[Cavalier777]

Hey NAGTROC, just a quick question: whenever I watch anything with Jeremy Clarkson talking about the GT-R, he always seems to mention that (paraphrased) the "bare" GT-R chassis was "(secretly) developed by lotus."

can someone explain this? thanks in advance.

 

[jaspergtr]

Lotus was requested as a partner to develop the chassis. Not sure this was ever a secret. It was pretty widely known before the car was released.

 

[Cavalier777]

Lotus was requested as a partner to develop the chassis. Not sure this was ever a secret. It was pretty widely known before the car was released.

thanks, I wasn't following the car as intently as until around the USDM 2009 model timeframe. is there literature on this topic?

 

[jaspergtr]

thanks, I wasn't following the car as intently as until around the USDM 2009 model timeframe. is there literature on this topic?

lol! You're taking me back through the excitement that I had, when waiting for the first R35 to come to our shores...

Link is from Nov 2007:

Thanks to help from Lotus, the GT-R boasts a sector-leading drag coefficient figure of 0.27, despite generating genuine downforce via its carbonfibre undertray and rear spoiler from 60mph. Weight distribution is slightly nose-heavy - around 53:47 front to rear - the car weighing in at a disappointingly hefty 1740kg.

http://www.evo.co.uk...nissan_gtr.html

 

[Rif]

Nice

 

[TODGTR]

Nissan spent more than 3 years on GT-R's aerodynamics, two of them at Team Lotus's rolling road wind tunnel. This climate controlled, 360-rotating device is one of the most advanced wind tunnels in the world, and a proving ground for Formula One designs.
Then to Japan for a year and a half of fine tuning at the Yoshitaka Suzuka.

 

[Tom_GTR]

Too bad lotus did not help design some more lightweight parts.....

 

[Cavalier777]

Too bad lotus did not help design some more lightweight parts.....

lol the weight is intentional. you can find Mizuno say that 100% of a car's performance is delivered at the contact patch of the tires, and you need that weight to generate friction to perform.

 

[ATL_GT-R]

I feel like everyone makes such a big deal out of the GT-R's weight but does it not only weigh ~100 lbs. more than an M3 (which is not viewed as an overly heavy car)?

 

[thewraith]

Vehicle weight has long been a very misunderstood subject by racing fans and everyday drivers. Lightweight is useless unless the contact patch is there. This is part of the reason that (in the old days) if you would open the trunk of a high power American RWD car- you would find kitty litter or sandbags in the trunk...more traction.

Of course spoilers and aerodynamics make a difference, but at some point- good old fashioned weight is the easiest/most cost effective way to put the power down.

 

[Cavalier777]

Vehicle weight has long been a very misunderstood subject by racing fans and everyday drivers. Lightweight is useless unless the contact patch is there. This is part of the reason that (in the old days) if you would open the trunk of a high power American RWD car- you would find kitty litter or sandbags in the trunk...more traction.

Of course spoilers and aerodynamics make a difference, but at some point- good old fashioned weight is the easiest/most cost effective way to put the power down.

well weight is the only way to make friction at any speed, otherwise your downforce-limited friction is a function of the airflow around you, which is in turn dependent upon your speed. also, AFAIK it's not as much of a challenge to make GT-R parts stronger and apply more power. so, bravo, mizuno - excellent strategy.

 

[Monaco]

so, bravo, mizuno - excellent strategy.

yup. Let's face it. We are not going to see lightweight cars of yore due to modern regulations. I just don't see it happening without serious compromise.

 

[Bullo]

Vehicle weight has long been a very misunderstood subject by racing fans and everyday drivers. Lightweight is useless unless the contact patch is there. This is part of the reason that (in the old days) if you would open the trunk of a high power American RWD car- you would find kitty litter or sandbags in the trunk...more traction.

Of course spoilers and aerodynamics make a difference, but at some point- good old fashioned weight is the easiest/most cost effective way to put the power down.

Load of shit!!!

A lighter GTR would be faster than a heavier GTR.
Heavier the car, more weight you have to carry while accelerating, braking, cornering, it eats up tires, brakes, puts more stress on suspension.
Lighter is better.

 

[thewraith]

You're joking, right? Wow, ever heard of traction? I agree that a little bit of weight reduction would help with CERTAIN things- however as an overall package, I can't believe that you think they just cut costs.

 

[jaspergtr]

To a point, I agree with Bullo... Or else - why would the (fabled) Spec-R have a (rumored) 3600lbs curb weight to improve performance?

I don't think a 2000lbs GT-R would be able to do what the current 3850lbs GT-R can, but I believe that a few less pounds would reduce stress on certain components, and increase performance overall.

 

[Cavalier777]

To a point, I agree with Bullo... Or else - why would the (fabled) Spec-R have a (rumored) 3600lbs curb weight to improve performance?

I don't think a 2000lbs GT-R would be able to do what the current 3850lbs GT-R can, but I believe that a few less pounds would reduce stress on certain components, and increase performance overall.

I disagree with Bullo, but I do think that the car should be 1700kg WITH passenger(s).

 

[Bullo]

You're joking, right? Wow, ever heard of traction? I agree that a little bit of weight reduction would help with CERTAIN things- however as an overall package, I can't believe that you think they just cut costs.

GTR has a well build chassis, but if you can eliminate weight without sacrificing the chassis integrity, you will have faster lap times.

Jasper, regarding you point, I understand what you are saying, but if you took out 2000LBS, it will no longer be a GTR.

 

[Bullo]

Of course spoilers and aerodynamics make a difference, but at some point- good old fashioned weight is the easiest/most cost effective way to put the power down.

So racing folks, who spend thousands dollars and hours to reduce few pounds, are out of their mind? They are not utilizing weight correctly?
Laughable.

 

[thewraith]

I strongly disagree with you Bullo- "racing folks" don't just cut pounds- there is so much more involved. You must add downforce, sticker tires, tuned suspenion, etc when you considerably reduce weight on a car that is as well balanced and purpose built. I'm not talking about Civics or EVO'S, I'm talking about purpose built vehicles like the GT-R. There is a balance that must be maintained, otherwise you're throwing the original millions of dollars of research out the door. I don't think that you're understanding the complexity and basic physics. For every weight reduction in a newer model, there are aero improvements.

 

[Monaco]

Ideally the benefit of weight reduction is to increase acceleration, to reduce wear on the consumables, and reduce axial moments of inertia. But these lightweight cars have added aerodynamic aids to increase the loading on the tires for increased grip and stability. Weight loss doesn't come without compromise.