2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

  • Thread starter emad
  • 3,050 comments
  • 148,243 views
forza2.0
Im just rubbing it in. Im just waiting for two certain german mags to come out with their issues which I believe will hold some information which will go in my favour and hopefully put this argument to its grave for once and for all ;)
Click to expand...

And what if those mags praise GT-R instead of being typical porsche/BMW/Audi/M-B worshippers? this far there hasn't been a single negative review of the GT-R.
 
Leonidae
And what if those mags praise GT-R instead of being typical porsche/BMW/Audi/M-B worshippers? this far there hasn't been a single negative review of the GT-R.
Click to expand...
That's because its fast and it drives very very well.


It could have a interior straight from a 1979 Ford Pinto and it would still get good reviews.
 
No, he is expecting them to post the true performance figures for the car. There is a difference between wanting the truth and actually hating the car, and quite frankly, I'm (presumably) in the same camp that he is.

Letting non-Nissan folks (without bias) wring the car out in factory, showroom stick trim is what I want, nothing else.
 
Yeah but the problem with Forza 2.0 and Hodenhsvgtsr has nothing to do with if they're right or not, it has to do with them dismissing any argument that doesn't agree with their own despite the fact they have zero proof to back thiers up. I don't care if I agree with them or not, at this point I don't care if they're right or not, all I do know is that neither of them can have fair debate. They just do the old schoolboy routine of "I'm right and your wrong" without having proof on anything.
 
Well,
I don't think any of this has been worthy of an argument.
I've seen arguments like this before and it comes from Online Racing back when we had to use analyzer data. :ouch:
Lap times are nothing in the great scheme of things, why worry about such trivial issues as 7'38 v. 7'45... Any one on here going to buy a GT-R or race it at top speed on the Ring? :rolleyes:
If I could change the angle of discussion... I'd suggest...

At a base price of 70,000 dollars, what does this car bring to the market?
What cars will be the competition to the GT-R?

Discuss... :cheers:
 
Holdenhsvgtsr
so your saying that car that did the 7:38 lap time was a showroom car?
Click to expand...
No I'm saying there is no proof that it was not a showroom car, and respectable argument to be had with somone saying otherwise has to reflect that fact.


Anyways, I agree with Kent, the time round the ring is not the be all and end all for this car. In the grand scheme of tihngs it doesn't matter if it does it in 7'40 or 7'50. Lapping the ring is rarley definitive anyway for hundereds of different reasons.

I think that for the price, there won't be much to stand it's way, and I'm going off the US and Japan price, and expecting it to be in M3 territory price wise over here. It's not imo a raw sportscar, thats what a TVR is, and as a result it will lhave far more appeal to people who will use it more regularly. I can't comment on if it will appeal more han a Corvette, it will over here, but I don't know the US market, but I expect them to sell out over here.
 
Dave A
No I'm saying there is no proof that it was not a showroom car, and respectable argument to be had with somone saying otherwise has to reflect that fact.
Click to expand...

but a showroom model has been tested around the 'ring and that did it in 7:50 which is the only lap time we have therefore the GTR laps the 'ring in 7:50 and dont claim i am wrong if you dont believe/accept that,blame sportauto.

At a base price of 70,000 dollars, what does this car bring to the market?
What cars will be the competition to the GT-R?
Click to expand...
in the uk its going to be near enough that price in GBP,for that you could get(imo)

Z06 (wouldnt buy one LHD and dangerous and abit "lazy" to many V8's around)
SRT-10 (as above wouldnt buy one LHD and dangerous and abit "lazy")
997 turbo (too old and common so so inside not all that fast)
M6 (noone would like me)
vantage (looks nice and great interior but too slow)
db9 (same as above)
early F430(too much of a poser car)
R8 (gallardo wannabe never a gonnabe too slow aswell)

i would go with an early gallardo (looks great and is rather subtle,one of the greatest sounding cars with a proper screaming V10 and practical....kind of)
 
Dave A
Yeah but the problem with Forza 2.0 and Hodenhsvgtsr has nothing to do with if they're right or not, it has to do with them dismissing any argument that doesn't agree with their own despite the fact they have zero proof to back thiers up. I don't care if I agree with them or not, at this point I don't care if they're right or not, all I do know is that neither of them can have fair debate. They just do the old schoolboy routine of "I'm right and your wrong" without having proof on anything.
Click to expand...

Holdenhsvgtsr
so your saying that car that did the 7:38 lap time was a showroom car?
Click to expand...

Come on, Holden. Read what he wrote, rather than interpreting. I don't see anything in his post which even mentions "Nissan", "GT-R", "Nuerburgring" or "7:38" - why the need to place words into his post which weren't even hinted at in the first place.

The new GT-R did a 7'38 lap of the 'Ring. Or it didn't. No-one really cares beyond the people desperate to prove one or the other - and, when it's all stripped away, they don't really care either. There's a new car out, it's fast, it's a Nissan and there's some cars at about the same price which are as fast and some which are not as fast.

Whoopee. Maybe when anyone on this site sees one in 2009 the care levels might rise a little.


As a moderator-level note, this is exactly the kind of thread - and you, Poverty, ought to remember and know better - that gets people so worked up they say something they shouldn't and end up getting red numbers on our screens for. And for what? A Premiership footballer's weekly salary's worth of a variety of alloys, plastics and cow's arse, which someone, 10,000 miles away, thought was a neat idea and with which no-one here has any form of personal involvement. Why is that worth getting booted off a website about a computer game where you probably have some friends you like to speak to?
 
It's just all this circular argumentation on hand saying that it can't-can't-can't, and one on the other hand saying: "We have not seen enough evidence to prove it either way."

forza2.0
It is, hence it wont go much if any faster when independantly tested ;)
Click to expand...

That's not a logical argument. It's like saying "it's amazing that they got a man into space.", then concluding from this that we'd never get to the moon.

So... if 240 mph is shtongkingly and unbelievably fast for a 2 ton supercar, then it can't go any faster? The nice thing about having a ton of development money is that you can always go faster than the guy who built his car last year, or the year before that, or...

A lot of us were Veyron doubters when it was in development, simply because we couldn't see the point of it... but to deny that it can go fast when it obviously can is another thing altogether... some of us learned quite a bit of humility from that, and it's something you should think about.

Like I've said several times before, none of us have claimed that Nissan's claimed time is gospel... (except, in the last few pages, Prosthetic, who probably needs to learn that the R34 actually makes somewhere between 340-400hp based on who you believe...) We're saying: 7:38, pre-production, inconclusive, but indicative... 7:50, partially wet, November... indicative, but probably nowhere near the best the car can do....

Whereas some people have gone "dah-dah-dah... tires... dah-dah-dah... weight... dah-dah-dah..." it's repetitive... it's boring.

Come April, when the car fails to do any better than 7:45, then you can crow about it. Till then, there's really not much to say about the issue except for some independent crews to get it together with a Turbo on a random racetrack and wring the hell out of it.

So far, the reviews I'm reading are impressive... and some of them are shocked at how nimble the car is despite its weight. Worst thing I've seen is an item on cooked brakes at the track...

http://www.motivemag.com/pub/feature/first_steer/Motive_First_Drive_2009_Nissan_GT-R.shtml
 
Holdenhsvgtsr
i dont recall anyone saying it was a bad car :confused:
Click to expand...

Exactly, leonaide and grey cap are funny guys with funny arguments :dopey:

No, he is expecting them to post the true performance figures for the car. There is a difference between wanting the truth and actually hating the car, and quite frankly, I'm (presumably) in the same camp that he is.

Letting non-Nissan folks (without bias) wring the car out in factory, showroom stick trim is what I want, nothing else.
Click to expand...

This is exactly my stance. Just because I dont believe everything nissan says certain guys here are trying to make me out as being anti japanese car or anti GTR when im really not.

P.S


I will stop saying that it cant, when people stop saying it can. There is no REAL HARD evidence to prove either way, although there is more partial evidence to suggest that it can.

The only thing we know for sure is that the showroom spec GTR laps the 'ring in 7 mins 50 ;)

Oh and that its not as fast as a 997TT in a straight line ;)

P.S.S

Just read from one guy regarding the sportauto test of the GTR. Apparently the day that nissan claimed they did a 7 min 38 is the same day that sportauto tested the car, and regarding the track conditions they said that "one key turn was damp".

How hilarious is that, one bleeding turn being a bit damp. How do you guys fancy your chances of the GTR being 10 secs faster on a track without one key turn( kessleschen) "damp" :lol:


Evidence: http://www.sportauto-online.de/test_U_technik/fahrberichte/hxcms_article_508540_14469.hbs

read and weep :D

Sportauto: 0-62mph in 4.8 secs
price: 80,000 euros.
 
You know how fast they can drive on the ring, right? Try to drive your seat at even half of the pace at dry conditions, then entering a damp section and you'll instinctively back off the throttle. From personal experience from driving on damp conditions, even 100km/h means aquaplaning, and that was on fresh Goodyear Eagles. I had to drop under 80km/h in order to get some grip in the front. So I'd say that damp section (cold road, wet, cools the tyre = less grip) may very easily cost 10 seconds to a driver who isn't as familiar with the car as the factory driver is. And GT-R has been reported to be bit tail-happy in easily controlled manner.

the one who makes funny arguments is you, with your weekly changing arguments about tyres, boost etc..

and about that article: they didn't say if they used the launch control, did they?
 
Leonidae
You know how fast they can drive on the ring, right? Try to drive your seat at even half of the pace at dry conditions, then entering a damp section and you'll instinctively back off the throttle. From personal experience from driving on damp conditions, even 100km/h means aquaplaning, and that was on fresh Goodyear Eagles. I had to drop under 80km/h in order to get some grip in the front. So I'd say that damp section (cold road, wet, cools the tyre = less grip) may very easily cost 10 seconds to a driver who isn't as familiar with the car as the factory driver is. And GT-R has been reported to be bit tail-happy in easily controlled manner.

the one who makes funny arguments is you, with your weekly changing arguments about tyres, boost etc..

and about that article: they didn't say if they used the launch control, did they?
Click to expand...


How can you aquaplane in damp conditions? There will be no standing water, damp conditions just mean that its not dry but not wet either, and 1 corner isnt going to amount to 10 secs ;)
 
forza2.0
How can you aquaplane in damp conditions? There will be no standing water, damp conditions just mean that its not dry but not wet either, and 1 corner isnt going to amount to 10 secs ;)
Click to expand...

just an example, dear friend. and how long will it take from the tyre until it has warmed up after driving on damper, cooler surface, hmm? 5 seconds? 20? that might as well be the reason for the time loss. and depending of the length of the damp area, the cooling effect it has on the tyre has larger impact. consider that, before you believe germans who are defending their own sportscars with slight bias..
 
Leonidae
just an example, dear friend. and how long will it take from the tyre until it has warmed up after driving on damper, cooler surface, hmm? 5 seconds? 20? that might as well be the reason for the time loss. and depending of the length of the damp area, the cooling effect it has on the tyre has larger impact. consider that, before you believe germans who are defending their own sportscars with slight bias..
Click to expand...
not long actually in fact i doubt you would notice in fact i doubt they would even cool down that much for you to notice.couple of weekends ago i was in an evo 5 and 7 with toyo proxes r888's(much less tread than the gtr's tyres) on a very very damp track (you could even argue a wet track)and once they had warmed up they were perfectly fine even when running over the "streams" of water going accross the track. and the driver that did the sportauto lap was reportedly one of the nissan test drivers.
 
Didn't Mizuno say that they have three drivers? one who did 7'3x range, one for 7'4x and another for 7'5x..? I guess that Horst Von Saurma is the 7'50 pilot..
 
Leonidae
Didn't Mizuno say that they have three drivers? one who did 7'3x range, one for 7'4x and another for 7'5x..? I guess that Horst Von Saurma is the 7'50 pilot..
Click to expand...

doubt he would be that slow considering he drives the 'ring almost everyday and maybe that quote was "misheard" in the translation like so many other things hes "apprently" said.
 
Wait, WHat? "Stock" Vette? in the 10 SECOND range in 1/4 of a mile?

No, that's wrong. that's drag car territory. you need drag slicks, WELL over 500 HP, lightening, and special suspension setups to get that fast...Not to mention, the NHRA requires you have a rollcage to run anything 10.99 or under...The guy was running a ringer, I'm sure of it. He's not letting on as much as he says.
 
forza2.0
P.S.S

Just read from one guy regarding the sportauto test of the GTR. Apparently the day that nissan claimed they did a 7 min 38 is the same day that sportauto tested the car, and regarding the track conditions they said that "one key turn was damp".

How hilarious is that, one bleeding turn being a bit damp. How do you guys fancy your chances of the GTR being 10 secs faster on a track without one key turn( kessleschen) "damp" :lol:


Evidence: http://www.sportauto-online.de/test_U_technik/fahrberichte/hxcms_article_508540_14469.hbs

read and weep :D

Sportauto: 0-62mph in 4.8 secs
price: 80,000 euros.
Click to expand...

Uhhh...

there's nothing in the online article claiming that the sportauto test took place on the same day as Nissan's test (reportedly in September). If there's something I'm missing from a print version anywhere, feel free to photocopy and translate.

And... on one page, the author says 4.8 seconds. On the next, the databox reflects 3.6. Color me confused.

;)

Of course, I don't want to get into a Poverty-level argument about 0-100 versus 0-60 times... so I'm not. I'll just say, with near 500 bhp and AWD, I won't be surprised if it's under 4 seconds, but with that weight, I won't be surprised if it's over. It'll all boil down to the settings the car is run on and launch technique.
 
Yeah 0-62 3.6 so 0-60 3.5 thereabouts. It'd be nicer if I could read German and not just pickout the data from the text, it's still a case of having to wait and see.
 
It'll also vary according to gearing. A difference of 0-60 versus 0-62, or 0-96 versus 0-100 is sometimes just 0.1 or 0.2 seconds, or it could be up to 0.8 seconds, depending on where the gearchange for second to third (for most streetcars) or first to second (for some high powered sportscars) lies... Hell, my slow-ass car does 0-96 in 7.7 seconds, and 0-100 in 8.2, and 3rd gear still starts before 96... if it started at, say, 98, that'd be a 7.5 versus an 8.2.

It's all a case of marketing. Ever since US magazines started measuring 0-60 times, certain manufacturers have been building boxes optimized for a quicker 0-60 time, at the sacrifice of making the gears a bit longer than they should be.

4.8, though, is pretty damn slow. I'd expect a 4 flat, but no slower, based on the spec sheet. Typo, mayhaps? Considering they still quote factory claims in their data box. Ah well, we'll wait for the big guys to review it... then we'll argue about C&D's ridiculous times again... :lol:
 
Leonidae
Didn't Mizuno say that they have three drivers? one who did 7'3x range, one for 7'4x and another for 7'5x..? I guess that Horst Von Saurma is the 7'50 pilot..
Click to expand...

So seeing as horst von saurma was apaprently part of the developing team how come he doubts the car can do under 7 mins 40, when surely if the nissan drivers did achieve such a time he would have been there to witness it and therefore have no doubts ;)

And... on one page, the author says 4.8 seconds. On the next, the databox reflects 3.6. Color me confused.
Click to expand...

3.6 is manufacturers claimed figures.
4.8 is what sportauto achieved.

confusion over ;)

Didn't Mizuno say that they have three drivers? one who did 7'3x range, one for 7'4x and another for 7'5x..? I guess that Horst Von Saurma is the 7'50 pilot..
Click to expand...
So the most experienced 'ring driver of the 3 is also the slowest by such a large margin.... yeah right.
Horst is no slow driver. He was faster than all the BMW test drivers in the M3 CSL....

4.8, though, is pretty damn slow. I'd expect a 4 flat, but no slower, based on the spec sheet. Typo, mayhaps?
Click to expand...

New M3, RS6 and UK spec hyper evo's all do around 4.x somethings secs.....So I would say its about right and inline with the competition.
 
The fat of the matter is, unless you read German fluently you don't know what the article said. The 4.8 could have been in any context, on the one side your arguing against people using a quote you claim has been "lost in translation" and yet here you are picking out data from an article in a foreign language and using that as evidence to support your claims.

If the 7'38 Ring time is dismissive, so is this.
 
Dave A
The fat of the matter is, unless you read German fluently you don't know what the article said. The 4.8 could have been in any context, on the one side your arguing against people using a quote you claim has been "lost in translation" and yet here you are picking out data from an article in a foreign language and using that as evidence to support your claims.

If the 7'38 Ring time is dismissive, so is this.
Click to expand...

I am fluent in german but my reading is poor. However I can just get my mother dearest to translate for me later on :D
 

Similar threads

jac0
"Lite" skinpack for the Nissan Skyline GT-R R32 JTCC
Replies
0
Views
465
jac0
jac0
Greg_ST
All The Skins For The Nissan Skyline R32 JTCC
Replies
5
Views
2K
Greg_ST
Greg_ST
M
Nissan GT-R 17 OP?
Replies
13
Views
2K
Meythia
Meythia
GTPNewsWire
Own a Gran Turismo Academy Champion's R32 Nissan Skyline GT-R
Replies
1
Views
2K
DaGiBUS
DaGiBUS
GTPNewsWire
See Where the Legend Started With This Rare 1969 Nissan Skyline GT-R
Replies
6
Views
2K
VXR
VXR

Latest Posts

Back