Motor Trend claims Nissan GT-R making at least 507 HP
For car buffs it's baffling (and pretty cool, too) to see a $70,000 Nissan weighing nearly 4,000 lbs whoop up on lighter, more powerful cars. The GT-R lapped more than five seconds quicker than a Corvette Z06 and 911 Turbo at Buttonwillow Raceway during Road and Track's test, and Car and Driver pulled off some pretty incredible numbers during theirs, running 0-60 mph in 3.3 seconds and the quarter mile in just 11.5 seconds. However, some have questioned the numbers. How does the GT-R, which has a weight-to-horsepower ratio 25% higher than the Turbo and Z06, beat both around the racetrack?
Motor Trend questioned the numbers too, and decided to check for themselves when they received a GT-R to review. They took the GT-R over to K&N Engineering in San Bernardino, CA, who strapped it to their in-house chassis dyno to see just how much horsepower the car was making. Three separate runs in fourth gear netted an average of about 430 horsepower at the wheels. Assuming a conservative 15% drivetrain loss, the GT-R is actually producing more than 500 horsepower and 500 lb-ft torque at the flywheel. That helps explain the numbers, but it won't give 911 Turbo and Corvette Z06 owners any comfort. Thanks for the tip, Jake!
Gallery: Nissan GT-R (US-spec)
[Source: Motor Trend]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
creaturesofwar 12:03PM (3/29/2008)
=] I knew it.
Reply
Ligor 11:03AM (3/29/2008)
this still means nothing.
they had the GT-R and the 911 Turbo tested on the same dynos (2 of them) and hte difference was only a few HP more for the GT-R
in the end the GT-R chasis and suspension are top notch, even better than that of hte 911 Turbo
now let's see how the GT-R Spec V vs. GT2 vs. ZR1 match-up goes.
I can't wait, but i'd be surprized if the ZR1 is not the fastest at least in a straight line
DomManganelli 9:52AM (3/29/2008)
had no idea it weighed 4000 lbs? leaves the door open for nissan to make a supperleggera just in time for the introduction of the next 911turbo
Reply
zreeb 11:44AM (3/29/2008)
V-Spec will be lighter with more HP.
why not the LS2/LS7? 12:10PM (3/29/2008)
The V-spec model hasn't had more HP than the street model in the past, has it?
Franz 1:11PM (3/29/2008)
The V-Spec never had more power on paper, but the R34 never had more power than the R32 on paper either. They were always conservatively rated at 280-ish hp. If I had to guess, I'd say it probably did. Maybe resident Skyline expert Sean Morris can shed some light on the subject. Where are you Sean?
jgp 6:34PM (3/29/2008)
They were all officially rated at 280hp for legal reasons, regardless of how much power they actually made.
Franz 7:20PM (3/29/2008)
Not legal reasons. It was basically a gentleman's agreement.
DomManganelli 11:13PM (3/29/2008)
if i'm not mistaken the gentlemen's agreement was to avoid any kind of legal restrictions and lawsuits that would come with high output engines. avoiding a horsepower war, now that is true business ethics.
Stephan Wilkinson 10:00AM (3/29/2008)
Typically the power-loss numbers for a front-engine/rear-drive car are more on the order of 25 percent, especially if it's awd even with a 100-percent rear torque split. 15 percent would be correct for a car with engine, transmission and drive wheels co-located, like a 911. But dyno numbers fluctuate anyway, from day to day, operator to operator, phase of the moon to phase of the moon...
Stephan Wilkinson
Reply
Brian 10:09AM (3/29/2008)
I agree that 15% drivetrain loss sounds low for an AWD car. I've heard that some AWD systems sap closer to 30% of the power available at the flywheel.
why not the LS2/LS7? 12:01PM (3/29/2008)
I heartily disagree with your 25% figure on drivetrain loss on a dyno. Especially for a front engine, rear drive car. Dyno runs are done in top gear and with a rather heavy load to keep the rate of acceleration down and thus lower the inertial losses as much as possible.
That figure is more likely for an AWD car, although I doubt this one was functioning as an AWD car when on the dyno.
Stephan Wilkinson 12:18PM (3/29/2008)
The losses aren't all inertial. Lot of frictional losses as well.
Franz 3:53PM (3/29/2008)
@ why not the LS2/LS7?:
It was functioning as an AWD car on the dyno. On an AWD Dynojet, the rollers aren't mechanically linked and unless I'm seeing things, the front wheels were turning.
3seriesisking 9:55AM (3/29/2008)
Wowee Wow Wow!
Reply
mcheddadi 10:00AM (3/29/2008)
Strip it down and become UNSTOPPABLE!
Reply
Mike 10:01AM (3/29/2008)
Eh I'd bet it needs alot of that weight to keep the performance. You might be able to take off a few hundred pounds, but nothing more than that.
HotRodzNKustoms 10:08AM (3/29/2008)
That still doesn't explain it. The power to weight ration is still way off being able to do what it does
Reply
Brian 10:11AM (3/29/2008)
I have a feeling that many high-power road cars like the Z06 are not limited by their power-to-weight ratio, they are limited by grip. If the GT-R is losing less power to wheel spin or it is delivering power more smoothly, it would explain better lap times despite its weight.
vwboyaf1 10:42AM (3/29/2008)
That's what I immediately thought as well. The AWD system has a lot to do with the incredible performance. A base WRX has pretty impressive acceleration and cornering ability, even though it weighs about 3400 pounds.