2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

[Joey D]

Is it just me, or does the lap end before it should? They start the clock just after he passes the green banners on the wall, but they stop the clock right after he's out of the last corner. Does the rest of the track not matter? Am I missing something?

Seems to be an issue that I've seen brought up on other sites. I would sort of like to know the answer as well. The flying start has also raised questions on other websites as well. An example can be seen on the Autoblog message board.

I don't want to start a giant debate but the video really makes me question the testing procedures and what other sort of things when down during the run.

 

[Leonidae]

Do we really have to go through that again? the starting and stoppingpoints are correct and legit, and this procedure is followed by most manufacturers that bother to provide few if any video evidence about their laps. this same discussion was done when the original 7'38 lap was published, sheesh.. talk about short term memory..

 

[niky]

Do it on public days, you do the "Bridge To Gantry" lap... or was that "Binge To Galley"... Can't honestly recall. And yes, it's a legit lap. You don't do laps on the Nurb as you do them in GT4. For one thing, you don't bounce off the walls and back onto the racing line when you hit them... you kind of just sit there in a million pieces waiting for a recovery crew.

 

[Leonidae]

unless you do the R8 V10 proto thing and burst into a fireball..

 

[Joey D]

Do we really have to go through that again? the starting and stoppingpoints are correct and legit, and this procedure is followed by most manufacturers that bother to provide few if any video evidence about their laps. this same discussion was done when the original 7'38 lap was published, sheesh.. talk about short term memory..

I just don't think we should have to bow down to the car just because a few people are fans.

 

[niky]

You don't have to, but the question has been hashed and rehashed here ad nauseum. This issue can be raised against any car timed on a public session. It's a generally accepted format for lap-recording, though, and it's what many people quote.

 

[the Interceptor]

Additionally, people have become over sensitized on both sides when it comes to the GT-R.

 

[Loon]

Do we really have to go through that again? the starting and stoppingpoints are correct and legit, and this procedure is followed by most manufacturers that bother to provide few if any video evidence about their laps. this same discussion was done when the original 7'38 lap was published, sheesh.. talk about short term memory..

I've maybe been in this thread twice, and that was my first post in here. Sorry I haven't kept up with thread so I'd know how things are done, it just seemed strange to me, as imagine it would to most people, so I asked.

 

[Joey D]

Additionally, people have become over sensitized on both sides when it comes to the GT-R.

I stems from people thinking the car is god, people then will tend to dislike those people and it's a spiral downwards. I don't really hate the car all that much aside from it being about one of the ugliest sports cars I've seen. I just dislike the uber fans of it that think it's the next Jesus.

 

[the Interceptor]

But just because of those uber fans I dislike just as much as you, why do pretty much all of the figures the GT-R produces generally have to be questioned? That's the exact same overreaction, just seen from the other side. That said, I don't think either of the sides covered oneselves with glory.

In the end, I have the same problem as I had with the Veyron discussion: why can't people just accept, apart from liking it or not, that it's a good car?

 

[niky]

And that's the issue. There have been, maybe... one? Rah rah yes men here. The rest of us concede that: 1. It's ugly, 2. It's overweight.

It's the detractors that have actually been ruling this thread... spouting nonsense going back at least fifty pages about tires this, pre-production that... this time is bull because Horst Von Saurma did a slower lap (on a pre-production car in traffic)... Nissan is crap because they always overstate the car's lap time (disproven)... Nissan is crap because they understate the car's power (disproven... although how understating power is actually a bad thing, I don't know...).

Simply. It's a stupidly ugly, stupidly heavy, stupidly fast and terrific handling car. And it's made by Nissan. That last fact alone has brought dozens of detractors into this thread... and that silly, endless argument has gotten some people banned, some people sanctioned and killed the thread off a month or two ago when both sides decided to stay away because of that.

 

[Max_DC]

Ok I don't want to start new discussions here, but imo this is a really beautiful car, I really like it. Well that's personal preference, discussing that is totally pointless.

 

[Joey D]

But just because of those uber fans I dislike just as much as you, why do pretty much all of the figures the GT-R produces generally have to be questioned? That's the exact same overreaction, just seen from the other side. That said, I don't think either of the sides covered oneselves with glory.

In the end, I have the same problem as I had with the Veyron discussion: why can't people just accept, apart from liking it or not, that it's a good car?

I accept that it's a good car, I just don't think it's the end all to end all cars. Anything that claims to be the best is going to be looked at very closely, but I question a lot of the cars that run times because of the testing methods used.

 

[the Interceptor]

I think that looks can not be discussed at all, because beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I personally like the looks, but that's for everyone to decide by him- or herself.

Weight is a issue, and the GT-R surely is a heavy car. Nevertheless, it is joined by quite a bunch of cars with similar or smaller size that are equally heavy, while some are even smaller. Despite its weight, the GT-R seems to work well in terms of handling. So the meaty hips are something you have to live with, but they are something you can live with it seems.

 

[Jay]

Ok I don't want to start new discussions here, but imo this is a really beautiful car, I really like it. Well that's personal preference, discussing that is totally pointless.

I agree, when I saw the 2005 TMS final concept I was skeptical. When I saw the production model, epecially in white.... thats a whole different story, now I really like the styling.


Overall also really like the car and plan on possibly purchasing one in the future, I do completely agree weight is an issue, though I think weight is a issue in most modern cars at the moment.

 

[Leonidae]

This cars design could have gone very very WRONG..

 

[Joey D]

It went pretty wrong though, I still think the GT-R is an ugly car...not Ferrari 612 ugly, but still not really something I would want to driver around in.

 

[niky]

Aw, c'mon... that's giving it too much credit... at least the 612 had an interesting shape (and this is coming from one of the GT-R defenders...).

Actually, it's only the greenhouse that turns me off of the GT-R... but that's pretty easy to rectify.

 

[Omnis]

Aw, c'mon... that's giving it too much credit... at least the 612 had an interesting shape (and this is coming from one of the GT-R defenders...).

Actually, it's only the greenhouse that turns me off of the GT-R... but that's pretty easy to rectify.

Yeah, I wonder how it would look with a box design instead of the fastback/reverse wedge.

 

[the Interceptor]

Fortunately for all of us, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and doesn't make a car good or bad in technical terms.

 

[YSSMAN]

So Car and Driver had a face-off...



(click the image for link to the article)

I can't say I'm completely surprised, particularly when we're well aware of C/D's driving preferences. To that end, I have to say that I completely agree with them. When you factor in everything all together, particularly the pricing of the vehicles, their final choice seems far more rational than I had originally thought. Particularly if you have to live with the car every day. Then again, as they joke, there was a car missing. You have to look really hard to see it... But if you believe it, that's all that matters.

 

[Tornado]

Without reading it, let me guess: The BMW won?

 

[Jay]

Without reading it, let me guess: The BMW won?

They're that predictable?

 

[Joey D]

Fortunately for all of us, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and doesn't make a car good or bad in technical terms.

I still would rather have a good looking car that is half a second slower around a track then this ugly thing.

 

[the Interceptor]

Although the 911 Turbo is 120 pounds heavier than the relatively lightweight M3, the 911 sports the lowest roofline and the shortest wheelbase and overall length.

Do I have to understand how they talk about the M3 being lightweight?

From the official websites:

BMW M3: 3704 lbs
Porsche 911 Turbo: 3494 lbs

I still would rather have a good looking car that is half a second slower around a track then this ugly thing.

Well, that's your choice. I would have the GT-R any day.

 

[Joey D]

Well, that's your choice. I would have the GT-R any day.

I probably didn't make my point well enough, in fact I know I didn't when I go back and look at it.

Sure a car can be a technical masterpiece but if it looks like hell then people are going to look else where. Honestly track numbers are fairly pointless in the grand scheme of things since a lot of the people who buy cars of this caliber rarely track them and if they do many of them aren't skilled or brave enough to go all out and use the car to it's full potential (this isn't to say there aren't people who do).

People tend to buy flashy sports cars because of the way they look or the brand on the bonnet. It's about image.

 

[YSSMAN]

Without reading it, let me guess: The BMW won?

Spot-on my friend!

It seems like they pretty much leveled it at a difference of quality and feel, and although the GT-R is brutally fast in every measurement and is by all means the steal of the century... It just can't replace that feeling that the M3 gives you.

Considering that you end up saving about $10K and really aren't that much slower (when it comes to useable speed), I'd be happier with the BMW too. I was quite surprised when they didn't give the nod to the GT-R, but I'm glad that someone called it out for what it is... A sportscar for the younger generation, which doesn't appeal to everyone.

But, as they noted, Larry Webster and I wanted the Z06 to be there, but it wasn't.

*sigh*

It probably would have finished third anyway.

 

[the Interceptor]

People tend to buy flashy sports cars because of the way they look or the brand on the bonnet. It's about image.

I totally agree, but then again, I find this way of choosing a car pretty ... cheap.

 

[niky]

They're that predictable?

Wahahahaha... yes, they probably are.

But having sample the new M3 in person... I'm willing to bet they're right.

See... the new M3 may still suffer the onus of being a pretty digital car, but in that comparison, it's the only rear-driver and it's the only naturally aspirated car.

Rear drive makes it feel more lively, and the hydraulic rack and lack of front drive-axles probably makes the steering more communicative.

Natural aspiration makes the M3 sound like sex on wheels. The distinctive growl and bark of that high-revving V8 are things you want to record and play back in your bedroom on especially kinky nights.

It's a "feel" thing, I guess. But it does a disservice to two cars that are eminently more capable, more powerful and easier to drive quickly than the M3. Like putting the Elise they mentioned up against a bunch of sportscars... sure, it'd get the win, but is it getting the win for the right reasons?

At least they didn't resort to some esoteric math and just went ahead and chose a winner based on what they liked.

 

[McLaren]

The GT-R has appeared in C&D's latest test, and while I now desperately want to read to see how the GT-R got first, it is apparent that the Viper went out and kicked some major tail.

Corvette Z06 4th place

Curb weight 3180 lb
0-60 mph 3.8 sec
1/4 mile 11.9 @ 124
70-0 mph 159 ft
Slalom 62.9 mph
Lap time 2:01.7 / 79.9 MPH (Button Willow No13 2.7 mile)


Viper SRT10 ACR 3rd place

Curb weight 3420 lb
0-60 mph 3.4 sec
1/4 mile 11.8 @ 126
70-0 mph 149 ft
Slalom 71.9 mph
Lap time 1:55.7 / 84.0 MPH (Button Willow No13 2.7 mile)


Porsche GT2 2nd place

Curb weight 3300 lb
0-60 mph 3.7 sec
1/4 mile 11.8 @ 121
70-0 mph 155 ft
Slalom 67.2 mph
Lap time 1:59.7 / 81.2 MPH


Nissan GTR 1st place in the write up

Curb weight 3920 lb
0-60 mph 4.1 sec
1/4 mile 12.6 @ 111
70-0 mph 155 ft
Slalom 67.6 mph
Lap time 2:01.1 / 80.3 MPH (Button Willow No13 2.7 mile)

Is the GT-R really that great anymore? I mean, just LOOK at the ACR's QTR mile speed compared to the GT-R's! Jesus, it's got some power.