Wait isn't this a thread about the 911 Turbo?

 

this is unbelievable. You guys need your own reality show. 'Grown men acting like tards'

 

Before we proceed any further, let's see if you can answer a simple question. Are you now claiming you *knew* it was a warmup lap video and not the timed run of 7:40? Try to be honest here because I have the post where you originally brought this up and I can prove you a liar pretty easily.

 

15 seconds for Suzuki? Based on what formula.

BS + Nonsense = Yeah right?
LOL

 

^ +1,

Seriously getting tired of these tangent threads, want to know more about the 2010 997 MKII Turbo.

The optional aerokit and center lock wheels look nice, the stock Turbo Wheels on the MKII look a bit odd.

Given that Porsche is extremely conservative with their 0-60 numbers I don't doubt that the MKII can do 3.0 sec to 60 and a reduction on laptimes at the Ring.

The articles out there state that the compression ratio of the engine has been raised compared to the GT1 block engine, on top of that it's a DFI engine so the effective compression ratio is probably higher. BTW: Any info regarding what kind of sleeves the new engine is using?

 

No, before we proceed any further, why don't you answer the simple question of whether Rohrl could be faster than 7:29 in the GT2 given a completely closed track.

 

"I just don't see where another 27 seconds comes from with the car I drove. Ten, perhaps - fifteen with a set of those gummy Dunlops fitted, Suzuki-san driving, using his sublime skills and telephathic knowledge of the car's handling traits."
--Chris Harris

 

I knew you wouldn't have courage to answer because it would require you to be intellectually honest - a concept you're apparently not very familiar with.

 

Are you going to start talking about cars, or not? Your tangent here is as relevant as me bringing up your theory that Sport Auto supertested an MSRC-equipped Corvette to explain the rather substantial 16s difference between mfr claim and Sport Auto time.
I knew you wouldn't have the courage to answer because it undermines the worth of the DR article: "The Truth" can't be the truth if they don't know how fast the GT2 can truly go given the same testing methods as Nissan did for the GT-R. Nevermind the fact they were referencing the wrong GT-R lap time.

 

Man I wish I had some money to just throw around because this is what I'd do: I'd walk into a Nissan dealer and purchase a brand new GTR. Then I'd walk into a Porsche dealer and purchase a brand new 997 Turbo. I'd then have both cars secretly shipped over to Germany to be tested on the ring. I'd then offer 1 million dollars to the Nissan factory driver and 1 million dollars to the Porsche factory driver to show up and replicate their ring times. This would be a day of days!!! I'd have the ring closed down that day so there is no traffic. I'd make sure the weather conditions were ideal. Each driver would get 5 laps to replicate their times after which a heads up race between the two drivers would make up the finale. Could you imagine it?

I’d promote the event like no other. The world would know what was happening that day. I can see it now. All of the Porsche and Nissan fanboys would come out in droves wearing their Porsche and Nissan paraphernalia lining up alongside the track. Hell, I’d try to recoup my money by selling tickets to the race and even making it a pay per view event on HBO..

<O</OOne thing for sure, there would be no excuses that day. I don’t care if you’re a scientist, lawyer, doctor or exotic dancer. Your arguments using scientific methods or due process would hold no weight this day.

<O</OLastly, even if the winner doesn’t match their publicized ring time, I think the general auto enthusiast would let this slide. But man, whoever looses that day would go down in history as a lying sack of sh*t manufacture whose credibility would be shot for years to come…

<O</OJust my .02<O</O

 

Sure, but I wanted to prove what an intellecutally dishonest weasel you were first. Mission accomplished. As for the C6, I accepted your correction that while SA did test an MSRC equipped model, the one they timed for the supertest did not have that option.

As far as me not willing to indulge your question because it would "undermine the DR test", that is laughable. You want to speculate about the best possible time Rohrl could pull out of a GT2 and then act like that hypothetical time has some relevance. It has none. Even if I agreed there is a possibility of him getting a better time, I can't *quantify* how much faster he would be on a bonzai run. You definitely can't either. I (and DR) prefer to work with known quantities - demonstrated performance - not fudged numbers from a bench racer who has never even sniffed a racetrack. Lastly, it is not incumbent on DR to normalize manufacturers' ring times to one another or make an exhaustive list of excuses for a car that doesn't perform up to a manufacturer's claimed times. Harris (and Davies) both gave their estimations on how fast the actual cars they drove would perform under better conditions. You can **** and moan and twist the numbers to your liking all you want but don't presume for a moment that your opinion carries the same weight as theirs. I guess for some, "The Truth" is just a little hard to swallow.

 

Actually, you are applying a bit of the scientific method here. You are certainly controlling for any fiddling the manufacturers might do with the cars before running the laps, and you are controlling for weather conditions, traffic, and probably driver skill. Plus, you are going a long way towards ensuring that each driver puts in their best effort. Not a bad way to go about this!

 

Go ahead. Post the link. I don't recall saying that video was the actual supertested fastest lap; I even timed the segments and found differences indicating as such.

Do bear in mind that this bench racer who has never sniffed a racetrack exposed the "290 kph @ Schwedenkreuz" for the sham that it was, in the face of people here who have tracked cars and should have known better.
And as it turns out, I was right about 5th Gear complaining about the control layout of the PDK system; how you and heavy kept inferring that I said anything about the actual mechanical function of PDK itself, even after the clarification, is simply puzzling.
DR prefer to work with known quantities? Is that why they only found out about the Cup+ differences until after the test? Rohrl's 7:32 is not a known quantity. Nobody can say it was done the same way as Nissan. It is the responsibility of the person writing "The Truth" to know the context behind how each time was set, if they want to draw any meaningful conclusions about the validity of the mfr claims. What if, theoretically, it turned out that Rohrl passed 30 cars on his 7:32 lap and encountered rain and road works along the way? Clearly this should affect Harris's assessment of how far/close he got to Rohrl's time. By the same token, anyone wanting to compare car vs bike times should know that many of the listed bike times are BTG.

Did Harris include the conditions of track and weather in his calculations for the GT-R? I might have missed it. Post it up if you have it.
Davies's estimation, in the passage I quoted, didn't include the driver variable (Harris admits he's slower than Suzuki), nor did he consider the effect of VDC on a truly hot lap. Later, he only adds Suzuki would have probably been under 7:45 on a better day without regard to tire differences, and that's what Suzuki did indeed do with the S1 GT-R (7:38).

 

I guess you can say that some inherit controls are in place. I just wish I had the coin to make it happen.

 

Before too long, I bet someone will pull off something like this. Chris Harris and DR tried to come close, but it's never good enough. Consumer Reports does something like this. When they do car comparisons, they will actually buy the car off the lot without informing the dealer of what they are up to. However, when they road test cars, they don't wring them to within an inch of their lives as some car buff magazines do. They always get very conservative 0 to 60 times, for example, as you probably know.