R&T: GT-R vs ZO6 vs 911
#181
03-20-2008, 03:00 PM
This is the same argument in every thread.
People try to talk about each car and its respective merits and HC comes in guns blazing that every single magazine has been given the ol' reach around by Nissan and it's a world wide conspiracy against the 997. God forbid someone out do a car that they were actually aiming for. NO ONE IS A GOOD DRIVER, NO ONE CAN HANDLE THE ALMIGHTY 997 correctly (Hmmm, maybe a car shouldn't be impossible for joe-sick-pack to drive, sorry we aren't all FIA certified drivers that you apparently need to be to control a 997 correctly, that or the almighty heavychevy himself.)
This constant bickering between you, heavychevy, is childish and a constant reminder of how insecure you are. I have honestly seen more eloquence out of some preteens when, quote unquote, discussing cars. You simply throw up a little cackling smiley and hide behind your undeniable smugness...get the hell up off your horse.
This is same damn story in every thread. It is amazing to me the extent to which you will ***** and moan about every test until one comes out a shows the 997 faster, seems like that is the only thing you are looking for. Even your fellow P-car brethren are tired of your self acknowledging rhetoric and tired use of opinion versus true information.
We get it, you think the 997 isn't as slow, I would be suspect of it being 5 seconds slower, but I also have an ego I can see past and maybe there is something to every driver in the world being able to lap a GTR quicker, but no, probably not, it's all a game to **** you off.
Frankly I find it entertaining that you get so pissed off about something so obviously irrelevant to a driver like you. I would love to have a face to face conversation with you and see how much of what you say online would come out. I am hardly going to throw out threats on the interweb, as it is ever so serious, but I'd be willing to bet my bottom dollar that if this wasn't online you'd have quite a different approach, but please, let your e-***** grow some more.
Aside from the entertainment value of you, I must say that even when I joined and you were flinging the same **** you are now and serves to ruin every goddamn thread with your tired and recycled bull****...grow up, no one honestly holds you in the esteem you clearly hold yourself.
Over and out.
EDIT: oh and before you go flexing your E-Seniority on this board over me, let me just go ahead and tell you that of the things in the world that I would give a **** coming out of your mouth, this wouldn't be one of them. Address my post, not my post count.
People try to talk about each car and its respective merits and HC comes in guns blazing that every single magazine has been given the ol' reach around by Nissan and it's a world wide conspiracy against the 997. God forbid someone out do a car that they were actually aiming for. NO ONE IS A GOOD DRIVER, NO ONE CAN HANDLE THE ALMIGHTY 997 correctly (Hmmm, maybe a car shouldn't be impossible for joe-sick-pack to drive, sorry we aren't all FIA certified drivers that you apparently need to be to control a 997 correctly, that or the almighty heavychevy himself.)
This constant bickering between you, heavychevy, is childish and a constant reminder of how insecure you are. I have honestly seen more eloquence out of some preteens when, quote unquote, discussing cars. You simply throw up a little cackling smiley and hide behind your undeniable smugness...get the hell up off your horse.
This is same damn story in every thread. It is amazing to me the extent to which you will ***** and moan about every test until one comes out a shows the 997 faster, seems like that is the only thing you are looking for. Even your fellow P-car brethren are tired of your self acknowledging rhetoric and tired use of opinion versus true information.
We get it, you think the 997 isn't as slow, I would be suspect of it being 5 seconds slower, but I also have an ego I can see past and maybe there is something to every driver in the world being able to lap a GTR quicker, but no, probably not, it's all a game to **** you off.
Frankly I find it entertaining that you get so pissed off about something so obviously irrelevant to a driver like you. I would love to have a face to face conversation with you and see how much of what you say online would come out. I am hardly going to throw out threats on the interweb, as it is ever so serious, but I'd be willing to bet my bottom dollar that if this wasn't online you'd have quite a different approach, but please, let your e-***** grow some more.
Aside from the entertainment value of you, I must say that even when I joined and you were flinging the same **** you are now and serves to ruin every goddamn thread with your tired and recycled bull****...grow up, no one honestly holds you in the esteem you clearly hold yourself.
Over and out.
EDIT: oh and before you go flexing your E-Seniority on this board over me, let me just go ahead and tell you that of the things in the world that I would give a **** coming out of your mouth, this wouldn't be one of them. Address my post, not my post count.
Last edited by stradaONE8; 03-20-2008 at 03:08 PM.
#182
03-20-2008, 03:10 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. So what, there are people who have been driving for years at track events and never gotten past the novice run groups. And some, actually MANY of the best drivers in the world are some of the youngest. Because you write for a living and get to drive a car around a track for your job doesnt even mean you been to a course on driving, had professional instruction or have the ***** to even push a car to it's limits. How long you've been driving means absolutely nothing.
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.
There is NOTHING different about the U.S. Spec GT-R only that it was tested at Altitude in warmer weather. Other than that the U.S. Spec GT-R is supposed to handle better due to complexities in the balance with the LHD.
You havent brought out any evidence, is what I'm trying to tell you. The same car ran a 0-60 time of 3.4 which other than Edmunds test at sea level in cool weather is the fastest yet. There is nothing else different about the car.
If someone's job for many years was racing cars, it has always been the case that they are better than mag writers who occasionally drive cars. How often does C&D do track tests a year? Not enough to make an editor a top level driver, that's for sure. How many times have they been on track with other cars, if you havent been on a track with other cars, or had instruction, you could never get any better and not know what you're doing.
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.Of course it carries more speed when:
- The 997 Turbo is drifting (Car magazine)
- The 997 Turbo and GT3 are running less than a second faster than an M3 (Best Motoring)
-The 997 GT3 is drifting ( Evo)
- There is only one lap and the GT3 pushes because the tires are freezing (Autocar)
- The Z06 is being sandbagged. There is NO excuse whatsoever for a pro driver going 1 second slower than a mag writer. And not only that but the Pro guy has better steering and handling with the upgraded improvements on the Z06 that has been tested to be faster by OTHER PRO drivers.
The 997 Turbo is actually a front engine AWD car, not RWD. I dont know about the 335 in FIA, but I do know that cornering faster because it's front engine is not the reason.
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.....
Your little vague tidbits of info are completely useless as no one knows the background of the series and WHY it's winning, you just use a car and it's success, no matter what reason it's winning to support your theory when in fact you have done no such thing.
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.
Burning the tires and understeer are two different things, but with all of your "track knowledge" I would think you know the difference. And yes most any car at the limit will understeer, they are made to do so from the factory. You hadnt heard of understeer in the GT-R until fifth gear said it and showed it with heavy understeer.
My point was simply that the freezing tires made the understeer 10 times worse, and that I have experienced for myself.
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. So what, there are people who have been driving for years at track events and never gotten past the novice run groups. And some, actually MANY of the best drivers in the world are some of the youngest. Because you write for a living and get to drive a car around a track for your job doesnt even mean you been to a course on driving, had professional instruction or have the ***** to even push a car to it's limits. How long you've been driving means absolutely nothing.
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.
There is NOTHING different about the U.S. Spec GT-R only that it was tested at Altitude in warmer weather. Other than that the U.S. Spec GT-R is supposed to handle better due to complexities in the balance with the LHD.
You havent brought out any evidence, is what I'm trying to tell you. The same car ran a 0-60 time of 3.4 which other than Edmunds test at sea level in cool weather is the fastest yet. There is nothing else different about the car.
If someone's job for many years was racing cars, it has always been the case that they are better than mag writers who occasionally drive cars. How often does C&D do track tests a year? Not enough to make an editor a top level driver, that's for sure. How many times have they been on track with other cars, if you havent been on a track with other cars, or had instruction, you could never get any better and not know what you're doing.
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.Of course it carries more speed when:
- The 997 Turbo is drifting (Car magazine)
- The 997 Turbo and GT3 are running less than a second faster than an M3 (Best Motoring)
-The 997 GT3 is drifting ( Evo)
- There is only one lap and the GT3 pushes because the tires are freezing (Autocar)
- The Z06 is being sandbagged. There is NO excuse whatsoever for a pro driver going 1 second slower than a mag writer. And not only that but the Pro guy has better steering and handling with the upgraded improvements on the Z06 that has been tested to be faster by OTHER PRO drivers.
The 997 Turbo is actually a front engine AWD car, not RWD. I dont know about the 335 in FIA, but I do know that cornering faster because it's front engine is not the reason.
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.....
Your little vague tidbits of info are completely useless as no one knows the background of the series and WHY it's winning, you just use a car and it's success, no matter what reason it's winning to support your theory when in fact you have done no such thing.
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.
Burning the tires and understeer are two different things, but with all of your "track knowledge" I would think you know the difference. And yes most any car at the limit will understeer, they are made to do so from the factory. You hadnt heard of understeer in the GT-R until fifth gear said it and showed it with heavy understeer.
My point was simply that the freezing tires made the understeer 10 times worse, and that I have experienced for myself.
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.
And what happened with the MC12 vs Enzo? So much for the heavier car winnnig huh?
And for what it's worth the GT3 carries more speed in the corners, and did so on cold sport cups. You do the math, if two cars run .3 apart and the one (GT-R) is much faster in a straight line, which one (GT3) cornered better?
If you take two cars running similar times and one is much faster in a striaght line than the other, the slower car has to handle better to make up for the lost time on the striaghts. Auto shows this without telling it. If the GT3 was equal in corners, faster out of corners and faster on the straights, the GT3 would have been miles behind,not .3, and this was on freezing r comps which area liability at that temp.
See, just the kind of stuff I'm talking about, not able to develope your own opinion from the information given.
But the time will come when you fanboys have to put up or shutup an the mag times wont help you. And for that there are GT3's and Z06's chomping at the bit to show you tail lights. I cant wait to see it.
#183
03-20-2008, 03:25 PM
If you are faster coming out of corner at 3 mph, by the end of straight the difference will be more like +6 mph depending on the length of the track.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...ct_OnTrack.pdf
break point speed at first turn:
Z06: 126.8 mph
GT-R: 125.4 mph
911 Turbo: 123.0 mph
avg second turn speed:
GT-R: 62.7 mph
911 Turbo: 59.6 mph
Z06: 58.5 mph
avg third turn speed:
GT-R: 94.6 mph
Z06: 91.2 mph
911 Turbo: 90.3 mph
avg fourth turn speed:
GT-R: 101.2 mph
Z06: 96.2 mph
911 Turbo: 93.2 mph
break point speed at fifth turn:
GT-R: 127.6 mph
911 Turbo: 121.9 mph
Z06: 120.9 mph
Notice how the speed difference between GTR and ZO6 increase towards the end? Those small difference in turn speed adds up. That is how GTR was able to beat ZO6.
Last edited by Akira; 03-20-2008 at 03:40 PM.
#184
03-20-2008, 03:35 PM
With a sandbagging pro driver yeah 3 mph is realistic, yeah.
Strada, shutup. This is a discussion forum is it not? And what happens on a discussion forum, DISCUSSION.
All I'm doing is discussing the details, if you dont like it, go view another thread.
Unless of course you have a sound rebuttal for my sound rebuttals to these tests.
Which you dont.
So again, take your 17 posts and shutup, at least in reference to me. When I break forum rules, then they can ban me, until then, I'll argue all I want, so back to fanboyism with you.
EDIT: Woah there strada, I cut your post short because I didnt see anything worth reading, but upon further investigation, you can meet me at the track whenever you're ready, and I'll talk the same way I'm talking now if the situation calls for it.
You dont know me, so dont try your luck. If you are going to make e threats be a man about it. No beating around the bush.
Strada, shutup. This is a discussion forum is it not? And what happens on a discussion forum, DISCUSSION.
All I'm doing is discussing the details, if you dont like it, go view another thread.
Unless of course you have a sound rebuttal for my sound rebuttals to these tests.
Which you dont.
So again, take your 17 posts and shutup, at least in reference to me. When I break forum rules, then they can ban me, until then, I'll argue all I want, so back to fanboyism with you.
EDIT: Woah there strada, I cut your post short because I didnt see anything worth reading, but upon further investigation, you can meet me at the track whenever you're ready, and I'll talk the same way I'm talking now if the situation calls for it.
You dont know me, so dont try your luck. If you are going to make e threats be a man about it. No beating around the bush.
Last edited by heavychevy; 03-20-2008 at 03:42 PM.
#185
03-20-2008, 03:43 PM
And while we are on the subject of insecurity, who's the one trying to talk trash because of a disagreement about cars?
You just threw a punch and hit yourself in the face with that same punch, all in one post.
You just threw a punch and hit yourself in the face with that same punch, all in one post.
#186
03-20-2008, 04:02 PM
Only because this is really entertaining, why not try something like this (pure fantasy
Get those same 3 cars on a good fast and/or complex track.
Get them all the same compound tires, if possible, same size (aspect, diameter, etc.)
Equip them with F1 type telemetry systems to watch ever second of the car for everything from driver reactions time, slip angles, fuel consumption, throttle reaction times, the whole nine-yards of information.
Conduct on the same day, ideal weather (whaterver that is to you.)
Now here's the sticky bit. Do we choose a driver that races for maybe F1 cars for a living (a Ferrari driver for example.) If this driver only drives Ferrari's all his life, then we can at least agree on unbias. (good luck finding that ladd.)
OR,
How about each car with a specific driver that's good in the car they're familiar with? I put this out because clearly, the variable after this is driver. The problem is, getting comfortable in all 3 cars for one driver may affect the results. In my mind, having the best Vette Driver pitted against the best Nissan Driver v.s. the best Porche Driver would ensure EVERY car is pushed to their limits with clear knowledge of how to extract the most from the car. Biased? Damn straight it'll be but in a balanced way. It's the true test of "put up or shut up". I mean how many or you guy's will own all 3 cars and test all 3 and say you're not really biased. You may subconciously be simply because you're more "comfortable" in a specific car, are feel more "connected to the road" or another is simply more "predictable".
Given my scenario, all those little nuances that add up to 1/10 sec. per lap in any of the cars, will tighten up when you get your best Vette driver that says all those things he feels in a Z06 are perfect; same for the driver of the Nissan or the Porsche.
The end result is what I think everyone want's to know: which car will beat the other. Cmon', you know that's what this is all about.
But from my perspective, regardless of who wins, would it still change your minds? Sure "Toyota" under Penske finally won a NASCAR race in 1st and 2nd place but I'm not going to go out and buy a Camry! The forum is full of all types here. I give respect to Nissan for achieving this point in their technical prowness. But as said before, give in a year or two, and another top dog will come out again. For you Porsche and Vette fans, you guy's have always had that target on your backs... you should be ready for anything. True character is how you respond.
Fun thread this is turning out to be.
Get those same 3 cars on a good fast and/or complex track.
Get them all the same compound tires, if possible, same size (aspect, diameter, etc.)
Equip them with F1 type telemetry systems to watch ever second of the car for everything from driver reactions time, slip angles, fuel consumption, throttle reaction times, the whole nine-yards of information.
Conduct on the same day, ideal weather (whaterver that is to you.)
Now here's the sticky bit. Do we choose a driver that races for maybe F1 cars for a living (a Ferrari driver for example.) If this driver only drives Ferrari's all his life, then we can at least agree on unbias. (good luck finding that ladd.)
OR,
How about each car with a specific driver that's good in the car they're familiar with? I put this out because clearly, the variable after this is driver. The problem is, getting comfortable in all 3 cars for one driver may affect the results. In my mind, having the best Vette Driver pitted against the best Nissan Driver v.s. the best Porche Driver would ensure EVERY car is pushed to their limits with clear knowledge of how to extract the most from the car. Biased? Damn straight it'll be but in a balanced way. It's the true test of "put up or shut up". I mean how many or you guy's will own all 3 cars and test all 3 and say you're not really biased. You may subconciously be simply because you're more "comfortable" in a specific car, are feel more "connected to the road" or another is simply more "predictable".
Given my scenario, all those little nuances that add up to 1/10 sec. per lap in any of the cars, will tighten up when you get your best Vette driver that says all those things he feels in a Z06 are perfect; same for the driver of the Nissan or the Porsche.
The end result is what I think everyone want's to know: which car will beat the other. Cmon', you know that's what this is all about.
But from my perspective, regardless of who wins, would it still change your minds? Sure "Toyota" under Penske finally won a NASCAR race in 1st and 2nd place but I'm not going to go out and buy a Camry! The forum is full of all types here. I give respect to Nissan for achieving this point in their technical prowness. But as said before, give in a year or two, and another top dog will come out again. For you Porsche and Vette fans, you guy's have always had that target on your backs... you should be ready for anything. True character is how you respond.
Fun thread this is turning out to be.
#187
03-20-2008, 04:14 PM
I think there is enough proof to admit the GTR did what it was designed to do, go heads up with the 997TT. Different track, different temps, different drivers would have them trading wins and losses all day long. Good job Nissan.
#188
03-20-2008, 04:21 PM
Id rather 3 of each car, as it is from the showroom and 3 pro drivers. That way we'd have an average, a peak and all the info in between.
But as long as media is running the event, not attending, they cant be trusted.
When the media was just attending Nissan's testing of the 997 TT and GT-R they were pretty much dead even, and this was NISSAN testing and only a couple month before release.
Now that the media gets ahold of it, the TT starts drifting and all hell breaks loose.
Way to go Nissan, whoever's in the advertising department should get a raise.
But as long as media is running the event, not attending, they cant be trusted.
When the media was just attending Nissan's testing of the 997 TT and GT-R they were pretty much dead even, and this was NISSAN testing and only a couple month before release.
Now that the media gets ahold of it, the TT starts drifting and all hell breaks loose.
Way to go Nissan, whoever's in the advertising department should get a raise.
#189
03-20-2008, 05:07 PM
Id rather 3 of each car, as it is from the showroom and 3 pro drivers. That way we'd have an average, a peak and all the info in between.
But as long as media is running the event, not attending, they cant be trusted.
When the media was just attending Nissan's testing of the 997 TT and GT-R they were pretty much dead even, and this was NISSAN testing and only a couple month before release.
Now that the media gets ahold of it, the TT starts drifting and all hell breaks loose.
Way to go Nissan, whoever's in the advertising department should get a raise.
But as long as media is running the event, not attending, they cant be trusted.
When the media was just attending Nissan's testing of the 997 TT and GT-R they were pretty much dead even, and this was NISSAN testing and only a couple month before release.
Now that the media gets ahold of it, the TT starts drifting and all hell breaks loose.
Way to go Nissan, whoever's in the advertising department should get a raise.
.... Ted?
#190
03-20-2008, 06:04 PM
Id rather 3 of each car, as it is from the showroom and 3 pro drivers. That way we'd have an average, a peak and all the info in between.
But as long as media is running the event, not attending, they cant be trusted.
When the media was just attending Nissan's testing of the 997 TT and GT-R they were pretty much dead even, and this was NISSAN testing and only a couple month before release.
Now that the media gets ahold of it, the TT starts drifting and all hell breaks loose.
Way to go Nissan, whoever's in the advertising department should get a raise.
But as long as media is running the event, not attending, they cant be trusted.
When the media was just attending Nissan's testing of the 997 TT and GT-R they were pretty much dead even, and this was NISSAN testing and only a couple month before release.
Now that the media gets ahold of it, the TT starts drifting and all hell breaks loose.
Way to go Nissan, whoever's in the advertising department should get a raise.
#191
03-20-2008, 06:16 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.
Last edited by ISO9001; 03-21-2008 at 08:47 AM.
#192
03-20-2008, 06:25 PM
This begs for some photoshops - perhaps a rock shaped like an R35 on Mars, Nessie emerging from an R35 sunroof, a magnetic floating R35 forming crop circles, chupracabras working on the R35 assembly line, OBL driving a desert camo colored R35 in a tunnel leading out of Tora Bora......
#193
03-20-2008, 06:49 PM
Heavy I think 289 has a better comparison. What I've taken from these tests is Nissan went with a stickier tire to get better cornering at the cost of tire wear. It's also one of the things they can plan on being criticized for on long term tests. I don't think it has to go to the extreme of same size ect. but just what is allowed for production racing. Also on The GT-R site they brought up a good point of using a 6-speed instead of the tiptronic. The tip is quicker because not only for faster shifts but also because you'll always be on boost. The only other thing from past experience was the fact that it's a US _spec_ car. Since I'm sure they haven't built the cars for the US yet I'm speculating that this car was put together by their engineering department just for these tests. When we did this, things were blueprinted and the chassis setup was close to perfect. I'm assuming that with the rest of the world cars being built I'm sure the engine and running gear are production. So I'm thinking the only difference between the test car and what will be production, is setup. Also on the GT-R sites they bring up the same question as Heavy, what happened to the straight line performance. Not a conspiracy question but I think it is a valid one. So with the performance difference what will that do to their ring times when it comes to using a production car? (Mabe the drive train for the magazines car had issues, who knows).
But changing tires would make it too much like when you actually go to a track. And may contradict the fanboys and their magazines. Having to modify the cars in any way just makes the area more gray, finding the right tire kinds and sizes that are equally beneficial to each car would be an arduous task and just throwing the same set on each car could have some serious varied results. Not to mention testing the proper tire temps for each car. Tires are a complicated subject that's why it's best to give the car what the manufacturer has already factored in, even if performance isnt at the top of the list for that tire (Z06).
If you notice when whoever it was did the 0-100-0 the driver said the Z06 was accelerating so much faster than the GT-R that he couldnt judge when to hit the brakes. He ended up late and consequently the Z06 lost the test. This tells me the Z06 is much faster, as I have stated from a long time ago. It doesnt matter what the conditions, the Z06 accelerates much faster. At sea level in Tokyo, the GT-R trapped 120 and 121. At sea level in the U.S. Z06's trap 125-127. Either way you slice it, the Z06 is faster. And even the TT has trapped 121 in less than ideal conditions, and even trapped 122. The newest test only confirms what I've been saying all along. Both the TT and Z06 are faster in a straight line, and it's been mentioned, but ignored. And sooner or later the road course data will fall in line.
Nissan has made sure the BEST press comes out early. The initial press is CRUCIAL to a car as risky as the GT-R going worldwide with it's love or hate looks, and being a 70k Nissan, they know full well what they are doing. We'll see what the GT-R traps when Inside Line (who trapped 121 in Tokyo) goes into 1200+ feet elevation and uses the same equipement as they did with all the other cars. I bet it wont be 121. And I'd bet we dont see much of that at the drag strips either.
My theories may be a little strong, but in time we'll see them come to pass.
#194
03-20-2008, 07:03 PM
Just looked up the Elevation for Willow Springs, it's over 2400 ft. So take a car from sea level to 2400 ft and you should expect to see 4 mph lopped off the trap speed. This isnt rocket science, it's just the initial test conditions were perfect ones. The rest of the world is not. Both the Z06 and TT were below their high trap speeds as well. And if anyone thinks the GT-R will average 121 mph trap speed, the've lost their mind.
I do recall telling the fanboys this after the inside line test. They wanted to compare the GT-R's trap speed of 121 to inside line testing the TT at 118. But completely ignored that the two were tested in totally different conditions. The TT being a almost 1500 ft more elevation.
One fanboy had the nerve to tell me that it didnt matter what the conditions were, the GT-R would always run the same time and trap the same speed. He said elevation doesnt affect Turbo cars. HAHAHAHAH
Now you see what we are dealing with in terms of knowledge.
I do recall telling the fanboys this after the inside line test. They wanted to compare the GT-R's trap speed of 121 to inside line testing the TT at 118. But completely ignored that the two were tested in totally different conditions. The TT being a almost 1500 ft more elevation.
One fanboy had the nerve to tell me that it didnt matter what the conditions were, the GT-R would always run the same time and trap the same speed. He said elevation doesnt affect Turbo cars. HAHAHAHAH
Now you see what we are dealing with in terms of knowledge.
#195
03-20-2008, 07:09 PM
Strada, shutup. This is a discussion forum is it not? And what happens on a discussion forum, DISCUSSION.
All I'm doing is discussing the details, if you dont like it, go view another thread.
Unless of course you have a sound rebuttal for my sound rebuttals to these tests.
Which you dont.
So again, take your 17 posts and shutup, at least in reference to me. When I break forum rules, then they can ban me, until then, I'll argue all I want, so back to fanboyism with you.
EDIT: Woah there strada, I cut your post short because I didnt see anything worth reading, but upon further investigation, you can meet me at the track whenever you're ready, and I'll talk the same way I'm talking now if the situation calls for it.
You dont know me, so dont try your luck. If you are going to make e threats be a man about it. No beating around the bush.
All I'm doing is discussing the details, if you dont like it, go view another thread.
Unless of course you have a sound rebuttal for my sound rebuttals to these tests.
Which you dont.
So again, take your 17 posts and shutup, at least in reference to me. When I break forum rules, then they can ban me, until then, I'll argue all I want, so back to fanboyism with you.
EDIT: Woah there strada, I cut your post short because I didnt see anything worth reading, but upon further investigation, you can meet me at the track whenever you're ready, and I'll talk the same way I'm talking now if the situation calls for it.
You dont know me, so dont try your luck. If you are going to make e threats be a man about it. No beating around the bush.
Uh, right. Clearly your reading comprehension is as over inflated as your ego.
Not once did I say anything about the test between the cars (actually wait...I said one thing, apparently I'm a fanboy for saying that I found the Porsche being 5 seconds slower suspect, CHECK!), my post was simply calling you out in your constant attempt to act holier and smarter than thou regardless of what anyone else says or posts.
Why would I bother posting information to counter you, you would just throw up another
and revel in your own smugness and claim it was bias. That isn't a discussion, sorry...apparently you missed the whole respect others and humility part of life. Sorry I'd rather DISCUSS (which you clearly have no idea what it means) with someone who acts like an adult. Just because you are older than me with more posts (which again, I told you to ignore but you couldn't [see again: reading comprehension]) doesn't mean ****.
You constantly throw out opinion and claim that everything is biased, call people stupid for thinking anything other than the 997 is God's gift to the automobile...sorry but I'd rather not waste time arguing with you, hence why that was my only post: it regarded you and your E-*****, not anything about the comparo, as I'd rather discuss it with a blender than you, if you want that spelled out, YOU ARE NOT WORTH MY TIME.
Secondly, you're damn right, I don't know you and you don't know me, hence why I stated, I'm not making e-threats...as I'm old enough and mature enough to realize how stupid it is. For all I know, you're a 150lb cocky jerk on a web board or a 275lb linebacker, point is I don't and it wouldn't matter, what are you gonna do beat me up?
But you again, can't read, and can't resist. As for inviting me out to the track, sorry I never once stated I had a car that could take on what you have, this has nothing to do with that and I'm still young and in a field where I wont have to validate my worth by racing some guy around a road.
Finally, that "meet me there" attitude is a lot of hot bull**** on the internet, again I simply bet you would have a different tact in person, I BET, didn't say you 100% wouldn't be the ******* you are on this web board, but I speculated, sorry, you gonna swing at me champ???
Point is, you can blow all the hot air you want at me about the comparo, you are simply just another inflated ego on the internet to me. I won't waste another minute arguing cars. Now if you want me to point out every which way every thing I claim about you being an arrogant snob is spot on, then I got all day, as you clearly can't read and even if you could, all you can come back with is E-prowess. You're a joke.
Last edited by stradaONE8; 03-20-2008 at 07:15 PM.