# Evo magazine article



## michaelsk (Jul 18, 2007)

new one just dropped through my door

GTR vs Corvette z06 on the drag strip
GTR vs R8 on the road
GTR vs GT3 on the track

I'm sure you can guess the results 

"respect is due, big respect. Nissan has built a new performance icon"

"This Nissan GT-R really is a Veyron sized upset for the current perfomance car market"

I think they liked it, odds on favourite for this years ecoty ?

cheers

Michael


----------



## Dave_R1001 (Nov 24, 2002)

Hopefully mine will be at home waiting for me then!

Good subscribers cover shot this month?


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

michaelsk said:


> GTR vs Corvette z06 on the drag strip


1/4 mile times were?


----------



## Chuck_H (Jul 28, 2006)

Post up some scans! This issue won't be out here for about a month.  

Video: GT-R vs GT3 Nissan GT-R v Porsche GT3 | Planet evo | Videos | evo


----------



## SmigzyGTR (Mar 20, 2006)

I cant wait to get home!! eCoty will be interesting


----------



## michaelsk (Jul 18, 2007)

cover not bad. GTR, RS6, 9ff and new Gallardo LP560-4

no scanner at home I'm afraid, but:

*0-100-0*
Z06 _*14.0*_
GTR _*13.9*_

Bedford west circuit
GT3 _*1:22.6*_
GTR _*1:21.7*_

to put that into perspective its sits just behind the enzo

Carrera GT _*1.19.7*_
Maclaren F1 _*1:21.2*_
Enzo _*1.21.3*_
superleggera _*1:21.8*_
599 GTB _*1:23.1*_
997 turbo *1:23.55*
996 GT3 RS _*1:24.2*_
F430 _*1:24.2*_
E92 M3 _*1:26.6*_

Cheers

Michael


----------



## SmigzyGTR (Mar 20, 2006)

Very impressive times round Bedford.


----------



## Chuck_H (Jul 28, 2006)

Thanks for the results. Did they mention any 1/4 mile times?


----------



## michaelsk (Jul 18, 2007)

ssems they used both ben's and the litchfield car in to test. still csn't make my mid up on colours, all I know is I don't want red

cheers

michael


----------



## michaelsk (Jul 18, 2007)

no 1/4 mile times i'm afraid, I do wonder if they would hit the 112mph limiter on that ? 

cheers

Michael


----------



## doggiehowser (Oct 8, 2007)

Cue: Chevy with another of his "these journalists are all biased!" comments.

Wasn't Evo oft chided for putting another Porsche in their CotY awards every other year?


----------



## skyline69_uk (Jan 6, 2005)

I was so proud when I read the article this morning :thumbsup: . And the cars still had their 112mph limiters fitted and one had only done 400km off the boat! 

Against the GT3 on the track



> The Nissan GT-R posts a crushing 1:21.7. And all seemingly without breaking a sweat.


Against the R8 on the road



> What of the R8, the dynamic benchmark for mid-engined cars? "I'd probably have had an accident if I'd tried any harder to keep up" says a grim looking Meaden.





> In fact, you find yourself short-shifting or soft pedalling the throttle to give the Audi a chance to catch up so you can see how hard it's trying. The game has moved on.


----------



## SmigzyGTR (Mar 20, 2006)

Yes, evo are said to be very Porsche biased by some.


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

Mag SCAN?!?!?!?!


----------



## bernmc (Dec 26, 2006)

One of the most impressive things for me is that we're seeing comparisons between the full-fat GTR against Porsche's pinnacle road-going track car. What happens when the spec-v arrives...?


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

Chuck_H said:


> Post up some scans! This issue won't be out here for about a month.
> 
> Video: GT-R vs GT3 Nissan GT-R v Porsche GT3 | Planet evo | Videos | evo


I NOTICE one thing!!!

The GT-R had 2 passangers in the video comparison running side by side with the GT3. Do you guys notice that and the GT-R still wins with better lap time with 2 passangers???


----------



## EvilChap (Jan 3, 2008)

Im sure the video was to look good, but the hot laps for timing in all the cars would have the same number of people in them for the sake of fairness


----------



## Sock (Dec 16, 2007)

They mention in Evo that the price will be around £59000 , it's a good £3000 more than i wanted to pay.


----------



## Peely (Jan 27, 2008)

bernmc said:


> One of the most impressive things for me is that we're seeing comparisons between the full-fat GTR against Porsche's pinnacle road-going track car. What happens when the spec-v arrives...?


Mmm, thats true. But after watching the vid with the GT3 and the GTR, why oh why didn't they make the GTR sound half as good as the Porker.
Nissan, PLEASE PLEASE make the Spec V sound better, PLEEEEEEASE !!:bawling:


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

Sock said:


> They mention in Evo that the price will be around £59000 , it's a good £3000 more than i wanted to pay.


Okay, spend another £71,000 ish and get a new 911 Turbo then!

:chuckle:


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

Sock said:


> They mention in Evo that the price will be around £59000 , it's a good £3000 more than i wanted to pay.


Is that price for the base or premium model? 
Exchange rate has got worse against the yen of late, but its not gone as far as it might have. I'd personally estimate prices for the base to be about £60k with premium at £65k OTR. Not much of a wait left now to find out!


----------



## Sock (Dec 16, 2007)

Trev said:


> Okay, spend another £71,000 ish and get a new 911 Turbo then!
> 
> :chuckle:


It's more the fact of how much they pay in Japan for a GT-R compared to here. If the list goes too highin the Uk i would probably buy a slightly used Gt-R and import it myself in 2009 , if i can get a saving of over £15000


----------



## michaelsk (Jul 18, 2007)

borat52 said:


> I'd personally estimate prices for the base to be about £60k with premium at £65k OTR. Not much of a wait left now to find out!


from what I hear we are looking at £55k for the base on £58k for the premium, I think moving it to a figure starting with a 6 will be a psychological barrier that will have a negative impact. I guess it will all become clear on the 6th

cheers

Michael


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

The GT-R accelerate and brakes better then the Corvette Z06.

It has better driving feel and performance on the road then the Audio R8.

It's 1 second quicker then the 911 GT3 and 2 seconds quicker then the 911 Turbo at Bedford Race Circuit.

This is yet another independent 3rd party testers. I wonder what kind of excuse heavychevy has now to tell us? LOL!


----------



## zen141 (Feb 25, 2008)

GTRJack said:


> The GT-R accelerate and brakes better then the Corvette Z06.
> 
> It has better driving feel and performance on the road then the Audio R8.
> 
> ...


Actually it lost to the Corvette in acceleration but not by much, the reaction time was higher for the Corvette as well. However the Corvette has the dragstrip as it's higher priority than the GT-R so that is unsurprising.

The inside is a bit clunky to me, like the outside, but everyone seems impressed by the build quality which is great to hear. This is a complete road car to look after us drivers who are not the worlds best, a car should give confidence to us sort. It's nice to hear that theres a touch of understeer on high speed corners to show the limit, for the road that sounds ideal. For the track you can always put a pair of cup tyres on the front, or can you ? I still can't get my head around nitrogen filled tyres. They should have made it helium at least to give the guys at Kwik fit a few giggles making squeaky voices when you put the cheap CEAT Spyders on.... those tyres sound a pain and expensive. 

Talking of expense, seems the price is going up though, now £60k is being mentioned rather than low 50's. I'm not going to be able to afford one and will have to get one second hand. 

I want one of these cars, seems the complete road car for the enthusiast before we all have to drive quick but boring diesels.

Regards

Andy


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

Chuck_H said:


> Post up some scans!


Yeah. Damn it man. I want to see some copyright breaching?


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

zen141 said:


> Actually it lost to the Corvette in acceleration but not by much, the reaction time was higher for the Corvette as well.


Hi Andy but it still doesn't explain how the GT-R got better time 0 - 100 and back to - 0 again. If it lost the acceleration to 100 then the GT-R must had much better brake then? I personality thought that the GT-R had better to 60 time but got cought up to 100 but still overall the GT-R got better to 100 time but ends with the braking being pretty even. That's how I thought the GT-R got 13.9 sec. and the Z06 got 14 sec flat.


----------



## skyline69_uk (Jan 6, 2005)

zen141 said:


> Actually it lost to the Corvette in acceleration but not by much, the reaction time was higher for the Corvette as well. However the Corvette has the dragstrip as it's higher priority than the GT-R so that is unsurprising.
> 
> The inside is a bit clunky to me, like the outside, but everyone seems impressed by the build quality which is great to hear. This is a complete road car to look after us drivers who are not the worlds best, a car should give confidence to us sort. It's nice to hear that theres a touch of understeer on high speed corners to show the limit, for the road that sounds ideal. For the track you can always put a pair of cup tyres on the front, or can you ? I still can't get my head around nitrogen filled tyres. They should have made it helium at least to give the guys at Kwik fit a few giggles making squeaky voices when you put the cheap CEAT Spyders on.... those tyres sound a pain and expensive.
> 
> ...


The Nitrogen is not a problem - any tyre can be filled with it and have been in race cars for years (as have some construction vehicles). The nitrogen can also mean your tyre life extends and you get far less leakage - oxygen molecules are tiny and leak out compared to Nitrogen. Temperature also has less effect on pressure compared to normal air and there is no water vapour in the nitrogen. A number of garages are now supplying nitrogen as an option anyhow and if you can't get it then just use air instead.


----------



## Hazardous (Nov 30, 2007)

I'm no expert, and I'm not certain why nitrogen is better than air, but Graham's law of effusion of gases states: the relative rates of effusion of two gases through a tube or pathway of equal size is inversely proportional to the square root of the molecular masses of the gases. Nitrogen N2 has a molecular mass of about 28. Oxygen O2 has a molecular mass of about 32. Given this, nitrogen, being a slightly lighter molecule, theoretically would leak through the tyre slightly faster than air.

Thus the use of nitrogen in car tyres is likely because there is less oxidation, drier, freezes at lower temperature (certainly compared to the water content in air), etc. I expect that the oxidation could appear to be a loss of gas from within the tyre.


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

GTRJack said:


> Hi Andy but it still doesn't explain how the GT-R got better time 0 - 100 and back to - 0 again. If it lost the acceleration to 100 then the GT-R must had much better brake then? I personality thought that the GT-R had better to 60 time but got cought up to 100 but still overall the GT-R got better to 100 time but ends with the braking being pretty even. That's how I thought the GT-R got 13.9 sec. and the Z06 got 14 sec flat.


The 'reaction time' is the time taken to go from WOT to brakes. I've seen a few tests where one car accelerated and stopped faster than another car but still lost overall because of a longer reaction time.


----------



## Zed Ed (Oct 24, 2007)

Hazardous said:


> I'm no expert, and I'm not certain why nitrogen is better than air, but Graham's law of effusion of gases states: the relative rates of effusion of two gases through a tube or pathway of equal size is inversely proportional to the square root of the molecular masses of the gases. Nitrogen N2 has a molecular mass of about 28. Oxygen O2 has a molecular mass of about 32. Given this, nitrogen, being a slightly lighter molecule, theoretically would leak through the tyre slightly faster than air.
> 
> Thus the use of nitrogen in car tyres is likely because there is less oxidation, drier, freezes at lower temperature (certainly compared to the water content in air), etc. I expect that the oxidation could appear to be a loss of gas from within the tyre.


You guys obviously listened more in science class than I did!


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

Tyre pressure remains more constant under different temps with nitrogen.


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

Lets not forget air is over 75% nitrogen in the first place so I expect it only makes a very marginal difference to anything. I certainly would not expect to be able to tell the difference between nitrogen and air filled tyres. Filling these tyres with normal air would not worry me one bit.


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

borat52 said:


> Lets not forget air is over 75% nitrogen in the first place so I expect it only makes a very marginal difference to anything. I certainly would not expect to be able to tell the difference between nitrogen and air filled tyres. Filling these tyres with normal air would not worry me one bit.


Here you go:

Nitrogen in Tires : Information about Nitrogen Tire Inflation News, Benefits, Generator Dealers, Location Finder & More


----------



## skyline69_uk (Jan 6, 2005)

Hazardous said:


> I'm no expert, and I'm not certain why nitrogen is better than air, but Graham's law of effusion of gases states: the relative rates of effusion of two gases through a tube or pathway of equal size is inversely proportional to the square root of the molecular masses of the gases. Nitrogen N2 has a molecular mass of about 28. Oxygen O2 has a molecular mass of about 32. Given this, nitrogen, being a slightly lighter molecule, theoretically would leak through the tyre slightly faster than air.
> 
> Thus the use of nitrogen in car tyres is likely because there is less oxidation, drier, freezes at lower temperature (certainly compared to the water content in air), etc. I expect that the oxidation could appear to be a loss of gas from within the tyre.


I know that Nitrogen is the oddball in the group but cannot remember the reason fully now as I read about it a long time ago in nuclear reactions in stars but I thought also it would leak quicker due to the IE laws i.e. 



> As electrons are added to atoms (new elements), protons are also added to the nucleus, and each outer ("valence") electron feels a stronger attraction from that nucleus because, on average, valence electrons are all the same distance from the atom. Therefore, atomic radius decreases with increasing atomic number.
> 
> In atomic nitrogen, there are five valence electrons: two in the s orbital, and one in each of the three p orbitals. However, since the p-electrons are equally distant from the nucleus (they don't "shield" each other), they each see a larger nuclear charge than in carbon, +7 rather than +6, and the atomic radius drops.


I reckon it is probably something about the paired bonding (N and O are both pair bondings) and some hard to get at fact about N2 without going into University texts etc. Either way it has been known for quite a long time that removing most of the Oxygen from tyres is a very good thing even if only from a safety point of view (reduces the chance of leaking leading to blow-outs). The fact that Oxygen reacts with bl00dy everything including the tyre bits and pieces is a good reason to remove most of it.

Here are the results of an independent test(TyreBayDirect.co.uk) comparing nitrogen inflation with compressed air:
54 truck tyres were used: 33 inflated with nitrogen, 21 with compressed air.
1. Tyres inflated with nitrogen ran 26% more miles before having to be replaced.
2. Tyres inflated with Nitrogen gave 48% more miles before failing.
3. Tyres inflated with nitrogen had a smaller failure percentage than compressed air, 30% compared to 57%.

Lets sum up the benefits of nitrogen:
1. Better tire pressure retention
2. Improved fuel economy
3. Cooler running tires
4. Removal of oxidation
5. Improved retreadability
6. Elimination of rim rust
7. On-the-road reliability


----------



## zakiidin (Nov 22, 2006)

alright,no more proof or evidence for me. the GTR is a world beater and its been proven like a million times, even by biased journalists. whatever it races in its performance category,it rips the rivals head off. when the v spec/spec v comes out,i think its gonna make the veyron developer think "how do they do that with a 3.8 litre V6?"


----------



## Rising sun (Sep 15, 2005)

In a lot of ways...nothing about this car makes sense, and I'm bloody loving it.


----------



## tokyogtr (Feb 14, 2008)

one of the biggest causes of power loss is through transimission right? does anyone know what the TT transmission loss is vs the GT-R transmission loss? and any other car for that matter? Maybe that's one of the reasons the GT-R is so good is that the engineers spent so much damn time on the transmission.


----------



## NISFAN (Oct 11, 2003)

Yes the GTR has impressed all at EVO. Glowing review indeed.

More about that 0-100-0 time. 

The vette did get to 100 in 0.4 seconds less than the GTR, 8.5 vs 8.9 seconds.
Braking was vette 4.5 seconds, GTR 4.3 seconds. 
The vette did have a worse reaction time between WOT and brakes. It seems the vette was accelerating past the 100 faster(and the driver had just had to change to 3rd to get to 100), which meant it was more difficult to judge when to brake. They also mentrioned using left foot braking on the GTR, because it only has 2 pedals. They don't say how much past 100 each car went. 

I must say, the vette really impressed me on that one. Bearing in mind, it is a RWD car, so getting off the line is never going to be easy, and it is a full manual. The DSG box probably cut at least 0.5 seconds off to 100, if not more.

However you look at it, they are both are very quick cars. 

The most impressive comparison for me was with the GT3 round Bedford West circuit. Absolutely stunning lap time from the GTR. 
She goes well round corners for a big fat bird.

I guess I will have to drive a GTR. I am not a fan of DSG boxes, for me they ruin the whole concept of 'driving', and it seems the box is the thing that moves the GTR on so far in comparison to others. It was clear in the Audi R8 comparison, and would have had an effect on track too.


----------



## Peely (Jan 27, 2008)

GTRJack said:


> Hi Andy but it still doesn't explain how the GT-R got better time 0 - 100 and back to - 0 again. If it lost the acceleration to 100 then the GT-R must had much better brake then? I personality thought that the GT-R had better to 60 time but got cought up to 100 but still overall the GT-R got better to 100 time but ends with the braking being pretty even. That's how I thought the GT-R got 13.9 sec. and the Z06 got 14 sec flat.


They also mentioned that the Z06 was accelerating harder/faster when it passed 100mph, therefore took longer to reach zero.....................if that makes sense ?:nervous:


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

NISFAN said:


> More about that 0-100-0 time.
> 
> The vette did get to 100 in 0.4 seconds less than the GTR, 8.5 vs 8.9 seconds.
> Braking was vette 4.5 seconds, GTR 4.3 seconds.


OK did the GT-R used the launch controll during the acceleration to 100??? I suspect they didn't use the GT-R launch control during this test. I need confermation.

I refuse to believe the Vette did faster 0 - 60 (if launch control is used) but I believe the Vette is faster from 60 - 100

Of course the Vette has an amazing acceleration as well, it has way more torque then the GT-R, much lighter and the rear tires is wide as 325. Regardless of this it woun't beat the AWD GT-R to 60 time if the launch control is used. The Vette Z06 is though well known to be extreemly fast abow 60 to 150 mph. The GT-R woun't stand a chance from a roll, from the data we've seen the stock Z06 has higher trap speed then the GT-R on a drag strip but the time are about equal coz the GT-R is quciker to 60.


----------



## NISFAN (Oct 11, 2003)

Yes they used the GTR launch mode. 4500rpm foot on both brake and accel. then release brakes. 
Probably not suited for a fast get aways on all surfaces, and the pod surface is very sticky. But that is the problem with electronic aides. 

Vette got to 60 in 3.9 vs the GTR 3.8, so is close.


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

NISFAN said:


> Yes they used the GTR launch mode. 4500rpm foot on both brake and accel. then release brakes.
> Probably not suited for a fast get aways on all surfaces, and the pod surface is very sticky. But that is the problem with electronic aides.
> 
> Vette got to 60 in 3.9 vs the GTR 3.8, so is close.


So the GTR did 0-60 in 3.8 and 0-100 in 8.9. That's its slowest 60-100 time yet (5.1s). It normally takes around 4.7s from 60-100, ref. CAR, Edmunds and Autocar, - all 4.7s from 60-100.


----------



## Rising sun (Sep 15, 2005)

There was a magazine that saw the GT-R hit 60 in 3.3seconds...I wonder why that hasn't been replicated since.


----------



## NISFAN (Oct 11, 2003)

Perhaps, but EVO use a set standard when testing, and that means 2 people in the car. I'm not sure if the others do the same???

They also mentioned that it was a loan car, so didn't want to do multiple launches and destroy it.


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

Well that black GT-R from the test just arrived the shore and came off the boat with 400km. I guess that the engine wasn't properly driven in so the 3.8 sec. to 60 isn't that odd after all.

The red GT-R that was tested by Inside Line which did 3.3 to 60 was a privatly own car and the engine already had some kms in it.

At least Car Magazine manage to do in Ben's car in 3.6 sec to 60. BUT 5.1 sec from 60 to 100 is by far the slowest time I've seen yet. Maybe they had 2 passangers here as well in the GT-R on this test as they had in the video comparison side by side between the GT-R vs. 911 GT3???


----------



## Godspd (Dec 12, 2001)

So does that mean EVO has now given the GTR five stars...


----------



## Dave_R1001 (Nov 24, 2002)

Godspd said:


> So does that mean EVO has now given the GTR five stars...


Oh yes :thumbsup: 

They thoroughly loved the car. I read it all last night and to paraphrase; Nissan set the target as the 997TT, we then took, probably, the best in each discipline and not only did it come close, it has beaten all 3 of them. 

The Nissan marketing guys must be rubbing their hands together!


----------



## Godspd (Dec 12, 2001)

Dave_R1001 said:


> Oh yes :thumbsup:
> 
> They thoroughly loved the car. I read it all last night and to paraphrase; Nissan set the target as the 997TT, we then took, probably, the best in each discipline and not only did it come close, it has beaten all 3 of them.
> 
> The Nissan marketing guys must be rubbing their hands together!


Can't wait till I get my hands on the latest issue downunder...


----------



## Thrust (Jun 8, 2004)

NISFAN said:


> Perhaps, but EVO use a set standard when testing, and that means 2 people in the car. I'm not sure if the others do the same???


What kind of set standard is that? How much does a "people" weigh? :lamer:


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

Thrust said:


> What kind of set standard is that? How much does a "people" weigh? :lamer:


I wonder that too. Look at the video comparison with the 911 GT3, the GT-R had 2 passangers and still beaten the 911 GT3 around track


----------



## Yakozan (May 23, 2005)

Sock said:


> It's more the fact of how much they pay in Japan for a GT-R compared to here. If the list goes too highin the Uk i would probably buy a slightly used Gt-R and import it myself in 2009 , if i can get a saving of over £15000


Did som e calculations really fast (might be wrong.)

But if you're aiming to save £15000 off the UK retail you would need to find a GTR in Japan for about 5500000JPY.
And as they're about 7200000JPY new and 9500000JPY for a used one today I think you're gonna have to wait longer than 2009.


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

All cars had 2 people in for both the timed lap and 0-100-mph tests


----------



## Hope4Sun (Jul 28, 2003)

Man the more i read about this car and how it defies the laws of physics, just amazes me!! Either they have Scotty locked up at Nissan Japan, or there privy to some sort of alien technology!! The V-Spec will most likely come with a Flux-capcitor and tear holes in the space time continuum or something


----------



## NISFAN (Oct 11, 2003)

Is it for sale Mr.Litchfield?


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

Not at the moment. Way to much fun


----------



## NISFAN (Oct 11, 2003)

It does look very menacing in Black.  

Please post up some piccies :bowdown1:


----------



## diddy_p (Oct 5, 2006)

mr litchfield, is it registered yet? or is the numberplate just for show?


----------

