No...the Ring times say he's right. If you want to compare same drivers, same magazine, then you're looking at 7:50 for the GT-R, and 7:49 for the Z06 from Sport Auto's test driver Horst von Saurma.

 

You havent been keeping up much have you. The Z06 ran from a standing start. In only a couple of days of testing. It's surely still faster. Nissan took the easiest way to get the fastest recorded lap, there is still no proof that other manufacturers test the same way, so the only people Nissan beat are sport auto and themselves. And Sport Auto was faster in the Z06 than the GT-R BTW, and that was on a warm up lap.

 

So do you think EVERY test so far has been staged?

 

The ring time is BS, that GTR tested was tuned with race suspension, racing tires, and likely over 600hp. Look at this comparison, the GTR barely beat a 997TT, which is a fairly slow track car. It wouldn't even be able to beat a GT3 on that track, which is much faster than TT. Nissan did the same thing with the old Skyline and got caught red handed... the cars they test are not the same spec as cars they sell to customers.

If you seriously believe that a 475hp weighing 3,800lbs can lap the ring in 7:35 then you're either in denial or insane. If that car can do 7:35 in the ring, than why the heck did it barely beat a 997TT on this track. Please enlighten me.. because 1 second difference on a 2 mile track is nothing and could easily go either way depending on the driver.

GTR: 475hp, 3800lbs
Z06: 505hp, 3100lbs

You don't need to be a genius to figure out which car is faster, its basic physics.. which is something you have a hard time understanding apparently

 

Maybe I should cancel on the TT and go for one of the alternatives.
Has the TT lost it's magic?

 

There was something wrong with that car, they even stated so. And if you go by those results a TT is a drivers race with a GT500 (they ran the same time)

So it's not a good test to go by.

 

In what tests have the two been compared head to head.

Best Motoring - their races are ALWAYS staged, there is no way a GT-R or Superleggerra would be running 3 and 4 seconds a lap faster than a TT and GT-R on a barely 1 minute track. On top of that these are all PRO drivers, there is no excuse for that when a pro driver ran 2 seconds faster in the same TT with shot tires a couple weeks prior.

Staged?- Yes

Car Magazine- As noted above, there is no way the TT would be that much slower in two corners than ALL of the other cars, one of which an M3, NO WAY POSSIBLE. Then it has the fastest top speed BY FAR. And is fastest in the last corner all of a sudden when it wasnt even close the first two??????? If you watch the video the guy was drifting the whole time he drove the Turbo, he wasnt trying at all to really drive it. It doesnt seem to complicated what their motive is. And if you look at some of the pre release press they were calling the Gt-R a better car before any of them drove it, so they already had a favorite.

Staged?- Yes.


Now lets move to Autocar who test the GT-R against the GT3. They test for one lap on a freezing cold morning. This is unheard of and purely stupid, they've never done such a test before but knew a good way to handicap the GT3. On cold Sport Cups the GT3 understeers badly and loses by .3. So they can make the GT-R out to be faster on a Road Course than a GT3 and that is pure nonsense.


Staged?- I definitely beleive so.


Finally the Nurburgring. I dont beleive this was staged, I think Nissan just has a better testing procedure. Walter Rohrl has to run in traffic with other manufacturers while Nissan rented out the whole track. Walter passed 11 cars on the GT2's flying lap and 5 on the GT3's. If he tested without the trafiic I'm sure he'd be much faster. There is too much speculation about who times what part of the track and how to make a real comparison.

Staged?- who knows.



As far as everything else the GT-R ran an 11.6 @ 121 for an edmunds test in Tokyo. It was cold and at sea level. Edmunds ran 11.6 @ 118 in 1120 ft elevation in Nevada which is sure to sap lots of trap speed. The GT-R had enough traction to run 3.3 0-60 so traction wasnt an issue. But the fact remains that the TT is just as fast or faster in this area, but everyone is making it out to be otherwise. Several mags have said the TT feels faster in a straight line, but that part gets left out and the GT-R is considered faster in every way. But it will come to light soon enough.

 

Well, I guess we will have to wait for Sport Auto's next Supertest to see if the four second difference they are running on the North Loop holds true.

 

1) Will the production car be identical to the one on these tests?
2)Is there a journalistic bias unseen with independent testing?

BTW --I like the Nissan but in all fairness proof does just come in the form of a profit driven article or with cars which may or may not be produced .

This is what Nissan's cheif engineer expressed in Autoweek,
This article was written in April before the legendary lap time in September .
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../71017001/1065


It Quotes the cheif engineer at Nissan below
From link--
Earlier, Mizuno-san had offered some lap times from the Nordschliefe for various cars driven by the German magazine SportAuto. Those times are driver-dependent, track-knowledge-dependent, weather-, traffic- and bunny-crossing-the-track dependent. But Mizuno suggested the GT-R could get anywhere from 7:44 on up, with most laps coming in between 7:55 and 7:58. So he suggested the GT-R’s strong suit was that it offered “the best cost per lap time.” For whatever that’s worth."

 

Well, whether this test was biases, staged, etc is debatable. But the fact is that at this test, at this condition, at this magazine, GTR was faster than 911 Turbo...


Now heavychevy has some valid points, but until his theory can be proven with a actual printed numbers (With magazine tests or at the track), it is only a point of view at this point.

Like heavychevy said, we will find soon enough. But my personal view is that GTR is faster than Turbo... by just a little bit.

 

The post reveals doubt and contradiction. You can believe as Thor creates thunder, Poseidon causes tsunamis and that GtR is faster if you wish but I would rather look for an actual answer than a manufactured one .

Your conclusion is drawn on an invalid argument as the "evidence" supporting it is filled with doubt. A GTR or a 997 Turbo --neither are faster with "printed numbers" as the faster car is the one which crosses the finish line first regardless of what might be printed .

I am not claimg that the Porsche is faster .
I am not claiming that the Nissan is faster .
I can thus be 100 percent correct .

 

I think you are looking into it too much. I don't proof read my thread, I just type it as I go. So if there are inconsistency, my bad.

But look at my last sentence, I said "But my personal view is that GTR is faster than Turbo... by just a little bit."

All I am saying is that until a test or review that comes out saying 911 Turbo is faster than GTR, I will think otherwise. I just follow the numbers... and so far all the numbers are telling me that GTR is faster.

 

If you would rather look at "actual answers," here you go.

https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...&postcount=244

Now question is, can you provide any printed reference supporting your claim? (Other then your own quote or quotes on the message forums.)

 

I am not making a claim other than to say that neither can you . That is until all jourmalistic bias is omitted from BOTH cars and you are standing there at the track with production cars facing independent testing .

The Nissan may win.
The Porsche may win.

What is so awful about saying "I can't know" at this time ?

 

This was my reply:

I'm very sorry, but as much as I love the article and it's great and all...it's a little bogus to me. I highly doubt the GTR would beat the Turbo...and yes, I know it did on the ring...that's not my point. My point is that, if any of you saw the video for part of this review, you would see that this idiot test driver, I don't care how good he is, CANNOT drive a porsche correctly. Is this saying I can? No. It's saying that seeing him over-steer when he's trying for a fast lap is idiotic. The Turbo has such immense traction, and if you don't know how to trail-brake, ESPECIALLY with a Porsche, which he obviously didn't, you end up with slow times. If he actually drove the Porsche well, then I'm pretty sure it would have a much better time, if not beat the GTR by a very small margin of <1 sec.

Sorry for the rant guys, I just don't like comparisons based on lack of PORSCHE (not general) driving skills.