Define "that" . The vague term serves no relevance to my question which was -- Do you know of any other manufacturer who has made such an effort to limit its drivers use of his own car?

By limitations -I was referring to the customer disclosure waiver which BTW does not only refer to track use . Theres an entire list of compliance demands . The list is so detailed and provides enough escape clauses that they may never face a class action suit again.

On top of that they confine the owner with one tech and and one sales rep claiming that its individualized but in reality it isolates the parties --increasing their ability to manage the situation by limiting the participants . It pits the manufacturer in a position of strength and in my opinion reveals characteristics of a structured control tactic. In my opinion .. it's pathetic. Sadly .. I actually think the car has a lot of merrit .. but I don't agree with the manner in which the ownership experience is handled.

And yes the indoctrinated pro Nissan waiver signing zealot believes its to his benefit and as long as he walks the Nissan line ... he may never face any reason to question why he surrendered the car that he paid for .. to their strict supervision and control.

[/quote]Most, but not all. Porsche's stance is that if the car is tracked, they are under no obligation to fix it on their dime. You signed the warranty agreement, so I doubt a court would rule in your favor. [quote]

I have signed no waivers . Just a buyers order that I took delivery .It's nothing more than a sales record of payment.

The courts did NOT award in favor of Nissan . If Porsche was able to prove legitimacy to their case or not serves no relevance to whether Nissan could . In fact that Nissan didn't. Here's the Cheif engineer backpedal explaination. Notice how he claims that "launch control" wasn't really "launch control" but rather some unauthorized description of a systen used to get out of SNOW . (of course AFTER the transmissions broke ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1bHGaV-Lvw

I view the Turbo primarily as a street car. In fact I have stated many times that a normally aspirated 911 model may be slower in a straight line but lighter and more nimble . I have also stated in my first post on this thread . that the specific car, the track itself, as well as the race all play a factor .

It's no accident that all cars can test on a track or that primary street cars in stock form have respectable times but I have never seen such an extraordinary effort to tout the track numbers as with the launch of the Gtr.The entire base of the Gtr advertisements were that it was a (paraphrasing) "Porsche beater" . Until it broke . Then launch control became something for snow . And when Porsche bought and tested a Gtr and it was 30 secons slower at the Ring .. they were offered driving lessons. Anything but to address the issue . BTW .. the Porsche numbers place the GTR in 997S territory .. but I favor independent testing. http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com...ssons-Chumps-/

I have not signed a waiver . Just a buyers order. In fact an owner who buys a car via private sale simply gets a title transfer. There is no formal correspondence with Porsche other than them thanking me for buying the car and sending me information , magazines and newsletters and a very nice paper weight .

I am aware that every manufacturer has its own terminology defining its warranty but Nissan has gone above and beyond in an effort to claim the car has capabilities but the owner /driver is limited so greatly in being able to attain them.

 

Signature or not, the GTR and the Corvette will beat the doors off any Porsche. Don't psych yourself out and think you can hang. B/C Porsces have to be properly driven to even hang. Most don't have the skills. When you buy a Porsche, sure you are paying for a sports car. But what you are really paying for is exclusitivity. Anyone can buy a Chevy/Nissan. I bet the GTR will stomp some Ferraris also, but we don't see that comparison or Aston. Ask anyone which car they would rather have, Veyron, GTR or ZR1. All are close in numbers.

 

Every warranty certificate for every car is "carefully written , edited, re edited , and amended with time to insure their defense against any customer who strays from their compliance.

It is given to the customer at a time when he is star struck by the car of his dreams in a moment when his impulsive emotional reasoning of "I want the (insert your car here)" might even impair his rational decision making.

See how easy that is?

The only difference is - Nissan ensures that you've either read the manual, or have been given instructions about how to operate the car by the gm or dealer principal.

In fact - the signature also tells Nissan that the dealer took you out for a test drive and showed you certain things. I'm not sure of any other car in Nissan's line up that requires you are showed certain things.

It is clear to me that you have no idea what is on it, and don't even bother to learn. You just want to complain about something...

Don't let me stop this train of ingorance - carry on.

The internet has done its job of brainwashing you, apparently.

This thread was started by a troll comparing track performance of the 911 to the GT-R. Somebody felt somewhere that transmission issues in early models by people who launched the car endlessly (or others who operate within the parameters of the manual - who have received repairs without incident) had any sort of relevancy to this topic.

I don't think anybody who knows anything about cars can dispute either the 911 or the GT-R's performance.

The reliability of either car can only be told years after. For now - the Nissan has had a large success rate. A few issues (let's say - 100 for an insanely high estimate) out of over 6000 sold worldwide so far is around a 98.5% reliability. Now with this incredibly high estimate for which I have no data for (except for when each incident happens - it gets reported 7.34 x 10 to the 14th power), it still seems pretty reliable.

However - none of that matters to the troll's original intent. The performance of both cars are about equal.

And (as mentioned quite well earlier) thanks to Nissan, Porsche is pushed to raise their performance. I'm enjoying the 'battle'. It's the HP wars of the new century, and we all win.

 

What numbers are they all close in?
Price? Negatory.

Ring times? Veyron is waaay behind both ZR1 and GTR.

Straightline performance? Another negatory. Veyron will flush both of them before the 1/8 mile by bus lenghts and the ZR1 would flush the GTR with ease by the 1/4 mile and there after.

Anyway these thread are for those that like to argue for arguments sake. Both cars are great for there strengths. GTR owns the Porsche in twisties and Porsche owns GTR in the straights stock to stock. One is more exclusive than the other and has a better pedigree. Both will own 99 % of the cars on the road today so either owner is a winner. There everythings covered. Let it go people.

 

I posted it on this thread. LOL. Scroll down (link) . Also Nissan once had it on their website but at this time a search only brings up the New Zealand info. Nontheless it can be found here -http://jalopnik.com/5201918/2010-gt+...-for-denying-n

Lastly -- there is a huge difference between a manufacturer stating a warranty to cover itself and quite another to attempt a form of control over an owner with HIS paid property after he takes possession. The disclosure form is that additional step .

 

An amusing thread.

It is quite surprising that 95% of the comparisons and tests I have seen between Gt3/turbo vs GTR have clearly favored the GTR....its obvious that in order to keep up with the GTR the porsche driver needs to be highly skilled whereas the GTR driver doesnt need to be as skilled...that says something right there...the GTR is faster around the track.

And I know on the Porsche boards you will hear all the usual arguments about why it(tracktimes) doesnt matter because its the unspoken aura and feel about the Porsche that you buying but lets not kid ourselves, most of us wouldnt buy a Gt3 or turbo if it was 2 seconds slower 0-60 or had significantly worse laptimes...if you want a nice looking car that is sporty you could go M5 or Aston Martin or some Ferraris...to me Porsche is a drivers car and no matter what anyone says it was meant for the track(esp Gt3 and turbos)....why else woulod you see so many on trackdays?...hence its reasonable to be "bothered" that a Nissan is clearly faster.

One thing for sure, Porsche needs to get its act together now as the GTR has set the bar clearly higher.

Would I buy a GTR?? ...well no because the interior and exterior is too ugly...but do i accept it is faster around the track ...yes...would I buy a GTR if they changed the exterior and interior to my liking?? ...yes!

Im trying to be objective here as a Porsche owner(dont own a GTR) but after reading this thread doing some DD, I think the GTR guys who have posted on here have the better argument and the Porsche arguments seem...dare I say it "desperate"....sorry, but thats the way I see it........go ahead rip me a new orifice for saying this on a Porsche board.

 

The two cars in question are the Nissan and the Porsche . Mentioning other cars in an effort to dilute the topic serves no relevance to the two cars in question.

The GTR will not beat the Porsche in every race . It is even up for debate whether the data used on the Ring is even valid pertaining to a USA production car . The GTR will not win the 1 mile competitions . It will not win a rolling start . It does not win every race. It certainly lost every race where a transmission broke. It lost the race of customer service with many former owners who took them to court and won.

The car gained tremendous respect and then lost much of it in the same breath. No one likes deception , doubt, and control tactics .

Every time Nissan is questioned .. they fail to address the topic almost sounding like politicians rather than engineers. When Porsche questioned the data Nissan welcomed Porsche drivers to take driving classes ? When Launch control was questioned the reply was that it was used for snow?
Do you think that buyers can't see through this ?

Then to top it all off Nissan requires a disclosure waiver on 2010 cars basically limiting the driver from attaining the same numbers it promoted in its huge advertising campaign . Did you forget all the auto journalists who wrote volumes mainly on the topic of the Gtr's track ability ?

Just about everything about the GTR is BRILLIANT !!!! The ad launch, the denial of coverage. the failure to refute opposing facts , even the cheif engineer interview in Japanese (when he speak English) to a primary audience of English proficient viewers (usa , europe, etc) . It leaves just enough room for him to perhaps claim that the language loses meaniung in translation or that interpretation might be taken out of context.

 

Most of the Porsche owners like the Gtr. I have said many times that I do.
But liking a car and accepting the methods used by the manufacturer are two different things but they are BOTH part of owership.

I don't think the Gtr is ugly at all (both interior and exterior are very nice).
I do think their tactics are despicable though.

Lastly --this is not the same Nissan that won me over with my former 300zxtt . Maybe the Gtr cost them too much at a time when automakers are struggling .. but either way .. as a consumer .. their problems belong to them.

 

Go back and re-read what you wrote:
1) Why would Nissan build a car touting it track capability yet not stand behind covering its track drivers repairs ?

So, um, yes. Porsche, GM, Mitsubishi, etc. all limit the driver's use of his own car, in terms of what they will provide in terms of warranty coverage. Go read your warranty agreement; you will see it is, in effect, a waiver. Coverage that you would otherwise have is denied, dependent on how YOU use your vehicle. Nissan and Dodge were being more explicit, with separate waiver forms.
You were trying to imply that Porsche will stand 100% behind the track use of its products. After all, like Nissan (you claim), they tout their cars as being designed for track use.

As for Porsche being 20 seconds slower in the GT-R than the 997.1 Turbo, they are the only ones who have realized such a result; being in the business of selling Porsches, was another outcome expected? German magazines (Sport Auto and Auto Motor und Sport) who are quite familiar with Porsches have reached an opposite conclusion: the GT-R is noticeably faster than the Turbo on the 'Ring. But we could guess as much based on the half-dozen or so tests between these two cars on other tracks all over the planet (in which there are zero instances of the Turbo being faster; play the odds on that one). Driving lessons for the GT-R would appear to be in order.
Porsche's whole contention was that there was no way the GT-R could be that fast based on its power/wt ratio. They conveniently ignore that their own 997.2 Turbo w/PDK and Panamera Turbo are faster than their on-paper specs suggest.


BTW .. the Porsche numbers place the GTR in 997S territory
LOL, whut?

 

Well I guess the OP has a point then. This topic is quite annoying/disturbing no matter which side you're on. I will admit I'm a bit pissed too that Nissan can build a car that threatens Porsche on several major fronts. I've spent a lot of money with them and Porsche has made LOADS of money off all of us. However I'm not buying the GT-R in spite of Porsche, I'm buying it to enjoy it, then sell it, then whatever. I'd love to get the Panamera Turbo however i don't want to wake up 12-months from now and have it be worth 40K less than I bought it for. This won't happen with the GT-R I guarantee you. That's the cool thing about it. Will I buy more Porsche's? Yep. Brand new? Probably not. For such a "prestigious" brand their resale value simply sucks these days...

The fact is Porsche can't play the games they've always been able to play anymore. This is what good competition is supposed to do in any good business, kind of reminds me of the turtle and the hare. No doubt Porsche is/will answer the call. Whether they can get away with charging over twice the competition's price is questionable. The GT-R won't be the only car knocking on Porsche's door in the next couple of years. Personally I think they've been laughing their way to the bank for a very long time...

I love both of the aforementioned cars for what they are and that's ok, don't need to pick sides. I'm good with it.

 

Guibo -
There is a huge difference between a manufacturer stating it warranty versus having a customer sign a disclosure form . In fact Nissan --prior to the 09 transmission issues did NOT even have this waiver . Even they know the difference.

As for the data . I happen to agree with you . It appllies to BOTh Porsche and Nissan and just as you might feel Sport Auto is biased journalism one can say the same of Edmunds too.

My point is independent testing in the absence of profit (IMO) would insert a bit of fair play . Nissan had that chance BTW --When Porsche claimed that their purchased Nissan failed to beat the record instead of offering driving lessons Nissan could have inpected and tested that exact car . But they didn't.

 

I happen to agree . But "good competition" does not include deception . It refutes claims by providing facts and it doesn't backpeddle .

The GTR certainly got noticed but to say that it acheived all that it's claimed to be is riddled with doubt and even those who buy the car may never be permitted to attain it due to the limitations set on the day they say "I do ".

 

see sig

 

They did not have the revised waiver, but they did have the waiver about driving with VDC off. And they have made goodwill repairs on some earlier cars that failed with VDC off.
If anything, Sport Auto and Auto Motor und Sport would be biased in favor of Porsche. For them to reach the conclusion that the GT-R is noticeably faster is quite telling.
How do you know Nissan didn't inspect that car? There have been reports in media that they did.

 

#1 Was the GT-R built for 1 mile races?

#2 How many did they lose?

#3 How many "races" did it lose because of a broken transmission (I'll bet you $1 you neither know how many or if their was even a single one)?

#4 How did Porsche respond to Nissan's proven 'Ring time (I'll help you with this - denial - then they put their own driver, ran a 7:55 and said,"It's impossible." Then Sport Auto ran a 7:38 - which was closer to the advertised 'Ring time than Sport Auto got to the Porsche claim of their 911T - go figure - perhaps they've should've taken Nissan up on their offer for lessons)? They sure sounded like politicians to me... What would you call it? (please don't be in Porsche owner's denial)

#5 The snow comment... Really? People still - to this day - don't know that the Japanese government does not allow any launch control? Really? This still has to be explained?

#6 People who bought this car because it could've done 0-60 in 3.5 secs (mine does) bought it for the wrong reason.

#7 The car also "advertises" a sub-7:30 around the 'Ring. So if I don't do it, should I also sue Nissan?

How silly does this argument become?