21.11.2008
Nissan says the GT-R laps the Nürburgring in 7:29.03. Porsche says ‘impossible’. DR tries to get to the bottom of it – with a GT2 to put things into perspective.
Read the 23 page feature magazine
Click the picture below
Watch the video laps..
The then tell us what you think. Is this the end of the debate or is it set to continue?
About Eds
Tell us what you think..
When you post a comment, it will also appear in your News Feed on Facebook (if you so choose), enabling you to take the conversation to where your friends already are. Thereafter you can continue discussing on Facebook and the conversations between SkiddMark and Facebook will be auto-magically synched, regardless of where the comment was made.
86 Comments
Mark Williams
November 21, 2008I wouldn’t be surprised if the GT2 is quicker.
Weight is the enemy, and always has been. For the GTR to use it’s arsenal of technology and driver aids to overcome the extra weight is a big ask. If the rumours are to be believed, they both have very similar power outputs, so what your left with is the extra ballast, trickery, tyres and paddle-flapping boxes.
With rwd and a manual box, combined with lower weight and a half-decent wheel-man, I’d have my money on the Porsche.
Mark Williams
November 21, 2008I wouldn’t be surprised if the GT2 is quicker.
Weight is the enemy, and always has been. For the GTR to use it’s arsenal of technology and driver aids to overcome the extra weight is a big ask. If the rumours are to be believed, they both have very similar power outputs, so what your left with is the extra ballast, trickery, tyres and paddle-flapping boxes.
With rwd and a manual box, combined with lower weight and a half-decent wheel-man, I’d have my money on the Porsche.
JC919
November 21, 2008The Jesus car has been beaten!!!! In all seriousness this is the test I’ve been waiting for, and the feature just may be my favorite of the lot.
JC919
November 21, 2008The Jesus car has been beaten!!!! In all seriousness this is the test I’ve been waiting for, and the feature just may be my favorite of the lot.
Alan
November 21, 2008Great feature and I am glad the porsche was quicker. Despite the times, there is one fundamental difference between the 2 cars. The 911 has me looking and thinking, how in the world am I going to buy and own one of these. The GTR has me thinking, nice car and fast, but I’ll leave it to someone else. It is still a huge bridge for Nissan to bridge.
Alan
November 22, 2008Great feature and I am glad the porsche was quicker. Despite the times, there is one fundamental difference between the 2 cars. The 911 has me looking and thinking, how in the world am I going to buy and own one of these. The GTR has me thinking, nice car and fast, but I’ll leave it to someone else. It is still a huge bridge for Nissan to bridge.
judah777
November 22, 2008The fact the DR actually got sucked into this pointless debate has cause me to stop and think about the motivating force that lead to this “test”.
The Laws of Physics cannot be broken; more mass and less or equal motive force will always be slower than less mass and more or equal motive force….within the context of two equally impressively well engineered examples of high-end automotive technology.
I have been impressed by the GT-R. In fact it is actually rather disturbing that Nissan would put so much effort into a flawed idea. Several years ago Mitsubishi tried to do the same thing with its 3000 GT (AWD, 4WS, Twin-Turbo V6, 1700kg) but had rather less impresive results.
Nevertheless, what ever happened to “driver involvement” ?.
Had Nissan had the good sense (and technological ability) to produce a 1400kg package with the same 500hp V6 hooked up to a proper 6-speed manual, then it would have truly created a world beater.
Strangely enough the recent released 370Z shows exactly this kind of thinking; reportedly almost 200kg lighter, more compact and slightly more powerful.
How is it that the same company manages to pursue such seemingly distinct paths to creating its sports cars?
This is what makes Porsche great; all of its sports cars share the same commitment to the same engineering philosophy.
I EAGERLY look forward to a FULL comparison of the new Cayman S with the optional LSD and Nissan’s new 370Z with the Sports Pack; now that’s a comparison that has relevance.
….and PLEASE, no more Nürburgring Ring laps; Wales has more than enough excellent real driving roads!
judah777
November 22, 2008The fact the DR actually got sucked into this pointless debate has cause me to stop and think about the motivating force that lead to this “test”.
The Laws of Physics cannot be broken; more mass and less or equal motive force will always be slower than less mass and more or equal motive force….within the context of two equally impressively well engineered examples of high-end automotive technology.
I have been impressed by the GT-R. In fact it is actually rather disturbing that Nissan would put so much effort into a flawed idea. Several years ago Mitsubishi tried to do the same thing with its 3000 GT (AWD, 4WS, Twin-Turbo V6, 1700kg) but had rather less impresive results.
Nevertheless, what ever happened to “driver involvement” ?.
Had Nissan had the good sense (and technological ability) to produce a 1400kg package with the same 500hp V6 hooked up to a proper 6-speed manual, then it would have truly created a world beater.
Strangely enough the recent released 370Z shows exactly this kind of thinking; reportedly almost 200kg lighter, more compact and slightly more powerful.
How is it that the same company manages to pursue such seemingly distinct paths to creating its sports cars?
This is what makes Porsche great; all of its sports cars share the same commitment to the same engineering philosophy.
I EAGERLY look forward to a FULL comparison of the new Cayman S with the optional LSD and Nissan’s new 370Z with the Sports Pack; now that’s a comparison that has relevance.
….and PLEASE, no more Nürburgring Ring laps; Wales has more than enough excellent real driving roads!
judah777
November 22, 2008The fact the DR actually got sucked into this pointless debate has cause me to stop and think about the motivating force that lead to this “test”.
The Laws of Physics cannot be broken; more mass and less or equal motive force will always be slower than less mass and more or equal motive force….within the context of two equally impressively well engineered examples of high-end automotive technology.
I have never really been impressed by the GT-R. In fact it is actually rather disturbing that Nissan would put so much effort into a flawed idea. Several years ago Mitsubishi tried to do the same thing with its 3000 GT (AWD, 4WS, Twin-Turbo V6, 1700kg) but had rather less impresive results.
Nevertheless, what ever happened to “driver involvement” ?.
Had Nissan had the good sense (and technological ability) to produce a 1400kg package with the same 500hp V6 hooked up to a proper 6-speed manual, then it would have truly created a world beater.
Strangely enough the recent released 370Z shows exactly this kind of thinking; reportedly almost 200kg lighter, more compact and slightly more powerful.
How is it that the same company manages to pursue such seemingly distinct paths to creating its sports cars?
This is what makes Porsche great; all of its sports cars share the same commitment to the same engineering philosophy.
I EAGERLY look forward to a FULL comparison of the new Cayman S with the optional LSD and Nissan’s new 370Z with the Sports Pack; now that’s a comparison that has relevance.
….and PLEASE, no more Nürburgring Ring laps; Wales has more than enough excellent real driving roads!
judah777
November 22, 2008The fact the DR actually got sucked into this pointless debate has cause me to stop and think about the motivating force that lead to this “test”.
The Laws of Physics cannot be broken; more mass and less or equal motive force will always be slower than less mass and more or equal motive force….within the context of two equally impressively well engineered examples of high-end automotive technology.
I have never really been impressed by the GT-R. In fact it is actually rather disturbing that Nissan would put so much effort into a flawed idea. Several years ago Mitsubishi tried to do the same thing with its 3000 GT (AWD, 4WS, Twin-Turbo V6, 1700kg) but had rather less impresive results.
Nevertheless, what ever happened to “driver involvement” ?.
Had Nissan had the good sense (and technological ability) to produce a 1400kg package with the same 500hp V6 hooked up to a proper 6-speed manual, then it would have truly created a world beater.
Strangely enough the recent released 370Z shows exactly this kind of thinking; reportedly almost 200kg lighter, more compact and slightly more powerful.
How is it that the same company manages to pursue such seemingly distinct paths to creating its sports cars?
This is what makes Porsche great; all of its sports cars share the same commitment to the same engineering philosophy.
I EAGERLY look forward to a FULL comparison of the new Cayman S with the optional LSD and Nissan’s new 370Z with the Sports Pack; now that’s a comparison that has relevance.
….and PLEASE, no more Nürburgring Ring laps; Wales has more than enough excellent real driving roads!
Steve - DR
November 22, 2008judah, the fact that so much debate has been generated by this topic on forums and blogs around the world shows that this is a real topic that many people would like to understand better.
We as enthusiasts ourselves had already experienced the GT-R many times and found that it was able to lap a circuit like Silverstone in an identical time to the GT2.
We could have just left it there and concluded that the GT-R and GT2 were equal and therefore Nissan’s claimed 7min 29 must have been valid.
But we’re curious, like you are, and we also have the resources and the capability to test the theory, so we did.
But as you can see from the feature we were less concerned with finding the absolute fastest lap, but more in understanding how each car would have performed relative to the other around sections of the track that we know very well.
That’s what I find so fascinating about this feature, seeing where each car’s relative strengths lay.
We were genuinely impressed (more so than we had anticipated) at the GT2′s sheer speed but also how much traction it found in conditions which would have (in theory) suited the GT-R better.
We knew the GT-R was an incredible machine (and it’s fun to drive too by the way), and we feel that both cars come out of this test looking rather well.
To lap the ‘ring in under 8 minutes in any road car is not an easy achievement, and we’re glad we have been able to perform an independent assessment to discover just how each of them go about doing so.
Steve - DR
November 22, 2008judah, the fact that so much debate has been generated by this topic on forums and blogs around the world shows that this is a real topic that many people would like to understand better.
We as enthusiasts ourselves had already experienced the GT-R many times and found that it was able to lap a circuit like Silverstone in an identical time to the GT2.
We could have just left it there and concluded that the GT-R and GT2 were equal and therefore Nissan’s claimed 7min 29 must have been valid.
But we’re curious, like you are, and we also have the resources and the capability to test the theory, so we did.
But as you can see from the feature we were less concerned with finding the absolute fastest lap, but more in understanding how each car would have performed relative to the other around sections of the track that we know very well.
That’s what I find so fascinating about this feature, seeing where each car’s relative strengths lay.
We were genuinely impressed (more so than we had anticipated) at the GT2′s sheer speed but also how much traction it found in conditions which would have (in theory) suited the GT-R better.
We knew the GT-R was an incredible machine (and it’s fun to drive too by the way), and we feel that both cars come out of this test looking rather well.
To lap the ‘ring in under 8 minutes in any road car is not an easy achievement, and we’re glad we have been able to perform an independent assessment to discover just how each of them go about doing so.
Arthur Veldhoen
November 22, 2008I find it amusing to see the surprise and relief on the porsche-philes faces, after their car with an almost 100bhp per tonne (!!!) power to weight advantage manages to lap 21km of high speed circuit a handful of seconds faster than a 1740 kg Nissan that seats four people and has a boot.
The Nissan, btw, set out to challenge the Porsche Turbo, which would not be able to see which way a GT2 went.
The mere fact that people at Porsche came up with such a silly accusation easily proves just how serious the panic was at Porsche HQ when the extent of the GT-R’s capabilities became apparent.
And the fact remains that Porsches fastest effort, after fourty-somewhat years of development and with one of the worlds greatest drivers at the helm while doing so, can only be seen as quite seriously overrated when an overweight Japanese barge can run it so close, and all this for a paltry 50K.
I make it 80K for just that badge.
Quite ridiculous, obviously, but not nearly as ridiculous as anyone at Porsche or the fanclub really seeing this “victory” as a reason to be very proud of themselves.
Porsche will need to come up with a 4-wheel drive Cayman equipped with a GT-2 engine to stay with the GT-R, especially with a V-spec version around the corner.
ECotY 2008 was interesting. Or is that term not done on this site?
Arthur Veldhoen
November 22, 2008I find it amusing to see the surprise and relief on the porsche-philes faces, after their car with an almost 100bhp per tonne (!!!) power to weight advantage manages to lap 21km of high speed circuit a handful of seconds faster than a 1740 kg Nissan that seats four people and has a boot.
The Nissan, btw, set out to challenge the Porsche Turbo, which would not be able to see which way a GT2 went.
The mere fact that people at Porsche came up with such a silly accusation easily proves just how serious the panic was at Porsche HQ when the extent of the GT-R’s capabilities became apparent.
And the fact remains that Porsches fastest effort, after fourty-somewhat years of development and with one of the worlds greatest drivers at the helm while doing so, can only be seen as quite seriously overrated when an overweight Japanese barge can run it so close, and all this for a paltry 50K.
I make it 80K for just that badge.
Quite ridiculous, obviously, but not nearly as ridiculous as anyone at Porsche or the fanclub really seeing this “victory” as a reason to be very proud of themselves.
Porsche will need to come up with a 4-wheel drive Cayman equipped with a GT-2 engine to stay with the GT-R, especially with a V-spec version around the corner.
ECotY 2008 was interesting. Or is that term not done on this site?
judah777
November 22, 2008Steve,
Just to be clear, I never meant to belittle the automotive journalism at DR; the entire team at DR is doing some rather impressive work.
The section by section analysis was actually quite impressive and interesting.
hope to see this kind of analysis for future comparison tests.
Keep up the good work and the in-car-videos.
(waiting for that new Cayman S with LSD vs new 370Z Sport Pack test)
judah777
November 22, 2008Steve,
Just to be clear, I never meant to belittle the automotive journalism at DR; the entire team at DR is doing some rather impressive work.
The section by section analysis was actually quite impressive and interesting.
hope to see this kind of analysis for future comparison tests.
Keep up the good work and the in-car-videos.
(waiting for that new Cayman S with LSD vs new 370Z Sport Pack test)
aki
November 24, 2008What a pointless comparison. So was DR too cheap to come up with the Dunlops on the GT-R as they should’ve? Why would you use Bridgestone runflats, saying it would be 5-seconds faster with the Dunlops, then go and declare the Porsche as being 6.9 seconds or whatever faster? Should’ve stuck some Kumhos on the Porsche if you don’t think tires mean much.
And you’re not even testing it on a dry track. Here’s a hint: you don’t get ‘ring times by running on a rainy day. Or using the wrong tires. Nice article layout, but the conclusion is full of failure. Porsche’s original point was that the GT-R was *a lot* slower. If you had actually used Dunlops, the difference would’ve been very small.
Either way, Porsche was proven wrong. But perhaps impartiality is too much to ask for, in spite of your purported “being above the fray” attitude.
aki
November 24, 2008What a pointless comparison. So was DR too cheap to come up with the Dunlops on the GT-R as they should’ve? Why would you use Bridgestone runflats, saying it would be 5-seconds faster with the Dunlops, then go and declare the Porsche as being 6.9 seconds or whatever faster? Should’ve stuck some Kumhos on the Porsche if you don’t think tires mean much.
And you’re not even testing it on a dry track. Here’s a hint: you don’t get ‘ring times by running on a rainy day. Or using the wrong tires. Nice article layout, but the conclusion is full of failure. Porsche’s original point was that the GT-R was *a lot* slower. If you had actually used Dunlops, the difference would’ve been very small.
Either way, Porsche was proven wrong. But perhaps impartiality is too much to ask for, in spite of your purported “being above the fray” attitude.
Steve
November 24, 2008aki, we never set out to achieve an ‘outright’ fastest possible time around the ‘ring, otherwise we would never have attempted this test in November.
Nissan plan on repeating their laps, but will wait until April ’09 when the conditions should be more ideal.
We set out to understand whether the GT-R ‘could have’ achieved the time claimed by Nissan and more importantly to disect what ingredients would have been necessary to achieve this. That’s what Chris describes within the feature, and it allows us (and you) to form our own conclusions as to whether the infamous lap time was in fact achieveable.
We could have gone through an exhaustive list of steps to prepare each car – service them, fit them with new tyres and brakes and then wait (and wait) for the ideal track conditions to set the perfect laptime, but perhaps you might appreciate that the budgets available to an independent publication like ourselves is somewhat smaller than that available to Nissan and Porsche.
Our appreciation of the GT-R remains intact after this test, in fact I would say it is enhanced, after all how many other 1740kg cars can lap the ‘ring in under 8 minutes in less than ideal conditions?
Steve
November 24, 2008aki, we never set out to achieve an ‘outright’ fastest possible time around the ‘ring, otherwise we would never have attempted this test in November.
Nissan plan on repeating their laps, but will wait until April ’09 when the conditions should be more ideal.
We set out to understand whether the GT-R ‘could have’ achieved the time claimed by Nissan and more importantly to disect what ingredients would have been necessary to achieve this. That’s what Chris describes within the feature, and it allows us (and you) to form our own conclusions as to whether the infamous lap time was in fact achieveable.
We could have gone through an exhaustive list of steps to prepare each car – service them, fit them with new tyres and brakes and then wait (and wait) for the ideal track conditions to set the perfect laptime, but perhaps you might appreciate that the budgets available to an independent publication like ourselves is somewhat smaller than that available to Nissan and Porsche.
Our appreciation of the GT-R remains intact after this test, in fact I would say it is enhanced, after all how many other 1740kg cars can lap the ‘ring in under 8 minutes in less than ideal conditions?
jl123
November 24, 2008I think there is a problem here with context:
Not one tester has made comments like Chris has here about the GT-R:
“Like the GT-2, either axle will relinquish grip at any time, but the lack of traction is the most surprising problem. The main issue here is that to anyone who has experienced it extra-terrestrial abilities, the GT-R is loaded with expectation- you expect it to fashion something from nothing- but a wet ring vanquishes its indomitability…the Gt-R’s greater mass forces it even further to the outside of the circuit.”
Chris makes it seem that the GT-R does not meet expectations of sure handling in the wet. We all know that it does meet expectations in the wet, in fact its one of just a few of the best handling wet road cars ever created. Not one journalist or race driver have said about this car what Chris has- on tracks and the most demanding roads and conditions all over the world.
Chris needs to preface his statement, telling us that this car does not behave this way in most any other road condition, but indeed only at the ring with its very particular conditions.
Otherwise the statements mislead readers that on-limit the GT-R has surprising poor traction- which it again most certainly does not.
Please have Chris clear up the difference between the on-limit wet handling of the GT-R at the ring vs everywhere else on the planet.
R is suprisingly
jl123
November 24, 2008I think there is a problem here with context:
Not one tester has made comments like Chris has here about the GT-R:
“Like the GT-2, either axle will relinquish grip at any time, but the lack of traction is the most surprising problem. The main issue here is that to anyone who has experienced it extra-terrestrial abilities, the GT-R is loaded with expectation- you expect it to fashion something from nothing- but a wet ring vanquishes its indomitability…the Gt-R’s greater mass forces it even further to the outside of the circuit.”
Chris makes it seem that the GT-R does not meet expectations of sure handling in the wet. We all know that it does meet expectations in the wet, in fact its one of just a few of the best handling wet road cars ever created. Not one journalist or race driver have said about this car what Chris has- on tracks and the most demanding roads and conditions all over the world.
Chris needs to preface his statement, telling us that this car does not behave this way in most any other road condition, but indeed only at the ring with its very particular conditions.
Otherwise the statements mislead readers that on-limit the GT-R has surprising poor traction- which it again most certainly does not.
Please have Chris clear up the difference between the on-limit wet handling of the GT-R at the ring vs everywhere else on the planet.
R is suprisingly
jl123
November 24, 2008Sorry, I forgot to say, yes the test was very good and highly specific! Good and innovative work! And in fact talking about how a car handles SPECIFIC corners should be the new standard in comparing the handling of cars!
jl123
November 24, 2008Sorry, I forgot to say, yes the test was very good and highly specific! Good and innovative work! And in fact talking about how a car handles SPECIFIC corners should be the new standard in comparing the handling of cars!
Jethro Bovingdon
November 25, 2008Feel like I should add some background to answer aki’s reasoned comments.
We were in discussion with Dunlop (their GT-R tyre is also a runflat by the way), but unfortunately there were no tyres in Europe available.
The track wasn’t wet – it was damp in a couple of places. If it was wet we wouldn’t have recorded sub-8 minute laps. By the way, in these conditions it may have been that the Bridgestone was the tyre to be on.
Your points about the conclusion are interesting – as Chris concludes by saying he thinks the Porsche could have gone lots faster, but that the GT-R was closer to its ultimate pace. However, it also points out what a fantastic car the GT-R is. On a better day, on the fastest tyre it’d no doubt run the GT2 pretty close. Phenomenal for such a car at its price point. Don’t get us wrong, we love the GT-R. We’ll try to repeat the test (maybe with a ZR1 for company) in the Spring.
Jethro Bovingdon
November 25, 2008Feel like I should add some background to answer aki’s reasoned comments.
We were in discussion with Dunlop (their GT-R tyre is also a runflat by the way), but unfortunately there were no tyres in Europe available.
The track wasn’t wet – it was damp in a couple of places. If it was wet we wouldn’t have recorded sub-8 minute laps. By the way, in these conditions it may have been that the Bridgestone was the tyre to be on.
Your points about the conclusion are interesting – as Chris concludes by saying he thinks the Porsche could have gone lots faster, but that the GT-R was closer to its ultimate pace. However, it also points out what a fantastic car the GT-R is. On a better day, on the fastest tyre it’d no doubt run the GT2 pretty close. Phenomenal for such a car at its price point. Don’t get us wrong, we love the GT-R. We’ll try to repeat the test (maybe with a ZR1 for company) in the Spring.
bad_roo
November 25, 2008Good work guys.
As you’ve said, it’s almost impossible to line up a whole series of complex variables to provide a genuinely valid comparison, so we have to take what we can get from exercises such as this.
What do you think the result would have been if you’d cut out the Dottinger Hohe straight? This seems to be where the GT2 exercised its power advantage.
I wonder whether a BTG time on a dry track with the GTR on Dunlops would have reversed this result?
bad_roo
November 25, 2008Good work guys.
As you’ve said, it’s almost impossible to line up a whole series of complex variables to provide a genuinely valid comparison, so we have to take what we can get from exercises such as this.
What do you think the result would have been if you’d cut out the Dottinger Hohe straight? This seems to be where the GT2 exercised its power advantage.
I wonder whether a BTG time on a dry track with the GTR on Dunlops would have reversed this result?
George Xanthopoulos
November 25, 2008Excellent story DR. Many have wondered but you guys actually bothered to find out.
I was just at the SportAuto site and they have posted a 7min50secs time for a 997C2S with PDK. Even more impressive. the track though does appear dry and I think it says that the car was shod with Michelin Cup tyres. I’m not positive though because I don’t speak ze language.
George Xanthopoulos
November 25, 2008Excellent story DR. Many have wondered but you guys actually bothered to find out.
I was just at the SportAuto site and they have posted a 7min50secs time for a 997C2S with PDK. Even more impressive. the track though does appear dry and I think it says that the car was shod with Michelin Cup tyres. I’m not positive though because I don’t speak ze language.
Jethro Bovingdon
November 25, 2008I’ll set a B-to-G start/finish line and see the difference. GT2 generally holds a slight advantage in corner speed and is quicker on anything resembling a straight, so I suspect it’ll be a similar result.
Like I said, the Dunlops might have been too dry/warm weather orientated for these conditions and made the car slower. We’ll never know. However, we will try to repeat the test in future and perhaps be completely conclusive. Then again – where’s the fun in ended the debate completely!?
Jethro Bovingdon
November 25, 2008I’ll set a B-to-G start/finish line and see the difference. GT2 generally holds a slight advantage in corner speed and is quicker on anything resembling a straight, so I suspect it’ll be a similar result.
Like I said, the Dunlops might have been too dry/warm weather orientated for these conditions and made the car slower. We’ll never know. However, we will try to repeat the test in future and perhaps be completely conclusive. Then again – where’s the fun in ended the debate completely!?
Craig Fettes
November 25, 2008I’m sure this has been brought up, but as I couldn’t find it here, I thought I’d ask. Was it me or did the track look slightly damper for the GT-R’s lap? I’m not all that ‘in the know’ about his sort of stuff, but i feel like a little more water would make quite a difference at this pace.
Craig Fettes
November 25, 2008I’m sure this has been brought up, but as I couldn’t find it here, I thought I’d ask. Was it me or did the track look slightly damper for the GT-R’s lap? I’m not all that ‘in the know’ about his sort of stuff, but i feel like a little more water would make quite a difference at this pace.
Jethro Bovingdon
November 25, 2008The GT2s lap was done first – so hypothetically it had the ‘worst’ of the conditions. However, I would say 90-percent of the track was dry – but still cold and clearly not running as fast as it might in the summer (without leaves compressed into the track etc).
Jethro Bovingdon
November 25, 2008The GT2s lap was done first – so hypothetically it had the ‘worst’ of the conditions. However, I would say 90-percent of the track was dry – but still cold and clearly not running as fast as it might in the summer (without leaves compressed into the track etc).
jl123
November 25, 2008SteveDR,
“We were genuinely impressed (more so than we had anticipated) at the GT2’s sheer speed but also how much traction it found in conditions which would have (in theory) suited the GT-R better.”
But its not in theory that the GT-R is better than the GT-2 its in reality- on real roads. So its here that I’d think a little discussion is due. How valid is the ring at telling us how a GT-R handles on demanding roads? Aren’t the speeds quite a bit different than what most anyone would find on any road? Some thoughts on the GT-R at the ring vs the Road?
jl123
November 25, 2008SteveDR,
“We were genuinely impressed (more so than we had anticipated) at the GT2’s sheer speed but also how much traction it found in conditions which would have (in theory) suited the GT-R better.”
But its not in theory that the GT-R is better than the GT-2 its in reality- on real roads. So its here that I’d think a little discussion is due. How valid is the ring at telling us how a GT-R handles on demanding roads? Aren’t the speeds quite a bit different than what most anyone would find on any road? Some thoughts on the GT-R at the ring vs the Road?
KJ
November 26, 2008Great article DR, very innovative way of bringing us readers into the thick of the test.
Whilst I appreciate that Nurburgring lap records are a very vague way of comparing cars, it still makes for compelling reading:-
As one of the most challenging circuits in the world, what does it take to get any given car around that track in the least time possible?
Watching Nissan’s official video of the 7m 29s lap, it’s quite obvious that the driver is absolutely committed and knows the GT-R intimately. I doubt anyone else but him can set a time within 5 secs of that record time even in the same car on the same day!
Anyway, checking back on Porsche’s silly press release, I’m amazed that Porsche claimed that the GT-R’s best lap time is what you guys managed with used Bridgestones on a damp track.
The repeat showdown next year will be most interesting (for the sake of pub banter you understand…)
KJ
November 26, 2008Great article DR, very innovative way of bringing us readers into the thick of the test.
Whilst I appreciate that Nurburgring lap records are a very vague way of comparing cars, it still makes for compelling reading:-
As one of the most challenging circuits in the world, what does it take to get any given car around that track in the least time possible?
Watching Nissan’s official video of the 7m 29s lap, it’s quite obvious that the driver is absolutely committed and knows the GT-R intimately. I doubt anyone else but him can set a time within 5 secs of that record time even in the same car on the same day!
Anyway, checking back on Porsche’s silly press release, I’m amazed that Porsche claimed that the GT-R’s best lap time is what you guys managed with used Bridgestones on a damp track.
The repeat showdown next year will be most interesting (for the sake of pub banter you understand…)
jl123
November 26, 2008Well I really wanted to get into a in-depth conversation about the cars/test. But alas this seems not the place for it- republic or not.
A much more lively and in-depth discussion of this test can be seen here…even one of Chris’s racing partners enters the talk:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=614443&nmt=GT-R%20losses%20at%20the%20Ring
jl123
November 26, 2008Well I really wanted to get into a in-depth conversation about the cars/test. But alas this seems not the place for it- republic or not.
A much more lively and in-depth discussion of this test can be seen here…even one of Chris’s racing partners enters the talk:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=614443&nmt=GT-R%20losses%20at%20the%20Ring
Richard - DR
November 27, 2008jl123, sorry we haven’t got back to you on this sooner. I did spend some considerable time composing a reply to you yesterday morning, but managed to lose the lot during posting. Still, it would appear you haven’t sat idle during the hiatus…
Anyway, in answer to your question, while the Ring is unique amongst circuits in its ability to challenge every aspect of a car’s dynamics, it remains a circuit. That means you’re fully on the brakes, fully committed at turn-in and hard on the power towards the corner exit. It requires a few shades of grey compared to most tracks, but the way you drive the Ring is nothing like driving on the road.
I understand your sense of frustration at this, as I know you like to dissect on-road dynamics in minute detail. I also know that you are especially fascinated with all-wheel drive and how it compares to two-wheel drive.
That said, I’m sure you appreciate why we wanted to take a GT2 and GT-R to the Ring, as the level of debate/argument/loving/hating surrounding these two cars and their relative performance is unprecedented.
As you noted, Chris’s breakdown of the circuit, and the description of each has shed more light on where each car builds its lap time than any other publication has the means or inclination to do. Ultimately this is all we hoped, or indeed could reasonably expect to do: that’s to say put someone who knows the circuit and cars pretty well, but by no means as well as the Walter or Suzuki-san, drive each car for one or two flying laps on the same day, hope to God that the weather isn’t too awful, get a time and give subjective feedback. We’ll be uploading another video with commentary, which should provide more information on each car’s lap.
We could have waited until spring to do the test, but you’re never guaranteed good weather at the Ring and we’d have been far too late to add anything to the ‘debate’. Besides, there’s always the ZR1 spanner to throw into the works at a later date…
As for how this relates to on-road performance, well, as we all know, it really doesn’t. Looking at Chris’s findings, the GT2 steals its biggest advantage whenever the track is straight enough to use all its power. The longer the straight or the steeper the incline the bigger the difference. That’s raw physics at work. If you look back at previous track tests I’ve done – one at the Bedford Autodrome, one at Silverstone’s GP circuit – the times have been very close. At Bedford against a GT3 the GT-R was decisively quicker, but at Silverstone against the GT2 the Porsche pipped the Nissan. That’s only because Silverstone gives the Porsche more room to stretch its legs. At the Ring, where there are a handful of places where a quick car can run at 150-160mph, and a long straight where 180mph is possible you’d expect the GT2′s advantage to be compounded as the GT-R Chris drove simply couldn’t live with the GT2′s explosive straight line pace.
Through the corners both cars trade punches, which is impressive for the Nissan, as it clearly does a very good job of controlling its substantial mass. Likewise, the GT2 clearly does a very good job of controlling its quirky weight distribution. Honours even then.
Switch this to an on-road scenario and, in my experience, I would say the GT-R would be the more complete machine, as both cars are so quick you simply don’t spend enough time hard on the power for the Porsche to make any significant gains. The GT2 is a far more specialised/track focussed car than the Nissan, and is less controlled over bumpy roads as a result – it skips and hops, as I mentioned in the ‘Hard & Fast’ test a few weeks back – where the GT-R manages to smother all but the worst. Also, in typical wet conditions, where you don’t have the chance to get the GT2′s tyres up to a decent operating temperature traction is an issue in the Porsche, thanks to two-wheel drive and a spikey power delivery. The stability control system isn’t as progressive or as trustworthy as the GT-R’s either, which never helps settle your nerves on a dark and stormy night.
Ultimately both cars are so fast that to say one is quicker than the other on the road is probably more pointless than Ring lap times. Assessing and rating a car on the road should never be about taking risks, which is why we always try to put forward a combination of empirical and subjective comments in our verdicts. Increasingly I find which car wins a test depends more on how it goes about its business – what it asks of you, how it makes you feel – than out-and-out pace. That’s often why Porsche product does well because the cars are extremely capable but also extremely tactile things to drive.
That said you can’t divorce money from this pairing. That’s why the GT-R has dominated all the Car of the Year tests: judged on performance-per-£ it simply can’t be beaten. Money no object I’d have a GT2, but I’d probably have a GT-R as well. They’re both that good.
I hope this lengthy(!) missive answers some of your questions.
Richard - DR
November 27, 2008jl123, sorry we haven’t got back to you on this sooner. I did spend some considerable time composing a reply to you yesterday morning, but managed to lose the lot during posting. Still, it would appear you haven’t sat idle during the hiatus…
Anyway, in answer to your question, while the Ring is unique amongst circuits in its ability to challenge every aspect of a car’s dynamics, it remains a circuit. That means you’re fully on the brakes, fully committed at turn-in and hard on the power towards the corner exit. It requires a few shades of grey compared to most tracks, but the way you drive the Ring is nothing like driving on the road.
I understand your sense of frustration at this, as I know you like to dissect on-road dynamics in minute detail. I also know that you are especially fascinated with all-wheel drive and how it compares to two-wheel drive.
That said, I’m sure you appreciate why we wanted to take a GT2 and GT-R to the Ring, as the level of debate/argument/loving/hating surrounding these two cars and their relative performance is unprecedented.
As you noted, Chris’s breakdown of the circuit, and the description of each has shed more light on where each car builds its lap time than any other publication has the means or inclination to do. Ultimately this is all we hoped, or indeed could reasonably expect to do: that’s to say put someone who knows the circuit and cars pretty well, but by no means as well as the Walter or Suzuki-san, drive each car for one or two flying laps on the same day, hope to God that the weather isn’t too awful, get a time and give subjective feedback. We’ll be uploading another video with commentary, which should provide more information on each car’s lap.
We could have waited until spring to do the test, but you’re never guaranteed good weather at the Ring and we’d have been far too late to add anything to the ‘debate’. Besides, there’s always the ZR1 spanner to throw into the works at a later date…
As for how this relates to on-road performance, well, as we all know, it really doesn’t. Looking at Chris’s findings, the GT2 steals its biggest advantage whenever the track is straight enough to use all its power. The longer the straight or the steeper the incline the bigger the difference. That’s raw physics at work. If you look back at previous track tests I’ve done – one at the Bedford Autodrome, one at Silverstone’s GP circuit – the times have been very close. At Bedford against a GT3 the GT-R was decisively quicker, but at Silverstone against the GT2 the Porsche pipped the Nissan. That’s only because Silverstone gives the Porsche more room to stretch its legs. At the Ring, where there are a handful of places where a quick car can run at 150-160mph, and a long straight where 180mph is possible you’d expect the GT2′s advantage to be compounded as the GT-R Chris drove simply couldn’t live with the GT2′s explosive straight line pace.
Through the corners both cars trade punches, which is impressive for the Nissan, as it clearly does a very good job of controlling its substantial mass. Likewise, the GT2 clearly does a very good job of controlling its quirky weight distribution. Honours even then.
Switch this to an on-road scenario and, in my experience, I would say the GT-R would be the more complete machine, as both cars are so quick you simply don’t spend enough time hard on the power for the Porsche to make any significant gains. The GT2 is a far more specialised/track focussed car than the Nissan, and is less controlled over bumpy roads as a result – it skips and hops, as I mentioned in the ‘Hard & Fast’ test a few weeks back – where the GT-R manages to smother all but the worst. Also, in typical wet conditions, where you don’t have the chance to get the GT2′s tyres up to a decent operating temperature traction is an issue in the Porsche, thanks to two-wheel drive and a spikey power delivery. The stability control system isn’t as progressive or as trustworthy as the GT-R’s either, which never helps settle your nerves on a dark and stormy night.
Ultimately both cars are so fast that to say one is quicker than the other on the road is probably more pointless than Ring lap times. Assessing and rating a car on the road should never be about taking risks, which is why we always try to put forward a combination of empirical and subjective comments in our verdicts. Increasingly I find which car wins a test depends more on how it goes about its business – what it asks of you, how it makes you feel – than out-and-out pace. That’s often why Porsche product does well because the cars are extremely capable but also extremely tactile things to drive.
That said you can’t divorce money from this pairing. That’s why the GT-R has dominated all the Car of the Year tests: judged on performance-per-£ it simply can’t be beaten. Money no object I’d have a GT2, but I’d probably have a GT-R as well. They’re both that good.
I hope this lengthy(!) missive answers some of your questions.
jl123
November 27, 2008Richard is that you? Its me Jeremy, jl23 is me, Rich! My goodness we’ve both been in froze for a decade, its 2001 a space odyssey-
HAL: What are you doing, Dave?
HAL: I’m afraid. I’m afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going. There is no question about it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I’m a…fraid. Good afternoon, gentlemen. I am a HAL 9000 computer. I became operational at the H.A.L. plant in Urbana, Illinois on the 12th of January 1992. My instructor was Dr. Lieberman, and he taught me to sing a song. If you’d like to hear it I can sing it for you.”
Meets…
Planet of the apes-
“A planet where apes evolved from men? There’s got to be an answer.”
Dr. Zaius: “Don’t look for it, Taylor. You may not like what you find.”
and now certainly Close encounters of the 4th kind…
“Gentlemen, ladies, take your positions, please. This is not a drill. I repeat. This is not a drill. Could we have the lights in the arena down sixty percent, please? Sixty percent. I don’t think we could ask for a more beautiful evening, do you? OK, watch the skies please. We now show uncorrelated targets approaching from the north northwest.”
Dear God Dickie your coming home.
jl123
November 27, 2008Richard is that you? Its me Jeremy, jl23 is me, Rich! My goodness we’ve both been in froze for a decade, its 2001 a space odyssey-
HAL: What are you doing, Dave?
HAL: I’m afraid. I’m afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going. There is no question about it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I’m a…fraid. Good afternoon, gentlemen. I am a HAL 9000 computer. I became operational at the H.A.L. plant in Urbana, Illinois on the 12th of January 1992. My instructor was Dr. Lieberman, and he taught me to sing a song. If you’d like to hear it I can sing it for you.”
Meets…
Planet of the apes-
“A planet where apes evolved from men? There’s got to be an answer.”
Dr. Zaius: “Don’t look for it, Taylor. You may not like what you find.”
and now certainly Close encounters of the 4th kind…
“Gentlemen, ladies, take your positions, please. This is not a drill. I repeat. This is not a drill. Could we have the lights in the arena down sixty percent, please? Sixty percent. I don’t think we could ask for a more beautiful evening, do you? OK, watch the skies please. We now show uncorrelated targets approaching from the north northwest.”
Dear God Dickie your coming home.
Craig Fettes
November 28, 2008Was there ever any thought of trying to get a ZR1 for this test? Just watched the ring video of it on youtube. Pretty amazing stuff. I feel like I’m pretty into driving, but am having trouble comprehending the determination and ball size required to attack that hard for 7+ minutes. Keep up the great work.
Craig Fettes
November 28, 2008Was there ever any thought of trying to get a ZR1 for this test? Just watched the ring video of it on youtube. Pretty amazing stuff. I feel like I’m pretty into driving, but am having trouble comprehending the determination and ball size required to attack that hard for 7+ minutes. Keep up the great work.
Richard - DR
November 28, 2008Yes, we did try to get a ZR1 but the UK press car was still on its way across the Atlantic. We explored the possibility of accessing a test car from mainland Europe but to no avail. We’ll do our very best to get one for next year though.
Agreed on the balls required to get an optimum lap out of the thing. It’s a monster isn’t it?
Richard - DR
November 28, 2008Yes, we did try to get a ZR1 but the UK press car was still on its way across the Atlantic. We explored the possibility of accessing a test car from mainland Europe but to no avail. We’ll do our very best to get one for next year though.
Agreed on the balls required to get an optimum lap out of the thing. It’s a monster isn’t it?
chris harris
November 28, 2008Interesting to see that the ZR1 doesn’t reach a higher speed on the main straight than the GT2 though. If it didn’t have a silly 6th gear I think it would do over 190mph -as it is he’s accelerating hard in 5th, goes for the next gear and it just dies. Love the way he admonishes himself for the few tiny mistakes he makes on the lap. v v v impressive stuff.
chris harris
November 28, 2008Interesting to see that the ZR1 doesn’t reach a higher speed on the main straight than the GT2 though. If it didn’t have a silly 6th gear I think it would do over 190mph -as it is he’s accelerating hard in 5th, goes for the next gear and it just dies. Love the way he admonishes himself for the few tiny mistakes he makes on the lap. v v v impressive stuff.
Jethro Bovingdon
November 28, 2008Yeah, but is he as quick as Sabine? I hear she’s waaaay quicker than that Walter Rohrl. What’s he ever done, anyway?
Jethro Bovingdon
November 28, 2008Yeah, but is he as quick as Sabine? I hear she’s waaaay quicker than that Walter Rohrl. What’s he ever done, anyway?
Kermit79
November 28, 2008So, let me get this straight, from what I have read.. if Sabine is as quick as everyone says, she must have massive balls….which isn’t a nice thought, the lip hair was a give-away.
Well for my two-pence worth, I couldn’t really care what car is fastest by a few seconds. If we were all being honest, we should all be driving around in boring ‘mobiles that do the speed limit and nothing more. I don’t like putting that, but these things are transport, and thier is a legal limit. BUT, that would be too easy. Mankind are thrill seekers, because there are no bears to chase us about anymore and get the old adrenal gland working. So we look for something that gets the sticky palm business going…travelling fast. However, there are a few things that need to be looked at, as people have touched on. Namely, the manufacturers need to get over the “My Dad’s better than your Dad” playground talk that are manufacturer ‘ring times. If I wanted to go round a track faster than the Porsche for the same money I could. I would go and spend the money on a stripped out purpose built car, and destroy the Porsche, and enjoy driving it on track more-so…big deal. Richard touched on a very valid point, the GTR is more useable than the Porsche, has a decent boot, can accomodate 4 adults and is a shit-load less expensive. These ‘ring times are about as relevant as a 0-62 figure. (Unless you are in a race) Anyone who bases their buying behaviour on this sort of thing is a knob, who I can imagine will have no friends to show around the car once they have bought it. This is not ‘Top Trumps’ this is about something that is supposed to be usuable, it is called a car, motor vehicle, automobile etc. These cars will spend most of the time on the road, or if you are insane, for track days only (in which case you wouldn’t buy the GTR)… if this is so get your head checked and get a track weapon instead.
The way a car makes you feel is very important. This can be due to the looks, the way it communicates to you through the seat/steering, the way it breaks, the way it sounds etc. Every individual puts emphasis on different features, that meld to create that intangible asset that creates a wonderful experiance and ultimately; car.
I have to say that if I had the money I would buy neither of these cars, because they are not overly-good to behold. Granted they are good at what they do, but both had different objectives. Each achieved in their own way. I have a feeling that in the winter months you are far more likely to jump into a GTR ahead of the Porsche. 1 – 0 to the Nissan then. I also appreciate that on that given road, in that given time and the right environment, the Porsche would be a blast, 1 – 1. But these cars are as different as chalk and cheese. The GTR an all-rounder of unquestionable ability, the Porsche the purist’s choice to test your wits. Taking budget into account, if you had the choice between a GTR + R500 + BMW 330 D M sport Estate on the drive and a couple of very nice holidays, or just the Porsche, which would you take?
Nissan has shown up Porsche here badly, and the rest of the establishment. I have a feeling that Porsche must be worried that they have to keep a straight face when telling people that their car is worth £84,000 plus, more than the Nissan, and this Playstation on four wheels has just gone very quickly on their home turf, and in essence stolen their thunder. The Nissan does re-write the rule book in many areas, which suddenly makes ‘supercars’ less than their namesakes. The arrival of the V-Spec might be interesting to put up against Porsche GT2 ‘bitquickercar’.
Lastly, Caparo must surely be looking at all this PR and planning their dates by now. I am sure their time will be discredited because the car is basically like a race-car for the road, a little like the Radical record that never was.
Chris, just to stroke your ego a little, your times are up on Wikipedia… here is the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschleife_fastest_lap_times
Kermit79
November 28, 2008So, let me get this straight, from what I have read.. if Sabine is as quick as everyone says, she must have massive balls….which isn’t a nice thought, the lip hair was a give-away.
Well for my two-pence worth, I couldn’t really care what car is fastest by a few seconds. If we were all being honest, we should all be driving around in boring ‘mobiles that do the speed limit and nothing more. I don’t like putting that, but these things are transport, and thier is a legal limit. BUT, that would be too easy. Mankind are thrill seekers, because there are no bears to chase us about anymore and get the old adrenal gland working. So we look for something that gets the sticky palm business going…travelling fast. However, there are a few things that need to be looked at, as people have touched on. Namely, the manufacturers need to get over the “My Dad’s better than your Dad” playground talk that are manufacturer ‘ring times. If I wanted to go round a track faster than the Porsche for the same money I could. I would go and spend the money on a stripped out purpose built car, and destroy the Porsche, and enjoy driving it on track more-so…big deal. Richard touched on a very valid point, the GTR is more useable than the Porsche, has a decent boot, can accomodate 4 adults and is a shit-load less expensive. These ‘ring times are about as relevant as a 0-62 figure. (Unless you are in a race) Anyone who bases their buying behaviour on this sort of thing is a knob, who I can imagine will have no friends to show around the car once they have bought it. This is not ‘Top Trumps’ this is about something that is supposed to be usuable, it is called a car, motor vehicle, automobile etc. These cars will spend most of the time on the road, or if you are insane, for track days only (in which case you wouldn’t buy the GTR)… if this is so get your head checked and get a track weapon instead.
The way a car makes you feel is very important. This can be due to the looks, the way it communicates to you through the seat/steering, the way it breaks, the way it sounds etc. Every individual puts emphasis on different features, that meld to create that intangible asset that creates a wonderful experiance and ultimately; car.
I have to say that if I had the money I would buy neither of these cars, because they are not overly-good to behold. Granted they are good at what they do, but both had different objectives. Each achieved in their own way. I have a feeling that in the winter months you are far more likely to jump into a GTR ahead of the Porsche. 1 – 0 to the Nissan then. I also appreciate that on that given road, in that given time and the right environment, the Porsche would be a blast, 1 – 1. But these cars are as different as chalk and cheese. The GTR an all-rounder of unquestionable ability, the Porsche the purist’s choice to test your wits. Taking budget into account, if you had the choice between a GTR + R500 + BMW 330 D M sport Estate on the drive and a couple of very nice holidays, or just the Porsche, which would you take?
Nissan has shown up Porsche here badly, and the rest of the establishment. I have a feeling that Porsche must be worried that they have to keep a straight face when telling people that their car is worth £84,000 plus, more than the Nissan, and this Playstation on four wheels has just gone very quickly on their home turf, and in essence stolen their thunder. The Nissan does re-write the rule book in many areas, which suddenly makes ‘supercars’ less than their namesakes. The arrival of the V-Spec might be interesting to put up against Porsche GT2 ‘bitquickercar’.
Lastly, Caparo must surely be looking at all this PR and planning their dates by now. I am sure their time will be discredited because the car is basically like a race-car for the road, a little like the Radical record that never was.
Chris, just to stroke your ego a little, your times are up on Wikipedia… here is the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschleife_fastest_lap_times
Kermit79
November 28, 2008Link as mentioned above..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschleife_fastest_lap_times
Kermit79
November 28, 2008Link as mentioned above..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschleife_fastest_lap_times
Brian
November 28, 2008I’m surprised that no other car magazine even thought of doing this, seeing how much attention it’s been getting online.
Chris’s comments regarding how much faster the GT2 can go vs. the GTR being at the limit is very very subjective no? He races Porsches, so his familiarity with the Porsche vs. the GT-R should give the GT2 an advantage. Hypothetically speaking, couldn’t a GT-R test driver say the same thing about the GT-R vs. the GT2 (that he felt he could go faster).
I think this was the argument of Nissan too, that the Porsche driver just couldn’t unleash the full potential of the GTR the same way the GTR test driver could.
Another gripe I have with a lot of the online arguments is how some people forget that the GTR has a double-clutch gearbox, which should shave a heck of a lot of time off. Just check the 911 PDK vs. manual. Or the EVO X with manual (lighter) vs. the one with the double-clutch.
Porsche could probably lower their lap times a huge amount by giving the GT2 PDK.
Brian
November 28, 2008I’m surprised that no other car magazine even thought of doing this, seeing how much attention it’s been getting online.
Chris’s comments regarding how much faster the GT2 can go vs. the GTR being at the limit is very very subjective no? He races Porsches, so his familiarity with the Porsche vs. the GT-R should give the GT2 an advantage. Hypothetically speaking, couldn’t a GT-R test driver say the same thing about the GT-R vs. the GT2 (that he felt he could go faster).
I think this was the argument of Nissan too, that the Porsche driver just couldn’t unleash the full potential of the GTR the same way the GTR test driver could.
Another gripe I have with a lot of the online arguments is how some people forget that the GTR has a double-clutch gearbox, which should shave a heck of a lot of time off. Just check the 911 PDK vs. manual. Or the EVO X with manual (lighter) vs. the one with the double-clutch.
Porsche could probably lower their lap times a huge amount by giving the GT2 PDK.
jl123
November 28, 2008“attention it’s been getting online.”
What attention?
jl123
November 28, 2008“attention it’s been getting online.”
What attention?
jl123
November 29, 2008many would probably be interested to see a naked GT-r broke down without engine/trans. Nissan were not playing round when they designed this chassis. The worlds more rigid chassis is the Bugatti at 60,000 Nm/deg. Cars like the 997 are at about 32,000. I’d say the Gt-r might be around 45,000 without a cage. This might contribute to its abillity to literally hold its weight so well…link…
http://jdm-insider.com/Blogs/Eric/?p=763
jl123
November 29, 2008many would probably be interested to see a naked GT-r broke down without engine/trans. Nissan were not playing round when they designed this chassis. The worlds more rigid chassis is the Bugatti at 60,000 Nm/deg. Cars like the 997 are at about 32,000. I’d say the Gt-r might be around 45,000 without a cage. This might contribute to its abillity to literally hold its weight so well…link…
http://jdm-insider.com/Blogs/Eric/?p=763
jl123
November 29, 2008Fellows,
Ones ability to place links on here is a 50/50 proposition. If you draw white as I have, your cracked. A nice link is now invisible under my last comment- for those so coordinated a nice site can be yours.
jl123
November 29, 2008Fellows,
Ones ability to place links on here is a 50/50 proposition. If you draw white as I have, your cracked. A nice link is now invisible under my last comment- for those so coordinated a nice site can be yours.
Richard - DR
November 30, 2008Here’s the link again (in black)
http://jdm-insider.com/Blogs/Eric/?p=763
That’s pretty cool to see a GT-R being stripped down and discover how much went into the thing. However, some of the captions are, er, interesting…
Nissan displayed a great cutaway car on the Geneva Show stand earlier this year – it was literally cut in half down the centre line of the car, transmission and all. Fascinating stuff. The transmission is a work of art, but it is massive and must be very heavy compared to a manual ‘box. I haven’t seen any weight figures for it compared to other DSG-type ‘boxes. I wonder how it compares to Porsche’s PDK and/or Porsche standard H-pattern manual?
Funny to think that all this whole Porsche v Nissan furore will kick off again when the V-spec surfaces. Unless of course the GT-R’s 7:29 lap was a bit of early testing for the V…
Richard - DR
November 30, 2008Here’s the link again (in black)
http://jdm-insider.com/Blogs/Eric/?p=763
That’s pretty cool to see a GT-R being stripped down and discover how much went into the thing. However, some of the captions are, er, interesting…
Nissan displayed a great cutaway car on the Geneva Show stand earlier this year – it was literally cut in half down the centre line of the car, transmission and all. Fascinating stuff. The transmission is a work of art, but it is massive and must be very heavy compared to a manual ‘box. I haven’t seen any weight figures for it compared to other DSG-type ‘boxes. I wonder how it compares to Porsche’s PDK and/or Porsche standard H-pattern manual?
Funny to think that all this whole Porsche v Nissan furore will kick off again when the V-spec surfaces. Unless of course the GT-R’s 7:29 lap was a bit of early testing for the V…
Richard - DR
November 30, 2008Or maybe not. Who cares? White’s the new black anyway
Richard - DR
November 30, 2008Or maybe not. Who cares? White’s the new black anyway
Mark McTavish
December 2, 2008This might be a question for another thread of conversation in the dialogue but thought I’d put it out there…I wouldn’t be surprised if it has been discussed already..somewhere?
Much has been discussed about the differences between the two cars but how much as been said about Porsche’s future cars, which may try to move the game on beyond the reach of the ZR-1 and GTR?
I believe the 959 was an inspiration for the original R32 GTR? Could/would Porsche make a modern day 959 in response to the GTR? i.e GT2 with rear biased 4WD, PDK box and some more technowizardry?
Like I said…might be a discussion for another time?
Mark McTavish
December 2, 2008This might be a question for another thread of conversation in the dialogue but thought I’d put it out there…I wouldn’t be surprised if it has been discussed already..somewhere?
Much has been discussed about the differences between the two cars but how much as been said about Porsche’s future cars, which may try to move the game on beyond the reach of the ZR-1 and GTR?
I believe the 959 was an inspiration for the original R32 GTR? Could/would Porsche make a modern day 959 in response to the GTR? i.e GT2 with rear biased 4WD, PDK box and some more technowizardry?
Like I said…might be a discussion for another time?
waremark
December 2, 2008“Could/would Porsche make a modern day 959 in response to the GTR?”
The next car due from Porsche is a 997 mk 2 GT3 with PDK. That will probably be pretty fantastic, if not quite what you are looking for.
waremark
December 2, 2008“Could/would Porsche make a modern day 959 in response to the GTR?”
The next car due from Porsche is a 997 mk 2 GT3 with PDK. That will probably be pretty fantastic, if not quite what you are looking for.
Mark McTavish
December 2, 2008Am I right in thinking that when DR tested a PDK equipped 911 and GTR at Silverstone, the 911 beat the GTR by a nose in the drag races towards the end of the video? That was just a regular Carrera as well…
…as I think was pointed out that shows just how important gearboxes are becoming.
Certainly when I was in a GT2 it seemed much more difficult to get consistent figures near the manufacturers claims than something like a flappy-paddle equipped LP-560.
I just think that whilst the GTR is good it’s just happened to come a long at the right time with the right technology.
Mark McTavish
December 2, 2008Am I right in thinking that when DR tested a PDK equipped 911 and GTR at Silverstone, the 911 beat the GTR by a nose in the drag races towards the end of the video? That was just a regular Carrera as well…
…as I think was pointed out that shows just how important gearboxes are becoming.
Certainly when I was in a GT2 it seemed much more difficult to get consistent figures near the manufacturers claims than something like a flappy-paddle equipped LP-560.
I just think that whilst the GTR is good it’s just happened to come a long at the right time with the right technology.
jl123
December 2, 2008Porsche now finds itself at the limits of there rear-engine roots.
They have to chose between tradtion and “the look”, that millions love, or pure function.
Unless they really think out of the box and somehow lighten the car and literally even out the weight distribution by putting weight in the front and rear!
Do like Honda will be doing- electric engines by/in the wheel hubs- all four- then keep the Beetle “look” and keep “tradition” in place.
jl123
December 2, 2008Porsche now finds itself at the limits of there rear-engine roots.
They have to chose between tradtion and “the look”, that millions love, or pure function.
Unless they really think out of the box and somehow lighten the car and literally even out the weight distribution by putting weight in the front and rear!
Do like Honda will be doing- electric engines by/in the wheel hubs- all four- then keep the Beetle “look” and keep “tradition” in place.
jl123
December 3, 2008Ok ok for purists- replicate the twin engine GOlg of the 80′s.
3 cylinder turbo at each end.
jl123
December 3, 2008Ok ok for purists- replicate the twin engine GOlg of the 80′s.
3 cylinder turbo at each end.
TUNÇ
January 14, 2009I LOVE AND ADMİRE TO GTR İTS SUPERİOR TO 911 TT PORCHE ANYWAY BUT VERSUS THİSE 515 KWA 972 İT WİLL HAVE NO CHANCE AT ALL I PRESUME ET 1/4MİLE WİLL BE AROUND 10.5 SEC WHİC İS QUİTE GOOD BUT THE PRİCE İS HİGH ALTHOUGH SPECİAL CONROD AND PİSTONS ETC ..I HAVE A 450HP EVO BUT I LOVE TO HAVE ONE OF THİS 700HP SUPER CAR
TUNÇ
January 14, 2009I LOVE AND ADMİRE TO GTR İTS SUPERİOR TO 911 TT PORCHE ANYWAY BUT VERSUS THİSE 515 KWA 972 İT WİLL HAVE NO CHANCE AT ALL I PRESUME ET 1/4MİLE WİLL BE AROUND 10.5 SEC WHİC İS QUİTE GOOD BUT THE PRİCE İS HİGH ALTHOUGH SPECİAL CONROD AND PİSTONS ETC ..I HAVE A 450HP EVO BUT I LOVE TO HAVE ONE OF THİS 700HP SUPER CAR
Arthur
June 22, 2009Alright, “the truth” as you like to call it, is finally official.
It seems that DR’s impromptu matchup between GT-2 and GT-R, even though something of a mismatch, turns out to be rather accurate when the weather conditions at the time are factored in.
7 months on, and the definitive results are out.
Horst von Saurma has put a boggo 2010 model GT-R on Dunlop tyres to the ultimate challenge; sportAuto’s Supertest.
Last year the GT-2 put in an astounding Nordschleife laptime of 7:33 in the hands of der Horst, putting it within only one second of Porsche’s hypercar, the Carrera GT.
And only last month, in the previous issue of the magazine, the very latest rendition of the GT-3 did the Supertest, coming in a hefty 7 seconds quicker than the previous version at 7:40, but still 1 second adrift from it’s nemesis, the Ferrari 430 Scuderia.
The time that von Saurma set in the GT-R is nothing short of sensational, because he exactly matched Nissan’s own laptime that was so widely disputed all of last year; 7:38.
Which pulled the trousers from the people at Porsche right down to their ankles, after they – ridiculously – claimed that their fastest testdriver (and there can be only one) could not lap a hastily purchased Nissan any quicker than 7:54.
And they have no one to blame for looking fantastically stupid but themselves, obviously.
But the thing that kinda ruins the joke for me is the fact that some marketing knob-ends at Porsche willingly damage the name of a certified legend like Walter Rohrl trying to lie about the performance of both their own car and the Nissan’s.
Because if Horst von Saurma (who is approaching near legendary status himself) can do a 7:38 in a GT-R, there is absolutely no way that Walter’s best time was a 7:54!
Anyway, well done to Chris, for in less than ideal conditions his times in both the GT-2 and GT-R were seriously quick, and the difference between the two very similar when compared to the times that von Saurma did in their respective Supertests! Impressive stuff, and no mistake.
Arthur
June 22, 2009Alright, “the truth” as you like to call it, is finally official.
It seems that DR’s impromptu matchup between GT-2 and GT-R, even though something of a mismatch, turns out to be rather accurate when the weather conditions at the time are factored in.
7 months on, and the definitive results are out.
Horst von Saurma has put a boggo 2010 model GT-R on Dunlop tyres to the ultimate challenge; sportAuto’s Supertest.
Last year the GT-2 put in an astounding Nordschleife laptime of 7:33 in the hands of der Horst, putting it within only one second of Porsche’s hypercar, the Carrera GT.
And only last month, in the previous issue of the magazine, the very latest rendition of the GT-3 did the Supertest, coming in a hefty 7 seconds quicker than the previous version at 7:40, but still 1 second adrift from it’s nemesis, the Ferrari 430 Scuderia.
The time that von Saurma set in the GT-R is nothing short of sensational, because he exactly matched Nissan’s own laptime that was so widely disputed all of last year; 7:38.
Which pulled the trousers from the people at Porsche right down to their ankles, after they – ridiculously – claimed that their fastest testdriver (and there can be only one) could not lap a hastily purchased Nissan any quicker than 7:54.
And they have no one to blame for looking fantastically stupid but themselves, obviously.
But the thing that kinda ruins the joke for me is the fact that some marketing knob-ends at Porsche willingly damage the name of a certified legend like Walter Rohrl trying to lie about the performance of both their own car and the Nissan’s.
Because if Horst von Saurma (who is approaching near legendary status himself) can do a 7:38 in a GT-R, there is absolutely no way that Walter’s best time was a 7:54!
Anyway, well done to Chris, for in less than ideal conditions his times in both the GT-2 and GT-R were seriously quick, and the difference between the two very similar when compared to the times that von Saurma did in their respective Supertests! Impressive stuff, and no mistake.
Fokdeebysed
July 2, 2009Очень понравился ваш блог! Подписался на rss. Буду регулярно читать.
Fokdeebysed
July 2, 2009Очень понравился ваш блог! Подписался на rss. Буду регулярно читать.