R36 GT-R due by 2013

[xcye]

Of course, lighter is better.

There is one thing Mr, GTR forgot to mention. A lighter car requires less centrical force to turn than a heavier car does, if both go around the corner at the same speed. So, a lighter car does not need that much grip than a heavier car does. That is why a F1 car can go around a corner a lot faster than a R35. They both has the same down-pressure 1600kg, but F1 car is 1000kg lighter.

I believe the only reason for R35 to be that heavy is cost. Everything else is designed around that weight, not the other way around.

What really bugged me was how he was using Kg, and not N, KG is just mass, you can't generate 1000kg of force, you can generate 9810N which is an equvilent weight of 1000kg on earth. If we understand about Gravity being a constant we can talk about it in KG

He was talking about f1 cars generating 1000kg of downforce, They haul pretty good.

He is completely right with the physics on the situation.

The basic argument is a car with a mass of 1600kg, will have the same friction (thus same centripetal force) on the entire system as a 600kg car whose aerodynamics generate and additional 1000kg to the car.

The more fricton you have the faster you can go through a corner. ( Fcentriptal= (Mass x v^2)/r^2 Fcentripital being the force of friction the car generates. (since its the only thing stopping the car from sliding away) Ff=Normal force x Coefficient of friction. (The normal force is the force that the ground is pushing on the car. Since the car isn't falling through the ground the normal force has to be equal to the weight of the car plus the down force aerodynamics.)
So if you strip the aerodynamics of the lighter car you will have less friction and cannot take the corner as fast.

To conclude lighter is better for turning if you have the aerodynamics, but due to regulations and such the car can't have a huge fin on the back or front and can't be so low to the ground. So for the power to weight ratio this weight is optimal for the speeds they were projecting.

[quadracer111]

Wishlist......

Design it off the r32
5 speed or 6
and not all those gay restrictions where they can tell you took your wheels off ect.

[Chow]

Of course, lighter is better.

There is one thing Mr, GTR forgot to mention. A lighter car requires less centrical force to turn than a heavier car does, if both go around the corner at the same speed. So, a lighter car does not need that much grip than a heavier car does. That is why a F1 car can go around a corner a lot faster than a R35. They both has the same down-pressure 1600kg, but F1 car is 1000kg lighter.

I believe the only reason for R35 to be that heavy is cost. Everything else is designed around that weight, not the other way around.

Your looking at it the wrong way.

in this case the max centripetal force that can be applied equal to the force of friction, since it is the only thing holding the car on the road, so we would want to find the max tangential velocity for each weight under the same condition.

Breaking out the calculator i found something interesting, there the same velocity, i knew this back in my honors physics class, but somehow over the course of a year i forgot Newtonian mechanics.

Force of friction is mgu (u being coefficant of friction) so mgu=mv^2/r the masses cancle out. so v=(gur)^1/2

Thus the mass alone has no effect on how fast the car can take the corner.

So lighter is only better if you have a downforce supplied. otherwise they can take the same speed.

[m_melen]

your brain is bigger than mine, but at least i can spell "they're" lol. kudos on the proof though

[xcye]

True, V=(gur)^1/2.

None of my arguments said a lighter car can go faster around a corner than a heavier car does without conditions. All I am saying is Mr. GTR forgot to mention the fact: A lighter car needs less centripetal force to turn a corner than a heavier car does, if BOTH GO AROUND the corner at the SAME speed, which can be easily concluded from your formula : F = M * V ^ 2 / R. I also said F1 cars can go faster than a R35, if both have the SAME down-pressure. It can also be concluded from: F = M * V ^ 2 / R ---> V = (F * R / M) ^ 1/2.

Therefore, when MR, GT-R said (OR wanted us to believe) 1600kg was a optimal weight for R35 was for the reason of that weight made R35 go around a corner faster, I did not believe him. Neither, did you, right? ( V = (GUR) ^ 1/2, where G is the gravity acceleration constant, U is the friction coefficient, which is also a constant, and R is the corner radius; so none of them is related to the weight or MASS of a car). Think about it, if R35 could be lighter, It could have smaller wheels, smaller brakes, smaller engines, require less fuel, and could still be as fast at the same time.

So, I think, the only reason why R35 is this heavy is COST. They knew 1600kg was the weight they had to work with to make the car accessible to their buyers. Then they went from that weight to make their wheel choice, engine choice, and brakes. etc... What MR GT-R said was misleading.

Your looking at it the wrong way.

in this case the max centripetal force that can be applied equal to the force of friction, since it is the only thing holding the car on the road, so we would want to find the max tangential velocity for each weight under the same condition.

Breaking out the calculator i found something interesting, there the same velocity, i knew this back in my honors physics class, but somehow over the course of a year i forgot Newtonian mechanics.

Force of friction is mgu (u being coefficant of friction) so mgu=mv^2/r the masses cancle out. so v=(gur)^1/2

Thus the mass alone has no effect on how fast the car can take the corner.

So lighter is only better if you have a downforce supplied. otherwise they can take the same speed.

[cschepp]

Ok first thugs first.... Take that damn v6 out and replace it with a straight 6 or surpass people and make it a killer straight 8. Use more of the original design of the skyline, throughout the years you could tell the cars were skylines now the only thing that displays this is the gtr emblem! Weight is not really going to happen as most of the people who can afford these cars are not it our age range. The majority of us probably can't afford 100k car, they should make it cheaper. And like many other people have said make many more options than just one. And get rid of that stupid paddle shift bs!!! I like everyone else loves to enjoy driving the car, not granny shifting!!!!

[albertm7]

Your looking at it the wrong way.

in this case the max centripetal force that can be applied equal to the force of friction, since it is the only thing holding the car on the road, so we would want to find the max tangential velocity for each weight under the same condition.

Breaking out the calculator i found something interesting, there the same velocity, i knew this back in my honors physics class, but somehow over the course of a year i forgot Newtonian mechanics.

Force of friction is mgu (u being coefficant of friction) so mgu=mv^2/r the masses cancle out. so v=(gur)^1/2

Thus the mass alone has no effect on how fast the car can take the corner.

So lighter is only better if you have a downforce supplied. otherwise they can take the same speed.

I don't think it's as simple as that. And you forgot about the engine and driveline layout different of a F1 car vs GTR. As a simple analogy, think about a hammer with the head in the middle vs a hammer with the head at the end. The hammer with the head in the middle is much easier to rotate DESPITE it being the same mass. An F1 car has a lower moment of inertia than the GTR, even if the GTR was stripped to 600 kg.
+ There is suspension geometry, wind conditions, tyres used, etc...
Conclusion: we'd all be F1 engineers if it was that simple.... but it's not

[leeaspin]

at least nissan is still making a skyline...unlike toyota not producing anymore supras
True battle of supercars

[Dragon Humper]

I don't think it's as simple as that. And you forgot about the engine and driveline layout different of a F1 car vs GTR. As a simple analogy, think about a hammer with the head in the middle vs a hammer with the head at the end. The hammer with the head in the middle is much easier to rotate DESPITE it being the same mass. An F1 car has a lower moment of inertia than the GTR, even if the GTR was stripped to 600 kg.
+ There is suspension geometry, wind conditions, tyres used, etc...
Conclusion: we'd all be F1 engineers if it was that simple.... but it's not

Plus Chow is assuming that the coeficient of friction between the tire and the road increases linearly with mass, which it doesn't. If you take two vehicles with everything being the same except for mass, the lighter car will always generate more G-force in a turn then the heavier one (speaking in real world terms anyway). Trying to overcome that inertia as the mass goes up gets harder to do faster than the friction between the tire and the road goes up.



Jon.

[QuietChaos]

@leeaspin: Toyota's got the LF-A, and the FT-86 is coming up. The company's making a return to it's sportier roots for sure.

[Ricky Ricer]

Ok first thugs first.... Take that damn v6 out and replace it with a straight 6 or surpass people and make it a killer straight 8. Use more of the original design of the skyline, throughout the years you could tell the cars were skylines now the only thing that displays this is the gtr emblem! Weight is not really going to happen as most of the people who can afford these cars are not it our age range. The majority of us probably can't afford 100k car, they should make it cheaper. And like many other people have said make many more options than just one. And get rid of that stupid paddle shift bs!!! I like everyone else loves to enjoy driving the car, not granny shifting!!!!

None of that will happen. It's not a Skyline anymore, it's a GT-R. The car is already a steal at it's price, originially Skyline GT-Rs were around 6,000,000 Yen new IIRC. Part of the reason the GT-R is so fast is because it can shift in less than half a second. And as for an I6 or I8, that just won't happen, the V6 is proving itself to be an awesome motor, and can handle a beating. I don't really think you can knock either parts of the powertrain until you've driven one. It was almost more fun to drive than my R33... Almost.

[MarusGTR]

@leeaspin: Toyota's got the LF-A, and the FT-86 is coming up. The company's making a return to it's sportier roots for sure.

I dunno, JDM cardom just started going downhill after 2002... I seriously don't have any brand loyalty (except pre-2002 nissans) because I think they've all lost their past focus. Sure it's nice going forward and all but I just feel like they've all dropped the ball a decade ago, felt a big hole where sports cars should of been, and now they're trying to fill it back up, cramming it with current high-tech fancy trends because there's money to be made.

It just doesn't feel right.