Autocar - First for car news and reviews

This is a road test you may expect to have already seen, thanks to a stream of unofficial (and, indeed, semi-official) imports of Japanese-specification Nissan GT-Rs last year.

But we prefer to road test a car only once it has been priced and when proper UK-spec cars begin to cross the border. In this case that’s just as well because, as we will explore later, there are a couple of subtle differences between the GT-Rs we drove last year and the red 2010 model-year car you see on the...Read the full article

In the "Against", it says "Inconsistent wet-weather handling", but there's no elaboration on this in the main report.

 You'll need to buy the magazine to find out about that, after all this is a business.

while the 100bhp-per-litre twin-turbo V6 engine is new, sits well back in the chassis and drives all four wheels via a dual-clutch automated gearbox.

 Ah - wrong. 126 bhp per litre

The other thing I meant to say was I would not mind putting money on the 'official' output being somewhat conservative. 1775 kg, 478 bhp and well under 4 seconds to 60?

A second quicker than the lighter XKR supercharged and it (the Jag) has 25 more hp? I don't think that he Nissan's AWD chassis can make up for that kind of deficit. I wouldn't mind betting it's got another 50 hp or so that Nissan aren't talking about...

wow! Amazing....

jelly7961:

The other thing I meant to say was I would not mind putting money on the 'official' output being somewhat conservative. 1775 kg, 478 bhp and well under 4 seconds to 60?

A second quicker than the lighter XKR supercharged and it (the Jag) has 25 more hp? I don't think that he Nissan's AWD chassis can make up for that kind of deficit. I wouldn't mind betting it's got another 50 hp or so that Nissan aren't talking about...

I agree.

Autocar says:

"...First the numbers: 0-60mph in 3.8sec, 0-100mph in 8.5sec and 0-150mph in 20.3sec. Given the GT-R’s less than stellar power-to-weight ratio of 275bhp per tonne, such figures are mind-blowing.

The GT-R is also an easy car in which to go incredibly fast. This is partly due to the traction advantages of all-wheel drive and the GT-R’s clever differentials, and partly to the dual-clutch gearbox. ....."

Me thinks it's also parly due to this thing pushing out comfortably over 500bhp.

 

 

The launch control, 4WD and 7 speed double clutch and that weight distribution contributes to a quickened acceleration time. The horsepower is mst likely accurate yet mid RPM overboost can lend to even quicker times something (overboost) a supercharge engine finds difficult to do.

Driving:

The launch control, 4WD and 7 speed double clutch and that weight distribution contributes to a quickened acceleration time. The horsepower is mst likely accurate yet mid RPM overboost can lend to even quicker times something (overboost) a supercharge engine finds difficult to do.

Yes, the elements you mentioned (as did the Autocar) certainly do aid acceleration times, but this thing weighs well over 1700 kgs. It takes more than a clever greabox and 4wd system to achieve sub-4 secs for the 0-60 and mid 8 secs for 0-100 for a car this heavy.

By way of comparison, the Gallardo LP560 (also 4WD), despite weighing over 300kg less and having 552bhp on tab does 0-60 in about the same time and is only a little quicker to 100 mph. It just doesn't add up that the GT-R only has 478bhp.

Also, I thought the British version of the GT-R didn't have launch control.

The GT-R accelerates more quickly than you may expect due to the mega-quick gearbox, traction and its gear ratios, not because it has a secret one million horsepower. UK cars have launch control (with the recalibrated settings) and its use is covered by warranty.

jelly7961:

A second quicker than the lighter XKR supercharged and it (the Jag) has 25 more hp? I don't think that he Nissan's AWD chassis can make up for that kind of deficit. I wouldn't mind betting it's got another 50 hp or so that Nissan aren't talking about...

Probably has a bit more power, the 4wd will definitely help in standing starts and the Jag has really long GT gearing so isn't particualrly fast in the 0-60 race.

The GTR may 'only' produce a maximum of 478 bhp, but what that figure doesn't tell you is over what rev range it produces it. It produces over 400 bhp from 4500rpm to 6300rpm...in addition, the 7 speed 'box is keeping it perfectly planted in this powerband.

Very very quick motor!, and the 1750kg kerb weight no doubt includes the driver, full tank and all oils and fluids.

You'll find the Scuderias published weight is dry. (1250 kg, so add in an 80 kg driver, and 60kg fuel and 30kg fluids, and you're at a 1420kg kerb weight (approx). So it really isn't ridiculously lighter than a GTR...