Who cares for AUTOBILD, this paper belongs to the Springer Press, which might be compared with the British Sun or here The National Enquirer.

Yes, both cars are build by extraterrestrial life forms ;-)

 

GT-R + Switzer p800 = game over.

 

Lingenfelter + ZR1 > Cobalt SS

See how useless that sounds.

 

gtr with p800 pkg still cheaper then new turbo...

 

All 24 hours of Le Mans? People sit through all of that? Most people would be in danger of driving tired if they drove for long enough for a GT3 to come into its game. Excuse me, do you mind if we warm up for an hour before we race? Not at all, go ahead.



Not really. My original statement before heavylevy strawman'd it into talking about tyres, corvettes and Weetabix was just that the GTR proved to be better in the handling department for less. All credit to the 997 for being so fast in a straightline though. That truly is hypercar pace 0-100mph.


My whole point is what the hell do motorsports prove anyway? How a car performs with a carbon body and a few hundred grand of racing parts on slicks over a period of several hours with a pro-racing driver at the wheel on a track he knows off by heart has no bearing on its worth or performance as a road car. In fact by designing a chassis for such an event it may be entirely compromised as a road car on normal tyres. However if you are going into motorsports as a means of showing off your technology, then in view of the fact that it has no bearing on your road car at any level, why not go all out at the very top level, which is F1.

It depends how you take it. F1 hasn't been a successful arena for them, nor Toyota, nor many others. It's a huge expense and not one you can afford unless you're taking home a lot of podiums. Most teams self-relegate themself due to high investment costs and poor returns. But it has no bearing on road cars anyway, it's just a nice advertising tool. Very few motorsports events have any bearing on actual road cars. It may seem pathetic to reference Targa Tasmania against Le Mans as I did but frankly it's more relevant to the cars that Joe Public can buy from the showroom. Again the debate reached this point because hc decided to take a strawman detour from discussing road cars and started discussing Le Mans as if it proves anything about road cars. If the same chassis is used about all it proves is that that chassis will hold together. A car that's internal skeleton doesn't disintegrate. Important and yet irrelevant all the same.

 

Wait till maintenance, replacement, and repair work kicks in. You'll be begging for Porsche customer service and warranty.

 

"BigFoot was seen driving a 2010 GTR. Elvis has one on order".

Tell me it ain't so, it had to be an impersonator.

 

Still after everything i will have 30 k for any service possible


But serious this threads should be closed as soon as they start as this two monster cars are amazing at what they are. This is pointless hah.

I luv em both.

 

GTR: $87,320
Turbo: $149,120


The Turbo isnt just more expensive than a GTR, the price difference is downright laughable considering the how closely they perfom. Either way, it cost over 60k more and is still slower on a track.

How can you excuse this HeavyFanboy?















How

 

First of all.. I OWN a GTR..

Let me say this..

The GTR is like an affair with a smoking hot girl, but the Porsche is what you take home to meet your mother..

I get an immense amount of looks and pictures and compliments on my GTR everytime I drive it.. Its the "People Car" the car that can do everything the rich sports car owner can for a lot less.. BUT. I still love the Porsche in my heart, It has class, style and pedigree, quality plastics, leather, sound etc...... Sure my GTR is an out performer esp when modded, but the Porsche is a beautiful german woman who can also cook..

Its hard guys.. both are amazing... but secretly, I wish I had a Turbo.. ssshh

 

Remember this post the first time the Turbo is on MPSC, a tire still slower than the Dunlops. I will make sure I point it out to you.


Does the GT-R being faster than an F430, or SLR McLaren on a track make it worth more, or them worth less.

To think the GT-R is worth anything more than it is is the funny thing. The Turbo demolishes the GT-R in acceleration and only needs some comparable tires to do the same thing on the track. When the GT-R doesn't need R-compounds to compete, then get back to us. But until then, it's just riding Dunlop to magazine wins.

This is inconclusively shown in the recent tests.

So a more fitting statement is "The GT-R Dunlops are way faster than the Porsche Bridgestones, so why should the Turbo cost so much"? Hope you feel better.

Anyone can make a cheap fast for one lap car, ANYONE! And Nissan is LOSING money on their cheap car, how smart is that?

 

Originally Posted by BD-

My whole point is what the hell do motorsports prove anyway? How a car performs with a carbon body and a few hundred grand of racing parts on slicks over a period of several hours with a pro-racing driver at the wheel on a track he knows off by heart has no bearing on its worth or performance as a road car. In fact by designing a chassis for such an event it may be entirely compromised as a road car on normal tyres. However if you are going into motorsports as a means of showing off your technology, then in view of the fact that it has no bearing on your road car at any level, why not go all out at the very top level, which is F1.


Manufacturers don't go racing to showoff their technologies. They go racing to refine their technologies and test them under the most grueling conditions like 24hrs of Le Mans. Of course winning gives them some marketing power. How well a chassis, engine block, transmission, and etc... hold up during those types of racing allows manufacturers to apply those same technologies into the road cars. I don't think it's fair to discount racing as just an avenue for manufacturers to waste their money and show off their technological prowess.

 

SO when we will see a book from you about gt-r vs porsche turbo?

I think it will be a bestseller!

 

When i drive my Porsche i'm not driving it be noticed. I hear comments like yours of people say i get ' pictures taken everywhere' 'people ask me questions' blah blah ... i don't want that. If i did, id get a Ferrari. ****, i get all that and MORE when i drive my Smart Car.

It sounds like an attention ***** bagging to be noticed, when people with GTR's say that.....


As for faster... man oh man... where were all these GTR owners that did not participate in Forum Wars: “Talk Smack, Then Hit the Track” ?

serioustly... i went.... with my slow porsche....i don't talk **** unless i can....others here talk and talk and talk and will talk all their life, but never put words into action.

 

HAHAHAH BD is trying to render motorsports useless now because he has nothing that the GT-R can win (not a real one anyways).

GT racing is the ultimate test of a cars chassis at the limits. All of the chassis manufacturing put to the test, shows what the car is really capable of. The GT-R is limited because what it uses on the street for speed (Dunlops) won't carry it on the track when the tires are regulated and equalized.

The true judge of a car is when the tire compounds are equal. You saw how Best Motoring made the Evo's and STi's keep up with the Porsches, Ferrari's and such for years. By shodding them with R-compounds. Nissan just took Best Motoring to a whole new level. Using tires to overcome all of the deficiencies.