Alain Prost says "No way GTR does 7:29"

Its standard these days to udnerate the bigger sportscars,nothing new. Ford GT's dyno-ed over, and I don't see a big stink being raised about it.(Granted, they didn't lay numbers and "records" out for years in advance). The Z06's are underated as well.

 

sigh.... yes, here we go again.

Yes, it may be a customer car, but it is NOT a US-spec car. We have tighter emissions laws here and different gas, so it's highly likely that the car will not hold up to reports - but we shall see. There was another test where the GTR was simply outclassed by some Italian cars, it was at a track in Italy, I forget the mag that ran the test, but for a car that some claim to be on part with the Zonda and quicker than the CGT, the result was disappointing.

As for the track time comparison... lol, come on, be serious.... % differences are irrelevant when comparing different tracks. The n-ring is a completely different track than b-willow, so "X% slower on track A therefore X+50% slower on track B makes sense" is just ludicrous.

As for Millen his time being faster than C&D doesn't mean too much, because what were the comparable conditions and who was driving for C&D? Also, Millen's time in the Viper was waaaay off what other times have been.

Rather than trying to e-bench race, how about we wait until a US customer car, US spec GTR gets tested against a US-spec ZR-1 and US-spec ACR. That has only happened once so far, and the GTR got demolished. Whether history repeats itself or not remains to be seen.

 

Correct, Nissan is reporting more power in exported GT-Rs (480 instead of 473)

I agree different tracs for different cars, I've seen Ferraris and Vipers loose rather handily to Miatas on tight Autocross circuits.

The data tells us the Ring time GT-R to Z06 delta is not out of line. That's a fair comparison to be made. It clearly shows it's not the edge of the bell curve for what the GT-R can do when compared to the Z06.

The Z06 is the control car since it's used in both test and gets comparable times in both tests. I've raced at Buttonwillow and the conditions can vary, you have a point there, but given the similarity in Z06 times and the low trap speed int he GT-R is pretty clearly shows that specific car was having some sort of issue. C&D even commented on it.

No bench racing here, just analysis of existing races and the data.

The data doesn't support the claim of a "ringer"
The data does support the ring times that were achieved
The Video of the actual ring time achievement is a far better authority of what the GT-R did than Alain Prost's speculation.

 

Dude, I agree 100%, but why bother....they will ALWAYS have an excuse!

 

The only excuses being made are by those that don't believe Nissan's claim backed with video proof.

 

"Claim" is right....

 

Give it a rest already.

 

Na, it's too much fun annoying the fanboys.

 

Bumpity-bump!


Porsche buys a GT-R off the showroom floor, takes it to the Nurburgring, has one of their professional chassis engineers and "expert N-ring" guys drive it, and they can't come within 25 seconds of Nissans claimed time. Porsche's response is "they can not have been using factory tires on their run".

http://carsguide.news.com.au/site/motoring-news/story/porsche_accuses_nissan_of_cheating_at_nurburgring


So what are the excuses now from the GT-R fanbois? Porsche are liars?


There are only a very few possible answers

1) The GT-R used by Nissan *was* in fact a ringer or running on non-standard equipment, contrary to Nissans claims (ie Nissan lied)

2) The driver that Nissan had driving the car is capable of taking 25 seconds out of the Porsche experts time (impossible for me to believe - unless the Porsche guy was sandbagging, which I would find impossible to believe also)

3) Something was very seriously wrong with this particular GT-R (hard to believe, considering it was showroom stock and were it throwing codes or some such, I am sure Porsche would have had it looked at)


Comments?

 

Car and Driver had an article saying the same thing. They believe that Nissan adjusted the boost on all the cars.

 

Does anyone knows the Scuderia time @ the Ring?

Fifth Gear - Nissan GT-R vs Porsche 911 Turbo

Bruno Senna put a comparison on the Nissan GT-R and Porsche 911 Turbo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnmpIqFoYtg

 

1.) I would say no, There have now been dozens of independent tests with customer spec cars that confirm that the GT2 is not as fast as the GT-R

2.) I believe that a Porsche driver is a Porsche expert, and probably knows how to get the best times out of a Porsche. Nissan spent years at the ring to get a 7:29, I'm sure they have thousands of laps that are much slower and they had to learn a lot to get the car to where they did.

3.) I doubt it, however a GT-R premium has Bridgestone tires, the base has Dunlops. It's been established the base tires is 2 seconds faster at Buttonwillow. (Base GT-Rs have silver rims, Premium have dark graphite rims)

I will add.

4.) Where is CarGuide's link to source? It's entirely possible they're citing some internet rumor, god knows there is so much misinformation at this point.

5.) I now know for a fact that Road and Track's Willow Spring 997 GT2 beating time is accurate for a GT-R. I've now witnessed two GT-R's at Willow posting similar and better times. And one of those GT-R's is one I just purchased

 

Excuses... excuses... excuses...

"they used the crappy tires"

"he doesn't know how to drive the GT-R"

etc, etc.


I seriously doubt there is 25 seconds per lap difference between the "base" tires and the "premium" tires. As I said in another thread, that is the difference between a Chevy Z06 and a Chevy Cobalt. That's outside the realm of possibility for two different street tires. Also, we don't know what tires were on the car... we only know it was showroom stock. Presumably, Porsche would have bought whatever car was cheapest, but availability was also likely a factor. But, however you slice it, I do not believe that two options of street tire is going to make a 25 second difference on that track. Neither did the Porsche guy (who, I am sure would know a lot more than either of us) because he said...

"He believes the time achieved by Nissan with ex-Formula One driver Toshio Suzuki would only be possible with a semi-slick race-style tyre."

As for the source, did you read the article? It says...

"says August Achleitner, the 911 product chief for Porsche, speaking to the CARSguide at the Australian press preview of the latest 911 Cabrio."


As for the Willow Springs times... that is not comprable to the N-ring times. Different track, and I am not sure of the details of either the GT-R's runs or the GT2's runs. What we do know is that...

1) GT-R's have not been dynoing a number that would jive with the claimed 1/4 mile results

2) The dyno number they have been tested at also doesn't jive with Nissan's claims of what the driveline loss is

3) There has been a LOT of doubt about the validity of the GT-R's N-ring time, mostly because it's pretty unbelievable that a 3900lb ~500hp car on street tires is going to be better than a GT-2 or just slightly slower than cars like the ZR1 with 150hp more, ~700lbs less, and a lot more tire, and something like the ACR with ~100hp more, ~500lbs less, and way more tire (and "street/race tires"). Porsche didn't believe it either... they went out and bought one, sent it around the track, and it was over 25 seconds slower.

Their driver has thousands of laps at the n-ring, and presumably had a lot of time to test in the GT-R. Were he unable to drive the GT-R correctly, then presumably he would have noted such, since Porsche's goal was to test the real speed of the car, not to hamper their results by getting an artificially high time.

Face it - this is yet another data point that there have been some serious embellishments (being kind) about the true performance of this car. In other words, Nissan lied about the N-ring times.

 

You stated there were three possibilities I spoke to them, Did you want an open discussion or were you just flaming baiting?

Fact of the matter is there is oceans of unsupported hearsay, and this article especially is hearsay.

Facts are facts and time again independent tests confirm the Porsche is slower around circuits than the GT-R. Anglesy, Silverstone, Willow Springs, Button Willow, etc. I just picked up a GT-R myself, had it run around Willow International and it handily disproved this "ringer" mythology. I will post times and videos in a few weeks when the footage is released.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyIomZ5bK2o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emUEcw4Uk-Q&feature=related this one is against a gallardo sl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjmyt52-c8c&feature=related this against the z06

the r35 does well for against the z06 considering that is a 3.8 Liter compared 7.0 liter. Its also taller ,wider, and it weighs more than 600lbs more than the z06

 

I would say than in a blown engine like the GTR the fuel quality and heat can have a massive effect on performance, far more so than in other cars.

So if 100 Octane gives you great lap times becuase the boost stays on longer and you can get this fuel at tracks the performance is relevant. I still seriously doubt that the GTR with its weight no matter what the performance can hold up to multiple laps without wilting brakes and melting tires, would like to hear different though.

One last point all acceleration runs in a GTR show rate of aaceleration dropping off markedly with speed, far more rapidly than in a ZO6 for example. So we have a trick tranny with tight gear ratios up to say 100mph, which explians the 0-60 but does point to a car that is noticeably slower than those it is compared to once the speeds rise.

In the Car magazine test on youtube the driver really loved the GTR. Question is which is more fun, and which can post great lap times with, let's say the casual trackday driver, my bet is the GTR scores real well here, but I still think it is gonna wilt.

 

Very interesting, and what the world suspected all along.

 

Yeah and those two turbochargers don't do a thing....

 

No there just for looks dont be so stupid. Ive always said there was no way the GTR could run a 7:29 and this proves it.

 

I was being sarcastic....over you head I guess....

 

I was being sarcastic as well. In all honesty I dont think the car can only run what porsche got out of it, I think its faster. I think the real truth is somewhere between the Z06 time and what Porsche got out of it. We shall see how Nissan responds to this, it should be intersting.