2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

[niky]

@Scaff: That's good info... so the Pilot Sport Cups should have... theoretically... been at optimum temperature.

RE: 3-series: Envy. But I'm even more envious of anyone with the current M3 (they gave taxi-rides... still waiting on permission to borrow a test unit). That thing sounds just perfect... like pure emotion... The lack of low-end torque, even compared to lowly 300 hp turbo cars, is palpable, but I think the soundtrack and handling make up for it.

Would I buy one over a GT-R, given a similar price, and knowing that it's quite a bit slower? I don't know. I'd have to listen to the GT-R to decide.

----

RE: Shelby:

Well... who knows? This is the problem with track testing. No two tracks will give you the same results between two similar vehicles... the number of variables that affect a lap-time are too big. And note, this is a retuned Mustang against the same 997 911 Turbo we've had since... well, since it came out... the game moves on, little by little. I have no doubt that Porsche will release a faster 911 Turbo in the near-future... considering the GT2 is, supposedly (according to Chris Harris), so much quicker than the current Turbo.

 

[SagarisGTB]

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

Isnt the Shelby Mustang nearly 200kg heavier though? The Turbo is still a very fast car. Just seems to be something of an outlier in the test, which takes away a bit of credibility.

 

[YSSMAN]

Per the C&D test (the August 2007 issue):

Despite a strong 480 horsepower, it wasn't that happy around VIR and ran an unexpectedly mediocre 3:05.8 time, partly because of its 3528-pound mass, partly because the power went away after a couple of laps, and partly because it really doesn't like to dance... The Turbo suffers from an overly stimulating amount of midcorner lief-throttle oversteer, although its reasonably stable as long as it's set up early and powered through the turns.

I don't think "stale" is the right word to use, but when the Turbo first debuted against the Z06 and the F430 earlier that year, it had the same problem in that European-based test.

Per the question of the GT500:

Its a strange car - it moves around obsessively when driven hard, with so much body roll and pitch that its hard to believe it was designed to perform in such a manner. It is, however, a safe car to drive fast because it is exceptionally predictable, is seemingly impossible to spin, and has brakes that hold up well.

I'd be interested to see how the GT500KR compares against this one, but I have no idea if they're running it for the 2008 test or not. We'll have to wait until July to find out...

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

apparently m3's get marked up to 100k too...

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/10/2008-bmw-m3-coupe-being-marked-up-to-100-000/

 

[Jim Prower]

I think I said earlier that some people have to have the Latest, greatest thing. I mean, I bet there'll be markups of around $10,000 (Don't want to get too optimistic) on the Challenger SRT-8.

It'll calm down when the "Gimmes" have theirs.

 

[exigeracer]

apparently m3's get marked up to 100k too...

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/10/2008-bmw-m3-coupe-being-marked-up-to-100-000/

That's one dealership. I know people who've been offered an M3 at exactly MSRP, and some other dealers are getting their first batches with cars that haven't even been spoken for.

 

[YSSMAN]

I believe I've talked about the GT500 Convertibles that were being marked-up $40,000 here before. No one in their right mind, unless they're die-hard Mustang fans, are going to pay $80,000 for a supercharged convertible that isn't really all that spectacular in the first place...

 

[Tornado]

Meanwhile, the Pontiac GTO went unanswered.
​

 

[Jim Prower]

That's probably because it wasn't a Firebird.

 

[niky]

Meanwhile, the Pontiac GTO went unanswered.
​

Because, while it was fast. It didn't look like sex. People will pay for sex.... even if it looks like Tom Selleck (the Mustang) or a leather-clad bondage toy (the M3).

 

[Leonidae]

new JGTC safety car.. okay, who will turn it into RPV? (Repost Police Vehicle)

 

[McLaren]

apparently m3's get marked up to 100k too...

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/10/2008-bmw-m3-coupe-being-marked-up-to-100-000/

Has to be a rarity then, or models just sitting on the showroom. My salesman already told me there are no premiums for your own ordered vehicle.

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

hmmm mclaren and I share the same birthday, just noticed haha =) Happy birthday!

 

[Omnis]

new JGTC safety car.. okay, who will turn it into RPV? (Repost Police Vehicle)

MEMEMEMEME

 

[Leonidae]

GT-R Vs Z06, R8 and GT3!

All Hail Nissan.. The Godzilla has returned!

It matched Z06 at 1/4 and 0-100-0, humbled R8 on B-roads and defeated GT3 by a second on a track..

 

[Kent]

They sure were nice to that GT-R when comparing to the Z06.
I mean, they cost about the same and yet it's some miracle that the GTR keeps up with the Z06 (more or less)? I would think the GTR should be every bit as fast since it is designed to do so and cost about the same amount.

One thing that stood out to me was the 0-100 times.
While they were very similar (z06 and gtr) the Z06 made up something like half a second in the final segment of the run to 100 (where the GTR seems to suffer from the alleged weakness we all heard about early on in the GTR's release).
0-90 was 7.4 for the vette and 7.3 for the GTR yet 0-100 was 8.5 for the vette and 8.9 for the GTR. All of those are impressive numbers but if I was a journalist I certainly wouldn't act like the cars were "remarkably similar" since the Vette seems to have much better acceleration up in the supercar play range.

Don't get me wrong, I know the differences in PWR and all that stuff but all in all I think the magazine was a little too generous with the compliments to the GTR.

All around the GTR is amazing but I'm still not sure it is the fastest sportscar at its price. More over, I'd say the test would be worse for the GTR if the 0-100 went up to real supercar areas like 0-150.

One other thing I didn't like (although I may have not caught it) was that I didn't see a lap comparison between the Z06 and the GTR... That's really what I'd like to see... Drag racing to 100 was interesting (showed great differences between the cars) but the drag comparison doesn't seem to fit well being that one is 4wd, the other is rwd, and the pwr aren't really all that close.
That said, it's still great to see what Nissan has done with the 4wd system... Of course, that makes me wonder what they had to do to get the GTR to do those times... I wonder if they had to go through that same old launch procedure?

In the end I really see the GTR as a great car but I definitely see it being way over hyped and serious worshiped by the fanboys.

 

[forza2.0]

I have to agree with you kent, it seemed like in the article they were openly looking for thinks to praise the GTR over the Z06. Im sure if they raced up to 150mph the Z06 would have left the GTR behind but then the GTR they drove was limited to 112mph.

On track my money would be on the Z06, but only if they gave it a decent chance unlike where car magazine (or was it autocar) tested the GTR vs 997 Turbo, and they were powersliding the 911 everywhere which ofcourse would give a slow laptime.

 

[Greycap]

On track my money would be on the Z06, but only if they gave it a decent chance unlike where car magazine (or was it autocar) tested the GTR vs 997 Turbo, and they were powersliding the 911 everywhere which ofcourse would give a slow laptime.

Don't you think that might be because the Porsche has a tendency to oversteer when pushed while the GT-R is neutral? Unless you've driven the same car with the same tyres on the same track in the same conditions you can hardly say "of course" as you don't know the situation. It's been said by several professional race drivers over the years that the correct way to drive Porsches (and any rear engined cars for that matter) fast is a slight powerslide, otherwise they will push wide and that's not any faster for sure. I'm willing to bet that's the reason to why the Porsche was driven as it was.

<slight rant> I still don't get it. For the time the GT-R hadn't been released the things that were said about it weren't believed. People wanted to hear the opinions of unbiased European magazines. Now we're getting those opinions, the GT-R is collecting the glory but still the things that are said about it aren't believed. Why? Face the facts, it's right up there with its rivals. </slight rant>

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I have to agree with you kent, it seemed like in the article they were openly looking for thinks to praise the GTR over the Z06.

I will agree somewhat, since they did make it seem like the fact that the Z06 was accelerating harder around 100 like a bad thing. But the performance the GTR offers at its weight is pretty incredible.

 

[forza2.0]

Don't you think that might be because the Porsche has a tendency to oversteer when pushed while the GT-R is neutral? Unless you've driven the same car with the same tyres on the same track in the same conditions you can hardly say "of course" as you don't know the situation. It's been said by several professional race drivers over the years that the correct way to drive Porsches (and any rear engined cars for that matter) fast is a slight powerslide, otherwise they will push wide and that's not any faster for sure. I'm willing to bet that's the reason to why the Porsche was driven as it was.

The stig doesnt powerslide it, and neither do the german testers. Watching the video was cringeful there was no need for all the tail happy powersliding like they were doing.

I still don't get it. For the time the GT-R hadn't been released the things that were said about it weren't believed.

I think the whole GTR issue is being overclouded by the 'ring lap time. No one ever thought the GTR was gonna be slow, everyone just thought it would be pretty damn impossible for it to be barely off the pace of zonda's, cgt's etc as nissan claimed, and so far we have seen nothing to suggest the GTR can do those claimed 'ring times. I mean the GTR is barely faster around the track evo took it round than the much less powerful R8 and GT3.

 

[Greycap]

No one ever thought the GTR was gonna be slow, everyone just thought it would be pretty damn impossible for it to be barely off the pace of zonda's, cgt's etc as nissan claimed, and so far we have seen nothing to suggest the GTR can do those claimed 'ring times. I mean the GTR is barely faster around the track evo took it round than the much less powerful R8 and GT3.

Intentional or not, you just brought up a very good argument for the GT-R's side there. It's barely faster (but still faster) than the GT3, right? I think it's safe to say we agree on that. But this is where it gets interesting. The claim of 7'38 around Nürburgring sounds very possible now looking at the time of the fastest 997 GT3 lap. Were the tyres cut slicks after all?

Actually, there's interesting info on that old tyre debate on the Supercars.net forums, more specifically here. Sure, there's "slick cut tyres" on the leaderboard but it wasn't there originally and only appeared after some people decided not to believe the time, like here and here. Unfortunately the result is seen here. Two GT-R haters manipulated the leaderboard to their liking, one of them running the board. Great creditability.

Anyway, the time for the 997 GT3. Taken from the Supercars.net laptime leaderboard.

7.39* -- 161.58 km/h -- Porsche 997 GT3, 415 PS/1395 kg, *mfr. (quote sport auto 05/06)

 

[Kent]

That big line of deleted replies should be a good indication to all...

This thread and some of the replies are skating on thin ice, I suggest you do not post a reply unless you seriously have something to contribute. Otherwise, take note of the zero tolerance policy.

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

I mean the GTR is barely faster around the track evo took it round than the much less powerful R8 and GT3.

Power doesn't mean much, look at the NSX-R's lap time. Not only that but considering its power to weight ratio the GTR still does damn well. Get rid of that back seat and some other unneeded stuff and you'll see those numbers be even faster. And also as its been said before, the GTR is the lowest standard version while the cars its being compared to are the top of the line versions, Lets see what the vspec can do. I'd love a vspec ZR1 comparo 👍

Also I disagree with the article about the GTR not turning heads, you should see how many people surrounded Daryl's R35 at the cars and coffee, and you have to remember cars and coffee is where people are used to seeing veyrons, enzo's and every other kind of exotic, muscle and classic cars.

 

[YSSMAN]

No surprises there, exactly as I had assumed: The GT-R is equally as fast as its nearest (price) competitor, the Z06. It will be a death match until the very end, and even so, I'd still be willing to bet that the Corvette may eventually pull it out at the track...

I'm so happy that someone (finally!) included the Z06!

 

[exigeracer]

These pictures hurt so much. You all know exactly which cars I would be looking at.

 

[Joey D]

Looks like the racing version did quite well.

Nissan GT-Rs first hit the track in 1969, and won their inauguaral race.

23 years later the R32 GT-R race car won its first Japanese GT Championship race at the first attempt, and yesterday at Suzuka, the Xanavi NISMO R35 driven by Benoit Trulyer and Satoshi Motoyama continued the tradition by taking round one of the 2008 Super GT Championship.

Trulyer, who was also one of the drivers who took the R34 GT-R to victory in its last appearence in Japanese GT in 2003, reckoned that his new car is more stable than its predessor, the Super GT Z, and thus much easier to drive on the limit, but has lost a little in terms of top speed, which may hurt the GT-R's chances when it visits the world's longest straight at Fuji Speedway in May and November.

Unless the GT association take exception to the GT-R's dominance this race and impose extraordinary penalties on the car, which has precious little in common with its road going counterpart, expect a similar performance at Round 2 in Okayama on April 13th.

However this means nothing compared to the normal car since race cars are rarely similar to their on road counterparts.

 

[Jay]

Up to and to the end of the Group A R32s Skyline GTR touring cars they were quite similar to the road versions, after that with new racing classes road and race versions separated dramatically.

 

[McLaren]

Also I disagree with the article about the GTR not turning heads, you should see how many people surrounded Daryl's R35 at the cars and coffee, and you have to remember cars and coffee is where people are used to seeing veyrons, enzo's and every other kind of exotic, muscle and classic cars.

And you have to remember these photos were taken when all the other cars had left. I saw the photos of this car when everyone else was there, and there was no one around it because they were too busy looking at an original 250 GTO, and the various Ferraris and Lamborghinis.

I'm not saying the GT-R isn't a head turner, but your statement is just misleading because the whole story isn't told. It's obvious these were taken during the evening because most of the day was spent with clouds, and that back lot behind the GT-R was filled with Porsche 928s.

So, of course, it's obvious folks will be staring at the GT-R when its the only thing left next to it is a Lotus group. No offense man, but I don't think GT-R can turn heads quite like a red head can, and the C&C event just seems to be the final thing to prove that considering what has appeared there in the past.

 

[niky]

The stig doesnt powerslide it, and neither do the german testers. Watching the video was cringeful there was no need for all the tail happy powersliding like they were doing.

Do we have to go through this again? I distinctly remember a few famous 'Ring videos of various Porsches going sideways in certain corners.

What technique you attack a track with is dependent on the track and conditions... which is preferable... a slight slide or endemic understeer. When they give in to the understeer... they're slower... when they let it slide, they're still slower... which would you prefer?

I think the whole GTR issue is being overclouded by the 'ring lap time. No one ever thought the GTR was gonna be slow, everyone just thought it would be pretty damn impossible for it to be barely off the pace of zonda's, cgt's etc as nissan claimed, and so far we have seen nothing to suggest the GTR can do those claimed 'ring times. I mean the GTR is barely faster around the track evo took it round than the much less powerful R8 and GT3.

Don't start. Again.

 

[TheCracker]

One other thing I didn't like (although I may have not caught it) was that I didn't see a lap comparison between the Z06 and the GTR... That's really what I'd like to see... Drag racing to 100 was interesting (showed great differences between the cars) but the drag comparison doesn't seem to fit well being that one is 4wd, the other is rwd, and the pwr aren't really all that close.

EVO's own lap time chart done at the Bedford Autodrome West Circuit, has the GT-R 2 seconds a lap quicker than the Z06.