To me, the bolded text in your post above kind of says it all.

No offense, but I think you really need to own a supercar before you can really make an "intuitive comparison." Driving a car around the block or riding as a passenger is not enough. It is hard to take you seriously if you don't own one of the cars you claim to know so much about. It is the difference between being book smart and street smart. That is what makes the whole GT-R debate frustrating - almost no one owns the car. None of us can say anything for sure until we get input from a few who have both the GT-R and the 997TT in their garage. The only thing we can really debate now are stats on paper, the asthetics and the veracity of the articles being written comparing them. Until the GT-R hits the North American market, this is all pretty useless . . .

One thing I do agree with, however, is that an experienced driver at his home track in a turbocharged 07 Mustang could beat any inexperienced 997TT driver at a track he is unfamiliar with. That proves nothing. Winning at the track - or on the street for that matter - is more about the driver than the car.

 

This is a Porsche area. WHO GIVES A CRAP ABOUT THE NEW Datsun. Go on Lambo power see what they say.

 

I agree...the fan boys just dont stop. I think it was a few pages back where someone stated something along the lines of, its alwyas the people who cant afford it trying to out do the rich guy or one up him. I dont give a **** what the tests say, yeah its fast, but lets see the production versions start running around....

 

airflite1: Rants? The only thing I was ranting about was the fact that 9Eleven discredited my post/experience/knowledge, simply because of the fact that I had 11 post at the time. And to a lesser extent, the ignorant people that don't give the GT-R ANY respect, despite how well it performs. Don't you see that? Are you really nieve enough to believe that the GT-R that beat the Turbo/GT3 In Autocar and Road & Track's lap times was a mule or prototype? Why can't you accept the fact that it was a production model GT-R? Also, did you read this paragraph of mine in my original post on this thread? "For me the biggest downfall of the GT-R is the fact that there is currently no manual transmission available, and the fact that I would eventually probably get bored with a sub 600hp GT-R on the track. The car probably isn't the most rewarding track car in the world, simply because of the impressive awd systems that does a lot of the work for you, and overall weight distribution of the car (compared to the rear engine Porsche). Simply put, it wont be a very challenging car to drive near 10/10ths, especially when considering how blistering fast its cornering speeds are. This is one thing that Porsche's have always been known for...in being a drivers car. The 993/6's and to a lesser extent 997's, are well known for their lift throttle/trailbrake oversteer manners, and overall hard to tame and unique vehicle dynamics. As flawed as the rear engine design is, it's one of the things that makes it most rewarding to drive. And if you're able to conquer this challenge, obviously comes reward in the neurological pathways of our brains, which increases our love and passion for the car. A lot of the fans of the GT-R fail to see this or admit to it. From my experiences on the gtrnaoc.org forum, I've realized that most of them only see numbers, and fail to comprehend vehicle dynamics/feel and things of that nature that make a car fun and rewarding to drive." Like I said, you need to go back and read my original post, and take it for what it is worth. Sorry if I defend what's right...maybe you guys would like to assasinate me, much in the way Martin Luther King Jr. was assasinated for standing up for what was right.

Barrister: I agree on the fact that it's hard to compare the GT-R and Turbo at this point in time, simply because the GT-R has yet to make it to the states. But if you want to make that arguement, what's the point in having this 11 page thread. It seems like everyone else was entitled to judging both cars except for me...for whatever reasons. So far everyone is seeming to go to great lengths to pick apart anything I said.

 

If you go over to the GT-R forums you will find posts from an individual that was involved with the tests. He explained how they ended up with the tires they had on the car with the options that were on it.

 

Thanks for being so descriptive of where I can find this information lol. It's been discussed over and over again on gtrnaoc.org, that the tires used on the GT-R to achieve its 7:38 ring time, were the nitrogen filled Bridgestone RE070R, regardless of what you would like to believe they were. The reference that suggested that Nissan was using grooved slicks was misquoted, and is widely regarded as faulty information to anyone well intuned to the GTR community.

 

I'm talking about the car and driver test. It's been awhile but if it will make you feel better, I'll start a search and provide you a link.

 

You have to understand this IS a porsche forum, timeattack. You made a valid point about how some of these guys are just saying "it's not the car for me" but when you point out why it might be a better car for you with some numbers and opinions of your own, you get jumped on.

But consider Porsche is probably the make that will be hurt the most by the GT-R. BMW, Mercedes, and Audi are more luxury vehicles and the prestige and exotic describe some Ferraris and Lamborghinis. The best thing porsche had going for it was being the poor man's entry into the "exotic" car territory and it's performance ability. It may never have had the exotic car looks, save for the CGT, but it was respected as a performance car.

It shouldn't matter that there is a faster car out there but I just don't think many Porsche owners are used to that. Might explain some of the hostility that you don't see in BMW or Ferrari communities.

Corvette on the other hand, might be worse than Porsche.

 

What Car and Driver test are you talking about? Car and Driver hasn't even done any type of back to back comparison testing of the GT-R against it's competitors. Can't wait for their one lap shootout at VIR though. Please provide me a link, and please explain what you are trying to prove with this information?

 

not trying to prove anything other than the claim That I read it was a test mule.

I'm not a computer expert, but I found it on NAGTROC under Car and Driver scan. Starting with post 45 he was just correcting some misconceptions.

 

epik: I totally understand this is a Porsche forum. But what's the point in having a "Nissan GT-R Superior" thread when no one is entitled to their opinion, unless their sentiments are 100% pro Porsche...to me that would just be one big happy ego boosting circle jerk. That's why I even stated "my opinion is as important as the next guys" in my original post, and even ended my post with a non hostile peace smiley. But most of these guys get all butt hurt if you have ANYTHING even slightly negative to say about the Turbo...it might be a low self-esteem, or over the top ego...I don't know. Also, I don't believe the GT-R will have much of an impact on 911 sales, simply because of their fanbase. Most these guys grow up dreaming about owning a Porsche, and that's what they are set on getting...and I respect that. I think the GT-R will impact the general consumer in a good way, as it will force the other manufacturers to step their games up, which will reek benefits for all of us "car guys".

 

Definitely. At the end of the day the GT-R is good news for all of us. Personally I do think 911 sales will be affected.

 

Thanks for the reference. Here's a excerpt quoted from MoPho, the photographer that was assigned to photoshoot the GTR that day. "I think you are focusing too much on the words "test mule", like I said, the writer only referred to it as such because the car was wired up for diagnostics and the engineers were testing it, it is not like it was a prototype. I don't know exactly what they were testing but as far as I can tell (Despite being married to a Japanese woman, my Japanese is only good enough to get me into trouble, not understand engineering speak) , they were only checking tire and brake temperatures, the suspension settings appeared to remain the same.

Nissan told us it was the US spec car, I see no reason to doubt them, and that was the reason for testing it. As ShahulX pointed out the magazines almost always test cars supplied by the manufacturer and quite often they are pre-production or from a press fleet, so if you want to nit-pick, I suppose you could cast a doubt on any test. That said, there is usually variations in performance in cars, you could have five of the same car and all of them will produce a different result (though Launch control and semi-automatic gearboxes are helping with some consistency)"

You can take the results for what they are worth, but trying to discredit the times achieved because it's a test mule (for diagnostic purposes) is stretching it a bit. I will admit that the straightline times recorded in this test were on the higher side (especially the trap speed), but is typical of Car and Driver.

 

When I worked in engineering for polaris we provided test mules for magazine tests. Test vehicles are usually blueprinted to get consistant test data. I have seen in production one machine actually outperformed the preproduction machines. So getting back to the test since they were doing suspension and tire tests, and the fact you track your mustang, you have to know the GT-R was cornerbalanced and set up for the track they were testing on. I'm sure the numbers for the production car will be very close to this, if it's also set up properly.

 

I could believe certain aspects of the car being blueprinted. If someone told me the engine and transmission were blueprinted to specs I could accept that, as it would bring more long term consistant results and reliability...as you mentioned. "you have to know the GT-R was cornerbalanced and set up for the track they were testing on." What makes you think they corner balanced the car? Especially considering the car doesn't have coilovers. In my opinion this has nothing to do with blueprinting, and more to do with altering the cars set up from the factory specifications. The guy that was there for the test even mentioned that he never witnessed any suspension tuning, which would likely be needed for maximum results.