2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

[Leonidae]

(from racingflix.com, by Nuke61)The PistonHeads article gives what appears to be a direct quote. The so-called "update" is just an article -- notice that Mizuno was not quoted. What he was *quoted* as having said is very clear, 'We used cut slick tyres'. What you posted is NOT a quote of Mizuno, other than he said "real world" -- everything else in the sentence is what the *writer* wrote as an interpretation. If the article quoted Mizuno as saying, "we did not use cut-slicks, because that is not real world" that would be one thing, but to only quote "real world" isn't much proof.

In any case, I think it's possible that with the OEM tires the GTR could have run that time, because tires can make a huge difference in track times. What I've never seen anyone talk about so far is the actual tires used, so I looked up the specs of the GTR tires and compared them to other tires.

The Z06 OEM tires are Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar EMT tires that have a treadwear rating of 220.

As far as I can tell, the RE070A's that will be OEM on the GTR are just the regular RE070's with a different tire size, although it's possible that they will be even softer than the RE070's. How soft are the RE070's? They have a treadwear rating of 140.

As a point of reference, Nitto NT555RII's tires have a treadwear rating of 100. So if I'm correct, the GTR tires will be close to being as soft/sticky as the NT555RII's -- with a very short tread life compared to the Goodyears.

As another point of reference, the Pilot Sport Cup tires have a treadwear rating of 80, and as 'Ring times show, the cars that have used them have much better times than when using "normal" OEM tires.

So it's possible that the RE070A's have a treadwear rating even lower than the 140 that the RE070's have. Even if they don't, the RE070's are very sticky tires with tire life that you would expect of sticky tires -- shorter than for most other tires. I think I may have found the real explanation for why it's possible for the GTR to have run that time in production trim, right down to the tires. Keep in mind that the tires could have been shaved, heat cycled and siped, but in my opinion, that's still production and OEM.

Thus, we could say that these new tyres, that have been designed specifically for GT-R only, have better grip than your average runflats. I'm not sure if his speculation is even near the mark, but he knows his stuff usually.

 

[Greycap]

Sorry to say this forza2.0, but this is hopeless. You just don't get it. All this time people have been using the Sport Auto times as reliable benchmarks here. Now you say those times must have had semi racing tyres fitted. Maybe they have indeed, I don't know. But guess what? That means that if would only be fair for the GT-R to have those tyres too.

And that, in turn, would mean that the 7'38 time of the GT-R is valid in comparison.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

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

nothing to do with pedigree in fact holden and ford have a HUGE pedigree in the land of oz,The GTR's were just too damn fast and reliable.The Holden's didnt have the power to keep up and the Ford RS500's just werent reliable enough.They skylines were supposed to only have 550bhp (holdens around 620ish,johnsons RS500 was said to have around 700bhp) but then again its all to easy to plug in a laptop and suddenly get another 50bhp at least. The turbo cars also just seemed to build thier speed up alot quicker as well than the NA holden's.



plus the aussie fans hated the fact that these "invaders" were stopping thier home grown cars from winning so they had to go.

Thus, we could say that these new tyres, that have been designed specifically for GT-R only, have better grip than your average runflats. I'm not sure if his speculation is even near the mark, but he knows his stuff usually.

several members of racingflix have also said through the years that the E46 M3's straight 6 was half a Mclaren F1 engine.....

 

[Tornado]

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

The difference, of course, is that you are the one who raised the allegations of Nissan pulling something. When I brought up evidence to the contrary of your evidence, you went through a laundry list of reasons why my evidence is less valid than yours, even though it really wasn't.

several members of racingflix have also said through the years that the E46 M3's straight 6 was half a Mclaren F1 engine.....

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

Here you go. Naturally, I'm sure the car was on racing slicks.

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" ?

Lets see: Porsche 997 Turbo competitor versus a Porsche 996 GT3 competitor. Hmm.

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.

And I will tell you to get your common sense checked, unless you can think of a specific reason why the GT-R cannot get under 8 minutes (that is not omigod the car is too heavy). Because based even on your silly "PWR is everything logic," the GT-R could easily do under 8 minutes. 7:38 is a stretch, yes. But under 8 would be no problem. And if you honestly think that there is a chance in hell that it would struggle to get under 8:40, I suggest you get a new batch of common sense.
Hell, the GT-R has a considerably better PWR than the plows-so-much-I-could-clear-my-driveway-with-it Audi RS4, not to mention the plows-so-much-I-could-clear-my-driveway-with-it-but-add-200kg Audi RS6, and both of those cars did a near 8:00 lap time (with the RS4 actually coming under 8 minutes). So what then? Will the GT-R be slower than these two cars based on a mass produced sedan with front heavy weight bias and far worse aerodynamics?

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 CSL did its 7 mins 50 time wearing semi racing tires and that car was designed for the racetrack anyway.

So, know even official magazine tests are rigged? So who can we trust, exactly, Mr. Pessimist? And what about the normal E46 M3, hmm? The R34 probably had more power, certainly had more torque and traction and probably had more downforce than that car, but the M3 got a 8:22. So, would the GT-R be at least 8 seconds slower to a car that it is faster than on paper to in every way? Especially considering the R32 ties the E46 in its 'Ring time?

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

The difference, of course, is that you are the one who raised the allegations of Nissan pulling something. When I brought up evidence to the contrary of your evidence, you went through a laundry list of reasons why my evidence is less valid than yours, even though it really wasn't.

i didnt though again go back and look

(with the RS4 actually coming under 8 minutes).

no it didnt,the RS4 stock does 8:09. it did 7:58 on non standard pilot sport cups.

 

[Tornado]

i didnt though again go back and look

I don't understand what you are saying.

no it didnt,the RS4 stock does 8:09. it did 7:58 on non standard pilot sport cups.

Pilot Sport Cups are still street legal tires that come stock on many cars (including the previously mentioned BMW M3 CSL and Porsche 911 GT3). Regardless, my point still stands.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

I don't understand what you are saying.

theres a surprise

Pilot Sport Cups are still street legal tires that come stock on many cars (including the previously mentioned BMW M3 CSL and Porsche 911 GT3). Regardless, my point still stands.

but not on the RS4 which is exactly what were are debating,why not stick some R888's on it?
your point doesnt stand as the RS4 doesnt come with them stock hence it cant go round in under 8 mins stock(as you claimed it did)

 

[Tornado]

theres a surprise

Well, you can be a total smartass about it, or you can use some punctuation. Your choice.

but not on the RS4 which is exactly what were are debating,why not stick some R888's on it? your point doesnt stand as the RS4 doesnt come with them stock hence it cant go round in under 8 mins stock(as you claimed it did)

Actually, I believe your entire point was about the GT-R's speed was how it had to have cut slick tires on it to go that fast. Not that it didn't have RE70s on it.
And regardless, my point does still stand. Even if you disregarded a minor detail, that merely shows how ignorant you were of my actual point.

 

[Greycap]

your point doesnt stand as the RS4 doesnt come with them stock hence it cant go round in under 8 mins stock(as you claimed it did)

In this case, I bet there aren't many cars on the roads that could run "legal" times as tyre choice is something that every driver has their own preferences on. Is the next step stating that time X was invalid because the car had had its spare tyre overinflated and was sporting furry dices hanging from the mirror, those aren't showroom stock? Maybe it even - hold your breath, this is something unbelievable - had non-standard light alloy wheels!

Please. Use common sense.

 

[forza2.0]

Thus, we could say that these new tyres, that have been designed specifically for GT-R only, have better grip than your average runflats. I'm not sure if his speculation is even near the mark, but he knows his stuff usually.

Im running Eagle F1's GSD3's they are not runflats and are arguably a grippier tire than the runflat version. The runflat versions have design comprimises.

Michelin pilot sport cups are regarded as semi racing tires, therefore if the article above is indeed correct the GT-R was running semi racing tires just like how I was saying to beat the porsche time.

Just out of interest were can I find the treadwear rating for tires? I would like to see if I could get even grippier tires for my car

P.S the 997 GT3 has done the ring in 7 mins 37 on semi racing tires whilst it was being tested by porsche.

Now you say those times must have had semi racing tyres fitted. Maybe they have indeed, I don't know. But guess what? That means that if would only be fair for the GT-R to have those tyres too.

And that, in turn, would mean that the 7'38 time of the GT-R is valid in comparison.

No because when the GTR did the 7 min 38 time it was on slicks.We will soon find out

Now you say those times must have had semi racing tyres fitted. Maybe they have indeed, I don't know. But guess what? That means that if would only be fair for the GT-R to have those tyres too.

And that, in turn, would mean that the 7'38 time of the GT-R is valid in comparison.

Two manufacturers in one racing series is not real competition. The holdens were nothing special perfomance wise on a world scale.

Here you go. Naturally, I'm sure the car was on racing slicks.

What a complete and utter joke, no wonder you guys believe this GT-R stuff if you believe this. If the cobalt can do that it must be like the fastest FWD car in the world! So how come it cant replicate those competition shattering performance against its compeitors when independantly tested........

 

[Greycap]

No because when the GTR did the 7 min 38 time it was on slicks.We will soon find out

The last time I checked, you and the others were stating it was on cut slicks. CUT SLICKS. Not the same thing as slicks. You're giving false info to make the GT-R look slower than it is, upping the requirements when the old ones get beaten, and you know it. This is hopeless indeed.

You're giving us all that crap about the GT-R running on semi racing tyres. At the same time you forget that the others were running on the same tyres (as you said yourself) so the GT-R time is fully comparable. Michelin Pilot Sport Cups are street legal tyres. Nothing prevents one from fitting them on their GT-R.

Tell me and others, what the hell is so difficult here, admit that you're wrong in your claims?

 

[forza2.0]

Lets see: Porsche 997 Turbo competitor versus a Porsche 996 GT3 competitor. Hmm.

I dont get it. The 996 GT3 has actually been around the 'ring just as fast as the 997 turbo....

And I will tell you to get your common sense checked, unless you can think of a specific reason why the GT-R cannot get under 8 minutes (that is not omigod the car is too heavy). Because based even on your silly "PWR is everything logic," the GT-R could easily do under 8 minutes. 7:38 is a stretch, yes. But under 8 would be no problem. And if you honestly think that there is a chance in hell that it would struggle to get under 8:40, I suggest you get a new batch of common sense.
Hell, the GT-R has a considerably better PWR than the plows-so-much-I-could-clear-my-driveway-with-it Audi RS4, not to mention the plows-so-much-I-could-clear-my-driveway-with-it-but-add-200kg Audi RS6, and both of those cars did a near 8:00 lap time (with the RS4 actually coming under 8 minutes). So what then? Will the GT-R be slower than these two cars based on a mass produced sedan with front heavy weight bias and far worse aerodynamics?

1. The RS4 outhandles most cars on the road, and pretty much everything coming out of the states bar the Z06.

2.The RS4 only did under 8 mins when fitted with semi racing tires.

3 I never said it would struggle to get under 8 40, it will struggle to get under 7 50.

So, know even official magazine tests are rigged? So who can we trust, exactly, Mr. Pessimist? And what about the normal E46 M3, hmm? The R34 probably had more power, certainly had more torque and traction and probably had more downforce than that car, but the M3 got a 8:22. So, would the GT-R be at least 8 seconds slower to a car that it is faster than on paper to in every way? Especially considering the R32 ties the E46 in its 'Ring time?

Maybe its because the M3 is better suited to the 'ring....

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

The last time I checked, you and the others were stating it was on cut slicks. CUT SLICKS. Not the same thing as slicks. You're giving false info to make the GT-R look bad, and you know it.

You're giving us all that crap about the GT-R running on semi racing tyres. At the same time you forget that the others were running on the same tyres (as you said yourself) so the GT-R time is fully comparable. Michelin Pilot Sport Cups are street legal tyres. Nothing prevents one from fitting them on their GT-R.

Tell me and others, what the hell is so difficult here, admit that you're wrong in your claims?

but in essence your missing my orginal point of the GTR doing that time from the factory.fitting pilot sport cups,street legal yes but will that confirm that the gtr can do the 'ring in 7:38.no because it didnt come like that from nissan hence stock the gtr wont do it in 7:38 (if you can see what i mean )

 

[Greycap]

I never said it would struggle to get under 8 40, it will struggle to get under 7 50.

Oh really? What's this then?

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.

Looks suspiciously like saying it would struggle to get under 8'40 to me.

Maybe its because the M3 is better suited to the 'ring....

Didn't anybody tell you that the R34 GT-R V-SpecII Nür was fine tuned at the Nordschleife? Quite a shame that you've been missing information.

but in essence your missing my orginal point of the GTR doing that time from the factory.fitting pilot sport cups,street legal yes but will that confirm that the gtr can do the 'ring in 7:38.no because it didnt come like that from nissan hence stock the gtr wont do it in 7:38 (if you can see what i mean )

There are many people missing points here. I can see what you mean. But then again, the guy I just quoted keeps shovelling out that crap about non-standard tyres on the GT-R while the others had their tyres changed too. Unless someone can confirm that all the other cars have been showroom stock, the GT-R's time is just as valid as the others'.

 

[forza2.0]

Looks suspiciously like saying it would struggle to get under 8'40 to me.

It was a typo anyone can see that, otherwise what I wrote doesnt make sense. Why would I say it would struggle to do under 8 mins let alone 8 40. I meant 7 40.

Didn't anybody tell you that the R34 GT-R V-SpecII Nür was fine tuned at the Nordschleife? Quite a shame that you've been missing information.

I addressed that vehicle. It wont do under 8 mins and gets a right old spanking from porsches and beemers round the 'ring.

The last time I checked, you and the others were stating it was on cut slicks. CUT SLICKS. Not the same thing as slicks. You're giving false info to make the GT-R look slower than it is, upping the requirements when the old ones get beaten, and you know it. This is hopeless indeed.

You're giving us all that crap about the GT-R running on semi racing tyres. At the same time you forget that the others were running on the same tyres (as you said yourself) so the GT-R time is fully comparable. Michelin Pilot Sport Cups are street legal tyres. Nothing prevents one from fitting them on their GT-R.

Tell me and others, what the hell is so difficult here, admit that you're wrong in your claims?

You are obviously getting confused let me clarify what my stance is.

1. The GT-R will struggle to get a 7 50 time with semi racing tires.
2. I predict that without semi racing tires it will struggle to get under 8 mins.
3. I predict that any time nissan got under 7 mins 40 will have been with either slicks or cut slicks.

 

[Leonidae]

any pictures, graphs, evidence to support your guestimations? if there's none, your speculations are about as valuable as the air you breath.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

There are many people missing points here. I can see what you mean. But then again, the guy I just quoted keeps shovelling out that crap about non-standard tyres on the GT-R while the others had their tyres changed too. Unless someone can confirm that all the other cars have been showroom stock, the GT-R's time is just as valid as the others'.

not all the others had their tyres change,as said some cars came with these cars as standard.most people will no doubt say that they bought the gtr because it can do 7:38 around the 'ring and that its faster than an slr,z06,997 turbo etc when it might not be able to do it in 7 38 on re070's.so saying that because an csl did it in cups doesnt mean that you should then only test the cars on cups because that will give an accurate time because it wont as you cant buy the car with those tyres.

 

[forza2.0]

any pictures, graphs, evidence to support your guestimations? if there's none, your speculations are about as valuable as the air you breath.

F430 is slower than the GT-R going by what nissan say.

M6 doesnt exactly get cosy with the 8 min mark either....

Going by the compeition is where I build my predictions of. Sorry if you dont like them

 

[Leonidae]

F430 also has naturally aspirated engine with less torque.

 

[forza2.0]

F430 also has naturally aspirated engine with less torque.

But alot less weight, and a lower center of gravity....

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

F430 also has naturally aspirated engine with less torque.

i heard the suspension and chassis are rubbish as well and it weighs the same as an A380

 

[Greycap]

I addressed that vehicle. It wont do under 8 mins and gets a right old spanking from porsches and beemers round the 'ring.

Got proof? Completely reliable, that is?

You are obviously getting confused let me clarify what my stance is.

1. The GT-R will struggle to get a 7 50 time with semi racing tires.
2. I predict that without semi racing tires it will struggle to get under 8 mins.
3. I predict that any time nissan got under 7 mins 40 will have been with either slicks or cut slicks.

Hell yes I'm getting confused, I would have to be quite a mental wizard not to when you seem to change your mind twice in an hour. First you said the GT-R must have been running on semi racing tyres. Then the driver of the car said they used cut slicks. Some time after that one you came up with the conclusion that it was running on full slicks. No idea where you pulled that from, don't you think the driver might know better than you? Or was it just a too fast time to be run on cut slicks so something had to be thought up quickly?

And then, naturally, I'd like to know where you get those predictions from. From an unofficial run on a semi wet track? In that case I could as well say that the car will run 7'40 on a fully dry track without traffic on its original tyres. Then you'd jump on me, stating that I'm a liar and that I don't have proof.

Correct. I don't have proof, neither do I need it as I'm not making statements. But do you?

 

[Tornado]

So how come it cant replicate those competition shattering performance against its compeitors when independantly tested........

So, the Cobalt that hasn't come out yet already needs to be able to replicate its test results despite no one testing it at this time?

I dont get it. The 996 GT3 has actually been around the 'ring just as fast as the 997 turbo....

So, what you are saying is that the stock 996 GT3 is faster than the 997 GT3, the 997 GT3 RS, the 996 GT3 RS and the 996 GT3 Cup? Because the 997 Turbo is faster than all of them around the 'Ring.

1. The RS4 outhandles most cars on the road, and pretty much everything coming out of the states bar the Z06.

2.The RS4 only did under 8 mins when fitted with semi racing tires.

3 I never said it would struggle to get under 8 40, it will struggle to get under 7 50.

1. The Audi RS4 outhandling American cars has to do with what? And it was outhandled by quite a few cars when it came out, if I remember correctly. Notably the older E46 M3.

2. A DOT street legal tire is not a semi-racing tire when cars can be bought with them stock.

3. So, you mistyped two letters? Right.

Maybe its because the M3 is better suited to the 'ring....

Which is something you have no chance in hell of proving. I'm also pretty surprised that you would throw dumb statements like that around, because I could just as easily say that the GT-R was designed for the 'Ring more than the 911 Turbo was so that is why it is faster. However, that not really being a real reason regardless...

I addressed that vehicle. It wont do under 8 mins and gets a right old spanking from porsches and beemers round the 'ring.

Ah, more things you cannot prove.

1. The GT-R will struggle to get a 7 50 time with semi racing tires.
2. I predict that without semi racing tires it will struggle to get under 8 mins.

For reasons you still have not explained, because your PWR argument is still garbage.

3. I predict that any time nissan got under 7 mins 40 will have been with either slicks or cut slicks.

So now we have jumped from cut slicks to slicks? Despite knowing full well that if it had full slicks it would be way, way faster than 7:38?

But alot less weight, and a lower center of gravity....

All of which apply to your beloved 997 Turbo, to which you can add worse weight distribution, poorer handling, poorer acceleration and lower top speed. Even more hilariously, the Porsche has been proven to be slower on tracks too. So explain that. I'm guessing the Porsche was on cut slicks.

 

[niky]

Just a few notes:

The one thing keeping the old stock GT-Rs from doing a decent ring time is, as aforementioned, the stock speed limiter. I guess sub-8 times "as stock" is just not possible... but the low limiter is an artifact of the Japanese market... if the old GTR would have been sold widely outside Japan, I doubt the export models would have had limiters.

Arguing for ideal lap times from stock cars is fruitless... IMHO.

Tires? When you have cars coming on a very diverse set of tires, and some cars sporting ridiculously marginal street tires (PSCups, for one... but they're still not as bad/good as slicks) as stock... who's to say what's allowable and not allowable for "stock" cars?

And consider that tire technology just keeps moving forward... a time that would be incredible ten years ago is just *yawn* now... (note all the "records" being broken in the past few years)... so should we handicap cars because they're using tires one or two generations behind anyone else's? Or what about chassis technology?

A near-empty fuel tank? No spare tire? Dry weather? Warm track? No traffic? Do we want brand-new tires (full tread means more squirm in the corners) or worn-down or shaved tires? Virgin engines or broken-in engines? (that should be good for five or six seconds on those long straights)

Comparing 'ring times from multiple sources is a fruitless endeavor. A difference in traffic, conditions and driver can add or subtract maybe 10-20 seconds from a stated time. Sure, Jeremy Clarkson versus Sabine Schmidt is a huge jump, but between two pro drivers, there can still be a two or three second discrepancy on a regular track... which would be about ten to thirty seconds on the ring. Add in weather and the difficulty of getting a clean lap, and that could stretch to infinity.

------

Because someone has done the time, it's obvious it's possible.

The question of which is comprehensively faster might never be answered unless someone does a group time attack on the ring with the new production GTR and its competitors... till then, we can only guess.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

Just a few notes:

The one thing keeping the old stock GT-Rs from doing a decent ring time is, as aforementioned, the stock speed limiter. I guess sub-8 times "as stock" is just not possible... but the low limiter is an artifact of the Japanese market... if the old GTR would have been sold widely outside Japan, I doubt the export models would have had limiters.

alot of the tests were done with UK spec cars which had it raise to 155mph,it still couldnt do it.

Comparing 'ring times from multiple sources is a fruitless endeavor. A difference in traffic, conditions and driver can add or subtract maybe 10-20 seconds from a stated time.

better than having just 1 lap time though,if you have a few you can get a rough idea of what it can do it in,but constant 10+ second differences must make you think something isnt right.

 

[niky]

But from how many different sources, though? And (I'm sorry if this has already been posted), as driven by the same driver against the Porsche in the same conditions?

I often try to stay out of these "which is faster" or "which is better" arguments simply because there are too many factors for you to say that A>B is a golden rule. I mean, we get enough of that when C&D releases its latest set of acceleration times... if somebody's done it, it can be done, even if you can't do it or replicate it... some "stock" cars are fitter than others (I've seen a range of 0.4 - 0.5 seconds between stock vehicles in 0-100 km/h testing) and some drivers (and some drag-strips) are better... that's just the way things are.

For example, you would never claim that an EK or EG Civic Type R was a comprehensively faster car than an Evo VII... from a stop, it'd get murdered... from a roll, it'd get murdered... on most modern race courses, it'd get murdered. But on my favorite local track, it's Civics that consistently turn in better lap times.

I do admit to hearing a lot of rumors of Nissan using a "ringer" for that test with the R34... with a simple ECU tweak to unlock the power that Nissan squelches in their wink at actually making the 286 (or is that 276?) hp "gentleman's agreement" limit. but it has never been proven...

Until someone in the press gets ahold of the new version, though, and does a track test (I'm betting EVO magazine will get first crack) against the Porsche 911 GT2, I don't think the debate will ever end.

 

[forza2.0]

Got proof? Completely reliable, that is?

Blowdog himself is proof, and the 'ring track times list. Hell the Evo 8 Laps tsukba race circuit quicker than the R34 GT-R.

Hell yes I'm getting confused, I would have to be quite a mental wizard not to when you seem to change your mind twice in an hour. First you said the GT-R must have been running on semi racing tyres. Then the driver of the car said they used cut slicks. Some time after that one you came up with the conclusion that it was running on full slicks. No idea where you pulled that from, don't you think the driver might know better than you? Or was it just a too fast time to be run on cut slicks so something had to be thought up quickly?

No mate, I have not paid any attention to that article, its just pretty much common sense for the GTR to get under 8 mins chances are it was running semi racing tires.

And then, naturally, I'd like to know where you get those predictions from. From an unofficial run on a semi wet track? In that case I could as well say that the car will run 7'40 on a fully dry track without traffic on its original tyres. Then you'd jump on me, stating that I'm a liar and that I don't have proof.

I have told you were I get my predictions from. Its an educated estimation based on the results of similiar weighted/powered cars.

Correct. I don't have proof, neither do I need it as I'm not making statements. But do you?

I dont need proof as I never said anything was a fact.

So, the Cobalt that hasn't come out yet already needs to be able to replicate its test results despite no one testing it at this time?

I swear some telivision crew got a first drive of this car. But let me ask you a question. Do you honestly believe that when independantly tested this car will do the 'ring in 8 mins 22 secs or anywhere near there?

So, what you are saying is that the stock 996 GT3 is faster than the 997 GT3, the 997 GT3 RS, the 996 GT3 RS and the 996 GT3 Cup? Because the 997 Turbo is faster than all of them around the 'Ring.

The 997 GT3 RS is faster around the ring than the 997 Turbo.....
The 996 GT3 has been out for years and over the years some people have managed to really get to know that car and hence post such a fast lap time round the 'ring that is just as fast as that of the 997 GT3. However im certain the 997 GT3 will soon beat that.

1. The Audi RS4 outhandling American cars has to do with what? And it was outhandled by quite a few cars when it came out, if I remember correctly. Notably the older E46 M3.

2. A DOT street legal tire is not a semi-racing tire when cars can be bought with them stock.

3. So, you mistyped two letters? Right.

1.Older in what way as they both run the same generation chassis.

2. Not in europe its not. Sport auto regards such tires as the michelin cups as semi racing tires. Goodyear eagle f1's are pretty much regarded as the best high performance tire, anything much better than that is regarded as semi racing.

3. Another typo

Ah, more things you cannot prove.

Go look at the 'ring list, oh and blowdog himself is proof, although hes unique as he got a spanking in his highly no expenses spared tuned R34 by a Rear engined rear wheel drive car, round the outside in the snow

So now we have jumped from cut slicks to slicks? Despite knowing full well that if it had full slicks it would be way, way faster than 7:38?

We dont know "full well" anything about this car until its independantly tested/slated.

Which is something you have no chance in hell of proving. I'm also pretty surprised that you would throw dumb statements like that around, because I could just as easily say that the GT-R was designed for the 'Ring more than the 911 Turbo was so that is why it is faster. However, that not really being a real reason regardless...

Secretly porsche is ashamed of the 997 turbo. The marketing department won that battle when it came to the design briefing. They made up for it though with the GT2.

All of which apply to your beloved 997 Turbo, to which you can add worse weight distribution, poorer handling, poorer acceleration and lower top speed. Even more hilariously, the Porsche has been proven to be slower on tracks too. So explain that. I'm guessing the Porsche was on cut slicks.

I dont even like the 997 turbo I think its a disgrace. Redline is at like 6600rpm or something low like that. Not my idea of fun really.

The 997 turbo is a underperformer. It was setup to soft and now its paying the price. Give me a Audi R8 anyday, and I'll spend the difference on a supercharger to bring it up to power.

And what about the Z06, lighter, more powerful, better center of gravity etc and yet beaten by some lardy GTR?

P.S

The audi R8 has beaten the 997 turbo around numerous tracks but not the 'ring. The R8 has not been below the 8 minute barrier when tested by sportauto, and that car is kinda regarded as the best in its class. Around circuits like hockenheim and TG racetrack and teh racetrack that evo use the R8 has outperformed many more powerful cars. Basically what im getting at is that for a porsche the 997 Turbo is not very good.

 

[Greycap]

Blowdog himself is proof, and the 'ring track times list. Hell the Evo 8 Laps tsukba race circuit quicker than the R34 GT-R.

The other driver may have been a lot better, you've said it yourself that some of the cars on that list must have been running on semi racing tyres and Tsukuba isn't quite the Nordschleife. If I can beat a dragster with a go-kart on a karting circuit, does it automatically mean I'll beat it on the drag strip too? The example is just as valid as your statement.

No mate, I have not paid any attention to that article, its just pretty much common sense for the GTR to get under 8 mins chances are it was running semi racing tires.

Two big mistakes there. First, you haven't read the article. Second, "chances are" isn't absolute proof. Chances are many other cars on that Nürburgring time list were running semi racing tyres too. I'll return to this later in this post.

I have told you were I get my predictions from. Its an educated estimation based on the results of similiar weighted/powered cars.

Great. Educated estimation based on PWR. In that case, let's make a bit more of these estimations.

7:33 - Porsche 997 GT2, 530 PS/1497 kg (sport auto 11/07) - PWR 2.8245
7:57 - Lotec Porsche 993 Turbo, 600 PS/1558 kg (sport auto 05/98) - PWR 2.5966

The Lotec Porsche has a considerably better PWR, yet is 25 seconds slower. The validity of your estimations was just thrown out of the window.

I dont need proof as I never said anything was a fact.

1. The GT-R will struggle to get a 7 50 time with semi racing tires.

In that case, change your wordings a bit. "Will" is a sure happening, "may" is what you mean.

The 996 GT3 has been out for years and over the years some people have managed to really get to know that car and hence post such a fast lap time round the 'ring that is just as fast as that of the 997 GT3.

Doesn't this very clearly say that a better driver in a slower car can match a faster car? To me, it does.

Not in europe its not. Sport auto regards such tires as the michelin cups as semi racing tires. Goodyear eagle f1's are pretty much regarded as the best high performance tire, anything much better than that is regarded as semi racing.

This is where I return to the semi racing tyres.

Read this article and say, do you really think Porsche would make a car with tyres that aren't road tyres?

Read this article too. The Carrera GT has Pilot Sport Cups as stock, so it probably should have been fitted with some grocery store tyres before its run on the Nordschleife to ensure the validity of the times? After all, semi racing tyres give an unfair advantage, don't they?

Go look at the 'ring list, oh and blowdog himself is proof, although hes unique as he got a spanking in his highly no expenses spared tuned R34 by a Rear engined rear wheel drive car, round the outside in the snow

Sabine Schmidt overtook Porsches in her Ford Transit. With your logic, the Porsches get a beating from a Transit.

And what about the Z06, lighter, more powerful, better center of gravity etc and yet beaten by some lardy GTR?

That's called the advantages of an independent rear suspension, for example.

You may not realize it, but it's great fun getting you caught of contradicting your own sayings, stating estimations as facts with no proof, and being the biggest Nissan hater there is. Let's keep going, this is amusing! 👍

 

[forza2.0]

The other driver may have been a lot better, you've said it yourself that some of the cars on that list must have been running on semi racing tyres and Tsukuba isn't quite the Nordschleife. If I can beat a dragster with a go-kart on a karting circuit, does it automatically mean I'll beat it on the drag strip too? The example is just as valid as your statement.


Two big mistakes there. First, you haven't read the article. Second, "chances are" isn't absolute proof. Chances are many other cars on that Nürburgring time list were running semi racing tyres too. I'll return to this later in this post.


Great. Educated estimation based on PWR. In that case, let's make a bit more of these estimations.

7:33 - Porsche 997 GT2, 530 PS/1497 kg (sport auto 11/07) - PWR 2.8245
7:57 - Lotec Porsche 993 Turbo, 600 PS/1558 kg (sport auto 05/98) - PWR 2.5966

The Lotec Porsche has a considerably better PWR, yet is 25 seconds slower. The validity of your estimations was just thrown out of the window.



In that case, change your wordings a bit. "Will" is a sure happening, "may" is what you mean.


Doesn't this very clearly say that a better driver in a slower car can match a faster car? To me, it does.


This is where I return to the semi racing tyres.

Read this article and say, do you really think Porsche would make a car with tyres that aren't road tyres?

Read this article too. The Carrera GT has Pilot Sport Cups as stock, so it probably should have been fitted with some grocery store tyres before its run on the Nordschleife to ensure the validity of the times? After all, semi racing tyres give an unfair advantage, don't they?


Sabine Schmidt overtook Porsches in her Ford Transit. With your logic, the Porsches get a beating from a Transit.


That's called the advantages of an independent rear suspension, for example.

You may not realize it, but it's great fun getting you caught of contradicting your own sayings, stating estimations as facts with no proof, and being the biggest Nissan hater there is. Let's keep going, this is amusing! 👍

I love you fanboys, just because someone doesnt think the GTR is as fast as nissan says because they have been proved to have lied twice before automatically makes me a nissan hater

1.
Lotec is a tuner car, and probably a poor tuner at that.

2.
The cup sports are regarded as semi racing tires and sport auto usually tells us when a car is fitted with semi racing tires when they do their tests.

Just to let you know the new M3 also does not manage to beat the 8 min barrier around the 'ring.

3.
Blowdog says the his porsche is a much faster car around the racetrack. The skyline is just easy to drive fast due to its 4wd.

4.
I never said semi racing tires give an unfair advantage, however the majority of cars tested by sport auto are usually firtted with non semi racing tires and therefore you guys need to take that into account. In colder countries semi racing tires will not be a viable option. They are too dangerous in cold/wet conditions. As for the porsche they will come with the tires that you tell the dealer you want. As for the CGT thats a super car, completly different game here but chances are if you want to drive it in all conditions you will also have a set of all season tires for it. The michelin cups just slide about everywhere untill they reach their optimum temp. And if its slippery and cold in the first place that will never happen. Its purely a summer/racetrack only tire.

5.
The R34 GTR is over hyped, never living up to its reputation unless tuned. The only reason why people go ga ga over them is because of their tuning capability. The R34 was never faster than its competition at the time or anything overly special. Special only when tuned.

Do you recognise that nissan has lied about its two previous GT-R's 'ring capabilities?

 

[Jim Prower]

Fanboy? who's being a fanboy? It sounds like you're being the Fanboy here, the Porsche fanboy. Either that, or an anti-Nissanite, prejudiced against the car and all who like it because it's a Nissan, and you're saying that to make us all feel guilty.

Yeeeah.

and Why should I trust someone called "Blowdog?" Some forumer I don't know? Not to mention you're changing your arguments, constantly upping the ante...you're now looking at Porsche's racing homologation specials, the GT3/GT2, when the clear target is the more luxurious Turbo (Which is still scorchingly fast). Apples=oranges, there. If you want to compare to the GT3/GT2, wait for the GT-R N1.

(On the other hand, Nissan has GOT to be loving that this thread is 39 pages long)