2009 Nissan GT-R - Zero tolerance for asshattery

[niky]

Many reasons. All of them hard to explain.

So let me explain them:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showpost.php?p=3130434&postcount=2682

Understandable, but what happens when more magazines run dyno tests and get the same results? Moreso, when other international magazines are starting to accept their tests as "proof" (points to Top Gear)?

It by no means makes it the final word, but when they've tested two different cars at different times of the year and get the same 500+ BHP rating, that tends to say that something is up. There isn't anything wrong with putting more power in the car, but it'd be nice to have Nissan be honest with us.

C&D has tested two of five cars to make 420 whp on the Mustang. Others have tested 400 flat on the Mustang... others have tested 415-420. Some even claim 500 whp from the Mustang with a GT-R. The only way to "prove" anything is to put a stock GT-R on the same dyno as a stock Porsche GT2 and show that it makes as much power at the wheels... or up against another Turbo and show more power, this time.

Of course, I've discussed dynos in-depth... and this quote from another forum is another suport for my argument on the futility of bench racing:

http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=24253&st=0&p=347825&#entry347825

Twice now C&D have alluded to using "corrections" for their results but they
have made more than a concerted effort to hide their methods and the raw uncorrected figures
they obtaned.

Edmunds have also dyno tested a GT-R and produced a great write up about why the GT-R's dyno results
should NOT be corrected. The GT-R runs an absolute pressure controlled iterative system. For every RPM, Throttle
Position, etc. the ECU has a setpoint manifold absolute pressure. The boost is continuously adjusted up or down
to achieve the setpoint manifold pressure, which is fed back to the ECU via a manifold pressure sensor or similar device.

Since the system is governed by the absolute pressure, by default it automatically corrects for air density and air temperature
up to minimum air density/maximum air temperature combination. It is entirely unlikely that anyone will drive
a GT-R in conditions that overstep those maximum/minimum values.

This also means that comparing boost pressure is a pointless excercise as the boost is continually varied to
account for the ambient conditions. In this car the boost is just a means to an end (the required manifold pressure).

From edmunds,

SAE J1349, Section 5.5:

"... boosted engines with absolute pressure controls shall not be corrected for ambient barometric pressure."

And yet every GT-R dyno I've seen from other sources, so far, applies SAE correction.

I don't believe in SAE corrections. At all. I've seen gains of 10% or higher from SAE. I'll say it again... SAE corrections are pointless on a turbocharged engine.

The interesting argument at the moment is what the actual drivetrain loss is. Nissan claims a low drivetrain loss. In fact... 10%.

Given the raw numbers in the test... 430 whp... correct by 10%... what do you get? 470 bhp. We should actually be carping about how Nissan is over-rating the engine...

I don't know how people don't get how automotive technology moves over time... Let me reiterate: drivetrain losses are an estimate. It's not a law. That's why Honda Civics and Toyota Corollas regularly dyno higher than other cars with the same absolute horsepower... low losses. Many new cars, even with automatics, which traditionally have a 25% drivetrain loss compared to about 15-20% for manuals, actually dyno in the same region as manuals... lower drivetrain losses due to friction. It's my bane... automatics with the same bhp as my manual car dyno at the same whp because my drivetrain is an oily, rotating piece of prehistory.

Drivetrain losses are not a sliding scale, either... the extra weight of 20" wheels and extra driveshafts will not affect a Mustang Dyno. A load dyno will only be affected by drivetrain friction and wheel traction... too little traction will cause high readings as the tires slip creates more torque against the brake... which is why a Dynapack is a great measure of absolute no-BS power... except Dynapacks are calibrated very high compared to Mustangs, so the "traditional" 15-20% calculations don't apply there, either.

But the problem with load-dynos like the Mustang is inaccuracy (Again... 500 whp?) due to the aforementioned tire slip. Dynojets seemingly give the most consistent numbers... but you can't apply the 15-20% loss calculations there, either... because they read high, too... and there's a big question amongst tuners as to the accuracy (repeatability =/= accuracy) of the Dynojet... since changing tires or even changing a flywheel will affect your horsepower reading on the Jet.

Changing a flywheel doesn't make horsepower. It makes for less inertia, which is why a lightweight flywheel allows for faster 0-60 times, but it won't increase your top speed, which is reliant on absolute power.

In the end, C&D's tests show that there's some differences between GT-Rs in terms of track times (but given their reliance on weather-correction for track performance may throw these numbers off)... and that there are performance differences between ECU builds... but nothing more.

I love it when I don't have to re-type... ...basically, your regular automotive hack is just that... a hack... most people can't grasp the concept of how a dynamometer actually works, and think that "if X is so, then Y should also be so". I've had over two dozen dynos on my car at three different locations, with power varying a lot between locations and even on the same dyno at different times of the year, despite SAE corrections, so my expectations of what those particular dynos will read isn't as bizarrely tunnel-sighted as C&D's is. A dyno that is not done back-to-back on the same day in the same conditions as another car of the same aspiration and similar power is patently useless.

And if it all sounds too good to be true? Well... the GT-R's low-friction drivetrain apparently eats itself for lunch if you use the launch control too often... which probably explains why some GT-Rs run slower as the tranny fluid and gears eat themselves alive... oh... and the turbos, too. Apparently that much torque against that much weight equals a ton of stress on the components.

As for lap-times... how well attuned to a car a person is often dictates how far they're willing to push it. As stated in some reviews, the Nissan is just downright ornery when you pass its limits... which means that a driver more familiar with it can conceivably push it harder with more confidence than a driver not familiar with it. In most cases where the driver has equal experience in all cars in the test, the GT-R usually comes out between the GT2 and the Turbo in lap times on standard tires. Remember, however hard C&D holler, their own tests show that the GT-R is slower than the competition at high speeds, (despite the extra gears and low drag) so it's not a factor of engine power. And on the dyno, said "press" GT-R gets the same power as the 911 Turbo... so the discrepancy is definitely in the tires, AWD, transmission and suspension tuning.

I'm willing to believe those stock tires are extra sticky... (remember, Nissan admitted the second run was on the dry-weather only Dunlops, and not the Bridgestones). I'm also willing to believe that a non-test driver can only get 7:54 on the 911 Turbo and 7:50 on the GT-R, especially if they're not familiar with the ABS-tuning and the grip limits. What I'm not willing to believe is that the same driver can get such wildly varied times as Porsche is claiming, when all other independent testing evidence indicates otherwise.

 

[slidesquad#1]

Dunno if this was posted here before, but some guy with a somewhat recognisable last name drove the GT-R and 911 turbo. This one a ringer as well?
http://www.gtrblog.com/index.php/2008/09/09/fifth-gear-nissan-gt-r-vs-porsche-911-tu?blog=4

 

[niky]

Interesting reaction by Chirs Harris on Driver's Republic.

http://drivers-republic.com/first_l...fm?articleid=e4f2857514b74fd1abb770ddf45f0b2d

Chris' column - 2 October
02 October 2008

Hold on to your handbags –Porsche has announced that it now understands how the Nissan GT-R, with less power than a GT2 and 200kg tubbier, manages to lap the Nordschleife quicker than the fastest Porsche currently in production.

According to an interview on carsguide.com.au, August Achleitner, the boss of the regular 997 programme, the advantage was down to, er, rubber.

Now this is the age-old problem with Nurburgring lap-times. There is no parity, and until Euro NCAP comes-up with a standardised Nurburgring-test, there is unlikely to be a level playing field. The speed of the circuit itself seems to change on an hourly basis, so when manufacturers begin to extract lap times that will form the basis of a global media campaign, it’s not surprising that the list of ‘variables’ becomes extremely long -as they attempt to perfect their message.

Earlier this year, Nissan claimed a standard GT-R lapped the old circuit in 7min 29sec, and then posted a rather excellent video of Toshio Suzuki driving at some lick. Around this time, Porsche announced that Walter Rohrl had achieved 7min 32sec in a GT2 –but on the revised 997 launch earlier this summer, I struggled to get anyone from the company to talk on-the-record about the fact that a heavy Nissan was faster around Porsche’s home test track than its own scud-missile. This was before a Corvette ZR1 popped-in a 7min 22sec effort, but I don’t think anyone doubts the potential of a 600bhp plus, plastic bodied 2 seater. The GT-R’s time, however, has industry chins wagging.

Well, now Herr Achleitner has piped up with some new evidence. Apparently Porsche recently took a GT-R, a Turbo and a GT2 to the ‘Ring and whereas it managed to get very close to the claimed times for its own cars (7min38 and 7min34 respectively) the best its test driver could achieve in a showroom spec GT-R was a 7min 54sec. That’s 25sec slower than the claimed time.

Now before we consider what this might tell us about the state of Nissan’s definition of ‘standard’ or for that matter Porsche’s paranoia, we should probably ask a more pertinent, general question. Namely, does anyone really give a ****? I mean once you learn a bit about the place, and what a very, very fast lap requires, you quickly begin to understand that these are among the most random markers of absolute performance to have been perpetuated since the advent of the 0-60mph time. Yes, they give you a very good indication of the car’s complete performance potential, but the scope for naughty ‘infringements’ and the variability of drivers means they must be taken with a pinch of salt.

The Nissan deserves some manner of defence though. It is not possible to make any kind of accurate estimation of its actual performance by looking at its bare numbers, as our Silverstone lap on DR TV proves. Numbers mean nothing, it’s the net available and useable performance that counts and, plucking some completely arbitrary figures out of the ether by way of example, if a GT2 can deploy 75 percent of its potential over a given lap, the figure for the GT-R must be in the 90s. Furthermore, the ‘Ring isn’t especially hard on brakes, and that’s the one area in which –over multiple laps- the GT-R eventually comes unstuck.

What people really need to know about these published Nurburgring times, is that they are almost certainly not replicable by any normal human being. Nor, in light of everything discussed above, is a difference of under 5sec between two cars worthy of much discussion. The exercise is too loose, to unscientific for the numbers to be worthy of anything beyond public house pontificating. What we should recognise though, is some kind of outline benchmark scale for individual times.

By way of suggestion, it might go something like this:

BRISK
Under 8 minutes.

VERY BRISK
7min 50sec to 8min

GENUINELY FAST
7min 40sec to 7min 50sec

OUTRAGEOUSLY FAST
7min 30sec to 7min 40sec

SO FAST, IF YOU SAT IN PASSENGER SEAT, YOU’D PAP YOURSELF
7min 20sec to 7min 30sec

ALMOST CERTAINLY INVOLVES SLICK TYRES
Anything under 7min 20sec.

If you want to debate this and other aspects of the Nurburgring, join the ‘Ring group page in the community. In fact, they’ve been discussing this for a few days already.

Even more interesting reaction from GTRBlog:
http://www.gtrblog.com/index.php/2008/09/30/porsche-has-a-cry-about-it?blog=4

(Take that one with a grain of salt and a sense of humor).

 

[Jay]

In other news,


Nissan Australia has now officially priced the GTR in Australia

Standard $148k AUD
Premium $152K AUD

and they have also annouced which Nissan dealers have the pleasure of becoming Nissan high performance centres.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

In other news,


Nissan Australia has now officially priced the GTR in Australia

Standard $148k AUD
Premium $152K AUD

and they have also annouced which Nissan dealers have the pleasure of becoming Nissan high performance centres.

I would rather have an Elfin for $50k less.........

 

[Jay]

I would rather have an Elfin for $50k less.........

Fantastic........

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Fantastic........

Isn't it?

 

[the Interceptor]

I remember reading a review of a bunch of those pocket rockets, and the Elfin was the worst by far. I'll see if I can find it if you guys are interested.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

I remember reading a review of a bunch of those pocket rockets, and the Elfin was the worst by far.

I've read a review too, and the Elfin beat the Caterham, and lost to the KTM and Lotus with reasons cited such as: The KTM and Lotus both had downforce producing aero packages, slick tyres, and something about the KTM not being road legal in the trim they tested?

Edit 2: My mistake, not a KTM, the Radical. Edit 3: Actually, I was way off about the cars used.

Edit: If anything, the Elfin had a higher top speed on the straights. I'll get this review too. But the Elfin isn't a car for beginners, it's difficult to use.

Tarmac Magazine May 2008
STORY: PETER MCKAY, DEAN EVANS | PHOTOS: THOMAS WIELECKI
Break out the Bell, or ease on the Arai, meet the four hottest hardcore road and track cars around.

Ariel Atom vs Elfin Clubman vs Lotus 2-Eleven vs Radical SR3

They don't have doors, side windows or even a roof. Their uses are focussed and limited – but you won’t hear one word of complaint.

This is the parallel world of high performance road and track cars, pure performance machines designed to eke out the drudgery of life by offering heart thumping, uncompromised speed that only the truly focussed possess. Want a guide? The heaviest car here is 900kg with a power-to-weight ratio better than a Porsche Turbo.

Forget luxuries like air-conditioning, power windows, radios or even door locks, this quartet of performance production cars is tough, at times terrifying and the ideal antidote for apathy.

These supercar-fast track stars share a common focus, but in slightly different ways. Each is a small volume production car with its own niche, focus and forte, and while they may share a similar maxim of performance above all, each promotes it at a slightly different level and method.

Australia’s own Elfin Clubman MS8 is at the comfort end of the group – it has a soft-top and a windscreen. It’s more tough streeter than a track star, but don’t take that as weak. Or slow. Or anything bad. With its Holden V8, it’s swear-word quick, but it’s also the easiest to live with, on a relative scale. And it’s the only fully registerable car in the herd; in its 1960s Le Mans Gulf livery, it has the looks of Nemo with the power of an army.

The other three come from the spiritual home of the track day, Britain. The Ariel Atom reminds us that driving can be a passion. Its Honda Civic Type R engine and visible scaffolding underlines – with a baseball bat – that less is definitely more.

Like the Atom, the Lotus 2-Eleven is road legal in the UK. Its supercharged Celica engine and track focussed nature combine with the elements of a road Lotus to personify user-friendly.

And then there’s the Radical, the most hardcore pure-bred racer here, with a 1300cc Suzuki Hayabusa motorbike engine, sequential six-speed gearbox and slicks. Forget the road – it’s sans indicators and headlights – because the rush is wholly and wildly befi tting of its name.

So with four track stars, two test drivers, a VBOX, and an open Eastern Creek Raceway courtesy of Driving Solutions, we’re in for one hell of a day.

ELFIN CLUBMAN MS8: Modern-day Cobra

The new Elfin Clubman is not exactly your classic clubman look. Elfins of a generation ago were inspired by the minimalism of early British clubman cars.

The design philosophy of the new Clubman MS8 is based around a thumping V8 in a lightweight chassis; it’s unmistakably Aussie, where the engine threatens to overpower the handling, and where the traditional Spartan approach to cockpit equipment and furnishings is ignored. There’s also a hint of cartoon toy in its chunky bathtub body and big steamroller wheels and tyres.

Tom Walkinshaw’s 2006 purchase of Elfin Cars was well received, with the technical breadth, the infrastructure and dollars to finish the project and get the products to market with the aim of making it more driveable and acceptable to consumers.

So here we are, in Nemo, a 500km fresh MS8 with the latest developments and a demonstrator for Elfin Sydney outlet Supercar Investments.

While the slick leather buckets offer good support, the driver’s butt is planted low in a what feels like a high cockpit. The footwell is squeezed by the massive transmission tunnel dominating a relatively narrow cabin.

In the confined work area, my elbow can’t fit inside, so I dangle it out in the wind but at least the threat of claustrophobia fades. Still, aesthetically if not ergonomically, the cabin looks smart and modern and neat with body colour blue swathed in leather.

No storage bins, glovebox or radio, just three gauges and a switch that disarms the traction control – a system from the VZ Commodore.

Ready to rumble. With 245kW on hand from its 5.7-litre V8, and shod with optional 18-inch Dunlop Direzza semi-slicks, its acceleration is best described as explosive.

Any gear, any speed and the Clubman wants to reel in the horizon with the kind of ferocity that contributes towards the drama. It’s pure theatre in the Clubman and there’s this underlying feeling it’s waiting for the opportunity to bite the hand that steers it. And in a masochistic way, that’s part of its charm. It’s like poking a lion with a stick.

It needs to be man-handled but those hands can’t be ham-fi sted or it’ll get ugly. Mercifully, the non-assisted steering on this particular car is way improved over earlier models.

It’s still heavy, but lightens at speed to the point where it’s not an issue. The unservoed AP Racing brakes need more of a shove than most cars, but they work consistently and reassuringly.

It is still largely a turn/point/squirt jigger which can use its power and tractability with great effect.

Enter a corner with too much pace, and the snout starts pushing. Let it settle, and get on the gas hard, and the optional Kaaz LSD works with the fat rear tyres to keep things nice. It squirms and squats, then grips and hauls off in search of the next corner. In a straight-line, it’s a missile: try 0-100km/h in 3.8 seconds! And a 12.3 quarter!

Thankfully the Tremec six-speeder’s shift quality and overall durability has been improved by replacing some plastic bits with steel and, as a consequence, it’s way slicker to manipulate. It’s hardly a pressing issue: such is the torque supply, that there is no trade-off in lap times by shifting gears 1000rpm short of the 6500rpm cutout.

There is an underlying aggression to the Elfin Clubman MS8. From the V8’s rumble, to its exposed cabin, it feels like it belongs on a boulevard, cruising the beaches on a summer day, rumbling along with the help of side-exit pipes. It’s like wearing a muscle shirt, with the bulging biceps to pull it off. It evokes words like grunt, brutal and muscular. Its presence and theatre is half the show – the Elfin knows it’s tough and fast, and doesn’t need to prove it. It’s like walking around with a pair of Uzis.

A modern-day version of the simplistic but brutal AC Cobra 427, with a brush of mod-cons.

Undeniably a thrilling beast to drive on a racetrack, but with road registration, perfectly at home on the street.

TEARDOWN
Elfin Clubman MS8
Engine: 5.7-litre OHV, 16-valve V8
Gearbox: Six-speed manual
Power/torque: 245kW/465Nm
Weight: 900kg
0-60km/h: 1.7s
0-100km/h: 3.8s
0-400m: 12.3 @ 181km/h
Lap time: 1m:44.9s
Price: $84,990
Contact: www.elfin.com.au
Tarmac grade (A-C): A
• Useable muscle car, F-ING quick!
• Commands respect

TIMES UP!
Drags

Want contrast? Try launching and squeezing lap times out of these four. Each requires a distinctly different method and style, and they also reward and thrill in different ways.

With no weight, the Atom needs just 3500rpm to launch but its super-short gearing demands a snap-shift into second – made easy by the superb Honda six-speed. It starts struggling and gets all gusty in third gear, right where you’re wanting that supercharger. The engine feels like it could rev to 10,000rpm and feels a little ‘limited’ at 7000rpm.

Still it jumps to 100km/h in 4.7 seconds. The Atom puffs hard to produce a 13.6 quarter-mile. Impressive, but it begs for the blower. The Lotus has it. And launch control too.

Hold it flat, revs flare to the preset, and dump the clutch. Around 5500rpm works best allowing just enough wheelspin to keep the engine on its highlift cams. Shifting at 8500rpm, the supercharger offers what the Atom lacks as it blasts out a 3.9 time to 100km/h. The 2-Eleven’s speed at the end is 20km/h faster too, and breaks into the 12s.

The Radical is similar but it needs revs, made difficult by the lack of tacho. It proves easier to launch with cold slicks – a little wheelspin allows it to maintain high revs. But when they warm, the SR3 needs the full 11,000rpm to rocket off the line. Clutchless shifting helps (just lift the throttle for a moment), but the 1.3-litres does struggle for pure straight line speed – at the 400 metre mark, it’s 10km/h faster than the Atom, but 10km/h slower than the Lotus. The Radical’s acceleration times of 4.1 and 13.2 are good, but it’s best when combining that speed with corners.

The Elfin is a polar opposite to the trio of fourcylinders.

Grunt, grunt and brutal grunt, its V8 requires just 3500rpm and minimal wheelspin to allow the engine to use its reserves of... grunt.

Two-tenths faster to 60km/h than the Lotus, and a blistering 3.8 second sprint to 100km/h, it thumps along to record a stunning 12.3 ET at an incredible 181km/h. That is EF-AYE-ESS-TEE!

Track

With four different niches, it’s interesting to compare speeds but don’t let lap times or apex speeds suggest these cars aren’t anything but total fun. As a guide, a quick road car like a Nissan 350Z will lap Eastern Creek in a 1m:50s time. So when the Atom’s 1m:46 is the ‘slowest’ time, it’s clear none of these cars is hanging around.

The Atom’s 191km/h top speed down the main straight feels like 250, but the trade-off is that it’s flat through turn one. On Bridgestone semi-slicks, its raw corner speed rates highly, but at split 3, where the combo of cornering and horsepower is needed, it slips behind.

The Elfin’s grunt is its backbone and a massive 224km/h down the main straight blitzes everything else. It’s not as composed through the corners, and though there’s plenty of mechanical grip from the Dunlop semi-slicks, it doesn’t have the aero grip of the Lotus or Radical and is slowest through turn one. Maybe at that speed, it’s part fear as well. It’s the hardest to drive, and requires throttle control and patience to put the power down. It offers thrills though, like wearing a target-print shirt in the forest during hunting season.

The Lotus is one second faster but it’s five times easier to drive: its spread of power, light steering and great brakes mean it’s quick everywhere.

Mixing the speed of the Elfin with the aero grip of the Radical, the 2-Eleven is one second faster than the Clubman, but at substantially reduced stress levels It’s also sensitive to heat, running its laps in the midday sun. On a cooler day on a cooler track, the 2-Eleven has lapped the same track in 1:41.5.

But it’s the Radical that’s miles ahead. And on slicks, it should be. But it’s the combo of grip, power, brakes, quick-shifting and aero that makes it the most effective package. No, it won’t go over speed humps like the other three road cars can, nor is it as comfortable or practical. It’s not the quickest in a straight line either, but for a package, it’s tailored to suit. Its shift lights illuminate in sixth gear right at the braking point of turn one, so the 211km/h top speed is close to max. But the massive 187km/h apex speed through turn one is the answer to its lap speed and proof that while power is good, at the end of every straight is a corner – and that is where the Radical is strongest. It’s 1m:38.2s lap time is not only fastest here by more than five seconds, that time would put it mid-pack in a GT Championship race.

Visit Tarmac Magazine

 

[TheCracker]

I remember reading a review of a bunch of those pocket rockets, and the Elfin was the worst by far. I'll see if I can find it if you guys are interested.

This one?

 

[the Interceptor]

Nope. If I remember correctly, there were 5 cars: Ariel Atom, Elfin, Lotus 2-11, Radical and some 5th car. I'll search it when I come home tonight...

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

It doesn't matter, the Elfin is certainly not the most refined car out there, I know that. I was just saying I'd prefer it over the GTR (not because it's necessarily better, or more fun, or anything like that) which costs $50k extra in Australia, is that a crime? I'm proud of Australian cars, and I like my V8s, I hope that's not a crime either.

I wonder if I'll ever see a GTR on the roads in Australia.

 

[Joey D]

Elfin. Does it have pointy ears and live in Middle Earth?

===

There are a lot of cars people would probably take over the GT-R for less money, I see nothing wrong with that as I'm one of them. The GT-R is not the be all and end all of sports cars.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Elfin. Does it have pointy ears and live in Middle Earth?

===

Well.......now that you mention it:

Just have a look at the Streamliner in my gallery, I really dig the look of it. There is apparently a 4cyl Elfin on the way using the Solstice GXP engine.

 

[the Interceptor]

It doesn't matter, the Elfin is certainly not the most refined car out there, I know that. I was just saying I'd prefer it over the GTR (not because it's necessarily better, or more fun, or anything like that) which costs $50k extra in Australia, is that a crime? I'm proud of Australian cars, and I like my V8s, I hope that's not a crime either.

Sorry mate, in no way I intended to spoil your fun. It's just that the name Elfin rang a bell, as I had never heard of that name before the following review from the AutoBild Sportscars 1/2008:

Flying weights

900 kilometres of country road at a strech - without spring travel or windshield: sounds exhausting, but actually is heaven

Why are we doing this to ourselves? On this cold morning the sun smiles, yet the frosty air, paired with undamped head wind, creeps through helmet and clothing down to the skin like a clammy worm. "Wuss!", the inner devil of driving dynamics moans, "go snuggle up in your Rolls Royce.". And he's right! Every curve junkie will accept to brave the elements once in a while.

Or you get into the Elfin MS8 right away. In the Australian lightweight, the passengers will be baked alive even in deepest winter. No surprise, as under the bonnet you will find a 5.7l Chevy-V8. Sounds promising: up to 188 mpg (300 km/h) are supposed to be possible when 333 horses push 900 kgs of outback technique fordwards. Actually, we don't want to go that speed though. Approaching the first corner, a certain level of mistrust emerges in the face of the only moderately decelerating brakes - loads of pedal force needed. The accelerator and the clutch also require loads of attention due to fulgurously locking rear wheels on failed attempts of double-clutch downchanging. Mouldy: the paralysed steering, which only reacts to changes of direction when the bend is almost over. Quickly, the Elfin emerges as the odd one out.

As opposed to the Brooke Double R. No surprise that the 264 Cosworth-hp literally play around with 550 kgs weight. "Boy, this thing goes!" - just said that, the zone of fines and penalty points are up for grabs. The rear wheels translate all accelerator movements almost slip-free, while the front tires bite even the tightest radius relentlessly. Also, the petite-appearing brake discs destroy even highest excess speeds trouble-free and easy to dose. The only thing that needs to grip is the driver. For lack of hold, he is thrown from side to side like a puppet in the sparse cockpit. Still: the tiny english business Brooke has produced a dynamic challenge with the formula-racing-connatural 260 Double-R.

For this matter, Caterham has been responsible for decades. Compared to the Brooke, the classical racer from the British isles feels a little crude - even in the latest version called Superlight R400. Entering a bend, the stronger-leaning logboat understeers more than the Brooke, on the exit the rear end steps out hefty, yet predictable - old-school drivers feel right at home. That's exactly what driving a Caterham is about, especially with 210 hp under the bonnet. All the more, the everyday usability of the roadster surprises. As the only car in this group, he has something one could call itself a boot. If you put on the side wind deflectors, you will survive even longer travels without a helmet. And those who are brave enough could use the Superlight every day, says our devils voice gaining influence.

And we haven't even experienced Englands finest: the Ariel Atom 300 and the Lotus 2-Eleven. For starters, the 300 hp only facing 500 kgs of the Atom appeal. At full throttle, the rolling frame literally jumps forward. Accompanied with the whining supercharger, the two litre Honda engine lusts after revolutions - only at 8500 revs, the speeding pistons scream for salvation. Enough of straights, finally some bends. A slight hint of the forearm is enough, and the Atom sweeps though the bends like on a string. Even the most powerful biturbo-brawler will creep after it desperately. However, the edge of losing grip is very thin. Put the accelerator just right, and you become the drift champion. A bit too much, and the superlight racer spins in an instant. As with the Brooke, the humbly-looking brakes satisfy. 240-mm-discs would melt immediately in a different work environment - here, they perform true deceleration orgies.

But you can get even more hardcore. The Lotus 2-Eleven doesn't have quite the impact in acceleration compared to the Ariel. But as soon as the straight comes to an end, it will outdo even the Atoms mad cornering capabilities. With perfect balance and without the slightest lean, the Lotus 2-Eleven seems to know the drivers wishes in the forefront. The perfectly sensitive and highly precise steering delights in contrast to the wishy-washy rudder of the Elfin. Also in all other aspects, the differences to the rough Australian warhorse are like day and night. The small aluminium gear lever and the trio of tiny pedals along with the lank brake disks look a bit weak at first, later emerge as a group of musical instruments in terms of optimal control and feedback. As such, the Lotus wins our hearts with a small advantage. Also the Ariel, the Brooke and the Caterham inspire with sporty purism. Only the Elfin disappoints. Nevertheless, it's the one we enter again: we're freezing to death.

 

[TheCracker]

Who the hell wrote that - Troy Queef?

 

[homeforsummer]

Interesting reaction by Chirs Harris on Driver's Republic.

Interesting column, thanks 👍 I tend to agree with Chris Harris on most things and he certainly has a point - it's a bit arbitrary argueing about 'Ring times because 99% of owners of any of the cars involved would likely never get remotely close to the times the test drivers achieve. I have images in my head of GT-R owners sneering down at Porsche owners for having the "faster" car (and vice versa with Porsche owners) when in reality if either owner could get within a minute of the published times I'd be surprised.

And the only time lap times actually matter again, in racing, the chances are that a group of mechanics in a shed could make a kit car that could destroy the GT-R or the Porsche on lap times in a race.

 

[niky]

Given the times posted for cars like the Donkervoort and the Radical, they not only could, they already have. Of course, the manufacturers continue to ignore these times, simply out of convenience.

 

[Wolfe]

Of course, the manufacturers continue to ignore these times, simply out of convenience.

Out of convenience, or because they know it's completely pointless to even try to compare their amenity- and comfort-laden closed top roadcars to track-focused kit cars?

 

[Joey D]

Nissan is defending themselves

Nissan defends GT-R 'Ring time
As expected, Nissan has responded to Porsche's claims that the GT-R isn't quite as fast as they say it is. In fact, representatives for the German automaker suggested that Nissan may have used racing slicks to achieve the 7:29:03 lap time of the Nürburgring. Says Nissan, "The final word from us is that it was done on absolutely standard tires which are available to customers in the showroom. They're not trick tires – absolutely standard tires, normal road tires."

Despite the allegations, Nissan is remaining calm about the issue, adding that the fast time was set by its racing driver, Tochio Suzuki, and achieved using the GT-R's optional Dunlop tires. Could it be that Porsche purchased a model with the slightly slower Bridgestones? Maybe, but can having the right tires could account for a 25-second lap time difference? In any case, Nissan's taking the high-road, falling short of suggesting that Porsche's drivers are slow.

 

[Kent]

Not surprised by much other than Nissan not saying the times were slow, which they should have said. Further, I wouldn't have been so ambiguous about the tires- first the car was all stock, etc etc , now the car was using optional Dunlops... That could be a slippery slope.

I have a feeling the story from Nissan will continue to grow as long as this story is making news. If the story grows I'll be interested to see if or how it changes. I wouldn't be surprised if this stink sticks to the R35. It could be hard to live this sort of incident down quickly and the R35 regardless of year may be subject to scrutiny from Porsche and the like.

 

[Wolfe]

Regardless of whether or not the time was "slow," Porsche already gained my respect for going out and testing an ordinary GT-R. Now, with Nissan's response, Porsche would gain even more respect if they take that same exact GT-R, fit it with the optional Dunlops, and invite Tochio Suzuki to drive it. The stopwatch doesn't lie, and with both sides present, neither could lie about the stopwatch.

 

[the Interceptor]

Both tires are available for the car from the factory on the owners choice, so they both go as stock tires. Check this link: http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=22043&st=0&p=313928&#entry313928

 

[Leonidae]

Oh Boy, let's see Porsche wriggling out of this one..

 

[Jay]

etc , now the car was using optional Dunlops... That could be a slippery slope.

The dunlops are stock on Premium model, Nissan already said thats the tyres they used when they did the lap before Porsche ever publically doubted them. They are not back pedalling if thats what you are thinking.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Oh Boy, let's see Porsche wriggling out of this one..

I'd rather see Nissan do it.

 

[Leonidae]

Why? Porsche started crying at the moon, not Nissan.. and Porsche hasn't provided evidence about this matter at all, just speculation from one engineer that can be sacrificed. There's too many question marks around this issue. Porsche should let Röhrl do the driving instead of some no-name engineer. Then someone might take these claims bit more seriously. As it is, it's political dirt throwing in order to boost Porsches diminishing sales.

 

[YSSMAN]

Regardless of whether or not the time was "slow," Porsche already gained my respect for going out and testing an ordinary GT-R. Now, with Nissan's response, Porsche would gain even more respect if they take that same exact GT-R, fit it with the optional Dunlops, and invite Tochio Suzuki to drive it. The stopwatch doesn't lie, and with both sides present, neither could lie about the stopwatch.

I'm up for that.

Or we can let Top Gear DE grab one and had it to Sabine?

 

[niky]

The Dunlops are stock on the regular model, AFAIK... the Bridgestones are "stock" on the Premium.

Hmmm... interesting post by Dickie Meaden at DR... says that from what he's gathered, the Dunlops are about 5 seconds faster than the Bridgestones on a regular track. Others have piped up saying that a GT-R on Dunlops is about as fast or faster than a GT2, but the Dunlops don't last more than a few laps before they lose grip... which is probably the reason why the Bridgestones are on the premium cars, as they last longer.

 

[Jay]

The Dunlops are stock on the regular model, AFAIK... the Bridgestones are "stock" on the Premium.

Rechecking Nissan website for specs you are right, Dunlops are the standard model tyres.