2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

  • Thread starter emad
  • 3,050 comments
  • 148,014 views
Sorry, I thought it was a generalization. And I never heard of "Car Magazine" I usually just read the online articles here and other places.

But what track was this timed at? I'm surprised how well the GT-R is fairing up with the competition. Nissan really made the GT-R a serious contender. Kudos đź‘Ť
not sure doesnt say on thier site although at the lap times i would hazzard a guess at bedford autodrome ( or is that evo that uses there?)
 
It was done around rockingham racetrack.

2001974459281712140_rs.jpg
 
Its Car magazine đź’ˇ

And if you want more info go buy the magazine, the publishers want to get their investment back.
Yeah, look at my last post, and you don't have to be a dick for someone mis-reading your post. For me it's kind of a hassle to go buy a magazine considering I don't have a car, and I kinda live out of the way and it's to late to go bike into town... And even if it wasn't late I don't feel like going out considering I am sick, so can't you just supply a little more information. đź‘Ž

not sure doesnt say on thier site although at the lap times i would hazzard a guess at bedford autodrome ( or is that evo that uses there?)
Don't know xD but thanks for the info anyways. đź‘Ť
 
Yeah, look at my last post, and you don't have to be a dick for someone mis-reading your post. For me it's kind of a hassle to go buy a magazine considering I don't have a car, and I kinda live out of the way and it's to late to go bike into town... And even if it wasn't late I don't feel like going out considering I am sick, so can't you just supply a little more information.

Order it off the internet and get it delivered to your house. Theres not much more info to be had other than posting the entire article which I could/would not do anyway.
 
car15.jpg

car14.jpg


Snippets of the article. Its a really long and interesting one. The guy somehow managed to stick the R8 in the gravel trap lol. Notice how on one corner the 997 TT is massively slower than the competition in one of the corners which is kinda odd. I think once the R8 comes out with a more powerful engine it could very well be the fastest of these cars, although I hear from the porsche boys that the facelift 997 TT is not far off and porsche are on a mission. Happy Days :D
 
This is all making me very anxious for the American tests in a few months...
 
I dont care how many miles a car journalist drives in all sorts of different cars as matter of fact they can never give me the full picture of what its like to live with a car day to day. Why else do car jorno's resort to long term tests? So they can give us full perspective of what its like to live with that car day to day.

The problem with mags like evo etc is that they are too performance orientated reviews. I want to read more about real life situations. I want to read about how the cars are how 99% of them are actually driven by real owners. Car jornos most of the time miss a car's hidden talents because they dont get to drive it day to day. Hell Im still learning stuff about my car and forming opinions on it all the time.

Now im a gas engineer and all of the men who have been in the trade for 30+ yrs all say that the customer knows more about their appliance than the engineer will. And the same goes for car owners vs car jornos.

And you're missing the point. Wasn't the original question what the GT-R was like, performance-wise, compared to a 911 Turbo?

And a road-tester is not an engineer. He is a user, just like the customer. Listen, we don't just get pristine cars with fresh tires that we can wring the hell out of and forget. Most media testers are complete crap. Fried clutches, worn tires, rattly engine mounts. A test-unit provides a window into what the car will look like five years down the line.

And we don't drive the cars at 100% attack all of the time. otherwise, we'd all be in jail. We drive them hard to see what they'll do, and we drive them to the office and back, just like regular owners do. If you cover more than 100 miles in one test, you've got that 99% of info you need to say something about a car.

I'm still learning things about my car, three years and a half-dozen trackdays later... but does that make my initial impressions any less valid? No. I know more, but the quality of that knowledge, like I said, is like filling in that last 1% that I didn't get in the first 500 miles.

Initially, I said the steering was sharp. That's still true. I said that there's body roll, but that the car is stable in turns. That's still true. I noted that there's bump steer. That's still true. The brakes were soft then, and faded easily. That's still true, or would be if I hadn't changed the brake lines. The engine had no top end back then. That'd still be true if I hadn't messed with tuning and exhaust. The only additional information I've got on the car is that it loses suspension composure if you put r-compounds on it (which isn't a shock) and that bushings wear out if you drive over rough roads... and the clutch won't last more than ten laps on track. Wow... big insight.

And then there are the honest owners, of which there are hundred around. We dont have many on this forum as most people here either dont drive or drive something thats not exactly sporting.

Which brings us around to the circular argument. There are trustworthy car owners and those who can't give an honest opinion... how does that make them any different from journos? Some couldn't tell a manual from an auto, but the guys at Evo and Autocar are generally among those who could tell you things about your own car in just one sit than you couldn't find out yourself in three years of driving.

Did I say that it was bad?

I can't be bothered to look them up, but you have said that "based on the the power-weight ratio" and "the GT-R can't do that on road tires" and other such stuff. I haven't heard you actually admit that, yes, maybe Nissan wasn't lying when they said it was fast. You just go on and on about how Nissan "over-rates" their cars, even after numerous people, including yourself, have shown that Nissan's numbers bear out in real-world testing.

But many do.

Which means that they're actually using them. Good for them.

Take note of the evo's weight distribution. Hell do you know how many cars have a weight distribution of around 60:40?

Note: you missed the sarcasm. Or maybe I forgot my [sarcasm] tag. The point I was trying to make: Judging a car based solely on your preconceptions and biases is a good way to miss out on a lot of good cars. Many people have poo-poohed the Audi RS4 and R8, even before they came out. Many did the same with the Veyron. But in the end, when it turns out that they're actually good cars... what do those people have to say?

You've been caught pre-judging the GT-R based on your biases, but now that it has been proven to be a good car, you're trying to pretend that the argument doesn't exist. You haven't actually admitted that you might have been wrong, that the GT-R is actually a pretty good car. You just turn the argument back on me and ask if you've ever said it was a bad car...

Notice how on one corner the 997 TT is massively slower than the competition in one of the corners which is kinda odd.

It's not odd at all. The 911 does something in certain slow corners. It's called understeer. That's one of the disadvantages of the RR layout. In the Autocar video, you'll notice that it's this that gave the GT-R a faster lap-time than the 911 GT3. Without it, the 911 would have been faster.

I think once the R8 comes out with a more powerful engine it could very well be the fastest of these cars, although I hear from the porsche boys that the facelift 997 TT is not far off and porsche are on a mission. Happy Days

And by then, we'll also have the GT-R V-Spec. I wouldn't hold my breath on the R8 just yet, they've had the heat problems with the turbo motor... but I would dearly love love to see the diesel when it comes out... that's the R-car we've all been waiting for. ;)
 
It's not odd at all. The 911 does something in certain slow corners. It's called understeer. That's one of the disadvantages of the RR layout. In the Autocar video, you'll notice that it's this that gave the GT-R a faster lap-time than the 911 GT3. Without it, the 911 would have been faster.

And before anyone jumps on me for that... yes, I know the the 911 Turbo isn't RR, but it's still rear-engined.
 
Well, even a trick AWD system can't kill physics ;).

It makes sense that it would still understeer even if it technically isn't RR, in the same way Audis will still lead with their nose despite a rear-end bias to the system. Those engines will always be remaining in the same place, and affecting the handling accordingly.

Glad you quoted that, because I was initially confused about the mention of the Turbo and the GT3 together, but now I've figured it out. Odd that anybody would compare the GT3 to the GT-R though... I guess only because they're closer in price?
 
Probably.

But personally, Knowing that the GT-R compares favorably to the 911 Turbo in terms of power (or, if it falls behind, it doesn't fall behind very far... there are two conflicting camps on this... I wouldn't be surprised if some units turned out to be more powerful than others... deepening the anti-Nissan conspiracy theory even further), I'd like to know how it compares to the best handling 911 on the track.

Of course, the 911 GT2 would be an interesting comparison... GT3-type balance and Turbo power... :D :D :D
 
Dont act all high and mighty with me as if you have authority around here. Go tell some more people how much better your nova is than inferior mini's.
Did you not read and take on board the "Zero tolerance" part of the thread title? Given how close you are to a ban and your past track record I would be very, very careful about your attitude. I can assure you that should you get banned again you will not be coming back.



The problem with mags like evo etc is that they are too performance orientated reviews. I want to read more about real life situations. I want to read about how the cars are how 99% of them are actually driven by real owners. Car jornos most of the time miss a car's hidden talents because they dont get to drive it day to day. Hell Im still learning stuff about my car and forming opinions on it all the time.

Now im a gas engineer and all of the men who have been in the trade for 30+ yrs all say that the customer knows more about their appliance than the engineer will. And the same goes for car owners vs car jornos.
Sorry but I totally disagree with you on this, little news flash for you Car journalists are car owners too, and ones with generally a much greater interest and understanding of the cars they own that the vast majority of average car owners. They are also better placed to compare them to a wider range of cars that the average owner is as well, the average owner of a car may think it the best think since sliced bread (and in isolation may be right), however in comparison to other competitors may in truth be average. As for spending time with cars to get to know them inside out, what do you think thousands of miles on road tests and long term tests are for?


Now onto the main point of my post, Evo have put the GTR on test against three rivals in three separate tests.

0-100-0 vs Corvette Z06

OK so all you lot really want is the numbers for this one, so here we go:

All figures are Z06 / GTR

0-30 : 1.9 / 1.7
0-40 : 2.5 / 2.3
0-50 : 3.1 / 3.0
0-60 : 3.9 / 3.8
0-80 : 5.8 / 6.0
0-90 : 7.4 / 7.3
0-100 : 8.5 / 8.9

0-100-0 : 14.0 / 13.9

All times recorded at the Santa Pod drag strip


On the road vs Audi R8
A purely on road assessment of the two cars over a wide variety of road type and a good number of miles, its a long section so I will just use a bit from the end which I feel sums it up quite well.

Evo
In fact, you find yourself short-shifting and soft-pedalling the throttle to give the Audi a chance to catch up so you can see how hard it's trying. The game has moved on.


On the track vs Porsche 911 GT3
Put against the GT3 on the west circuit at Bedford Autodrome (1.8 miles in length) the times were:

911 GT3 - 1:22.6
GT-R - 1:21.7



Overall its a stunning performance from the GT-R and despite Forza 2.0's opinion of reviews in magazine such as Evo, I don't believe that all they focus on the the performance end of the car. They certainly do focus on performance, but if that was all they were interested in then they would not bother with the on road test, nor do I believe the following would be in the final summary.

Evo
You can enjoy its effortless precision at a lazy lope or at full speed


I would strongly recommend to anyone in the UK that they pick up a copy of the latest Evo to have a good read of these three tests.


Regards

Scaff
 
0-100-0 vs Corvette Z06

OK so all you lot really want is the numbers for this one, so here we go:

All figures are Z06 / GTR

0-30 : 1.9 / 1.7
0-40 : 2.5 / 2.3
0-50 : 3.1 / 3.0
0-60 : 3.9 / 3.8
0-80 : 5.8 / 6.0
0-90 : 7.4 / 7.3
0-100 : 8.5 / 8.9

0-100-0 : 14.0 / 13.9

All times recorded at the Santa Pod drag strip

That is shockingly close, my friends. Its going to come down to driver skill and road conditions (and likely track conditions) to decide who's the fastest out of these two. I'm under the assumption that the power and weight advantage gives the Corvette a boost as speeds climb, but for short blips of speed, the AWD and "right now" power of the GT-R is hard to beat.

Per the rest, I still find those GT3 times surprising. That, as we all know, is a strong performer when it comes to price and performance comparisons. I'd have guessed it to be a fair bit faster than the GT-R usually, but it looks like its pretty consistently about a second or so behind in most cases. I do wonder if track choices play a part at all, but since its been consistent, I'm beginning to doubt it.

As for the R8, why bother even bringing it up other than the price comparison? I personally didn't find its performance all that awe-inspiring, not being much faster (if at all) than your average 911 Carrera S. Sure, its a lovely performance machine, but the world was already turning against it by the time it was making its impact. Much like the Aston V8 Vantage, its a very pretty car with some very strong capabilities, but nevertheless, there are better options out there for less money.

===

Its fun to debate the pros and cons of the GT-R, but we could all be a bit more civil about it (including myself). Its just a car, a damn-good one at that, and there are plenty of alternatives out there to gab about.

And yes, I'll say it once more: I can't wait for the official test in the US against the Z06 and 997T. Tracks like Grattan (one hopes Car and Driver does it in my backyard), VIR and Willow Springs (where Motor Trend usually tests) should make things very interesting indeed.
 
Sorry but I totally disagree with you on this, little news flash for you Car journalists are car owners too, and ones with generally a much greater interest and understanding of the cars they own that the vast majority of average car owners.

True but im not talking about the average car owner as they in most cases are not too interested anyway. Im talking about the real enthusiasts, the guys that have owned M3's, Evo's, 911's, R34's and caterhams throughout their lifetime. People like blowdog for example, and there are quite a number of people who have owned such high performance vehicles in the UK. I used to think the E46 M3 could do no wrong, that it was the best thing since sliced bread due to how the media fussed over it, but then I read a few owners reviews and how the M3 compared to Evo's and 911's and I soon learnt that these guys talked about things that all these car journo's seemingly missed your just failed to mention. The M3 is still a great car but its by no way the gift from god like some people like to speak of it.

I have learnt far more from them about those vehicles and how they behave on the track and on the road than I have from car magazines.


Anyway back to the evo article, where there no laptimes for the Z06 or R8?

I also have gripes how they state that the GTR has moved the game on when comparing it to the R8. In what way do they mean as from reading different car mags im getting conflicting messages. The R8 doesnt have the power to keep up with the GTR, but many say its a much better handler, and the more enjoyable track car. Same going for the GT3.

Im hazarding a guess that the GTR, like such cars as the Evo are easy to get fast and consistent laptimes out of, and that it makes average and above drivers seem like they are more skilled than they really are. I support this view back to the sportauto figures where proffesional drivers seem to post faster lap times in the GT3. But then again maybe this track just suits the GTR's nature better.

And guys im really not a GTR hater. I was just scepticle of the nissans claimed 'ring time, that is all there is too it. I never thought it was slow I just dont believe it lapped it in what nissan said they did.

Anyway I await more tests of this vehicle, and I more eagerly await to see how the industry responds. The GTR is good for the car industry. Right now the porsche forums are talking why the 997TT is slower around the racetrack and why they doubt the 500hp, DSG equipped Facelifted turbo will also struggle to beat it.
 
True but im not talking about the average car owner as they in most cases are not too interested anyway. Im talking about the real enthusiasts, the guys that have owned M3's, Evo's, 911's, R34's and caterhams throughout their lifetime. People like blowdog for example, and there are quite a number of people who have owned such high performance vehicles in the UK. I used to think the E46 M3 could do no wrong, that it was the best thing since sliced bread due to how the media fussed over it, but then I read a few owners reviews and how the M3 compared to Evo's and 911's and I soon learnt that these guys talked about things that all these car journo's seemingly missed your just failed to mention. The M3 is still a great car but its by no way the gift from god like some people like to speak of it.

I have learnt far more from them about those vehicles and how they behave on the track and on the road than I have from car magazines.
Again I would counter with the same question, do you not think that car journalists own cars and have the same (or greater) depth of knowledge.

It strikes me that the only press pieces you seem to take notice of are the first drives and first tests, no car enthusiast is going to be able to provide any more of an insight (and almost certainly less of one) given the same amount of exposure to a car. Its why long-term road tests exist and why you need to read beyond the numbers and first reports.

Its why the piece written by Chris Harris that I posted was, in my opinion, so important. as quite frankly you are going to struggle to find a car enthusiast with a better understanding of the 911 than him, so his comments on the GT-R are both incredibly relevant and bore of experience of the GT-R's benchmark target.



Anyway back to the evo article, where there no laptimes for the Z06 or R8?

I also have gripes how they state that the GTR has moved the game on when comparing it to the R8. In what way do they mean as from reading different car mags im getting conflicting messages. The R8 doesnt have the power to keep up with the GTR, but many say its a much better handler, and the more enjoyable track car. Same going for the GT3.

Im hazarding a guess that the GTR, like such cars as the Evo are easy to get fast and consistent laptimes out of, and that it makes average and above drivers seem like they are more skilled than they really are. I support this view back to the sportauto figures where proffesional drivers seem to post faster lap times in the GT3. But then again maybe this track just suits the GTR's nature better.
No laptimes were posted for the R8 and Z06 because the GT-R was put against each in isolation, however both have previously been around the same track, with the following times...

Audi R8 - 1:22.10
Z06 - 1:24.45

..however those would have been recorded under different conditions, the circuit is the one that Evo always use and as such it does provide a limited benchmark. However that does not get away from the fact that the GT-R is very quick indeed.

While you describe the GT-R as an easy car to get good times out of, from all the pieces on the car I have read it does seem to be as much a fact of how good it is as a drivers car and how involved it makes the driver.



And guys im really not a GTR hater. I was just scepticle of the nissans claimed 'ring time, that is all there is too it. I never thought it was slow I just dont believe it lapped it in what nissan said they did.
To be honest your comments went beyond reasonable scepticism and given the majority of evidence seen so far (the cars used both by Evo and Autocar were not press cars, rather personal imports straight from the Japanese Nissan dealership network) accusations of specifically preped cars do not seem to be bearing out at all.



Anyway I await more tests of this vehicle, and I more eagerly await to see how the industry responds. The GTR is good for the car industry. Right now the porsche forums are talking why the 997TT is slower around the racetrack and why they doubt the 500hp, DSG equipped Facelifted turbo will also struggle to beat it.
I think we all await tests on this car, and I don't think its will stop the internet speculation. Additionally given that we will have to wait some time for your 'real enthusiasts' to have time with the cars, the writings of those real enthusiasts who also happen to write will have to do for now (and they certainly seem to like the car).


Regards

Scaff
 
I would strongly recommend to anyone in the UK that they pick up a copy of the latest Evo to have a good read of these three tests.

Just an FYI to our American friends as well, you can pick up EVO at Boarders for like $10, they have Top Gear there as well.
 
No laptimes were posted for the R8 and Z06 because the GT-R was put against each in isolation, however both have previously been around the same track, with the following times...

Audi R8 - 1:22.10
Z06 - 1:24.45

..however those would have been recorded under different conditions, the circuit is the one that Evo always use and as such it does provide a limited benchmark. However that does not get away from the fact that the GT-R is very quick indeed.

I assume they were quite bad for the Z06 to perform that poorly? Furthermore, that it was an earlier version of the car?

If anything, the R8 should have had its ass handed to it by the Z06 without much of a problem. That is of course, unless they used a Z51, which would have been a very close race.
 
It wasn't the 2008 revisions model, but I'm pretty sure that one was done in the past year. I'll take a look at my older issues. It just doesn't suit the track, the Audi is alarmingly fast around that place (beating the GT3 is pretty crazy).
 
There must be some kind of advantage to the AWD setups there. The Corvette usually is a pretty decent all-around car on most tracks (the Porsche too), but I know the earlier models were a bit "twitchy" on overly complex circuits.

A new steering box and a refined rear suspension make it a much better car, and has improved track times in tests here. The GT3 is a cracking good car, and is (as I recall) fractions of a second behind the Z06 around VIR.
 
If anything, the R8 should have had its ass handed to it by the Z06 without much of a problem. That is of course, unless they used a Z51, which would have been a very close race.

You really do not give the R8 enough credit. In europe it has beaten the 997TT quite a few times now around racetracks always seemingly punching above its 420hp weight. I would expect the Z06 to beat it but hardly say it would get its ass handed to it. But thats depending on a track with not too many straights.
 
Well, if this is the place that Evo does all its tests, I suppose the R8's power deficit is its one big handicap there... given that these cars are faster in a straight line, the R8's lap time is an accomplishment in itself, reflective of its more advantageous mid-engined layout.

From what I can remember (a friend has my last EVO copy at the moment... ) there is at least one chicane and a complex turn-combination or two that may give the Z06 some trouble. It might be a rear-geometry problem that GM will finally sort out on the Z51.

But like Scaff says, you can't really compare lap-times on different days on a 1:1 basis, simply because changes in the weather and track conditions can affect them drastically (as we pointed out, RE: Nurb, so many hundreds of pages ago...). The only times that matter are the GT3's versus the GT-Rs... one thing I'd like to know... any mention of track temperature in the article? The Autocar video hinted that cold conditions weren't good for the Pilot Cup Sports on the GT3... I'd like to know if it was a similarly cold and/or greasy day during the EVO test.

I would strongly recommend to anyone in the UK that they pick up a copy of the latest Evo to have a good read of these three tests.

Regards

Scaff

Thanks for the heads up... I'm going to look for this at the bookstore. Unfortunately, since EVO Philippines folded up, I have to pay import prices for this mag... :(

They've finally gotten around to doing a comparo... finally!

Speaking of which, Scaff, I've finally gotten to drive the E90 320i... great car... nice and sharp... no wonder you got one... kinda light on steering feel, though, compared to my older Mazda, and it's obviously slower, because of the weight, but I like it better than most of the other cars on the road in this class. How's yours going? (shameless OT)
 
You really do not give the R8 enough credit.

You're damn right I don't. Although I certainly appreciate its performance at 911 Carrera S and Corvette Z51 levels, its no Z06 competitor. It just doesn't have enough juice for that.

Using the Car and Driver "Lightning Lap" yardstick from the 2007 test at Virginia International Raceway:

(lap time/average speed in MPH)

Chevrolet Corvette Z06 - 2:58.2/82.7
Porsche 911 GT3 - 3:01.8/81.3
Chevrolet Corvette Z51 - 3:03.6/80.0 (BTW: This is the "old" LS2-powered model, times should improve slightly for 2008 with the extra 36 BHP from the LS3)
Audi R8 - 3:04.6/79.6
Porsche 911 Turbo - 3:05.8/79.9
Ford Shelby GT500 - 3:05.9/79.2

And a rough guess as to where the GT-R will fit in if they can get one for this years test?

I'd bet the GT-R would go somewhere around 2:57-3:00 with an average speed likely above 81.5 MPH.
 
Right in there with the Z06, eh? I wouldn't call you that far off. Might extend my upper limit to Juuuuust behind the GT3.

Then again, is the VIR layout they used a power or handling course? (Not that the GT-R has neither, but...)
 
Using the Car and Driver "Lightning Lap" yardstick from the 2007 test at Virginia International Raceway:

(lap time/average speed in MPH)

Chevrolet Corvette Z06 - 2:58.2/82.7
Porsche 911 GT3 - 3:01.8/81.3
Chevrolet Corvette Z51 - 3:03.6/80.0 (BTW: This is the "old" LS2-powered model, times should improve slightly for 2008 with the extra 36 BHP from the LS3)
Audi R8 - 3:04.6/79.6
Porsche 911 Turbo - 3:05.8/79.9
Ford Shelby GT500 - 3:05.9/79.2
I have trouble trusting a source where a Ford Mustang is 1 tenth off a Turbo and the Turbo is beaten handily by an "old" Corvette Z51. In my opinion, im very sceptical of bias.
 
When I see cars so closely packed, I think of the other stuff... Looks, interior, overall appeal, the unspoken charisma (sp?).
Appearance is a big one for me. :sly:

Bottom line is, most test have some kind of bias and many of these cars being compared are very close in performance.

Personally, I find it sort of entertaining and comforting to catch the problems with testing... Chris Harris of Autocar recently did a comparo of the GT3, GTR, and M3. The M3 was way off pace (and it was his personal car used in the test). The GT3 was .3 off the GTR around the track. However, Mr. Harris did one lap at easy speeds and then pushed for one more, only doing two laps overall, he admitted on camera that the test was biased because the GT3's ClubSports weren't up to proper temperature thanks to the 2 degree weather (that's 2 degrees with a C and not an F ;) ).

Point is... When cars are that fast and that close in performance, wouldn't it be best to find something else to choose favorites on?

I find the Gallardo is the best looking car on the market and a SuperLeggera without the dopey decal would be incredible. Likewise for the R8 and that stupid side panel.
Of course, the GTR and Z06, I don't think they need any improvements on appearance, they both look great as they are now. đź‘Ť
 
Well, if this is the place that Evo does all its tests, I suppose the R8's power deficit is its one big handicap there... given that these cars are faster in a straight line, the R8's lap time is an accomplishment in itself, reflective of its more advantageous mid-engined layout.

From what I can remember (a friend has my last EVO copy at the moment... ) there is at least one chicane and a complex turn-combination or two that may give the Z06 some trouble. It might be a rear-geometry problem that GM will finally sort out on the Z51.
The west circuit at Bedford Autodrome is a fairly technical circuit, it does have two chicanes and a couple of shortish straights (around a 1/4 mile each), it would tend to favour handling over raw power, but not to a huge degree.

Anyone who has/had Race Driver 3 would have come across the circuit as its used in the game.



But like Scaff says, you can't really compare lap-times on different days on a 1:1 basis, simply because changes in the weather and track conditions can affect them drastically (as we pointed out, RE: Nurb, so many hundreds of pages ago...). The only times that matter are the GT3's versus the GT-Rs... one thing I'd like to know... any mention of track temperature in the article? The Autocar video hinted that cold conditions weren't good for the Pilot Cup Sports on the GT3... I'd like to know if it was a similarly cold and/or greasy day during the EVO test.
The Evo article says...

evo
Poor weather would have unquestionable sealed the 911's fate before the test could start, so it's great to see the west circuit is bathed in brilliant sunshine as we convene in the pit lane.

...they later go one to say that they ensured that tyres were up to temperature on both cars before going after lap times.


Speaking of which, Scaff, I've finally gotten to drive the E90 320i... great car... nice and sharp... no wonder you got one... kinda light on steering feel, though, compared to my older Mazda, and it's obviously slower, because of the weight, but I like it better than most of the other cars on the road in this class. How's yours going? (shameless OT)
Loving mine more and more each day, the more miles it gets under it the better the engine feels and handling wish its excellent. Not a single regret at all, and the RWD makes it more fun as well.


Scaff
 
I have trouble trusting a source where a Ford Mustang is 1 tenth off a Turbo and the Turbo is beaten handily by an "old" Corvette Z51. In my opinion, im very sceptical of bias.

Well, I'm not sure either. As I recall, that version of the GT500 had the updated suspension and the revamped engine for 2007. As for the Corvette, the new suspension really made a big difference for the car, and I'm certain that this year, that gap should widen just a bit as well.

Simply put, I think the 997T is just too heavy for a good run at VIR.
 
Back