997 TT beats GT-R at Ring. Nissan accused of cheating.
#1126
10-25-2008, 05:01 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 551 
HC:
Here's my proof: https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...7-post663.html (from this thread). I suppose it is technically "evidence" and not dispositive, but still better data than has been used above.
HC & Swampy: These are both my cars. You are right that I don't know for sure how much power each is making-- but isn't empirical dats from real world better than dyno anyway? Maybe I have a ringer GT-R and an unethical tuner on my 997TT. However, my main point it to highlight (with real live data from ME in MY CARS) that the Dual Clutch makes a big difference. Look at the chart.
Swampy: No turbo has no lag. Turbo cars get extra bonus from dual clutch in that you get to WOT shift, which keeps turbos fully spun up. Agree that GT-R makes this benefit (at the margin) less than other cars, but it is still there.
Here's my proof: https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...7-post663.html (from this thread). I suppose it is technically "evidence" and not dispositive, but still better data than has been used above.
HC & Swampy: These are both my cars. You are right that I don't know for sure how much power each is making-- but isn't empirical dats from real world better than dyno anyway? Maybe I have a ringer GT-R and an unethical tuner on my 997TT. However, my main point it to highlight (with real live data from ME in MY CARS) that the Dual Clutch makes a big difference. Look at the chart.
Swampy: No turbo has no lag. Turbo cars get extra bonus from dual clutch in that you get to WOT shift, which keeps turbos fully spun up. Agree that GT-R makes this benefit (at the margin) less than other cars, but it is still there.
Chris, you have said yourself that you dont use near the potential of the TT, that your intimidated by it as well. I dont see how this data is worthwhile when we have other members here who have gone faster, just on that straight in much lesser cars. That just doesnt make any sense.
You also ignore the fact the we can plainly see you get on the throttle and then lift in the TT, maybe turned in too early or something but there is certainly an error there. Had you slowed to the same speed in the TT you could have gotten on the gas at the same time from what that graph says.
#1127
10-25-2008, 05:20 PM
Chris, you have said yourself that you dont use near the potential of the TT, that your intimidated by it as well. I dont see how this data is worthwhile when we have other members here who have gone faster, just on that straight in much lesser cars. That just doesnt make any sense.
You also ignore the fact the we can plainly see you get on the throttle and then lift in the TT, maybe turned in too early or something but there is certainly an error there. Had you slowed to the same speed in the TT you could have gotten on the gas at the same time from what that graph says.
You also ignore the fact the we can plainly see you get on the throttle and then lift in the TT, maybe turned in too early or something but there is certainly an error there. Had you slowed to the same speed in the TT you could have gotten on the gas at the same time from what that graph says.
I fully acknowledge that I do not get the most out of my cars in the turns. Who here does? But this data is from straights. Tires don't matter, driver doesn't matter. Just look at the slopes of the lines. They indicate in-gear acceleration. Then look at the shift points in the TT and absence of them in the GT-R.
From a prior post (this time at Reno/Fernley): https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-my-turbo.html (Look at the chart in the initial post).
I included the chart from most of the lap. just look at the straights (steep slopes up). Story in consistent. Stock GT-R is very closely matched (on straights) to the 610HP 997 TT-- mostly due to faster shifting.
Last edited by chrisn; 10-25-2008 at 05:28 PM.
#1129
10-25-2008, 10:01 PM
#1130
10-25-2008, 10:16 PM
Dude, these are WOT straights. No skill required. There is much to the GT-R story that is subject to debate, but I don't think my data or the inherent superiority of dual clutch is one of them. You are losing credibility here.
I fully acknowledge that I do not get the most out of my cars in the turns. Who here does? But this data is from straights. Tires don't matter, driver doesn't matter. Just look at the slopes of the lines. They indicate in-gear acceleration. Then look at the shift points in the TT and absence of them in the GT-R.
From a prior post (this time at Reno/Fernley): https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-my-turbo.html (Look at the chart in the initial post).
I included the chart from most of the lap. just look at the straights (steep slopes up). Story in consistent. Stock GT-R is very closely matched (on straights) to the 610HP 997 TT-- mostly due to faster shifting.
I fully acknowledge that I do not get the most out of my cars in the turns. Who here does? But this data is from straights. Tires don't matter, driver doesn't matter. Just look at the slopes of the lines. They indicate in-gear acceleration. Then look at the shift points in the TT and absence of them in the GT-R.
From a prior post (this time at Reno/Fernley): https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-my-turbo.html (Look at the chart in the initial post).
I included the chart from most of the lap. just look at the straights (steep slopes up). Story in consistent. Stock GT-R is very closely matched (on straights) to the 610HP 997 TT-- mostly due to faster shifting.
#1131
10-25-2008, 10:41 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ridgcrest Ca
Age: 65
Posts: 1,122
Rep Power: 95
Here is a video of a Porsche 385 HP PDK beating the GT-R in a Drag race by the guys at Driver republic.
http://www.drivers-republic.com/dr_t...4e&area=videos
Not some guy with tractor at Fernly. So how in THE HELL does a 480HP DAT-SUN beat the 610hp 997 TT?? You have lost all credibility with that one.
That has to be the most gravitational challenged load of crap I have ever heard(that means the load of crap will float off into the ether never to be heard from again!)
Its DOES agree with one think Chrisn says. The dual clutch is VERY important. SO important that the 385 hp Carrera beats the GT-R comfortably.
So given Chrisn's figures the 610hp TT with the PDK should beat the holy crap out of the GTR by maybe 2 minutes!
This video is with race driver testers
On the track segment the GTR beat the 911 (a regular 911 NOT a 911S or EVEN a 610Hp SUPER TWIN TURBO 911!!!) by 4 seconds at Silverstone. The SAME 911 the GT-R LOST to in a DRAG race. HOW IN THE HELL is it going to beat a car with 225 MORE hp than the lil' 911 it LOST TOO!!!!!!
I would guess at Silverstone the 610HP TT would beat that GT-R by 10 seconds.
http://www.drivers-republic.com/dr_t...4e&area=videos
Not some guy with tractor at Fernly. So how in THE HELL does a 480HP DAT-SUN beat the 610hp 997 TT?? You have lost all credibility with that one.
That has to be the most gravitational challenged load of crap I have ever heard(that means the load of crap will float off into the ether never to be heard from again!)
Its DOES agree with one think Chrisn says. The dual clutch is VERY important. SO important that the 385 hp Carrera beats the GT-R comfortably.
So given Chrisn's figures the 610hp TT with the PDK should beat the holy crap out of the GTR by maybe 2 minutes!
This video is with race driver testers
On the track segment the GTR beat the 911 (a regular 911 NOT a 911S or EVEN a 610Hp SUPER TWIN TURBO 911!!!) by 4 seconds at Silverstone. The SAME 911 the GT-R LOST to in a DRAG race. HOW IN THE HELL is it going to beat a car with 225 MORE hp than the lil' 911 it LOST TOO!!!!!!
I would guess at Silverstone the 610HP TT would beat that GT-R by 10 seconds.
#1132
10-26-2008, 01:09 AM
HC:
Here's my proof: https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...7-post663.html (from this thread). I suppose it is technically "evidence" and not dispositive, but still better data than has been used above.
HC & Swampy: These are both my cars. You are right that I don't know for sure how much power each is making-- but isn't empirical dats from real world better than dyno anyway? Maybe I have a ringer GT-R and an unethical tuner on my 997TT. However, my main point it to highlight (with real live data from ME in MY CARS) that the Dual Clutch makes a big difference. Look at the chart.
Swampy: It's been a long time since I took my stats classes in undergrad, but my reference to "systematic bias" (maybe my vocab is wrong) was not meant as an insult, it was a technical comment that if your model if consistently wrong, you prob need to take a look at the variables you are tracking instead of explaining the observed world as being highly improbable (many sigmas away from mean). I think your model would be better if it included a "shift time" variable. I am highly highly confident (R^2 =99.99; would bet my life on it) that a predictive HP model would be better if it accounted for shift times. How could it possibly be otherwise? I do hear you, that you are pointing to differences among the GT-Rs, which maybe could be explained by weather or other factors. I think your are saying "7:29 car must be more powerful than other GT-Rs" and I am saying "It may be (who can know?), but don't forget the non-HP factors when talking ring times."
Swampy: No turbo has no lag. Turbo cars get extra bonus from dual clutch in that you get to WOT shift, which keeps turbos fully spun up. Agree that GT-R makes this benefit (at the margin) less than other cars, but it is still there.
Here's my proof: https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...7-post663.html (from this thread). I suppose it is technically "evidence" and not dispositive, but still better data than has been used above.
HC & Swampy: These are both my cars. You are right that I don't know for sure how much power each is making-- but isn't empirical dats from real world better than dyno anyway? Maybe I have a ringer GT-R and an unethical tuner on my 997TT. However, my main point it to highlight (with real live data from ME in MY CARS) that the Dual Clutch makes a big difference. Look at the chart.
Swampy: It's been a long time since I took my stats classes in undergrad, but my reference to "systematic bias" (maybe my vocab is wrong) was not meant as an insult, it was a technical comment that if your model if consistently wrong, you prob need to take a look at the variables you are tracking instead of explaining the observed world as being highly improbable (many sigmas away from mean). I think your model would be better if it included a "shift time" variable. I am highly highly confident (R^2 =99.99; would bet my life on it) that a predictive HP model would be better if it accounted for shift times. How could it possibly be otherwise? I do hear you, that you are pointing to differences among the GT-Rs, which maybe could be explained by weather or other factors. I think your are saying "7:29 car must be more powerful than other GT-Rs" and I am saying "It may be (who can know?), but don't forget the non-HP factors when talking ring times."
Swampy: No turbo has no lag. Turbo cars get extra bonus from dual clutch in that you get to WOT shift, which keeps turbos fully spun up. Agree that GT-R makes this benefit (at the margin) less than other cars, but it is still there.
First, can both sides please take a chill pill. This is a fun debate that will never prove anything, but it doesn't have to get personal.
I can't explain the CGT scenario. I can, however, explain and prove the situation of a GT-R beating a 610HP Stage IV 997TT down the main straight. Please to examine the graph below. Green = GT-R (stock), Blue = 997TT with (at the time) 610HP (per tuner-- don't ask me for dyno). Note a couple of things. I get on the gas coming around Turn 14/15 at Thill sooner in GT-R than in TT. Not slope in blue line. Slope=acceleration. Note that blue slope > green slope (997TT has faster in-gear acceleration through 5th gear when stock turbos run out of breath). Note the steps in blue line where I am shifting. See how accel falls to zero until I get back in gear and boost builds? Note no such pause in green line. Magic.
That's your answer. #1, it's the dual clutch tranny. #2, for non-pro drivers, it's easier to get on the gas sooner with GT-R.
I also think it's shocking to see claims that GT-R is faster than cars like the Scud, CGT, etc. I agree that it makes no sense on paper. But I have real GPS data from me in real cars that help to begin to explain.
Look how much speed/time is lost to shifting. How many times do drivers shift on the Ring? 50 times? That adds up. How much faster does Porsche claim the PDK C2S is around the ring (or if normal track mulitply diff by 4).
I can't explain the CGT scenario. I can, however, explain and prove the situation of a GT-R beating a 610HP Stage IV 997TT down the main straight. Please to examine the graph below. Green = GT-R (stock), Blue = 997TT with (at the time) 610HP (per tuner-- don't ask me for dyno). Note a couple of things. I get on the gas coming around Turn 14/15 at Thill sooner in GT-R than in TT. Not slope in blue line. Slope=acceleration. Note that blue slope > green slope (997TT has faster in-gear acceleration through 5th gear when stock turbos run out of breath). Note the steps in blue line where I am shifting. See how accel falls to zero until I get back in gear and boost builds? Note no such pause in green line. Magic.
That's your answer. #1, it's the dual clutch tranny. #2, for non-pro drivers, it's easier to get on the gas sooner with GT-R.
I also think it's shocking to see claims that GT-R is faster than cars like the Scud, CGT, etc. I agree that it makes no sense on paper. But I have real GPS data from me in real cars that help to begin to explain.
Look how much speed/time is lost to shifting. How many times do drivers shift on the Ring? 50 times? That adds up. How much faster does Porsche claim the PDK C2S is around the ring (or if normal track mulitply diff by 4).
Since there is no x axis you can not tell exactly how much time you are taking to shift. It looks to me like way too long. Not to say that I can shift faster than you, just to say it does not look like you are getting the most (or even a fair shake) of your MT.
I will be the first to argue the importance and advantages of a DCT transmission. I have one in my E92 M3 and love it! The shifts, much like the GT-R, are lightning fast. However, I don't think the advantage on a track can be calculated as simply as # of shifts on track * MT shift time. A step closer would be the number of WOT upshifts * MT shift time. However, even this rough estimate and is still probably too high. When I ran a bunch of numbers and simulations for my E92 M3 M-DCT I figured the M-DCT was good (in a straight line) for about 20 hp. That is significant. This still is not enough to explain the observed differences.
As far as the various regression models. Don't worry about a potential insult. I did not take it that way. There are "problems" with this model it is by no means perfect. Unfortunately, there are so few M-DCT cars and tests for their lap times, that you can not regress for this variable. At some point you will be able to. However, if you honestly believe, and would be your life, that R^2 would improve to 99.99 you are now dead
.- R^2 is bounded by 1.0 not 100.
- There is way, way too much variation from all of the other factors other than power to weight to expect some accounting of the DCT could do this to the regression. Long term you could probably expect an improvement in R^2 of maybe 5%. As powerful as the regression analysis is there will always be a scatter of data and accounting for DCT cars does nothing to non DCT cars.
- Two of the most important variables other than P/W are tires and driver.
I can explain your 610 hp 997TT being roughly equal to your GT-R in many ways. Where to start.
- Your GT-R is very likely not producing 480 hp.
- Your 997TT is very likely not producing 610 hp.
- The GT-R is always heralded as so much easier to drive, this is a factor in my argument, the regression analysis, everything, and it is likely a factor here as well.
On a totally unrelated note: How lucky are you to be tracking a modded 997TT AND a GT-R. Enjoy, drive safe.
#1134
10-26-2008, 08:35 AM
OldGuy - that was an "S" version they tested though. Both cars sounded like they used Launch Control. They said in the video earlier on that the GTR does 0-100mph in 8.5s yet they record 9.5s at the end. I would expect a ROMPING against the PDK C2S with the given HP difference. But the Nissan is a PIG with sticky feet.
The Porsche is 2WD. I wonder what the AWD 4S would do.
#1135
10-26-2008, 08:44 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: close to the Nordschleife
Posts: 239
Rep Power: 27
btw: cheating. how much does a stock gtr rev? I checked the revs on the record laps and they go up to 7200 rounds per minute, which may point to some video acceleration...
#1136
10-26-2008, 10:14 AM
However, if you honestly believe, and would be your life, that R^2 would improve to 99.99 you are now dead .
If you 997TT does indeed have 610 hp there is no way the GT-R can match the raw straight line acceleration of such a car with 480 hp, PERIOD. It just can't happen.
.If you 997TT does indeed have 610 hp there is no way the GT-R can match the raw straight line acceleration of such a car with 480 hp, PERIOD. It just can't happen.
In terms of in-gear acceleration, I 100% agree with you--- that data in in my charts (reflected as the slopes of the in-gear parts of graph).
In terms of shifting speed, for sure I can improve (especially heel-toe and shifting while "busy"), but I have a few thousand miles on track and don't think I suck in a statistically significant sense (at least not for WOT shifts on the straights).
Why do you think Porsche claims an 8 second advantage (on the Ring) for their PDK? What does your model say if you put in the stats for the 911.2 C2S (stick), then shave 8 secs of the lap. How much extra HP does that imply?
#1137
10-26-2008, 11:22 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ridgcrest Ca
Age: 65
Posts: 1,122
Rep Power: 95
Porshaboy
Instead of just sounding stupid why dont you point out where I was wrong...
OH you CANT!!
You can only sound stupid!! I see I gotta admit, you are very good at it!
Did you watch the video? Did you see where the GT-R lost?
Instead of just sounding stupid why dont you point out where I was wrong...
OH you CANT!!
You can only sound stupid!! I see I gotta admit, you are very good at it!
Did you watch the video? Did you see where the GT-R lost?
#1138
10-26-2008, 11:41 AM
OldGuy - he won't admit it. He is a POSER not a PORSHER - big difference. Being an atagonist is his only claim to fame as he does not have anything else to recite to the GTR fanboys.
FYI - if you are really in good with your NISSAN TECH MANAGERS you will discover that there are now 26 cases nationwide on the Tranny Issues. I didn't say failed and i didn't say no warranty. I am saying there are 26 cases involving the tranny and I do not mean for noise or solenoids. I mean problems with the tranny. I know the GT-R fanclub over at Nagtroc refuses to believe there are more than 2 after they have been told more than that. They just want to blame the drivers abusing it and they deserve what they get.
You will not notice that on this board is because Porsche doesn't deny warranty because a black box told them so. In fact most companies don't.
Also take note of the Gear Tranny Upgrade that a company is offering. Unbreakable gears is what they are claiming. At a cost of what? Definately warranty denial on anything associated to the driveline/motor. Thought you had problems with LC think what would happen with changing out gears that are "SO TOUGH" that the transaxles just gives out.
You spend 85K on a car put another 20K in to void your warranty on the motor and the driveline. SCHWEEET!! Also did you notice no one took a stand that there is not a problem with the GT-R tranny? A member posted that concern there as well. Funny that the Nissan fanboys says "OUR TRANNYS ARE MORE THAN FINE" but welcomes the thought of upgraded gears for 10-20K? What's next?...
Porsche Upgraded Clutch = 2.5K
Nissan Upgraded Gears = 15-20K
Porsche PDK with LC = Warranty
Nissan DSG with LC = VOID
All the Nissan fanboys spending 115K/120K to get a car to perform as advertised = priceless.
FYI - if you are really in good with your NISSAN TECH MANAGERS you will discover that there are now 26 cases nationwide on the Tranny Issues. I didn't say failed and i didn't say no warranty. I am saying there are 26 cases involving the tranny and I do not mean for noise or solenoids. I mean problems with the tranny. I know the GT-R fanclub over at Nagtroc refuses to believe there are more than 2 after they have been told more than that. They just want to blame the drivers abusing it and they deserve what they get.
You will not notice that on this board is because Porsche doesn't deny warranty because a black box told them so. In fact most companies don't.
Also take note of the Gear Tranny Upgrade that a company is offering. Unbreakable gears is what they are claiming. At a cost of what? Definately warranty denial on anything associated to the driveline/motor. Thought you had problems with LC think what would happen with changing out gears that are "SO TOUGH" that the transaxles just gives out.
You spend 85K on a car put another 20K in to void your warranty on the motor and the driveline. SCHWEEET!! Also did you notice no one took a stand that there is not a problem with the GT-R tranny? A member posted that concern there as well. Funny that the Nissan fanboys says "OUR TRANNYS ARE MORE THAN FINE" but welcomes the thought of upgraded gears for 10-20K? What's next?...
Porsche Upgraded Clutch = 2.5K
Nissan Upgraded Gears = 15-20K
Porsche PDK with LC = Warranty
Nissan DSG with LC = VOID
All the Nissan fanboys spending 115K/120K to get a car to perform as advertised = priceless.
#1139
10-26-2008, 11:51 AM
FYI - if you are really in good with your NISSAN TECH MANAGERS you will discover that there are now 26 cases nationwide on the Tranny Issues. I didn't say failed and i didn't say no warranty. I am saying there are 26 cases involving the tranny and I do not mean for noise or solenoids. I mean problems with the tranny. I know the GT-R fanclub over at Nagtroc refuses to believe there are more than 2 after they have been told more than that. They just want to blame the drivers abusing it and they deserve what they get.
I did three LCs and did not find it that thrilling of an experience. The 1-2 and 2-3 shifts are just as impressive from a less violent start. I assume most folks with manuals don't make a habit of dong clutch-drop starts at 5K unless they are drag racers and have the budget to fix what will inevitably break.
At the same time, I think it's bogus to not have clear guidance on the LC issue. Is 5 too much? 15? 50?
#1140
10-26-2008, 12:35 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ga
Posts: 8,934
Rep Power: 551 Dude, these are WOT straights. No skill required. There is much to the GT-R story that is subject to debate, but I don't think my data or the inherent superiority of dual clutch is one of them. You are losing credibility here.
I fully acknowledge that I do not get the most out of my cars in the turns. Who here does? But this data is from straights. Tires don't matter, driver doesn't matter. Just look at the slopes of the lines. They indicate in-gear acceleration. Then look at the shift points in the TT and absence of them in the GT-R.
From a prior post (this time at Reno/Fernley): https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-my-turbo.html (Look at the chart in the initial post).
I included the chart from most of the lap. just look at the straights (steep slopes up). Story in consistent. Stock GT-R is very closely matched (on straights) to the 610HP 997 TT-- mostly due to faster shifting.
I fully acknowledge that I do not get the most out of my cars in the turns. Who here does? But this data is from straights. Tires don't matter, driver doesn't matter. Just look at the slopes of the lines. They indicate in-gear acceleration. Then look at the shift points in the TT and absence of them in the GT-R.
From a prior post (this time at Reno/Fernley): https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-my-turbo.html (Look at the chart in the initial post).
I included the chart from most of the lap. just look at the straights (steep slopes up). Story in consistent. Stock GT-R is very closely matched (on straights) to the 610HP 997 TT-- mostly due to faster shifting.
- You were driving a car you're admittedly scared of even now and that on other tracks you've gotten speeds on straight slower than a stock 997 TT could do. And this was last year when you were probably even more scared of the TT.
- Like swamp says, over a while straight there is no way the shifting should be that slow. That's some of the slowest shifting I've ever seen.
- Your first time at said track when you were in the TT.
- You take any random lap from different track days, in different conditions, with different experience levels. That's not even consistent for one driver.
-This isnt good data at all, no speeds on the graph or anything, two shifts in the TT and only one in the GT-R???? Were you short shifting??
I'm sure you have access to the real stuff, so at least try not to leave out EVERYTHING that would make the data substantial, not that it would really be anyways.
Last edited by heavychevy; 10-26-2008 at 12:46 PM.