R&T: GT-R vs ZO6 vs 911
#76
03-19-2008, 01:11 PM
DIfferent track different conditions. The cars where I live trap slower than other track/areas.
#77
03-19-2008, 01:13 PM
thats another thing. good point
im ready for porsches 911 turbo refresh and see the 998 and GT-R battle it out
#78
03-19-2008, 01:15 PM
Heavy Chevy, stick to your Excellence and Corvette magazines since every single automotive publication out there is biased towards the GT-R one way or another. If this is the case, this is the doom of automotive publications period. Who can I now trust for unbiased information........someone please help.
#79
03-19-2008, 01:17 PM
I hate to interrupt your conspiracy theory here, but Steve Millen has been a test driver for Road & Track reviews for years. Take this article for example, not one single Nissan in the lineup, yet R&T used Steve Millen as their test driver for all of the cars:
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/01/h...in-0-200-dash/
I see, but why can he not beat a 997 Turbo with a Z06 when everyone else has?
And why can he not beat a mag writer from Car and Driver in a new and improved Z06?
Seems to me like he wasnt trying to hard to do so.
Because he's driven all sorts of cars doesnt mean he doesnt have a favorite.
And don’t forget this one from 2005:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=1949
Strange, the Corvette gets 1st, the Porsche’s get 2nd and 3rd place, while the Nissan in that test only gets 8th place. By your theory, shouldn't the Nissan have won since clearly it is his "favorite"?
They would have been the laughing stock of the country had they beaten a Z06 with a 350Z, clearly over exhaggerating you are.
Looks like they even called on Millen back in 2002 when testing the F40, F1, and 959:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....article_id=392
And yes, Millen drove Nissans in IMSA, but in the ~40 years since he began his professional racing career, he has also driven for the following manufacturers:
Jaguar
BMW
Ford
Triumph
GM
Toyota
And last but not least
Porsche
http://www.stillen.com/page.asp?heritage1
Racing in a Porsche and being a factory driver are two different things, you see drivers go all over from Porsche to BMW to Ferrari and it's based on what TEAM they are racing for, just because he drove a Porsche, which I think was a GT1 doesnt mean he had any official affliation with Porsche. He actually had that relationship with Nissan.
BTW, here is an interesting part of his career from '79:
Professional driver for General Motors Dealer Team
Looks like the Z06 should have beaten the Porsche by 5 seconds in this test as well, since he was at one time employed directly by GM.
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/01/h...in-0-200-dash/
I see, but why can he not beat a 997 Turbo with a Z06 when everyone else has?
And why can he not beat a mag writer from Car and Driver in a new and improved Z06?
Seems to me like he wasnt trying to hard to do so.
Because he's driven all sorts of cars doesnt mean he doesnt have a favorite.
And don’t forget this one from 2005:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=1949
Strange, the Corvette gets 1st, the Porsche’s get 2nd and 3rd place, while the Nissan in that test only gets 8th place. By your theory, shouldn't the Nissan have won since clearly it is his "favorite"?
They would have been the laughing stock of the country had they beaten a Z06 with a 350Z, clearly over exhaggerating you are.
Looks like they even called on Millen back in 2002 when testing the F40, F1, and 959:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....article_id=392
And yes, Millen drove Nissans in IMSA, but in the ~40 years since he began his professional racing career, he has also driven for the following manufacturers:
Jaguar
BMW
Ford
Triumph
GM
Toyota
And last but not least
Porsche
http://www.stillen.com/page.asp?heritage1
Racing in a Porsche and being a factory driver are two different things, you see drivers go all over from Porsche to BMW to Ferrari and it's based on what TEAM they are racing for, just because he drove a Porsche, which I think was a GT1 doesnt mean he had any official affliation with Porsche. He actually had that relationship with Nissan.
BTW, here is an interesting part of his career from '79:
Professional driver for General Motors Dealer Team
Looks like the Z06 should have beaten the Porsche by 5 seconds in this test as well, since he was at one time employed directly by GM.
#80
03-19-2008, 01:21 PM
Common buddy, there are so many different variables in this one. Even I can make excuses for this. The weight of the drivers, test equipment, track conditions, elevation, maybe even the weather. Lets not forget the visibility, heat soaked engine, worn out brake pads, and the lack of coolant. Don't get me started with the runflats. They were already punctured. Oh wait, I think Steve Millen did these tests when he was slightly hungover. Oh noooos! Why can't you accept the fact that this car actually beat the other two? Are you that much in denial? Watch out the media is out to get you!
Last edited by Monaco; 03-19-2008 at 01:25 PM.
#81
03-19-2008, 01:27 PM
wow... heavychevy is still in denial? after every single review/mag... wow you are a bigger suprise than the GTR itself...
#82
03-19-2008, 01:28 PM
All literature must be reviewed for validity. I'm sorry to have to break it to you, but there are NO non-biased car magazines out there. They are out there to sell magazines, and to collect advertising fees.
Take a look at the other industries out there: pharmaceutical, health, fashion, etc. They publish so that they can push the product. It is up to the consumer to review and find if its credible or not. If they find the study credible, they buy the product. If they don't, they still bought the magazine!
Take a look at the other industries out there: pharmaceutical, health, fashion, etc. They publish so that they can push the product. It is up to the consumer to review and find if its credible or not. If they find the study credible, they buy the product. If they don't, they still bought the magazine!
#83
03-19-2008, 01:35 PM
Ok in that case we shouldn't trust any publication. Why bother reading anything then since they are all "biased"? It's bull**** anyways right? We've all been duped for the past several decades, but it wasn't until the GT-R was tested where the question of validity came up and suggested rigged and biased tests. The funny thing is that in this test, every car was tested as it sits, in stock form. No change to the tires, absolutely nothing modified. Even the Porsche had the overboost function, AN ADVANTAGE. Look at the numbers. I don't know whats so hard to see. In a straight line, the GT-R was ROMPED. The trap speed suggests a more closer to stock reported HP. The Porsche and the Vette were clearly faster and had a HP/Torque/Weight advantage. There is no denying that. Where the GT-R shines is where the other two lacks; the turns. If it makes you guys happy, yes, the GT-R will most probably get walked in a street encounter, highway race, etc. What is so hard to see/believe in this test?
Last edited by Monaco; 03-19-2008 at 01:43 PM.
#84
03-19-2008, 01:44 PM
Common buddy, there are so many different variables in this one. Even I can make excuses for this. The weight of the drivers, test equipment, track conditions, elevation, maybe even the weather. Lets not forget the visibility, heat soaked engine, worn out brake pads, and the lack of coolant. Don't get me started with the runflats. They were already punctured. Oh wait, I think Steve Millen did these tests when he was slightly hungover. Oh noooos! Why can't you accept the fact that this car actually beat the other two? Are you that much in denial? Watch out the media is out to get you!
I was also one of the only people still saying the TT would beat the GT-R in a straight line. But now it's the U.S. models are down on power? HAHAHAH
The fanboys were also starting to beleive the GT-R would beat the Z06 in a straight line, got RAPED severely, and it ran a 3.4 0-60.
The more mag tests come out, the more they struggle to cover up the B.S.
And what about the Dyno #'s. Fanboys running amuck saying 560 hp yet Inside line, the same ones who went 3.3 @121 at sea level tested one at 408 awhp.
Real cars add up all the time. The GT-R stories never add up. I'll beleive it when it starts to make sense.
Hell the GT-R fanboys cant even keep their own site together, ended up with two identical ones in different colors and are now having a fued over who gets what. Yet they are supposed to be the authority on cars?
#85
03-19-2008, 01:45 PM
After reading all this, I feel like I'm at High-School again.
So in this reagard, the one thing you HAVE to remember is "who's playground you're talking smack in?"
I'm too poor own any of these but the thread keeps me amused. Don't worry, another year will pass and a 'new' fast car will arrive I'm sure. All it takes is a little perseverence.
So in this reagard, the one thing you HAVE to remember is "who's playground you're talking smack in?"
I'm too poor own any of these but the thread keeps me amused. Don't worry, another year will pass and a 'new' fast car will arrive I'm sure. All it takes is a little perseverence.
#87
03-19-2008, 01:47 PM
Heavychevy, ever heard of sarcasm? The GT-R wasn't "down" on power in this test. It is at where it's supposed to be, as claimed. Yes 5 seconds is a whooping, but are you implying the boost was automatically ramped up for more power when it came to the lapped tests? Common now the straightline comparison should give you a guage where the car sits in stock condition..............NO WHERE NEAR the 560 crank hp you're suggesting. I'm not even surprised at the outcome of the straight line test! I sure hope a 3100 lb, 505hp car does a whooping on cars with less hp and more weight!
Last edited by Monaco; 03-19-2008 at 01:52 PM.
#88
03-19-2008, 01:51 PM
All literature must be reviewed for validity. I'm sorry to have to break it to you, but there are NO non-biased car magazines out there. They are out there to sell magazines, and to collect advertising fees.
Take a look at the other industries out there: pharmaceutical, health, fashion, etc. They publish so that they can push the product. It is up to the consumer to review and find if its credible or not. If they find the study credible, they buy the product. If they don't, they still bought the magazine!
Take a look at the other industries out there: pharmaceutical, health, fashion, etc. They publish so that they can push the product. It is up to the consumer to review and find if its credible or not. If they find the study credible, they buy the product. If they don't, they still bought the magazine!
ricereater please tell me why a car mag would be baised towards the GT-R over the BELOVED porsche?
if there was bais going on it would definitaly be towards the 911 turbo. which only shows that Nissan did a great job b/c im sure some of these mags ARE porsche baised. but they couldnt lie about the GT-R's potency.
you are starting to sound like heavy. HEAVYCHEVY is this you?
#89
03-19-2008, 01:52 PM
I hate to interrupt your conspiracy theory here, but Steve Millen has been a test driver for Road & Track reviews for years. Take this article for example, not one single Nissan in the lineup, yet R&T used Steve Millen as their test driver for all of the cars:
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/01/h...in-0-200-dash/
And don’t forget this one from 2005:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=1949
Strange, the Corvette gets 1st, the Porsche’s get 2nd and 3rd place, while the Nissan in that test only gets 8th place. By your theory, shouldn't the Nissan have won since clearly it is his "favorite"?
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/01/h...in-0-200-dash/
And don’t forget this one from 2005:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=1949
Strange, the Corvette gets 1st, the Porsche’s get 2nd and 3rd place, while the Nissan in that test only gets 8th place. By your theory, shouldn't the Nissan have won since clearly it is his "favorite"?
This Millen conspiracy was something Nissan 350Z guys brought up previously. I had thought on a Porsche board that things would have been a tad different.
#90
03-19-2008, 01:57 PM
ricereater please tell me why a car mag would be baised towards the GT-R over the BELOVED porsche?
if there was bais going on it would definitaly be towards the 911 turbo. which only shows that Nissan did a great job b/c im sure some of these mags ARE porsche baised. but they couldnt lie about the GT-R's potency.
you are starting to sound like heavy. HEAVYCHEVY is this you?
if there was bais going on it would definitaly be towards the 911 turbo. which only shows that Nissan did a great job b/c im sure some of these mags ARE porsche baised. but they couldnt lie about the GT-R's potency.
you are starting to sound like heavy. HEAVYCHEVY is this you?
Why would there need to be two of me when you arent smart enough to handle one?
It's media, it's hype, it sells magazines. Unfortunately they cant cover up the nonsense in the midst of it. No one has been biased towards the 911 Turbo since it came out, it's been getting beat in all kinds of comparos and performance tests.
Still waiting on how a pro driver goes a second slower than a mag editor by a second. How the same difference is on a 13 mile course as a 2 mile course between cars, and how the Z06 all of a sudden manages to lose to the 997 Turbo somehow?
If you cant see the propaganda by now, you really need a visit to the eye doctor.