I'm not exactly sure how this thread became about the GT-R, when Porsche releases their fastest/strongest car ever. The strong point about the GT-R is the transmission, no doubt. The tires don't last very long, though. I switched to those fabled Dunlop tires, and with only 1 track event and 5,000mi they are showing cords in the rear (yes, I'm aware of the track camber vs street camber adjustments). Awesome performance in the dry, but the Bridgestones last sooo much longer.

I hope that there is a PDK Porsche supercar that comes out (GT2, CGT, 918 Spyder, etc...). THAT will be the car I dream about. I've driven the PDK - VERY, very nice.

It is also unfortunate to hear about the overheating of the cars... As we have tracked numerous GT-R's at various levels all day without anybody overheating. Are these temps going above 300deg?

Anyway, as far as cost - if you purchased a GT-R instead of the Turbo, you'd have about $60k (based on similar options that come standard on every GT-R) to make those tire/fluid/brake changes... I don't see the differential of those costs adding up for at least 30-40 years or so (because the Porsche brakes/tires/fluids won't last 30 years either. and they aren't free).

So........., how 'bout that GT2RS?

 

I think the new gt2rs is the car to get if you like to be challenged. I suspect is is one of the most raw cars ....and in the hands of a good driver like 930man...impossible to follow.


Jeff

 

Yeah, the Skyline GT-R was just that - a Skyline with go-fast parts (a lot like the M3 is just a 3-series with go-fast parts). The Skyline is a family car. It really held back the performance of the car. Once Nissan gave the GT-R its own chassis, and split it apart from the Skyline (G35/37), it became its own car.

But as far as the last line in your previous post, and the first one in the quoted post...

A GT2RS w/PDK and some of those almost R-compound tires... Sounds intoxicating.

 

a 7:38 doesn't beat most supercars but it is very close. A 7:29 does. The 7:29 is outright BS and the 7:38 might be believable on track tires. The 997GT2 ran a 7:32 so a 7:38 for a 600lb heavier car with less power is a stretch. But with track tires to overcome the weight I might believe it. Lets face it, no where has nissans claims been matched except by nissan.

 

English is not my mothers tongue, but I am pretty sure that "up to 10 years old" doesn't mean "10 years old".

No, that is cherry picking.

I am just saying that you should compare current models. I hope you can agree that both the GT-R and the GT2RS are 2010 models?

I am comparing Nordschleife times. Why not?

You really want to claim that your first post in this tread had nothing to do with earlier discussions about Suzuki's time?

Really?

Post #80 only confirms that you were hinting on those discussions.

 

I was content on letting this drop...

But, since you brought it up -

Nissan GT-R 'claimed time' 7:29 (on stock wheels and tires) - SportAuto - 7:38

Porsche 997 911T 'claimed time 7:39 (on stock tires) - Sport Auto - 7:54

So who's results are unattainable? Which is a greater deviation?

I don't know enough about Nissan's situation to claim them as credible or incredible, nor do I know about Porsche's claims. I haven't discredited anybody's claims.

And, yes, you're right - it doesn't beat ALL supercars, but I think there is enough evidence that supports my theory of MOST supercars (let's throw in Ferrari F430, Mercedes SLR, Pagani, all of the tested Lamborghinis, etc...). I left out (for basis of comparison) the only two times HvS ran faster than the 7:38 is the GT3RS (7:33 - last month) and the Koenigsegg CCR (7:34 5 years ago). Since you said "...A big heavy car near the weight of an M5 beating most supercars, lol." - I thought I had enough supporting evidence to refute that claim. That's all.

 

I only left out the two times HvS ran faster, because I wasn't referring to your post when I listed them... That post was in response somebody else, it just so happened to contain the same 3rd party driver who drove the 997 Turbo (is that a current car?) some 16secs slower than they drove a GT-R around the same track.

Why don't you throw in Sport Auto's time (not HvS) of the Gumpert Apollo of 7:11? Then the 'claimed time' of Porsche ISN'T the fastest supercar out there. There is always somebody faster. I didn't make this about the GT-R - you did. I was NOT referring to ANY controversy - just noticing the lack of objectiveness displayed here. Did you see any? Hell, even I'm amazed that ANY car with ANY tire can run that time.

I have no idea how you can think about comparing the GT2RS to the GT-R. I think it cheapens the GT2RS. Why don't you compare it to the Corvette C6 Z06 (because since most people claim that they are performance peers - this should lump the Z06 right into the same category as the GT2RS, and you could throw in the 911Turbo as well...). And while you and Chris Harris (the genius who tested the 996 GT2 against the GT-R, even though even Nissan, themselves, said that wasn't the target) are at it - go play basketball with some 3rd graders and be amazed at yourself with all of the ball-handling skills you seem to have...

This seems to be a touchy subject with you. It appears to me that you read WAY to much into my comment, and saw what you wanted to see - a GT-R owner 'crying foul' at a Porsche claimed time. What you saw (or perhaps, should've seen) was a GT-R owner who was amazed at the the time that he read, and questioned the faith of EVERYONE who posted up to that point, because they were all in just 'awe' of what happened.

I have no idea how you could make this thread about the GT-R. But, that was some good work you've done.

 

Let me make it clear. The Nissan run times were bogus. Nissan lied, lies, cheats whatever you want to say. Just like the video of the older GTR running against the 996tt and the Ferrari. All of the JDM's were on track tires and the Ferrari and the turbo were on worn out street tires and both cars were very hot from having run against each other prior to going against the JDM's. I like it how the Japanese put conditions in their favor. They do that a lot.

 

Your opinion is/was clear. The facts are not so clear.

GT-R: Nissan 7:29 - HvS 7:38
997 Turbo: Porsche 7:39 - HvS 7:54

Sport Auto 9 secs off Nissan's claim, 15 secs off Porsche's claim. Your statement regarding Nissan was:

If I change the word Nissan to Porsche, is the statement still true? I'm so not defending Nissan here, just poking holes (playing devil's advocate). To me, this thread should never have contained the words 'Nissan' or 'GT-R'.

 

Why would that be relevant?

It isn't. I never said it was.

Ok, but I can only understand that you would be surprised by this lack because of earlier discussies, which have been related to the Suzuki time.

The lack of objectiveness... I can't say your wrong in noticing that.

Why? Both are very quick around the Ring. Of course times will be compared.

Because our discussion never involved the Corvette. But I don't know why I should be a snob... and discard the fact that Corvettes are, nowadays, very fast around the Ring?

Did you forget to take a pill or something? Problems at home? Man, chill!

Not really. To me it seems that you're very sensitive about the GT-R vs Porsche discussions... I don't know, perhaps we simply don't understand each other.

You really should read my 1st reaction again...

I don't know if everyone just plainly believed the quoted time. I didn't just believed it, but I am positive that the moment Von Saurma drives this car it will be very, very fast.

I really doubt that I am the only one here that didn't take this time for a fact.

I aim to please.

 

I agree with almost everything you just posted...

And I, indeed, went back and reread your original reply to my post. The first sentence is what I hoped for, and expected... What I didn't expect was the second part (which brought the GT-R into this thread).

I like to compare cars that are in the same class, not cars of a different class.

 

What is your source?

 

Almost all of the times I posted I found in a 5sec search of either SportAuto or here at Wikipedia (they showed the same results):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times

 

Looking at the source: Porsche is claiming to have used Pilot Sport Cup (R-compoud) and a 7:34 GT2 7:38 Turbo.

Furthermore: it apparently was an interview. The Turbo running only 4 seconds slower is very strange. You would expect 14 seconds... and perhaps, that is just what happend: a reporter taking notes and a 7:48 became a 7:38.

If not: Porsche lied. Because the 997 turbo Mk I isn't capable of getting round the Ring in 7:38.

 

I don't know enough to claim or disclaim either of the times. I'm just looking forward to seeing what the GT2RS is capable of on other circuits (mainly because I know I'll most likely never get one - or be able to get one).