R35 GTR v My 944 Turbo

[bennyboy]

We had an R35 GTR in at work for a week's valuation, managed to get a go in it yesterday. Verdict? Very, very fast, but also felt very fidgity and quite heavy. Understeered quite dramtically before the electronics sorted it out. Took my turbo our for an hours blast this morning. OK, so it's not as fast (wouldn't be a million miles away with some engine work though), but I'm convinced it handles and rides better. It's just as tight and roll-free, but it isn't fidgity or crashy, and is comfortable to simply cruise in. Ok, so my car runs KW and is considerably lighter than when it left the factory, but it is comfortable, chuckable, precise and fun all at the same time. I also think my car looks better than the GTR? When I haven't been out in her for a while, my mind starts to wonder and I begin to think about what I might replace it with one day. Then I get a free hour, jump in the car and just drive it anywhere, and I actually end up feeling guilty and somewhat daft for having those thoughts. Am I the only one?

 

[944 man]

I think that an R32 or R33 GT-R easily had the legs on my M758, and the R34 only built on this. Id honestly be surprised if a 951 could hold a candle to the new Skyline (whether so-named or not). This subjective of course, and thats only my opinion.

 

[jasonp]

hiya ben, with you all the way mate! start to think about a mint 911 3.2, i will have a chance to buy in the spring/summer but every time i drive my s2, i feel guilty and regretful, and yes i think that 944 looks much better then the skyline, regards jason p

 

[barks944]

About 350bhp in a standard 944T would match the power to weight of a GTR. You won't match it in conditions like wet/ice/snow etc though. The clever 4wd system will win hands down in those conditions. My car was spinning the wheels in 3rd gear in the wet the other day, albeit with some slightly worn but still legal rear tyres. I'm starting to agree with the P/O of the car that it doesnt really need much more power (275bhp) on the road, its a great combination of power and handling as it is. Especially now the new intercooler has made the boost response better. If I do any work to the engine it wont be for massive power gains, probably a new injection system for economy and general smoother running and maybe a more modern quicker spooling turbo of similar size.

 

[sawood12]

Clever 4wds only work to a point - at the end of the day you can't beat having a good chassis under you. I don't think these Jap cars have that good a chassis. I read a report in this months Autocar that demonstrates this where it says the new GT-R is twitchy and difficult to handle in wet/damp conditions whereas the new 911 turbo is nice and composed and easier to drive fast. Classic signs of the clever 4wd system making up for shortfalls in the chassis and pushing the capabilities of the car beyond the chassis - which is a potentially dangerous situation for a road car. In the end they waited for the track to dry before timing laps and the GT-R was still 0.3 seconds quicker than the new 911 turbo (i.e. basically the same) but it would have been interesting if they'd posted times in the wet/damp conditions- which in reality is a much more searching test of how good a car is rather than a one-off timed lap in the dry - especially since the GT-R comes with fancy sticky semi slick tyres and the 911 turbo comes with normal road-going tyres.

The older GT-R's are pretty quick cars and it would have to be a very special 944 turbo to get the legs on them.

 

[barks944]

Interesting points Scott, I thought the GTR would have a pretty good chassis, its got a 50/50 weight distribution like the 944. I was watching a video by the guy who designed the car and his methodolgy was very interesting. He was really focussed on matching the car to the tyres to get best grip and for getting the balance of the car right. I'm surprised it has been described as being twitchy and difficult to handle as it seems like it was designed to be easy to drive by avg Joe. Maybe it is those sticky tyres that are really giving it the edge over other production cars in the dry but making it a bit unpredictable in the wet.

 

[sawood12]

It was my take on what the outcomes of the Autocar road test was, but what they don't tell you is how fast the cars are going in any given situation. If the GT-R was going 20mph quicker at the same point as the 911 then that puts a different slant on things.

The thing they seem to have got right in the GT-R is the sheer levels of grip - largely helped by the special tyres. How else have they manaed to get such performance out of such a heavy car. Weight distribution is a slightly over-rated aspect in chassis design. In reality for a sportscar designer it is about 3rd or 4th down the list of priorities with grip being the overwhelming consideration and torsional stiffness coming in a close second. Weight distribution gives the car good manners on and over the limit of grip, but as long as you have grip weight distribution is largely irrelevant apart from giving the driver a certain feel and confidence about the car - which I suppose is an important factor to give the driver confidence to push.

 

[barks944]

One of the things that the guy designing the GTR said was how important weight was for grip, in fact the 1700kg weight of the GTR and its 50/50 weight balance was specifically tailored to match the tyres and give the optimum grip. I think it was probably the highest factor on the GTR designers list of features and he designed the rest of the car to give it this weight distribution.

http://www.pistonheads.com/doc.asp?c=52&i=20819

I think he doesnt always explain that well what he is saying. I think the crux of what he is saying is that there is an optimum weight for a car and tyre that gives the best tyre grip in relation to how the weight of the car requires more grip. If that makes sense. If you watch all the videos you will see how important the overall weight and its distribution was most important in his design.

He also makes good points about the torque curve of the engine and how it effects what the gearing of the car should be.

 

[Hilux]

One of the things that the guy designing the GTR said was how important weight was for grip,

I might be talking out of my bottom but thats possibly an excuse or a bit of a red herring in my book.

The car is heavy by nature of modern design and so as to meet safety standards. It has AC /air bags galore/ passive restrain sytems/ pedestrian impact absorption systems/ electric motors/ sensors/ hydraulic actuators/ electric actuators/ 4wd etc etc so it needs 475 bhp to give a PTW of only (I say only []) 279bhp per ton!

A lightened 944T (say 1200kg) at 300 bhp offers a PTW of 250bhp per ton BUT is 500kg lighter so inertia etc is less which is probably why the GTR uses/requires the AWD sensing stuff as its a lot of weight to make it go around a corner as quick as it does. Remove it all and you`d have to be a very skilful driver indeed (same with Porsche Pasm etc)

As for grip in snow etc...........thinner tyres grip better, look at rally cars for example and as for weight in relation to tyres look at motorbikes and their contact area and if a lighter car doesnt grip then reduce the tyre contact area until it does for there is a correlation between ultimate grip and the weight per measured unit per measured area upon the tyre and a fine counterbalance between the torque applied to the tyre against the road surface.

I have had many discussions with Scooby (and in particular) EVO drivers most of whom admit greasy roads `fool` the intelligent AWD systems. Dry or wet is fine but in between the electronics struggle I am reliably told.

To summarise, the GTR needs special tyres and systems to do what it does because of its physical attributes so I dont honestly think they really designed it heavy [] but its remarkable value for all that technology (apart from when the pedestrian absorption system goes off)

 

[barks944]

I think you may be right about the red herring bit, although I think the principles still stand. He clearly considered the weight on each tyre to be of great importance. Have you watched the videos? I think that in some ways the GTR and the 944 are quite similar and I can't help but think that the guys who designed the 944 back in the day did so with similar principles in mind to the GTR design team. I might be talking out of my bottom there though .

Thinner tyres are better in mud/snow ice because the thinner tyre has more weight on it per unit area which makes the tyre compress the surface it is working on giving it more grip. Effectively it changes the surface that you are driving on for a more solid one. This doesn't have an effect on solid surfaces like tarmac for example. Changing the width of a tyre doesnt necessarily change the overall grip on a soild surface, as although you increase the surface area you reduce the weight per unit area as you say, you then need to select an appropriate tyre compound to make best use of the weight per unit area.

 

[Neil Haughey]

The way I see it is the engineer would have had requirements passed to him along the lines of the vehicle needs this sort of power and this sort of size wheels and overall vehicle size and cost per unit target etc. This would have resulted in the mass of the R35 to make it all work.

The thing that annoys me about all this is that I don't believe any true petrolhead engineer would want to start from the basis of creating a heavy techno monster. This Nissan R35 has happened for marketing reasons. No one believes for a second that Nissan didn't start out with the goal of producing something to outperform German high performance cars at a lower price point.

What I would like to see (Gordon Murray certainly seems to feel the same way from the many articles of his I have read) is a focus on materials and construction technology to produce a wonderful performing car via lower weight. In other words a much cheaper version of the McLaren F1 or Carrera GT. This will happen though which is definitely a good thing.

 

[barks944]

Roll on the new McLaren then eh . They have made quite a few cars now, some of which are lapping a circuit in spain 24/7 at the moment. My dad is is supplying some parts for the engine which is quite exciting. I hope he gets invited to a pre-release for the suppliers so I can tag along.

 

[Hilux]

The thing that annoys me about all this is that I don't believe any true petrolhead engineer would want to start from the basis of creating a heavy techno monster. This Nissan R35 has happened for marketing reasons.

Exactly my point.

I cant see how they would suddenly sit around a designers table and start off with a weight. I truly believe its the car itself that weighs so much and the equipment and dynamics to keep it under control probably raised the original benchmark [&:]

An ariel atom or a C500 seem to manage with less weight BUT thats a trade off for everyday comfort and safety. IIRC my mates 400 bhp F360 Spyder is near to 1700 kg []

 

[944 man]

As Ive already said, this is subjective: it is nothing more than peoples opinions, some are more informed than others of course. Beyond the OP though, who has actually driven a twin turbocharged Skyline (R32, R33 or R34)? Ive been an enthusiastic 924/944/968 owner/driver/tinkerer since 1992: Ive owned and run a 250bhp Turbo and I have imported a number of Nissan Skyline GT-Rs: all of which I have driven: some at length (principally R32 & R33s).

I think that if you have a similar budget to spend on either vehicle, then the Skyline will always be ahead: both in terms of brake horsepower and on-track performance. If you have deep pockets then 1,000bhp is achievable whilst retaining everyday drivability...

 

[bennyboy]

Some interesting debate here. We've had a lot of nice stuff in at work, but little that I felt as comfortable with driving quickly on the road as my 944 or even my old Impreza Turbo. The cars that I don't get on with usually have 2 things in common - a huge engine and a lardy kerbweight - Bentley GT, DB9, S65 AMG, Monaro, even current M3. Those which I have enjoyed employ a smaller engine and a relative reduction in kerbweight - Cayman S, 911 S, E46 M3 CS, Elise. I've said it before, but the only thing that I feel really lets the 944 down is the engine noise.

I'm beginning to think a 944 on KW's with an LS V8 could just be fast-road/track zenith (though it may have to be turbocharged as you just can't beat the rush!)

 

[barks944]

Maybe you are all right about the weight thing. Certainly it seems that keeping the weight of a car down is hard work these days with all the safety requirements and all the tech they are pouring in. I just found the designers interview interesting more than anything, even if he was BS'ing.

944 Man, I dont think anyone is questioning the perfomance credentials of the Skyline/GTR, whatever model. I will jump at the opportunity to drive one should it arise. Actually I look forward to driving any car thats a signifcantly better road car than my 944.

 

[Hilux]

As Ive already said, this is subjective: it is nothing more than peoples opinions, some are more informed than others of course. Beyond the OP though, who has actually driven a twin turbocharged Skyline (R32, R33 or R34)? Ive been an enthusiastic 924/944/968 owner/driver/tinkerer since 1992: Ive owned and run a 250bhp Turbo and I have imported a number of Nissan Skyline GT-Rs: all of which I have driven: some at length (principally R32 & R33s).

Accepted completely.

My only point (upon which I attempt to throw reasoning) is that if they started out with full intent to design it to a specific weight I`d be absolutely staggered.

 

[Neil Haughey]

ORIGINAL: 944 man
I have imported a number of Nissan Skyline GT-Rs: all of which I have driven: some at length (principally R32 & R33s).

I was very tempted last year to find a nice unmolested R32, found a couple in adverts in what looked like really good nick. However running costs etc. and the unknown quantity thing put me off. In hindsight I wish I had because as much as I like my 968 its just to similar to what I was already used to.

BTW my mate races an evo 6 RS in the south west sprint championship. The series is basically dominated by jap 4wd's for a reason, no 951 is going to get close to one of these cars with a true 400+ Bhp, race brakes / suspension, mechanical diffs and less weight then a 944 race car, no chance.

Anyone that doesn't believe me or 944 man have a look at the Time Attack times, in particular look at the relative performance to the 968 which is very similar spec to a PCGB class 1 race 968 (the owner posted some nice pics over on 968uk).

[hint its 10 seconds a lap between best race impreza and race 968 at Silverstone national]

 

[944 man]

It became very difficult to find decent R32s Neil. Grade 4 cars were non-existant and decent 3.5s were becoming are rare as ricking horse sh*te. Thats all acedemic now though, as sterling has fallen to ¥145!

 

[barks944]

Where do I find these time attack times?

Google wins.