Nissan GT-R still quick with updated launch control
The internet has been abuzz with chatter ever since it was revealed that Nissan had updated the software that governs the GT-R's launch control and was instructing all of its dealers to reprogram every vehicle in dealer inventory that had yet to be sold with the new software in a bid to keep additional transmissions from grenading.
The changes limit the maximum RPM that the car will sustain with the VDC switched off to around 3,500, a big reduction from the 4,500 limit of the old programming. Additionally, the software update adds a new, safer form of launch control that allows takeoffs at 3,000 RPM while the VDC remains active. Inquiring minds want to know: Would those alterations still allow the GT-R to hook up hard enough to reverse the earth's rotation at the drags?
We have some good news to share with Godzilla owners that are contemplating whether or not to have their cars updated with the new software. A bone-stock GT-R with the reprogramming has been timed at 11.34 @ 120.85 MPH with an excellent 1.69-second 60′ time. That result compares rather favorably with quarter-mile runs recorded by cars with the initial launch control programming. Thanks for the tip, ViperACR!
[Source: Drag Times]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Franz 8:02PM (2/05/2009)
Godzilla still has teeth then. Not bad.
Reply
P.V. 8:34PM (2/05/2009)
I couldn't have said it better myself.
xpolarx 9:36PM (2/05/2009)
Certainly still has gear teeth. I'm glad they came up with a fix that didn't involve issuing strengthened gearsets to everybody who bought a GTR...but this still seems temporary. The next gen needs a beefed-up transmission, for sure.
BigMcLargeHuge 8:49AM (2/06/2009)
@ xpolarx,
Why would they need a stronger tranny if Nissan is willing to stand behind a warranty on this one?
No matter what happens, the driver is covered if using the VDC-on launch. Which is fast.
Nibcrom 8:06PM (2/05/2009)
A previous article stated this vehicle was a loss-leader for Nissan. Has any other data been revealed about this? It certainly seems to be true given the price tag of the VSpec. Just curious.
Reply
Farris 8:42PM (2/05/2009)
Someone said the GTR was a loss leader? Sorry, but they're dumb. The GTR is a halo car.
Bryant 9:12PM (2/05/2009)
Farris, do you know what a loss leader is?
The PS3 is a loss leader for Sony because it costs so much more to make it than it does to sell it. It's possibly the same with the GTR, though I don't know where people picked up on this.
swimstarguy 9:18PM (2/05/2009)
A halo car can be a loss leader...
They don't care if they lose a few bucks on each sale as long as it gets people to come into the Nissan showroom.
~Zar4
Farris 9:58PM (2/05/2009)
*slaps forehead*
You guys are right. My bad.
why not the LS2LS7? 10:12PM (2/05/2009)
There's no way Nissan doesn't make a gross profit on the GT-R. If you can make an Altima and sell it at a profit for $23K, they can make this and sell it at a profit for $75K.
As to whether the GT-R will make a net profit, that's a tougher call. It depends on how you account for the R&D costs. If they don't reuse any of the R&D, it's quite possible they would lose money on this program. But if they use the R&D from this program on other future cars, they will certainly come out ahead. And if they don't reuse the R&D from this car on other cars, it'd be rather dumb.
sydbot 8:31AM (2/06/2009)
I think you mean the incremental cost, not including R&D, is profitable for them. Gross Profit is merely profit before taxes and other below the line items. Glad to know I can still recall some of my college education.
why not the LS2LS7? 11:42AM (2/06/2009)
Well, you're right, looks like gross profit doesn't include labor, so that's not what I mean. But incremental costs is just the costs. So I guess what I mean is the generated revenue from the car is greater than the incremental costs, and thus they increase their reported profit for each one one sold.
But is there a shorter term for this?
Johnny 8:09PM (2/05/2009)
The looks of this car has grown on me. i dont find it ugly anymore.
Reply
jv2k 8:13PM (2/05/2009)
That's because you are looking at it from the back. The front still looks horrible.
Jason 8:16PM (2/05/2009)
I disagree. It looks like nothing else, and that is what makes the styling so great.
jv2k 8:36PM (2/05/2009)
I disagree, the front end is just awful(a trend that has spread to other nissan models). Different doesn't automatically mean better. After all a Pontiac Aztec looks like nothing else on the road either.
416Hammy 8:43PM (2/05/2009)
@jv2k:
Your subjective statements were clear the first time. Reiterating them just makes you look insecure. K thx.
jv2k 12:37AM (2/06/2009)
I didn't reiterate. I simply stated that different != attractive.
I'm mostly posting to lol at my low rating though.
Matt 12:16PM (2/06/2009)
@Jason
It does look unique, so long as it's not parked alongside a Cobalt SS, which, if you're not an auto aficionado, could (unfortunately) (and fairly easily) mix one up for the other...
Jack 8:17PM (2/05/2009)
Don't pay for the looks...pay for the performance. I just got to drive one yesterday and the car feels fast and ready to blast off just going in reverse out of its parking spot.....I think I am in love....
Reply