From DR..... (on the 7:29 lap)

The GTR hits 290kph (180mph) twice on its way to that lap time. The throttle position graph tells of total commitment (TPOS on the graph). Lapping a 1740kg road car in 7:29 is simply a phenomenal achievement.



Chris Harris hit 168 mph tops. That's 12 mph difference. And It's second fastest speed is 160 mph, that's 20 MPH!!!!!!!!!

 

Right that's why DR spent to pages talking about because of the rain the GTR felt heavy, and had issues with grip.

 

You were right heavychevy the 7:29 Nissan GTR had allot more power than the production car. Porsche got it wrong by blaming the tyres. My guess is that the GTR had in excess of 600hp instead of the normal 480hp.

 

Its not because of the rain, its because the GTR IS A HEAVY CAR. You can make the steering as light as you want on a heavy car to make it seem light and quick but at the end of the day no car can defy physics.

DR didnt have as much problem with handling on the GTR, their main issues were tyre, brakes, and power. The Porsche on the other hand was at a massive disadvantage with the weather conditions. A dry track would have made the result more pronounced in favour of Porsche.

Ho many times in that video did CH mention that he had to lift or shortshift on the GT2 whereas the GTR was just flat out.

 

 

Abort mission or die
+
Fanboys lame Tags
+
Oink?

=

ROFLMAO




Who are you? AHAHAHAHAH




Edit: 2008 ugliest car to cheat and fail, bwahahahahahahahahahah

 

It was actually 3-4 laps from a guy who had been racing the Ring in the days prior to.


And tell that story to the ACR. Unfamiliar driver, one day, four hours, fastest stock car ever.

Then go and tell that to the ZR-1, two weeks setup, not even a pro driver but a test engineer, and only 1 hour to set the time.

The GT-R doesnt match the GT2, not even close. The Dunlops are worse in the wet than the bridgestones, so it could have possibly gone slower. And the short shifting etc on the GT2 would dissapear on a dry track and the GT-R would have gotten beaten even worse.

You are failing miserably at whatever it is you're trying to prove.

 

hilar ious

 

Mizuno, I wondered where you had been! Good to have you back!

 

Mizuno's picture is worth a thousand words!

 

It has a 1000 word on it already.



GT2 > GT-R. Who cares? Was anyone cross shopping those cars?

Embarrassing for Porsche that anyone even asked the question.

 

Why is it embarassing, The two fastest production cars there are cost much less than a GT2. People dont buy cars for dollar vs speed. It's the whole package, and obviously the GT2 offers enough of a package to sell for 200k.

No different for a Z06, great bang for the buck in performance, but other than that, NOT A PORSCHE. That lame arguement gets worse everytime it's used as if people buy Lambo's and Ferraris because they are the fastest, yeah right.

Not only that but Nissan continues to confirm what we already knew, they are taking a lashing on the GT-R. And they didnt even budget certain design stages of the car.

I bet you if we tallied what the manufacturer put into it and what it cost to buid vs profit, the GT2 would costs less, and go faster. But if Nissan are comfy eating all the losses, more power to them.

 

I'm betting the reason for the cost difference would become more evident if you were to race both cars around the 'ring for several hours. The GTR's brakes were already beginning to fade.

 

What I meant, in addition to massive (>2X) price delta, was that the GT2 is the pinnacle car in the range, not the base model with that chassis. I assume you are referring to the ACR and the ZR1. Those should be compared to the GT2.

GT-R should be compared to the 4S or TT in the 911 line or to the Z06 in the vette line.

BTW, I hope/assume that Nissan is losing money on the GT-R project. Maybe they do OK on a variable cost basis for each marginal car produced (esp after MSRP bump), but all-in, I assume they lost their shirt and the whole thing is ego driven. For me, that's upside!

The 7:29 'Ring time debate is interesting, but I care much more about the head-to-head stuff. It would be great if Nissan got out there with it's best driver in a showroom car and Porsche did the same.

-Chris

 

The reason for the price difference has more to do with economics than anything else. Porsche is not a mega manufacturer like Nissan, GM etc. So they have to build cars with better than average quality materials and provide better than average service to sell cars. Making a fast car is easy, there are lots of them, but making a fast car, providing top level material service and delivery, build quality and reliability is a completely different story. Porsche > Nissan in all aspects of that scenario. Especially when it comes to the sporting aspect.

If Porsche sold millions of sentras and maximas, I'm sure they could take a huge loss on an 80k car.

So in that aspect, it's Nissan who should be embarrased that lil old Porsche makes cars that are worth more money while using smaller budgets. And actually MAKES MONEY on them. Especially since the engine is in the "wrong" place.