying this is sort of the usual range of prices for repairs over there? that seems like a lot of money for the work you've described! wouldn't be anywhere near as much for similar repairs for a porsche, if nothing else because it doesn't have the pedestrian safety bonnet thing haha.
with those kind of repair prices, it seems like an insurance company could class a GTR as a writeoff when it really doesn't have that much damage physically?

[henk4]

you're saying this is sort of the usual range of prices for repairs over there? that seems like a lot of money for the work you've described! wouldn't be anywhere near as much for similar repairs for a porsche, if nothing else because it doesn't have the pedestrian safety bonnet thing haha.
with those kind of repair prices, it seems like an insurance company could class a GTR as a writeoff when it really doesn't have that much damage physically?

Prices are always higher than you think, however, I recently had to replace the rear bumper of the C5, which was just a tat over a 1000.
Insurance Write-offs could be a handy way for clever do-it-yourself repairers to get a cheap super car...

[clutch-monkey]

Prices are always higher than you think, however, I recently had to replace the rear bumper of the C5, which was just a tat over a 1000.
Insurance Write-offs could be a handy way for clever do-it-yourself repairers to get a cheap super car...
reading that thread it seems GTR owners have the same idea..
presumably nissan will address these prices over time anyway, but goddamn that seemed extreme.

[Cyco]

You are technically correct, as far as I am concerned. Less HP/L should translate to less stress and hopefully longer engine life. However, when one throws in the quality of material used in the engine design, the technique used to forge the engine block and components, and the general ergonomics and layout of the engine components, suddenly, longevity of an engine even with less HP/L comes into question.

These factors I have stated, among many other factors, may be partly responsible for the larger displacement of american muscle car engines. HP/L can be argued to be testament to quality of material used in the engine design, the technique used to forge the engine block, and the general ergonomics and layout of the engine components. All of these, among many other factors, may add up to engine reliability and engine longevity.


No engine block that I am aware of is forged, they are cast or (occasionally) machined. The tooling cost for forging would be horrific.

HP/L is most likely a measure of how much the engineers value size and mass in the car more than anything else.

[Matra et Alpine]

Just had to read that whole thread :)
MAN ... that's gotta hurt owners.

BUT, that's the way things are with modern cars.
They are designed and manufactured to be the CHEAPEST price leaving the factory.
So little regard is given any more on the basics like replacament, repairability and consequential damange/costs.

Look on the bright side, once the insurers cotton on and owners realise they'll be dumping these for pennines in the pound. THEN remove all that extraneous weight shit and keep it as a great track car.

Most modern cars in relatively small incidents end up uneconomic to repair once all those steering, dash, door, roof, side and seat airbags all deploy. Whole new interior needed and expensive to install - coz it was designed to be cheap to put together -- not take apart.

Seen a few RX-8s being written off by insurers and yet are perfectly salvagable and good cars -- but lacking all the safety gubbins can't pass any MOT/TuV tests :(

Liability issues abound too -- and why I suspect the NIssan struts are SO expensive.
Imagine the lawsuit of one of those fails to fire and a passenger is criplled and can convince a jury that in a lawsuit to pay out millions ??
So they will be built to NASA standards ( OK that's not such a good refernce point in recent decades -- but you know what I mean )

Again, been told that insurers run a mile if an RX-8 has side door damage JUST in case they miss on anything with the integrated safety hoop that locks together when the rear doors close.

I'm cetainly going to be scanning the salvage companies who buy up the insurance write-offs and see if I can get a half price GT-R :)

[Matra et Alpine]

HP/L is most likely a measure of how much the engineers value size and mass in the car more than anything else.
Not really as there ins't a consistent relationship.

Stress on the componnts has already been mentioned .. but most important in HIGH HP/L engines is the stress on the oil, lubrication, bearings and cooling. Momdern mechanical tolerance manufacturing means we can get to much highjer hp/l than in the past. So "recent" designs with fairly high hp/l arent' really stressing much other than the oil and coolling. Modern advances in those help, but wrt oil when you look at a high hp/l car you find it uses - BY DESIGN - more oil.

The debate's been had here many times. hp/l is an ENGIENERING measure that gives insight into the intent of the designer and how well they reach it.

[G35COUPE]

not dredging up another GTR vs world etc thread.

but goddamn!
Accident: Don't do what I did.... - GT-R Register - Official Nissan Skyline and GTR Owners Club forum (http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/127250-accident-dont-do-what-i-did.html)

looks like it will be a few years before parts prices drop, when more GTR's are in circulation. first post on page two is food for thought.

Thanks for the article. I will admit that the cost of maintaining and repairing a GTR is where it fails to inspire anyone. For example, a complete brake job with rotors pads, etc, with OEM parts, cost as much as $3000. The spark plugs alone approach $300. If you then breal the transmission with the launch control mode, then you are in for a $50,000 repair job.

Buying a GTR is like buying a HP printer ink cartridge---you really pay for the ink when you need to replace the original ink cartridge the printer came with.

[Ferrer]

Prices are always higher than you think, however, I recently had to replace the rear bumper of the C5, which was just a tat over a 1000.
Insurance Write-offs could be a handy way for clever do-it-yourself repairers to get a cheap super car...
What? :eek:

A thousand for a rear bumper?

[NSXType-R]

What? :eek:

A thousand for a rear bumper?

You didn't know it could be that expensive, huh?

[LeonOfTheDead]

I'm not that surprised, they are quite expensive since the introduction of parking sensors. Not that they make it more expensive to replace/design or something, it's their excuse for an even higher price than what it used to be.

[Ferrer]

I'm not that surprised, they are quite expensive since the introduction of parking sensors. Not that they make it more expensive to replace/design or something, it's their excuse for an even higher price than what it used to be.
I see. Like mirrors with indicators. Such a stupid idea.

[clutch-monkey]

Just had to read that whole thread :)
MAN ... that's gotta hurt owners.

I'm cetainly going to be scanning the salvage companies who buy up the insurance write-offs and see if I can get a half price GT-R :)
yeah, the disbelief expressed by some of them certainly seems justified.. as you say, if it was my GTR i'd just say to hell with it - not make an insurance claim, and make it a track car.


Buying a GTR is like buying a HP printer ink cartridge---you really pay for the ink when you need to replace the original ink cartridge the printer came with.
that's actually pretty good lol

What? :eek:

A thousand for a rear bumper?
i thought we were getting ripped at $700 AUD for a complete right rear quarter panel on the GT3.. but i guess that is just that, simply a panel, nothing else to be replaced with it.

[Cyco]

The 1st Murcie I drove I was warned by the owner that crashing it would be expensive as his insurance didn't cover under 30s... He was under the impression a front bumper was about $20k, and a rear would run to about $30k as it normally removed the exhaust at the same time if you damaged it enough to require replacement.

Since then the AUD has climbed quite a bit compared to the Euro and so these prices may well have dropped

[culver]

I could see the Corvette bumper cover being around $1000 to install in the US. I paid $500 to have a bumper cover sanded and painted (didn't replace the part). Of course I would also expect the state side repair to be cheaper than in Europe where the Corvette is a rare car. Here Corvettes aren't rare (though not truly common either). The parts can be had from competing dealers or used rather easily.

Of course by the same token I wouldn't expect that the 11,000 bp cost of the GTR repair would mean it would cost $20k or so in the US. I suspect some of that is dealers being dealers and charging what they think they can get away with rather than based on what things cost them.

[Ferrer]

I could see the Corvette bumper cover being around $1000 to install in the US. I paid $500 to have a bumper cover sanded and painted (didn't replace the part). Of course I would also expect the state side repair to be cheaper than in Europe where the Corvette is a rare car. Here Corvettes aren't rare (though not truly common either). The parts can be had from competing dealers or used rather easily.
henk4 has actually a Citroën C5 not a Corvette C5. :p

[culver]

henk4 has actually a Citroën C5 not a Corvette C5. :p

Oh, well I can't help in in that case :D

[AERO_HDT]

The moral of the story is, buy a pigeon passenger?