2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

  • Thread starter emad
  • 3,050 comments
  • 151,847 views
The GTR will do between 7.55 and 7mins47 around the ring on semi-racing tires. This is not factual but merely a educated observation on my part.

I will only be proved wrong if nissan has lied about the GTR's power output.

Sportauto/Evo will soon reveal all.
 
and from several videos you might have noticed that his English is anything else but fluent. So he probably meant the run-flats, standard tyres of the GT-R.

The GTR will do between 7.55 and 7mins47 around the ring on semi-racing tires. This is not factual but merely a educated observation on my part.

that's your guess, estimation, speculation etc. What will you do if the GT-R actually is just as fast as Nissan says it is?
 
and from several videos you might have noticed that his English is anything else but fluent. So he probably meant the run-flats, standard tyres of the GT-R.
:lol: i think there would be a huge difference in "cut slicks" and "standard run flat tyres" no matter what the language.
 
you weren't there, neither was I. so this is merely more speculation.. Nissan says standard tyres, some automotive gossip magazine says cut slicks, some fanboy claims semi racing tires.. see what I mean?
 
you weren't there, neither was I. so this is merely more speculation.. Nissan says standard tyres, some automotive gossip magazine says cut slicks, some fanboy claims semi racing tires.. see what I mean?
as i said previous chinese whispers,nissan never said it was on standard road tyres,the article i posted was first hand information,the article you posted which you claimed to be "leaked" would have been 4-5 hand information.
 
I'll want bread, milk and a note "hello GTP!" if you'll really do that. ;)

lol if it is as fast as it says I will buy a 2 year old one. 50% cash rest on finance.

Not that it will ever happen though, nissan are trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes ;)
 
Holdenhsvgtr
i think there would be a huge difference in "cut slicks" and "standard run flat tyres" no matter what the language.
So, I expect we will see your degree in Japanese then, yes? Because that is a very tall claim, even for someone such as you.
Holdenhsvgtr
the article i posted was first hand information,the article you posted which you claimed to be "leaked" would have been 4-5 hand information.
Thing is, yours was just as non-first hand as my article was. Funny that you are still trying to make its validity seem false, considering how you say it is obviously not to be interpreted as it is written. Furthermore, the same designer who said both cut slicks and standard tires is not the mouthpiece for Nissan. Nissan hasn't said anything on the matter.
forza2.0
Not that it will ever happen though, nissan are trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes
We shall see.
 
Funny thing is, yours was just as non-first hand as my article was. Funny that you are still trying to make its validity seem false, considering how you say it is obviously not to be interpreted as it is written.

Because you are childish. Something that we all know already.

We shall see.
thought personal attacks werent allowed :rolleyes:
 
I am still waiting to see your degree in Japanese, by the way.

didnt say i had one.if i say to you cut slicks and standard road tyres can you tell the difference in what im saying?

then again i guess im not allowed to express and try to explain my point of view and theory as it disagrees with it being the fastest car in the world?
 
didnt say i had one.if i say to you cut slicks and standard road tyres can you tell the difference in what im saying?
Yes, I can. Because no doubt you would be speaking English. Not Japanese, or fractured English. Based on previous interviews with the guy and based on the hilarious history the Engrish has, I say it would be incredibly easy for him to mistake the two terms in an interview, and for the interviewer to mistake the meaning or words the man said.
And regardless, he is not the mouthpiece of Nissan. And he said something completely different in another interview which is no less official than your interview.

then again i guess im not allowed to express and try to explain my point of view and theory as it disagrees with it being the fastest car in the world?
You can express it all you want. The problem comes out when you try to:
  1. Pass it off as fact.
  2. Vehemently deny that any other opinion other than your own has any chance of existing.
All without proof. Furthermore, the fact that you continue to be ignoring that 5 seconds faster than the Porsche it so obviously can't beat simply because it has a worse PWR is flawed because there are many reasons why it could have beaten besides the fact that PWR means very little, not to mention the fact that it only beat it by less than 1%.
 
didnt say i had one.if i say to you cut slicks and standard road tyres can you tell the difference in what im saying?

then again i guess im not allowed to express and try to explain my point of view and theory as it disagrees with it being the fastest car in the world?

Let's put it this way.

"The car was running on semi racing tyres."
"The car was running like on semi racing tyres."

This is only an example made up by me, but it shows that two very different things can sound very similar when certain wordings are used. Mix it up with less than perfect English and we might well have a misinterpretation.

This isn't about you not being allowed to express your point of view. This is about trying to make you understand that the car may actually be as fast as claimed, even if you do your best to bash it. Note, may. We can't prove it yet, but you can't prove otherwise either.

And please, no gross exaggerations. Even the most serious GT-R fan here (probably Leonidae) is smart enough to understand it isn't the fastest car in the world.
 
You can express it all you want. The problem comes out when you try to:
  1. Pass it off as fact.
  2. Vehemently deny that any other opinion other than your own has any chance of existing.
All without proof. Furthermore, the fact that you continue to be ignoring that 5 seconds faster than the Porsche it so obviously can't beat simply because it has a worse PWR is flawed because there are many reasons why it could have beaten besides the fact that PWR means very little, not to mention the fact that it only beat it by less than 1%.

and you havent been doing that? Why havent you or leon took on board what ive said yet what i am saying must be lies because it doesnt agree with what yous say considering yous have as much info as me

i know PWR means very little,i said that! and ive seen it in for real,i dont just go to trackdays for the sake of seeing cars on a race track.

Let's put it this way.

"The car was running on semi racing tyres."
"The car was running like on semi racing tyres."

This is only an example made up by me, but it shows that two very different things can sound very similar when certain wordings are used. Mix it up with less than perfect English and we might well have a misinterpretation.

you might need to explain that one abit more for me.if i was interprating that i would say that he said it was on semi racing tyres.how could you mistake "like on semi racing tyres" to mean road tyres?(no cheek intented in that comment genuinely wondering how someone could interprate that to mean road tyres)


This isn't about you not being allowed to express your point of view. This is about trying to convince you that the car may actually be as fast as claimed. Note, may. We can't prove it yet, but you can't prove otherwise either.
i do admit it is fast,my doubt is its not as fast as nissan claim it be,even you have to admit there are some things that just dont add up,even you have to admit there could be some doubts over the performance figures and i dont just mean the lap time and lets me honest,nissan arent exactly the most honest company around when it comes to performance claims.
 
you might need to explain that one abit more for me.if i was interprating that i would say that he said it was on semi racing tyres.how could you mistake "like on semi racing tyres" to mean road tyres?(no cheek intented in that comment genuinely wondering how someone could interprate that to mean road tyres)
OK, no problem.

"The car was running on semi racing tyres." = In other words, well, there are no other words... it was running on semi racing tyres.

"The car was running like on semi racing tyres." = The car has so much mechanical and aerodynamical grip that even on road tyres, it feels like it was running on semi racing tyres. Just a feeling expressed by the driver, caused by the excellent grip created by the combination of high performance road tyres and very good suspension.

One short word, capable of being unheard in the middle of a fast spoken sentence with less than perfect English, can change the entire situation. I'm not saying this kind of a thing happened, but it's possible.
 
OK, no problem.

"The car was running on semi racing tyres." = In other words, well, there are no other words... it was running on semi racing tyres.

"The car was running like on semi racing tyres." = The car has so much mechanical and aerodynamical grip that even on road tyres, it feels like it was running on semi racing tyres. Just a feeling expressed by the driver, caused by the excellent grip created by the combination of high performance road tyres and very good suspension.
ah ok i get you now.

when meantioning expressed by the driver maybe he could have meant towards the everyday drive that might not have experience of semi race tyres but makes them think they are in a race car? (after all most high performance/driver focused cars do try to give you the feel of being a racing driver)
 
The GTR will do between 7.55 and 7mins47 around the ring on semi-racing tires. This is not factual but merely a educated observation on my part.

I will only be proved wrong if nissan has lied about the GTR's power output.

Sportauto/Evo will soon reveal all.

Seeing as how the old R34 did a lap in under 8 minutes on street tires with over 100 less horsepower and an older version of the 4wd system... why would you assume the new car would be only four seconds faster on semis? Are you really saying that on regular street tires you don't think it'll break 8 minutes?

:lol:
 
Seeing as how the old R34 did a lap in under 8 minutes on street tires with over 100 less horsepower and an older version of the 4wd system... why would you assume the new car would be only four seconds faster on semis? Are you really saying that on regular street tires you don't think it'll break 8 minutes?

:lol:

:lol:

Oh boy read through the entire thread. No stock R34 GT-R has ever done the 'ring in under 8 mins. Nissan succesfully managed to mislead you. I have addressed that issue, nissan basically lied. The R34 does it in about 8 mins 30 roughly.

I mean really how about using a a degree of common sense here, chances are on standard road tyres (presumedly those horrid runflats) the GTR will struggle to beat the 8 min mark unless nissan have drastically underrated the engine.

Its not like nissan have some sort of wonder technology here that no other person in the world knows of for them to drastically put other cars in its class to shame. No doubt it could very well be a class leader but certainly not by such a large margin.
 
Apologies if I haven't read every post in a 38-page thread. Care to point me in the direction of "proof" that an R34 is slower than a Cobalt around the track?

A quick look around the 'net shows even the R33 broke the 8-min mark. It wasn't "official" though, since the car didn't have the speed limiter the UK cars had. I don't understand that, because everywhere else in the world the limiter wasn't equipped. So I would still consider that a rough indicator of what the car can do.

Further on, if a stock 997S can lap under 8-min, and the 997 Turbo does it in 7'40 as the GT-R benchmark, the Nissan must be closer to the latter if they're spending so much effort comparing to that car. I am using common sense here; a car with the the GT-R's specs shouldn't have trouble breaking the 8-min mark if many other lesser-performing cars can do it. Common sense isn't automatically favouring a car because its German.
 
No stock R34 GT-R has ever done the 'ring in under 8 mins. Nissan succesfully managed to mislead you. I have addressed that issue, nissan basically lied. The R34 does it in about 8 mins 30 roughly.
The 350Z does it in 8'26 and that's a Sport Auto test so it should be reliable. Are you really trying to tell us that the R34 GT-R is slower than that comfort-biased boulevard sport?

I mean really how about using a a degree of common sense here, chances are on standard road tyres (presumedly those horrid runflats) the GTR will struggle to beat the 8 min mark unless nissan have drastically underrated the engine.
The E46 M3 CSL does it in 7'50 and that's a Sport Auto test so it should be reliable. Those "horrid runflats" happen to be some of the grippiest road tyres ever factory fitted to a car. The GT-R has 30% more power but only 20% more weight. Even though PWR isn't everything, don't you think it would move at least at the same rate, on the long straighs even faster thanks to its better drag coefficient?

Its not like nissan have some sort of wonder technology here that no other person in the world knows of for them to drastically put other cars in its class to shame. No doubt it could very well be a class leader but certainly not by such a large margin.
In case you haven't heard the legend of the Godzilla, the R32 GT-R that is, I'll tell you. It won 29 of its first 29 Group A races in Japan. Then it was banned. It entered the 1991 Bathurst 1000km race, being pitted against the big Ford and Holden V8 cars. It won. The next year it had 100kg of weight penalty and a mandatory turbo pop-off valve. It won again. Then it was banned.

There were two reasons to that. First, the superb ATTESA-ETS four wheel drive system (retained to this day, improved on the way) and an equally superb Super Hicas four wheel steering system. Those two things gave it the ability to keep up with, and even beat, more powerful, lighter cars. Why wouldn't Nissan be able to do it again?

Oddly enough, I just read this thread back and it's only been a week since you were praising Porsche's superiority over the GT-R and saying that the GT-R was bound to fail at living up to the hype. Now you're saying it could very well be a class leader. What's caused such a change of direction?
 
A quick look around the 'net shows even the R33 broke the 8-min mark.

no it didnt




Those "horrid runflats" happen to be some of the grippiest road tyres ever factory fitted to a car.

Yokohama A038R fitted to the 340R iirc are the grippest tyres factory fitted to a road car :)

It entered the 1991 Bathurst 1000km race, being pitted against the big Ford and Holden V8 cars. It won.

it wasnt just the bathurst 1000 race but the ATCC championship,ford didnt race falcon V8's but rather Sierra RS500's,only holden stuck with the V8.
 
http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/228511/

And a single lap time does not make all other laps achieved in the same car invalid. If I were to go take a 911 around the 'Ring in 10 minutes, would that become the new official lap?

Reading comprehension is your friend. Read my entire post.
and if you read the full article(which they havent uploaded,donno why) youll find with the car standard spec they couldnt get under 8:30.
 
Apologies if I haven't read every post in a 38-page thread. Care to point me in the direction of "proof" that an R34 is slower than a Cobalt around the track?

A quick look around the 'net shows even the R33 broke the 8-min mark. It wasn't "official" though, since the car didn't have the speed limiter the UK cars had. I don't understand that, because everywhere else in the world the limiter wasn't equipped. So I would still consider that a rough indicator of what the car can do.

Further on, if a stock 997S can lap under 8-min, and the 997 Turbo does it in 7'40 as the GT-R benchmark, the Nissan must be closer to the latter if they're spending so much effort comparing to that car. I am using common sense here; a car with the the GT-R's specs shouldn't have trouble breaking the 8-min mark if many other lesser-performing cars can do it. Common sense isn't automatically favouring a car because its German.

1.
Since when can a cobalt do the 'ring in under 8 mins 30?

2.
The R33 never broke the 8 min mark. Nissan lied again. All tests my car mags couldnt make that thing get anywhere near 8 mins. The same goes for the R34.

3.
A stock 997S can do it in under 8 mins? That is definetly news to me. Going by my sources it cannot break the 8 min mark.

4.
How do you know the GTR shouldnt have trouble beating lesser performing cars when you dont know for certain if those "lesser" cars are indeed "lesser" ?

5.
Common sense tells me a car weighing in at over 1700kg with only 470 something HP will struggle to go around the ring in under 8 mins let alone 8 mins 40.

The 350Z does it in 8'26 and that's a Sport Auto test so it should be reliable. Are you really trying to tell us that the R34 GT-R is slower than that comfort-biased boulevard sport?

I made a rough guess of how fast the R34 would lap the 'ring, I could not be bothered to go find my ring list. That time is impressive though, the car must have had semi racing tires fitted.

The E46 M3 CSL does it in 7'50 and that's a Sport Auto test so it should be reliable. Those "horrid runflats" happen to be some of the grippiest road tyres ever factory fitted to a car. The GT-R has 30% more power but only 20% more weight. Even though PWR isn't everything, don't you think it would move at least at the same rate, on the long straighs even faster thanks to its better drag coefficient?

Runflats are dreadful. There is a reason why everyone especially BMW owners slate them. Non run flats perform better in every possible way apart from punctures ;)

The GTR has 20% more power in regards to what the CSL? And weight is the biggest enemy to any car. Add 100kgs of passengers to a impreza etc and it will perform drastically worse. The CSL did its 7 mins 50 time wearing semi racing tires and that car was designed for the racetrack anyway.

In case you haven't heard the legend of the Godzilla, the R32 GT-R that is, I'll tell you. It won 29 of its first 29 Group A races in Japan. Then it was banned. It entered the 1991 Bathurst 1000km race, being pitted against the big Ford and Holden V8 cars. It won. The next year it had 100kg of weight penalty and a mandatory turbo pop-off valve. It won again. Then it was banned.

There were two reasons to that. First, the superb ATTESA-ETS four wheel drive system (retained to this day, improved on the way) and an equally superb Super Hicas four wheel steering system. Those two things gave it the ability to keep up with, and even beat, more powerful, lighter cars. Why wouldn't Nissan be able to do it again?

Oddly enough, I just read this thread back and it's only been a week since you were praising Porsche's superiority over the GT-R and saying that the GT-R was bound to fail at living up to the hype. Now you're saying it could very well be a class leader. What's caused such a change of direction?

Nothing out of the ordinary there. Audi had a similiar story with their 4wd touring cars that dominated competitions and then getting banned the following year.

As for the GTR beating holdens thats nothing special, no offense but holdens and fords arent exactly reknowned world wide for their racing pedigree.

There has been no change of direction, all I was saying that even if the GTR was faster than the porsches which is highly unlikely the porsche will still be the drivers choice.

The next year or so is gonna be fun.

997 turbo vs Z06 vs GT-R vs 580hp RS6 engined audi R8.

I know which car my money will be on :D
 
Back