bro you are so thick with it. man take your 911 turbo thats perfect and ride off into the sunset or off a cliff or something.

people are tired of your conspiracies

I read the articles for what they are, and take things for face value. Case in point:

So this mag editor, who so happens to also own a Nissan Tuning brand called Stillen (here's your answer 240ka) and has been to multiple GTR development sessions, drives a GTR and whoops the z06 and 997TT. What does that say?

Yes, the provided GTR did beat those cars that day. Was there a possible bias? Hmmm.... possibly. Who paid for the track day and provided the GTR? Why are there different trap speeds in other tests? What happened to their purported "record breaking" 'Ring time? Can I go out to the Nissan dealership and buy a GTR with that performance? As heavychevy said, why is a mag editor lapping times the same as a "pro race" driver? These are just questions that are posed in my mind.

All conspiracy theories aside, one this is apparent: the GTR is a good car for the money. We can debate all we like about what's better: the 997TT or the GTR. The bottom line is that the Nissan's performance is good enough to threaten the 997TT's position in the enthusiasts hierarchy of fast cars. For the record, I will not be completely sold until I drive one myself or read that a magazine road tested an actual production vehicle for their tests. With all the inconsistencies in its performance, would you trust the GTR that Nissan that was sold to you?

and who are you suppose to be? the dude that stood infront of the tank outside of Tinanmen Square?

There is not any inconsistencies at all, mostly it is just the information being given out wrong by one member to another.

All car magazine articles are biased with predetermined outcomes in their "shootouts" and "comparos". Usually leaning toward the bigger advertiser or the next newest thing, it's very obvious and predictable. I wouldn't put stock in anything any car magazine says.

Really looking forward to seeing the results there. And may I be your new best friend?I'm certain you will need help driving all three to the track

Like another said, the GT-R is way underrated at the crank and tyres. Its a little tradition of Nissan's to under-report their power, the R34 was listed at 280hp but dyno's revealed more like 330 at the tyres.

For one RiceEater, this is the first test of its kind of a GT-R in U.S. soil. More U.S. based tests will definitely confirm or deny the hype, but so far this test has CLEARLY shown the times. The numbers don't lie! I don't think anyone here is trying to sway Porsche buyers. Porsche is an amazing car company with a complete racing pedigree and a stringent fan base. No doubt! Is the GT-R a threat? Yes, I believe so! The only thing that would get me and many others into buying one is its price! Why do you think the ZO6 was such a hit? To get all this tech in the GT-R for that price is considered a bargain. Not only that, the modability factor of this car definitely outweighs that of any other car out there. It's considerably cheaper to mod a Japanese car than a European car to obtain similar results. This has ALWAYS been the case since the history of tuning and is what made the GT-R and cars like it (Supra, etc.) so famous/popular.

Do you really think every magazine can produce biased, sensationalized results? If anything, the more numbers and tests that pile up, the more believable they become. If the GT-R used was really a ringer, than it's acceleration tests and trap speeds would have been a bit more impressive. Really ho-hum numbers and trap speeds IMO.

Is there a link to this C&D lap time? Unless someone can show me that they used the exact same track configuration, please drop this argument.

A former professional driver took three cars around the track on the same day, same conditions, and these were the results. Good enough for me.

No inconsistencies, huh?

Dyno showing 475hp at hubs=550hp crank
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/s...p-at-the-hubs/

Dyno showing 406whp indicative of 480hp
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do....photopanel..1

Nissan's video of a "stock" GTR doing 7:38 on the 'Ring vs Sport Auto's time of 7:50.

Like I said, buyer beware.

Stillen sells plenty of 350Z parts, but other R&T tests involving Millen have the 350Z falling short on the track.

That definitely is the case with non-U.S. cars, but this test shows the contrary.

ok then i take that back. you arent as irrational as Heavy, nowhere close. so i apologize for that

but there hasnt been inconsistencies in my eyes in terms of the GT-R. no more than there has been with reviews of 911 turbo reviews past and present. the noted times and speeds are subject to change depending on conditions. also mind you most of these reviews have been conducted when these GT-R's are barely broken in even if that much.

i would trust the GT-R to do what the reviews and nissan stated its capable of, just the same way i would if i bought a porsche.

im not going to pushing my car like these drivers in these car mags and one thing has remained very consistent. The GT_R has proven to out perform the 911 turbo everytime in every test and beat the GT3 everytime the few times theyve been tested.


so whether i bought a 911 turbo, Z06, or GT-R. with reviews this consistent (the end result of every GT-R test and review so far) i trust the cars to do whats said

Exactly! It's also how the magazines get the competitor car brands to increase their advertisements with them.

I completely agree with the inconsistencies between the U.S. and non-U.S. spec. cars, but regardless of what seems to be the hp numbers, the RESULTS (track-time) speak for itself.