2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

[forza2.0]

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)

Blowdog has had numerous different vehicles. He has first hand knowledge on 911's and GT-R's. Its of his opionion that the 911 is far superior. Try argue with that.

The GTR weighs over 1700kg and only has 470 somethin hp and nissan have a history of lieing about its 'ring performances. No wonder I dont believe them, nissan has no credability.

Nothing to do with me not liking nissan or prefering porsche. Neither of them really float my boat, wouldnt mind owning one though but Id rather have a aston, ferrari, r8 or lambo.

 

[Greycap]

Its of his opionion that the 911 is far superior. Try argue with that.

In my opinion Skoda Superb is far superior to the C-class Mercedes. I have experience on them, I said so, it's the fact then, right?

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

That is, because that "someone" constantly keeps demanding the Nissans for more than the other cars. I'll return to this later in this post.

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

Does it matter? It proves that a car with similar, or worse, PWR can be 25 seconds faster around Nürburgring.

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.

Gotcha. Now tell us why the Nissans should be running on stock tyres then.

In colder countries semi racing tires will not be a viable option. They are too dangerous in cold/wet conditions.

Do you really think someone would be stupid enough to actually use those tyres when it's freezing cold and snowing? And moreover, do you really think it's never summer here?

As for the porsche they will come with the tires that you tell the dealer you want.

Somehow I have a feeling that money can help this situation with other brands too...

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.

This comment makes me wonder if you have ever driven a car year round in a country that has four seasons, probably not. It doesn't really matter if the summer tyres are those Michelins or the cheap ones bought from the grocery store, they won't grip in the cold. Specific winter tyres are needed no matter what the car is.

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.

How is it different from the base model 911 then? It's the GT and Carrera models that fly the flag of the fast Porsches.

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

Oddly enough, I have yet to see official statements from Nissan about these cars. We've seen Best Motoring and a few other unofficial times, but not once have I seen official Nissan times. So no, I don't recognize that as I haven't seen the proof.

 

[Joey D]

In my opinion Skoda Superb is far superior to the C-class Mercedes. I have experience on them, I said so, it's the fact then, right?

Actually yes, if you personally feel one car is better then another no one can tell you you're wrong.

 

[forza2.0]

In my opinion Skoda Superb is far superior to the C-class Mercedes. I have experience on them, I said so, it's the fact then, right?


That is, because that "someone" constantly keeps demanding the Nissans for more than the other cars. I'll return to this later in this post.


Does it matter? It proves that a car with similar, or worse, PWR can be 25 seconds faster around Nürburgring.


Gotcha. Now tell us why the Nissans should be running on stock tyres then.


Do you really think someone would be stupid enough to actually use those tyres when it's freezing cold and snowing? And moreover, do you really think it's never summer here?


Somehow I have a feeling that money can help this situation with other brands too...


This comment makes me wonder if you have ever driven a car year round in a country that has four seasons, probably not. It doesn't really matter if the summer tyres are those Michelins or the cheap ones bought from the grocery store, they won't grip in the cold. Specific winter tyres are needed no matter what the car is.


How is it different from the base model 911 then? It's the GT and Carrera models that fly the flag of the fast Porsches.


Oddly enough, I have yet to see official statements from Nissan about these cars. We've seen Best Motoring and a few other unofficial times, but not once have I seen official Nissan times. So no, I don't recognize that as I haven't seen the proof.

Im getting bored now.

1.

Im not saying that the nissan should be running stock tires. I have no problems with them running semi racing ones. How often do I need to say this

2.

Yes I do think someone would be stupid enough to take a car fitted with cups out in the cold.

3.
I live in england and my car will be wearing GSD3's for the winter. Its a summer tire, and a high performance one at that. My GSD3s do grip better than my old dunlop sp sports.

4.
Every porsche is still special. Porsche dont need huge power to be a good drive. Driving a porsche is meant to be a eye opening experience of what a real drivers car is. Porsche owners laugh at the bmw guys who think that their M3 is some sort of driving dynamics god.

5.
I find it odd you only know of the info that you want to know of.

 

[forza2.0]

Actually yes, if you personally feel one car is better then another no one can tell you you're wrong.

But that does not mean its true. If 100 people say the merc is better and 1 says the skoda is better chances are is that the merc is indeed better.

 

[Pyrelli]

I've spent the last few days following this thread and really the arguments are simply becoming circular.

The whole thing with the tyres is pretty ridiculous seeing as (as far as I am aware) no-one has posted any links of real credibility as to what the OEM tyres are [incidentally which I believe to be RE070s]; and even if they are RE050s or Pilot Sports they are road tyres however marginal/season dependant they may be. I don't understand why it is so hard to believe that the GT-R could have them as standard.

Using the RE050s, they might be typically approved for cars like the Ferrari Enzo but don't forget that they are also a factory option on cars such as the Vauxhall Astra - if that's the case why can't they be on the GT-R? Hmmm... how mind boggling

There's also been a lot of emphasis on various comparisons, but really just how valid are they..? As Greycap has aptly proved, various means of comparison such as the PWR are subjective and really are only useful for set conditions. On a track as diverse as the Nurburgring, these one dimensional means of comparison lack substance. Even against similarly weighted/powered cars there are way too many variables, i.e. how effectively the power is used (consider in particular the GT-Rs new transmission), how good the weight balance of the car is, the cars platform, C of G etc.

Under such variables who's to say that the GT-R, or any other car which has what have been deemed as poor specifications, can't produce fast lap times under conditions that could have favoured its characteristics. Let us also not forget about the parts of the specification for which we'll probably never know such as its true drag coefficient and its downforce + how this is distributed across the car (I can’t cite references but I read somewhere the chief designer talking about the car generating significant downforce over each axle which he called a rarity).

I'll admit that I am skeptical of its lap time but I also accept that it is a possibility that perhaps Nissan have the expertise and know how required to develop a car of this weight (perhaps this was part of the compromise to add weight for components that would help its performance) that can do competitive lap times.

Pyrelli

Edit: Link to specifications including the tyre options (manufacturer claimed)

The article refered to in the post about CD and downforce

 

[Joey D]

But that does not mean its true. If 100 people say the merc is better and 1 says the skoda is better chances are is that the merc is indeed better.

Yes it does, the car is better in your opinion. Might not be better on paper but there is no right and wrong when it comes to how you personally view the car. I personally hated the WRX and thought it was a rubbish car because I wasn't comfortable in it.

 

[forza2.0]

Yes it does, the car is better in your opinion. Might not be better on paper but there is no right and wrong when it comes to how you personally view the car. I personally hated the WRX and thought it was a rubbish car because I wasn't comfortable in it.

Well I wouldnt try to change your mind to that, the wrx is often either loved or loathed, and in the UK no longer a performance bargain.

 

[Greycap]

I have no problems with them running semi racing ones.

Let's see.

"This car will not go around the ring in under 7 mins 50 secs unless it has semi racing tires."

Stick on the semi racing tyres, drive around 7'40 and we have a time comparable to the others then. Fair and agreed?

Yes I do think someone would be stupid enough to take a car fitted with cups out in the cold.

In that case, it isn't the tyres' fault anymore.

I live in england and my car will be wearing GSD3's for the winter. Its a summer tire, and a high performance one at that. My GSD3s do grip better than my old dunlop sp sports.

Come to Finland in mid-February and try to drive your car on other roads than the biggest highways. Chances are you can't use speeds anywhere near the speed limits or you'll find your car wrapped around some sturdy pine tree. The "damn, it's raining again" winter of England isn't quite the same as our version. This is more like "damn, -20 degrees Celsius again... and another 20 cm of snow!"

Every porsche is still special. Porsche dont need huge power to be a good drive. Driving a porsche is meant to be a eye opening experience of what a real drivers car is. Porsche owners laugh at the bmw guys who think that their M3 is some sort of driving dynamics god.

And the BMW guys laugh at the Porsche owners with their overgrown VW Beetles with a ridiculous weight balance. Were you trying to prove something, other than that you're a Porsche fan?

I find it odd you only know of the info that you want to know of.

Give me that info and I'll read it. No doubt. This far, I just haven't seen any official Nissan statements here.

Seriously now. You say you're getting bored. Well, so would I if I was proven wrong at the same rate as you are. The fact is, at this point we don't have the facts to say how fast the GT-R is. So, why are you making estimations and basing your bashing of the car on them? You don't know the truth. None of us do.

The smart thing to do would be to stop trying to sound like a sports car specialist, wait for someone to stick those semi racing tyres on the GT-R, drive a fast lap on the Nordschleife and then draw more conclusions. Before that happens, your sayings have no value as there is nothing to back them up.

 

[forza2.0]

You do know that the 997 Turbo did the 'ring in 7 mins 54 with semi racing tires right...

And as for the M3 and 911, its not me liking porsche im just repeating the words of ex M3 owners that now own 911's. Natural transition onto bigger and better things.

I stand by what I said though. The GTR will not do the 'ring in under 7 mins 50 unless with semi racing tires. If it was any other car with the same stats as the GTR but without the badge I would say it would struggle to do the 'ring in under 8 mins with semi racing tires.

So the GTR will be faster than all those cars listed below right?

Corvette C6 Z06 ------------------------------------------ 7.49 min
Lamborghini Murciélago -------------------------------- 7.50 min
BMW M3 CSL -------------------------------------------- 7.50 min
Ford GT -------------------------------------------------- 7.52 min
Lamborghini Gallardo ----------------------------------- 7.52 min
Mercedes SLR ------------------------------------------- 7.52 min
Porsche 997 Turbo ---------------------------- 7.54 min (semi-R-tires)
Mercedes CLK-DTM ------------------------------------- 7.54 min semi R tires
Ferrari F430 ------------------------------------------- 7.55 min
Ferrari 360 CS ------------------------------------------- 7.56 min
Aston Martin V8 Vantage --------------------------------- 8.03 min (R-tires)
Lamborghini Diablo GT --------------------------------- 8.04 min
Audi R8 -------------------------------------------------- 8.04 min semi racing tires
Porsche Carrera S (997) -------------------------------- 8.05 min semi racing tire
Ferrari 575M --------------------------------------------- 8.05 min
Ferrari 550M --------------------------------------------- 8.07 min
BMW M6 -------------------------------------------------- 8.09 min
Ferrari 360M --------------------------------------------- 8.09 min

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

Stick on the semi racing tyres, drive around 7'40 and we have a time comparable to the others then. Fair and agreed?

i dont agree with that as it doesnt come with those tyres,my whole debate on the time is nissan basicly saying "you buy this car and if your good enough you can drive it round the 'ring in 7:38"

not "you buy this car and you can drive it aroud in the 'ring in 7:38......but youll need to put on cut slicks......and take off the limiter......and up the boost,then you can do it!"

 

[Keef]

What are you buggers on about? The GT-R's time is 7:38, and yes, the car has Extreme Performance summer tires on. It's a Department of Transportation classification here in the states, so don't argue with me about that. Same thing with GT-Rs of old; the reason they kept up with all those Porsches is because they had the most performance-oriented "normal" street tires money could buy. Whereas the Porches just wore Pilot Sport 2s and similar tires which are at least one performance class below the GT-R's tires.

So basically the only reason the GT-R outlapped the Turbo is because it has better tires. Of course, they'll wear out after 1 summer of driving it, and the Turbo's won't. The GT-R will be a helluva hand full in rain and the Turbo won't. Put the Turbo's tires on the GT-R and it'll probably lose.

I just watched the video of the GT-R's "7:38" lap. BULLCRAP!!! They started timing at the end of pit road, just before the first left corner, but ended timing mere feet after exiting the last right hand corner onto the front stretch. Bullcrap! There's at least 4 seconds missing in there. If Nissan can't even time a lap right then I've lost all trust in what they say about their new fanboy car.

So, it's an unofficial and approximate 7:42 for the GT-R in my book. The 911 Turbo is quicker around the ring. Argument solved.

 

[Greycap]

i dont agree with that as it doesnt come with those tyres,my whole debate on the time is nissan basicly saying "you buy this car and if your good enough you can drive it round the 'ring in 7:38"

You're correct in saying that it may not be able to do that straight off the showroom floor. But to properly compare it to other cars that have been running on semi racing tyres, it needs those tyres too. This is what I'm talking about, forza2.0 wants to say that the GT-R on its stock tyres (with very little actual knowledge about those tyres) is slower than the Porsches on their semi racing tyres. No doubt it might be, but is that a fair comparison?

not "you buy this car and you can drive it aroud in the 'ring in 7:38......but youll need to put on cut slicks......and take off the limiter......and up the boost,then you can do it!"

What limiter? What boost upping? Did you just invent those or are you mixing up the R33 and the new model?

I just watched the video of the GT-R's "7:38" lap. BULLCRAP!!! They started timing at the end of pit road, just before the first left corner, but ended timing mere feet after exiting the last right hand corner onto the front stretch. Bullcrap! There's at least 4 seconds missing in there. If Nissan can't even time a lap right then I've lost all trust in what they say about their new fanboy car.

So, it's an unofficial and approximate 7:42 for the GT-R in my book. The 911 Turbo is quicker around the ring. Argument solved.

About the older GT-R's and their tyres, factory road tyres are factory road tyres. Cars have different engines, cars have different suspensions, cars have different tyres. That's called being different. The next thing I'll have to face is "but the Porsches have semi racing tyres as stock!" but I can answer it in advantage. Yes, the super fast models have. The slower ones don't.

About that time of the 997 Turbo... semi-racing tyres, that are virtually cut slicks. Not a wet track. Fair?

This is ridiculous. If Ferrari claimed they have run 7'40 in a car that weighs 1700+ kg and has around 500 bhp, would anyone doubt it? No, because everyone knows Ferraris are fast. The same applies to Aston Martins. But because this is a Nissan, it must perform like the stereotypical driven to death Micra or it's a lie.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

You're correct in saying that it may not be able to do that straight off the showroom floor. But to properly compare it to other cars that have been running on semi racing tyres, it needs those tyres too. This is what I'm talking about, forza2.0 wants to say that the GT-R on its stock tyres (with very little actual knowledge about those tyres) is slower than the Porsches on their semi racing tyres. No doubt it might be, but is that a fair comparison?

but you arent properly comparing it to tyres like cups because the GTR doesnt come with them standard,if it did then it would be fair but it doesnt,hence it is fair.if you could get a GTR from nissan then it would be fair but you cant.Some of the GTR boys might think thats cheating that other companys might supply cups from the factory but nissan dont.i said way back that could a skyline GTR do it in 7:38,probably.but could a showroom spec GTR do it,very very doubtful.

What limiter? What boost upping? Did you just invent those or are you mixing up the R33 and the new model?

R33

 

[Keef]

Well, thanks to Race Idiot, I now know that the GT-R wears Bridgestone RE070

Compare that to this...



...and you have a lap on stock tires. But they still forgot to time the entire front stretch, so no, it does not make a complete lap in 7:38.

EDIT: But if you guys want to debate about it do it amongst yourselves, because I can't find an R-comp tire with the same wide circumferential grooves as the tire from the video, and we can't even see what sort of pattern is between them. All I can say is that the stock tires are RE070s and they have nearly the same grooves as the video.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

Well, thanks to Race Idiot, I now know that the GT-R wears Bridgestone RE070

Compare that to this...



...and you have a lap on stock tires. But they still forgot to time the entire front stretch, so no, it does not make a complete lap in 7:38.

cant see no thread

 

[Keef]

I edited my post to allow for more argumentation. Yes, you can't see the patterns, but you can see the grooves, and they're very much like that of the RE070. Plus the fact that I can't find any R-comps with grooves like that, and I'm to the conclusion that the lap was not taken with R-comp tires.

 

[Greycap]

(a slightly different picture overbrightened to bring out the grooves)

It does indeed look convincingly like the same tyre. Someone will probably come up with one of these theories: the tyre isn't from the same run, or, that they cut a slick to look like the RE070 to fool people.

One more thing that I hadn't realized this far is that the car was wearing the black masks on that run. Wonder how much downforce it lost thanks to the front bumper being covered?

 

[Pyrelli]

I'm not good with tags and such but this is a link to its page on the Bridgestone website:

RE070

You just just about match up the tyres based on this picture and the still taken from the video.

Pyrelli

 

[Keef]

I doubt the car actually creates much downforce. More like the design has no lift, or very little downforce.

Anyway, yes, the flappy black things are probably a big aerodynamic hinderance, but it's a negligible effect. Downforce is useless with a soft, stock suspension because the suspension will soak up the downward force, transferring very little of it to the tires. Nearly all the downforce gets to a race car's tires because the suspension isn't soft enough to absorb any of that force. Also, with the Ring's length and focus on racing line, the extra drag during the high speed sections would be mitigated by adjusting your entry to one of the corners...

I'm not good with tags and such but this is a link to its page on the Bridgestone website:

RE070

You just just about match up the tyres based on this picture and the still taken from the video.

Pyrelli

Thanks for the contribution, but that point has already been made here.

 

[the Interceptor]

Downforce is useless with a soft, stock suspension because the suspension will soak up the downward force, transferring very little of it to the tires.

Just for my understanding: let's say we have a bodywork that creates a specific downforce, and we use that on two cars - one with a soft stock suspension, and one with a harder racing suspension. The virtual weight the downforce generates is the same for both cars. If so, isn't the only difference that the softer car just sinks a little further into the springs? The force on the tires should remain the same. Or there's something in there I forgot...

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

One more thing that I hadn't realized this far is that the car was wearing the black masks on that run. Wonder how much downforce it lost thanks to the front bumper being covered?

cant see the black mask on the in car video how do you know it was the same car (well someone else would have said it!)

Just for my understanding: let's say we have a bodywork that creates a specific downforce, and we use that on two cars - one with a soft stock suspension, and one with a harder racing suspension. The virtual weight the downforce generates is the same for both cars. If so, isn't the only difference that the softer car just sinks a little further into the springs? The force on the tires should remain the same. Or there's something in there I forgot...

no quite,if the suspension is harder then it pushes the car down more as there is less suspension travel so in theory there is more of a tyre contact patch with the road.(i think could be wrong though)

 

[Keef]

Just for my understanding: let's say we have a bodywork that creates a specific downforce, and we use that on two cars - one with a soft stock suspension, and one with a harder racing suspension. The virtual weight the downforce generates is the same for both cars. If so, isn't the only difference that the softer car just sinks a little further into the springs? The force on the tires should remain the same. Or there's something in there I forgot...

No, you're right. I'm the one that screwed that one up, so my point doesn't make much sense. Oops. I was thinking about that after I posted it, but thanks for correcting me. So everyone just ignore my thing about soft suspensions and downforce, because I didn't know wth I was talking about.

 

[Leonidae]

Keef, I've said it before that the pit straight isn't part of the lap because it's the standard laptime procedure on the ring, set by Sport Auto, and most car magazines and manufacturers follow it due safety reasons. If the cars would blast at full throttle past pit straight and someone would be exciting the pit at the same time, the chance of crash at high speed is high.

 

[Keef]

Keef, I've said it before that the pit straight isn't part of the lap because it's the standard laptime procedure on the ring, set by Sport Auto, and most car magazines and manufacturers follow it due safety reasons. If the cars would blast at full throttle past pit straight and someone would be exciting the pit at the same time, the chance of crash at high speed is high.

Oh. Well I don't really have anything to say about that, then. It seems the GT-R has lapped a whopping 2 seconds faster than the 911 Turbo. Tire problem solved, aero problem solved, timing problem solved. What else is there that needs debunking?

 

[Leonidae]

The stubborness of badge lovers.. that's all that's left.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

Oh. Well I don't really have anything to say about that, then. It seems the GT-R has lapped a whopping 2 seconds faster than the 911 Turbo. Tire problem solved, aero problem solved, timing problem solved. What else is there that needs debunking?

tyre problem isnt exactly solved

what about the car being a prototype and not a production car

and iirc lotus did the aeros so nissan cant claim that credit

 

[Keef]

Unless you're an engineer on the GT-R project you can argue about that issue all you want!

Oh, here's a point. The Bridgestone RE070's wet performace is...well...there isn't any wet performance. The tire is Sage-awful on wet roads. But the Pilot Sport 2, on the Turbo, is excellent in wet conditions.

So there.

EDIT: Oh, I thought of something! The Turbo's engine is in the back, which is preposterous, and yet it still manages to perform on par with the GT-R. Therefore, Porsche's car is the more advanced in terms of chassis and suspension engineering.

 

[Pyrelli]

...Oh, here's a point. The Bridgestone RE070's wet performace is...well...there isn't any wet performance...

Well Bridgestone don't think so, according to their page for the tyre (RE070) they have "exceptional handling in hazardous, wet conditions".

But they would say that wouldn't they

Pyrelli

 

[Keef]

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Bridgestone&tireModel=Potenza+RE070

They're also noisy and uncomfortable. The PS2 isn't.