What went wrong?

What went wrong?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_GT-R_LM_Nismo
youtube.com/watch?v=G6E9P3bEaTs
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>nissan

>FWD GTR
topkek

>unrelated to the sports car
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_GT-R_LM_Nismo
seriously, what went wrong? fwd? a v6? no hybrid system?

it's slower than a 65 year old 0.6 liter 2 cylinder fwd car.

SAVAGE
How GTR fancucks can be recovered from this?

You don't simply make a completely new car and enter Le Mans 24h as your first race and hope to finish.
Had they taken this project seriously they would have raced the rest of the season and returned in 2016 with a proven car. If they added electric motors to power the rear wheels from the hybrid system they could even close the massive lap time gap.

youtube.com/watch?v=G6E9P3bEaTs

Darren Cox

The hybrid system failed resulting in it being a basic FWD V6 (The was still faster than the V8 Vettes)

>. If they added electric motors to power the rear wheels from the hybrid system
It had those, they failed and had to be scrapped, when they worked it was mighty fast.

>fwd
they were hoping to exploit some aerodynamic effect by having a large space for rear diffuser and duct tunnels
also there was an idea that the rear tires would only need to be swapped every 3rd pit stop
it back fired in that the front tires wore out much more quickly than they had planed

>v6?
they had one laying about

>no hybrid system?
there was some delay because Nissan was not decisive in picking an implementation and getting it ready early
by the time they made up their mind the people they commissioned had run out of time
its like nissan when hurr FWD then failed to work on any other part of the car

they could have just pimped out the delta
>If they added electric motors to power the rear wheels
no need
they were talking about using a prop shaft half shafts and portal axles for that (there is a cutaway diagram for that somewhere)
as it was without diverting power to the rear wheels the KERS was unusable due to lack of grip

what was it laying?

what the fuck is the thought process behind this?
did they just want to be different for the sake of being different?

>did they just want to be different for the sake of being different?
Yes. Nissan has a history of building oddball prototype racers.

as said the idea behind it being FF is way more room for rear aero and i think there was something in the regulations that limited the width of rear tires, but not the front tires so they could benefit from having better tires than the rest of the competition

It would've been very interesting to see how this car would've performed if the engine actually worked, if it had more development time and if the development budget was actually bigger than the marketing budget. Oh well

I wouldn't call one of the most competitive GTPs of its time "oddball". North American GTPs were generally designed like this, because raw Turbo power with strong downforce could reliably beat things like the 962 and the XJR9. Japanese prototypes in particular followed this design philosophy in NA (see Toyota 89CV or later, see Mazda 767, MXR01)

And then there was Porsche with the aircooled midmounted twinturbo mid drive 180° V-12 that gave a sub 900 kg car over 1500 hp at full boost.

There were restrictions on the amount of power the hybrid system could deliver to the front wheels but not the rears, the idea was with a FWD ICE unit and RWD electric motors you could put down a lot more power than you could legally if the ICE drove the rear wheels.

>I wouldn't call one of the most competitive GTPs of its time "oddball".
It's more the fact that they would use a production-based engine and trying to race it in GTP.

Different eras. The 956/962 was 1982-1994, the Nissan GTP posted above raced in the early 90s. That's around 20 years after the 917 era.

management

yeah but we can't have nice things anymore. It's racing so everything gotta sucks.