MEGA THREAD : PORSCHE VS. NISSAN : New GTR : 7:15 around the Nurburgring? | Page 24 | FerrariChat

MEGA THREAD : PORSCHE VS. NISSAN : New GTR : 7:15 around the Nurburgring?

Discussion in 'General Automotive Discussion' started by Akira, May 10, 2007.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. Guibo

    Guibo Karting

    Nov 21, 2003
    190
    #576 Guibo, Nov 11, 2008
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2008
    ...and slower transmissions, higher gearing, more drag, less available traction...as the driver of the Koenigsegg found out, 901 peak hp isn't going to do you any good when you're trying to send it out through only 2 tires. The Enzo has stickier tires than the GT-R's Dunlops? Proof, please.

    TopGear Australia...is that the one with the tuned Ford GT? 850 horses. Did you also not notice that the GT2 was faster than that car? What does that say about your precious hp/wt? Funny how you ignore also ignore the fact that the GT-R was hard on its speed limiter on the straight (no such limiter in the other cars). And yet it was still within .66s of the 850-hp GT. And 2 seconds faster than the 997 w/PDK, which Porsche claims is 4 seconds faster at the 'Ring than the GT-R. On the faster Silverstone Circuit, Drivers Republic found the difference to be 4 seconds in favor of the GT-R, and that GT-R wasn't even up to par in a straight line.

    Vs. GT2
    In that test with Prost (8/08), the GT-R is 2.7% slower. In the recent Motor Trend test (10/08), the GT-R is 1.0% slower. Looks like your claim that the GT-R is getting slower doesn't make any sense. But then you think an M6 (which has a better hp/wt ratio than the GT-R) will lap within .6s of a GT2. LOL.
    Steve Millen, driving the Nissan press GT-R at Willow Springs on the sticky Dunlops was only marginally faster than Sam Hubinette in a customer car with only 700 miles on it, with the Bridgestones. And that test was just released this past week. Next, you will try to convince me that all customer GT-R's are in fact ringers.

    Vs. LP560-4
    Autocar, 09/08:
    LP560-4 (352 hp/tonne): 1:55.99
    GT-R (276 hp/tonne): 1:56.69
    "But, there's a caveat. This thing [GT-R] is limited to 112 mph because of laws they have in Japan. And it sat on 112 mph for about 10-11 seconds on the road route. If it had gone beyond that, it would have blitzed the Lamborghini. And bear in mind it costs 1/3rd of the Lambo...what a car!"
    difference in Prost test: 2.8%
    difference here: 0.6%

    That Motor Trend test shows how very fast the GT-R really is. You don't realize it, because you haven't honestly stopped to think about the figures you're spewing out, but that car is still performing far, far above its hp/wt spec. But as long as it's behind a GT2 or ZR1, even if it's by .001s, you won't call "cheating" or question the hp/wt.

    Here's monaroCountry's "proof" of Nissan's cheating:
    Watch at 4:38 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DS7CbGRKq8
    Watch at 2:00 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns9mlf_ivYM
     
  2. Guibo

    Guibo Karting

    Nov 21, 2003
    190
    Where did they say he was going to teach Rorhl how to "drive around the Nurburgring?" Give me a source.
     
  3. monaroCountry

    monaroCountry Karting

    Dec 23, 2007
    110
    So you honesty believe that a 480hp 3850lbs car with skinny tires can match the much faster and better handler cars in the Enzo, Zonda, ZR1 and ACR?

    Dont worry as more European drivers drive the GTR around the ring im sure they WONT COME CLOSE TO THE NISSAN BS TIME. Every tests they do I will post them up, you can sprout about not ideal conditions and driver skill all you want but a difference of 7:29 v 7:46 does put up the alarm bells.

    Nissan has been caught cheating before, this isnt the first time. They introduced the car in a very sneaky fashion, especially with the VCD/warranty issue, and the published time.
     
  4. Guibo

    Guibo Karting

    Nov 21, 2003
    190
    Did you not see what the Loaded M3 CSL did to cars with far greater hp/wt??

    ZR1 better handling...is that why edmunds rated the GT-R a 9.0 to the ZR1's 8.8? If you bothered to remove your nose from the spec sheet, and god forbid actually read the article, you'll see exactly how the GT-R can keep pace on a track like the NRing.

    Where's the link to the Enzo's tires being stickier than the GT-R? More BS you made up, I see. Also, did you realize the Enzo had suspension failure during the test? On a good Enzo, with thousands of laps, perfect conditions and today's rubber, you'd see it quite a bit faster than that. And watch the video, for chrissake. He had a helluva time keeping it pointed on path w/o massive overcorrections.
    Wouldn't be monaroCountry if you didn't dodge the questions, eh? Clever!

    For the hundredth time (for god's sakes, man, listen!): The GT-R team were there for at least 7 sessions and thousands of laps, some of which occurred in perfect conditions (by their own words; look it up!). So, yes, I do think they can get that time, under those conditions. Does it mean they will do it every time, or get it 5% of the time? No, and to conclude that would be absurd. Does it mean the other cars mentioned can't go faster with further development and better conditions? You seem to think that, and that's comparing apples to oranges. You can't prove cheating on the basis of other underperforming cars, guy.

    Let me ask you point blank: Do you think the ACR, ZR1, and Enzo were any near on equal footing, compared to the GT-R team? Answer yes or no.
     
  5. monaroCountry

    monaroCountry Karting

    Dec 23, 2007
    110
    Another review with possibly the best driver to have driven the GTR thus far (Alain Prost) also hated the GTR's handling expecially how it understeers badly. As for your edmunds results, is this the one where they couldnt launch and drive the ZR1 properly?
     
  6. steved

    steved Rookie

    Dec 10, 2004
    20
    UK
    Full Name:
    Steve Davies
    Last Tuesday we took a 911 GT2 (supplied by Porsche) and a Nissan GT-R (a customer car imported from Japan) over to the Nurburgring to test each maker’s claims and provide substance to the row between Nissan and Porsche.

    Chris Harris was the driver and he drove each car for three laps (one out lap, and two flying laps). Chris successfully competed in the VLN race that weekend so was race-fit and needed no acclimatisation with the circuit. Naturally we recorded the laps on video and recorded the lap and section times on Racelogic telemetry.

    The feature and videos are now online and we're happy to answer question about the background details to the test and the conditions under which the laps were run.

    http://www.drivers-republic.com/features/
     
  7. QT3141

    QT3141 Formula Junior

    Jul 24, 2006
    609
    To keep things even, shouldn't you have solicited a customer GT2 instead of using one from Porsche? Did Porsche know you intended to run a publishable roadcourse test against a GT-R?

    That's my only criticism of your methodology. Let's for the sake of argument assume the GT2 wasn't a ringer. Now, I like the GT-R but I can't argue with the conclusion of that test: it showed what a good driver can achieve in equal conditions with the two cars. Even though the conditions sound like they should favor the AWD GT-R, the GT2 still wins by a healthy margin.

    Many questions remain: can there be an "innocent" explanation of this vast variability in GT-R performance? I've seen the claim that since Nissan hand-builds each engine, each will have a slightly different power output. The key word here is 'slight'. There's nothing slight about the variability we're seeing with different tests.

    What about the Top Gear test where the GT-R blew away the competition? I hate to say it, but it does sound like even that car was a ringer? Nissan sent it in, didn't it? I just don't trust manufacturer claims in general, there's a long history of lies and exaggeration by different makers, from the Jag E-type to the Mazda RX-8 to the older Skylines.

    I think we should have more tests performed in equal conditions using *customer* cars (and I mean the Porsche too!). The hard part is getting volunteers who have nothing to gain and lots to lose.
     
  8. steved

    steved Rookie

    Dec 10, 2004
    20
    UK
    Full Name:
    Steve Davies
    That's a very fair point and it's worth me answering directly.

    Firstly this particular 911 GT2 was one that we knew quite well. You can see it in the following image gallery, feature and our launch video back in May this year.

    http://www.drivers-republic.com/dr_images/photos/porsche_GT/
    http://viewer.zmags.com/showmag.php?mid=frdww&preview=1&_x=1?fm=2#/page2/
    http://www.drivers-republic.com/dr_tv/index.cfm?videoid=60cc97e647f04d8da11f730c5dd3326b&area=videos

    As Chris mentions within this new feature we have tested this car using our Vbox equipement and found it to be the slowest of the GT2s that we have driven. Each time it has recorded a slower time than Porsche's factory claims.

    Secondly we didn't tell Porsche what we were borrowing their GT2 for. We planned this test very discretely and in fact very few people who attended the ring during that day would have realised what we were up to.

    Also worth mentioning is that we knew the GT-R, we borrowed it for a feature back in the summer. http://viewer.zmags.co.uk/showmag.php?mid=htffs&preview=1&_x=1#/page2/

    So in answer to your question, we chose cars that we already knew the background of and were confident that they would be standard.

    We have very close relationships with both Porsche and Nissan, but neither of them would have sanctioned providing us with a car officially because they would clearly have wanted to ensure their cars were in optimal condition (naturally). We however wanted to simulate a 'real world' condition without any official help.

    As we mention in the feature this is not a definitive test, you could go to great lengths to perform a scientific study under controlled laboratory conditions, fitting each of them with brand new tyres, brakes etc, you could take the same cars to the circuit on another day and find they lapped 5 seconds slower.

    We had lapped both cars around a conventional F1 circuit (Silverstone) on several different occasions and we 'knew' they were very close in these conditions, but like you we were curious to cut through all the bull**** and find out what would really happen if we lapped them close to their potential around the very unique conditions of the Nurburgring.

    Had the GT-R been fitted with the Dunlops we know it would have lapped faster, likewise if the circuit had been bone-dry and above 10 degrees C then both cars would have lapped quite a bit quicker.

    We came away with the conclusion that the GT2 is an epic car, and if you read Chris' Column last week you will have seen that he now prefers this 997 GT2 to the 997 GT3 (something he never thought he would say), but the GT-R is also an amazing machine and clearly it has the potential to achieve sub 7 min 45 which is a considerable achievement for a 1740kg car.

    The real question, which remains unanswered is how did Nissan achieve their claim of 7 min 29. Nissan would like to prove this to the world which is why they are returning to the ring next April and will repeat the exercise under the full gaze of the public eye (and journalists). Personally I can't wait to see them do so.
     
  9. QT3141

    QT3141 Formula Junior

    Jul 24, 2006
    609
    Excellent, thank you very much Steve for your patient and thoughtful answer - you have allayed my doubts about the cars involved.

    I too can't wait for Nissan to try and prove their mettle in front of the journos and the whole world besides. They have a lot to prove, given that nearly every single real world test (using non-factory sourced cars) seems to contradict their claims.
     

Share This Page