Edmunds 911 Turbo BEATS GT-R 0-60, 1/4 Mile
Registered User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,878
From: ATL, GA
Rep Power: 102
timeattack - I would not be calling someone a DUNCE when you have not proven otherwise about yourself.
Sound like it go under your skin a little. If you say that you don't care then you can exit this thread and this forum. Unless I haven't looked lately as in within the last 2 seconds this is a 997TT Forum.
You are entitled to your opinion but do not state all things as facts because you have a company that is trying to sell their cars in the US and abroad handing out numbers until they get the results they want us to believe in. Since you do not own the car, have any intentions to buy the car then you should not comment as being "the all knowing" until such time you have beaten several 997TT owners on the track and on the streets. Until then you are a MAGAZINE Racer with a very limited amount of magazine knowledge, zero experience, and no R35 GT-R.
Looks are subjective. But your comments are not..
Sound like it go under your skin a little. If you say that you don't care then you can exit this thread and this forum. Unless I haven't looked lately as in within the last 2 seconds this is a 997TT Forum.
You are entitled to your opinion but do not state all things as facts because you have a company that is trying to sell their cars in the US and abroad handing out numbers until they get the results they want us to believe in. Since you do not own the car, have any intentions to buy the car then you should not comment as being "the all knowing" until such time you have beaten several 997TT owners on the track and on the streets. Until then you are a MAGAZINE Racer with a very limited amount of magazine knowledge, zero experience, and no R35 GT-R.
Looks are subjective. But your comments are not..
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 143
From: bay area
Rep Power: 24
430 to the wheels? Haha... looks like you're a little un-informed yourself. You might want to catch up on most recent reports coming from Japan and of course when you find it I am sure since you read it; it will be the truth and you will push it followed with you guys are un-informed. 
First of all, let me see your source for the 475awhp, then we can talk. I'm sure you're aware that dyno numbers can vary drastically (Do to the actual calibration of the dyno, and type of dyno), not to mention it's more common for dynos in Japan to already have a wheel hp to flywheel hp conversion factored in. A buddy of mine put down 492 rwhp on a bone stock C6 Z06 on a dynopack at Synergy. I thought these numbers were exaggerated, as I later found the dyno was calibrated to show really high numbers. As most Z's only put down 440-450 rwhp on a average dynojet. I still don't get what you're trying to prove in the whole scheme of things. Please explain. Even if the GT-R is under rated, how does this possibly take away from it in anyway, like you've been trying to do time after time. Through your crap, you're basically suggesting that either Nissan or Motortrend is lying about the dynojet numbers achieved, or the drivetrain parasitic loss. And also suggesting that the dyno numbers achieved for the GT-R by some private shop in Japan, are more credible than the MT and Nissan results and informations. Who are you again? What's next, are you going to tell us the the sun orbits around the earth, with your new found prophecies?
10% through a DSG and AWD vehicle. LOL... I don't know what is more funny, finding someone actually believing this or them really trying to push this drivertrain loss. First of all, why would Nissan find the need to lie about their drivetrain efficiency numbers, of all things? Please show me evidence that Nissan's claims are faulty, otherwise it's your holy word against Nissan's. The Borg Warner DSG unit uses a moist clutch set up, requiring very little lubrication which in turn helps reduce hydraulic drag and power loss. The ultra low friction bearings are likely the key ingredient in helping account for such low drivetrain parasitic losses. This comes from the horse mouth, if you think you are a more credible engineer to discount Nissan claims, so be it genious. I won't argue with you on that one.
Not to mention your lame reply to me regarding my statement of daily tweaks was very impressive. I forgot you are onsite helping them with this car. So the car is coming with a coilover setup as well? I won't waste my time responding to this, as you blow everything out of proportion, with your overall anti-GTR sentiments.
I feel more dumb arguing with you knowing you are reading everything, believing it all, and telling others they are un-informed. Very very funny! I would about bet money you're a bench racer with your Mustang.
First of all, let me see your source for the 475awhp, then we can talk. I'm sure you're aware that dyno numbers can vary drastically (Do to the actual calibration of the dyno, and type of dyno), not to mention it's more common for dynos in Japan to already have a wheel hp to flywheel hp conversion factored in. A buddy of mine put down 492 rwhp on a bone stock C6 Z06 on a dynopack at Synergy. I thought these numbers were exaggerated, as I later found the dyno was calibrated to show really high numbers. As most Z's only put down 440-450 rwhp on a average dynojet. I still don't get what you're trying to prove in the whole scheme of things. Please explain. Even if the GT-R is under rated, how does this possibly take away from it in anyway, like you've been trying to do time after time. Through your crap, you're basically suggesting that either Nissan or Motortrend is lying about the dynojet numbers achieved, or the drivetrain parasitic loss. And also suggesting that the dyno numbers achieved for the GT-R by some private shop in Japan, are more credible than the MT and Nissan results and informations. Who are you again? What's next, are you going to tell us the the sun orbits around the earth, with your new found prophecies?10% through a DSG and AWD vehicle. LOL... I don't know what is more funny, finding someone actually believing this or them really trying to push this drivertrain loss. First of all, why would Nissan find the need to lie about their drivetrain efficiency numbers, of all things? Please show me evidence that Nissan's claims are faulty, otherwise it's your holy word against Nissan's. The Borg Warner DSG unit uses a moist clutch set up, requiring very little lubrication which in turn helps reduce hydraulic drag and power loss. The ultra low friction bearings are likely the key ingredient in helping account for such low drivetrain parasitic losses. This comes from the horse mouth, if you think you are a more credible engineer to discount Nissan claims, so be it genious. I won't argue with you on that one.
Not to mention your lame reply to me regarding my statement of daily tweaks was very impressive.
I forgot you are onsite helping them with this car. So the car is coming with a coilover setup as well? I won't waste my time responding to this, as you blow everything out of proportion, with your overall anti-GTR sentiments.I feel more dumb arguing with you knowing you are reading everything, believing it all, and telling others they are un-informed. Very very funny! I would about bet money you're a bench racer with your Mustang.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,054
From: Northern Virginia
Rep Power: 78
Not to mention, one of the main company's reporting on the GT-R reported a Z06 would only go 122 in the 1/4. What a joke! But there again, I am sure you can explain how a car with 440 to the wheels at 3200 to 3300 lbs. with a driver only does 122 in the 1/4. I know I know, I shouldn't be questioning this as its in a mag so therefore and by your backing... it is all truth. No you're not a bench race but your sure the hell are an upbeat mag racer for the GT-R.
Wrong because you read about it... LOL OK!
This is my last post to you... please avoid me on the forum as I am hear for a reason and it isn't to start arguments about things I have read about a car I do not own.
Last edited by Almo; May 14, 2008 at 12:44 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 143
From: bay area
Rep Power: 24
timeattack - I would not be calling someone a DUNCE when you have not proven otherwise about yourself.
Sound like it go under your skin a little. If you say that you don't care then you can exit this thread and this forum. Unless I haven't looked lately as in within the last 2 seconds this is a 997TT Forum.
You are entitled to your opinion but do not state all things as facts because you have a company that is trying to sell their cars in the US and abroad handing out numbers until they get the results they want us to believe in. Since you do not own the car, have any intentions to buy the car then you should not comment as being "the all knowing" until such time you have beaten several 997TT owners on the track and on the streets. Until then you are a MAGAZINE Racer with a very limited amount of magazine knowledge, zero experience, and no R35 GT-R.
Looks are subjective. But your comments are not..
Sound like it go under your skin a little. If you say that you don't care then you can exit this thread and this forum. Unless I haven't looked lately as in within the last 2 seconds this is a 997TT Forum.
You are entitled to your opinion but do not state all things as facts because you have a company that is trying to sell their cars in the US and abroad handing out numbers until they get the results they want us to believe in. Since you do not own the car, have any intentions to buy the car then you should not comment as being "the all knowing" until such time you have beaten several 997TT owners on the track and on the streets. Until then you are a MAGAZINE Racer with a very limited amount of magazine knowledge, zero experience, and no R35 GT-R.
Looks are subjective. But your comments are not..
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 143
From: bay area
Rep Power: 24
You got me, your questions to my questions and drug out replies are entertaining. Information isn't anywhere near the norm; reports stagger from left field to 3rd base about the car and everything you have read you have READ. And you assume you know by the so called knowledge you have picked up through reading. Not to mention, one of the main company's reporting on the GT-R reported a Z06 would only go 122 in the 1/4. What a joke! But there again, I am sure you can explain how a car with 440 to the wheels at 3200 to 3300 lbs. with a driver only does 122 in the 1/4. I know I know, I shouldn't be questioning this as its in a mag so therefore and by your backing... it is all truth. A 122mph trap isn't that bad for a bone stock Z06, considering you don't know the possible variables such as headwind, DA, track inclination, altitude, shifting, launch, fuel, mileage on motor, tire pressure, all stuff you should be aware of, IF you own the fastest pullied 03 cobra in world, but yet you seem not to.
No you're not a bench race but your sure the hell are an upbeat mag racer for the GT-R.
Wrong because you read about it... LOL OK!
This is my last post to you... please avoid me on the forum as I am hear for a reason and it isn't to start arguments about things I have read about a car I do not own.
Not to mention, one of the main company's reporting on the GT-R reported a Z06 would only go 122 in the 1/4. What a joke! But there again, I am sure you can explain how a car with 440 to the wheels at 3200 to 3300 lbs. with a driver only does 122 in the 1/4. I know I know, I shouldn't be questioning this as its in a mag so therefore and by your backing... it is all truth. A 122mph trap isn't that bad for a bone stock Z06, considering you don't know the possible variables such as headwind, DA, track inclination, altitude, shifting, launch, fuel, mileage on motor, tire pressure, all stuff you should be aware of, IF you own the fastest pullied 03 cobra in world, but yet you seem not to.No you're not a bench race but your sure the hell are an upbeat mag racer for the GT-R.
Wrong because you read about it... LOL OK!
This is my last post to you... please avoid me on the forum as I am hear for a reason and it isn't to start arguments about things I have read about a car I do not own.
Last edited by timeattack07gt; May 14, 2008 at 01:28 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,028
From: Houston
Rep Power: 201
Back to the ORIGINAL argument between you, Tuskir, and myself, in which he decided to weasel his way out of. Show me proof that Nissan cheated to achieve their 7:29 lap time at the Ring or in any other performance aspect, otherwise you're guilty of being that very **** disturber you claim not be. Once you answer that, with evidence of what they modified or altered, I'll admit defeat and we can go our seperate ways. Thank You.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 143
From: bay area
Rep Power: 24
You have a point. I guess I should be using the documented 7:38 ring time for the argument then. The closed track day for GM and the new camaro was supposedly on April 16th, not the 17th. Nissan's GT-R testing took place on the 16th and 17th supposedly, what this means in reality no one really seems to know, except for insiders. It could be nothing more than some type of misprint or misinformation through the grapevine though. If you want to somehow use this as a petty excuse for Nissan not achieving the 7:29 laptime, so be it. Nissan was also quoted as saying that the 7:29 video would be realeased shortly after it was achieved...how soon I don't know. Also, where is the video proof for all of Porsche's, Ferrari, Mercedes, Audi or BMW Ring lap times. I don't you see you guys ever questioning the validity of the these manufacturers Ring claims lol. Gotta love the obvious double standards.
Last edited by timeattack07gt; May 14, 2008 at 01:56 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,054
From: Northern Virginia
Rep Power: 78
Back to the ORIGINAL argument between you, Tuskir, and myself, in which he decided to weasel his way out of. Show me proof that Nissan cheated to achieve their 7:29 lap time at the Ring or in any other performance aspect, otherwise you're guilty of being that very **** disturber you claim not be. Once you can answer that, with evidence of what they modified or altered, I'll admit defeat and we can go our seperate ways. Thank You.
It has already been proven the car has been tweaked and the excuses of the fanboys saying this is ok because it will find itself on future models is very pathetic. Not to mention, a 2009 model is being compared to a early year model… LOL I bet Porsche will answer the call with their 2009 and or 2010 models and I for one hope they show Japan what’s left on the table for their platform and the Porsche isn't some type of video vehicle. Either way and me being an on-looker, I still view this… Nissan pos compared to a Porsche. If you don’t like it as you have shown it gets your panties in a bind… don’t bother posting.
And I guess your intellect is sub par to say the Z06's trap speed of 122 is good yet articles of past have shown a 127 out of the car, stock! Yet, they toss up tainted numbers (122) for comparison when it comes to the GT-R and this is simple; hype!!! And its this I have been saying from the start... not that the car didn't do something they are reporting like you eagerly disseminate. Good try though!
By the way, I also read a bunch of crap and why don’t you go back and read about the way in which they delayed the car’s times trying to associate it to it sitting on a dragstrip. More pathetic ways to manipulate numbers. It's this I have asked you to explain and you play dumb with your bland replies. I shouldn't have to hold your hand as you have stated you know this car.
Last edited by Almo; May 14, 2008 at 02:10 PM.
Registered User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,878
From: ATL, GA
Rep Power: 102
timeattack - enjoy your ban. It was well deserved. I can chime in anytime I want because I actually own a car that I don't bench race or magazine read about.
You're obviously a senseless troll trying to stir up debate on a topic you have no intimate knowledge of. Your pseudo intellectual internet knowledge of the much praised GT-R will garner you no respect here and your continued idiotic responses has warranted a ban.
Just leave while you are behind...
You're obviously a senseless troll trying to stir up debate on a topic you have no intimate knowledge of. Your pseudo intellectual internet knowledge of the much praised GT-R will garner you no respect here and your continued idiotic responses has warranted a ban.
Just leave while you are behind...
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,054
From: Northern Virginia
Rep Power: 78
A 122mph trap isn't that bad for a bone stock Z06, considering you don't know the possible variables such as headwind, DA, track inclination, altitude, shifting, launch, fuel, mileage on motor, tire pressure, all stuff you should be aware of, IF you own the fastest pullied 03 cobra in world, but yet you seem not to.
If? Please know I wouldn't give you the time of day to explain to you what I have done. I pointed the variables in my above post and the variables do not matter because 127 trap speeds have been laid down... yet again, they toss in one doing 122. If this is the case of the Z, I am sure the numbers are tainted with the 997TT as well. In their article of comparison.