Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 118

Thread: Sport Auto Super Test of ZR1

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney, Down Under
    Posts
    8,833
    Quote Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead View Post
    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.
    Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
    – Hunter Thompson

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ozland
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by culver
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by ferrer
    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.
    Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.

    http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ozland
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by leon
    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.
    Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.

    http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ozland
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by Guibo View Post
    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.


    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.
    Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.

    http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by P4g4nite View Post
    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.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,489
    Quote Originally Posted by P4g4nite View Post
    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.
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    Quote Originally Posted by culver View Post
    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....
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    546
    Quote Originally Posted by culver View Post
    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.
    Last edited by henk4; 11-13-2009 at 09:49 PM. Reason: correcting the displacement figure for the Corvette (from 5 to 6 liter)

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    546
    Quote Originally Posted by Guibo View Post

    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.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ozland
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by G35
    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.
    Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.

    http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    ^^^^^^^^^ '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'

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,508
    Quote Originally Posted by G35COUPE View Post
    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.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,508
    Quote Originally Posted by G35COUPE View Post
    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).

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,489
    Quote Originally Posted by culver View Post
    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.
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    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

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Land Rover Range Rover Sport (1ste gen) 2005-2013
    By nopassn in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 04-29-2013, 10:04 AM
  2. Ford Sport Trac Concept 2005
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-22-2005, 05:29 PM
  3. PWR to new Super Cheap Auto Racing Team
    By v8chick in forum Racing forums
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-23-2005, 02:43 PM
  4. looking for some Auto Motor und Sport...
    By Justin Syder in forum Multimedia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-29-2004, 11:36 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •