2010 Porsche 911 Turbo Laps Nurburgring 10 Seconds Faster than Predecessor
997 Turbo / GT22004–present Turbo discussion on the current model Porsche 911 Twin Turbo. Sponsored By SharkWerks, Inc
Welcome to 6SpeedOnline.com!
Welcome to 6SpeedOnline.com.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join 6SpeedOnline.com today!
By the way, has anyone else heard that Ghosn and Mizuno were recently both admitted to the hospital? Reportedly they are suffering from some strange syndrome where their noses have started getting longer.
That's pretty funny.
I thought they were admitted for poisoning from bull feces exposure.
Sorry to burst your bubble guys, but the new 911 turbo did not do a 7:27. Far from it.
Hey nub, in case you didn't notice, Porsche has performance tires too. Ones that are much faster than standard Bridgestone Potenzas. I'm sure you searched long and hard for that, but you fail once again.
I don't buy into the internet article hype, so we'll see what the car does in real life, however even a 7:39 on regular street tires compared to the hybrid tires that the ZR-1, GT3 and GT-R (faster than R888) run, still looking pretty promising.
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
"Your kids would have to be thin, but then they would be, because you drive a Porsche, so you'd have a thin wife." - Jeremy Clarkson on the issue of kids in the back seat.
__________________
2001 Zinc Yellow SVT Cobra - Fully built turbo car, full time track duty.
2007 Black 997 911 Twin Turbo - a few odds and ends
Need four more posts before you can do that
I thought they were admitted for poisoning from bull feces exposure.
That could be. Perhaps there is some exotic bacteria in the bull feces that has an affinity for noses. Or it could be a growth homone that is fed to the bulls that passes in the feces and stimulates nose growth.
If automobile manufacturers were held to the same standards that researchers in the field of academia are held to, Nissan's BS would have been exposed long ago. For example, Nissan claims that a stock GTR lapped the 'ring at 7:27. Scientists make a claim by submitting a research article to a peer reviewed scientific journal. Basically, the researchers say they did such and such and got these results in the article. In order for other scientists to believe the results, the folks submitting the article have to explain in detail what they did in the study so that other scientists, if they chose to do so, could replicate the study. If others replicate the study but can't get the same results, the claims made by the scientists submitting the research article are in great doubt. An example would be cold fusion. No one else could get the same results, not even the guys making the initial claim, so, it has been dismissed. In a sense, this has been done with Nissan's claim regarding the GTR's laptime at the 'ring. Others have attempted to replicate Suzuki's time and no one can do it. Even more interesting, those who have tried to replicate Nissan's claim get lap times similar to each other, but don't come close to Nissan's claim. So, Nissan fails. We don't believe you. Give us a car that we can go over with a fine tooth comb, one that dynos at 480 hp with our independent testing, that can lap the 'ring at 7:27, and we will believe you. Simple as that.
We believe the times submitted by Porsche or Chevrolet because independent testers have come close to or equalled the times submitted by those manufacturers. Really, the only way to compare the performance of cars is to have independent sources purchase the cars off the lot and test them under the same conditions. If not this, then the next best sitiuation is to trust the results of independent testers, and if those testers are getting times similar to each other but very different from what the manufacturer claims, then we don't trust the manufacturer.
If automobile manufacturers were held to the same standards that researchers in the field of academia are held to, Nissan's BS would have been exposed long ago. For example, Nissan claims that a stock GTR lapped the 'ring at 7:27. Scientists make a claim by submitting a research article to a peer reviewed scientific journal. Basically, the researchers say they did such and such and got these results in the article. In order for other scientists to believe the results, the folks submitting the article have to explain in detail what they did in the study so that other scientists, if they chose to do so, could replicate the study. If others replicate the study but can't get the same results, the claims made by the scientists submitting the research article are in great doubt. An example would be cold fusion. No one else could get the same results, not even the guys making the initial claim, so, it has been dismissed. In a sense, this has been done with Nissan's claim regarding the GTR's laptime at the 'ring. Others have attempted to replicate Suzuki's time and no one can do it. Even more interesting, those who have tried to replicate Nissan's claim get lap times similar to each other, but don't come close to Nissan's claim. So, Nissan fails. We don't believe you. Give us a car that we can go over with a fine tooth comb, one that dynos at 480 hp with our independent testing, that can lap the 'ring at 7:27, and we will believe you. Simple as that.
We believe the times submitted by Porsche or Chevrolet because independent testers have come close to or equalled the times submitted by those manufacturers. Really, the only way to compare the performance of cars is to have independent sources purchase the cars off the lot and test them under the same conditions. If not this, then the next best sitiuation is to trust the results of independent testers, and if those testers are getting times similar to each other but very different from what the manufacturer claims, then we don't trust the manufacturer.
Nice little thesis you've written there. Too bad it won't give you a doctorate or even a small corner in the Sunday mail newspaper. I did not read through your entire passage - the first sentence pretty much sums it up that your analogy is wrong and contradictory.
Using your comparison, if internet forum discussions and debates were held to the same standards as in a professional court of law - then I guess you're baseless accusations and arguments in regards to the published GTR ring time as lies from Nissan would be dismissed as nothing more than dribble. In other words, accusations without proof has no place in any debate let alone in a court. You would then be instantly banned from the forums (kicked out of a court) for your lack of professionalism.
Hey nub, in case you didn't notice, Porsche has performance tires too. Ones that are much faster than standard Bridgestone Potenzas. I'm sure you searched long and hard for that, but you fail once again.
I don't buy into the internet article hype, so we'll see what the car does in real life, however even a 7:39 on regular street tires compared to the hybrid tires that the ZR-1, GT3 and GT-R (faster than R888) run, still looking pretty promising.
Someone is getting a little sensitive here. I am just passing on information from a more legitimate source. The last thing we want is to make a song and dance about a 7:27 ring time and then get into a pissing contest with GTR fanbois, only to find out later that the 7:27 time was just a fabrication. That would be embarrassing would'nt it....nub?
Someone is getting a little sensitive here. I am just passing on information from a more legitimate source. The last thing we want is to make a song and dance about a 7:27 ring time and then get into a pissing contest with GTR fanbois, only to find out later that the 7:27 time was just a fabrication. That would be embarrassing would'nt it....nub?
You talk about GT-R fanbois as if that group doesn't include you.
Comon, really?
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
You talk about GT-R fanbois as if that group doesn't include you.
Comon, really?
Nope, I'm a neutral person. I don't favour one brand over the other. If a company makes a car that suits my needs and purpose then I will buy that car. If the new turbo actually did 7:27, then I am ecstatic. I do hope that it can do a 7:27 though.
Yeah, right, you are nobody buy Z07 himself in disguise. You aren't fooling anyone. Your only posts are in GT-R content topics and you drivel about the weight/power motto the fanbois use all the time.
Haven't you learned by now that you can't fool me.
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
See Evo and Car magazine for details.
Last edited by heavychevy; 10-16-2009 at 01:58 AM.
If Porsche says the updated Turbo is 10 seconds faster than the original 997TT, and they claimed a 7:38 last year on MPSC's, then 7:27 sounds about right for the updated Turbo on MPSC's.
Linear Mode
