997 TT beats GT-R at Ring. Nissan accused of cheating.

[USCCayman]

It now seems pretty clear that the only reason for the launch control feature on the GTR was to show the press the car could do a 3.4 sec. 0-60 and low 11 sec. quarter and thus write about it in the mags. It's obvious now that Nissan didn't intend for the owners to use it. That said, it is not beyond belief that Nissan would lie about how they achieved the 7:29 at the 'Ring.

This ad is not displayed to registered and logged-in members. Register your free account today and become a member on 6SpeedOnline!

[cannga]

Only the least intelligent GT-R owners are still clinging to the 7:29. 7:38 is still ridiculous. Reasonably the car should be about 7:45, a good sample that is (see the variable power feature above). Which leads to the stupidity of Nissan in their greed: Claiming 7:45 would have been a victory already.

Originally Posted by USCCayman

It now seems pretty clear that the only reason for the launch control feature on the GTR was to show the press the car could do a 3.4 sec. 0-60 and low 11 sec. quarter and thus write about it in the mags. It's obvious now that Nissan didn't intend for the owners to use it. That said, it is not beyond belief that Nissan would lie about how they achieved the 7:29 at the 'Ring.

[blackbeast99]

Originally Posted by ALPINE_997

Porsherboy is this you?

[blackbeast99]

Originally Posted by MiniDHinkle

Heavychevy, Apline, and I are from the south. We can't read Japanese..

and me... I tried, but it didn't work too well.

[heavychevy]

Originally Posted by jaeS4

Heavychevy is the one that posted the link with that picture, i just posted the pic to show the reading of the dyno. I can't read japanese either, sorry. But if you look closer, you can see that the dyno is reading 611, i'm almost sure that is the whp reading.

WRONG!!!!!!

If you look at the TCF which is the correction factor you can program into Dynpack, you'll see they put in the claimed nissan drivetrain loss already, so the graph represents CRANK HP!!!!!!!!


Dynapacks are not widely accepted as a legit dyno measure, there are too many ways to flub the results as such. I would think Amuse would at least be honest on their HP though. But the TCF clearly shows drivetrain loss being accounted for.



So appearantly amuse think that Nissan's drivetrain loss is quite small too. Since they only gave it an additional correction factor of .10.



For those mathematically challenged:

457/.90 = 507 hp
438/.90 = 486 hp


The 997 Turbo is 480-500 hp 3650 (tip) which is as fast as the lighter manual because of launch control.

Weight/hp range and 7.6-7.3 for the tip.


If the GT-R was 540-570 hp

It would be 7.03 and 6.66 lbs/hp and would walk away from the TT especially if Nissan is getting less drivtrain loss, which they probably are over a tip TT with an auto. But just the opposite has been true for anything I've seen so far.



Like I said, you dont have a leg to stand on. 20% drivetrain loss is nonsense, and I've shown you that from several angles. Even 15% is too high. And at best it's equal to the TT in acceleration, and with less drivetrain loss + DSG + shorter gearing, it takes less hp to get it there.


Face it dude, the GT-R is NOT 540+ hp. At most 510 or so.

[ALPINE_997]

I look like I could read Japanese but no go..

[heavychevy]

Originally Posted by porsherboy

So, the GTR owners who still believe in the 7:29/7:38 claim from Nissan which has all the video footage and data to back up those times are "least intelligent". Yet you and your buddies take the words of a Porsche engineer over all the evidence from Nissan? That would make you guys less intelligent than the least intelligent wouldn't it now?

What DATA??


Data is what will clear the air, and I've seen no such thing. It is the trump card, and everyone knows this. All Porsche has done is require Nissan to show it, and Nissan could put this to a quick and easy death by releasing it. It's that easy, but what do we get???? NADA..........

Videos mean nothing, I would think the intelligent fanboys would be smart enough to see how Nissan has used the media to lie once already.

Show us some videos of a GT-R doing 3.6 0-60 without LC, and 11.7. LC is not allowable on the car and thus the results that come from it are not either since it's not an actual feature. But still Nissan claims it as their official numbers.

Where I grew up, that's considered lying, what about you???

[cannga]

I understand your argument, and if you keep your language clean, I won't ingore you any more . There are 3 problems with your argument:

1. As have been mentioned many times, 7:29 did happen. But it happens with power, probably around 650-700 hp, that no one will ever see in a normal car.

2. There are issues with power delivery in this car. It is documented. The car that Porsche tests is in the range of 3, below.

3. Nissan's own chief engineer stated that the car could be 7:45 fast, but most laps come between 7:55 and 7:58.

I agree that this car is fast and technologically advanced. But with problems with tranny, power delivery, clutch, wheel hop, VDC, warranty, SO EARLY in the car's life. Can't you see all the problems?

Originally Posted by porsherboy

So, the GTR owners who still believe in the 7:29/7:38 claim from Nissan which has all the video footage and data to back up those times are "least intelligent". Yet you and your buddies take the words of a Porsche engineer over all the evidence from Nissan? That would make you guys less intelligent than the least intelligent wouldn't it now?

[jaeS4]

Originally Posted by heavychevy

WRONG!!!!!!

If you look at the TCF which is the correction factor you can program into Dynpack, you'll see they put in the claimed nissan drivetrain loss already, so the graph represents CRANK HP!!!!!!!!


Dynapacks are not widely accepted as a legit dyno measure, there are too many ways to flub the results as such. I would think Amuse would at least be honest on their HP though. But the TCF clearly shows drivetrain loss being accounted for.



So appearantly amuse think that Nissan's drivetrain loss is quite small too. Since they only gave it an additional correction factor of .10.



For those mathematically challenged:

457/.90 = 507 hp
438/.90 = 486 hp


The 997 Turbo is 480-500 hp 3650 (tip) which is as fast as the lighter manual because of launch control.

Weight/hp range and 7.6-7.3 for the tip.


If the GT-R was 540-570 hp

It would be 7.03 and 6.66 lbs/hp and would walk away from the TT especially if Nissan is getting less drivtrain loss, which they probably are over a tip TT with an auto. But just the opposite has been true for anything I've seen so far.



Like I said, you dont have a leg to stand on. 20% drivetrain loss is nonsense, and I've shown you that from several angles. Even 15% is too high. And at best it's equal to the TT in acceleration, and with less drivetrain loss + DSG + shorter gearing, it takes less hp to get it there.


Face it dude, the GT-R is NOT 540+ hp. At most 510 or so.

You base that calculation on 10% loss, again you don't have proof of that either. I believe it's about 15% to 20%.

457= 571 @ 20%
430= 538 @ 20%

457= 538 @ 15%
430= 507 @ 15%

It pretty much comes down to what you believe or don't believe. I'm not saying you're wrong and definitely not saying you're right. And the same goes with me. We're both speculating and guessing. Don't act like you know everything and you're not always right. Bottom line is, neither one of us has any actual undeniable facts to back up what we're saying, none whatsoever. And the fact that you don't believe Nissan even with a video to prove it but yet you believe Porsche's claim without any proof at all is quite .

[cannga]

Let me repeat this one more time to make sure it comes across:

Yes, 7:29 did happen, but with a car that has nothing in common with stock. Intelligent and knowledgeable GT-R owners are no longer defending this 7:29.

Originally Posted by porsherboy

So, the GTR owners who still believe in the 7:29/7:38 claim from Nissan which has all the video footage and data to back up those times are "least intelligent". Yet you and your buddies take the words of a Porsche engineer over all the evidence provided by Nissan? That would make you and your bum buddies less intelligent than the least intelligent wouldn't it now? OWNED!!!!

[ALPINE_997]

Can - the GTR did a 7:29? NO WAY!! Lets see the videos - i kid - i kid..

[cannga]

Hi Khanh,

I am spending way too much time with this thread and nagtroc. I must admit it's a bad thing, but rarely in my life have I enjoyed someone else's suffering SO MUCH.

Make sure to visit nagtroc daily. It's teeming with fear, panic, explanations, excuses, lies, deceptions, reassurance, remedies, sharks circling. Quite a hoot really. THE THING HAS A LIFE ON ITS OWN!!!

Originally Posted by ALPINE_997

Can - the GTR did a 7:29? NO WAY!! Lets see the videos - i kid - i kid..

[chrisn]

This thread is so long that some things need repeating:

Use of LC or VDC (PSM) "Off" do not "Void" the warranty. Nissan, however, can deny a claim if they think excessive LC caused the problem.

Does anyone really believe that this result would be different for any other car? Anyone out there with a 997 GT2 or F430 want to let me go to 20 LCs in a row? IF something gets fried, do you really think the manuf will cover it?

On 7:29 v 7:38: who cares. I've never ben to the Ring and prob never will. It's an interesting trivia fact whether they managed the mind-blowing 7:29 lap in a stock car, but that is but one piece of data from a MOUNTAIN of other data (HC: please note; a Mountain, not "none") tha suggests the GT-R is very very very very fact around tracks. Probably faster than the 997TT around most tracks with most drivers.

Tires: Dunlaps are standard on the base car; Potenzas are standard on the Premium car. I have no idea why the Dunlaps are faster in some tests (including Ring test) than the Potenzas (which are supposed to be max performance have have lower tread rsting (i.e., softer)). In other words, Dunlaps are NOT an "extra cost" option. In judging what is "stock" or not, contrast this to the MSPC which are not available on USDM TTs.

In terms of intelligent or dumb and believe versus deny, no one here has anything meaningful to add. The GT-R is surprisingly quick given its weight and power. Is that news? Do we need 49 pages to argue about that?

Maintenance costs are high; tranny is expensive if you nuke it. No one yet knows whether the car will hold up to "normal" abuse (tracking) long term. It's a risk.

[heavychevy]

Originally Posted by jaeS4

You base that calculation on 10% loss, again you don't have proof of that either. I believe it's about 15% to 20%.

457= 571 @ 20%
430= 538 @ 20%

457= 538 @ 15%
430= 507 @ 15%

It pretty much comes down to what you believe or don't believe. I'm not saying you're wrong and definitely not saying you're right. And the same goes with me. We're both speculating and guessing. Don't act like you know everything and you're not always right.

At least what I beleive is based on sound evidence, weight/power ratios, comparable accelerations, factory claims (multiple factories since Nissan isnt trustworthy), tuner claims, trap speeds, supporting factors. Yours is based on what exactly???? Nothing.

I dont have proof, but I have agreement from Japanese TUNERS!!!!! You have agreement from a magazine, that is OBVIOUSLY wrong. 20% is rediculous and obsurd, and you claim to know that BMW loses low % as well with a less advanced tranny but think the Nissan one is 8-10% less efficient???? This 570 hp GT-R can only reach the same speeds as a 997S on certain tracks, behind the GT2 by 10 mph, and they couldnt have been taking it easy because they got a faster lap time in the GT-R. (which is a whole different story). Now how does that make sense???

If Nissan is 10%+ off in their drivetrain loss estimate, then that would mean their lying about much more than ring times, and the aero needs to be put in question as well.

This is race car technology, yet you want to categorize it with an Automatic. I'm done, you refuse to beleive otherwise, but it's pretty clear to everyone where the truth lies.

[ALPINE_997]

Porsher - until you own either one - STFU.. At least we can speak from one angle or another. I never put down the GTR you noob - find me a post that I have..

The point of this ENTIRE THREAD is the Nissan claim of 7:29 in a STOCK US SPEC CAR! not that it cannot do it. DUH! Trying to make a friend with chrisn so that you can have a buddy to help you defend GTR?

I have never bashed chrisn and he has been diplomatic in regards to this issue. He enjoys his cars and thats all that really matters.

Let me repeat something again since you seem pretty dense. I like the GT-R but I feel that they mispresented 7:29. The tranny is questionable and its not just one tranny. So far I have read about 6 of them. No I will not take the time to source the info for you since it is public info look it yourself if you want to dispute it.

Until the GT-R can be tested by another independent source outside of Porsche we will just be going off other people's information.

So until you have either a TT or GTR where do you feel that you can give any valid arguement to which one is better, faster, stronger?



So go back under your rock and stay there until you beloved GT-R hits your shores.