R&T: GT-R vs ZO6 vs 911
#166
03-20-2008, 10:54 AM
Great post! Thank you for showing others on here how to use their brains, seriously 
These are the same inconsistencies and questions that I had as well. These test results from R&T should be taken with a grain of salt! And again, exactly HOW did Millen get the first US GTR and who paid for the track event? No bias.... yeah right
These are the same inconsistencies and questions that I had as well. These test results from R&T should be taken with a grain of salt! And again, exactly HOW did Millen get the first US GTR and who paid for the track event? No bias.... yeah right
I disagree with the editor........especially with the extremely slow lap set by the ZO6 around Buttonwillow. I would say that a driver mod is in order. Hopefully not an ex Nissan factory driver and ex Nissan factory racer. As for the comment on nothing to be gained, again Steve Millen owns a company and guess what............they are currently holding their 12th Annual Nissan/Infinity Appreciation Day
NOTHING TO BE GAINED?
From: http://www.stillen.com/
IDENTICAL TIMES?
From Automotorsport around Mantorp Park's short (1.950 km/1.212 mile) configuration
and another
From:http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...p_2007_feature
Caranddriver The Lightning Lap at VIR, 2007
2007 Corvette ZO6 - 2:58.2
2007 Porsche 911 GT3 - 3:01.8
2007 Chevrolet Corvette - 3:03.6
2007 Porsche 911 Turbo - 3:05.8
NOTHING TO BE GAINED?
From: http://www.stillen.com/
IDENTICAL TIMES?
From Automotorsport around Mantorp Park's short (1.950 km/1.212 mile) configuration
and another
From:http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...p_2007_feature
Caranddriver The Lightning Lap at VIR, 2007
2007 Corvette ZO6 - 2:58.2
2007 Porsche 911 GT3 - 3:01.8
2007 Chevrolet Corvette - 3:03.6
2007 Porsche 911 Turbo - 3:05.8
#167
03-20-2008, 10:58 AM
Boy are you guillible, do you think the editor of a magazine would admit sandbagging? And destroy the reputation of their magazine FOREVER?
Man some of you guys would believe anything you read. I've dealt with the media a lot in my lifetime, and I can assure you what you read is FAR FAR from the truth in many cases, a bunch of guys who color stories and in many cases make them up to create a buzz and draw attention. So you'll have to excuse me for not being so ignorant as to beleive what mag writers have to say without backup and sound proof and details. And frankly we havent seen one test yet that has all of the above. Dripping with politics and propaganda.
Just another new car doesnt sell magazines, but one that can beat a Corvette and a Porsche (even when it cant) will sell all that's on the shelf, garaunteed.
#168
03-20-2008, 11:16 AM
Again, take things you read with a grain of salt, but know that there ARE inconsistencies! It's up to you to believe what you want.
#169
03-20-2008, 11:24 AM
Once again to HeavyChevy: you ignore that the MC12 is faster than the Enzo in some cases, despite being heavier and wider. You instantly fall back on horsepower and weight, caring little for how much speed the car carries in corners or the oodles of other factors that make a car go fast around a circuit. It's not 700 lbs heavier now is it. And faster in what cases? Dont just throw out random information without a source to back it up. Weight/hp has reigned supreme in racing forever now. There are several other factors, but ignoring a 700, 600 and 200 lb weight difference is foolish at best, you cant try to act like it doesnt matter but you'd only be making yourself look stupid.
We all agree that the GT-R is only a few MPH behind the 997TT or Z06 in the straights. On tracks, though, the corners are where you lose most of your speed (duh) and where a car really shines. Those who can keep most of their speed through the corners, maintain traction and exit the corner faster will win. Only a few? Do you realize how big of a difference 7mph is? May be negligible in the case of the 997 TT concerning the exit speeds, but sure isnt in regards to the Z06. And your example is track dependant, there are many that will take your theory and throw it in the garbage.
If you were at a circle track, the Z06 would beat these cars anyday. If you had lots of in and out, sharp, quick turns, the Porsche has many advantages. But on a normal track, where consistency and higher speeds through turns counts, the GT-R does stand a chance. Never said it didnt stand a chance, now did I? My only point is that there are NO accurate results from any of the tests we have seen, and all of them point to media exploitation of true performance measures. 5 seconds? On a 2 minute lap? Comon dude, if you have the knowledge to question my theories you should at least be able to see through that nonsense.
NO WAY NO HOW is the GT-R faster on a Course than a Z06 by 5 seconds being driven equally with equal drivers.
I guess the same day same driver routine isnt even safe these days with all of the b.s.
The point of the story is, you can have all the experience in the world, but if it makes you arrogant, and/or you do not learn from your experience, then the experience means nothing. Just because you do something a thousand times with the same result doesn't mean you did it right in the first place. In your case, you seem to have tons of experience, but its made you nothing short of arrogant, worse its blinded you to other factors that come into play. Experience-learning from it = absolutely nothing. Experience + learning from it = varying effects. Arrogance has nothing to do with it. Your experience told you that he had the wrong spark plugs by looking at it. And the wrong injectors am I not right. Therefore when you changed the criteria his prognosis went out the window.
That's exactly what I'm saying about these test. My experience tells me a 997 Turbo isnt going to be 5 mph slower in two corners than an M3 unless it's drifting like they showed in the video.
My experience tells me a pro driver should beat a mag editor driving the same car, not lose by 1 second. And that a Z06 that has been faster in EVERY (but one in germany) test, should not be slower than the 997 TT in a lap comparo.
Since all these things are coming to pass, it tells me the processes are flawed, and since there is no attempt to rectify them or ascertain them, I'm left to beleive there are other forces at work.
Look at the details, and explain them to me, then I'll shutup.
-Tell me how the 997 TT was slower in all these corners and that it wasnt drifting like they showed in the video.
-Tell me why the GT3 drifted to the point of smoking the tires
-Tell me why an ex factory driver cant beat a mag editor around the same track in the same car, and is in fact a second slower
-Tell me how the Z06 all of a sudden isnt faster than a 997 Turbo around a course.
-Tell me why someone would do a 1 lap test in freezing temps on tire they KNOW suck in the cold.
If you can come up with decent answers to all of these questions and show that there is no politics at work here, I will never post in a GT-R thread again.
Once again, lets leave the GT-R discussion for a moment, explain to me how the Maserati MC12, which is heavier and wider than the Enzo, can run faster than the Enzo? Under an expert drivers handling, which eliminates the possibility of drivers error? Its clearly done it before, which means there is far more at work than just horsepower and weight.
We all agree that the GT-R is only a few MPH behind the 997TT or Z06 in the straights. On tracks, though, the corners are where you lose most of your speed (duh) and where a car really shines. Those who can keep most of their speed through the corners, maintain traction and exit the corner faster will win. Only a few? Do you realize how big of a difference 7mph is? May be negligible in the case of the 997 TT concerning the exit speeds, but sure isnt in regards to the Z06. And your example is track dependant, there are many that will take your theory and throw it in the garbage.
If you were at a circle track, the Z06 would beat these cars anyday. If you had lots of in and out, sharp, quick turns, the Porsche has many advantages. But on a normal track, where consistency and higher speeds through turns counts, the GT-R does stand a chance. Never said it didnt stand a chance, now did I? My only point is that there are NO accurate results from any of the tests we have seen, and all of them point to media exploitation of true performance measures. 5 seconds? On a 2 minute lap? Comon dude, if you have the knowledge to question my theories you should at least be able to see through that nonsense.
NO WAY NO HOW is the GT-R faster on a Course than a Z06 by 5 seconds being driven equally with equal drivers.
I guess the same day same driver routine isnt even safe these days with all of the b.s.
The point of the story is, you can have all the experience in the world, but if it makes you arrogant, and/or you do not learn from your experience, then the experience means nothing. Just because you do something a thousand times with the same result doesn't mean you did it right in the first place. In your case, you seem to have tons of experience, but its made you nothing short of arrogant, worse its blinded you to other factors that come into play. Experience-learning from it = absolutely nothing. Experience + learning from it = varying effects. Arrogance has nothing to do with it. Your experience told you that he had the wrong spark plugs by looking at it. And the wrong injectors am I not right. Therefore when you changed the criteria his prognosis went out the window.
That's exactly what I'm saying about these test. My experience tells me a 997 Turbo isnt going to be 5 mph slower in two corners than an M3 unless it's drifting like they showed in the video.
My experience tells me a pro driver should beat a mag editor driving the same car, not lose by 1 second. And that a Z06 that has been faster in EVERY (but one in germany) test, should not be slower than the 997 TT in a lap comparo.
Since all these things are coming to pass, it tells me the processes are flawed, and since there is no attempt to rectify them or ascertain them, I'm left to beleive there are other forces at work.
Look at the details, and explain them to me, then I'll shutup.
-Tell me how the 997 TT was slower in all these corners and that it wasnt drifting like they showed in the video.
-Tell me why the GT3 drifted to the point of smoking the tires
-Tell me why an ex factory driver cant beat a mag editor around the same track in the same car, and is in fact a second slower
-Tell me how the Z06 all of a sudden isnt faster than a 997 Turbo around a course.
-Tell me why someone would do a 1 lap test in freezing temps on tire they KNOW suck in the cold.
If you can come up with decent answers to all of these questions and show that there is no politics at work here, I will never post in a GT-R thread again.
Once again, lets leave the GT-R discussion for a moment, explain to me how the Maserati MC12, which is heavier and wider than the Enzo, can run faster than the Enzo? Under an expert drivers handling, which eliminates the possibility of drivers error? Its clearly done it before, which means there is far more at work than just horsepower and weight.
Even so, small differences in weight are overcome by different things. But 200lbs, 300lbs and 700 lbs are not overcome so easily.
Not only that, being wider has nothing to do with anything other than turning radius in most cases, so what? The Enzo has an understeer characteristic at the limit, which may be the cause. But even still you are talking about fairly evenly matched cars in the weight/hp department, so trying to compare the Z06 and GT-R on the same basis is rediculous.
#170
03-20-2008, 11:32 AM
so what independent, unbiased person or outfit has to test these cars for us to believe the outcome?
WHO? Top Gear?
Let's name a journalist/person/race car driver now that we trust will give a fair comparison, so that when that comparison comes, we won't cry "rigged! rigged!"
WHO? Top Gear?
Let's name a journalist/person/race car driver now that we trust will give a fair comparison, so that when that comparison comes, we won't cry "rigged! rigged!"
#171
03-20-2008, 11:38 AM
There are NO un-biased sources of information. There are good articles and there are bad ones. All include bias just by the very nature of being human. Read it for what it is and make your own judgment call.
I can accept that the GTR is faster, but not through BS articles and marketing forces shoving it down our throats. And certainly, not by a recent magazine article which gets the US' FIRST GT-R driven by a NISSAN factory driver with his OWN NISSAN tuning company. I'll wait for my sport auto article and have them re-iterate how slow that car is around the ring, and how slow it is in a straight.
I can accept that the GTR is faster, but not through BS articles and marketing forces shoving it down our throats. And certainly, not by a recent magazine article which gets the US' FIRST GT-R driven by a NISSAN factory driver with his OWN NISSAN tuning company. I'll wait for my sport auto article and have them re-iterate how slow that car is around the ring, and how slow it is in a straight.
#172
03-20-2008, 11:40 AM
I think it will just take time. Nissan has shown that they can spread their media influence far and wide. But they cant have gotten to everybody, eventually someone will test the cars legitimately. But the ones who have managed to get the first tests are the ones who have managed to establish the best relationship with Nissan.
#173
03-20-2008, 12:24 PM
Firstly, I had maybe turned a wrench on a 350 V8 when I corrected that gentleman. I had a webpage open, thats all.
Second, we have had professional drivers in the GT-R now. And some of these mag editors have been driving since before you could afford a car, HC, I doubt that they are all the helpless dolts behind the wheel you make them out to be.
Whats more, no matter what evidence I bring out, you'd simply deny it. "Biased," you'd say, "inconsistent." The track conditions have been different in these tests, the cars different too. The US spec GT-R has been shown to be different than the UK and Japanese Spec GT-R, Heavy, but Stillen was driving the US spec GT-R. That would account for the car being slower, that or its highly possible a mag editor could be as good a driver as a former race driver. You yourself espouse that experience trumps all, and again, some of these guys happen to have it that their job is to be on the track. You and I, we just do it for fun.
And in your response you still ignore whats been seen again and again in these comparisons: the GT-R holds higher speeds in the turns and shifts much faster, little things that build up quickly. And I know you will just laugh at this and claim imminent knowledge and power over all once I say it, but the Porsche is a rear-engine, rwd car. You can't carry the speed through a corner in a car like that that a Front engine, RWD car can. Thats why the goddamn 320si is still winning races out in FIA even though FIA gave FWD cars 15 kilos of balast up from and took 15 kilos out of the 320si's rear.
But of course, that doesn't matter to you. No, no dynamics other than weight and horsepower matter to the great HeavyChevy. The 320si doesn't exist. And the Maserati hasn't been forced to carry weight penalties for its size before. Nope, FIA doesn't exist either. Shh.....
Yes the damn GT3 and TT were burning their tyres, but it was understeer, wasn't it? I have yet to meet anyone who will argue that the P-car won't understeer through a turn if you try and maintain higher speeds.
And just for the final time before I unsubscribe, the GT-R carries more in turns. In the straights this doesn't matter, in the corners it does. And what are these? Track comparisons. What are tracks? Full of corners. End of discussion. Go swap stories about your alien abductions and other paranoia now, also I hear your "all magazines are out to get me" rhetoric is getting popular in the "Truth in 9/11" crowd. They apparently have bingo on Wednesdays too.
Second, we have had professional drivers in the GT-R now. And some of these mag editors have been driving since before you could afford a car, HC, I doubt that they are all the helpless dolts behind the wheel you make them out to be.
Whats more, no matter what evidence I bring out, you'd simply deny it. "Biased," you'd say, "inconsistent." The track conditions have been different in these tests, the cars different too. The US spec GT-R has been shown to be different than the UK and Japanese Spec GT-R, Heavy, but Stillen was driving the US spec GT-R. That would account for the car being slower, that or its highly possible a mag editor could be as good a driver as a former race driver. You yourself espouse that experience trumps all, and again, some of these guys happen to have it that their job is to be on the track. You and I, we just do it for fun.
And in your response you still ignore whats been seen again and again in these comparisons: the GT-R holds higher speeds in the turns and shifts much faster, little things that build up quickly. And I know you will just laugh at this and claim imminent knowledge and power over all once I say it, but the Porsche is a rear-engine, rwd car. You can't carry the speed through a corner in a car like that that a Front engine, RWD car can. Thats why the goddamn 320si is still winning races out in FIA even though FIA gave FWD cars 15 kilos of balast up from and took 15 kilos out of the 320si's rear.
But of course, that doesn't matter to you. No, no dynamics other than weight and horsepower matter to the great HeavyChevy. The 320si doesn't exist. And the Maserati hasn't been forced to carry weight penalties for its size before. Nope, FIA doesn't exist either. Shh.....
Yes the damn GT3 and TT were burning their tyres, but it was understeer, wasn't it? I have yet to meet anyone who will argue that the P-car won't understeer through a turn if you try and maintain higher speeds.
And just for the final time before I unsubscribe, the GT-R carries more in turns. In the straights this doesn't matter, in the corners it does. And what are these? Track comparisons. What are tracks? Full of corners. End of discussion. Go swap stories about your alien abductions and other paranoia now, also I hear your "all magazines are out to get me" rhetoric is getting popular in the "Truth in 9/11" crowd. They apparently have bingo on Wednesdays too.
#174
03-20-2008, 12:28 PM
I think it will just take time. Nissan has shown that they can spread their media influence far and wide. But they cant have gotten to everybody, eventually someone will test the cars legitimately. But the ones who have managed to get the first tests are the ones who have managed to establish the best relationship with Nissan.
oh blah blah blah, excuse maker. youre the best, everyone is beneath you now you can go suck on a lemon.
no revview is good enough. and yes alot of these editors and car mags are baised. but the bais is towards the 911 turbo and for good reason.
but the fact remains there is no way the ending result can be fudged even alittle to push reviews in the porsches favor.
thats how many steps ahead the GT-R is. Stop crying the 998 911 turbo will be great and answer back to the GT-R. and this will go back and fouth. Nissan has knocked porsche off their rocker and its a good thing its happened b/c porsches has been baby feeding their customers with minors upgrades every couple years.
but porsche is now chasing nissan and their response is to due to having to answer back. not being revolutionary.
Nissan is now in the lead
and by the way. Heavy you give porsche owners a horrible name
Last edited by 240ka; 03-20-2008 at 12:32 PM.
#175
03-20-2008, 12:44 PM
I don't understand why people think that something is better because it costs more. I don't really feel there's much between the R35 and 997 in terms of build and interior quality. If we were talking about an R34, I'd agree but the new GTR interior is pretty nice. This coming from someone who's sat in both cars. I think Porsche has the opportunity to regain its number one spot if it gleans expertise from its new underling, Audi and developes a sound PDK system. Competition is good for the game but hanging on to shattered nostalgia serves no purpose.
Last edited by ISO9001; 03-20-2008 at 12:47 PM.
#176
03-20-2008, 01:43 PM
Backup and sound proof and details?
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...ct_OnTrack.pdf
http://www.m3post.com/goodiesforyou/car14a.jpg
If anything, it is you who doesn't have any backup and sound proof. Where is your data proving your theory? You haven't drove the GTR, you haven't tested the GTR at the track using GPS, etc.
And of course magazines have to sell their articles. That is how they make their living. But it doesn't mean that everything they write is false. Give me a break. If it was just one or two magazine saying GTR is faster, I could believe your point. But when every single magazine from east to west is saying the same thing, it is time to let go and accept the facts.
Last edited by Akira; 03-20-2008 at 02:36 PM.
#179
03-20-2008, 02:44 PM
Backup and sound proof and details?
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...ct_OnTrack.pdf
http://www.m3post.com/goodiesforyou/car14a.jpg
If anything, it is you who doesn't have any backup and sound proof. Where is your data proving your theory? You haven't drove the GTR, you haven't tested the GTR at the track using GPS, etc.
And of course magazines have to sell their articles. That is how they make their living. But it doesn't mean that everything they write is false. Give me a break. If it was just one or two magazine saying GTR is faster, I could believe your point. But when every single magazine from east to west is saying the same thing, it is time to let go and accept the facts.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...ct_OnTrack.pdf
http://www.m3post.com/goodiesforyou/car14a.jpg
If anything, it is you who doesn't have any backup and sound proof. Where is your data proving your theory? You haven't drove the GTR, you haven't tested the GTR at the track using GPS, etc.
And of course magazines have to sell their articles. That is how they make their living. But it doesn't mean that everything they write is false. Give me a break. If it was just one or two magazine saying GTR is faster, I could believe your point. But when every single magazine from east to west is saying the same thing, it is time to let go and accept the facts.
I dont have sound proof that the PRO driver was sandbagging when he's a second slower than a mag driver and there was no mentioned problem with the car?
You obviously cant think for yourself, so there is no point in continuing with you since all you can do is point to nonsense that's in question. How about something else that would show that a GT-R could beat a Z06 by 5 seconds on a 2 minute lap.
People like you are the reasons auto manufacturers are targeting the media so hard. If they get some good articles on release then they have you sold, because you'll believe anything you read, even if the details of the results are telling you otherwise.
I guess educated motoring enthusiasts are hard to come by these days.
#180
03-20-2008, 02:56 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bangladesh/Herndon VA & DC
Posts: 7,049
Rep Power: 320 
ME 2. plus i like Saabs so ugly cars are nothing new to me.