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.Originally Posted by culver
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.Originally Posted by ferrer
Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.
http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.
The GTR did very well on Evo's test track, way ahead of the Z06 and just behind the Enzo.Originally Posted by leon
Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.
http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.
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.
Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.
http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.
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.
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....
University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
www.fsae.utoronto.ca
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.
Last edited by henk4; 11-13-2009 at 09:49 PM. Reason: correcting the displacement figure for the Corvette (from 5 to 6 liter)
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.
G35, don't take this the wrong way but, reading your posts is like being slapped by a soggy dildo.Originally Posted by G35
Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.
http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.
^^^^^^^^^ 'cept it doesn't even list Alpine's "supercar" (sic.)
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
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.
so what will be the option code for the JATO rocket? OMFG1337 pack? lol
University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
www.fsae.utoronto.ca
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)