GTR Dyno

http://autopowervids.com/Nissan/watch-video/yIhsv6WSboY/mindlessoath/motortrend-gt-r-dyno-run.html


Liessssssssss nissan.. all liessssssssssssss

What were the results? Can't watch the video at the moment.

430.6 hp
425.3 lb-ft

AT THE WHEELS!

They said it pulled 430.6 hp and 425.3 ft/lb so using 15% or 25% driveline loss due to AWD the car makes well over 500hp and more than Nissan listed the car should at 480hp.

To me it's not a big deal as who doesn't love underrated power. But it does help explain why the car performs so well for it's portly weight.

As with many things on this car the real story is different than what was advertised. I'd have no problem with the car if Nissan listed the true HP, tested it in production trim and cut any corners at the Ring. If the car is truly worth the hype it should be able to perform on its own merit.

I highly doubt that its only a 15% drivetrain loss, through AWD.

:lol:

I hate to say "I told you so".

I can't see the video either. What kind of dyno is it?

Based on other things I've read, I am starting to believe that Nissan pulled off an AWD drivetrain with <15% loss.

I can't see the video either. What kind of dyno is it?

Based on other things I've read, I am starting to believe that Nissan pulled off an AWD drivetrain with <15% loss.

Appears to be a Dynojet - I might be wrong, though.

I can't see the video either. What kind of dyno is it?

Based on other things I've read, I am starting to believe that Nissan pulled off an AWD drivetrain with <15% loss.

They said it was a dynojet at K&Ns R&D facility.

they were speculating in the video some where between 25-50% drive train loss at at 50% it would crank out low 500's at 25% it would be about 575 crank horse power if it was 15% it probably 600

Whoa, way to get your percentages wrong! :) At 50% drivetrain loss, the engine would be producing 430 x 2 = 860 HP.

They said from 15% to 25%, translating to 504 - 570+ HP at the flywheel.

Car and Driver was testing a red GTR, looks to be the same one as in the video, unless they have several red production GTRs given for testing. This is the quote:

"That GT-R from the May issue launched at 4500 rpm; 4400 rpm is the final setting for production. This GT-R may have been down on power; the May car ran the quarter-mile in 11.5 seconds at 124 mph. This one couldn’t crack 12 seconds and was a stunning 9 mph slower. (We’ve since tested a third GT-R that was as quick as the first car.)"

So you have it. Over 500 HP at the crank (from the video), and it couldn't break into 11's (from the article). The question is, what is the GTR from Nuremberg making at the flywheel? Well over 600?

Edit: makes you wonder, why didn't they list the true HP? Many automakers have cars in the 500 to 600 HP range, and if bragging rights is everything, why not list it at 510 or 550, or whatever it's at?

430hp at the wheels is still mightly impressive for a V6. :p

the GTR from Nuremberg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nurburgring

Get it right. :p

....Edit: makes you wonder, why didn't they list the true HP? Many automakers have cars in the 500 to 600 HP range, and if bragging rights is everything, why not list it at 510 or 550, or whatever it's at?
Over the years I've been here, I thinks it's fair to say that I've been inundated with, shall we say, less than friendly posts, from folks here regarding GM's legendary underrating HP in it's vehicles yet that doesn't seem to bother anybody that they do that.

Assuming Nissan has underreported the GT-R's HP/Tq (and I'm not at all agreeing that is has), why should that bother anybody now?

When it comes to performance cars, who cars what is "stated" anyway...the only issue that really matters is how the thing performs day to day and if the people who plunk down the $$$ are satisfied with what they got for their money.

This car is going to be EXTREMELY well and frequently tested and over the course of the next few months, a true picture of its capabilities will emerge (not that such testing will ever get in the way of peoples opinions :) )

Over the years I've been here, I thinks it's fair to say that I've been inundated with, shall we say, less than friendly posts, from folks here regarding GM's legendary underrating HP in it's vehicles yet that doesn't seem to bother anybody that they do that.


The only vehicle that was grossly underrated by GM, in my memory, was the f-body. It had 330 HP to 345, depending on the dyno, and yet it was rated at 305. Several things to keep in mind. There was some sort of thing about not encroaching on Corvette's territory. And it was a mass-volume car.

Enter the Nissan GT-R, which is not in the same category as the f-body. This is Nissan's flagship, the Ferrari of Japanese cars, and this car's mission is to set the bar in every category. It doesn't have anything else to compete with from Nissan, and there is no unspoken rule of limiting the HP to 480. So why not set the record straight and make your car break the 500 HP mark at the flywheel?

I don't have any problems with this car being underrated, I'm just saying that it is very likely underrated (Nissan engineers claim to have designed their system to produce only 10% drivetrain loss... in an AWD vehicle nonetheless). Moreover, it also seems that the car(s) Nissan used to set some records were tuned to produce way more power than the claimed 480HP. The versions that consumers will get in the US will not perform as well as Nissan hyped it out to be.

....
Seems as if you are making a awful lot of assumptions...about the GT-R's "mission", about the vehicle in general and about what consumers will or won't get.

As to GM underrating its engines, I could dig up plenty of posts in which the knowledge bank here has claimed such to be true over and over again and not just with the Fbody...various "reasons" for this claimed underrating have been given but the only consistent point is that such claims of underrating by GM seem to happen anytime anyone tries to compare GM's numbers for a GM car to another car of another make...can't imagine why that would be. :)

As long as it's not OVERRATED, who cares? This is GOOD news. And we all kind of knew it had to be underrated based on the #'s at the ring, 1/4 mile, etc....

It's not the first supercar to be underrated. The Ford GT was underrated as well.

Another thought occurs which is that manufacturers absolutely DON'T want to be caught overrating their engines which can quickly lead to both embarrassment and lawsuits.

I'm nut suggesting that Nissan purposely underrates its engines but I can say that manufacturers report numbers they are reasonably certain they can support in the real world...I know well that Nissan engines built in the U.S. are routinely Dyno tested to make sure that what is coming off the line meets expectations.

So, while a manufacturer may have engines that sometimes or even often put out more power than officially claimed, they are likely going to report a number that is more "average" across the production run if only to err on the side of caution.

Dont forget that the GTR is geared very short. Its already in third gear by the time it hits 60mph. The Corvette is still in first. They can do this because their dual clutch transmission shifts so fast that multiple gear changes arnt an issue.

I was hoping to see a dyno graph...

doh...
http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadtests/coupes/8494021/112_0803_03z+2009_nissan_GT-R+dyno_graph.jpg

Another thought occurs which is that manufacturers absolutely DON'T want to be caught overrating their engines which can quickly lead to both embarrassment and lawsuits.

I'm nut suggesting that Nissan purposely underrates its engines but I can say that manufacturers report numbers they are reasonably certain they can support in the real world...I know well that Nissan engines built in the U.S. are routinely Dyno tested to make sure that what is coming off the line meets expectations.

So, while a manufacturer may have engines that sometimes or even often put out more power than officially claimed, they are likely going to report a number that is more "average" across the production run if only to err on the side of caution.


Agreed and there is nothing wrong with extra power for "free" so to speak. That's ok but nobody wants the 1999 Cobra fiasco. Yet no complaints from the 03-04 Cobra crowd.
So that's why GM felt ok with the LS1 in the F-body. In this case the same 350hp LS1 was put in the F-body and only there listed as underrated. As we know the only difference in driveline was the IRS for the Vette and the crap 7.5in Monza rear on the F-car. Intake and exhaust were said to be more restrictive. So the 305, 310, 320, 325hp ratings on the F-body seemed more arbitrary and marketing driven than actually tested.

For the GTR this hp rating just goes along with a list of other discrepancies from the Ring that seems to show that Nissan has a motive to this. It's as if they want the car to be seen as a wolf in sheep’s clothing rather than an all out wolf. They want this car to be seen as some great technological advancement. When actually it's just like any other car, better power to weight ratio and higher grip will translate into faster speeds and lower times. Cutting a corner helps too! No rewritten laws of physics needed for that.

...They want this car to be seen as some great technological advancement. When actually it's just like any other car, better power to weight ratio and higher grip will translate into faster speeds and lower times. Cutting a corner helps too! No rewritten laws of physics needed for that.
It isquite a technological advancement and is unlike any other car ever made...it's sad in a way that relatively few will ever get a chance to actually drive one and experience it...there simply is nothing else like it.

On the other hand, the fact that not every average Joe will own one has its own attractiveness. :)

It isquite a technological advancement and is unlike any other car ever made...it's sad in a way that relatively few will ever get a chance to actually drive one and experience it...there simply is nothing else like it.

On the other hand, the fact that not every average Joe will own one has its own attractiveness. :)

Not sure I'd go that far. It's a great car but they have not reinvented the wheel.
To each their own as many Ferrari, Lambo, Bugatti, SLR McLaren drivers could all say the same thing. Hey it's why the choices we have available are so important.

cool numbers
:cool:

doh...
http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadtests/coupes/8494021/112_0803_03z+2009_nissan_GT-R+dyno_graph.jpg

WTF is up with having HP and Torque on different scales? That's really weird.

Over 300 ft lbs of tq from 2500 rpm and higher? That's very nice, although I like that I have over 300 ft lbs at 1600 rpm. Problem is, my tq falls below 300 at 5100 rpm and the GTR never does. :)

That engine is seriously underrated. I mean, our LT1/LS1 RWD M6's which are about as basic as you get are 12.5%.

Dan