# R35 GTR dynoed - [email protected]!



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

R35 Dyno - NAGTROC - The GT-R Owners Club

















This may explain the 'ring time.


----------



## SmigzyGTR (Mar 20, 2006)

sweeeeet


----------



## Spearmint (Aug 7, 2005)

Awesome stuff! 

One day....maybe one day!


----------



## Redlineash (Jul 16, 2007)

*R35 Dyno'd*

Cracking post R33, nice one.

Add back about 15% or so for transmission loss Im guessing to get 550bhp at the crank?!?

Now thats a bit odd. In the Top Gear write up this month they seemed to intimate that the 911 Turbo kept up with a GTR at the top end. Does that mean Porsche are also telling fibs about the 911 Turbo's bhp?

Does seem strange that Nissan are underplaying the bhp by that much though. Surely it would be better saying 550bhp up front!!


----------



## Lith (Oct 5, 2006)

Doesn't the 911 have similar power and weigh a lot less? So if it has less power and weighs less it'd make sense that it could be a little quicker still?


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

Redlineash said:


> Cracking post R33, nice one.
> 
> Add back about 15% or so for transmission loss Im guessing to get 550bhp at the crank?!?
> 
> ...


Some 911 Turbos make 540+bhp stock and they're 150kg lighter. According to Edmunds, from a mid-revs 4th gear role, the Porsche marginally creeps forward. But is that with overboost?



> From medium revs in 4th gear, with me driving the Nissan and with a passenger on board, the radio countdown allowed us to nail the throttles simultaneously with the cars side by side. The Porsche crawled forward, and I mean crawled, v-e-r-y slowly. It only highlights the supernatural performance of the GT-R.


LOL - the GTR had a passenger.


----------



## Perra (Jan 6, 2002)

Sorry if I´m wrong here but on the top of the right graph it says: "Fly Wheel Power Graph". That´s NOT at the wheels. It just shows that Nissan is correct when they say the car has 480bhp and this one calculates 482. 

/P


----------



## canman (Jul 7, 2001)

Nismo have the same dyno too so you can only assume they've been underquoting the figures.

Porsche have always understated the performance of their cars, both in 0-100kph and power numbers......... I think it's a good idea as in hot conditions for instance the number might be more like what they've quoted........at least then they can't be accused of making false claims...

It's meant to be a "world car" so I suppose they've quoted the lowest figures ?


----------



## Chuck_H (Jul 28, 2006)

Perra said:


> Sorry if I´m wrong here but on the top of the right graph it says: "Fly Wheel Power Graph". That´s NOT at the wheels. It just shows that Nissan is correct when they say the car has 480bhp and this one calculates 482.
> 
> /P


A post from the link. 

"Scratch that. I called DynapacK and was told that the machine has the ability to convert but in the picture you look at the "TCF" box and that tells you what is the conversion calculation being used. In the pics it says "1.00" so that is what the cars made at the wheels."


----------



## tweenierob (Aug 5, 2003)

Not that our dyno is by any means a benchmark, but we will have some dyno graphs in 3 weeks time all being well..

Rob


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

Chuck_H said:


> A post from the link.
> 
> "Scratch that. I called DynapacK and was told that the machine has the ability to convert but in the picture you look at the "TCF" box and that tells you what is the conversion calculation being used. In the pics it says "1.00" so that is what the cars made at the wheels."


Well I'm glad to hear I wasn't talking bollox yet again.


----------



## Zoltarc (Jun 26, 2005)

Looks like it was dynoed in FWD too


----------



## canman (Jul 7, 2001)

No, they just hadn't bolted on the rear pods yet.............

Chuck, you're right on the TCF front, most people don't setup the TCF as it's just a best guess figure really unless someones properly measured the losses through the transmission.

There's an option to turn off the "flywheel" display, but they have an old version of software.

TweenieRob, it'll be interesting to see how it matches up. Different environment and all that, but just to see if the numbers are in the same ballpark, they certainly should be.


----------



## ybioul (Nov 23, 2007)

this is what i'be been thinking since the begining it had to have more HP than stated... to be better than 997 bi turbo with more weight....

I knew it... imaging as well that this car probably is still very new wo engine will bring on more power with time.....


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

The performance numbers should be a little better than the "guessed numbers".

If its 550 hp at the engine, and 4000 lbs (with driver) , then my calculators say -

Drag Racing Calculator

11.2 @ 121 . So probably in the 11.5 range would be realistic.


----------



## Andy Hornsby (Mar 22, 2003)

tweenierob said:


> Not that our dyno is by any means a benchmark, but we will have some dyno graphs in 3 weeks time all being well..
> 
> Rob


You trying to tell us something Rob?:chuckle:


----------



## monaroCountry (Dec 12, 2006)

> Add back about 15% or so for transmission loss Im guessing to get 550bhp at the crank?!?
> 
> Now thats a bit odd. In the Top Gear write up this month they seemed to intimate that the 911 Turbo kept up with a GTR at the top end. Does that mean Porsche are also telling fibs about the 911 Turbo's bhp?
> 
> Does seem strange that Nissan are underplaying the bhp by that much though. Surely it would be better saying 550bhp up front!!



As much as ive bagged the GTR in the past claiming false with its performance figures with only 480hp and 3800lbs. This higher power output than factory I can accept and congratulate Nissan on. 

I also find it strange that the 911 can keep up with the higher hp GTR on the top end, either the 911 has better aero or better gearing............but with the power difference between the GTR and 911, and the Cd figures shown by Nissan I find Porsches performance very suspect. 

BTW before anyone brings this up...........weight doesn't play that much of a role in top speeds.


----------



## rasonline (Mar 24, 2005)

i would really be amazed if the car can do an 11.5 straight out of the factory as Tyndago estimates. Power wise an e55 amg isn't too far off the GTR factory bhp claim, and that car is in the high 12s without 4WD. My bets would be on a 12sec flat or 11.9 maybe. Not sure of the exact time for the Porsche though.


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Just a pity the power goes off a cliff at 6318RPM, now if they can just get that up to around 9000.....................

DaveG


----------



## Chuck_H (Jul 28, 2006)

ATCO said:


> Just a pity the power goes off a cliff at 6318RPM, now if they can just get that up to around 9000.....................
> 
> DaveG


They did mention the limiter kicked in, so more potential should be possible.


----------



## Sidious (Jul 14, 2006)

monaroCountry said:


> As much as ive bagged the GTR in the past claiming false with its performance figures with only 480hp and 3800lbs. This higher power output than factory I can accept and congratulate Nissan on.
> 
> I also find it strange that the 911 can keep up with the higher hp GTR on the top end, either the 911 has better aero or better gearing............but with the power difference between the GTR and 911, and the Cd figures shown by Nissan I find Porsches performance very suspect.
> 
> BTW before anyone brings this up...........weight doesn't play that much of a role in top speeds.


Weight factors in at any speed. It is the actual BHP available (not just the power to weight ratio) that had a greater influence at higher speeds.

Not like the rated power or the dyno results mattered, a cars pace on the ring is based on the whole package not just the engine power.

I am sorry, but some people writing off the GTR's ring time based on BHP alone shows very little understanding about building and setting up cars on tracks.


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

Sidious said:


> Weight factors in at any speed. It is the actual BHP available (not just the power to weight ratio) that had a greater influence at higher speeds.
> 
> Not like the rated power or the dyno results mattered, a cars pace on the ring is based on the whole package not just the engine power.
> 
> I am sorry, but some people writing off the GTR's ring time based on BHP alone shows very little understanding about building and setting up cars on tracks.


Agreed, 100% right :thumbsup:


----------



## monaroCountry (Dec 12, 2006)

Sidious said:


> Weight factors in at any speed. It is the actual BHP available (not just the power to weight ratio) that had a greater influence at higher speeds.
> 
> Not like the rated power or the dyno results mattered, a cars pace on the ring is based on the whole package not just the engine power.
> 
> I am sorry, but some people writing off the GTR's ring time based on BHP alone shows very little understanding about building and setting up cars on tracks.


Are we still talking about top speed here? Because weight doesnt have as much of an affect when it comes to this, its mostly about power, gearing and aero.....or are we in agreement/

On another topic I find it extremely hard to believe that a 3800lbs car with a measly 480hp can lap the ring in under 7:40. With around 530-550 then this becomes believable. I'm still holding my breath for owner reviews with # attached.


----------



## Sidious (Jul 14, 2006)

monaroCountry said:


> Are we still talking about top speed here? Because weight doesnt have as much of an affect when it comes to this, its mostly about power, gearing and aero.....or are we in agreement/
> 
> On another topic I find it extremely hard to believe that a 3800lbs car with a measly 480hp can lap the ring in under 7:40. With around 530-550 then this becomes believable. I'm still holding my breath for owner reviews with # attached.


Sure it is possible, overall grip through the entire track (rate of attrition), the ability to put the power down that split second sooner, the acceleration force out of a corner, and to maintain speed into corners and braking makes more difference than the odd 50-100 BHP.

Stop writing cars track performamce off over rated horsepower, the more you try to refute this the more offensive you are to people who actually understand or even race cars.


----------



## stealth (Jul 6, 2004)

monaroCountry said:


> Are we still talking about top speed here? Because weight doesnt have as much of an affect when it comes to this, its mostly about power, gearing and aero.....or are we in agreement/
> 
> On another topic I find it extremely hard to believe that a 3800lbs car with a measly 480hp can lap the ring in under 7:40. With around 530-550 then this becomes believable. I'm still holding my breath for owner reviews with # attached.


Lol ! I'm sure most owners of this new GTR would not know what the Nurburgring was let alone know where it was ,so I woulden't hold your breath on owners times around the track


----------



## maximtaylor (Oct 28, 2007)

Dont worry, there will be quite a few owners taking their GTR's to Germany as soon as they have them. :squintdan


----------



## Mookistar (Feb 5, 2004)

tweenierob said:


> Not that our dyno is by any means a benchmark, but we will have some dyno graphs in 3 weeks time all being well..
> 
> Rob


whoa whoa whoa, don't just drop that in and run off. WHEN! and can i bring my camera

lol



mook


----------



## kingsley (Aug 26, 2002)

monaroCountry said:


> but with the power difference between the GTR and 911, and the Cd figures shown by Nissan I find Porsches performance very suspect.


Drag is not just down to the Cd - you need to multiply the Cd by the effective frontal area.


----------



## Chubby (Mar 13, 2008)

stealth said:


> Lol ! I'm sure most owners of this new GTR would not know what the Nurburgring was let alone know where it was ,so I woulden't hold your breath on owners times around the track



Mine will come straight out of the showroom - and straight to the Ring.

I can break 8 mins in miy car at the mo - so it will be iteresting to see what the GT-R can do.

600 miles run in - and then the Ring.

Getting a clear track is the problem.

Rich.


----------



## GTR FREAK! (May 15, 2008)

The GTR has 480BHP at the tyres (roughly), it has 550 BHP at the flywheel (roughly), so NISSAN arent lying or quoting low figures. Also, Audi quote crazy numbers for the RS4 (in my mind a bundle of shoite) but when it was dynoed it was no-where near them. The GTR loses that much power but thats not a big issue. The way that the car put the power down is astonishing, my friend has a 700BHP Supra yet it couldnt corner like the GTR could, certainly it would beat it in a straight but not around the ring. 

That leads me on... The ring needs to be understood, to do that it needs to be driven. Even being a passenger doesnt cut it. The Ring has an unbelievable ability to shake the 'greatest' cars because of the way it is, thats whats so special about it. Where the GTR is concerned it is great on the ring and on all tracks because of the way it is set-up. It truely is a masterpiece and although 55k is a lot of money its nothing for a supercar which WILL BE a supercar for a long long time!

Thats my 2 cents anyway.....


----------



## Chubby (Mar 13, 2008)

Totally agree with GTR Freak - It's a balance of usable power and handling. 

Having driven the Ring and know it well enough to put my car through it's paces, but play safe and leave a margin for errors, I am very interested in how the GT-R will perform for me.


----------



## GTR FREAK! (May 15, 2008)

whats your car chubby?


----------



## Chubby (Mar 13, 2008)

I have an Audi RS4 - B5 with nearly every mod in the book, hybids, p & p heads, ceramic manifolds and down pipes, larger SM intercoolers, de-cat, water injection running 80% meth 20 % water, producing 550bhp.


----------



## GTR FREAK! (May 15, 2008)

now thats a nice rs4. generally i dont like them but that sounds great, and i bet it does sound great!! Will be at the ring in M3 CSL this JULY so should be some fun!!!


----------



## Chubby (Mar 13, 2008)

We were at the Ring in early may, mallory on the 17th May and at Donnington this monday evening.

Nothing comes close to the Ring though - wish I could join you but won't get back there now until Sept.

Have fun.. Be safe.

R.


----------

