nice...

 

Nissan is the one making the wild claim that it was a stock GTR that ran the 7:27. Obviously I could not do it, but based on Nissan's claim, I would expect that one should be able to take one off the show room floor at random and run a 7:27 with Suzuki behind the wheel. Or certainly very close to that time. That would be the real test.

 

I agree that would be the real test but we both know porsche or nissan didnt do that. It would seem both would massage the cars to help in their favor. I still think the 7:27 time is maybe .2-.3 fast just because of the wheels. I guess untill its done we wont know. But if this car is running stock boost, stock brakes, tires, no weight reduction I really dont see what is the argument

 

I doubt any professional driver can drive the GTR anywhere near the time Nissan set..............USING A STOCK CAR!!!!!

On other tests the ZR1 and Viper ACR has absolutely hammered the GTR in track times. What makes you think that the GTR can keep up with the two brutes on a looong track with allot of high speed areas?

 

Do you base a car's "worth" by it's capabilities around the ring??? I sure hope not. At this point, the GTR has already proved to be a quite capable car all around. And at the end of the day, thats all a owner/true enthusiast can really ask for.

 

I would expect a ZR1 and ACR to beat a GTR in track times because of more power , lighter on a loong track. No doubt. No one in here said such a thing

I also disagree with you claim about any professional driver not being able to come close the time nissan set in a stock car. You have to remember Nissan spent months perfecting this. No driver can do this in a day maybe.

It would be like you and I driving at a track for a year and coming up with that perfect lap. I still dont see why the doubters especially since this time was proven in front of everyone.

I know the truth hurts Morano

 

We know Nissan didn't do it, but we don't know that Porsche didn't. There are three guys that have run within 4 seconds of Porsche's claimed time. One of which independant testing. No one within 20 seconds of Suzuki.

We also know Porsche is a stand up manufacturer, which is more than can be said for Nissans rep. Porsche claimed 7:28 for the CGT, Sport Auto ran 7:32 and that supercar test with the other guy ran 7:28 as well. Porsche seem to advertise attainable ring laps with their cars for any pro driver.

The evidence doesn't point to Nissan being of the same integrity.

 

The ACR and ZR1 flogs the GTR except on a track that should have suited the higher hp duo. The high hp cars usually prevail around the ring (not the case with the GTR).

The drivers who tested the GTR were extremely skilled and in HvS and WR's case far more experienced around the Nurburgring than the newb Suzuki. A gap of around 5 seconds is common with these top drivers 10-15 seconds for other less skilled drivers like Chris Harris. As for familiarity with driving a 4WD car, WR was and is regarded by many as a master when it comes to driving a high hp 4wd. Even the magnificent Alain Prost didn't believe in the GTR's ring time after he compared the car to the GT2, Scud, and Lambo.

Now Nissan has previously posted an unbelievable sub 8 minute lap time with the R33, however even using the same record breaking driver and a more powerful car Autocar was never able to get even close to the record time.

 

I totally agree!!!!!

 

Sorry if this post is all over the place.

So with the 09 GTR in its early stages of production. It went around the ring and consumers speculated those times. They posted videos of various views showing the tires used, the car used, from start to finish.

Porsche bought a GTR and tried to mirror the times of Nissan's claims. Not close. Now a second time around Nissan brings to the Ring Porsche Reps, magazines, etc and people still call b.s. because they used off the shelf Nismo wheels. Come on now, the stock GTR with video proof drove a 7:29 lap time. Now you mean to tell me they could not have shaved off two seconds by adjusting suspension, using lighter wheels, and adding 5 hp to the mix?

This reminds me of something Nissan does. Not to get too off topic but a quick word of how Nissan builds their engines. I own a 06 350Z. Now with the 350Z's from 03-05, 06, and 07+ all have different engine powers. Now the main point here is that the 06 makes 300 hp and the 07 306 hp. A 6 hp increase. Same weight same car basically. But that 6 hp advantage comes in at 500 rpm higher which makes a significant advantage over the 06. For instance in 1/4 mile alone and 06 traps in the 101 range while the 07+ in the 105 range with a difference of 6 hp.

Now with that being said where is that 5 hp increase being made? Midrange, uptop? It could do alot more than what people think.

Also Magazine testers do not have the available funds that Car companies do. So how many laps do you think they are doing around the ring? I forget how much is it to run 1 lap but it's expensive as ****. And to do it with multiple cars. So they probably get a best of 2-3 laps then their done testing.

Lastly I hate people saying how the maintenance costs of the car are so high but love the performance. ****'s not cheap right but is it worth it? A car that outhandles 200k 997 GT2's and Ferrari Scuderias, and still complain when they have to pay? Nissan built the car to go around a track. Not turn off the TC and go have fun at the drag strip. That transmission is a very strong piece. Very strong. But it's not good enough to handle 3800 lbs at 4500 rpm launch multiple times. At least not like the R34's 6 speed which everyone who owns an R35 wishes they have.

I love Pcars. To me they are the best cars in the world. But when something defies the laws of physics everyone breaks out a calculator to prove it wrong. I think the GTR is a magnificent piece of art work and only hope Porsche soon realizes that the 911 is an icon. A car that's been evolving around the world for 45 years. Stick to building the best sports car in the world and not on records you know you can beat. Let RUF and 9ff do that dirty work.

 

spec - currently, i've put a stage 1 tune from cobb on my car.

my peak hp went from 400/401 (baseline on a mustang) to 424/436 after the tune - a gain of 24 peak hp.

but the difference midrange was up to 100lb-ft tq and 60hp increase through the majority of the powerband, most of the gain was 3500 - 5000 rpms. i registered 400lb-ft of tq around 3000 rpms.

i mentioned this earlier as well - the 5hp peak increase could be as much as 50hp under the curve. until we dyno one here in the states, we can't solve for this.

 

haha haters will always hate. i neither support the car nor hate it, facts are facts and they have been proven. now that they proved it, people are saying it wont last, then people proves it lasts, and they start questioning the driver used. it'll never end

 

+1

Sour grapes in every haters mouth.

I know the truth still hurts

 

Absolutely nothing can defy the laws of physics. If something appears to, then you can bet something is not on the up and up. The scientific world hinges on the rule of replication. If you make a claim, but no one can replicate it, sorry, your research is considered a dud. Other independent folks have replicated Porsche's claims, but no one has replicated the Nissan's time but Suzuki. The claim was that the 7:29 is run by a stock GTR, not that Nissan can build a car that runs a 7:29. I am sure thay can. All Nissan has shown is that they can build a car that runs a 7:29. They have not shown that it was stock. When anyone else takes a showroom stock GTR and runs the ring, they are unable to duplicate Suzuki's time. I believe it has been well established here that there is nothing special about Suzuki's driving abilities relative to the other independents who have run the GTR around the ring. So it is pretty clear that the GTR running a 7:29 is not a stock car you can buy off the showroom floor. That is what they want us to believe, but they have not demonstarated that beyond a doubt. It would be so easy to prove, and Chris Harris and von Saurma have so far done the best "research" to show that a stock GTR has as of yet not been able to run a 7:29.

 

not that i disagree, but has any other car manufacturer demonstrated beyond a doubt?