2012 Nissan GT-R officially goes 0-60 in 2.9 seconds

[codyace]

Originally Posted by 20 til 3

but... the GTR has the technology to beat it... and when it comes to the corners, the zr1 cannot keep up.

It's the two fold answer

Does the GTR have the tech? Sure. Is the GTR faster? Depends on the driver. So with that said, what's really the 'faster' car? The capable one, or the one that needs to be driven?

I love both cars, I just find it hard to really say what is best. I will side on Take Vette though...to say the ZR1 can't keep up with a GTR is silly, as a Z06 is a fair 'track match' with the GTR...the ZR1 is on a true supercar level.


I've beein a new Zo6 and a GTR. The GTR is fun, the launch is second to none. But I prefer the beast mode of Z06. Can't beat the cubes, the sound, the feel, and the rawness IMO. Then again if I had to 'honestly' daily one, it would probably be the GTR.

[RBMadess]

Originally Posted by codyace

1. Have you driven a z06? zr1? base?

2. Don't bother asking, I know you have't.



10 technological generations behind? Please entertain me with your idiocy. Efficiency and simplicity >* Why package 4 cams and weight into something that is PROVEN not to out perform the traditional LSX???

I guess it sounds cool to say OHC. I'd rather say "it hauls ass".

This is 2011... do you get direct injection?? NO. Do you get Variable cam timing??? NO Variable Valve lift? NO.

Any moron could take a high displacement v8, slap a supercharger and make 600hp.

I have driven a z06, c5 and c6. its about as exciting to drive as my infiniti.
How is a forced induction v8 engine that makes 102.9 hp per liter considered efficient?? a naturaly aspriraded honda F20 4 cylinder engine makes 123hp per liter... simple, yes. Simple as a truck engine invented in the 1800's. And if you want to divide those numbers by the number of pistons to paint a clearer picture of how efficient the ls9 is, well that would just be embarrassing. And just tho throw this out there... GTR makes 80.8 hp per cylinder, LS9 makes 79.5 and these are 2009 numbers, the 2012 GTR makes 530hp

Why package 4 cams?? because it makes for a better engine. You could manage valve event much better and yield much better powerband. Just because chevy can't make a proper DOHC V8 doesn't mean that a pushrod engine dominates the world, it just means chevy guys are lazy. Ask yourself why the rest of the world builds dohc engines, do a little research outside the chevy fanboy forums. I hope my idiocy entretained you.

[Wookie384]

I still say the Atom pwns all. =P

[codyace]

Originally Posted by Wookie384

I still say the Atom pwns all. =P

Half as usable, and slower than a GTR, ZO6 or ZR1

[RBMadess]

Here's what should happen in 2012: Ford should remake the GT with the GTR's Technology, boost up their modular v8 and tune it to about 700hp at 8k rpm. and a proper sports car would be born

[RBMadess]

I agree 100%. the GTR is just a little better.

[codyace]

Originally Posted by RBMadess

This is 2011... do you get direct injection?? NO. Do you get Variable cam timing??? NO Variable Valve lift? NO.

No...but

-Do any of those features help determine the power output? Nope
-Do they help drivability? Nope.

You go find me a 'directed injected' 'variable cam' 'variable lift' 'overhead cam' V8 to even gear near the durability, and power potential of that GM engine in street form. This side of a pure compeittion based motor, it doesn't exist, and even then it's hard to find...look at GM being penalized for being dominant in their ALMS cars...and the Vipers before that.

But I can understand why you'd want that tech, I mean the new E92 M3 v8 is nice...if you like torquless, tapped out, and overly strung engines. BORING. They do sound nice though, so it's a push.

Maybe its' my track based and performance based background that clout my vision. I love simple. Simple is reliable. Simple is fast. Simple wins. Then again when you get involved with Nascar type tech, you'll realize that for a 50 year old design, it's probably got darn equal RD and tech that an F1 engine does. 10,000 rpm, 600 hp, that can go 500 miles of WOT and be ok? That's simply rediculous, especially from an engine platform that was NEVER designed to do that from the drawing board. Sure it's not as pretty as the 19,000 rpm F1 motors, specifically designed to spin high from the moment the CNC machine tears into the block of alumimum to build the one off motor, but damn it's just as impressive if you ask me. THe only thing more impressive in motorsports to me are Top Fueler's...they simply shouldn't work, but they do.

Originally Posted by RBMadess

Any moron could take a high displacement v8, slap a supercharger and make 600hp.

Undoubtedly. The difference though is that NOT every moron can design a 600 hp blown engine to have 100,000 mile reliability. That's the difference...especially in factory form.

Originally Posted by RBMadess

I have driven a z06, c5 and c6. its about as exciting to drive as my infiniti.

On track or on the street? I could care less about the highway honestly. Having also driven 35c and a 37c on track too, I can say that they are fun. To even remotely think (from a driver persepctive) they are near a Zo6 is laughable. FWIW, I could care less about all of the creature comforts on track.

Originally Posted by RBMadess

How is a forced induction v8 engine that makes 102.9 hp per liter considered efficient?? a naturaly aspriraded honda F20 4 cylinder engine makes 123hp per liter... simple, yes. Simple as a truck engine invented in the 1800's. And if you want to divide those numbers by the number of pistons to paint a clearer picture of how efficient the ls9 is, well that would just be embarrassing. And just tho throw this out there... GTR makes 80.8 hp per cylinder, LS9 makes 79.5 and these are 2009 numbers, the 2012 GTR makes 530hp

Ahhh HP per liter, ricer math. My s14 makes 200 HP per liter, does that mean it's better than all of them? Not a chance. Efficiency should never be measured by liter power...it's sort of like slalom numbers. Neat figure but has ZERO relationship to real world performance.

...I can see now you're more of a magazine reader, less a track guy. Nothing wrong with that though so dont' get upset. In the end there is a reason you see people swapping LSX into everything, and not Ford Mod Motors, or BMW engines, or Hemi's (which are actually impressive engines, just heavy)...cost, simplicity, and ease of use. Hell there is a reason why people have been putting American Small blocks into everything since their onset. To date, a proper AC Cobra is one of the fastest cars you could 'build'. Why is it you don't see 4.0 audi engines? 5.0 Infiniti engines?

Originally Posted by RBMadess

Why package 4 cams?? because it makes for a better engine.

Bigger and heavier too, not to mention weight higher in the chassis too Weight higher up sucks. Ever see how big a OHC to a OHV engine is?



That's a 5.4 ford and a 5.0 ford. Granted the 5.0 is not what I'm arguing about, but it's the same 'size' as a LS1 for sake of argument. Lets see, a 331 vs a 346. The ford is bigger, heavier, less cubes, less power, less torque, and 4x as expensive to build. BUt it's technologically superior so it's better? Package, weight, power, torque...LSX wins that all day. Scoring cool guy points on the forums, maybe not. Fast track times for sure though.

Originally Posted by RBMadess

powerband. Just because chevy can't make a proper DOHC V8 doesn't mean that a pushrod engine dominates the world, it just means chevy guys are lazy. Ask yourself why the rest of the world builds dohc engines, do a little research outside the chevy fanboy forums. I hope my idiocy entretained you.

Chevy did. LT5. 370 HP and Trq, in the mid 90's. These engines went on to help design modern Northstars, another fantastic overhead cam engine from them. You talk about me needing to leave the forums, maybe you should leave the Super Street magazine on the stand, and actually get involved with the performance world.

PS: I don't spend any time on Chevy Forums, well..limited. I'm a Ford guy. Even I can admit where my brand is flawed.

Originally Posted by Jimbo_Moone

while i whole heartedly agree on the half as usable thing... let's re-examine the numbers. I just want to know why we're comparing models that are $20,000+ apart? I want everyone to get along, so here you go. they are all the greatest thing ever in the whole wide world... in their respective price segments. YAY! everyone gets a slushee

Originally Posted by RBMadess

I agree 100%. the GTR is just a little better.

[codyace]

RBMadness, dont' construe most post as trying to flame you, or insult you. You have your opinion, and I have mine obviously when it comes to car. But when you bring up some comments that have no backing, it obviously warrants correction. I'm not the best at typing things out in an organized fashion on a forum, so bare with my 'all over the place' argument.

In the end, I'm impressed by performance, reliablility, and cost to maintain. Doesn't matter how they do it, or what the brand is, or etc etc. If Nissan has an LSX I'd still love it the same; if GM had a GTR I'd be just as critical of it as well. In the end though, the overall 'factor' that does effect it the most is simplicity. Does the Veyron impress me numbers wise? Sure it makes a shit to of power. Does it impress me motor wise? No...

Technology is cool; it helps move us towards the future. But when it comes to my cars, I'm not going to 'be hung up' or 'not buy' one or the other because one has a pushrod engine, and one doesn't. That's pretentious to me.

[RBMadess]

Cody, you're being nieve. VTC, DI, and VVL make all the difference in power output and driveability. Those features aren't as noticeble with v8's but hop in a 4cyl sedan with them and you'll see. VTC and VVL offer different cam profiles at different rpm, which allows you to have almost all of your available torque in the lower rpm range. a nice torque curve is the deffenition of drivability and practicality in the streets. Faster off the line? better fuel economy? better emissions?? yes yes and yes please. As Far as output goes, Emissions regulations are tighter now then ever, wich means by having alternate cam profiles you can have a higher engine output while being cleaner.

Damn gotta run but I'l lbe back later, good food for thought tho. and no worries, I don't take anything to heart. But you're dead wrong about me being a magazine reader type, I build engines for a living, I'm a tech for an independently owned exotic repair shop. and you can guess what I do in the weekends.

[RBMadess]

Now.... Efficiancy: the ratio of the work done or energy developed by a machine, engine, etc., to the energy supplied to it, usually expressed as a percentage. When where talking about the "efficiancy" of an engine, the ONLY way it can be measured is hp/liter. A poorly engineered engine needs loads of displacement(leads to bigger, heavier engine) a well engineered engine needs little displacement to gain larger output. If the LS engine was engineered on the same level as the japanese engines, the ZR1 would have 638hp from a naturaly aspirated 5.3 liter v8 instead of a blown 6.2, or maybe even a 4.6 liter blown/boosted v8. OR hell, maybe even a highly "efficient" and highly advanced 3.8 liter TT V6. Wait......... ooops nissan already thought of that.

[RBMadess]

SO. is a more "efficient" engine with high hp/liter better then the rest?? you bet your ass it is. lower displacement comes with lower weight. Maybe its just me, call it pretentious, but I just don't think I would ever be ready to spend 110k on mediocrety. I'd want every last penny of my hard earnt money to buy the very best. I'd rather spend less money, and get more out of it. which would bring us to a different subject of investing the price difference on the GTR and bring them into the same "price category". The ZR1 would lose outright, but that's a completely different topic.

Lets also for the sake of argument bring the Ferrari 458 Italia into the comparisson...

LS1: 350hp, 365 ft-lb, 5.7 liters, ohv, 6700 rpm redline. BOOOOORRRRIING.
Ferrari Italia Engine: 560hp@9000rpm, 400ft-lb@6000rpm with 80% of torque available from 3250rpm WOOOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! from a 4.5 liter!!!!! heavy?? no..torqueless?? hardly. boring? what do you think.... for "ricer math" my arguments make yours look like "muscle ignorance"

Oh and I don't read super street I read Moddified Mag, Car&Driver and Road&Track. good discussion, I'm over it tho

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by RBMadess

SO. is a more "efficient" engine with high hp/liter better then the rest?? you bet your ass it is. lower displacement comes with lower weight. Maybe its just me, call it pretentious, but I just don't think I would ever be ready to spend 110k on mediocrety. I'd want every last penny of my hard earnt money to buy the very best. I'd rather spend less money, and get more out of it. which would bring us to a different subject of investing the price difference on the GTR and bring them into the same "price category". The ZR1 would lose outright, but that's a completely different topic.

Lets also for the sake of argument bring the Ferrari 458 Italia into the comparisson...

LS1: 350hp, 365 ft-lb, 5.7 liters, ohv, 6700 rpm redline. BOOOOORRRRIING.
Ferrari Italia Engine: 560hp@9000rpm, 400ft-lb@6000rpm with 80% of torque available from 3250rpm WOOOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! from a 4.5 liter!!!!! heavy?? no..torqueless?? hardly. boring? what do you think.... for "ricer math" my arguments make yours look like "muscle ignorance"

Oh and I don't read super street I read Moddified Mag, Car&Driver and Road&Track. good discussion, I'm over it tho

GTR, Autotragic only... BOOORRRRINNG.

[drift freaq]

Originally Posted by Corbic

GTR, Autotragic only... BOOORRRRINNG.

Ya and I bet you have never driven one of those paddle shifting dual clutch semi auto's. If you think the transmission is auto tragic and boring you probably have no real ideal beyond reading. LOL

Its definitely not your fathers automatic.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by drift freaq

Ya and I bet you have never driven one of those paddle shifting dual clutch semi auto's. If you think the transmission is auto tragic and boring you probably have no real ideal beyond reading. LOL

Its definitely not your fathers automatic.

I've driven DSG and SMG cars... I'll keep my clutch, thanks.

If anything it comes down to options and preference. GTR does not give you the choice and that's a real shame.


If I'm dropping coin on a car its cause its a car I want. I could careless if its rival is a 10th faster, can be modded for another 100hp for $500 less or whatever other reason someone else may have to buy that car.

I dig the current R35 styling (not the 3rd Gen Eclipse update) and the interior is rad. V6 Twins are pretty groovy too... but its over when its DSG-style only (just like the new TT-S).

For 80k I'd be looking at a used Ferrari 360.

[drift freaq]

Originally Posted by Corbic

I've driven DSG and SMG cars... I'll keep my clutch, thanks.

If anything it comes down to options and preference. GTR does not give you the choice and that's a real shame.


If I'm dropping coin on a car its cause its a car I want. I could careless if its rival is a 10th faster, can be modded for another 100hp for $500 less or whatever other reason someone else may have to buy that car.

I dig the current R35 styling (not the 3rd Gen Eclipse update) and the interior is rad. V6 Twins are pretty groovy too... but its over when its DSG-style only (just like the new TT-S).

For 80k I'd be looking at a used Ferrari 360.

Hahahaha you have not driven a GTR and therefor are really not qualified to comment. You are comparing different brands tech and trying to say its the same. That is ignorance.

Oh and a used 360 still requires worse maintenance costs than a GTR. LOL and the GTR will still kick its ass.

Now a 458 Italia might be a better challenge. A 360 though. LOL my friend owns a 360 its ok but not amazing.

[SuicidnS13]

This thread is so full of misinformation now. First of all the tranny is the strong point and the weakness of the gtr. Its what makes it fast and easy to drive. Its also what limits it build capabilities for the average consumer of the car. The clutch packs hoefully have been revised as they are limited to around 500 ftlbs trq. Doesnt take much more than a tune and bolt ons to kill it. The rebuilds are in the tens if thousands, not thousands. I can afford it, but would I. But because I am a highly intelligent and prefer to invest in my play cars wisely a gtr is a bad investment for my needs. I need a car that can take 650-800whp all day and be cheap to maintain all while still being street driveable. The maintenance costs on zr1's and zo6's are less than a 5th the costs of the gtr. A few years of owning a gtr and you couldve bought a zr1. The next level of performance... Hands down.... A true drivers car

[projectdrifter]

ive driven both mr ace

my take on the whole situation... we are in a hp/tec race.. much like the muscle car era only this is the tec area... kinda of a blend of muscle and brains meet... where smog testing and general limits that were put on cars in the 60/70's have now been enhanced and pushed... to develope the motors of today... but now we have the import in the same mental state... and before u say but the price is diffrent for these cars.. its proportional to inflation .. the high end bb big dog cars of the era equal about the same as what the high end sports cars go for thesedays... just because u see a 1970 mustang dosnt mean it a cobra jet... or an r/t hemi or a 454 camero ect ect...
heck the ultra race cars of the day were pricde high to..

zr1... great car i dont care what people say its the top dog as far as muscle/domestic goes. the price is kinda steep.. but you can get one for a little less than msrp... you can throw slicks on and run killer times.. the car is sexy and hauls azz.... and it pulls it as well. it does look a bit difrrent than ur run of the mill z06 and it does get noticed...

r35... amazing peice of technology... padle shifter that rocks... you cant out shift fluid and for as creature comfort as the r35 is it pulls hard... they take to modds well.. an exhaust makes a world of diffrence... the ladies reconize the r35 as well.... the r35 does do 1 thing the r1 dosn't... rear seats comfortable ones to... the ladies love the back seat as well.

i seen a mention of 1 car ill comment on.

ford gt... now that is a beast of a car... but very crude... very track oriented yes its streetable and managable but i personally would not take it across country on a whim.. maybe to make a statment...its a 5.4 dohc (4 cams) and has a blower to.. much like the gtr... see domestics do it as well. and the ladies love the ford gt as well... and u know this.....


i dont really think the gtr was aimed at any specific group it is a well rounded car.. yup its bulky... but its very quiet,has nice layout and gadgets out the wazooo... its a pleasure to drive daily and for sport it demands similar maintance as the zr1 tho.. just not the trans itself.. the brakes are about the same and price point on maintance on them is roughly the same. the zr1 is a dry sump setup and holds sumthing like 9qts of oil and thats not a cheep oil change..


the price to modd a zr1 is much friendlier.. and does result in some stout numbers... and if ur put a modded r35 and zr1 u might want to keep the bets low... they roll out...

oh and gtr prices have come down... i have seen them up for sale in the mid 50/60 range for mild milage cars... cost of ownership takes a tole and when ur aproaching those big number thing to keep ur warranty you start to think of ways to get out from under it. boths cars have flaws but both are priced quite low for what they compete against and hold their own to... u want to have a exotic,Ferrari,lambo,Porsche, or be on the same level you should expect to pay close to those prices..

state ur view mr ace... u know ive driven all of them.. and thats how i see it... just my opinion and im entitled to it.

[Imarvin240]

i would take the zr1 over this anyday, at least the zr1 has a clutch pedal and a shifter. I love the GTR, i have not driven one, but i have road in one. its my personal opinion, but i dont like it.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by drift freaq

Blah blah blah you seem hung up on Image for Images sake rather than Performance for dollar.

Trying to have a intelligent discussion about performance with someone hung up on look and Image is useless. as they will always ignore Performance advantages for the sake of looks.


In the end I know you have never driven either car. So you really do not have a real life experience to back up your statements.

If you had I am sure you would not be so hung up on a 360. LOL

Either car? Which is the "either". Stop being a forum tool and living your life one quarter mile at a time. There is more to life and enjoying a car than "performance" in the sense of "speed".

And so fucking sorry Gurly Leep Nissan won't allow test drives on there GTRs. They've sold three, none of the owners got to drive them before buying it.... a drivers car indeed.

Whens the last time you took a GTR and 360 to the 'ring..,,GT5 need not apply.

[amaank]

2.9 seconds is fast but road and track has tested the 911 turbo s at 2.6 seconds.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...059e7c3413.pdf

I understand that 911 is much more expensive but it seems like its doing a lot more with its 530hp.

[Wookie384]

Originally Posted by codyace

Half as usable, and slower than a GTR, ZO6 or ZR1

Please refer to my earlier post.

Originally Posted by Wookie384

If I really wanted a fast car I wouldn't be complaining about plastic rocker panels, I'd be driving the damn thing... that being said;

Corvette ZR1:
0-60: 3.3 Seconds
1/4 Mile: 11.2 @ 135mph
Price: $110,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.20.4

Nissan GT-R35:
0-60: 2.9 Seconds
1/4: 11.6 ('09 model Mph unknown)
Price: $90,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.19.7 ('09 model)

Ariel Atom
0-60 2.9 Seconds
1/4: 10.6 @ 128.4
Price: $50,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.19.5

I'll take the Atom, plus theres no crappy rocker panels, or cheap interior for anyone to complain about and even if you were complaining about anything, the engine noise would drown you out.

Usability is a relative term in this case, most people who own these types of cars can afford to (and do) own another car for daily use, so since their GT-R's and ZR1's for the most part are garage queens, one could argue the Atom to be a top contender.

[Silvia_Drift]

To the guy saying that the GTR has an F1 derived transmission, I am pretty sure you have no idea what you are talking about. The only similarity between an F1 and GTR transmission is that they are both shifted by paddles. An F1 car is purpose built to go as fast as possible whereas while the GTR is fast, it still has to be drivable, and be sold at a reasonable price. There are compromises that have to be made, including the transmission.

[2forty]

I have never seen a stock zr1 trap 135. can someone link me to this site? the fastest test ive seen is 130 trap speed. Im sorry for the power the zr1 does not impress me. the z06 was a different story. its trapped 127 on numerous occasions. 450whp. the zr1 put down 550whp and trapped 129 against the 997.2 turbo? come on. it trapped the same as the 997.2 turbo in the test. id take a z06 h/c over a zr1 for the money. now the 997.2 turbo is impressive. 0-60 in 2.8 and 10.9@128.

[Wookie384]

Originally Posted by drift freaq

Ok you are clueless if you think the internals of the GTR trans are an off the shelf Borg Warner system. Nissan is owned by Renault. Renault uses a dual clutch semi automatic in their F1 car the same technology is being used in the GTR . If you think its the standard Borg Warner stuff you need to do a more research.

Sorry to do this to ya Dave, but some simple Google'ing took me to this Wikipedia page
Nissan GT-R - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...Which had this to say:
"A rear mounted six-speed BorgWarner designed dual clutch semi-automatic transmission built by Aichi Machine Industry is used in conjunction with the ATTESA E-TS system to provide power to all four wheels and along with Nissan's Vehicle Dynamics Control (VDC-R) to aid in stability. Three shift modes can also be selected for various conditions."

Originally Posted by Corbic

Either car? Which is the "either". Stop being a forum tool and living your life one quarter mile at a time. There is more to life and enjoying a car than "performance" in the sense of "speed".

And so fucking sorry Gurly Leep Nissan won't allow test drives on there GTRs. They've sold three, none of the owners got to drive them before buying it.... a drivers car indeed.

Whens the last time you took a GTR and 360 to the 'ring..,,GT5 need not apply.

Wait a minuite! Dave is too old to understand how to use A PS3 (I kid!)
Honestly though, I know of the friend he mentioned earlier who has a 360 (unless he knows someone else who owns one), and that person admits that the 360 is crap. Don't get me wrong, looks wise, and since I'm a poor bastid, I'd still take one any day.

Back onto topic, I honestly believe that these two cars are incomparable. The GT-R does have all those fancy driver aids (see what you get in just the quote above), and the ZR1 it's just raw power. One is a refined sports car the other is just brute power, they do the same, but they go about it differently, They're just two different kinds of beasts. Everyone has their own opinion and we can't try to convince the other differently.

Now just give up the arguing and admit the Atom is better.

[thrOwsumDs]

damn... mad arguing...

[P-Funk alot]

ok ive just briefly read through this. now has any one addressed the safe tune on the gtr. ive seen jesus at cobb tuning do some pretty amazing things with stock gtr's. Also ferrari and lambo ran test on both the gtr and zr1 and both came to the conclusion that the gtr was under priced by 150 grand whereas the zr1 was said to be Fairly priced. now i have been in both cars and both are great. but if i had to choose id go gtr all day its cheaper in initial cost and if you felt the need to spend that extra 20k you could use it on performance parts.

[Loogah]

halogen plate lights