Originally Posted by Quacker

The British test where Harris drove the GTR, M3 and GT3 was a fair test. Each car had a warm up and then a flyer. No car had more laps than the other. If you're claiming that it was unfair on the Porsche because it's tires didn't get to temperature, then tough luck. Those were the conditions that day and each car had to show its versatility. Too bad if it favoured one car over the other. It would be impossible to stage an event where no car would gain an advantage over the others.
The same can be said for the GTR, it is at a disadvantage since Harris has never driven one before - but he had numerous experience in the GT3 and M3. And the track was more suited to the GT3 than it would the GTR. We can go on all day about this but the fact remains - the GTR is a very good all round car which does well in ANY track and in ANY weather conditions.

Originally Posted by Trommel

On an objectively-assessed basis, much of the car is better.

The transmission is light-years ahead of either a manual or Tiptronic, which is why everyone else is also introducing dual-clutch transmissions.

Styling is subjective (and it's never going to be a favourite of mine), but the general fit and finish is about on par with a 997 and leagues ahead of a 996.

Straight line acceleration has generally been shown to be quicker than a 997 Turbo in most measured increments.

The USP of the car is the total composure of its handling and accessibility of its performance - the combination of the rock-solid stability, very high cornering speeds, excellent traction and the dual-clutch transmission. If US owners are more interested in drag racing, I think they're missing the point but that isn't a reflection of the car's abilities.
It's 4WD, it's powerful. Something has to give if you are constantly launching it hard from standstill. Nissan should have realised that US owners would do this all the time and either water-down the launch control (like BMW) or not include it all (like Ferrari). They didn't, and now the internet is awash with rumours they need to take some action to sort out.
I would have liked more steering feel from the GT-R (the R32-34 were excellent for 4WD cars in this respect), but on the other hand the Turbo offers nothing like the feedback that something like a Mk I GT3 does. I'll reserve judgment until I've driven one more on real roads. I think the gearbox also takes an element of interaction away (see PDK and evo magazine's Most Disappointing Product of the Year), but the benefits massively outweigh the negatives. In this respect, the Turbo is definitely not the car to be making comparisons with, because it's no Caterham.

Both GT-R and Turbo are great cars, so why all the bad feeling? Pay your money, take your choice.

Originally Posted by Quacker

Turbo vs GTR from my point of view. Non biased.

Interior: Turbo has better materials ie leather, but that's about it. GTR has tonnes more features and technology. Just the data screen alone has more technology than the entire turbo interior. Result: draw
The GT-R interior is ugly and doesnt flow at all, a mangled mess of buttons. You cant call that a tie because of gadgets.The TT's interior is more stylish and has better materials.

Turbo wins.

Exterior build/styling: Build wise, both cars are on par. Turbo looks better. Result: Turbo wins. The Nissan also makes lots of noises and rattles, stuff coming loose etc. But I agree, the turbo wins.

Transmission: GTR wins hands down. No comparison here. Result: GTR wins. Not really if you cant use the transmission as intended. You can launch the tiptronic without voiding the warranty. On the road racing circuit, the DSG is better, but anywhere else the Tip is better, from driving in autmatic mode, to repeated launches at the strip. The tip can also stand driving without traction control on, which per Best Motoring and Me_Qwkr the DSG cannot.

Turbo wins due to lack of developement on the DSG by Nissan. Reliability over Flash.

Awd system: ATTESA-ETS is a kick *** of a awd system!! Result: GTR wins. No arguement there, I dont think Porsche made the AWD with the same intentions.

engine: Turbo has more lag, but has more torque eventhough it is smaller in capacity. The engine in the turbo has proven itself. GTR engine is still too new. Result: turbo wins. The lag is because of the turbos. I'd give the engine to the TT and the turbo system to the GT-R = Tie

Brakes: Turbo is just a touch better (cos of the ceramic). Result: turbo wins.

Straight line acceleration/speed: Turbo is a smidge faster. Result: turbo wins. Turbo is a lot faster when it can launch and the GT-R cant.

Lap times/speed: GTR has yet to lose to a turbo in ANY test. Result: GTR wins. Actually it has lost a couple, not to mention a ton of bogus ones, but I'll concede, though I think the TT will eat it's lunch on the same tires.

wow factor: Heads are turning left right and center wherever the GTR goes. No one even takes a second glance at the turbo. Result: GTR wins
new vs old, always works that way, no arguement

tuning potential: It has already been shown that tuners can easily extract power from the GTR and more importantly make use of that power on the track far more easier than for the turbo. Example: TechArt turbo vs Mines and Cobbs GTR. Techart has more power and less weight but gets annilhilated on the track by the Mines and Cobbs GTR. Result: GTR wins.BS, that techart had just driven cross country on those same set of tires. And techart is a generic kit with generic coilovers and a bunch of nonsense bodykit. The TT has shown the ability to take mods and not break. Cobb tuning is supplying tunes to the majority of people with GT-R's and their car just broke. The Turbo has already shown it can handle 700 whp on the stock motor. And it's bullit proof.

Turbo wins, the GT-R barely has anything out yet.

Practicality: GTR has a boot, nuff said. Result: GTR wins. I agree

Price: Need i say anymore? Result: GTR wins. Yeah unless you have to replace a tranny or two.

Service Costs: The service costs for a GT-R dont match with the price of the car. The frequent maintenance for tracking, costs to replace brakes, body parts etc are more in line with a Ferrari. The TT only needs oil changes and gas. TT wins

Reliability: The GT-R has recalls already, customers suing over false advertising and voided warrantie's, even the media had a car that was in the shop for a combined two months of the time they had it. Turbo wins

Service: Porsche > Nissan anywhere anytime Turbo wins

Depreciation: Porsche TT's are some of the worst, but with this tranny issue, GT-R value may tank after the newness wears off (jury still out)

conclusion: GTR has 7 wins, turbo has 4 wins. GTR is the overall better car. Even if i take away the two subjective points 'wow factor' and 'exterior build/styling' - GTR still wins.

Originally Posted by 911TurboS2

As was said by HeavyChevy...You obviously have never tracked or raced any manner of car, except maybe some high speed driving on the street. Comparing straight line acceleration between these cars is relatively meaningless on a track, since these cars are comparable in that respect, as compared to handling and mantaining high speed in momentum racing. It takes some time for any R spec tire to reach optimal temperature, something the folks who work for magazines tend to forget.

Originally Posted by heavychevy

Conclusion: Other than a lap on the track, and trunk space, the Nissan doesnt come anywhere near the TT. You get what you pay for which is with the Nissan problems and worries if you want to drive it hard, shipped on an open carrier with acid etched engine parts, chipped wheels, paint dings where as with a Porsche you get a car wrapped like fine china.

Take the illegal launch control from the GT-R and the TT destroys it in acceleration. Better made, more luxurious and if you get an alignment and can really drive one, no problems on the track either. And since you get to pick alignments when you get your GT-R, I think it's only fair to do the same with the Porsche.

Originally Posted by Trommel

Both GT-R and Turbo are great cars, so why all the bad feeling? Pay your money, take your choice.

Originally Posted by Quacker

If you think that every turbo is delivered spotless and "wrapped like china", then you are dreaming.
Also, i never said that the GTR is faster in a straight line. Why do you always bring that up? Is it the only criteria you use to judge whether one car is superior to another?
More luxurious? If your definition of luxurious is in how much leather the car has then yes, the Porsche has better leather cladding but that's about it. The GTR is more luxurious in a 'electronic' sense.
Better build? I doubt it. I've looked thouroughly inside out at both the turbo and GTR and i can tell you that they are on par in terms of build quality.
But don't take my word for it, I highly recommend that you should have a close and personal look at the GTR yourself HC, and drive it as well.

Originally Posted by ALPINE_997

Another tool who thinks a PS3 put into a car makes it better!

Read your NAGTROC boards silly boy you will notice creaks, noises, etc. Oh wait I forgot the GTR fanboys want to play PS3 when their trannies are down and waiting for one from Japan on back order. Either you can concentrate on driving or concentrate on gadgets which one is it?

Have you sat in a "REAL" Turbo other than Virtual seating for one with surround view?

I am sorry that Porsche does not meet your PS3 gaming console requirements but I think that is better left at home and not the roads.

OH WAIT STOP THE PRESSES!!! - QUAKER is an Automotive Interior Design Engineer. Have you heard of initial quality and long term durability? Google that first before you answer.

Please go away...

Originally Posted by heavychevy

Says the Porsche enthusiast.