2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery
- Thread starter emad
- 3,050 comments
- 151,845 views
Leonidae
(Banned)
- 6,881
- GTP_Leonidae_MFT
pffft.. naysayers... I'll trust Nissan's word, not into a rumor that has been started by some annoyed porsche/chevy fan.. if there's no picture/video proof that it was on slicks, then that time is legit, valid and undeniably faster than Z06 or 911 Turbo. but that's only my humble opinion of this matter.
- 23,979
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
pffft.. naysayers... I'll trust Nissan's word, not into a rumor that has been started by some annoyed porsche/chevy fan.. if there's no picture/video proof that it was on slicks, then that time is legit, valid and undeniably faster than Z06 or 911 Turbo. but that's only my humble opinion of this matter.
Not slicks - but certainly not the tyres it will be sold with either.
Pistonheads
- 9,089
- Scotland
ive posted that countless times,they decided not to believe it
Joey D
Premium
- 47,441
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
pffft.. naysayers... I'll trust Nissan's word, not into a rumor that has been started by some annoyed porsche/chevy fan.. if there's no picture/video proof that it was on slicks, then that time is legit, valid and undeniably faster than Z06 or 911 Turbo. but that's only my humble opinion of this matter.
A couple seconds does not mean it's any better or worse then the Z06/911/ whatever. The cars are fairly equal in terms of performance. You also have to remember it depends on the driver, the Nissan driver might have been better then the Chevy driver, who knows.
- 30,001
- Cuddington, Cheshire
- JDA1982
No they didn't, they provided a quote that siad otherwise and said that you can't prove it either way without more info. I never believed it would riun into the 30's on regular sports tyres, but there's a deference in believeing in an assumption and believing in a fact and back then with two conflicting quotes, you could only assume which was right. That's why I never argued the case for or against, only that you couldn't state one as fact at the time. Which is what you were doing.ive posted that countless times,they decided not to believe it
- 9,089
- Scotland
- 30,001
- Cuddington, Cheshire
- JDA1982
And that statment also implied it wasn't using cut slicks at that time. It didn't say it directly, but it implied it. It is likely to have been purely a translation thing, but that didn't change the fact that with two quotes, one implying the opposite of the other you can't prove the case for one or the other without more evidence. That is the main thing people (myself included) were arguing against you for, because you were stating something as fact before you had the proof. It wasn't any concern to me if you were right or wrong, that wasn't my issue.
A member called Poverty used to do that all the time, he ended up getting slaughtered every time he said anything with any hint of "this is a fact" even in the odd case when it later turned out that he was right. It wasn't because he was right or wrong, it was because he made statments about things he couldn't prove, and heaven help the person that tried to point that out to him or dissagree, he'd be adamant he was right. He was right some times, and he was wrong other times, but that was all besides the point.
A member called Poverty used to do that all the time, he ended up getting slaughtered every time he said anything with any hint of "this is a fact" even in the odd case when it later turned out that he was right. It wasn't because he was right or wrong, it was because he made statments about things he couldn't prove, and heaven help the person that tried to point that out to him or dissagree, he'd be adamant he was right. He was right some times, and he was wrong other times, but that was all besides the point.
- 9,089
- Scotland
he didnt imply it in anyway,if it was on RE070's he would have said dont you think? yet ive yet to see a statement in which the laptime was on RE070's and not cut slicks yet i have found a statement saying that it was cut slicks.i think thats better concrete dont you think.if you go back i never said it was on cut slicks i just provided an article which the test driver said it was on cut slicks.
your asking me to provide more evidence that it was on cut slicks? why dont you provide proof that it wasnt? shouldnt be too hard if yous are right which yous seem so determind to be.
- 5,985
- Finland
You just don't get it, do you?
Dave isn't saying is was on road tyres. So why should he prove it?
Dave isn't saying it wasn't on cut slicks. So why should he prove it?
You're saying it was on cut slicks. Now prove it.
You're saying it wasn't on road tyres. Now prove it.
The truth is, you're throwing statements left and right without any proof in them. Then you ask the others to prove those statements wrong. How about proving them right yourself first?
Dave isn't saying is was on road tyres. So why should he prove it?
Dave isn't saying it wasn't on cut slicks. So why should he prove it?
You're saying it was on cut slicks. Now prove it.
You're saying it wasn't on road tyres. Now prove it.
The truth is, you're throwing statements left and right without any proof in them. Then you ask the others to prove those statements wrong. How about proving them right yourself first?
- 9,089
- Scotland
forza2.0
(Banned)
- 987
- And they look better
- Cheaper too
No its more than that because the gap between normal high performance tires and semi racing tires is about 10-12 secs round the 'ring. Slicks is a huge step up.
- 5,985
- Finland
I have a feeling that TheCracker meant the difference between the mentioned cut slicks and full slicks. Then again, in my opinion the cut slicks fall into the "semi racing tyres" category - they are road legal after all, rally cars sometimes use them on the public roads - so the time might have been around 7'50 on high performance road tyres. Then pay attention to the fact that they drove the time on a semi wet track, which reduces grip considerably.Pistonheads
Taking all the things above into consideration, it may actually be well possible for the GT-R to run around, maybe under, 7'40 with the high performance road tyres and a dry, warm track.
- 40,822
You simply don't get it, even after all this time. You had, at best, contrasting statements. You based you entire argument around an article, and then went to great length to say the article supplied to counterclaim your proof was invalid for random reasons. When you found out that no one was buying your BS, you simply played stupid and pretended to not understand what the articles statements truly meant (and I know you do actually know what they mean, because you went to great lengths to make it seem like the article in question should not be counted). That doesn't mean you had proof. That means you had ignorance and bias. Nothing more. At least forza2.0 brought an actual argument to the table. You simply vehemently denied any evidence that was made against you.
Whether you come out being right doesn't matter, because you didn't have proof of your claims at the time.
- 23,800
- Philippines
Quite possible... Some tires, like the Michelin Pilot Sport Cups, are so track-oriented that they carry a warning against use in the rain, and are nearly as sticky as full-on slicks.
Some of those lap-times were undoubtedly done MPSCs, since they come stock on quite a number of high-performance cars.
True, there's still a big difference between actual slicks and the growing range of street/race tires, but a lot of off-the-shelf road tires can pull some pretty respectable G-numbers nowadays.
Still, it would be interesting to see what the production car can do, in full-production trim, on an official time attack.
- 9,089
- Scotland
you are kidding right? ive had experience of high performance road tyres and cut slicks before(call me a lier all you want but do a search for knockhill and youll find about 10 threads) and cracker no doubt will have personal experience of slicks/cut slicks too as his brother(?) races.At the weekend i had a go in a 996 GT3RS(with a very very fast driver) which had R888 tyres,has been said to be one of the best if not the best tyre out there and the closest to a cut slick tyre there is(in fact i have seen these used sometimes on race cars).
I also had a go in an evo 5 which had its turbo boost upped to it made 380bhp (1 less than the gt3rs) it weight roughly the same but was on cut slick tyres(they had used full slicks before but suspension and wheel kept braking due to the force of the grip levels) but somehow the evo was 3-4 seconds a lap faster,and from the inside the evo was clearly faster around the corners,in fact it was able to carry around 80mph into the first corner whereas the GT3RS could only carry 72mph into the first corner.
so in the whole year and a half it was probably testing at the 'ring they never had a dry warm day?
again go back i never once claimed it was on slicks before i posted the article and when i did i argued the reason why it would explain why the time was so faster than previous.i hsve no ignorance or bias towards the GTR my arguement was simply stateing that things did not add up,your talking about a car that ran 7:50's through its testing then suddenly does a 7:38,which is fast/faster than cars with more power and less weight(again you can argue power to weight isnt everything which i agree with) being driven by a driver that you can say doesnt know the track all that well compared to walter rohl (again you could argue maybe he drove it non stop on GT4 all the time) a week before the cars hyped up launch.Then you have to take into account the car that did laptime wasnt a production GTR,so again it could have had more power/less weight that what you end up buying.
The reason i dont give the counter article much credit is because it isnt first hand information and as leon later said was leaked,a bit like playing chinese whispers(maybe its called something different where you live) where you tell someone something,then they are supposed to tell someone the same then and so on and usually by the end of it you dont have what was orginally said,whereas the article i posted was first hand information which is known to be alot more reliable than 4-5 hand information.Also reading it it doesnt disprove my article about it being on cut slicks all it says is in the dry on cut slicks it would have been faster,you could have even argued that because the track was damp/wet they used cut slicks to try and give it an accurate dry lap time.
- 23,979
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
I've totally lost track of where this thread is heading and who's arguing what with who. But, to play devil's advocaat...
Slicks > cut slicks > soft compound, road legal 'track day' tyres > regular compound road legal 'track day' tyres > high performance every day tyres > everyday tyres
I would say that there is probably an equal performance gap between each tyre on an average circuit. Most performance cars run 'high performance everyday tyre' and i would guess that the GT-R will run on them as well direct from the showroom. Anything else and on a heavy car like this you won't get anymore than 5000 miles out of them, even with little or no track work.
There - i don't know where this fits into the arguement, but i've had my two pence worth.
Slicks > cut slicks > soft compound, road legal 'track day' tyres > regular compound road legal 'track day' tyres > high performance every day tyres > everyday tyres
I would say that there is probably an equal performance gap between each tyre on an average circuit. Most performance cars run 'high performance everyday tyre' and i would guess that the GT-R will run on them as well direct from the showroom. Anything else and on a heavy car like this you won't get anymore than 5000 miles out of them, even with little or no track work.
There - i don't know where this fits into the arguement, but i've had my two pence worth.
- 5,985
- Finland
Three points here, all of which could water down your sayings.
1) Isn't it possible that the cut slicks were of soft compound for track use? Maybe Nissan had harder ones.
2) Isn't it possible that the Evo had more torque, a better drivetrain and suspension etc?
3) No drivetrain configuration necessitates the use of "slow in, fast out" technique more than RR.
It's not about that. It's about if they ran a flat out hot lap on one of those days, which they probably didn't do. Moreover, the car probably wasn't finished until quite recently. And we know your opinion about lap times with non-showroom cars.
As I've said earlier, that's only a 4% difference. 100 km/h vs. 96 km/h at place X. Hardly something that is impossible to achieve, considering it was a single hot lap compared to the steady long distance running which produced those 7'50 times.
How can you be so sure? And even then, maybe Walter would have driven 7'35...
It could have. Do you have proof that it did?
Notice the amount of unknown variables in your statements, which you're giving to us as facts.
- 9,089
- Scotland
so is that an admitance to that it could be on cut slicks?
doubt it considering they have went through so far,from the track days ive seen at, 7 engines and 2 set of wheels (note i said wheels not tyres)
he wasnt going slow in fast out trust me on that one,in fact maybe watch the incar videos? if your using slow in fast out maybe you need more practice in youe GT3 RS? or RR car to know that they do require slow in fast out.
didnt you watch the 45 minute video posted? they did a lap on a dry warm day and did a 7:39.
proof?
proof?
couldnt the same be said for most of your statements aswell.
- 1,565
- Dammam, Saudi Arabia
- m7ammed84
seriously this is just going in circles because there isn't hard facts so discussing this is unless , unless some kind of official statement from Nissan comes out , or somebody other than Nissan take the GT-R around the ring . In my opinion people are jjst arguing for teh sake of it now
- 23,979
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
- 1,565
- Dammam, Saudi Arabia
- m7ammed84
but its debating something that nobody concrete info on, if you would debate which is better a Z06 or a GTR or a 911 , then there is room to voice opinons facts ..etc hope you get my idea
- 5,985
- Finland
so is that an admitance to that it could be on cut slicks?
It could indeed. Then again, those sports tyres you posted are just about cut slicks too, so does it really matter?
doubt it considering they have went through so far,from the track days ive seen at, 7 engines and 2 set of wheels (note i said wheels not tyres)
What does this matter? They can always build a new good engine and to my understanding, breaking wheels doesn't mean the suspension and drivetrain are bad.
he wasnt going slow in fast out trust me on that one,in fact maybe watch the incar videos? if your using slow in fast out maybe you need more practice in youe GT3 RS? or RR car to know that they do require slow in fast out.
What? I need practice to know they require slow in, fast out despite the fact I just said they require slow in, fast out? Someone has a great miswording going on here.
didnt you watch the 45 minute video posted? they did a lap on a dry warm day and did a 7:39.
They did indeed. If I had said "but they lapped it in 7'39 on a dry, warm day" you would have jumped on me stating that the car wasn't the production version. See the situation? You've decided I'm wrong, that the entire bunch of GT-R supporters is, and change your approach accordingly.
proof?
The most ridiculous one. I made a wild guess, "maybe Walter would have driven 7'35". And you ask for proof. It's just as intelligent as asking for proof when someone says "maybe Hitler might have made a good janitor".
couldnt the same be said for most of your statements aswell.
Am I doing statements? As far as I know, I'm only questioning statements with nothing to prove them. At the same time, I'm making assumptions. If you want something to prove assumptions, you're even more childish than you seem.
Look, we all know by this point that no matter what, you hate the GT-R with a passion. I myself happen to hate the entire Mercedes range of cars. But does it matter? I can't deny that they're good cars, no matter how much I hate them. And you shouldn't deny the fact that the GT-R is good just because you hate it either.
It could indeed. Then again, those sports tyres you posted are just about cut slicks too, so does it really matter?
doubt it considering they have went through so far,from the track days ive seen at, 7 engines and 2 set of wheels (note i said wheels not tyres)
What does this matter? They can always build a new good engine and to my understanding, breaking wheels doesn't mean the suspension and drivetrain are bad.
he wasnt going slow in fast out trust me on that one,in fact maybe watch the incar videos? if your using slow in fast out maybe you need more practice in youe GT3 RS? or RR car to know that they do require slow in fast out.
What? I need practice to know they require slow in, fast out despite the fact I just said they require slow in, fast out? Someone has a great miswording going on here.
didnt you watch the 45 minute video posted? they did a lap on a dry warm day and did a 7:39.
They did indeed. If I had said "but they lapped it in 7'39 on a dry, warm day" you would have jumped on me stating that the car wasn't the production version. See the situation? You've decided I'm wrong, that the entire bunch of GT-R supporters is, and change your approach accordingly.
proof?
The most ridiculous one. I made a wild guess, "maybe Walter would have driven 7'35". And you ask for proof. It's just as intelligent as asking for proof when someone says "maybe Hitler might have made a good janitor".
couldnt the same be said for most of your statements aswell.
Am I doing statements? As far as I know, I'm only questioning statements with nothing to prove them. At the same time, I'm making assumptions. If you want something to prove assumptions, you're even more childish than you seem.
Look, we all know by this point that no matter what, you hate the GT-R with a passion. I myself happen to hate the entire Mercedes range of cars. But does it matter? I can't deny that they're good cars, no matter how much I hate them. And you shouldn't deny the fact that the GT-R is good just because you hate it either.
- 9,089
- Scotland
they arent cut slicks though
true but i could say that as they have went through 7 engines that the stock 4G63 is made of chocolate but then again the JDM lot will just claim that isnt true considering because XXX amount of evos havent blown up,although they are building an engine for next years UK time attack series.AFAIK i havent asked them how many clutchs they have went through and the suspension has only broke once,but the set up has also been changed on the GT3RS.
well have you driven a GT3RS before or had the experience of being in one to know that they require that kind of driving? surely that would just be a blanket generlisation (sp)
im not saying the entire bunch is wrong i am simply trying to make my point of view on it.i have came up for reason why it may have did the 7:38 time but the GTR supporters arent taking them on board and simply dismissing them without considering/thinking about them.
everyone and thier dog are always asking me for proof with almost everything ive posted in this thread,why cant i do the same?
ive never said i hate the gtr,in fact i rather like skyline GTR's having been in a number at different levels of tuning,i just find it funny that some people play thier computer games and watch (very biased) BMI videos where skylines seem to beat serious performance cars and suddenly people think they are the fastest things in the world when they just arent.
Leonidae
(Banned)
- 6,881
- GTP_Leonidae_MFT
R34 GT-R has been beaten by a Corolla in BMI. How biased is that? They love the Porsche, M3, M5, Z06, Gallardo etc.
and talking about "what tyres did the x have when id did that lap" is similar beating a dead horse until we have a solid proof from manufacturer.. but someone will never believe what Nissan says, instead some fanboys bend over instantly when Porsche, BMW, M-B or Chevrolet claims a laptime of this and that. just what kind of proof you would believe? getting a ride on the nurb on the car? then oyu'd claim that the ECU has been tampered, it has racing fuel etc etc..
Truth is, that there is no 100% official and approved method/standard for these laptimes, just a gentlemans agreement set by sport auto. we can whine, argue, speculate and analyze as much as we can, but only those who were there do really know.
And why would any manufacturer make a false claim of their top notch car knowing that when the truth would be found, it would hurt the sales pretty severely?
Seriously.. contribute something useful to this thread instead of clinging on every interweb rumour or hearsay. Nissans official release said 7'38.xxx, and I believe it more than some unconfirmed hearsay what some engineer might have said, since a lot can be lost in translation.
[/rant]
and talking about "what tyres did the x have when id did that lap" is similar beating a dead horse until we have a solid proof from manufacturer.. but someone will never believe what Nissan says, instead some fanboys bend over instantly when Porsche, BMW, M-B or Chevrolet claims a laptime of this and that. just what kind of proof you would believe? getting a ride on the nurb on the car? then oyu'd claim that the ECU has been tampered, it has racing fuel etc etc..
Truth is, that there is no 100% official and approved method/standard for these laptimes, just a gentlemans agreement set by sport auto. we can whine, argue, speculate and analyze as much as we can, but only those who were there do really know.
And why would any manufacturer make a false claim of their top notch car knowing that when the truth would be found, it would hurt the sales pretty severely?
Seriously.. contribute something useful to this thread instead of clinging on every interweb rumour or hearsay. Nissans official release said 7'38.xxx, and I believe it more than some unconfirmed hearsay what some engineer might have said, since a lot can be lost in translation.
[/rant]
- 9,089
- Scotland
- 9,089
- Scotland
