a 2002 911 turbo S?

 

but would you believe a one eyed toothless deputy and his vicious dog

 

Fact: a stock TT will beat a stock gtr on any road course in the USA with similar advanced drivers.
Fact: a modded TT on R comps will destroy a modded gtr with R's on any road course.
Street racing; completely unpredictable, meaningless and stupid in this day and age.

 

You forgot about the last fact.

Fact: A sham video is a tuner's shameless attempt at selling products.

Note the end of the video:

 

Not sure if you are being witty, but your first point is wrong, your second point is unanswerable and your third point is the gospel truth.


And BBYWU, I agree the video is silly. The Turbo appeared to be bogging in the wrong gear or else just not getting on it.

-Chris

 

if the baseline is 450hp on a dynojet, this is completely possible.

my baseline on a mustang was 400/401, and now i'm running a conservative tune @ 450/490. with just a tune. at the exhaust with a more aggressive tune, why not? i'm sure because of your extensive knowledge about hp numbers/claims, you already know what the average baseline on a dynojet is... so i won't bother correcting you.
nobody wants to see either the parade lap or you holding up the gt-r (unless you think the car behind the gt-r is slower than him as well). the only reason i've seen that many cars close together is that the front car is going so damn slow, and not allowing anybody to pass. don't worry, you don't have to show us the blue flag that came out on the next corner.

wow, so much knowledge in this post, it's scary.

first - what's wrong with the transmission? .1 sec shifts too slow? the ability to handle over 600whp too little?

second - nissan advertised 3.5 0-60. the car does 3.3 (launching in vdc 'r' mode). no warranty voiding there. you're pretty smart. i'll let you figure out everything else.

third - cheap hp? you've got be kidding. there are much cheaper cars with much greater hp potential than a gt-r (i.e. '03 cobra, etc...).

another great post. i'll help you out, because this was only covered 15 other times....

the price was $175k with the equivalent of a base model in the same country selling for over $100k.

because of the embedded taxes that we don't pay here, the msrp is a lot higher.

our base model is around $76k, giving us an equivalent of about $130k.

but don't let me disturb your ignorance.

well, what happened last time when nissan let the press in? you get what you deserve.
so because they all don't act like childish porsche owners by giving in to a street race, they don't have fast cars?

or should they have raced, because you think peer pressure is still cool?

one says, they don't street race, the other says they do. the anti-gt-r crowd doesn't even know what to consider criteria.

rickie didn't put up the video here first. he's been impartial to the gt-r for quite sometime (according to his other posts on other forums), and has provided the gt-r owners with a lot of non-biased information.

good discussion guys... i didn't mean to throw things off - continue the lynching.

 

Does that make it better that a HUGE increase in MSRP = a decrease in performance? Not to mention maintenance, replacements for carbon brakes, specialized equipment that dealers will not be willing to foot the bill for this time.


And I'm the ignorant one???


Not to mention no one brought rickie into this thread, he brought himself. The video speaks for itself, and although I commend him for making some clarification, it does not make that video any more than an advertising pitch.

 

yes, you are the individual who posted that the spec-v msrp is $175k when comparing it to the base model.

that, sir, means you are lacking education or knowledge - ignorant.

i made no comments about the speculative performance of the spec-v.

unless you think that the same source that had the gt-r run circles around a 911t (best motoring) that you found invalid, is all of the sudden valid with it's one day in the spec-v.

i think you have issues.

 

jasper, cool your jets, that shot was on the cool down lap. That's the only time the japanese car was even in the same shot.

 

you know what? i apologize... although there some truth in my outburst of a rebuttal, i was a little hot.

sorry man... i enjoy track time as much as the next guy (i'm hooked now). and i've learned that you never know what is going on the other guy's head (i.e. something he/she might be working on, off-line exercises, etc...).

that is a cool pic, and i think i took it out of context.

 

Cool

 

So you're going to make the world out of me just basing the price straight from exchange rates, something that many people do? A little desperate huh? So it will only cost you 50k to loose performance in the same platform as opposed to 100k.

Ok, my bad. You're too busy arguing over semantics while TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT. As I have come to expect from you guys.

Drama queens, I tell you.

 

heavychevy - your agenda is clear. but you would make a greater point if you used facts. it is not semantics, it's called facts. get them right, or don't make the uninformed (ignorant) statement to begin with.

like i said earlier - and i noticed you're still doing it.... you're taking a single source (and the only one currently available one that i'm aware of) that you yourself discredited earlier (best motoring) when the gt-r was making quicker laps than the 911t (on more than one occasion). but now that the results suit your agenda, you are glorifying it as gospel when comparing the spec-v to the base gt-r.

so which is it? is best motoring a credible source? or is it not?

 

SO WHAT!!!!!!!

FACT: The Vspec went slower on the same track with the same driver in similar conditions than both the 08' and 09' base GT-R's.

The 997 BM tested was admittedly on tires that had been run to death by the media and are not as sticky as either sets of tires on the GT-R's even when they are new. Not to mention at least one of the base GT-R's was MODDED with CF racing seats that saved way around 130 lbs in weight.

Everyone know BM is Japan biased, that would mean they'd have no reason to dilute the performance of the V-spec because that is a member of the "home team" and a GT-R at that, the icon in Japan.

Your pathetic attempts at justification are going to fail unless you can show a vid of a GT-R lapping like beginners at a DE while getting left by NSX-R;s like best motoring does to the 997 GT3 and Ferrari's and Lambos and Corvettes.

 

i'm going to assume by your lack of an acknowledgement about the other event with the porsche 911t along with a few other cars (lotus, nsx, etc...), that you still agree that best motoring also has an agenda... even though you're only going to bring up the instances that suit your agenda.

that's like me digging up one magazine's review about the z06 that states the z06 does the 1/4 in 11.7 and leave it alone. because my car does low 11's.

it's funny to watch you pretend like you know all about the spec-v because of a single day from a single biased (you stated yourself) company.

is it too much of a stretch to think that bm's agenda (although biased) doesn't closely align with your's?