Base GT-R lobs 7:38 Nordschleife Supertest Lap Time
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,710
From: MPLS, MN USA
Rep Power: 466
The ZR1 has a close ratio and very nicely spaced set of cogs, especially when you consider the fact that the ZR1 has some crazy amounts of torque at its disposal that would make any manufacturer (bar Dodge) cry for mercy.
2009 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1
Gear Type
Close Ratio 6-Speed Manual
Final Drive3.42:1
1st Gear Ratio2.29:1
2nd Gear Ratio1.61:1
3rd Gear Ratio1.21:1
4th Gear Ratio1:1
5th Gear Ratio0.81:1
6th Gear Ratio0.67:1
2005 Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z06
Gear Type
Tremec 6 Speed Manual
Final Drive3.42:1
1st Gear Ratio2.66:1
2nd Gear Ratio1.78:1
3rd Gear Ratio1.3:1
4th Gear Ratio1:1
5th Gear Ratio0.74:1
6th Gear Ratio0.5:1
R35 Nissan GTR
Gear TypeGR6 dual clutch transmission
Final Drive3.700
1st Gear Ratio4.056:1
2nd Gear Ratio2.301:1
3rd Gear Ratio1.595:1
4th Gear Ratio1.248:1
5th Gear Ratio1.001:1
6th Gear Ratio0.796:1
2009 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1
Gear Type
Close Ratio 6-Speed Manual
Final Drive3.42:1
1st Gear Ratio2.29:1
2nd Gear Ratio1.61:1
3rd Gear Ratio1.21:1
4th Gear Ratio1:1
5th Gear Ratio0.81:1
6th Gear Ratio0.67:1
2005 Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z06
Gear Type
Tremec 6 Speed Manual
Final Drive3.42:1
1st Gear Ratio2.66:1
2nd Gear Ratio1.78:1
3rd Gear Ratio1.3:1
4th Gear Ratio1:1
5th Gear Ratio0.74:1
6th Gear Ratio0.5:1
R35 Nissan GTR
Gear TypeGR6 dual clutch transmission
Final Drive3.700
1st Gear Ratio4.056:1
2nd Gear Ratio2.301:1
3rd Gear Ratio1.595:1
4th Gear Ratio1.248:1
5th Gear Ratio1.001:1
6th Gear Ratio0.796:1
The stock Z06's die when shifting from 4th to 5th; DIE.
The ZR-1's do not, there torque and gearing work VERY favorably together. The GTR, obviously really does a great job of taking advantage
of it's torque curve with its fancy transmission.
MK
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 560
From: Sydney
Rep Power: 41
These doesnt seem to be happening in the real world and most magazines where the GTR is handily beaten by the ZR1 on top speed runs and especially on brakings. Im interested in seeing the main difference between the cars in Germany v the cars Nissan sells around the world.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,219
From: Fayetteville
Rep Power: 499
Top speed runs, sure... But not on road courses, apparently...
So now you think that the German GT-R's are different?
In the real world, people are still getting 12 and 13 sec 1/4's in a Z06 (much less the more powerful ZR-1). Most people who buy them, can't drive them (or won't because of the low volume production).
So now you think that the German GT-R's are different?
In the real world, people are still getting 12 and 13 sec 1/4's in a Z06 (much less the more powerful ZR-1). Most people who buy them, can't drive them (or won't because of the low volume production).
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 560
From: Sydney
Rep Power: 41
0-60 MPH
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 3.2
Nissan GT-R: 3.2
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 3.3
Porsche 911 GT2: 3.5
0-100 MPH
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 6.9
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorani: 7.1
Porsche 911 GT2: 7.3
Nissan GT-R: 8.0
QUARTER MILE
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 11.2 at 130.5mph
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 11.3 at 126.4mph
Porsche 911 GT2: 11.4 at 127.9mph
Nissan GT-R: 11.6 at 120mph
MOTOR TREND FIGURE 8
Porsche 911 GT2: 22.9
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 23.7
Nissan GT-R: 24.1
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 25.1
60-0 MPH BRAKING
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 97 feet
Porsche 911 GT2: 98 feet
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 105 feet
Nissan GT-R: 105 feet
LATERAL ACCELERATION
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 1.10 g
Porsche 911 GT2: 1.10 g
Nissan GT-R: 0.97 g
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 0.95 g
LAS VEGAS MOTOR SPEEDWAY LAP
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 56.9 seconds
Porsche 911 GT2: 57.5 seconds
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 58.0 seconds
Nissan GT-R: 58.1 seconds
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 3.2
Nissan GT-R: 3.2
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 3.3
Porsche 911 GT2: 3.5
0-100 MPH
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 6.9
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorani: 7.1
Porsche 911 GT2: 7.3
Nissan GT-R: 8.0
QUARTER MILE
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 11.2 at 130.5mph
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 11.3 at 126.4mph
Porsche 911 GT2: 11.4 at 127.9mph
Nissan GT-R: 11.6 at 120mph
MOTOR TREND FIGURE 8
Porsche 911 GT2: 22.9
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 23.7
Nissan GT-R: 24.1
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 25.1
60-0 MPH BRAKING
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 97 feet
Porsche 911 GT2: 98 feet
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 105 feet
Nissan GT-R: 105 feet
LATERAL ACCELERATION
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 1.10 g
Porsche 911 GT2: 1.10 g
Nissan GT-R: 0.97 g
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 0.95 g
LAS VEGAS MOTOR SPEEDWAY LAP
Chevrolet Corvette ZR1: 56.9 seconds
Porsche 911 GT2: 57.5 seconds
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano: 58.0 seconds
Nissan GT-R: 58.1 seconds
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,219
From: Fayetteville
Rep Power: 499
Meh, I thought it was already common knowledge that these cars with a significant hp advantage can go faster on top speed runs mostly in a straight line.
What was the significant factor you were trying to imply?
What was the significant factor you were trying to imply?
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,571
From: Kirkland
Rep Power: 179
Top speed runs, sure... But not on road courses, apparently...
So now you think that the German GT-R's are different?
In the real world, people are still getting 12 and 13 sec 1/4's in a Z06 (much less the more powerful ZR-1). Most people who buy them, can't drive them (or won't because of the low volume production).
So now you think that the German GT-R's are different?
In the real world, people are still getting 12 and 13 sec 1/4's in a Z06 (much less the more powerful ZR-1). Most people who buy them, can't drive them (or won't because of the low volume production).
When I was talking to the guy I know with an HKS 570 GTR, he compared it to the ZR1 he was tuning. The ZR1 stock even has traction problems in 3rd gear at freeway speeds. In the GTR he said he can get in it and pretty much right away feel comfortable with pushing the limits in it. With the ZR1 you know the car is a lion at the zoo, if you have a lapse it will hurt you!
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 560
From: Sydney
Rep Power: 41
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q83ZWfuikwk
Very interesting, even he admits that those Nissan prepped test cars performed far better than the subsequent cars they tested. He even thinks that Nissan messed around with the software on some of these cars. Its a very sneaky way of promoting a car, its been done in the past but Nissan takess it to another level.
Both Top Gear and Car and Driver have noticed this. Many other publications have voiced concerns that the GTR isnt performing as well as expected i.e. up there with CGT, Zonda, Enzo, one of these testers include possibly one of the best driver in history, Alain Prost.
Very interesting, even he admits that those Nissan prepped test cars performed far better than the subsequent cars they tested. He even thinks that Nissan messed around with the software on some of these cars. Its a very sneaky way of promoting a car, its been done in the past but Nissan takess it to another level.
Both Top Gear and Car and Driver have noticed this. Many other publications have voiced concerns that the GTR isnt performing as well as expected i.e. up there with CGT, Zonda, Enzo, one of these testers include possibly one of the best driver in history, Alain Prost.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,571
From: Kirkland
Rep Power: 179
Apparently my posts contain enough truth to ruffle some feathers!
Latest Reputation Received ThreadDateComment
Base GT-R lobs 7:38... 06-15-2009 02:40 PMthank you for all your insight....porsche/GM community appreciates itbase gt-r 7:27 @ 'ring... 06-11-2009 10:52 AMi really don't understand why you keep posting. everyone knows you hate nissan. stfu already. it's not as if you're adding anything new to the conversation or have any real firsthand knowledge of the car. please.
Latest Reputation Received ThreadDateComment
Base GT-R lobs 7:38... 06-15-2009 02:40 PMthank you for all your insight....porsche/GM community appreciates itbase gt-r 7:27 @ 'ring... 06-11-2009 10:52 AMi really don't understand why you keep posting. everyone knows you hate nissan. stfu already. it's not as if you're adding anything new to the conversation or have any real firsthand knowledge of the car. please.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 561
From: US
Rep Power: 64
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q83ZWfuikwk
Very interesting, even he admits that those Nissan prepped test cars performed far better than the subsequent cars they tested. He even thinks that Nissan messed around with the software on some of these cars. Its a very sneaky way of promoting a car, its been done in the past but Nissan takess it to another level.
Both Top Gear and Car and Driver have noticed this. Many other publications have voiced concerns that the GTR isnt performing as well as expected i.e. up there with CGT, Zonda, Enzo, one of these testers include possibly one of the best driver in history, Alain Prost.
Very interesting, even he admits that those Nissan prepped test cars performed far better than the subsequent cars they tested. He even thinks that Nissan messed around with the software on some of these cars. Its a very sneaky way of promoting a car, its been done in the past but Nissan takess it to another level.
Both Top Gear and Car and Driver have noticed this. Many other publications have voiced concerns that the GTR isnt performing as well as expected i.e. up there with CGT, Zonda, Enzo, one of these testers include possibly one of the best driver in history, Alain Prost.
Temperature (maybe they are applying a correction factor to a turbocharged car when they shouldn't?)
Surface grip
Tires (Dunlops vs Bridgestones)
Break-in mileage
Nowhere does he say that they have all been tuned up by Nissan. The GT-R that was slower than M3's still beat the Z06 on the road course (and beat even the ACR in a few corners). There were no Nissan engineers on hand for R&T's track shootout, yet the GT-R ran the LP560 and GT2 quite close.
Please post up the direct quotes of Alain Prost saying he does not believe the GT-R can run that time on the 'Ring.
The Motor Trend result you posted is with the GT-R on Bridgestones, isn't it? Does it suddenly make sense that a 3900-lb 2+2 on runflat tires trails the GT2 by 0.6s? When the GT-R loses by 0.6s, you call it a "crushing," yet when the GT-R beats the GT3 by a similar margin elsewhere, you say the "GT-R can't seem to get away." Haha.
How about it, monaro? Care to address those differences between HvS times and those of other drivers? Isn't there like a 10-second gap between Rohrl's fastest and slowest times in the Carrera GT? If hp/wt mattered so much, why is a ZR1 sloppily driven by an engineer several seconds faster than a 900-hp Koenigsegg driven by a professional racecar driver? My guess is that you will fail to address this yet again.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 561
From: US
Rep Power: 64
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,930
From: ga
Rep Power: 552
How do we know he did not nearly lose it with the GT-R? That's right. You don't know. How do you know he went 100% in the GT-R? You don't. There is strong indication that he did not go 100%, that he left a few seconds left on the table.
GM's time is closer to 7:41, if they used a flying start instead of a standing start. That makes the difference 8 seconds. Which is not "allot" lower than the difference between Nissan and HvS times.
But wait. Did you fail to notice the 2 cars I specifically mentioned in my post? Why are you ignoring these?
1) Hvs is 16-19 seconds slower in the C6 Corvette than GM.
2) 900-hp Koenigsegg beaten by a poorly driven ZR1 with a headwind
Or how about these?:
3) HvS is 16 seconds slower than Porsche's time in the Turbo.
4) HvS is 7 seconds slower in the Murcielago than Chris Harris (Autocar).
5) HvS is 8 seconds slower than Basseng in the Zonda F; and even Basseng's lap was not optimal: the Zonda was misfiring near the end of the lap, and Basseng was slower in 2 corners than HvS.
Do you care to know what the 7:29 GT-R's estimated speed was at the same point as those other cars on Doettinger Hohe? I can almost guarantee you it's not 290 kph.
GM's time is closer to 7:41, if they used a flying start instead of a standing start. That makes the difference 8 seconds. Which is not "allot" lower than the difference between Nissan and HvS times.
But wait. Did you fail to notice the 2 cars I specifically mentioned in my post? Why are you ignoring these?
1) Hvs is 16-19 seconds slower in the C6 Corvette than GM.
2) 900-hp Koenigsegg beaten by a poorly driven ZR1 with a headwind
Or how about these?:
3) HvS is 16 seconds slower than Porsche's time in the Turbo.
4) HvS is 7 seconds slower in the Murcielago than Chris Harris (Autocar).
5) HvS is 8 seconds slower than Basseng in the Zonda F; and even Basseng's lap was not optimal: the Zonda was misfiring near the end of the lap, and Basseng was slower in 2 corners than HvS.
Do you care to know what the 7:29 GT-R's estimated speed was at the same point as those other cars on Doettinger Hohe? I can almost guarantee you it's not 290 kph.
LOL, thanks for posting this.
So the Sport Auto car hit 275 kph at Dottinger as it's top speed on the straight, yet Nissans car hit 289 kph (TWICE). That's still a 10 mph difference in straight speed. Now 2 GT-R's that are massively slower on that same straight than Nissan's car. You can only cry conditions for so long before you start to smell the coffee. And that was the original 7:29 GT-R that hit 180 mph, the one that hit 7:26 could have very well been even faster. And Suzuki lifted in the 7:29 car before the kink but still managed 180 mph.
Given the tires tested, and drivers, it makes perfect sense that HvS was very close to the maximum potential in the GT-R. There is not another 11-12 seconds in a car that's 10 mph slower on the straights, combine all of the long straights and 5 mph here, 8 mph there really start to add up.
If anything this further confirms that Nissan was using more power just like I've stated from the beginning.
The original GT-R is a mid 7:40's car, the US version a low 7:40's and the newest one mid-high 7:30's. But Nissan has claimed 7:38 - then 7:29 then 7:26. If you go back to his 7:50 time for the fabreicthe (sp) then add Dunlops -8 seconds, then the updates (2-3 seconds), the data is consistent. I bet that other car was 10 + mph slower on the back straight too. Making it 3 CARS.
The deviation in times is not consistent for you to pick any car and compare lap times. Horst has driven the GT-R several times and was at one time recruited for testing the vehicle during ring developement, so he's definitely familiar with the car. Getting in a Z06 or C6 was likely his first time ever in those cars and on some sucky tires.
So the Sport Auto car hit 275 kph at Dottinger as it's top speed on the straight, yet Nissans car hit 289 kph (TWICE). That's still a 10 mph difference in straight speed. Now 2 GT-R's that are massively slower on that same straight than Nissan's car. You can only cry conditions for so long before you start to smell the coffee. And that was the original 7:29 GT-R that hit 180 mph, the one that hit 7:26 could have very well been even faster. And Suzuki lifted in the 7:29 car before the kink but still managed 180 mph.
Given the tires tested, and drivers, it makes perfect sense that HvS was very close to the maximum potential in the GT-R. There is not another 11-12 seconds in a car that's 10 mph slower on the straights, combine all of the long straights and 5 mph here, 8 mph there really start to add up.
If anything this further confirms that Nissan was using more power just like I've stated from the beginning.
The original GT-R is a mid 7:40's car, the US version a low 7:40's and the newest one mid-high 7:30's. But Nissan has claimed 7:38 - then 7:29 then 7:26. If you go back to his 7:50 time for the fabreicthe (sp) then add Dunlops -8 seconds, then the updates (2-3 seconds), the data is consistent. I bet that other car was 10 + mph slower on the back straight too. Making it 3 CARS.
The deviation in times is not consistent for you to pick any car and compare lap times. Horst has driven the GT-R several times and was at one time recruited for testing the vehicle during ring developement, so he's definitely familiar with the car. Getting in a Z06 or C6 was likely his first time ever in those cars and on some sucky tires.
Guibo, how about that response???????
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 561
From: US
Rep Power: 64
I'm pretty sure I did:
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...2-post110.html
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...5-post113.html
You said Suzuki lifted. He did not. Both the telemetry and video confirmed that he did not lift.
You said Nissan's GT-R hit 289 kmh twice. It did not. First time (at Schwedenkreuz) was due to wheelspin as a result of going airborne. The car itself was not physically going 289 kmh.
You continue to claim that Nissan's GT-R hit 290 kmh on the straight, where other mags like Sport Auto, Auto Motor und Sport, and Drivers Republic took their readings. It did not. It hit 290 on the downhill section into Tiergarten, where Rohrl hit 310 in the GT2.
Now, do you care to estimate how fast Nissan's GT-R was on the straight (on the same portion as AMuS's test)? I will laugh if you think it's still 290 kmh.
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...2-post110.html
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...5-post113.html
You said Suzuki lifted. He did not. Both the telemetry and video confirmed that he did not lift.
You said Nissan's GT-R hit 289 kmh twice. It did not. First time (at Schwedenkreuz) was due to wheelspin as a result of going airborne. The car itself was not physically going 289 kmh.
You continue to claim that Nissan's GT-R hit 290 kmh on the straight, where other mags like Sport Auto, Auto Motor und Sport, and Drivers Republic took their readings. It did not. It hit 290 on the downhill section into Tiergarten, where Rohrl hit 310 in the GT2.
Now, do you care to estimate how fast Nissan's GT-R was on the straight (on the same portion as AMuS's test)? I will laugh if you think it's still 290 kmh.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 561
From: US
Rep Power: 64
"I haven't had a huge amount of time in the C6 Z06, but tons in the C5 [with which he has won some of those championships], but they're very similar. It drives almost identically."
HvS has driven 2 C5's before: a regular car and a Europe-only Commemorative Edition celebrating their Le Mans victories. He has also driven Vipers in supertests. He's no stranger to high-hp, high-torque, fat-tired RWD cars with somewhat vague steering feel.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,571
From: Kirkland
Rep Power: 179
Is a Z06 a lot different to drive from the C6? Probably not. In R&T's track shootout, they had 8-time SCCA autocross champ Gary Thomason driving one of the segments. He said:
"I haven't had a huge amount of time in the C6 Z06, but tons in the C5 [with which he has won some of those championships], but they're very similar. It drives almost identically."
HvS has driven 2 C5's before: a regular car and a Europe-only Commemorative Edition celebrating their Le Mans victories. He has also driven Vipers in supertests. He's no stranger to high-hp, high-torque, fat-tired RWD cars with somewhat vague steering feel.
"I haven't had a huge amount of time in the C6 Z06, but tons in the C5 [with which he has won some of those championships], but they're very similar. It drives almost identically."
HvS has driven 2 C5's before: a regular car and a Europe-only Commemorative Edition celebrating their Le Mans victories. He has also driven Vipers in supertests. He's no stranger to high-hp, high-torque, fat-tired RWD cars with somewhat vague steering feel.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,930
From: ga
Rep Power: 552
I'm pretty sure I did:
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...2-post110.html
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...5-post113.html
You said Suzuki lifted. He did not. Both the telemetry and video confirmed that he did not lift.
You said Nissan's GT-R hit 289 kmh twice. It did not. First time (at Schwedenkreuz) was due to wheelspin as a result of going airborne. The car itself was not physically going 289 kmh.
You continue to claim that Nissan's GT-R hit 290 kmh on the straight, where other mags like Sport Auto, Auto Motor und Sport, and Drivers Republic took their readings. It did not. It hit 290 on the downhill section into Tiergarten, where Rohrl hit 310 in the GT2.
Now, do you care to estimate how fast Nissan's GT-R was on the straight (on the same portion as AMuS's test)? I will laugh if you think it's still 290 kmh.
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...2-post110.html
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...5-post113.html
You said Suzuki lifted. He did not. Both the telemetry and video confirmed that he did not lift.
You said Nissan's GT-R hit 289 kmh twice. It did not. First time (at Schwedenkreuz) was due to wheelspin as a result of going airborne. The car itself was not physically going 289 kmh.
You continue to claim that Nissan's GT-R hit 290 kmh on the straight, where other mags like Sport Auto, Auto Motor und Sport, and Drivers Republic took their readings. It did not. It hit 290 on the downhill section into Tiergarten, where Rohrl hit 310 in the GT2.
Now, do you care to estimate how fast Nissan's GT-R was on the straight (on the same portion as AMuS's test)? I will laugh if you think it's still 290 kmh.
How does wheelspin determine vehicle traveling speed? We are talking Telemetry here, not speedometer readings. And my quote is directly from Nissan's press release so you'll have to state your source, since you claim to know so much. But so we are clear, you are saying he kept it flat through Dottinger,and there was acceleration all the way through the turn, or that he didn't lose speed? Go ahead put your foot in your mouth for me.
Either way, the fastest speed the DR car hit ANYWHERE on the track was 169 mph, so it had to be an even bigger deficit since the GT-R's second fastest speed on the track was 160 and thereafter 157. So we are now talking 20 mph or more on a section of the track.
BTW have you driven a Viper and a C5 and a C6 to make these statements? None of the three drive anything alike. And you are using one statement from one guy who has nothing to do with the tests to draw a conclusion? What kind of nonsense is that? A Viper doesn't drive anything like a Corvette, and an SRT is WAY faster than a 8:16 or whatever he ran in it, and need I mention that HvS has not driven all of the Supertest laps forever, they did have other drivers for a long time, and some of the cars were not made in RHD so he could have possibly been driving on his wrong side with a stick shift. There are TONS of variables that have no application to the GT-R.
You are reaching so hard for straws it's getting rediculous.
Last edited by heavychevy; Jun 16, 2009 at 01:48 PM.