Ah okay, didnt know the US spec ones had no speed limiter. You guys are lucky, for those of you who would buy one.

 

Have you guys read this article?

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...column?cid=259

 

No need, because C&D's correction factor made the whole thing b.s. and what's funny is that they continue to act like they didnt screw that up. The GT-R doesnt resemble a 124 mph trapping car. Without that bogus correction it would have been 11.6 @ 119.

This is prime reasons the mags cant be trusted.

 

But the article said they dyno the cars at 415 to the wheel, meaning 520 to the crank. Do you think they didn't dyno the cars?

 

Nissan clearly lied and the car is total piece of crap. However, I am a humanitarian and will take yours off your hands at MSRP. Happy to help.

 

Probably no need to argue about this now. Looks like we will be getting to the bottom of this soon. Nissan can choose to ignore it, which probably means they did "cheat", or they can pull a few cars off the lots and run 'em against a TT and GT2 of the lot at the ring and see what happens. I know that there was an article in "Redline" magazine a few months back which indicated that someone in the Nissan camp did say that they were using shaved tires to make the record run. The mag also said this would not be the first time that Nissan has fudged. I'll get the reference and post it when I get home.

 

The sim says a 420 whp GTR should run ~11.6 at 119-120.
335 whp would get you their 12.6 at 111 mph run.
450 whp would get you 11.4 at 123...

So the numbers are all over the map- over 100 hp at the wheels differences in those times. As more GTRs run the 1/4 and we'll know, but it seems the customer cars have lots of variation as well.

If anyone ever traps a stock one at 11.2/ 126 that's my guess for what the 'ring record car would run (490 whp). I'll bet a flashed one would run that...

And yes we'll get to the bottom of it soon- every magazine is booking time at the ring with a gtr and a porsche right now...

 

Car and Driver obviously didnt take much math or have much common sense. Combine their miscalculated correction factor with this and it seems they are intentionally inflating the numbers to make their first lie seem like the truth. THE GT-R CANNOT TRAP 124 MPH!!!!!!!

Nissan claims the GT-R only loses like 10% or something really low from the drivetrain, you'd think C&D would have at least known that. Either way 20% by todays standards is poor, VERY POOR. Car and Driver knows that no one uses 20%.

At 15% which is reasonable, 415 whp would be 488 crank hp which makes perfect sense and is right on par with Nissan's numbers.


This is even more evidence that the mags are clueless ********. They know todays sports cars arent losing 20% from the drivetrain, unless it's a super beefy one like maybe a Viper, but even those are like 18% I think. The AWD 996 TT is only like 18%

This is idiotic journalism at it's best.

 

That's interesting as I am reading both sides to the argument. I guess we'll just have to wait and find out when other magazines do more tests.

 

Just for reference, the GT-R is a bit slower than the TT in accelerration. Let's just use the Tip for example which accelerates as fast as the manual but weighs 3600+ lbs. That puts the GT-R at ~200 lbs more than the TT. Which would make it a little slower than the TT in acceleration which is what we've seen. It can launch as well, and shift quicker, which is why we'll see nearly identical 1/4 mile times from the two. But the TT will trap higher, and start pulling away after 100 mph.


It's more than likely that the power is nearly identical to that of the Porsche and the weight is the limiting factor in acceleration. But this is not a 480 whp car. I would venture to say that Porsche underrates everything in the power department, so the TT is likely around 490-500 tops at the crank.

 

There are too many references that indicate that the Nissan GTR is a better car on the track than the Porsche 911 GT3 and turbo. I own a 911 997S and my car is more expensive than a GTR but significantly slower than a GTR in every aspect.

Even if they cheat, it is a remarkable car for a lot less money than a GT3 and a Turbo. Porsche needs to do one of two things:
1-Big improvements to 911 performance or,
2-Big discounts to a car that is being beat left and right by a Nissan

One advice to Porsche: stop accusing Nissan and start working harder to justify the sticker price of a GT3, GT2, and the turbo

 

What seems to be lost in this discussion is the fact that the GTR is driven by computers. It's not a drivers car. I'm sure it's fast... Maybe even legitimately more so that the Turbo and GT2 . But in my opinion, computers are a band-aid for a poor design. Turn the computers off. If it still beats the GT2 and Turbo, that's one hell of a car! But at 3800lbs.... Won't happen. To this, can you imagine what a GT2 with with Nissan's electronic stability control would be like. UNTOUCHABLE. But then again, it wouldn't be a Porsche.

I have a friend that drove one of the test cars around Firebird before the official launch. He said that with the computers controlling everything, you almost can't crash the car. You point it towards the apex and hit the gas. Microsoft does the rest. In addition, he said if you really push the car, it fries the electronics. That's what I want. A 3800lb car flying into a turn without any aids.

In the end, the car is probably a very fun car. With the electronics on it's is wickedly fast. But what I like about my GT3 is the fact that it does what I tell it to do. And it's the chassis that does it. Not some gimmick I can put on a '78 Pinto and lap the "Ring" in under 8 minutes. If I tell it to do something right, it does it right. If I tell it to do something wrong, it makes me pay. That's a good driver's car! If nothing else, this will make Porsche even more hungry to become better. And they'll do it with design, not electronics.

Oh, by the way. I wonder how the GTR will do in ALMS. Oh that's right. Nissan doesn't race anymore

 

I admit that I do sometimes think that Porsche and their parts are overpriced but when I think harder, there's a reason why I got my GT3. I wanted to drive the car and not let the car drive me. So for $108K base price for a GT3, that wasn't bad at all. As for performance, there's always going to be someone out there that will be faster and better than you. Heck, there are kids who SC their Civics and Supras and I admit, they are fast, but am I going to buy it and drive it? Will I get the same excitement as driving my GT3? I highly doubt it.

 

Sure they race, but only in magazines!

 

Once again, unless Porsche can prove their claim of 7:54 and comes out with some video and any actual recorded document of their "test", then their claim is bogus as well. At least Nissan has a video to prove it, the only questionable part is Nissan's HP rating, which is probably the only explanation how the GTR was able to accomplish 7:29. I think it's safe to say that it's not 485hp but more than likely about 540hp