Under the hood of the Nissan GT-R: Engine details revealed
The upcoming Nissan GT-R is already a streetbound race car, but rather than just toss the tasty-enough VK V8 in the engine bay and call it a day, Nissan's going all out with an engine befitting an actual racer. The VK45 was rumored to be the engine for the GT-R, but Nissan felt its overall style was more Grand Touring than was appropriate, so they reached back into history and pulled out a little number from the R390 LeMans racer.
Follow the jump for the story. Thanks to Chuck for the tip!
[Source: 7Tune]
The R390 sported a 3.5 liter V8 known as the VRH35L, which was essentially recreated as a V6 production engine in the form of the upcoming GT-R's VR38VETT. Even though it loses two cylinders, it gains 300cc of displacement, for a total of 3.8 liters. Oh yeah, there's a couple of turbochargers thrown in for good measure, too. Despite the amount of air it can pump, the VR38 is a compact mill with lots of trick touches. Among the most interesting features, and probably the ones that tuners will hate the most, are the integrated turbine housings in the exhaust manifolds. Having the impellers right in the manifold keeps weight down and improves response, while also making the overall package more compact and thus easier to nestle down into the frame. Each cylinder bank has its own independent intake manifold, which is the main thing you see when lifting the hood. The cylinders fed by that plumbing are occupied by lightened pistons, which are in turn flung around by svelte connecting rods and crankshaft, too. Cosworth had a hand in engineering the engine, which has an alloy block with linerless bores, plenty of magnesium alloy pieces, an oiling system capable of coping with high g's, and an eagerness to rev in a way 3800ccs usually aren't.
The GT-R will be impressive when it debuts in just a couple of months, and from the numbers, it looks like it'll give a Porsche 911 Turbo quite a run for its (big pile of) money. The horsepower figure for both cars is 480ps, and while the GT-R gives up some torque to the Porsche, the GT-R rips off equally quick dashes to 100 km/h (3.9 seconds) and has been designed with vehicular balance as an overarching theme. While the chassis of the GT-R can handle more power, Nissan's considerable Group C racing experience showed that cars with better balance are faster than horsepower champs. With a front engine/AWD layout, it'll be less a widowmaker than the 911, which can get wiggly at times. How's this sound – performance equal to (and potentially better) than the 911 Turbo for half the price (7.9 million Yen versus 18.2 million Yen)? Yeah, we thought so. Besides, the GT-R isn't stuck in some kind of iconoclastic styling purgatory the way the 911 is.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
zen zen 2:01AM (9/11/2007)
If i'm looking at the chart after the read link right then it looks like the GT-R is 6MT only, or else they are not considering their paddle shifted sequentel manual an 'auto' box. I really hope for a 3rd pedal! I just refuse to lust after this beast anymore if it's an auto and will wait for someone else to get the recipe right.
Reply
HyperLemon 12:01PM (9/11/2007)
It says "sequential" after the "6MT", if that helps.
Socky 2:09AM (9/11/2007)
i wonder how much attention will be placed on the ride comfort of this beast? :o wouldnt want it to have those in the 350z with thin paddings >.
Reply
smartmlp 2:26AM (9/11/2007)
By contrast, the Z06 does 0-60 in 3.7 Seconds, and is naturally aspirated and most likely gets better gas millage then this thing. Oh, and it has a American V8 Growl. Its an easy choice for me.
Reply
adam 8:22AM (9/11/2007)
And by further contrast, the Z06 has the interior quality of a $15,000 Cobalt.
Scott 10:27AM (9/11/2007)
Of course Nissans are not known for their high quality interiors either. It fact that was the failing of the gen 1 G35, and that was supposed to be a luxury car!
DetroitWhat 12:48PM (9/11/2007)
If Nissan keeps in line with what they are doing, the GT-R's interior should as cheap as the interior on my 350z, and need trans work on it by 19k!
naggs 2:33AM (9/11/2007)
480 hp awd and 3.9 sec to 60 is all it can manage...
must be heavy
on the plus side, it might be faster than a new camaro
Reply
smartmlp 2:39AM (9/11/2007)
Its a good thing the new camaro is half the price then :-).
dustin 8:07PM (9/11/2007)
The camaro won't be anywhere near as fun to drive.
gouzizi 2:48AM (9/11/2007)
3.9 to 100kp/h roughly 62mph. You can shave 0.1' to 0.4' for the 60 figure.
Reply
Za 5:11PM (9/11/2007)
You cannot shave .4 seconds off for 2mph...let's be serious here.
chris 3:07AM (9/11/2007)
When will people actually realise than manufacturer acceleration claims are almost always conservative (and yeah you can knock off at least a tenth for the 0-60mph anyways)? So if someone can get a Z06 to 3.7 on a drag strip, I'd be stunned if the GT-R didn't at least match it, even though the car isn't designed to appeal to the same 1/4 mile lovers as the Z06 (not saying that's all it's good for, just that what it's fans seem obsessed with).
How anyone can criticise the speculated performance of this car is just insane. And to compare it to a Camaro is like comparing a Z06 to a Mustang V6.
Reply
smartmlp 3:58AM (9/11/2007)
I doubt this. The Z06 has a better engine, and is not weighed down by complex AWD systems. Lets not forget that the Z06 motor is underrated from the factory and produces well above 500 horsepower. Notice how these ratings are in PS and not in horsepower. PS is not the same, and 480 is actually around 470 (and possibly less when rated in SAE). Lets not forget that the Z06 is barely tapped from the factory, and can be unleashed to produce power well beyond what the GT-R could create.
Its a nice car fast car, but with a 3.8L V6, its no supercar.
chris 4:40AM (9/11/2007)
Better engine? How the hell did you come to this conclusion? You have speculated (not confirmed) engine specifications of a car that won't be seen in the US for at least 6 more months and somehow the VR38VETT is worse than the LS7? Every single modern GT-R has been underrated in power, from the 300hp R32 to the 550-580hp R34 Z-tune, and how can the Z06 be underrated with the SAE stuff? That just doesn't happen anymore.
And how is it heavier than the Z06 with absolutely nothing even speculated about the GT-Rs weight in that article let alone anything confirmed? You're an American car fanboy, that's ok, just stick to being happy with your own cars instead of trying impossible 'back to the future' comparisons with other cars.
Then you start bringing in modifications, which is just so stupid I can't even be bothered criticising it.
Ken 7:18AM (9/11/2007)
Simple, we know what other lesser equipped models on this platform have weighed so we can then estimate it's weight with the addition of the AWD system and other luxuries. Both the current 350Z and the Z06 weighs around 3100 lbs. add in a little more luxury features to the Z, and the AWD system and you're easily at a 3500lb+ vehicle, about the weight of the non-Z06 Corvettes. I'm not bashing the GT-R but the Z06 is a great performance bargain and does have a lot of room for improvement, from the sounds of the article underhood packaging of the GT-R is pretty tight so it will be interesting to see what the aftermarket comes up with for it.
I do take exception to the articles comments on the Porsche turbo. I guess it does get a little loose if you try to make a maneuver at 150mph but otherwise the 997 turbos are some of the most benign sports cars to drive fast, it's actually a fault in my opinion, 100+mph doesn't feel like you're going that fast and traveling at the speed-limit is downright boring in that car. Also, purely from and opinion viewpoint, I'd take the 997s styling over the new GT-R any day, one is an aggressive mismatch of angles and shapes, the other is an evolution of an iconic design.
Ken 7:32AM (9/11/2007)
And just for fun:
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2007/chevrolet/corvette/comparisons/index.html?vehicle[1].year=2007&vehicle[1].make=Nissan&vehicle[1].model=350Z&vehicle[1].trim=1143;6;5;14&vehicle[2].year=2007&vehicle[2].make=Porsche&vehicle[2].model=911&vehicle[2].trim=927;2;3;3&vehicle[3].year=2007&vehicle[3].make=Infiniti&vehicle[3].model=G35&vehicle[3].trim=990;35;3;14&vehicle.fullTrimId=
Dan Roth 10:53AM (9/11/2007)
Ken, that's kinda what I meant - the 997 has had most of the legendarily nasty handling gotchas tuned out of it, and you'll never be able to drive the car hard enough on the street to make any remaining character traits to show themselves (unless you're insane and homicidal).
We can disagree on styling - I love the styling of the early 911/912s, but it's become a caricature, the supercar equivalent of the Jaguar XJ. Not bad looking per se, but the paradigm is tired. A 997 is not a car that I find exciting to look at. Just one hack's opinion...
brian Mita 3:39AM (9/11/2007)
Fap fap fap.....
Reply
nagmashot 3:38AM (9/11/2007)
they clocked the 911Turbo with 3.2s 0-60mph (Motortrend) and 3.4s 0-60km/h at (car&driver for both manual and tiptronic!) and if I am not wrong with 11.4s 1/4mile, the 0-100km/h time is 3.7s factory claim Porsche Turbo tiptronic, that factory claim the 911turbo reached in every German test.
A better compare is 0-300km/h(186mph) there the 911turbo takes 40.7seconds
Reply