Edmunds 911 Turbo BEATS GT-R 0-60, 1/4 Mile
#17
05-07-2008, 02:52 PM
#18
05-07-2008, 02:59 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 550 
That didnt seem enough. And the GT-R fanboys were claiming that since edmunds trapped 120 in tokyo vs 118 in the TT in vegas the GT-R must be faster, just using their clueless logic, but the TT was still tested in worse conditions and went faster in the states. But couldnt overcome sea level and cool weather in tokyo with a dashboard timer.
Make sense?
#20
05-07-2008, 03:39 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 550
Try making 800 hp on the stock block with the already weak engine components on the GT-R. Then try to keep the tranny from exploding.
You lose.
You lose.
#21
05-07-2008, 03:40 PM
Oh noes! A really harsh review here
HC I didn't know you wrote for them!
The GT-R is the blind date everybody’s been telling you about for months: incredible body, second in her class at Harvard, fabulous conversationalist, star athlete. Then you meet her. Yes, she has obvious “assets,” but nobody mentioned the halitosis. She graduated with a B.A. in accounting. She’s a great conversationalist, but her voice sounds like run-flat tires with three-inch sidewalls running over a concrete-aggregate rumble and tar-strip slap. She's an athlete, but a grunting shot-putter, not a Sharapova. In short, the GT-R is SO not a supermodel.
...
Two of the car's most highly touted features baffle me, though. One is the endlessly configurable instrument display, called-up via the nav screen. Nissan readily admits that it “was inspired by videogames.” It’s not what you’d call useful– unless you're intent on studying steering-wheel deflection, slip angle, transmission-oil pressure and brake-pedal position while late-apexing an off-ramp. It's the geek equivalent of the complex chronographs of the 19th century: pocket watches that read out everything from the tides to your mistress's menstrual cycle.
The GT-R’s fiddly “launch mode” for maximum acceleration (meaning turbo spool-up) is also a curiosity. It will amuse those who haven't an ounce of mechanical sensibility who don't mind abusing machinery. Actual GT-R owners will use it a few times to amuse the neighbors, and then will realize that they're still making payments on the $70,000+ appliance they're brutalizing. Even Nissan told me to only use it "once or twice."
For me, the car's tires are the biggest turnoff. Quick! Name a single benefit to run-flats. They're noisy, expensive, difficult to repair and can only dismount with special machinery. ...The Bridgestones on the GT-R are so loud they negate the Bose sound system; a Costco Kenwood would have sufficed amid the din.
...
There's a lot to like about this car, but is it the ultimate, the Godzilla, the Nurburgring killa?
Who cares? Acquiring a supercar, rather than fantasizing about one, faces the buyer with a decision with vastly more to do with real-world attributes than with video games, bad movies and teen fetishes. It fascinated me that nobody in Nevada or California noticed the GT-R, other than carwash attendants, 14-year-olds with mullets and every parking valet in Vegas. The rest of the world walked on by, assuming they’d encountered a new Toyota Supra.
Seventeen years ago, the first Japanese supercar arrived in the States: the Acura NSX. Fabulous numbers, a half-price Ferrari, buff-book craziness, slavering car writers, rumored to be the benchmark for the McLaren F1, development work by Ayrton Senna… So where did the NSX go? Ultimately, it became the orthodontist's car, when the world went back to buying Porsches and real Ferraris. Care to take bets on what will happen to the GT-R?
Bottom line: the car world may have gone cuckoo for Coco Puffs over the GT-R but it’s ultimately a pointless, nerdy, twin-turbo, electronics-laden technological curiosity.
...
Two of the car's most highly touted features baffle me, though. One is the endlessly configurable instrument display, called-up via the nav screen. Nissan readily admits that it “was inspired by videogames.” It’s not what you’d call useful– unless you're intent on studying steering-wheel deflection, slip angle, transmission-oil pressure and brake-pedal position while late-apexing an off-ramp. It's the geek equivalent of the complex chronographs of the 19th century: pocket watches that read out everything from the tides to your mistress's menstrual cycle.
The GT-R’s fiddly “launch mode” for maximum acceleration (meaning turbo spool-up) is also a curiosity. It will amuse those who haven't an ounce of mechanical sensibility who don't mind abusing machinery. Actual GT-R owners will use it a few times to amuse the neighbors, and then will realize that they're still making payments on the $70,000+ appliance they're brutalizing. Even Nissan told me to only use it "once or twice."
For me, the car's tires are the biggest turnoff. Quick! Name a single benefit to run-flats. They're noisy, expensive, difficult to repair and can only dismount with special machinery. ...The Bridgestones on the GT-R are so loud they negate the Bose sound system; a Costco Kenwood would have sufficed amid the din.
...
There's a lot to like about this car, but is it the ultimate, the Godzilla, the Nurburgring killa?
Who cares? Acquiring a supercar, rather than fantasizing about one, faces the buyer with a decision with vastly more to do with real-world attributes than with video games, bad movies and teen fetishes. It fascinated me that nobody in Nevada or California noticed the GT-R, other than carwash attendants, 14-year-olds with mullets and every parking valet in Vegas. The rest of the world walked on by, assuming they’d encountered a new Toyota Supra.
Seventeen years ago, the first Japanese supercar arrived in the States: the Acura NSX. Fabulous numbers, a half-price Ferrari, buff-book craziness, slavering car writers, rumored to be the benchmark for the McLaren F1, development work by Ayrton Senna… So where did the NSX go? Ultimately, it became the orthodontist's car, when the world went back to buying Porsches and real Ferraris. Care to take bets on what will happen to the GT-R?
Bottom line: the car world may have gone cuckoo for Coco Puffs over the GT-R but it’s ultimately a pointless, nerdy, twin-turbo, electronics-laden technological curiosity.
#22
05-07-2008, 03:54 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 550
Dont say that, it'll be on all the GT-R forums as fact in 15 minutes.
I'm selling my car so I can travel the world and write negative articles on the GT-R. HAHAHAAHAH
I'm selling my car so I can travel the world and write negative articles on the GT-R. HAHAHAAHAH
#23
05-07-2008, 04:08 PM
Where do you get that the engine components are weak? The aftermarket will sort out any block issues just as they'll sort out any transmission issues. But for now, a GTR with stock turbos and transmission can make around 700hp crank, whereas a TT can make about 550-560hp.
There's production reliable and aftermarket reliable. Let's not forget that Ruf fitted titanium conrods to the 590hp version of the R Turbo.
There's production reliable and aftermarket reliable. Let's not forget that Ruf fitted titanium conrods to the 590hp version of the R Turbo.
#24
05-07-2008, 04:09 PM
Where do you get that the engine components are weak? The aftermarket will sort out any block issues just as they'll sort out any transmission issues. But for now, a GTR with stock turbos and transmission can make around 700hp crank, whereas a TT can make about 550-560hp.
There's production reliable and aftermarket reliable. Let's not forget that Ruf fitted titanium conrods to the 590hp version of the R Turbo.
There's production reliable and aftermarket reliable. Let's not forget that Ruf fitted titanium conrods to the 590hp version of the R Turbo.
Please point me to the sites that you can find these articles. I am curious as I have always admired the R34 V-Specs and would love to own one here in the states without the absurd price tag.
I always think there are two sides to every story. HC was just pointing out the other side(US SIDE). The Japanese have always played with HP numbers and you know it.
I am not a Porsche "FANBOY" but a CAR Enthusiast so please let me know how you come to this conclusion about 700hp crank for the R35 GT-R if you don't own one or have driven one or have intimate knowledge that it is "STOCK".
#25
05-07-2008, 04:28 PM
It's even funnier that you cannot read the correction factor of 10% built into the numbers - TCF 1.10, indicating that is a CRANK hp estimate with a 10% driveline loss.
Don't you even read your own GTR boards? http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=22542
Don't you even read your own GTR boards? http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=22542
Last edited by eclou; 05-07-2008 at 04:36 PM.
#26
05-07-2008, 04:32 PM
It's still funny on how you didn't read everything I said. RELIABLE!
Eclou just told you the story about the engineers. Plasma liners. I like to see a just trained TECH at Nissan take care of those issues.
Eclou just told you the story about the engineers. Plasma liners. I like to see a just trained TECH at Nissan take care of those issues.
#27
05-07-2008, 04:38 PM
It's even funnier that you cannot read the correction factor of 10% built into the numbers - TCF 1.10, indicating that is a CRANK hp estimate with a 10% driveline loss.
Don't you even read your own GTR boards? http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=22542
Don't you even read your own GTR boards? http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=22542
Funny how one sided things can become..
#28
05-07-2008, 04:41 PM
Good lord, there's a certain amount of light & heat around this R35-vs-911TT topic. The cars are close enough in performance (stock vs stock) that it's a matter of personal preference; an individual driver will provide far more variance in any meaningful performance competition than the difference between the cars. In terms of bang for the buck, the R35 seems like the obvious winner. To many 997 owners, that's beside the point.
In my opinion, the ugly comparison war isn't the 997TT vs the R35, it's the upcoming 997GT2 vs ZR-1. Even if the price were the same (which it's not going to be, even with 'market adjustment'), the ZR-1 looks like it's going to wipe the floor with the GT2 (and for that matter the Ferrari F430). That, IMO, is a shame for Porsche.
In my opinion, the ugly comparison war isn't the 997TT vs the R35, it's the upcoming 997GT2 vs ZR-1. Even if the price were the same (which it's not going to be, even with 'market adjustment'), the ZR-1 looks like it's going to wipe the floor with the GT2 (and for that matter the Ferrari F430). That, IMO, is a shame for Porsche.
#29
05-07-2008, 04:47 PM
Nissan has engineered a driveline that experiences about 10% driveline parasitic losses, which is better than most. There are a few reasons to believe the 482 figure on a Dynapak-
1)Dynapaks read higher than most dynos
2)PS is an international metric which converted to SAE is 472 hp.
3)many engineers have concluded that the GTR does produce more than 500hp at the crank
regardless, there is no 700PS or SAE R35 on stock turbos, whereas EVO, AWE and Proto have been producing 997tt 690 kits for awhile using stock turbos
1)Dynapaks read higher than most dynos
2)PS is an international metric which converted to SAE is 472 hp.
3)many engineers have concluded that the GTR does produce more than 500hp at the crank
regardless, there is no 700PS or SAE R35 on stock turbos, whereas EVO, AWE and Proto have been producing 997tt 690 kits for awhile using stock turbos
#30
05-07-2008, 04:59 PM
Nissan has engineered a driveline that experiences about 10% driveline parasitic losses, which is better than most. There are a few reasons to believe the 482 figure on a Dynapak-
1)Dynapaks read higher than most dynos
2)PS is an international metric which converted to SAE is 472 hp.
3)many engineers have concluded that the GTR does produce more than 500hp at the crank
regardless, there is no 700PS or SAE R35 on stock turbos, whereas EVO, AWE and Proto have been producing 997tt 690 kits for awhile using stock turbos
1)Dynapaks read higher than most dynos
2)PS is an international metric which converted to SAE is 472 hp.
3)many engineers have concluded that the GTR does produce more than 500hp at the crank
regardless, there is no 700PS or SAE R35 on stock turbos, whereas EVO, AWE and Proto have been producing 997tt 690 kits for awhile using stock turbos
That's not necessarily true.
I dynoed my car when it was stock on both a DynaPak and a Mustang dyno, and hp readings were within 2hp.
Just thought I'd mention it.
I know this is a common belief, but that has been my experience.