Pistonheads: Interview with 'Mr GTR'
- Thread starter Clarkey
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 20,189
- Location
- Middlesbrough
Didn't really understand the why a V6 question. He started babbling on about transaxles and balance.
So a V8 or V10 isn't balaned?
I suppose it's got to do with the cost of the vehicle aswell. If the GTR had a V10 then it would just be another supercar that cost £80,000+.
The fact that it's either this or a 911 is why it's so special. This is probably the best bang for buck car you can buy at the moment.
So a V8 or V10 isn't balaned?
I suppose it's got to do with the cost of the vehicle aswell. If the GTR had a V10 then it would just be another supercar that cost £80,000+.
The fact that it's either this or a 911 is why it's so special. This is probably the best bang for buck car you can buy at the moment.
Didn't really understand the why a V6 question. He started babbling on about transaxles and balance.
So a V8 or V10 isn't balaned?
I suppose it's got to do with the cost of the vehicle aswell. If the GTR had a V10 then it would just be another supercar that cost £80,000+.
The fact that it's either this or a 911 is why it's so special. This is probably the best bang for buck car you can buy at the moment.
I think he was talking more about weight balance between the engine and transaxle being at either end of the car. Not that V8 or V10 isnt balanced.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,497
Didn't really understand the why a V6 question. He started babbling on about transaxles and balance.
So a V8 or V10 isn't balaned?
I suppose it's got to do with the cost of the vehicle aswell. If the GTR had a V10 then it would just be another supercar that cost £80,000+.
The fact that it's either this or a 911 is why it's so special. This is probably the best bang for buck car you can buy at the moment.
Weight Vs. Power Delivery Vs. Fuel Consumption Vs. Emissions Vs. Cost Vs. Longevity, etc..
He certainly knows what he is on about and he has matched everything up for perfect performance, I understand why he went for 6 gears and a decent V6 over a V8 etc.
Much respect to the guy.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 20,189
- Location
- Middlesbrough
Not disputing the fact, the car is amazing. The performance figures are there for all to see. I just didn't understand it
reading the pistonheads comments
some seem to think he is backwards aruging the weight and pretending they wanted it to be that heavy
rather than admitting they "built a stunning car, that just happened to be a bit portly... not that it matters." instead.
Cheers for the links, awesome videos. It's great to see the inside view of the cars design stage, and this guy really knows his stuff.
A little off topic, but everytime I see someone Japanese explain something awesome I can't help but remember:
"Herro. How come I rich, and you not? How come you not sell real estate like I do? How come I sleep with your wife while you're at work and then I pee in your toilet and don't flush. And sometimes, I open the back part and pee in there, so that when you flush, pee come out. You know why? 'Coz I'm smart. I'm smart, you stupid. Call now!"
A little off topic, but everytime I see someone Japanese explain something awesome I can't help but remember:
"Herro. How come I rich, and you not? How come you not sell real estate like I do? How come I sleep with your wife while you're at work and then I pee in your toilet and don't flush. And sometimes, I open the back part and pee in there, so that when you flush, pee come out. You know why? 'Coz I'm smart. I'm smart, you stupid. Call now!"
i can see both sides of the argument tbh
- that how can you argue that heavier cars are better than lightweight ones ,otherwise people would be running round with sandbags in their car for extra grip, and BTCC wouldnt have 'weight penalities" if the weight made the car handle better
- equally, the car defies everything we have been taught about how cars can handle, redefined limits and generally warped everybodys mind with whats possible. Maybe we need to sit down and challenge whether convential wisdom is actually correct. After all, you were once considered barking made for suggesting the earth was anything other than flat.
- that how can you argue that heavier cars are better than lightweight ones ,otherwise people would be running round with sandbags in their car for extra grip, and BTCC wouldnt have 'weight penalities" if the weight made the car handle better
- equally, the car defies everything we have been taught about how cars can handle, redefined limits and generally warped everybodys mind with whats possible. Maybe we need to sit down and challenge whether convential wisdom is actually correct. After all, you were once considered barking made for suggesting the earth was anything other than flat.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,497
I think the gains are felt more at the low speed corners, it can go round quicker, allowing for higher exit speed which then counters the lower power etc. Seeing as on the road its normally sub 100mph speeds the extra weight probably would mean it would kick the backside of an M5 or something lighter.
Looking at the Nurburgring Laptimes and the car above it which is .3 seconds quicker has 200hp more but 200kg less...
Enzo is 350kg lighter, 200hp more and is 1.2 seconds quicker over a 7 min 25 sec lap. 30 seconds quicker with the same power is the SR8LM but I think thats something like 600kg. But to get a car like this down to that would be impossible.
I don't need to read the comments on Pistonhead's to know they know sweet F/A compared to the engineers on this. And as an in training aero engineer I can certainly see the basics of where this has come from and why they went for these specs.
Drag on aircraft is a similar thing, you would think that drag is lowest and the slowest speeds, its actually not. There is a minimum drag but its not near stall or Vmax... Its usually 20-30% along the speed range from what I remember of it!
All very interesting concepts!
