# Couple of pieces in this months Evo



## bluediamond (Sep 6, 2010)

Mag has had a first drive in th MY011 and V Spec up against some tasty competition in the alps

The V spec is their least favourite of the 4 cars tested. Inevitable and obviously brilliant GT3 RS, The M3 GTS and , a bit leftfield, the Jag XKR 75.
All down to the ride it seems which they say just can't handle the bumps and doesn't feature the switchable settings of the stock GTR.
Doesn't help that its the most expensive car in the group!!

loved the MY011 car which looks great in the blue. Real step forward in terms of disguising its mass apparently.

Most interesting bit was the MY011 updates will reportedly be available as a retro-fit from Nissan GB


----------



## nick the tubman (Jun 28, 2006)

how did the jag fair? bet the v-spec was the quickest though


----------



## bluediamond (Sep 6, 2010)

Not for the first time, its stacked up very well.
I think it suprised them with its pace and of course Jag get brilliant ride/handling compromises generally. 
I think they thought of it as a bit of a rest after the V spec

No question, the V spec was clearly the fastest when space allowed.


----------



## Steve (Sep 21, 2001)

I think it was a pretty pointless exercise with the 11 car as they kept on saying about how little the difference is over the "old" car, a lil bit more HP, a lil bit more turn in, oh and of course the day time (waste of effort) running lights. 
Looks like a bloody Audi !!!! 

Is the "standard" punter is gonna "feel it" ??? I don’t think so, and I am sure that the extra £10k could be spent on a lot better improvements to an already superb car! LOL


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

Steve said:


> Looks like a bloody Audi !!!!


:thumbsup: Spot on there mate! It's probably because so many ex Audi drivers have got GTR's now, it's to make them feel more at home.:chuckle:


----------



## Steve (Sep 21, 2001)

LOL we are a nice bunch arent we !!!


----------



## PSC (Feb 3, 2010)

Does anyone know if the new met black paint Nebula Opal Black is the same as on the V Spec?

I see Autocar saying torque up 3lbs whereas Evo say 40lb ft. To justify the extra £10K we need the 40lb ft as well as flatter curve.


----------



## Steve (Sep 21, 2001)

PSC said:


> Does anyone know if the new met black paint Nebula Opal Black is the same as on the V Spec?
> 
> I see Autocar saying torque up 3lbs whereas Evo say 40lb ft. To justify the extra £10K we need the 40lb ft as well as flatter curve.


That's journalism for you !!!!

This is all hype to get you to pay £70k for a £60k car !!! (Nissan want more of your soul and YOUR MONEY !!)


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

PSC said:


> Does anyone know if the new met black paint Nebula Opal Black is the same as on the V Spec?
> 
> I see Autocar saying torque up 3lbs whereas Evo say 40lb ft. To justify the extra £10K we need the 40lb ft as well as flatter curve.


The metallic black paint is exactly that, metallic black.
The Ultimate Opal Black on the SpecV was a very dark version of Midnight Purple, but sadly that is not an option for the normal GT-R.

It would be hard to gain 40+hp with only a 3lb.ft torque increase!
I think evo's guess is going to be closer to the mark.


----------



## bluediamond (Sep 6, 2010)

*What is it about running lights*

Its a pretty light facelift on the whole. Apart from the fairy lights and the extra bump on the front quarter, seems the same.Apart from slightly worse looking wheels.

I think the Evo figures seem right, but as we know, the cars nearly all give more than quoted, especially torque numbers. The key facts are that Nissan are suggesting that there is now 40bhp more model for model.

A comparison between a Cobb or Ecutek remapped car and an MY11 car are begging to be done


----------



## Steve (Sep 21, 2001)

David.Yu said:


> The metallic black paint is exactly that, metallic black.
> The Ultimate Opal Black on the SpecV was a very dark version of Midnight Purple, but sadly that is not an option for the normal GT-R.
> 
> It would be hard to gain 40+hp with only a 3lb.ft torque increase!
> I think evo's guess is going to be closer to the mark.


Awww, that's not cos you work for them eh Dave ? LOL Sorry couldn't resist !:wavey:


----------



## Cris (Sep 17, 2007)

Steve said:


> Awww, that's not cos you work for them eh Dave ? LOL Sorry couldn't resist !:wavey:


If peak power is 40bhp up but torque is only up 4 ft/lbs at that level you'd need to be pulling 52,000 rpm odd. If peak power is 40bhp up but torque is up 40 ft/lbs at that level you'd need to be pulling 5,250 rpm.

That would suggest that torque is nearer to 40 than 4.

Apparently the grill in wider too. So in fact it's completely different to the previous version :nervous:

Hmmmm Nissan release the GTR to compete with a certain brand. When it's time for an update Nissan decides to roll out a car which looks almost identical to the previous version. I'm sure that reminds me of another company...


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

Cris said:


> When it's time for an update Nissan decides to roll out a car which looks almost identical to the previous version. I'm sure that reminds me of another company...


Pork scratching anyone?


----------



## PSC (Feb 3, 2010)

The 2010GTR is 0 - 100 mph in around 8.5 to 9 secs according to various tests by UK mags.

The 2011 car has to be circa 10% better to justify the hype and if > 40 bhp/40 lb ft plus flatter torque curve, that looks doable.

10% should be sub 8 secs and a noticable difference worth coughing up for. Knock off 10% from a 2010 car and that's M3/Audi RS5 levels of performance and we spit on that.

The 911GTS at £76K is most tempting alternative and it comes pretty well loaded. Specced up to GTR levels incl semi auto and rises to £80K. And performance to 100mph probably 8.5 - 9 secs.

Nissan can't pitch GTR much higher than £70K......

Unless maybe they offer better after sales with more comprehensive warranty/cheaper running costs in line with Porsche.


----------

