Crown

Carlos from Spain:

BiTurbo:
Because there was a bump in power output from 480 to 485, I expect her to run 7:23 kicking MC12's ass
--

you not only get the extra 5HP but you also get the mandatory "LC delete" factory option for that price increase 
--

LC delete is meant to keep customers on the streets a little bit longer before things go out of control

If Porsche was serious about refuting Nissan's claim, they'ld just meet them at the Ring...

What if Nissan would (anonymously) buy a stock Porsche and Porsche would buy a stock GT-R to meet at the Ring and settle this? (they seem to be there anyways)

Either this isn't important to Porsche, or they fear not being able to beat the GT-R...

Eunice:

If Porsche was serious about refuting Nissan's claim, they'ld just meet them at the Ring...

What if Nissan would (anonymously) buy a stock Porsche and Porsche would buy a stock GT-R to meet at the Ring and settle this? (they seem to be there anyways)

Either this isn't important to Porsche, or they fear not being able to beat the GT-R...

        As per today:

DR has verified that the GT2 is quicker (by far) than the GTR on the NBR (which should not have happened if Nissan was right about their NBR claims).

SportAuto has verified that a GTR with a completely revised suspension is still 1.5s slower than a standard GT2 at HHR.

 As per today the Nissan marketing claims are more unlikely than ever. I - as I have done for months - consider these claims lies and BS more then ever 

In addition: the claims and rumours posted about the "V-Spec" have now been materialized as well. This car - apparently - will not have more hp and will be just ca. 50kg lighter than a regular GTR (thus: 1.7t vs. 1.75t). Very funny indeed. Some people have really been confused by all the Nissan BS 

MKSGR:

Eunice:

If Porsche was serious about refuting Nissan's claim, they'ld just meet them at the Ring...

What if Nissan would (anonymously) buy a stock Porsche and Porsche would buy a stock GT-R to meet at the Ring and settle this? (they seem to be there anyways)

Either this isn't important to Porsche, or they fear not being able to beat the GT-R...

        As per today:

DR has verified that the GT2 is quicker (by far) than the GTR on the NBR (which should not have happened if Nissan was right about their NBR claims).

SportAuto has verified that a GTR with a completely revised suspension is still 1.5s slower than a standard GT2 at HHR.

 As per today the Nissan marketing claims are more unlikely than ever. I - as I have done for months - consider these claims lies and BS more then ever 

In addition: the claims and rumours posted about the "V-Spec" have now been materialized as well. This car - apparently - will not have more hp and will be just ca. 50kg lighter than a regular GTR (thus: 1.7t vs. 1.75t). Very funny indeed. Some people have really been confused by all the Nissan BS 

     All GTR lap times by every magazine are faster than every 911 except the GT2. I wonder why you can't understand and appreciate this.

You can't compare lap times from different days with different track conditions. You can't be sure that the cars are unmodified and driven by objective and equally good drivers.

Only a race can settle this, if I were Porsche I would take the opportunity to bust Nissans claims on the track in public with anonymously bought cars.

AUM:

MKSGR:

Eunice:

If Porsche was serious about refuting Nissan's claim, they'ld just meet them at the Ring...

What if Nissan would (anonymously) buy a stock Porsche and Porsche would buy a stock GT-R to meet at the Ring and settle this? (they seem to be there anyways)

Either this isn't important to Porsche, or they fear not being able to beat the GT-R...

        As per today:

DR has verified that the GT2 is quicker (by far) than the GTR on the NBR (which should not have happened if Nissan was right about their NBR claims).

SportAuto has verified that a GTR with a completely revised suspension is still 1.5s slower than a standard GT2 at HHR.

 As per today the Nissan marketing claims are more unlikely than ever. I - as I have done for months - consider these claims lies and BS more then ever 

In addition: the claims and rumours posted about the "V-Spec" have now been materialized as well. This car - apparently - will not have more hp and will be just ca. 50kg lighter than a regular GTR (thus: 1.7t vs. 1.75t). Very funny indeed. Some people have really been confused by all the Nissan BS 

     All GTR lap times by every magazine are faster than every 911 except the GT2. I wonder why you can't understand and appreciate this.

--

I agree that this is the case. However, Nissan did not claim a lap time in the 997TT range (7.52 based on SportAuto) but a 7.29. If they had just claimed a reasonable lap time my view on their strategy would be totally different. However, they decided to go with a 7.29 claim and tried to mislead potential buyers. That's what makes me concerned.

No doubt, the GTR offers a lot of performance for that price. Even if the 997TT FL will have identical (or maybe even slightly better performance?) again it will still cost 50% to 100% more (depending on where a buyer lives). This highlights that the GTR is a great package.

Since when have we considered a car's longevity/build quality when evaluating its performance parameters? Isn't it good enough for a specific car to run 2-3 laps of the Ring without failure? Even the Enzo exhibited suspension problems on its first lap!!

Yes, Porsche probably makes the most durable sports car, but  what excuses will we start making next - fuel mileage/range? Let's give credit when it's due.

Most sports car owners will never attend track sessions. Even among those who do, few can/will actually perform lap after lap at 90+% of the car's capabilities.

While the GT-R is impressive, as MKSGR already said, Nissan should have been more restrained in its Ring claims. Porsche, however received little criticism with its latest 997tt time of 7:38. Does anyone here really think that time is realistic?

08 PORSCHE Turbo Cabriolet, 06 Ferrari F430,  04 Durango HEMI,  04 Harley FLHTCSE,  93 Harley FLSTN

mp:

Since when have we considered a car's longevity/build quality when evaluating its performance parameters? Isn't it good enough for a specific car to run 2-3 laps of the Ring without failure? Even the Enzo exhibited suspension problems on its first lap!!

Yes, Porsche probably makes the most durable sports car, but  what excuses will we start making next - fuel mileage/range? Let's give credit when it's due.

Most sports car owners will never attend track sessions. Even among those who do, few can/will actually perform lap after lap at 90+% of the car's capabilities.

While the GT-R is impressive, as MKSGR already said, Nissan should have been more restrained in its Ring claims. Porsche, however received little criticism with its latest 997tt time of 7:38. Does anyone here really think that time is realistic?

--
997TT Blk/Blk 05 Harley Davidson Ultra Classic

Think Carlos was referring to the GTR's 'issues'. Although we should probably give Nissan some slack, they havent had 40+ years to refine the GTR. And I'd have to agree relibility is a major factor when I'm deciding on my everyday, all year round sports car.  Build quality  is a biggy too.     

08 PORSCHE Turbo Cabriolet, 06 Ferrari F430,  04 Durango HEMI,  04 Harley FLHTCSE,  93 Harley FLSTN

mp:

Since when have we considered a car's longevity/build quality when evaluating its performance parameters? Isn't it good enough for a specific car to run 2-3 laps of the Ring without failure? Even the Enzo exhibited suspension problems on its first lap!!

Hello? performance consistency or longevity not to be considered in a sportcar?? thats fine and dandy for a garage queen or a poseur (no risk of the GT-R being that given its looks), but that is certainly not OK for an everyday sportscar or one that will be driven how its meant to be driven. The whole point of the ring lap times is to get an idea of the realworld performance and in the realworld just performing for just a couple of laps won't cut it. Traded in my ex-996 with over 60k miles, and have now 45k on my 997 and the car is as good as new, never any worries wether its when high-speed commuting or for fun weekend driving...

STRADALE:
Just a hunch but IMHO Porsche wouldn't have publicly stated they couldn't come close to re-producing the times unless they really couldn't. If they were able to validate the Ring time w/ their own testing imho instead of saying they didnt get similiar times they would have just kept it quiet. I could be wrong but that's just my opinion.   

FWIW, Porsche did not make a public statement about the validity of Nissan's performance claims for the GT-R.
It was made informally by a Porsche staff member to an Australian journalist in the course of a press event relating to introduction of the 997.2 Carrera. By my assessment, this was hardly a venue which Porsche would have chosen to make an official statement on this matter, as it wouldn't want to distract attention from the new product.
My guess is that the journalist goaded this reaction out of the Porsche guy by bringing up the subject of the GT-R in a provocative manner. Anyone who has experienced journalists at work will know that this is standard operating procedure for them.

In my view, if the Porsche company had wanted to make an "official" statement about Nissan's product it would have done it through its public relations department, not through its engineering staff as happened here.

Beyond that "qualifier" I think, like you, that the Porsche guy concerned would not have made the claim he did make if it were not based on fact. He would have known that, sooner or later, a Sport Auto Supertest will be published which will  reveal the truth.

The 7.29 video is interesting. Either Nissan committed fraud by altering the video (without leaving any trace of tampering) and decided to risk losing all corporate credibility forever for the sake of a few seconds bragging rights at the Ring, or the video is an accurate record of the lap. 

Logic would say Nissan could not be so foolish as to publish a doctored video, emotion says they lied and hid the evidence with diabolical oriental ingenuity.

BTW the test results of the GTR do not rule out the possibility of a 7.29 lap being real (after thousands of attempts by a fully committed race driver). 

But I would still choose even a simple 345bhp Carrera over the much faster GTR. 

AUM,

It stands to reason that its not the video that was altered but rather the car. Its pretty clear that in order to obatain such a lap time the car used was not precisely a production version driven of a dealer's lot. Nothing new, back in the mid 1990's Nissan made a similar marketing stunt by claiming a sub-8 min NRing lap time for its R-33 GT-R, the predecesor or the current GT-R, and it was later discovered that they had used slick tires instead of street tires to achieve that lap time.

What's really hard for me to believe and to this day blows my mind, honestly,  is that anyone with a minimum knowledge of sportcars and the Nurburgring could believe that the formula 480HP+1700Kg=7:29sec could be even remotely posible or remotely close to reality, that really puts a lot of things into perspective when talking about this to other people.

The car looks and sounds stock in the video. There is no evidence of any modification and Nissan have staked their corporate credibility on the car being a standard production model.

I have driven the GTR on a track and it has corning speeds that you cannot believe. In many tests it corners faster than the GT2 and Scud. It is the GTR's cornering speeds that allows for its stellar lap times. 

I guess we will have to wait for April when Nissan do more time attacks under verifiable conditions.

AUM:

The car looks and sounds stock in the video. There is no evidence of any modification and Nissan have staked their corporate credibility on the car being a standard production model.

--

If you think you can tell by the ambient sound and image of an inside camera if a car has stock suspensions and setting, stock tires, and engine mods such as turbo pressure, to name a few, you are either very naive or have magical powers...

As to staking their corporate credibility, I will say it once again: they have done it before with the same car.

I find any discussion about a 7:29 lap simply UNREAL, its like Galileo reading about the world being flat. Nissan's marketing department must be rolling on the floor laughing about this, though they won't laugh much after the SportAuto Supertest of the Euro-Spec, then again, if there is ever such test, since the car keeps getting misteriously dealyed.

AUM:

I have driven the GTR on a track and it has corning speeds that you cannot believe. In many tests it corners faster than the GT2 and Scud. It is the GTR's cornering speeds that allows for its stellar lap times. 

--

In the recent SportAuto test the GTR was far (!) from "comparable" to a GT2 or Scuderia even with a heavily modified suspension (the car still suffered from understeer, based on SportAuto). The suspension mods done to the test car should have had a positive impact on the car's lap time (HHR is a very flat track as you know). Also, one of the official importers of the GTR is quite happy with the test result - which tells a lot (if not all...).

This car does not handle similarly as a GT2 or Scuderia. It is too heavy, has a poor weight distribution and lacks power. AWD also does not make a car faster on the track either.

DR and SportAuto have now issued the first reliable tests. The Supertest will be around soon hopefully to finally put any remaining doubts to an end
 

MKSGR:

AUM:

I have driven the GTR on a track and it has corning speeds that you cannot believe. In many tests it corners faster than the GT2 and Scud. It is the GTR's cornering speeds that allows for its stellar lap times. 

--

In the recent SportAuto test the GTR was far (!) from "comparable" to a GT2 or Scuderia even with a heavily modified suspension (the car still suffered from understeer, based on SportAuto). The suspension mods done to the test car should have had a positive impact on the car's lap time (HHR is a very flat track as you know). Also, one of the official importers of the GTR is quite happy with the test result - which tells a lot (if not all...).

This car does not handle similarly as a GT2 or Scuderia. It is too heavy, has a poor weight distribution and lacks power. AWD also does not make a car faster on the track either.

DR and SportAuto have now issued the first reliable tests. The Supertest will be around soon hopefully to finally put any remaining doubts to an end

And have you seen this Japanese test from 1992 ? Stock GTR 280bhp vs Ruf ctr 469bhp ? There  was no Japanese Spec car in the 90's that would pass 180km/h, but this GTR is indeed a stock GTR as nissan claims 

MKSGR:

AUM:

I have driven the GTR on a track and it has corning speeds that you cannot believe. In many tests it corners faster than the GT2 and Scud. It is the GTR's cornering speeds that allows for its stellar lap times. 

--

In the recent SportAuto test the GTR was far (!) from "comparable" to a GT2 or Scuderia even with a heavily modified suspension (the car still suffered from understeer, based on SportAuto). The suspension mods done to the test car should have had a positive impact on the car's lap time (HHR is a very flat track as you know). Also, one of the official importers of the GTR is quite happy with the test result - which tells a lot (if not all...).

gangajas:

MKSGR:

AUM:

I have driven the GTR on a track and it has corning speeds that you cannot believe. In many tests it corners faster than the GT2 and Scud. It is the GTR's cornering speeds that allows for its stellar lap times. 

--

In the recent SportAuto test the GTR was far (!) from "comparable" to a GT2 or Scuderia even with a heavily modified suspension (the car still suffered from understeer, based on SportAuto). The suspension mods done to the test car should have had a positive impact on the car's lap time (HHR is a very flat track as you know). Also, one of the official importers of the GTR is quite happy with the test result - which tells a lot (if not all...).

I wonder if the 4 ºC track  temeprature had any influence on the results.

What's really hard for me to believe and to this day blows my mind, honestly,  is that anyone with a minimum knowledge of sportcars and the Nurburgring could believe that the formula 480HP+1700Kg=7:29sec could be even remotely posible or remotely close to reality

--

        Lap times are a combination of speed which is largely deteremined by the power to weigh ratio and cornering speed which is not.

The GTR has a huge handicap with its high weight but if you check the test data you will see that in spite of this handicap its exit speeds are 3 mph higher than the Scud (for example in the VIR comparison). The Scud of course is faster on the straights. The end result is the heavy underpowered GTR is within 0.5% of the Scud (1 second on a 2.55 lap).  

The ability of the GTR to corner faster than a Scud and match it on a track (despite its significant power to weight handicap) is a testament to its chassis, balance, AWD and suspension. How about some kudos for this outstanding achievement?

Imagine what a GTR with the same power to weight ratio as a Scud or GT2 would achieve. 

AUM:

What's really hard for me to believe and to this day blows my mind, honestly,  is that anyone with a minimum knowledge of sportcars and the Nurburgring could believe that the formula 480HP+1700Kg=7:29sec could be even remotely posible or remotely close to reality

--

        Lap times are a combination of speed which is largely deteremined by the power to weigh ratio and cornering speed which is not.

The GTR has a huge handicap with its high weight but if you check the test data you will see that in spite of this handicap its exit speeds are 3 mph higher than the Scud (for example in the VIR comparison). The Scud of course is faster on the straights. The end result is the heavy underpowered GTR is within 0.5% of the Scud (1 second on a 2.55 lap).  

The ability of the GTR to corner faster than a Scud and match it on a track (despite its significant power to weight handicap) is a testament to its chassis, balance, AWD and suspension. How about some kudos for this outstanding achievement?

Imagine what a GTR with the same power to weight ratio as a Scud or GT2 would achieve. 

--

        Nobody here is saying the GT-R is slow around the corners, we know its sophisticated AWD gives it impressive cornering speeds, but thats one thing and another completely different is exaggerating it to ridiculous and comical lengths.

On a side note, its AWD system may be impressive and I give Nissan credit for it, but such performance achieved through a big heavy AWD auto car does not appeal to me much, on a sedan maybe, but not on a sportcar. I'd trade it any day of the week a car with "similar" overall real-world performance through lighter weight, RWD, manual tranny, mechanical endourance, and disengageable ESP.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/features_classic_cars/the_lightning_lap_2008_feature+page-22.html
--

Mostly we all agree that the GTR is not very desirable. And after driving a GTR I would never buy one. But let's give credit where it is due. It is no small feat to corner faster than a Scud.

Carlos from Spain:

AUM:

What's really hard for me to believe and to this day blows my mind, honestly,  is that anyone with a minimum knowledge of sportcars and the Nurburgring could believe that the formula 480HP+1700Kg=7:29sec could be even remotely posible or remotely close to reality

--

        Lap times are a combination of speed which is largely deteremined by the power to weigh ratio and cornering speed which is not.

The GTR has a huge handicap with its high weight but if you check the test data you will see that in spite of this handicap its exit speeds are 3 mph higher than the Scud (for example in the VIR comparison). The Scud of course is faster on the straights. The end result is the heavy underpowered GTR is within 0.5% of the Scud (1 second on a 2.55 lap).  

The ability of the GTR to corner faster than a Scud and match it on a track (despite its significant power to weight handicap) is a testament to its chassis, balance, AWD and suspension. How about some kudos for this outstanding achievement?

Imagine what a GTR with the same power to weight ratio as a Scud or GT2 would achieve. 

--

        Nobody here is saying the GT-R is slow around the corners, we know its sophisticated AWD gives it impressive cornering speeds, but thats one thing and another completely different is exaggerating it to ridiculous and comical lengths.

On a side note, its AWD system may be impressive and I give Nissan credit for it, but such performance achieved through a big heavy AWD auto car does not appeal to me much, on a sedan maybe, but not on a sportcar. I'd trade it any day of the week a car with "similar" overall real-world performance through lighter weight, RWD, manual tranny, mechanical endourance, and disengageable ESP.

--

 WOW.......what are you talking about a Lada or something.......GTR Mate......holds it's value better then any Porker and for Gods sake it's Japanese.......will go for ever.

Mid 2010 for the first 485ps deliveries?

WTF?!

"Las unidades que se comenzaron a entregar en marzo de 2009 tenían 480 CV de potencia. Los pedidos realizados desde abril de 2009, son de 485 CV y se entregarán a los clientes a mediados de 2.010."

http://km77.com/00/nissan/gt-r/t01.asp