# Is This The Lightest GTR In The UK?



## GTRSTAR (Nov 26, 2009)

Probably, I changed the seats to Cobra Imola Carbon and the exhaust to GTC TITAN 90mm, I weighed the bits comming off, and the bits going on, did the maths and got a figure of about 100KG weight saving, Total cost was about £4500.00.










Notice how the car sits a <10 millimeters higher as a result of the weight saving? no me neither, but it does!











Even though the weight saving was a side effect of the modifications, so not the main reason for doing it, Id say it was well worth it, You really can feel the difference in both acceleration and handling.

One thing we noticed when doing the work was how lightweight everything else on the car is, which leads me to a question;

What other areas on the car can be lightened to the extent that it will have a possitive and noticeable effect on the performance? and more importantly, how cost effective are they?


----------



## LiamGTR (Nov 26, 2006)

I don't think it will be the lightest i nthe world, alot more GTR's are being taken a lot more seriously, but still... good effort though and glad you're happy with the results.


----------



## Mark B (Jul 28, 2004)

Looks great.

Weight saving has got to be the best power hike on these cars. But Mizuno San seemed to be very clear in the PistonHeads interviews that the weight was part of the calculation in downforce (not sure I believe it!) and therefore the handling?

(I have a spreadsheet for the S2000 too - dshaved off about 35kg so far )


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

The ride height should be addressed. It was not designed to be 10mm higher than stock and handling will be affected.

Top Gear magazine did an interesting feature the other month when they took a Peugeot 207 GTI and stripped loads of weight out of it, e.g. all seats other than driver's, interior etc and did back to back lap times.

Surprisingly they stayed exactly the same with the lighter version much harder to handle.

So I think there is a lot to be said about weight *distribution*, i.e. keeping the balance as originally intended.


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

Mark B said:


> Looks great.
> 
> Weight saving has got to be the best power hike on these cars. But Mizuno San seemed to be very clear in the PistonHeads interviews that the weight was part of the calculation in downforce (not sure I believe it!) and therefore the )


Thats the kind of marketing BS, that smart people, that have raced cars do not buy into. However, the non questioning masses might be able to live with that explanation, don't be one of those guys. I take it your not from the Smile there. 

On the US forums, we got into this weight thing for pages, and pages. 

They managed to lose a decent amount of weight on the SpecV, but it cost them pretty big money to do it. When you have a car the size of a GT-R, weight savings is going to come at high cost, or comfort. Something most people don't want either of.


----------



## Mark B (Jul 28, 2004)

Nope I don't believe it, especially as an ex Exige owner and Lotus fan. Colin Chapman would have laughed at Mizuno's weight explaination!

And it doesn't fit with the Spec V being lighter either.


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

GTRSTAR said:


> Even though the weight saving was a side effect of the modifications, so not the main reason for doing it, Id say it was well worth it, You really can feel the difference in both acceleration and handling.
> 
> One thing we noticed when doing the work was how lightweight everything else on the car is, which leads me to a question;
> 
> What other areas on the car can be lightened to the extent that it will have a possitive and noticeable effect on the performance? and more importantly, how cost effective are they?


Carbon fiber bits and pieces. Real stuff is expensive. 

Lighter wheels and tires. The lighter it is, the more expensive it is. 

Lighter brakes . Again, very expensive.

You can delete things like the A/C, but that comes at the cost of comfort. 

Check out Cobb Tunings Time Attack R35 - Cobb Tuning R35 GTR

And Brass Monkeys World Challenge R35's - 2009 Nissan GT-R


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

I loved this article. Just in case anyone wants to quantify weight vs ET.

Also lots of good cost effective ways to lose weight.

SCC Technical Assistance Program

Step 1: Baseline
Curb Weight: 2,762 lbs
1/4 Mile:16.3 @ 84.0 mph
60-foot:2.9 sec.
0-60 mph:8.6 sec. 










Step 7: Styling
Curb Weight:1,674 lbs
1/4 Mile:14.3 @ 93.2 mph
60-foot:2.6 sec.
0-60 mph:5.8 sec. 










Yes that last picture is the same car.


----------



## EvolutionVI (Sep 6, 2005)

GTRSTAR said:


> Probably, I changed the seats to Cobra Imola Carbon and the exhaust to GTC TITAN 90mm, I weighed the bits comming off, and the bits going on, did the maths and got a figure of about 100KG weight saving, Total cost was about £4500.00.


You saved roughly 50 kilo´s.....for sure not more...OEM seat is 28 kilos or so,yours with brackets etc minimum 10 kilos...so saving there is 18kilos per seat....

oem exhaust is 20 kilo´s more then your GTC....

18+18+20 = 56kilos ......my car even has a KW alloy suspension and lighter wheels....and is far from 100kilos saved:chuckle:


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

Sorry to disappoint but it's not even the lightest in gloucestershire. 2 cars here have less weight  you should pop over and have a look


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

Looking at those results from the images above, saving 1100lbs (500kg) on a low bhp car made 2 secs in the quarter or .4secs per 100kg. On a high BHP car per 100kg your gonna save what ? doesn't seem worth it. 

I can't even tell when I have a passenger in mine, well maybe if it was Giant Haystacks :thumbsup:


----------



## Godders (Oct 7, 2009)

I think my best way to save weight is to stop eating cooked breakfasts. I had thought about cutting off my left leg as I don't really need it, but then I thought about trying left foot breaking and changed my mind.... perhaps a carbon fibre left leg?? Hmmm...


----------



## GTRSTAR (Nov 26, 2009)

Litchfield said:


> Sorry to disappoint but it's not even the lightest in gloucestershire. 2 cars here have less weight  you should pop over and have a look


no disapointment  on the contrary, Im more than happy to tell you how to get 722BHP from your cars if you can tell me your secret of how you make your cars over 100KG lighter ?! :thumbsup:


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

lol thanks, I have seen what your're having to do to get 700bhp and I'll stick to our larger turbos 

Carbon bonnet (Ben does a nice vented one), lighter wheels and Ceramic brakes will save a massive amount of rotational weight


----------



## GTRSTAR (Nov 26, 2009)

Litchfield said:


> lol thanks, I have seen what your're having to do to get 700bhp and I'll stick to our larger turbos
> 
> Carbon bonnet (Ben does a nice vented one), lighter wheels and Ceramic brakes will save a massive amount of rotational weight


nice, cheers


----------



## Jm-Imports (Feb 12, 2007)

David.Yu said:


> The ride height should be addressed. It was not designed to be 10mm higher than stock and handling will be affected.
> 
> Top Gear magazine did an interesting feature the other month when they took a Peugeot 207 GTI and stripped loads of weight out of it, e.g. all seats other than driver's, interior etc and did back to back lap times.
> 
> ...


good post


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Jm-Imports said:


> good post


Thanks. Here is the link to the article I referred to (if it's allowed) How fat is your car? - BBC Top Gear

Basically they took a stock 207 GTI, gutted an impressive 127kg of weight out of it (near enough 10% of the original weight) and it posted an identical lap time as stock.

Sure, if it had been set up properly, the Stig thinks it would be faster, but the fact remains that simply stripping weight out of a car without taking into account balance will not necessarily make it quicker on a track.


----------



## Zed Ed (Oct 24, 2007)

makes me think many of the remarks on here, berating Nissan's positioning of the GTR vis a vis weight, power, set-up etc, or by those offering ' improved performance' are just a tad glib:chuckle:


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

When we did our initial research our development GTR came back with a perfect 55% front - 45% rear split  We have supplied/sold GTR’s to other manufacturers and they were Very impressed with the packaging. One British manufacturer said it was the best they had seen on a road car 

As Alex and others have done if you want to drop static weight from the car then front seats are probably the first place to look.


----------



## TAZZMAXX (Mar 9, 2010)

Assuming Alex's car is 700BHP and 1740Kg this gives 402BHP/tonne. Losing the 100Kg gives 426BHP/tonne, so he's spent £4500 to get a 24BHP/tonne increase. I realise that making the car lighter may seem the way to go but it seems a lot of money for the small amount of power gain. That money may have been better spent on suspension mods?

It's his car so why not? I don't think it would be for me though.


----------



## GTRSTAR (Nov 26, 2009)

TAZZMAXX said:


> Assuming Alex's car is 700BHP and 1740Kg this gives 402BHP/tonne. Losing the 100Kg gives 426BHP/tonne, so he's spent £4500 to get a 24BHP/tonne increase. I realise that making the car lighter may seem the way to go but it seems a lot of money for the small amount of power gain. That money may have been better spent on suspension mods?
> 
> It's his car so why not? I don't think it would be for me though.


as per my original post, the weight saving was a SIDE EFFECT of modifications carried out for OTHER REASONS namely more feed back and support in the driving possition and perfomance and sound both of which enrich the driving experience.


----------



## GTRSTAR (Nov 26, 2009)

:blahblah:


Zed Ed said:


> makes me think many of the remarks on here, berating Nissan's positioning of the GTR vis a vis weight, power, set-up etc, or by those offering ' improved performance' are just a tad glib:chuckle:


another one of your unwaveringly possitive posts Zed Ed, thanks for that, though please dont use words like 'glib' as no one under the age of 55 will know what the hell you are on about  again 

What I think youre itching to say is that the GTR cannot be impoved on so why do we spend all this money trying to make it better, and in doing so we're merely 'berating' nissan.:blahblah:

I guess individuality wasnt somthing the facists of the 20th century condoned? :banned: nor the corporate marketing machine that is nissan in the 21st century, apparently! 

We like to MOD  it might not make the car faster around Jeremy Clarksons track, who cares! its faster louder and better to drive on the open road and thats what its all about. :flame:


----------



## GTRSTAR (Nov 26, 2009)

David.Yu said:


> Thanks. Here is the link to the article I referred to (if it's allowed) How fat is your car? - BBC Top Gear
> 
> Basically they took a stock 207 GTI, gutted an impressive 127kg of weight out of it (near enough 10% of the original weight) and it posted an identical lap time as stock.
> 
> Sure, if it had been set up properly, the Stig thinks it would be faster, but the fact remains that simply stripping weight out of a car without taking into account balance will not necessarily make it quicker on a track.


David youre right, as per usual  do you have any advice on actually saving weight to improve the way the car drives though


----------



## charles charlie (May 3, 2008)

Personally I'm all for people doing whatever takes their fancy with their own cars and money. I'm an addict for fiddllng, so it would be hypocritical of me to criticise anybody else's efforts.

My own feeling with regards weight savings is twofold..


Firstly there is the cost/benefit relationship. A Cobb AP with one of GTCs tunes and a y-pipe gets you around another 80 horses for around £1500. Start removing seats and you can spend the same again, lose some airbags, lose some day to day comfort, whilst not necessarily gaining a noticeable performance improvement.

Secondly, Nissan have made much of the weight helping with downforce and stability at speed and losing weight without addressing changes elsewhere may be problematic.


I'm no expert in these matters, but if I was going down the road of removing weight, I'd seriously consider seeking advice of tuners who have experience changing all aspects of a cars geometry and suspension in order to ensure that any weight lost was adequately compensated for.


----------



## Zed Ed (Oct 24, 2007)

I like what you are doing; all I am saying is that the equation has more in it than just power.





GTRSTAR said:


> :blahblah:
> 
> another one of your unwaveringly possitive posts Zed Ed, thanks for that, though please dont use words like 'glib' as no one under the age of 55 will know what the hell you are on about  again
> 
> ...


----------



## Cris (Sep 17, 2007)

GTRSTAR said:


> Probably, I changed the seats to Cobra Imola Carbon and the exhaust to GTC TITAN 90mm, I weighed the bits comming off, and the bits going on, did the maths and got a figure of about 100KG weight saving, Total cost was about £4500.00.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To my mind the obvious choice would be lighter wheels. should only improve the car. If you stick to srock sizes I'd guess a couple of kilos per wheel is possible.


----------



## ozren (Apr 12, 2009)

Well, I don't know about lightest GT-Rs, but mine for sure is one of the heaviest, thanks to its Godzilla-sized driver (125kg). On top of that there is either wife, 2 Recaro baby seats and 2 kids OR my friend (at 120kg).

I guess I need to get a cement bag for the trunk as well hehe!


----------



## balam (Mar 18, 2010)

Here's a really light one!

Avance Meitou


----------



## balam (Mar 18, 2010)

But... Oooops, its a R32! :chuckle:


----------



## tarmac terror (Jul 16, 2003)

Mark B said:


> Nope I don't believe it, especially as an ex Exige owner and Lotus fan. Colin Chapman would have laughed at Mizuno's weight explaination!
> 
> And it doesn't fit with the Spec V being lighter either.


I'm with Mark on this one....

As long as cars have existed less weight=better....end of story. I'm not saying the R35 dynamics have not possibly been tuned with the original weight thrown into the equation but seriously....you just have to look at top end race machinery to see that the weight factor is significant.
Less mass=faster acceleration, deceleration and better cornering ability.
Less rotational mass=less inertia (and gyroscopic effect when talking about brake rotors)

The OP says he notices the difference in performance after the weight reduction.....I think you would need to have the perception of a professional vehicle tester to pick up on that given the weight you say you have saved.

TT


----------



## GTRSTAR (Nov 26, 2009)

tarmac terror said:


> The OP says he notices the difference in performance after the weight reduction.....I think you would need to have the perception of a professional vehicle tester to pick up on that given the weight you say you have saved.
> 
> TT


Following that train of thought, if our scales were wrong, and EVOVI was right, and Ive only saved 50kg, if I can still feel the difference does that make me F1 driver material ?! :smokin:


----------



## tarmac terror (Jul 16, 2003)

Definately mate. You must have a precision posterior.....

:chuckle:

TT


----------

