You are entitled to your opinion. I simply see you once again drawing a conclusion that you want to be true (that the GTR really isn't as fast as everyone says it is) based questionable evidence at best. Having run one lap I know how ludicrous it is to make assumptions about a car's speed at one event without knowing all the variables, of which there are more than one can count. That is all...

Edit: And your attempt to explain to me why it's not questionable evidence, when you've never driven in the event, met Tony, etc, while I have is vaguely comical...

 

I don't see what you're arguing. You came here suggesting that a stock GTR with an expert driver went up against a stock 996 GT3 with a good driver and won by only 4s. The truth is that the GT3 driver was an expert and the GTR driver was merely good and that the GT3 definitely isn't completely stock. The drivers had also been racing the same car for several years.

Yes the winning ACR driver is a multiple SCCA champion as well. What's your point there?

 

SPANKED!!!!!


4 22 Porsche GT3 SSGT1 BB 5:03.002 345
Peter Lier, Ian Stewart
14 100 Nissan GT-R SSGT1 BB 5:22.332 295
Tony Swan, Mary Seelhorst




Mind you, this guy beat steve millen by a second in the Z06. So the fanboys are going to have to admit one way or the other, the Millen was sandbagging and Swan is not all that of a driver, rendering Road and Tracks test that the fanboys love to claim obviously rigged, OR, the the GT3 is it's rival.


But this is similar to what no driving GT-R fanboys will see at PCA events. And I'd bet money that Swan can driver better than 95% of people buying GT-R's.

PWNED.

 

Spakned x2 at Mid america today, they had two sessions.

2 22 Porsche GT3 SSGT1 BB 5:03.410 355
Peter Lier, Ian Stewart
3 25 Chevrolet Z06 Corvette SSGT1 BB 5:07.690 350
Dan Corcoran, Kyle Corcoran

8 100 Nissan GT-R SSGT1 BB 5:15.153 325
Tony Swan, Mary Seelhorst




Who making the excuses now?!?!?!?!?!

 

You keep talking about what you've done that has no relevance to my points.

Tony Swan is a average or sub par driver??????


THEN WHY DID HE GO FASTER BY A SECOND THAN A PRO DRIVER IN A FAIRLY DIFFICULT TO DRIVE CAR???? (steve millen, Z06)

AND WHY DOES HE HAVE ONE OF THE FASTEST TIMES FOR SAID CAR AT SAID TRACK?????? (Z06, Buttonwillow)


Yet he's just an average driver? You guys are pretty pathetic to call my theories of base and now that they are being confirmed, in more ways than one, I'm still crazy. Nissan's ring times dont help you drive and pass people one bit, especiall when they can drive.


I'm giving you the evidence, your just ignoring it. Start giving some decent rebuttals and I'll listen, but for now you're just getting your feelings hurt.

You fanboys are going to have to give somewhere, because it's not adding up for you and all your mag comparos. And we can go through them in detail for those that cant seem to fathom.

FACT: it does not add up (the mags)

 

What' the matter heavy, don't you know what mods these cars run?

In the real world, the conclusion you are trying to draw is flawed.

Irrespective of the outcomes of any future track events involving the GTR,GT3, 997TT etc, even if you manage to better a GTR at a track, the results of every single magazine test to date pitting stock GTR vs stock 997TT, GT3 is not going to be suddenly overturned.

Does that mean that everyone should desert Porsches and buy GTR'S instead...of course not. Track performance is not the only reason people buy Porsches.

In the real world, level headed people accept facts and move on.

 

If he's merely good, then why can he beat Steve Millen by one second on the same track in the same car and post one of the fastest times at the track in that car (Z06) that we know of.

You're going to have to admit Millen was sandbagging if he's so bad, and there is no way in hell the GT-R can beat a properly driven Z06 by 5 seconds if at all.

You guys are arguing, but have nothing to go by, you dont understand relative speed and skill?

 

The difference is that you guys life out of magazines. I live out of real life.

We have to watch every magazine article come up as a thread here, well if you're going to be here, you'll have to see both sides of the coin.

I'll see to that.

 

Leh's 6 seconds faster than the GTR in the Cayman.

 

5 5 Porsche Cayman GTR SSGT1 SB 5:09.141 340
Donald Barnes, Leh Keen

8 100 Nissan GT-R SSGT1 BB 5:15.153 325
Tony Swan, Mary Seelhorst

 

GREAT info...!!! Thanks for sharing.

 

On a small track like Mid America I expected a lot from the cayman, Leh's been there beofre and it's light and quick.

Mid America is designed by Allan Wilson which even with my level of power I'm lucky to get to 130 on his tracks and Mid America is even worse than Barber and CMP. So it makes sense.

 

There are only two choices as to what to beleive, Millen was sandbagging to run the same time as a average driver, or that Swan is a great driver hence the reason Millen couldnt beat him. But that means, it only takes a little bit of skill to beat the GT-R with a great driver in it.




Can be one, or the other, but not both.


So pick your poison fanboys.

 

The times are only proving my point- that One Lap times are a terrible way to measure a car's relative performance. That's all I've been saying. Do you seriously believe that same day, same driver the GT3 would be two seconds a lap slower at one track, then 5 seconds a lap faster at the next? Just maybe something else is going on there...

Or that Tony, who's your standard for driver performance, would run SEVEN seconds faster in the afternoon compared to the morning? While the GT3 runs within a second? Maybe Tony hadn't seen the track in a while and was picking it back up? Nah, that couldn't happen, because the drivers are all the same and it just comes down to the car...

But that's the whole basis for this thread- the drivers are relatively equal and we're seeing a true measure of the cars. Sorry- I don't care one way or another who's faster, that just isn't so at all at one lap. That's the only point I'm making- this stuff is interesting to watch, but as a measure of pure car performance it useless. And I'd be saying the same thing if the GTR was winning by 10 seconds a lap or loosing.

Having made my point to most (I think) I'll leave you in peace...

 

The GT3 driver had never been to Road America, and the tracks are completely different, with one having tons of straights and the other no speeds over 120 mph. So yeah actually that does make sense.

I believe there was some wetness on the track in the morning and the top cars had to run on a partially wet (but with dry line) track. The GT3 was farther down in the order so the front runners dried the track out. So 2+ seconds a lap makes good sense. And that's not even including getting more laps which generally you get faster, or that a mistake could have been made. 7 seconds difference is nothing over 3 laps considering the circumstances.

The viper went 5 seconds faster, so should that mean his time doesnt count either or that he's a sucky driver? If you look over the WHOLE FIELD, you'll see that the large majority of people got faster. Of course some made mistakes or had problems, spins etc. but overal, most people saw improvement in the afternoon. Dont try to hand pick one scenario to fit your position, at least look over the whole field.


Your last paragraph makes no sense because the first two got shot down.

So yeah, if that's the point you want to make, then go ahead, but I think my points trump yours pretty hard.

NEXT EXCUSE!