http://rocketpunchautoblog.blogspot....-who-cant.html

It's going to have a DSG system akin to newer Audi/VWs.

 

Priced right around the current Z06. Did anyone notice the weight?

 

Wonder if those two GTR's on the truck are production or the prototypes recently reported on the Ring tearing up the 911 GT's time.

The curb weight is a bit dissapointing. I wonder how much power would be needed to pull that kind of weight around the ring for those low 7 min times.

 

High curb weight doesn't necessarily have to translate into bad performance, but I have to believe that Nissan is squeezing a LOT of power out of that V6 to turn the times that have been reported. I'm guessing easily 500+, which would put it at more than what the rumored 480 was. Who knows though, Nissan may have turned the wick up on the pre-production cars to generate a buzz at the 'Ring.....

 

I agree totally as there are many cars with great performance and a higher curb weight, I hope one is the new Camaro. That being said against the kinds of cars this GTR is up against and the supposed low 7 min times they claimed at the Ring, wouldn't lead me to believe that this car was spotting the 911's, Z06's and F430's by 300-500 lbs with equal power. Just doesn't add up if true. Laws of phyisics can't be broken.

We certainly don't know the true power and weight of production nor the one at the ring, so time will tell.

 

Eh....would do everything better if it lost a few hundred lbs., but we've been down that road once or twice or three hundred times.

 

There is another component to consider than just weight/HP/Tq, etc which is a vehicle's ability to STAY on the track and to carry speed into/out of a corner (which the Ring has plenty of)...raw numbes never tell the whole story about how a car actually drives/handles on a track.

The GT-R's performance at the "Ring, posted a couple of weeks ago, may be due in no small part of it's AWS and AWD systems.

Just a thought anyway.

 

But on the other hand AWS and AWD add weight and complexity and you don't always make up that disadvantage on dry pavement. Or at least you don't for more than a few laps.

 

What would you expect? Take one 3600+ pound G37. Add all-wheel drive and turbos. Be happy it's not heavier!

 

There are always tradeoffs – they could have made a car much like the Super 7 which is essentially four wheels and an engine and handles like it’s on rails; it would be very light and not very sophisticated but it would sure handle and go fast (but probably wouldn’t appeal to very many buyers)!

AWD and AWS and other such systems do add complexity and weight - I guess whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages have to be looked at (and whether they do for the GT-R is still pretty much an unknown).

I do wonder on what you base your statement that… as I haven’t heard that complaint before.

My personal experience with AWD came in the early ‘80s when Audi produced a car (for European consumption) called the Quattro which was a five cylinder (turbo) and an AWD set-up…the car they imported to the States was simply called the “Coupe” which was essentially the same car but without the AWD and was NA…I owned an Audi Coupe.

I had the opportunity to drive a Quattro in Germany and the system provided a noticeable improvement in handling and I never noticed any fading with use…obviously that wasn’t hot laps of the ‘Ring but trust me when I say the car was driven hard and for quite a long while!

The AWD set-up on the Quattro certainly added weight and complexity but I found it to be a very acceptable trade-off.

 

Many cars are getting to the point where they're severely traction-limited, even at higher speeds on dry pavement. In this era of 500+ HP, AWD and other traction systems (torque vectoring and what-not) start becoming more than just foul-weather driving aids.

 

It is not that it is just a foul weather aid, but that the advantage is probably not as great as you would expect given the weight penalty on dry pavement. The last bit of comments were more a thought about tire wear versus a lighter car with only 2 wheel drive.

 

ive got a bet with a buddy that the ZR1/blue devil vette will run a quicker time at the 'ring than the GT-R. I raised the BS flag when they quoted 7:15 before. now they come out with mid 7:3x range. seems more reasonable. still right behind a carrera GT.

 

I don't hear of people bashing the AWD system in the TBSS or the Silverado SS. Every Subaru sold here is AWD. The WRX and Evo are praised for their handling.

With AWD you can apply full power coming out of turns.

And who says that Nissan didn't put extra sticky tires on the cars that ran the 'Ring? Maybe they even bumped the boost up a couple psi just to see what it was capable of...

 

A mere 200 pounds with AWD & twin turbos and no doubt heavier duty everything else is actually very impressive.



AWD has it's place, and shouldn't be seen as a cureall for everything, or even be seen as a requirement for every performance car. It's heavy, complex, and tends to be incompatable with high torque engines and especially high torque engines with manual transmissions.

AWD is great in rally cars, and is a part of the Skyline's DNA. But other cars like Corvette, Camaro, Mustang, and even BMW's "M" cars shouldn't have them.