8 seconds over 13 miles on stickier tires with more hp.

NOT JUST PDK.

 

(start of short off topic material) I think the fact that there are over 80 pages of predominately 911 Turbo owners defending the performance of their cars against a manufacturer that is better known for making economy cars, pick-ups, and minivans is a true testament that Nissan succeeded with the GT-R. I mean come on, even if you never use the launch control you still have a great car with fantastic performance (handling, not acceleration being the most impressive) for half the price. The car is a success whether the members here admit it or not.

As a former multi-Porsche GT3, 911 Turbo, Ferrari, and current Lamborghini owner, I couldn't be more happy with my GT-R I'll just keep on running up the miles on it while everyone else argues if it has a faulty transmission or if Nissan cheated when they brought the car to the "Ring. (end of short off topic material)

 

I'm not scared to drive fast in straight line.

All shifts were WOT.

Same # of shifts-- you just can't see them in GT-R

Slowest shifter ever? Thanks for the ad hominem, but how would you know? This is speed over distance, not over time. Shows how fast each car was going at same point on track.

I'll post the full graph and also pull the data into Excel to make my point more clearly. I also have GPS data from F1crazydriver. I will compare his shift times to mine (I assume faster, but I assume doesn't make a big diff).

-Chris

 

My source (maybe wrong) says 8 secs was delta on PDK v non-PDK no other diffs:

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/06/18/p...e-on-the-ring/

No sure about tires (it says sport tires)--- I assume the same (unless Porsche is taking page from Nissan's book ;-) )

 

Actually I can see the 1 shift in the GT-R. And shifts are more pronounced the faster you go because the subsequent loss in momentum has a greater effect. There is definitely a 2-1 shift on that straight.

When I learn to print the screen I can show you several cars that arent nearly that slow shifting especially in the lower gears. Including many of my own and cars that would actually lose that power from not being in the powerband do to low torque/hp and low(long) gearing). These are redily available at traqmate.com.


Please post all of the data with F1crazydriver so we can see it.

 

I would have assumed that too if it were not for them not putting much detail into the tires. "sport tyres"??? Porsche has some sneaky advertising too (PCCB, PSM, Curbweight just to name a few) that they put extra emphasis on selling and dont meet expectations.

They clearly state sport tires on the PDK and nothing for the other cars which I'm certain they would have mentioned to make sure the PDK got all the credit.

Until it's stated for sure that the other cars had a special tire, then it cant be assumed. I personally doubt the PDK could do a 7:50 on anything less that sport cups, so that's my assumption.

 

It's good to have this Sunday chat with you, HC.

OK. So I went back and compared my shift times with F1's (let's use him as the "good driver" versus ChrisN as the "scared driver"). We're about the same. 3-->4 shifts on main straight (checked three laps for each of us) were within 150 MS of each other. I basically measured total "time off the power," so this was the full shift cycle and it (for both of us) was in the 1.10 to 1.30 second range.

HC: your eyes must be better than my GPS data, because you simply cannot see the GT-R shifts in the data. They are lost in the noise. Maybe if my GPS box were attached more firmly, you could se a bump. See my large-screen captures of the TraqMate output, below.

Unfort, F1 supplied me data in "Race Mode" which won't overlay with my data-- so I did two charts. Note the scale on the bottom (MPH) is diff (but G scale is the same). Note also that these are over TIME not DISTANCE, so it is hard to compare turn-by-turn, but I marked the main straight for reference.


Data from F1's 2:03.7 Lap in 996TT: http://homepage.mac.com/cnicholson1/F1_996TT.jpg

Data from my 2:05.7 lap in GT-R:

http://homepage.mac.com/cnicholson1/Chris_GT-R.jpg

 

I thought that initial hump on the front straight may have been a shift since it's not consistent on all the graphs, I dont know the gearing, but that first interuption in accel looked like a shift to me. I could be wrong.

What's good to see is a 480 hp TT on 300 treadware tires going faster than the GT-R if you look at the time at the bottom of the mph/time graph you can see the cars about equal for the lap until the later stages when he starts getting to the braking an accel zones before you.

It's also appearant that his 480 hp 996 TT is just as fast on the straight. If he didnt shift or lift towards the end (could have been traffic) he could have easily gotten the 3 mph difference prior to the braking zone on the front straight. And that's without the help of a DSG, just shifting old fashined style. Combine that with the fact that he ran prior to repave which nearly everyone is claiming 2 seconds and he's about 4 seconds faster.

No sport cups
No 600 hp
No DSG

And the 600 hp TT on r comps isnt supposed to be faster? If anything this should be proof to you how much power you ARENT using. And we arent comparing you to a pro, just an advanced DE driver which is what you claim to be.


And hopefully this disproves your theory pretty soundly.

 

But like I've said before you only made the car harder to drive for your skill level with the mods you put on it. The 997 TT has more than enough acceleration for it's handling capabilities, and when you add 30% more power without really upgrading the cars handling, you make the car even scarier than the stock power you were scared of.

 

My point in prior post was to show the advantage of dual clutch (tires don't matter; driver doesn't matter-- unless he shifts super slow, which apparently I don't). I have now proved my point to all other than HC.

I am not saying I am particularly fast around the track, or get the most of any car I have ever driven. F1 is faster in a lesser car. So what? I'm still learning. Nonetheless, I thought I would share this.

I did this a while back. I tried to manually overlay my 997TT (700 EVT with 100 Octane) over F1 in 996TT and me in GT-R (stock).

Not sure what it proves, other than the 997 ETV is wicked fast on the straights (~142mph GPS speed terminal velocity), but thought I would throw in the mix just to prove to HC that I know how to floor it on the straights. Also shows my shifts time realtive to F1's. Note this chart is by DISTANCE so the corners line of better.

Note: I am faster in the 997TT with More HP than the 996 with less HP. I still don't understand HC's biazarro-world logic that >HP equal < speed.

My prior comments (1000 posts ago) was that the 997TT (for me) was harder to learn to drive than the Cayman or the GT-R. Why harder? Fear. Does that make me a girly-man?

-Chris

Triple overlay:

http://homepage.mac.com/cnicholson1/...s_Enrrique.jpg

 

Unfortunately not. The data shows what the data shows.

Driving fast in a straight line isn't scary and doesn't require great skill.

What will it take for you to admit you are wrong?

 

Z07 what happened to that acerbic wit of yours?

 

I miss the Fu Man Chu picture too.

 

That picture was more annoying than he is!

 

This is the crux of the matter here, Its not true and it sinks the credibility of the claimer. Physics Doesnt lie!

I just showed a video of a 385hp Stock 911S beating the GT-R in a straight line. THEN the GT-R beat the 911 by 4 seconds on Silverstone with Race driver tester. If the 911 had 225 more horsepower it would smash the GT-R with those same test drivers- Simple as that.

What this proves IF the claimer has the cars he claims (and they are modded as claimed-997 TT to 610 and the GT-R stock) is that the Claimer doesnt know how to drive a 911. As most of us 911 owners know the 911 in any form doesnt suffer fools.
Its NOT an easy car to drive fast right away. Its not intuitive, like say a GT-R
This has never more evident as in this thread if the 610hp 911 is modded as claimed. He doesnt know how to drive the 911 at near its limits. In my first day at the track in my 996 GT3 I was getting passed by Honda S2000.
So now I should start a thread that I have PROVED beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Honda S2000 is FASTER than the 996 GT3?

This thread also shows as many tests have shown that any dummy (not my word it was in one of the mag tests) can drive a GT-R near is limits with all its nannies working. As intended by DAT-SUN.

So what I have gathered from all this is that Chrisn CAN drive his GT-R faster than his 997 911 Turbo. This proves his skill in 911 piloting is not as good as in Nanny cars.
Nissans Nannies are better than Porsches Nannies (albeit MOST GOOD 911 pilots dont WANT nannies, they take pride in their OWN skill not some embedded computers).

Big deal- Physics will not allow 4000 lb car to go around track faster than 3600lb car with 120 hp more, PERIOD. That just shows tester hasnt as much skill in driving cars that require a high level of experience in high HP cars with the engine in the back.
And thats not a bad thing there are many 911 guys that have a hard time with trail braking corner entry yada yada yada. But it DOESNT show that the Datsun is faster than the 997 TT. I think its a fact its not.