997 TT beats GT-R at Ring. Nissan accused of cheating.
#226
10-03-2008, 09:29 PM
Since some of you guys are quick to believe Porsche's statements, I'll ask these questions again:
1.) Do any of you actually believe that a Porsche test engineer managed a time of 7:38 for the 997TT, even one shod with MPSCs? Keep in mind that HvS' only managed 7:54 during Sport Auto's Supertest, and yes, the one he drove was also shod with MPSCs, and the lap was done on a closed track. I believe HvS also stated that 7:38 (what Porsche was claiming then) is impossible to achieve with the 997TT.
2.) If that Porsche test engineer is actually so good to be able to get that 7:38 997TT time (and he should be really good if his 997 GT2 time is 7:34), how come his GT-R time of 7:54 is 4 seconds slower that HvS' shakedown time (7:50) of a pre-production GT-R, on a partially wet and open track? Could it be that the Porsche test engineer is out of his element with the GT-R, being used to Porsches in general and the 911 platform in particular? Or maybe the Porsche representative who made the statement simply plucked the 7:38 time out of thin air?
1.) Do any of you actually believe that a Porsche test engineer managed a time of 7:38 for the 997TT, even one shod with MPSCs? Keep in mind that HvS' only managed 7:54 during Sport Auto's Supertest, and yes, the one he drove was also shod with MPSCs, and the lap was done on a closed track. I believe HvS also stated that 7:38 (what Porsche was claiming then) is impossible to achieve with the 997TT.
2.) If that Porsche test engineer is actually so good to be able to get that 7:38 997TT time (and he should be really good if his 997 GT2 time is 7:34), how come his GT-R time of 7:54 is 4 seconds slower that HvS' shakedown time (7:50) of a pre-production GT-R, on a partially wet and open track? Could it be that the Porsche test engineer is out of his element with the GT-R, being used to Porsches in general and the 911 platform in particular? Or maybe the Porsche representative who made the statement simply plucked the 7:38 time out of thin air?
#227
10-03-2008, 10:28 PM
This thread is soo funny. I dont blame all the porsche fanboys backing up there 997tt tho. I dont own either car and i would take a 997tt over a GTR, if i have to choose one. but i would give props to GTR for being faster then 997tt. ITS a fact that GTR is faster, mag test, independent, even a member from here say so. But some fanboys cant admited. Im disappointed with porsche doing such thing. =(
#228
10-03-2008, 10:45 PM
This thread is soo funny. I dont blame all the porsche fanboys backing up there 997tt tho. I dont own either car and i would take a 997tt over a GTR, if i have to choose one. but i would give props to GTR for being faster then 997tt. ITS a fact that GTR is faster, mag test, independent, even a member from here say so. But some fanboys cant admited. Im disappointed with porsche doing such thing. =(
"I don't own a 997TT"
"I don't own a GT-R"
"I've contributed a grand total of 3 posts"
"I make arguments based on what other people have said and done."
Who's the fanboy?
#229
10-03-2008, 10:49 PM
Hmm...I wonder what my 996TT (a less HP, softer spring rate) was running in stock form a year ago?
Last edited by bbywu; 10-03-2008 at 10:51 PM.
#230
10-03-2008, 11:04 PM
#232
10-03-2008, 11:53 PM
Swans personal comments on C&D's blog about their TWS run, they had plenty of excuses about "too much standing water." But 2:30 average lap time in the wet? That's not even considering their diismal quarter mile, 12.8s due to the "inability to make the launch control work in a drag-strip environment."
A likely excuse.
Last edited by bbywu; 10-04-2008 at 12:16 AM.
#233
10-04-2008, 02:48 AM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 551 
How about this test where the ring driver (Toshio) beat the GT-R in the Turbo??? In fact the original articles said the TT was faster. Notice "almost identically faster" but in the test at Leguna where the GT-R was .3 faster, they made sure to note it.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=119599
Doesnt get any better than Nissan beaing their own car in the TT. Maybe we can hire Toshio to drive the TT at the ring since Walter hasnt done so.
#234
10-04-2008, 03:47 AM
How about this test where the ring driver (Toshio) beat the GT-R in the Turbo??? In fact the original articles said the TT was faster. Notice "almost identically faster" but in the test at Leguna where the GT-R was .3 faster, they made sure to note it.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/GeneralFuture/articleId=119599
Doesnt get any better than Nissan beaing their own car in the TT. Maybe we can hire Toshio to drive the TT at the ring since Walter hasnt done so.
Doesnt get any better than Nissan beaing their own car in the TT. Maybe we can hire Toshio to drive the TT at the ring since Walter hasnt done so.
Hammad
#235
10-04-2008, 07:10 AM
#240
10-04-2008, 10:19 AM
>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../FREE/71017001
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."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Best cost per lap time." Priceless, just priceless. Once again, GT-R owners: good car, but too heavy because built to be cheap, and ridiculous warranty term, because, yes, built to be cheap. "Cheap" is this car's mantra; its own chief engineer said it.
Kidding aside. This is where I think Nissan has gone wrong: Instead of claiming 7:44, they got greedy (greed = stupidity) and went for that shameful 7:29 mark.
Even that *other* lie, that 7:38, might have been ok to cheat with. One could always claim driver/weather/car variations.
7:29 is so outrageous that even the least intelligent and least reasonable sports car fans know it's a cheat. It's an easy proof and Porsche is going after this mark because they know: you only have to prove someone's dishonesty ONCE.
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../FREE/71017001
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."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Best cost per lap time." Priceless, just priceless. Once again, GT-R owners: good car, but too heavy because built to be cheap, and ridiculous warranty term, because, yes, built to be cheap. "Cheap" is this car's mantra; its own chief engineer said it.
Kidding aside. This is where I think Nissan has gone wrong: Instead of claiming 7:44, they got greedy (greed = stupidity) and went for that shameful 7:29 mark.
Even that *other* lie, that 7:38, might have been ok to cheat with. One could always claim driver/weather/car variations.
7:29 is so outrageous that even the least intelligent and least reasonable sports car fans know it's a cheat. It's an easy proof and Porsche is going after this mark because they know: you only have to prove someone's dishonesty ONCE.