The GT-R truth getting abit more true
05-27-2008, 06:38 PM
#197
Still plays with cars.
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Here is the quote from TTAC I referred to:
No small part of the current GT-R lovefest can be attributed to the car’s 7:38 Nürburgring lap time. As TTAC has pointed out, there are real questions about the Green Hellmobile’s qualifications for the title “second fastest production car around the ‘Ring.” The GT-R's suspension was modified from the current Japanese production model, supposedly to reflect the American and European spec. Supposedly. Will anyone get a chance to compare the fabled ‘Ring runner and a final production car? I doubt it.
Meanwhile, the YouTube video of the Nissan’s “historic run” clearly shows that the GT-R had a flying start. All other manufacturers testing at the ‘Ring use standing starts for published lap times. The video also proves that the car's lap time was not measured at the exact same location (start and stop). Take these two factors into account, and the 7:40 claim seems highly dubious.
The icing on the cake: GT-R chief engineer Kazutoshi Mizuno’s subsequent admission from that "We used cut slick tyres." If that doesn’t cancel their claim, nothing does.
No small part of the current GT-R lovefest can be attributed to the car’s 7:38 Nürburgring lap time. As TTAC has pointed out, there are real questions about the Green Hellmobile’s qualifications for the title “second fastest production car around the ‘Ring.” The GT-R's suspension was modified from the current Japanese production model, supposedly to reflect the American and European spec. Supposedly. Will anyone get a chance to compare the fabled ‘Ring runner and a final production car? I doubt it.
Meanwhile, the YouTube video of the Nissan’s “historic run” clearly shows that the GT-R had a flying start. All other manufacturers testing at the ‘Ring use standing starts for published lap times. The video also proves that the car's lap time was not measured at the exact same location (start and stop). Take these two factors into account, and the 7:40 claim seems highly dubious.
The icing on the cake: GT-R chief engineer Kazutoshi Mizuno’s subsequent admission from that "We used cut slick tyres." If that doesn’t cancel their claim, nothing does.
05-27-2008, 07:50 PM
#198
Thinking outside da' bun...
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
So Michael Jordan traveled on the last three baskets of the game to get to 60pts. He took an extra step and the zebras gave him a little too much benefit of the doubt. I guess only scoring 54pts would have changed the entire complexion of Sundays headlines.
You can find a small JATO under the chassis for all I care. Its not going to wash clean the mindbending performance its capable of. I dont care if the thing is running on racing slicks or bias ply 115s off a 57 Beetle.
You can find a small JATO under the chassis for all I care. Its not going to wash clean the mindbending performance its capable of. I dont care if the thing is running on racing slicks or bias ply 115s off a 57 Beetle.
05-27-2008, 08:23 PM
#199
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is the quote from TTAC I referred to:
No small part of the current GT-R lovefest can be attributed to the car’s 7:38 Nürburgring lap time. As TTAC has pointed out, there are real questions about the Green Hellmobile’s qualifications for the title “second fastest production car around the ‘Ring.” The GT-R's suspension was modified from the current Japanese production model, supposedly to reflect the American and European spec. Supposedly. Will anyone get a chance to compare the fabled ‘Ring runner and a final production car? I doubt it.
Meanwhile, the YouTube video of the Nissan’s “historic run” clearly shows that the GT-R had a flying start. All other manufacturers testing at the ‘Ring use standing starts for published lap times. The video also proves that the car's lap time was not measured at the exact same location (start and stop). Take these two factors into account, and the 7:40 claim seems highly dubious.
The icing on the cake: GT-R chief engineer Kazutoshi Mizuno’s subsequent admission from that "We used cut slick tyres." If that doesn’t cancel their claim, nothing does.
No small part of the current GT-R lovefest can be attributed to the car’s 7:38 Nürburgring lap time. As TTAC has pointed out, there are real questions about the Green Hellmobile’s qualifications for the title “second fastest production car around the ‘Ring.” The GT-R's suspension was modified from the current Japanese production model, supposedly to reflect the American and European spec. Supposedly. Will anyone get a chance to compare the fabled ‘Ring runner and a final production car? I doubt it.
Meanwhile, the YouTube video of the Nissan’s “historic run” clearly shows that the GT-R had a flying start. All other manufacturers testing at the ‘Ring use standing starts for published lap times. The video also proves that the car's lap time was not measured at the exact same location (start and stop). Take these two factors into account, and the 7:40 claim seems highly dubious.
The icing on the cake: GT-R chief engineer Kazutoshi Mizuno’s subsequent admission from that "We used cut slick tyres." If that doesn’t cancel their claim, nothing does.
Did you read this article?
http://www.drivers-republic.com/news...e_14_05_08.cfm
"First up that Nurburgring lap. The target for the GTR was always 7:30 - and it had to be achieved in a fully representative 'customer-spec' car. Mizuno is quite clear on this: 'This time was set on a totally standard car, just like a customer will get. For us 'Time Attack' must be repeatable in a customer car. No special brake pads or cut-slick tyres - everything was standard GTR.' The time, set on April 8th, was achieved on the Dunlop SP Sport 600 DSST tyre that is standard on the basic GTR (i.e. non Premium or 'Black' spec, which both have Bridgestone RE070R tyres)."
05-27-2008, 10:29 PM
#200
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The latest C&D has a 3 way comparo of the M3, GTR, 997tt. The 997 handily out accelerates the GTR in every range, and the track lap advantage of the GTR is 1 second. Reset the ridiculous -0.4 front camber of the 997 and I would expect that advantage would disappear altogether. The GT3/RS would have matched the GTR in accel and probably turned a faster lap as well. As ugly as the GTR is, the price advantage is impossible to deny
05-27-2008, 11:13 PM
#201
The latest C&D has a 3 way comparo of the M3, GTR, 997tt. The 997 handily out accelerates the GTR in every range, and the track lap advantage of the GTR is 1 second. Reset the ridiculous -0.4 front camber of the 997 and I would expect that advantage would disappear altogether. The GT3/RS would have matched the GTR in accel and probably turned a faster lap as well. As ugly as the GTR is, the price advantage is impossible to deny
05-27-2008, 11:31 PM
#203
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Darin I have never done a hard standing start launch. My 997tt puts 640whp and the clutch would not probably not last very long. For comparo though, my car launched softly (0-60 in 4.5 sec) and into a 20mph headwind did 0-186 mph in 28 sec. By comparo the stock 7TT takes 40 sec and the 7GT3 47 sec.
05-28-2008, 02:04 AM
#204
Darin I have never done a hard standing start launch. My 997tt puts 640whp and the clutch would not probably not last very long. For comparo though, my car launched softly (0-60 in 4.5 sec) and into a 20mph headwind did 0-186 mph in 28 sec. By comparo the stock 7TT takes 40 sec and the 7GT3 47 sec.
05-28-2008, 06:03 AM
#205
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Nürburg DE Greystones IRL
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meanwhile, the YouTube video of the Nissan’s “historic run” clearly shows that the GT-R had a flying start. All other manufacturers testing at the ‘Ring use standing starts for published lap times. The video also proves that the car's lap time was not measured at the exact same location (start and stop). Take these two factors into account, and the 7:40 claim seems highly dubious.
.
.
That info is erroneous.
05-28-2008, 06:09 AM
#206
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Nürburg DE Greystones IRL
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't imagine something with more variety than the Nürburgring. Fiorano is flat (save for the little overpass) and smooth.
The ring has more camber changes and bumps than you can shake a stick at.
Vomit Comet and other stories
The ring has more camber changes and bumps than you can shake a stick at.
Vomit Comet and other stories
05-28-2008, 11:44 AM
#208
For the longest time, performance was the number 1 issue of conversation and at the core of ownership pride, now that the GTR has come along and 'trivialized' speed, we read members stating things like "I don't care how fast it is"! Same deal with Ring times, we've been referring to them for decades as a great benchmark, now that a new car (a glorified Datsun of all brands) is putting established records in perspective, people come out to claim Ring numbers are meaningless. Talk about denial!
GTR engineers must be laughing, the nay sayers arguing about tenths are doing the marketing job for Nissan by creating this huge controversy about whether the GTR is a fraction of a second faster or slower than cars costing twice the price with half as much utility and questionable reliability. The point is, and only elaborate lies are attempting to challenging this: the GTR is competing with the very best while addressing almost all downsides typically associated with high performance cars (except weight perhaps). Some may find satisfaction in showing that a 997turbo accelerates a tenth faster than a GTR, the truth is getting this close to a long standing performance standard is nothing short of admirable.
My point is, this will get Porsche and others to accelerate their development work and that's GREAT news.
Regards,
Chris
05-28-2008, 11:50 AM
#209
If that's correct, we're cumulating a pretty handsome list of lies and utterly unsubstantiated rumors that are being generated to discredit the GTR, which goes to show how threatening this car is to the people who haven't yet accepted that top performance is no longer the exclusive attire of European exotics.
For the longest time, performance was the number 1 issue of conversation and at the core of ownership pride, now that the GTR has come along and 'trivialized' speed, we read members stating things like "I don't care how fast it is"! Same deal with Ring times, we've been referring to them for decades as a great benchmark, now that a new car (a glorified Datsun of all brands) is putting established records in perspective, people come out to claim Ring numbers are meaningless. Talk about denial!
GTR engineers must be laughing, the nay sayers arguing about tenths are doing the marketing job for Nissan by creating this huge controversy about whether the GTR is a fraction of a second faster or slower than cars costing twice the price with half as much utility and questionable reliability. The point is, and only elaborate lies are attempting to challenging this: the GTR is competing with the very best while addressing almost all downsides typically associated with high performance cars (except weight perhaps). Some may find satisfaction in showing that a 997turbo accelerates a tenth faster than a GTR, the truth is getting this close to a long standing performance standard is nothing short of admirable.
My point is, this will get Porsche and others to accelerate their development work and that's GREAT news.
Regards,
Chris
For the longest time, performance was the number 1 issue of conversation and at the core of ownership pride, now that the GTR has come along and 'trivialized' speed, we read members stating things like "I don't care how fast it is"! Same deal with Ring times, we've been referring to them for decades as a great benchmark, now that a new car (a glorified Datsun of all brands) is putting established records in perspective, people come out to claim Ring numbers are meaningless. Talk about denial!
GTR engineers must be laughing, the nay sayers arguing about tenths are doing the marketing job for Nissan by creating this huge controversy about whether the GTR is a fraction of a second faster or slower than cars costing twice the price with half as much utility and questionable reliability. The point is, and only elaborate lies are attempting to challenging this: the GTR is competing with the very best while addressing almost all downsides typically associated with high performance cars (except weight perhaps). Some may find satisfaction in showing that a 997turbo accelerates a tenth faster than a GTR, the truth is getting this close to a long standing performance standard is nothing short of admirable.
My point is, this will get Porsche and others to accelerate their development work and that's GREAT news.
Regards,
Chris
I just wish the GTR, and our Porsches, weighed substantially less. Too bad engineers do not seem to focus as much energy upon making the cars lighter as they do developing technologies -- as great as they may be -- for compensating for the bloated weight and size.
TD
05-28-2008, 12:16 PM
#210
If that's correct, we're cumulating a pretty handsome list of lies and utterly unsubstantiated rumors that are being generated to discredit the GTR, which goes to show how threatening this car is to the people who haven't yet accepted that top performance is no longer the exclusive attire of European exotics.
For the longest time, performance was the number 1 issue of conversation and at the core of ownership pride, now that the GTR has come along and 'trivialized' speed, we read members stating things like "I don't care how fast it is"! Same deal with Ring times, we've been referring to them for decades as a great benchmark, now that a new car (a glorified Datsun of all brands) is putting established records in perspective, people come out to claim Ring numbers are meaningless. Talk about denial!
For the longest time, performance was the number 1 issue of conversation and at the core of ownership pride, now that the GTR has come along and 'trivialized' speed, we read members stating things like "I don't care how fast it is"! Same deal with Ring times, we've been referring to them for decades as a great benchmark, now that a new car (a glorified Datsun of all brands) is putting established records in perspective, people come out to claim Ring numbers are meaningless. Talk about denial!