I just stumbled upon these videos: First run--> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTx4qQ_2pqw Second run--> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67XoE90WZmg&feature=channel Enjoy
The 599 weighs less and has more hp and far superior aero. Plus they did a rolling start, which takes away the only advantage the GT-R has, traction off the line. A Z06 or TT would have done the same thing, never mind a ZR1. Taz Terry Phillips
The kerb weight of 599 is almost equal of Nissan GTR's one. The S*Cx of the 599 is 0,73 (cx = 0,33 and with S = 2,23 m^2) while GTR has quite better value S*Cx = 0,71 (S= 2,30 m^2, Cx = 0,31) That difference is only from engine power ...
I thought the GT-R would have come closer than that, but it was still impressive from the GT-R when you consider the GT-R has over 130 less than the 599. Plus as said above the rolling start took away the GT-R only advantage.
Luque- I am not talking about static aerodynamics, I am talking about high speed aerodynamics, where airflow is much better controlled on the 599. Taz Terry Phillips
I like Ferraris a great deal, as well as all sorts of cars, but this comparison is more of a pure straight-line horsepower/torque battle. Do another comparison and take them on a GT road course, and the 599 will suddenly have the hardest time of its life against the GT-R
I wouldnt go that far ......the GTR is fast but still fugly... http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/458d856a36a6a-vs-4717b80e35715.html
Terry, The Aerodynamic force to win to advance can be calculated as Fa = -1/2 *r *S *Cx*V^2 So a better S *Cx means better accelerations, and a Nissan GTR has advantage under this aspect. The Cx value is a mean calculated over all range car speed and, if a car has better airflow control at high speed as you write, you get it into this value mean. I hope it's much clear for you now. Sorry for my poor english Cheers Luque
Well use a 599 Handling GTE package with the some Nissan semislicks tyres (Dunlop SP Sport 600 DSST or bridgestone RE070A) and we will see if you are right. Luque
its a widely held belief that the gtr has more hp than what the factory claims. also the gtr's acceleration is helped by its short gearing. The 599 is truely one of my fav production cars available today, but the GTR is certainly no pig even if it looks like one !
agree I've resisted diving fully into this whole topic to avert a flame war over Ferrari v Nissan as I like both marques. Suffice it to say, a stock 599 would not do as well on a GT course in general versus an R35.
I had the pleasure of driving both the GTR and 599 HGTE on a private track day for pretty much 6 hours straight. For sure the GTR is more suited for the track, with tighter suspension, better turn-in, and better gearbox. The 599, even with HGTE upgrade, rolls a bit more than I like in corners, and the long nose makes the car more difficult to place in corners. Also, the front-mid engine layout takes more getting used to than most cars I've driven. The GTR just has a lot more feel on the track and you can drive it closer to the limits more than you could with the 599. I think the 599 is not really intended to be a track car like the GTR. The 599 has phenomenon acceleration and rides smoother, especially at higher speeds. Overally, I think the HGTE upgrade from a handling perspective is an improvement, but I the rest of the upgrade, ECU, gearbox, and exhaust are not worthwhile.
I wouldnt call this proof. If you can find the in car camra shoot of this run, you will see that they do not run the 599 all the way up to redline, they short shift it. Jim
No surprise here, you're comparing an AWD car that traps 118-122 mph (GTR) vs a RWD car that traps 129 mph (599). Even from a dead stop, the 599 is still quicker, although the GTR can stay much closer than the roll race. One reason the GTR appears to be very quick for its HP is that it is very much underrated, as proven by various dyno tests. The true crank HP is closer to 520-530 HP rather than 480. The real magic of the GTR is its highly developed AWD system's ability to make even a clown look talented on the road course, I've witnessed this in person a few times.
I would say a Z06 would give the 599 a run for its money in a straight line with a good driver. The Z06 completely stock in the hands of a very good driver ran a 10.9 in the quarter... The vettes are awefully quick... ask me which one i would rather have... and I would take the 599 any day of the week
?????? Sorry my friend but why in america do you always refers to dragstrip results ? No car magazine tests (american or european) was able to perform 10,9 s in the 1/4 miles with a Z06. I remember may be a 11,7 s of motor trend magazines .... 1) First of all measuring accelaration time with photocells is not precise. Starting few inches before first photocell means few tenths of second less. 2) Second, rubberized surface at standing start helps a lot to maximaze the grip and avoiding tyres slippering. These conditions are not what you normally find on the street or in a car magazine test track facilities. 3) Normally drag radials helps a lot .... A Z06 have no chance against a 599 despite in a 1/4 miles race. Cheers
Z06 vs. 599 would not be close. Speed through the trap in a 599 is astonishing and a 599 is relatively easy to drive fast (and there is no plastic roof on a 599 that will fly off). Motor Trend tested a ZR1 against several cars, including a 599 and a GT2, and the 599 was very close to a ZR1. The ZR1 was quickest.
