997 TT beats GT-R at Ring. Nissan accused of cheating.
#31
09-30-2008, 03:18 PM
I think it was a manager of a department - so I do not think he would speak for the company unless he was sure. Besides I do not think they would buy a GT-R and let them test it without some authorization from the top to make that comment.
#32
09-30-2008, 03:20 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Knoxville,Tennessee
Posts: 4,447
Rep Power: 214 
GT Rawr
#35
09-30-2008, 04:43 PM
Here is food for thought..
There is (1) known motor in the ATL, GA area that has blown - no warranty. Call up Regal Nissan if they will tell you.
There are (2) known transmissions are toast - no warranty. One posted on here and the other was the blown motor as well with Regal Nissan.
Things happen and no one claims perfect cars on either side.
But if you are going to create a everymans supercar - wouldn't you think you would also put the cost of maitenance at the price point you are trying to market to?
5-6K - Brakes - no options at the moment but rotor/brake pad replacement combo.
1-1.5K - Fluid Changes - Every 1800Km if you race the car.
Oil Changes of $240-$300
Motor is around 60K at the moment
Transmission is around 12-18K? or is that more?
Tires are special to the Nissan and is around $2000-$2500?
The car is a bargain for the performance that you get no doubt. But the upkeep is catered to those who buy this car as a weekender or as 2nd or 3rd car. For the everyman that it is catering to it is not their car. The upkeep costs so far will keep many people from A) driving to its full potential and B) looking at other cars.
I don't care about the HP claims, etc. I saw one(stock) dynoed at 440awd HP. What does that translate to? Why I ask this is because of the claimed 10% drivetrain loss nissan claims? What are the real numbers?
To those who tout the M-Moss Act to protect them it won't. There are enough specifics in the warranty disclosures to back Nissan up. The M-Moss Act was designed to protect vagueness of a warranty claim not the specifics of one. They are specifically telling you not to do something. If you lay out details about what you will not cover then the ACT doesn't come down and rescue you.
Here is something interesting I found out about the new PDK with Porsche.
If you continually use the launch feature of the PDK in the new 09 Porsche cars it will continue to deminish the effectiveness of the launch as the temps rise in the fluids. Thus not allowing you to beat the crap out of it. Why doesn't Nissan with all the High-Tech things they have installed on this car use this feature?
It is like hanging out Pamela Andersons Boob and saying you can only touch one but if you touch both of them we will slap your hand and take it away.
Why not build this feature into the GT-R to protect the transmission to also preserve any intense warranty claims resulting from the Launches. People will launch these cars no doubt.
This is not bashing on the GT-R - as I don't care about ring times as I can't drive it that fast and 99% of the people on here never will either.
There is (1) known motor in the ATL, GA area that has blown - no warranty. Call up Regal Nissan if they will tell you.
There are (2) known transmissions are toast - no warranty. One posted on here and the other was the blown motor as well with Regal Nissan.
Things happen and no one claims perfect cars on either side.
But if you are going to create a everymans supercar - wouldn't you think you would also put the cost of maitenance at the price point you are trying to market to?
5-6K - Brakes - no options at the moment but rotor/brake pad replacement combo.
1-1.5K - Fluid Changes - Every 1800Km if you race the car.
Oil Changes of $240-$300
Motor is around 60K at the moment
Transmission is around 12-18K? or is that more?
Tires are special to the Nissan and is around $2000-$2500?
The car is a bargain for the performance that you get no doubt. But the upkeep is catered to those who buy this car as a weekender or as 2nd or 3rd car. For the everyman that it is catering to it is not their car. The upkeep costs so far will keep many people from A) driving to its full potential and B) looking at other cars.
I don't care about the HP claims, etc. I saw one(stock) dynoed at 440awd HP. What does that translate to? Why I ask this is because of the claimed 10% drivetrain loss nissan claims? What are the real numbers?
To those who tout the M-Moss Act to protect them it won't. There are enough specifics in the warranty disclosures to back Nissan up. The M-Moss Act was designed to protect vagueness of a warranty claim not the specifics of one. They are specifically telling you not to do something. If you lay out details about what you will not cover then the ACT doesn't come down and rescue you.
Here is something interesting I found out about the new PDK with Porsche.
If you continually use the launch feature of the PDK in the new 09 Porsche cars it will continue to deminish the effectiveness of the launch as the temps rise in the fluids. Thus not allowing you to beat the crap out of it. Why doesn't Nissan with all the High-Tech things they have installed on this car use this feature?
It is like hanging out Pamela Andersons Boob and saying you can only touch one but if you touch both of them we will slap your hand and take it away.
Why not build this feature into the GT-R to protect the transmission to also preserve any intense warranty claims resulting from the Launches. People will launch these cars no doubt.
This is not bashing on the GT-R - as I don't care about ring times as I can't drive it that fast and 99% of the people on here never will either.
Not to bash you or anything like that but a few points:
Are you saying the brakes last 5-6k with tracking the GT-R or for DD use? From what I have heard, the 997TT ceramic brakes don't last more than 15k for a hard core tracker and possibly less. I don't think that the brakes could only last 5-6k just as a DD.
Fluid changes---I can't comment on that as I have no idea
Oil Changes-there haven't been any done yet to make sure this official so its just speculation at this point..
Motor-60k? There is no way the motor is worth 60k if the car costs 75k with the tranny being 18k. If you are talking about miles than that statement is false. Once again, its a huge speculation to say that it will only last 60k. I really doubt it and without proof, it shouldn't be said. Do you really think Nissan would sell a car for 75k-80k and have it last 60k miles only? I saw the claims of why but it was proven false from what I remember. Not all the good things make it on 6speed.
Tires--I agree, thats a pretty heavy price
As for the blown motors, I can't comment either but for the blown transmission that was posted with pictures. The owner of the car has replied with saying he did 70 LAUNCHES and since its just "70", you can take in 10 or so which who knows how much it is. I can guarantee you that if you do 70 launches in a AWD car in a week, it won't be in a drivable condition either.
Anyways, thats my opinion..
#37
09-30-2008, 05:37 PM
Exactly. I think this is high noon and Porsche is calling Nissan out. This is not a case of a bird puffing it's feathers up to look tough. Porsche employs some of the best engineers in the world and they know what they are talking about. Nissan can choose to respond or not to, but if they do, this time they will have to run under great scrutiny as will Porsche. No ringers this time. You think Porsche doesn't know they will probably have to back up what they say? come on! I think this is great! All this hype will soon come to an end. You notice that Porsche didn't challenge the ZR1 or ACR times, because they know those two cars can do it. I applaud Porsche for calling the liars out. This is certainly not the first time Nissan has done this.
I applaud HeavyChevy also. He said all along it came down to the tires. Porsche just backed him up!
#38
09-30-2008, 05:54 PM
still im not going to believe anything unless its proven and in this case its understandable, but again, nothings proven.
Last edited by zosomoso; 09-30-2008 at 05:58 PM.
#39
09-30-2008, 05:59 PM
My point was that neither Nissan nor any other major corporation) would knowingly make a false product claim. The 7:38 time appears in the Owner's manual for God's sake. Does anyone really think they made that up? If so, your favorite movie must be Capricorn One.
Not sure about how "official" the 7:29 lap was--- but there's a video out there. Was it doctored? In an interview, I thought driver clearly said stock car / stock tires.
Does anyone really think that the 7:54 time mentioned in passing (and reluctantly) by some random Porsche test driver is a more reliable number than the 7:38 number that Nissan prints in the owners manual?
Let's all take a deep breath and use common sense and not jump to conspiracy theories. As has been noted above, there is a mountain of evidence consistent with the GT-R being faster and none (except for this) suggesting that it would be significantly slower. Also note that TT was on Cups in this test, whereas most Mag tests were on Stock tires (for USDM).
-Chris
#40
09-30-2008, 06:04 PM
Although I don't believe the 7.29 time, I think most rational people would agree that stock for stock, GTR will be at least slightly faster than 997TT on most tracks. There are just too many head-to-head comparisons (even some by this board's members!) between the two with GTR coming up on top to deny this.
I am copying a post by an NAGTROC memeber (HeavyNissan) because i think it fits very well into this argument.
HMM
-Top Gear has the GT-R on their track beating the Turbo and GT3
oh but top gear is only entertainment and the turbo's run was in very wet conditions
-5th Gear has the GT-R beating the Turbo with B Senna driving
oh but it's still just a show
-R&T has the GT-R beating the Turbo at Buttonwillow
oh but they had steve millen who was paid off
-C&D has the GT-R beating the Turbo at Reno
oh but C&D is worthless anyway these are from american magazines who know nothing other than drag racing
-Autocar has the GT-R beating the GT3
oh they're from europe and not that big anyway
-Evo has the GT-R beating the GT3; with a speed limited customer car
oh theyre no longer the standard
-SPORTAUTO GOT PORSCHE'S TIME WITHOUT EVEN GOING ALL OUT, JUST GETTING A FEEL FOR THINGS...
Let Porsche keep talking. Nothing wrong with giving them a little rope...
Hammad
HMM
-Top Gear has the GT-R on their track beating the Turbo and GT3
oh but top gear is only entertainment and the turbo's run was in very wet conditions
-5th Gear has the GT-R beating the Turbo with B Senna driving
oh but it's still just a show
-R&T has the GT-R beating the Turbo at Buttonwillow
oh but they had steve millen who was paid off
-C&D has the GT-R beating the Turbo at Reno
oh but C&D is worthless anyway these are from american magazines who know nothing other than drag racing
-Autocar has the GT-R beating the GT3
oh they're from europe and not that big anyway
-Evo has the GT-R beating the GT3; with a speed limited customer car
oh theyre no longer the standard
-SPORTAUTO GOT PORSCHE'S TIME WITHOUT EVEN GOING ALL OUT, JUST GETTING A FEEL FOR THINGS...
Let Porsche keep talking. Nothing wrong with giving them a little rope...
Hammad
#41
09-30-2008, 06:11 PM
Dblock - no worries about offending me. It is just a car 
$5-6K - is the price to change the brakes so far. I am am making a point of the costs of the maintenance for a car in the 70-80K range is fairly high and for being a Nissan it should not go hand in hand for high costs maitenance.
In reference to the motor - I heard $60K but I also thought the same thing about the cost. It didn't seem right. I would still think at least 30K for the motor. I will try to find the total cost from the the blown motor here locally.
The 70 launches is crazy but then again it should not allow you to continually run it in cycles but it does. It know it can read fluid temps but they need a shut down mode for abuse to save the transmisson.
I would not want to own this car pre-owned unless I could get a full reading of how many launches it has had. Also the tires looks likely to wear in about 4-5K miles. Not a good thing either for a car in the $70-80K range. Since they are special tires associated to this car. I heard the costs is around $2-2.5K for them.
My point is that is supposed to be a DD and for being a Nissan the cost to maintain seems to be in the Lambo, Ferrari, etc category.The $240 oil change has been mentioned several times.
The 1800km fluid changes required/recommended is stickered on it. That is an expensive fluid change requirement.
I have said it before and I will say it again. I would not mind owning one of these after they get the kinks worked out and the maintenance costs down. Otherwise in one year I could be at more than 10% of the cars cost in repairs/maintenance.
Does that make sense?
$5-6K - is the price to change the brakes so far. I am am making a point of the costs of the maintenance for a car in the 70-80K range is fairly high and for being a Nissan it should not go hand in hand for high costs maitenance.
In reference to the motor - I heard $60K but I also thought the same thing about the cost. It didn't seem right. I would still think at least 30K for the motor. I will try to find the total cost from the the blown motor here locally.
The 70 launches is crazy but then again it should not allow you to continually run it in cycles but it does. It know it can read fluid temps but they need a shut down mode for abuse to save the transmisson.
I would not want to own this car pre-owned unless I could get a full reading of how many launches it has had. Also the tires looks likely to wear in about 4-5K miles. Not a good thing either for a car in the $70-80K range. Since they are special tires associated to this car. I heard the costs is around $2-2.5K for them.
My point is that is supposed to be a DD and for being a Nissan the cost to maintain seems to be in the Lambo, Ferrari, etc category.The $240 oil change has been mentioned several times.
The 1800km fluid changes required/recommended is stickered on it. That is an expensive fluid change requirement.
I have said it before and I will say it again. I would not mind owning one of these after they get the kinks worked out and the maintenance costs down. Otherwise in one year I could be at more than 10% of the cars cost in repairs/maintenance.
Does that make sense?
#43
09-30-2008, 06:19 PM
If you follow Nissan's recommendations and you track the car, it is super super expensive too maintain. But failing to follow them DOES NOT void the warranty.
Tire wear depends on alignment. Nothing new here.
#44
09-30-2008, 06:23 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 551
Fanboys:
Why has no one been able to explain why the GT-R ran only 1 second slower from ~100-~180 than a Zonda, .4 slower than a ZR-1 and faster than a Z06 on the back straight at the ring?????? All of which are 5-10 seconds faster from that interval??
You guys continue to bash, but even you guys cant think of a legit excuse. The funny thing is that the car that ran 7:38 had the identical time on that back straight, so even the first one was a ringer. Fact of the matter is that that was not a showroom GT-R, and even the one that Horst lapped to 7:50 was one of the same ringers, and he didnt think the mule had a 7:38 in it.
Now people are claiming that the GT-R can get three seconds over some of the stickiest non r-comp tires with the dunlops, those HAVE to be the fastest non r comp tires ever, of course the rating can mean anything and the RE's have the same softness as a NT-01 aready, so no telling how fast those Dunlops are.
I thought the volume was rather low on the vid, and there wasnt much squeal as owners are reporting.
I'm sure this pisses you guys off, but this is a Porsche Forum and if they make a statement of this type you SHOULD expect it to be a big deal here. How long did you think you'd get away with pedaling your GT-R crap around here taking up all the threads anyways???
Nissan's been caught with their hand in the cookie jar before, this wont be the first time. You'd think they would have learned by now.
Why has no one been able to explain why the GT-R ran only 1 second slower from ~100-~180 than a Zonda, .4 slower than a ZR-1 and faster than a Z06 on the back straight at the ring?????? All of which are 5-10 seconds faster from that interval??
You guys continue to bash, but even you guys cant think of a legit excuse. The funny thing is that the car that ran 7:38 had the identical time on that back straight, so even the first one was a ringer. Fact of the matter is that that was not a showroom GT-R, and even the one that Horst lapped to 7:50 was one of the same ringers, and he didnt think the mule had a 7:38 in it.
Now people are claiming that the GT-R can get three seconds over some of the stickiest non r-comp tires with the dunlops, those HAVE to be the fastest non r comp tires ever, of course the rating can mean anything and the RE's have the same softness as a NT-01 aready, so no telling how fast those Dunlops are.
I thought the volume was rather low on the vid, and there wasnt much squeal as owners are reporting.
I'm sure this pisses you guys off, but this is a Porsche Forum and if they make a statement of this type you SHOULD expect it to be a big deal here. How long did you think you'd get away with pedaling your GT-R crap around here taking up all the threads anyways???
Nissan's been caught with their hand in the cookie jar before, this wont be the first time. You'd think they would have learned by now.
#45
09-30-2008, 06:34 PM
And it gets juicier: http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../71017001/1065<STYLE> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </STYLE> <LINK href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CCANPHA%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5 Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml" rel=File-List><STYLE> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </STYLE><LINK href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CCANPHA%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5 Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml" rel=File-List><STYLE> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </STYLE><LINK href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CCANPHA%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5 Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml" rel=File-List><STYLE> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </STYLE>Quote: 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.<O></O><STYLE>!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </STYLE>
In other words, GT-R's chief engineer has confirmed that the much publicized 7:29 is a dream for a stock GT-R. I have nothing against Nissan, and in fact companies are known to "optimize"
their cars for better ring times, but to claim 20 seconds from the truth is to cross the line into cheating. It's a shameful act on Nissan's part; they should have known someone is going to expose them.
That such a heavy (near 4000 lbs!) and ugly car, with specific warranty policy prohibiting racing (!), from an average car company, is now listed near the top of the famed Nurburgring's time list is sad indeed. Unfortunately it will never go away and will remain a permanent blemish that I'll have to put up with every time I look at this list. http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?vie...ID=0&tID=10073
In other words, GT-R's chief engineer has confirmed that the much publicized 7:29 is a dream for a stock GT-R. I have nothing against Nissan, and in fact companies are known to "optimize"
their cars for better ring times, but to claim 20 seconds from the truth is to cross the line into cheating. It's a shameful act on Nissan's part; they should have known someone is going to expose them.That such a heavy (near 4000 lbs!) and ugly car, with specific warranty policy prohibiting racing (!), from an average car company, is now listed near the top of the famed Nurburgring's time list is sad indeed. Unfortunately it will never go away and will remain a permanent blemish that I'll have to put up with every time I look at this list.
http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?vie...ID=0&tID=10073
Last edited by cannga; 09-30-2008 at 07:43 PM.