Crown

Toshio Suzuki (鈴木 利男, Suzuki Toshio^?, born March 10, 1955) is a former racing driver from Saitama Prefecture, Japan.

Suzuki is as old as Von Saurma.

Lets see, if 7 months age difference accounts for 12 seconds for some people, then a driver 21 years younger than these too should be able to lap the Nring in 1 second!

 Horst von Saurma-Jeltsch (born 28 August, 1954 in Stuttgart, Germany)

There are few professional racers who have continued to win or even to race of this age. Older drivers loose their competitive edge and have too much interest in self preservation

Obviously HvS is not the fastest  driver in the world and his times can be beaten by younger more committed drivers who are being paid to extract 100%.

Toshio Suzuki (鈴木 利男, Suzuki Toshio^?, born March 10, 1955) is a former racing driver from Saitama Prefecture, Japan.

 

Suzuki is as old as Von Saurma.

ouch

Walter Rohrl is a former racer/rallye driver. Nowadays he is a development driver, albeit still very fast. Why don't Porsche use their factory professional Ring specialists like the Manthey 24H winners or someone like Marc Basseng for example to set times?

Since the NBR time is given such importance Porsche should give the task to a younger man who is also an active racer. If such a person is asked to spend lots of time there, doing daily as many laps as possible, I am sure we'll see a supertime to silence the Nissan team.

Porsche has many test- and development drivers but they use röhrls reputation for promotion-purposes such as the introducment of a new model (update). But porsche never createt such a media-hype like nissan about lap-times.

tabletop:

Porsche has many test- and development drivers but they use röhrls reputation for promotion-purposes such as the introducment of a new model (update). But porsche never createt such a media-hype like nissan about lap-times.

Yes, but now that Porsche are caught in the middle of this media-hype (they themselves got involved by publically disputing Nissan's claimed laptime), they should use some other high profile people who are currently racing to set the fastest time possible.

After having read 5 pages of argument, the facts are simply as follows:

1) all times have to be taken at face value and with a grain of salt. The fact remains that nobody can say whether any of these cars have or haven't been modified. Lets not kid ourselves with argument over a few seconds here or there.... Who's to say that the GTR driven in this test wasn't modified just like Suzuki's may have been.... Similarly who's to say that Porsche don't do same. A mate of mine worked in development for a manufacturer locally and any cars they gave to media for testing were modified with different ECU cals and/ or engine blueprinting... Customers got the usual crap... These guys are charging the big bucks and favourable reviews are a must- expect even greater tricks from them all... By the way Turbos are so easy to modify, just a little more boost and you have an extra 50hp whilst nobody sees anything different under the bonnet... The GT3 probably would be harder to tweak if at all because it is NA and already highly tuned...

2) Nissan have used the NBR time as a marketing tool to increase interest. Porsche made the wrong choice in trying to disprove them and now have egg on their faces as an independent driver for SportAuto has run faster than them in a "presumably" standard car. As a fellow poster mentioned above, they should  fight fire with fire, put their best drivers in their GT# cars, close the track and give us their best time.... No use in telling us that Walter ran a 7.40 in traffic with the recent GT3 and would be good for a few less seconds as published in a recent article. If SportAuto also ran 7.40 ,I'm sure the GT3 would be good for a time in the mid 7.30's- Just do it right and give us the facts. Nissan are questioning their ability to match the GTR- book out the track, do tens of laps and give us your best.... Giving us indicative times just won't do if their competition are going for absolute times.

3) Frankly, the only way to get a difinitive answer on which car is fastest, you would need to close the track, have each manufacturer nominate their driver, have one of each vehicle delivered independantly (ie car magazine to purchase or supply from dealer) to ensure they are truely not modified and give each camp 10-20 laps to do their best (in a true example of what you and I as customers would receive)... Till they do something along these lines, this useless arguing will continue and nobody will be any closer to the truth!!! 

I just spent the last three days racing against a whole bunch of cars, including two 997 GT2 and three R35 GTR.  Let's just say that in the hands of semi-pro racers and variable conditions, the GTR is heaps quicker!

there's this old post from another forum, where among other things they were discussing fast drivers on the 'Ring.

this was posted by a well known poster, who is a 'Ring regular, and long-time customer of Olaf Manthey.  while he does not state so specifically, i'm inclined to believe that the information came from Manthey:

the emphases in the quotes are mine.

"I spoke with two fellows about this. If there are five people in the world who are in a position to have an authoritative opinion about this, they are two of them. Their names are well-known.

The question related speficially to the Nordschleife.
One said that - currently - Walter is as fast as the fastest guys, who would be Menzel, Alzen, Lieb and Dumas, maybe a couple of others.
The other said - currently - Walter is nearly as fast, maybe within a second or two, as those guys.
They agreed that Walter is not quite as fast as he was at his peak, although his superior circuit knowledge compensated for some of that diminution. They said that, as expected, the younger drivers would definitely be faster than Walter on a modern circuit, such as 'ring GP.

They reckon that Sabine is 8-10 sec a lap slower.
One would need to have experienced how genuinely fast such a 8-10-sec-slower-lap is to know that is it really bloody fast. Some very "keen British club racers" might think that they were quicker than whatever demo lap Sabine gave them, but it's doubtful that they would have been.
To give you an example, Richard Westbrook is as fast as anyone alive in a GT3 Cup car. Last year Westbrook did, IIRC, three VLN races. He started out not knowing the circuit, but what the pros do is to follow someone fast who does know the circuit, and in that way they're able to keep up with almost anyone as they learn it.
Again, IIRC, by the third race Westbrook's times were about 8-10 seconds off those of Menzel, who was in an identical car. My point is that if Sabine's times are the same as those of the world's best Cup driver, the difference being that she knows the circuit better than anyone does whilst he knows it moderately well, that is still damn fast. I couldn't prove it, but I doubt that there are half-a-dozen Britons who would be as quick.

Back to the main point: Walter Rohrl is still the man. Whatever NS time he sets in a Porsche will be as fast as it can go."

We are getting slowly nearer to the truth but more talk probably won't help that much. I would like to see the data from the the HvS 7.38 and the Suzuki 7.29 and 7.26 laps. This would indicate if the time differences were gained in acceleration or cornering and braking. If it is acceleration then boost is the likely reason for the faster times. If it is in the corners and braking then driving is the more likely cause, since the press monitored the 7.26 lap and confirmed the tires, brakes and suspension were stock.

--

 I love Porsches and GTRs, so hold no favour towards either marque. I have owned R32, R33 and R34 GTRs and have an R35 arriving next week. I have also owned 993RS, 996GT2 and 997GT2. I have also driven reasonably frequently on the 'ring (2-10 days per year) and have completed the 3 day  'ring training course Scuderia Hanseat a couple of times.

I would say that as far as the 7:38 GTR time, the facts are plain:

1. The GTR is a fast car and is faster at the ring, as tested by HvS, than the GT3 (Mk1 or 2) and the 997TT and not a huge distance away from their GT2 time.

2. Porsche should be hugely embarrassed that they could not get within 16 seconds of a magazine test.

3. There is still a big gap to the Suzuki time and whilst the dedicated testing at 100% in every possible weather/track permutation will undoubtedly gain some time, 12secs is a lot to gain.

4. HvS is very experienced in driving and testing Porsches, having done so for a great many years and with dozens of Supertests. He does not have the same experience in driving GTRs which have never done a Supertest before. It is therefore quite likely that he will be far more able to get close to any Porsche factory time (as he did in the CGT and GT2) than a GTR factory time.

Just my humble opinion and likely to get lost in the banter.

I do feel that at 7:38 though the time falls into the 'wow Nissan were actually right, their car is fast' rather than the 'yep, they are now proven cheats and liars' that they would got had the car posted a 7:50+ time as many would I am sure have hoped.

Guy

The truth is simple.

- GTR made it to 7.26. Its VERY, VERY fast and is a better track car than current 911's

- The tested GTR was bone STOCK

- The tested GTR was with some stock mods which can be orfered from factory - special suspension setup, tires ans rims.

- We have done more than 100 races between 911TT and GTR - GTR is much better in corners - as a train on rails, but 911 TT is faster after 200 km/h in accelerating because of weight, gearing, and restrcitive stock cats at GTR.

- GTR Stage 2 with ECU+Exhaust+Sport Cats is able to do 0-300 at 34 sec.

artur777:

 

- GTR [...] is a better track car than current 911's

Good one.

PinKchampagnE:

artur777:

 

- GTR [...] is a better track car than current 911's

Good one.

I think he meant that its a better track car IF you don't mind the car's AWD doing all the driving and shifting and having the ESP nanny necesarily on, AND you don't mind disposing of the car after the track event (blown tranny, worn tires and brakes, voided warranty, no resale value, etc),,, if you don't mind than the yes or course!

artur777:

 

- GTR [...] is a better track car than current 911's

That's quite a daring statement!

If I were you, I would have posted this at the end of your enumeration of points... to ensure that some people continue to read the rest 

the GT-R is not a reliable track-tool for everyday use at a race-track without modification. It's simply too heavy so the tyres & brakes well be gone quickly. (without speaking of the transmission issues).

@the guy who thinks adding specV-wheels to a standard-gt-r makes it 3 seconds quicker around the ring:

it seems that you have no idea what you're talking about.

artur777:

The truth is simple.

 

- GTR made it to 7.26. Its VERY, VERY fast and is a better track car than current 911's

 

- The tested GTR was bone STOCK

 

- The tested GTR was with some stock mods which can be orfered from factory - special suspension setup, tires ans rims.

 

- We have done more than 100 races between 911TT and GTR - GTR is much better in corners - as a train on rails, but 911 TT is faster after 200 km/h in accelerating because of weight, gearing, and restrcitive stock cats at GTR.

 

- GTR Stage 2 with ECU+Exhaust+Sport Cats is able to do 0-300 at 34 sec.

People, we have an ignorant dreamer!!!  Who has supplied all of these cars?- Nissan... Do they have a motive to modify the cars they hand over to influence results? Yes for the reasons stated through earlier discussion...

911rox:

People, we have an ignorant dreamer!!!  Who has supplied all of these cars?- Nissan... Do they have a motive to modify the cars they hand over to influence results? Yes for the reasons stated through earlier discussion...

 

What a ridiculous statement. Surely this could also apply to any car provided by the manufacturer, including Porsche.

Your views are clearly not objective, but have already made your decision based on some form of misguided loyalty. Very sad fanboy behaviour of the highest order I'm afraid.

artur777:

The truth is simple.

 

- GTR made it to 7.26. Its VERY, VERY fast and is a better track car than current 911's

 

- The tested GTR was bone STOCK

 

- The tested GTR was with some stock mods which can be orfered from factory - special suspension setup, tires ans rims.

 

- We have done more than 100 races between 911TT and GTR - GTR is much better in corners - as a train on rails, but 911 TT is faster after 200 km/h in accelerating because of weight, gearing, and restrcitive stock cats at GTR.

 

- GTR Stage 2 with ECU+Exhaust+Sport Cats is able to do 0-300 at 34 sec.

This post reads VERY FUNNY 

Guy:

911rox:

People, we have an ignorant dreamer!!!  Who has supplied all of these cars?- Nissan... Do they have a motive to modify the cars they hand over to influence results? Yes for the reasons stated through earlier discussion...

 

 

What a ridiculous statement. Surely this could also apply to any car provided by the manufacturer, including Porsche.

Your views are clearly not objective, but have already made your decision based on some form of misguided loyalty. Very sad fanboy behaviour of the highest order I'm afraid.

 

That does include Porsche! If only you'd taken the time to read my post near the top of this page... I drive a Nissan (not GTR).... I'm far from biased....
 

As for fanboy behaviour, why don't you have another read of Guys comments. How does he know the GTR was STOCK. Would he be Suzuki's race engineer???

^^^^^ Correction-  Arturs777's comments, not yours....

the thing is that porsche never created such a media-hype around the lap-times of it's cars. The performance of their cars speaks for themselves as being the most used and most reliable track -car all over the world.

so here comes Nissan and claimes that an overweight four-seater beats all the high-performance sport-cars like an enzo or zonda.

I mean - come on that would be the same as if porsche would claim the panamera is able to do the ring in 7:30. That porsche got involved by saying it couldn'T go faster that 7:54 was stupid - they should have waited until nissan demasked itself.

On the other hand nissan was cought cheating before with the r33 and porsche was always very conservative concerning lap-times or the horsepower of their cars.

NIssan hasn't proved anything until now. They provided a video and invited journalistst afterwards to get a skin-deep look at the car - big deal, that proves nothing!

Suzuki should be invited by a car-magazine or top-gear (i know the show is not very belivable) and drive a stock gt-r around the ring and then lets see if he comes close to 7:30.

Someone could remember that "R33 cheat"?

To be clear - I love 911 more than GTR but we have to be objective that GTR is very fast in corners - faster than any 911's

artur777:

To be clear - I love 911 more than GTR but we have to be objective that GTR is very fast in corners - faster than any 911's

Yes, a combination of  Horsepower, an advanced/efficient All Wheel Drive system and a very good DCT.

Porsche hasn't managed to combine all 3 components above in one car yet. The likely candidate to better the GT-R formula must be the new 997.2 Turbo. We shall see if Porsche has the last word!

--
It's not where you're going, it's how you get there that counts

 What I find funny about the arguments involving these cars is I don't believe the performance of the GTR will change the decision to buy either car. The GTR can stomp all over the Porsche in performance but I suspect most would still buy the Porsche.

I doubt the GTR Ring time will change many minds.

nberry:

 What I find funny about the arguments involving these cars is I don't believe the performance of the GTR will change the decision to buy either car. The GTR can stomp all over the Porsche in performance but I suspect most would still buy the Porsche.

I doubt the GTR Ring time will change many minds.

Nick,

What annoyed many people is the dishonesty and the sheep who joined the discussion on every internet board imaginable defending the dishonesty.  Look at how many newbies joined sites just to discuss this one car.  Look at the amount of newbies in this tread alone.

What many people said, unbiased, was numbers don’t make sense, GT-R is probably very quick, but not as quick as claimed, wait for the Supertest.  Supertest is upon us and low and behold, quick, but not as quick as claimed.

What is also apparent is that the GT-R is showing to be a single purpose vehicle, quick for a short period of time.  Not an all rounder, this makes sense as they had to cut corners in reliability and the high cost of consumables.  These are other reasons, as well as badge, not to buy the GT-R.

.

thuggy:

Nick,

What annoyed many people is the dishonesty and the sheep who joined the discussion on every internet board imaginable defending the dishonesty.  Look at how many newbies joined sites just to discuss this one car.  Look at the amount of newbies in this tread alone.

What many people said, unbiased, was numbers don’t make sense, GT-R is probably very quick, but not as quick as claimed, wait for the Supertest.  Supertest is upon us and low and behold, quick, but not as quick as claimed.

What is also apparent is that the GT-R is showing to be a single purpose vehicle, quick for a short period of time.  Not an all rounder, this makes sense as they had to cut corners in reliability and the high cost of consumables.  These are other reasons, as well as badge, not to buy the GT-R.

.

Good summary! 

fritz

 BTW, new AutoBild states that Walter Röhrl does the NBR-NS in about 7.45 in a 997TT. That would be about 7s faster than HvS did last year. Of course we don't know whether 1,2 or 3s of the gap might be due to a slightly faster track. Anyhow, the gap highlights what kind of lap time difference between a pro-pro and HvS might be expected.

The last post says that Suzuki could also be faster than HvS for about 5-10 secs on a lap