Uh huh..

Discussion in '2008 Nissan GT-R' started by 2998ccCSL, Oct 17, 2007.

  1. 470hp, 3700lbs, 0-60 in 3.5? I'll believe after it actually comes out, cause that's a bold claim. As bold as any n-ring claim. With essencially the same p:w as an M5, can it really rocket that fast in the straights? I mean, I know the M5 is underatted at 4.5 (4.2 is more realistic with Automobile even stating 4 flat), but can AWD traction really make up half a second?

    I wanna see some 0-100 and 0-150 too.
     
  2. I'd say it's possible especially with Nissan's history of underrating the HP of Skyline GT-R's past including the "500hp" Z-Tune that could go from 0-400m (2.3m short of a qtr. mile) in 10.06 seconds.
     
  3. post proof of the 10.06
     
  4. AWD means a strong dig off the line, and advanced TC doesn't hurt either. Add an automatic transmission with very quick shifting, and there you go.
     
  5. #5 naota430, Oct 18, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  6. Between LC and the extra weight, I know the M5 has no trouble taking off, maybe less than this might have, but still! the SMGIII is one of the hardest fastest gearbox's available in a street car, but there is still a second, a full second, lost somewhere in the mfr. claims. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/confused.gif"></A>
     
  7. You're right, but I don't usually see Nissan exaggerating their cars performance numbers, and I certainly don't think they'd do it with their flagship. To release performance figures that are better than true values would be silly and could hurt the reception of the car. I'm looking forward to seeing what the numbers look like from the various automotive mags, but I see no reason to doubt their claims yet.
     
  8. Wait and see! They can't go under that now if everyone believes in these claims (it'd be bad press). That means they can either meet it or exceed expectations (I'm hoping for the latter, but it's up in the air).
     
  9. They won't get within a second of the claimed time. There isn't enough torque to improve acceleration. Look at the classic example of the Bugatti EB110. They claimed 0-60 in 3.4 seconds with 480 ft lbs of torque and 611 hp. No editor could ever get the car to break 60 in under 4.7 seconds. We will see. I just wish I could put some money on it. Too many stupid kids on this website.
     
  10. NO U
     
  11. Thats turbo lag. sub 4 liter v12 engines with 4 turbos tend to have quite a bit of lag, esp when they were designed 15 years ago.
     
  12. pwnt
     
  13. Well, I just got my Nov. issue of C&D and they are claiming the same numbers for the TT'd V6. 0-60: 3.5 sec and 1/4 in 11.7 sec. I agree w/ phanofmuzik2. He has a good point about the EB110's old-school engineering. It still boggles my mind as to how Nissan made this thing into a tank. Where's all the weight coming from???? My truck weighs about that much...
     

Share This Page