The creator of GTR explains how the GTR is so heavy

[hk20000]

It's extra heavy when loaded up with fat chicks.

[impactX]

Originally Posted by Prostrho

I get to work really fast everyday cause Canada Line is heavy.

HAHAHA I lol'ed.

[impactX]

Originally Posted by hk20000

It's extra heavy when loaded up with fat chicks.

And fat chicks have bigger contact patches thus creating more grip.

[Jackygor]

Originally Posted by impactX

And fat chicks have bigger contact patches thus creating more grip.

Makes sense, more grippin' for the pushin'...

[Ilagon]

Originally Posted by Timpo

The GT-R looks quite nice in person.

But still looks like shit compared to an 18 year old Honda.

[!e.lo_]

that's the best GT-R drawing EVAR!

didn't kno he was on the P10 Primera project... my mom drives one. lol

[ronald55555]

Originally Posted by carmaniac

Here's what I think he's trying to say:

It's all on the basis of optimizing the contact patch of the tire for driving in dry/wet/snow for maximum stability.

Say for example there are 2 cars, they both have the same parameters, same engine, same tires and pressure, same weight distrubution, zero downforce. The only difference is the curb weight. Car A is the lighter car. Car B is the GT-R.

Car A will have less weight supported by the tires. What this creates is less of a contact patch for the tires on Car A. Contact patch = grip.

In a cornering situation, car A would have less overall grip and therefore be less stable. The benefits of lighter weight may be found in turn-in reaction, acceleration, braking, economy, etc...but it compromises overall grip (stability) in a steady-state situation.

For a professional driver which can react quickly, and knows what they're doing, the benefits of lightness outweigh stability in a corner since they can position and optimize weight distribution correctly to maximize grip from a given contact patch of the tire.

That contact patch for the GT-R was determined from the requirements of maximizing stability and control in all weather conditions. That is where the 1700kg and 485 hp comes from.

The Spec V is lighter because it in optimized for dry/wet conditions and not the snow.

Hope that makes sense...lol

That isn't necessarily true. Contact patch should not be parameter to optimize, but rather a variable to optimize centripetal force. Increasing the normal force on the tire will increase grip, however, increasing the normal force by increasing the mass is a backwards way to solve the problem. Grip does NOT increase linearly with increasing normal force(even with a larger contact area), that is the key concept to understand.

The inertia however, WILL increase at a faster rate than grip with increasing mass.

The snow/wet handling argument is bs too. His whole argument is based on increasing contact area. Larger area = hydroplane. What he means is increasing contact pressure. There is a much better way than making the car heavier to increase contact pressure in snow. You can easily put smaller tires on a light car to increase the contact pressure. Here is a good example. Rally cars use very skinny tires in snow rallys. You dont see them using fat tires and making the car heavier.

[dutch]

this.

finally someone i can agree with. What he's saying in the video is spin. It's a naturally heavy car and hes spinning it to seem like a good thing.

It's still a great car though.


ps. those rally cars on studded skinny snow tires get very similar grip to their dry road setup. The skinnyness of the tire is so that it can cut through the soft surface snow and get down to the harder surface underneath. And like ronald said, it increases the load at the contact patch. The studs also do a hell of a lot to increase the contact patch.

[ronald55555]

Here is a really simple way to put it:

By increase weight, you increase grip by X amount.
You also increase the inertia, and increase the grip necessary to create a sufficient centripetal force by amount Y.

Y is larger than X.

This is based on the laws of physics, and a very well known characteristic of modern day tires.

[Mugen EvOlutioN]

Originally Posted by impactX

And fat chicks have bigger contact patches thus creating more grip.

sweet faster cornering speed!!!


fuck his logic..just to cover his own flaws fatass design

1700kg is 1700kg no argument there

[hk20000]

GTR is large and it has presence. That's part of the marketing point too.

[ctsport]

It seems to me that the CE is just making excuses for the overweight GTR. We know this because every other manufacturer (except the Americans I guess lol) aim to do the complete opposite - to make the lightest sports cars possible. Lighter = better acceleration, braking, cornering and it doesn't have to compromise on daily driving either.

The GTR is a sports car, not a family sedan built for Alaska. The CE's excuse that GTR needs to be able to handle varied terrain applies to all the other cars in its class (Porche 911, Aston Martin Vantage, etc.) These cars are also mainly DDs and people who can afford these cars will most definitely have a Range Rover (or similar) if they live in areas with harsh winters. The GTR is a pig, albeit a nice one. So the real question is, what is the REAL REASON for all the extra weight? My guess is to keep costs down by using cheaper, heavier materials over lighter, more expensive materials.

[Death2Theft]

Well keep in mind the race cars subsitute weight with aero.

Originally Posted by dutch

lighter is always better. the reason is when you go through a corner you have lateral load.

if you have a 2000 lb car vs a 3000 lb car with the same tire contact patch, the lighter car will corner faster because there is less weight in the lateral load.

his argument is that more weight is better in all conditions (dry, rain, snow), and of course he's trying to make it look good (its his baby).

I'm afraid all the gtr fan bois are going to think heavy cars are better.

the weight of the gtr is a side effect of the awd system. Anybody who preps are gtr for racing will strip it out to "add lightness".

[Mugen EvOlutioN]

Originally Posted by ctsport

It seems to me that the CE is just making excuses for the overweight GTR. We know this because every other manufacturer (except the Americans I guess lol) aim to do the complete opposite - to make the lightest sports cars possible. Lighter = better acceleration, braking, cornering and it doesn't have to compromise on daily driving either.

The GTR is a sports car, not a family sedan built for Alaska. The CE's excuse that GTR needs to be able to handle varied terrain applies to all the other cars in its class (Porche 911, Aston Martin Vantage, etc.) These cars are also mainly DDs and people who can afford these cars will most definitely have a Range Rover (or similar) if they live in areas with harsh winters. The GTR is a pig, albeit a nice one. So the real question is, what is the REAL REASON for all the extra weight? My guess is to keep costs down by using cheaper, heavier materials over lighter, more expensive materials.

my thoughts exactly


GTR is not a off road vehicle

[Elder_MMHS]

Interesting videos.

I'd like to see some real world comparison data between multiple cars, but part of me thinks the purpose, design, packaging - and as a side effect, the mass - of the vehicle is to minimize dynamic effects when driving near or at the limits. Static or near-static systems are much easier to engineer towards a given goal and ultimate easier to control as an end user.

[Marco911]

The engineer is full of shit in his explanation about why more weight is better. With the car's turbo and AWD system, they knew it was going to be a pig and didn't have the budget to use more exotic materials for weight redux.

[carmaniac]

Originally Posted by ronald55555

That isn't necessarily true. Contact patch should not be parameter to optimize, but rather a variable to optimize centripetal force. Increasing the normal force on the tire will increase grip, however, increasing the normal force by increasing the mass is a backwards way to solve the problem. Grip does NOT increase linearly with increasing normal force(even with a larger contact area), that is the key concept to understand.

The inertia however, WILL increase at a faster rate than grip with increasing mass.

The snow/wet handling argument is bs too. His whole argument is based on increasing contact area. Larger area = hydroplane. What he means is increasing contact pressure. There is a much better way than making the car heavier to increase contact pressure in snow. You can easily put smaller tires on a light car to increase the contact pressure. Here is a good example. Rally cars use very skinny tires in snow rallys. You dont see them using fat tires and making the car heavier.

Agreed. Tire grip is not a linear quantity.

Contact pressure is what he meant not contact patch. I believe in one part of the video he implied the contact patch was a constant, ie the basis on a 20" wheel package. My bad.

The GT-R does have a system to maximize centripetal force through the use of its differentials shifting its inertia by way of power distribution through a corner.

I believe the explanation in the video is really only the very basic philosophy with the GT-R, be it the optimal philosophy or not is very much up for debate as we can see in this thread lol.

[Adrenaline Rush]

Originally Posted by ctsport

It seems to me that the CE is just making excuses for the overweight GTR. We know this because every other manufacturer (except the Americans I guess lol) aim to do the complete opposite - to make the lightest sports cars possible. Lighter = better acceleration, braking, cornering and it doesn't have to compromise on daily driving either.

The GTR is a sports car, not a family sedan built for Alaska. The CE's excuse that GTR needs to be able to handle varied terrain applies to all the other cars in its class (Porche 911, Aston Martin Vantage, etc.) These cars are also mainly DDs and people who can afford these cars will most definitely have a Range Rover (or similar) if they live in areas with harsh winters. The GTR is a pig, albeit a nice one. So the real question is, what is the REAL REASON for all the extra weight? My guess is to keep costs down by using cheaper, heavier materials over lighter, more expensive materials.

The GTR's weight isn't really that surprising. If you go by the past design of the GTR, you know it's going to start with AWD, twin turbos, and the ability to hold 4 people. In this day and age with all the safety regulations, airbags, crumple zones, etc, that's automatically mid to high 3000 lbs right there.

Even 15 years ago, the Dodge Stealth TT and the Mitsu 3000GT VR4 had very similar weight. With bigger wheels, brakes, 200 more hp, I'm sure Nissan had to use a lot of weight cutting measures to even make it's current weight. The current gen 911 Turbo is 3500 lbs and is over a foot shorter in wheelbase.

You could go lighter with carbon panels, carbon brakes, etc, but the price would skyrocket.

[hk20000]

Also he says he wants to cater to beginner drivers (lol he knows there are too many Vansky people out there)

so that weight transfer is "pre-done" or at least partially done so you can drive it super hamfistedly and come out feeling like a hero

hence everyone thinks it's like a PS3 game driving that thing. You just aren't so involved. Add a good dose of twin turbo horsepowers and it'll be fast regardless lol.

[LiquidTurbo]

Thanks for the vids. Nice to hear accurate theory from someone who's actually qualified to give it. Unlike 95% of RS.

[impactX]

Yes, deriving the GTR-R35 from Formula 1 is accurate as F1 has neither 480hp and 50-50 weight distribution nor does it intend to be driving on any snowy surface with 20" rims with summer tires.

What does it have to do with 20" anyway? The width and height of the tire have more to do with the size of the contact patch than the diameter of the rim.

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by impactX

Yes, deriving the GTR-R35 from Formula 1 is accurate as F1 has neither 480hp and 50-50 weight distribution nor does it intend to be driving on any snowy surface with 20" rims with summer tires.

What does it have to do with 20" anyway? The width and height of the tire have more to do with the size of the contact patch than the diameter of the rim.

Because 20" rims are more baller than 19's. =P

It's basically a weakass marketing ploy to make the fatass GTR look like god to all teh GTR fanbois.

[cressydrift]

If Nissan decided to make the GTR say 500kg lighter, every rich daddy kid and middle aged small cock man would write these things off. The SOB goes 300km/h for christ sakes. I am pretty sure the regulations required that these things added a few pounds. My only beef with the GTR is that it did not come in a stick version. It would not be as fast but I love sticks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrlM1Abbk5s

[billboa]

poodlr

[optiblue]

I want a car with a warp drive