Crown

Quote:
SteveD said:

Quote:
AUM said:
We cannot rely on any one test to determine a cars true performance (even the most hallow Sport Auto Supertest). There are many reasons for lap times and other performance data to vary. In order to get a true indication of any car's performance we need many tests by many credible publications. When we have ten or more authorities all reporting similar results we start to have some certainty about a car's true performance.

Testing of the GTR is still not complete but the results of the tests so far indicate astonishing cornering speeds and grip levels with lap times ahead of the Turbo and close to the GT2 (despite being slower in a straight line). When we deny this growing and conclusive body of evidence we start to look like flat-earth-believers who cannot come to terms with a new reality.

A similar situation occurred with the release of the 997 Turbo. Most testers were disappointed with the car's tricky-at-the-limit handling. This provoked an avalanche of disbelief and outrage against the motoring press from Turbo lovers. Time has proven those reports to be quite accurate.

Perhaps it is time for a more open and mature approach to the GTR. I do not like its styling, image, weight, size - and there are reliability questions. All of this can be debated according to personal opinion and preferences. But from a performance perspective the body of evidence from more than a dozen independent tests is clear: The GTR has raised the bar considerably.

Very well said and I believe you sum up the situation perfectly.

The only change I would make to your statement is that whilst the GT-R has indeed raised the bar, this is not to say it is unbeatable or that somehow it defies any laws of physics.

Compared to its peers (i.e. those cars of a similar power/weight) it laps a circuit considerably quicker. This elevates it into the context of the class above (i.e. 911 GT2, Ferarri Scuderia) but doesn't make it a competitor, there are many more factors that determine the appeal of a supercar.

From my unbiaised perspective (and experience of all the cars in discussion) I see the GT-R's existence as being wholeheartedly positive, Nissan have provided an option to customers who would otherwise be unable to afford an uber-Porsche, and in doing so have pressured established supercars to raise their game in future.

Sounds like good news whichever side of the fence you sit on.

Quote:
AUM said:

Quote:
MKSGR said:

Quote:
AUM said:
A similar situation occurred with the release of the 997 Turbo. Most testers were disappointed with the car's tricky-at-the-limit handling. This provoked an avalanche of disbelief and outrage against the motoring press from Turbo lovers. Time has proven those reports to be quite accurate.

Can you still recall what Rennteam wrote about the 997TT? We were VERY critical towards this car. We were also sceptical when the Z06 hype peaked... Now we are sceptical regarding the GTR. I am sure we are right again

You seem to have missed the point which is that those that discount test evidence in favour of their assumptions cannot be taken seriously.

Quote:
reginos said:
IMO the debate regarding the GT-R vs Porsche and other fast cars has been exhausted.

Both sides repeat the same arguments over and over again.

I would suggest to fold the issue for the time being and resume when and if new relevant elements appear, both quantitative and qualitative.

Quote:
MKSGR said:

Quote:
SteveD said:

Quote:
AUM said:
We cannot rely on any one test to determine a cars true performance (even the most hallow Sport Auto Supertest). There are many reasons for lap times and other performance data to vary. In order to get a true indication of any car's performance we need many tests by many credible publications. When we have ten or more authorities all reporting similar results we start to have some certainty about a car's true performance.

Testing of the GTR is still not complete but the results of the tests so far indicate astonishing cornering speeds and grip levels with lap times ahead of the Turbo and close to the GT2 (despite being slower in a straight line). When we deny this growing and conclusive body of evidence we start to look like flat-earth-believers who cannot come to terms with a new reality.

A similar situation occurred with the release of the 997 Turbo. Most testers were disappointed with the car's tricky-at-the-limit handling. This provoked an avalanche of disbelief and outrage against the motoring press from Turbo lovers. Time has proven those reports to be quite accurate.

Perhaps it is time for a more open and mature approach to the GTR. I do not like its styling, image, weight, size - and there are reliability questions. All of this can be debated according to personal opinion and preferences. But from a performance perspective the body of evidence from more than a dozen independent tests is clear: The GTR has raised the bar considerably.

Very well said and I believe you sum up the situation perfectly.

The only change I would make to your statement is that whilst the GT-R has indeed raised the bar, this is not to say it is unbeatable or that somehow it defies any laws of physics.

Compared to its peers (i.e. those cars of a similar power/weight) it laps a circuit considerably quicker. This elevates it into the context of the class above (i.e. 911 GT2, Ferarri Scuderia) but doesn't make it a competitor, there are many more factors that determine the appeal of a supercar.

From my unbiaised perspective (and experience of all the cars in discussion) I see the GT-R's existence as being wholeheartedly positive, Nissan have provided an option to customers who would otherwise be unable to afford an uber-Porsche, and in doing so have pressured established supercars to raise their game in future.

Sounds like good news whichever side of the fence you sit on.

That is an excellent and well balanced summary

Quote:
Boxster Coupe GTS said:
NISSAN RELEASES SECOND GT-R VIDEO


A photo has also been released showing the stock tyres that were installed on the car, to dispel rumours the company was using special rubber.
Nissan_GT-R_Nurburgring_Link

Quote:
Boxster Coupe GTS said:

Watch the footage closely and you'll see that the clock starts just before the first left hander of the lap, and yet it stops just as the driver is coming out of the final right hander. In between the two there is a good 300 yards of straight, none of which is included in the lap time.

Unfortunately this means Nissan has got its sums wrong to the tune of at least six seconds, maybe more, and put the whole thing on film on the internet.

I received my 997 Turbo the day it was released in Germany. The release in Germany was, together with some other countries, the first one. The car arrived at my dealer around 10 days before the official release date. I also had the chance to drive a 997 Turbo mule a couple of weeks before the official release.

Why I'm saying this? Because some of you may remember what I said about the 997 Turbo suspension/4WD/PASM setup and the weird driving behaviour.

Many people criticized me for my claims because they didn't believe they're true. Some of them made fun of me because I ordered a 997 Turbo Tiptronic, btw. the only Tiptronic equipped 997 Turbo delivered to a customer before the summer vacation.

Over the past two years, Porsche has improved a couple of things regarding the suspension/4WD/PASM setup and the review of the semi-slicks equipped 997 Turbo clearly proved that.

The problem is: the 997 Turbo is fast on the Nordschleife, even with the "old" setup. What many people, including Horst v. Saurma, didn't realize by that time was the fact that Porsche has chosen a very strange setup for a 4WD car, they made a drift monster out of it. Some may like this but I don't and I still have my problems to understand what the heck drove Porsche to choose this setup. My guess is that especially PCNA asked for it because of the former criticism of the "old" 996 Turbo. Many customers apparently felt that the 996 Turbo is too neutral and shows too much understeer. Now Porsche made the mistake to provide the 997 Turbo not only with too much oversteer but some serious understeer too. This can't really work, so the setup is weird, the car switches from understeer to sudden heavy oversteer and back, depending how you drive it. This is in my opinion a pretty nasty setup, especially for beginners but also for pros. A pro would never expect such a setup from a 4WD car and this is where Horst  v. Saurma had his problems with the 997 Turbo. His review was absolutely correct, maybe somebody could re-post a translation. Unfortunately he didn't have the time(or didn't want to?) to adapt to this weird setup like for example Walter Röhrl did, who had no problem whatsover to do a time below 7:50 in the 997 Turbo on street tires. So no, the 997 Turbo isn't slow on the Nordschleife, it just needs some sort of adaptation to its driving behaviour and this also means that you need to spend at least a couple of hours with this car on the track to understand how the 4WD/PASM work on this car. I had serious problems with the 997 Turbo too at the beginning, especially my choice for Tiptronic gave me a lot of headache because so many Porsche employees told me to go for Tiptronic and at the beginning I wasn't too fond of it...until I learned how to "trick" the automatic sould inside the Tiptronic, something which worked of course only with PSM turned off and a somehow steady speed/acceleration.

The Nissan GT-R is certainly a fast car but I can't take claims seriously about the performance of a car which wasn't even officially on the market by that time. Furthermore, the tested car was an official test mule. Porsche 997 Turbo test mules were driving around with power levels ranging from 500 to 600 HP before the official launch, so who the hell knows how much power the Nissan GT-R had during the test?!

That said, I think we should wait until the SPORT AUTO Supertest shows up. My bet is 7:55 for the Nissan GT-R with street tires and maybe around 7:50 with semi-slicks.

Time will tell but since the GT-R weights much more than the 997 Turbo, I doubt that Nissan can do miracles.

As many of you are aware we took a customer owned Nissan GT-R over to the 'ring last week and compared it against Porsche's familiar 997 GT2 press car. 

Chris Harris who has raced throughout the season in the VLN set the lap times on Tuesday on a drying (but not fully dry track).  The GT-R was wearing the same Bridgestone's as used in Nissan's filmed lap and the 997 GT2 was fitted with Michelin Cup + tyres.  

You can probably guess that I'm not going to tell you the lap times until we publish the article, but it will perhaps settle this debate once and for all (famous last words...).  Chris followed the same procedure for both cars, namely 3 laps comprising an out-lap and two flying laps, so each had the same opportunity to shine. 

Chris' Column

Chris' initial thoughts are in his weekly column (above) and hopefully he's writing the article as we speak ready for publishing early next week. 

SteveD:

Chris' Column

Chris' initial thoughts are in his weekly column (above) and hopefully he's writing the article as we speak ready for publishing early next week. 

I'm very much looking forward to it, Steve  As you mentioned, Chris is a 'Ring regular, which means a lot when comparing the cars'  performance in the Green Hell

Seems that he was very much impressed with the 997 GT2  - especially compared to the 996 GT2

As a humble amateur doing some 200 laps or so per year with an underpowered BoxsterS my own observation is: the 997 GT2 in the right hands`(there are not many though )  is a true 'Ring monster

When these things fly by it's definitely another league compared to the GT3s. Something I never observed during "encounters" with the 996 GT2.

SteveD:

As many of you are aware we took a customer owned Nissan GT-R over to the 'ring last week and compared it against Porsche's familiar 997 GT2 press car. 

Chris Harris who has raced throughout the season in the VLN set the lap times on Tuesday on a drying (but not fully dry track).  The GT-R was wearing the same Bridgestone's as used in Nissan's filmed lap and the 997 GT2 was fitted with Michelin Cup + tyres.  

You can probably guess that I'm not going to tell you the lap times until we publish the article, but it will perhaps settle this debate once and for all (famous last words...).  Chris followed the same procedure for both cars, namely 3 laps comprising an out-lap and two flying laps, so each had the same opportunity to shine. 

Chris' Column

Chris' initial thoughts are in his weekly column (above) and hopefully he's writing the article as we speak ready for publishing early next week. 

--
____________________________________ Steve

If you finally confirmed that the GT2 destroys the GTR on the NBR you deserve a special "Rennteam Award" 

 I look forward to the day when all those gullible GTR fans will be confronted with some solid test results. Yours would be most interesting. The GTR Supertest will do the rest... The GTR fan club will then be silent forever and will regret having posted all these strange speculations for months and months... 

All tests prove the GTR laps faster than its real competitor the 99TT. And the fact that the GTR is even being compared to the GT2 is already an outstanding victory for the Nissan. 

Yes, the current GT-R is just the base model and is competing against the top of the range, most powerful 911 ever.

P.S.:  The GT-R is much faster with the Dunlops....

Greg81:
I believed it was common knowledge that timed laps follow this format? Im surprised Steve Sutcliffe has made that error

I've written many times not to take british car magazines very seriously.

Their tests and mostly their write-ups of driving impressions and comparisons (see CAR for example) are very superficial, subjective and should be taken lightly and as bedtime reading. The pictures are sometimes good though!

AUM:

All tests prove the GTR laps faster than its real competitor the 99TT. And the fact that the GTR is even being compared to the GT2 is already an outstanding victory for the Nissan. 

 

--

I agree, there is a certain truth to this 

My only point is: I don't like OEM's who deliberately cheat on their customers. Claimed lap times used to attract gullible buyers are inacceptable. Same as for MB's "faked" Nardo SL55 test car. At that time MB tried to cheat their customers as well. I really hate that kind of OEM strategies...  

gangajas:

Yes, the current GT-R is just the base model and is competing against the top of the range, most powerful 911 ever.

P.S.:  The GT-R is much faster with the Dunlops....

The real difference between the 2 cars is the selling price which in both cases has nothing to do with the real cost of producing either car.

The GT-R is heavily under-priced, as a marketing tool to lift the brand. Moreoever if a Nissan was sold at 200K Euro nobody want to hear about it. So, it is sold at a price people expect a very good Nissan to be offered for sale.

The GT2 is extremely overpriced (maybe 100%) because PAG can (or could) find enough willing buyers at this ridiculous price. IMO the GT2 might be cheaper than the GT-R to produce because it is based on the 997 model, whereas the GT-R is a standalone model.

Selling Price is irrelevant IMO because it is fictitous in both cases.

What counts is the ability of both manufacturers to design and produce such excellent cars. The GT-R is faster in the hands of "normal" drivers too because its advanced AWD flatters even the average person. The GT2 is more for "heroes" and very gifted drivers.

I expect that Porsche will sort out the FL Turbo next year so a very fast and at the same time safer car (than the GT2) will be available for "mere mortals" too.  

reginos:

Greg81:
I believed it was common knowledge that timed laps follow this format? Im surprised Steve Sutcliffe has made that error

I've written many times not to take british car magazines very seriously.

Their tests and mostly their write-ups of driving impressions and comparisons (see CAR for example) are very superficial, subjective and should be taken lightly and as bedtime reading. The pictures are sometimes good though!

I very much hope you don't believe that abour DR.  That's exactly one of the reasons why I chose to set DR up, I was tired of reading half-baked reviews and careless conclusions. 

If you realised the number of times some magazines give the nod to a particular car in a group test, just to ensure they get invited back for the next launch... A certain italian brand is well known for such subterfuge and some of the well known magazines play along only too willingly.

Ultimately what matters is not who gets the scoop, or first drive, but who conveys most honestly and clearly what a particular car is like to drive.  Wrap that up in a good story with entertaining driving and that best describes what DR tries to achieve.

As I say, we've driven both cars on equal terms, didn't practice for half a day before setting the times, nor did we invite the manufacturer along to optimise the car or fit it with their latest development parts. 

 We won't claim to have performed the 'definitive test', but it's an honest appraisal based on what you (the enthusiast) want to see.

SteveD:

reginos:

Greg81:
I believed it was common knowledge that timed laps follow this format? Im surprised Steve Sutcliffe has made that error

I've written many times not to take british car magazines very seriously.

Their tests and mostly their write-ups of driving impressions and comparisons (see CAR for example) are very superficial, subjective and should be taken lightly and as bedtime reading. The pictures are sometimes good though!

I very much hope you don't believe that abour DR.  That's exactly one of the reasons why I chose to set DR up, I was tired of reading half-baked reviews and careless conclusions. 

If you realised the number of times some magazines give the nod to a particular car in a group test, just to ensure they get invited back for the next launch... A certain italian brand is well known for such subterfuge and some of the well known magazines play along only too willingly.

Ultimately what matters is not who gets the scoop, or first drive, but who conveys most honestly and clearly what a particular car is like to drive.  Wrap that up in a good story with entertaining driving and that best describes what DR tries to achieve.

As I say, we've driven both cars on equal terms, didn't practice for half a day before setting the times, nor did we invite the manufacturer along to optimise the car or fit it with their latest development parts. 

 We won't claim to have performed the 'definitive test', but it's an honest appraisal based on what you (the enthusiast) want to see.

--
____________________________________ Steve

An unbiased approach to testing these cars is the most important aspect 

SteveD:

reginos:

Greg81:
I believed it was common knowledge that timed laps follow this format? Im surprised Steve Sutcliffe has made that error

I've written many times not to take british car magazines very seriously.

Their tests and mostly their write-ups of driving impressions and comparisons (see CAR for example) are very superficial, subjective and should be taken lightly and as bedtime reading. The pictures are sometimes good though!

I very much hope you don't believe that abour DR.  That's exactly one of the reasons why I chose to set DR up, I was tired of reading half-baked reviews and careless conclusions. 

If you realised the number of times some magazines give the nod to a particular car in a group test, just to ensure they get invited back for the next launch... A certain italian brand is well known for such subterfuge and some of the well known magazines play along only too willingly.

Ultimately what matters is not who gets the scoop, or first drive, but who conveys most honestly and clearly what a particular car is like to drive.  Wrap that up in a good story with entertaining driving and that best describes what DR tries to achieve.

As I say, we've driven both cars on equal terms, didn't practice for half a day before setting the times, nor did we invite the manufacturer along to optimise the car or fit it with their latest development parts. 

 We won't claim to have performed the 'definitive test', but it's an honest appraisal based on what you (the enthusiast) want to see.

--
____________________________________ Steve

DR is on a very good path for sure!

I have a lot of respect for Chris Harris and his collumn and videos were always brilliant exceptions in the mediocrity of Autocar magazine.

Eunice:
C'mon, everybody who loves cars is biased!

Are you sure 

 As far as I am concerned I think I am pretty unbiased when driving and evaluating cars. This is even true for those cars I already bought... Also, guys like RC are extremely unbiased (at least that is my personal opinion) 

 2009 Automobile of the Year: Nissan GT-R

The much anticipated Nissan GT-R is the first Japanese supercar to seriously threaten the reigning opposition, many of whom the GT-R bested on Germany's renowned Nurburgring. Editors noted that while the Nissan GT-R rides like a subway car, sounds like an appliance and weighs a ton, it still deserved to be named Automobile of the Year for delivering high-intensity fun and astonishing performance.

'For decades, previous versions of the GT-R were never exported to the United States. Now we know what we've been missing, and are we happy to be invited to the party,' said Jean Jennings, president and editor-in-chief of AUTOMOBILE Magazine. 'What we love about the GT-R is that it refuses to compromise. It is not comfortable, it is not trying to make friends and it is not trying to influence people. It exists for one reason only ' to go fast ' and it does.'

In awarding the GT-R its ultimate prize, AUTOMOBILE Magazine editors cited the car's 'neck-snapping acceleration,' 'super-accurate steering' and 'incredible value' by supercar standards.

http://www.thetorquereport.com/2008/11/automobile_magazine_names_the.html 

AUM:

 2009 Automobile of the Year: Nissan GT-R

......... the Nissan GT-R rides like a subway car, sounds like an appliance and weighs a ton, it still deserved to be named Automobile of the Year for delivering high-intensity fun and astonishing performance.

AUM:

 2009 Automobile of the Year: Nissan GT-R

The much anticipated Nissan GT-R is the first Japanese supercar to seriously threaten the reigning opposition, many of whom the GT-R bested on Germany's renowned Nurburgring. Editors noted that while the Nissan GT-R rides like a subway car, sounds like an appliance and weighs a ton, it still deserved to be named Automobile of the Year for delivering high-intensity fun and astonishing performance.

I think it also became Motor Trend's car of the year too.  I personally don't like the car just the looks of it, but performance wise it kicks ass.

It's a shame that when 996TT came out it became the car of the year for every magazine internationally and now the 997TT is considered just as another GT sports car like many others .  I hope Porsche is doing something spectacular for facelift one.