It's interesting how the discussion on the GTR has evolved from "Are those real numbers", to "Are they using stickier tires", to "more boost" to the point where now, the general concensus is that they are real numbers and not inflated artificially.

I think it shows an insecurity by Porsche owners who compare the two cars and put down the GTR. I too was skeptical that this car could last more than a few hard driven laps on track, because if you look at the car in terms of power to weight ratio, it's clear that it defies physics. However, more and more independent track tests show that the car does not go away or have brake fade after 20 continuous laps. That's saying something.

If your looking for a faster lap time, the GTR is the car for you. BUT, will it be as enjoyable? In looking at in car videotape shot at a track day, the car takes off from a dead stop with launch control (which a lot of cars are coming out with now a days) and the on board video looks like the car is super easy to drive. Where is the fun in that? Personally, I want to be involved in the ability to get around the track myself and not have help from the electronics. Buy that's just me, I'm not going to get a professional race car driving contract where the .5 seconds per lap is going to make a difference.

For the price point of a GTR (excluding the mark up at this time), it's a hell of a car you get for the money. I really don't think P cars and the GTR are in the same category with the exception of some crossover. BMW should be the ones that should be afraid. With roughly the same price point, the GTR is much more attractive in terms of performance in coupe form vs. the new M3.

 

The Lotus and the R8 is a great analogy. Absolutely dead-on. Plus until there are tuning packages for the GT-R that prove to be effective and reliable (and does not shred the DCT transmission to pieces), my Stage 3 997TT is still the more powerful car, and way lighter. I would guess that such packages, if they come out, will be 6 to 12 months after the US launch. By then, the game would have moved on by every manufacturer( Lambo LP560, Corvette ZR-1, Audi R10). Porsche would have an answer too. Wait! Porsche already has an answer before all that. Its called the GT2.

 

These numbers are so dumb. With all this talk of newer and faster and some amazing track time, go buy an airplane if you want to go that fast. You could fly around the ring in just a couple seconds with a stunt plane or unlimited racer. I can see it now. Aviator magazine “Extra 300 spanks the GT-R”. Or maybe in the future the average Joe can show up at the dealer, plop down ¼ mill, sign some paper and then go in the back room to clam their car and just get shot in the head. If you want to go 0-100 in .8 seconds just wait for hover cars, or buy a top fuel dragster. Let me explain how ridiculous this is. To go around some of these tracks at record setting pace, it would take a couple years for anyone in this forum to come close and the majority of us would end up dead because of how Fast these cars are. And to get this straight, we need faster?

Things I know for sure-

GT-R

Ugly as can be, no one on the face of the earth should be attracted to this car visually. It is really fast. So fast that all it would do on the street is be unusable, get you into trouble, or better yet just crash. Maybe rearrange those bodylines into something more appealing. If your into impressing people, especially a bunch of young kinds in civics this is the car for you. When they designed and built this car, the sky was the limit. Whatever engine, drivetrain, look, everything! They could have put rockets on the back and god knows it wouldn’t have made it look worse.

911

What almost half a century? Still the same idea is working? I really cannot think of a car that has changed so little over such a long course of time. It really impresses me what Porsche does with a sort of constraint to design that will hopefully never change. It can be as fast and look at me as you want. Or as slow and subtle as need be. I think the Top Gear where they compare the 997 Carrera, Vantage, and M6 puts it best. You can have all the power, all the style, but at the end of the day Porsche takes it. If you're around the automotive industry long enough, eventually you will have to tip your hat to this amazing car. It may not be the best car ever, but why make it a competition when you can just drive.

I think these threads on the GT-R are addictive. They **** me off and I want to quit, but they just keep showing up!

 

To tell you the truth, come to think of it now, I do believe that a plausible reason for fitting the GTRs with a DCT is because of the fact that they are rated at a certain amount of HP/TQ. Manual trannies can be altered as one wishes quite readily, but DCTs, to my knowledge, aren't as easy to change/strengthen. So, IMO, I think all the mod freaks that plan to rape the living hell out of their engine may end up with a transmission that fails. This also provides a great reason for Nissan to deny them service, even if they remove their mods before bringing it in, because something like that would never happen to the tranny in the normal-spec car. Smart!

 

A "Porsche is a Porsche" because it's long been one of the best engineered, most entertaining cars around. That ceases to be the case Porsche will loose brand image just as fast as Cadillac before it.

Make no mistake- the 997 TT loosing nearly 5 seconds a lap to the GTR (R&T), which as you rightly point out is a whole class down, is a serious threat not just to the 997 TT but to Porsche as a company. Obviously there have been cars cheaper and faster than Porsche flagships before (Z06, etc) but never one so much faster with so few excuses. Unlike a Z06, the GTR is a "jack of all trades" like the Turbo, so you can't suggest that it's simply a striped out track specialist (like a Z06 or Elise). It's faster simply due to better engineering, and it's difficult to say otherwise. That's the threat- engineering is where Porsche has built its reputation and how it's stayed at the front of the pack in usable road cars, perfecting passive rear wheel steering, 4wd, PCCB, VG turbos, etc to keep at the front of the pack.

Unfortunately Porsche has cheaped out in other areas over the last 10 years, and it's now coming back to bite them. They are using derivatives of air-cooled blocks from the early 90s in their 2008 flagship GT series cars, with water cooling and 4v heads bolted on after the fact. This leads to engines 100+ lbs heavier than their competition for similar output- if they used CGT technology they could save 150+ lbs in the motor alone, which as it's hanging out the back would be huge. Same story in the transmission- they have stuck with slush-boxes despite the twin-clutch writing being on the wall for years. These decisions saved lots of money; I'm sure the bean-counters weighed eroding their highest-in-the-business profit margins vs staying at the leading edge, and decided to take short-term profit over long-term technical superiority. Good for them- they've made tons of money, but now the bill is due.

Porsche absolutely needs to show that it can answer the GTR and the copycats it will spawn, or it will resign itself to the roll of an ex-pro athlete, trading on past glory and quickly forgotten. In my mind a stripped out 997TT is a half-step band-aid: it clearly won't close a 5 second a lap gap, and it will be open the the same criticism that we all lay at the Z06, Viper, etc's feet (sure it's fast, but...). What's needed will cost porsche real money- a new lightweight block for their GT models, a new transmission (keep developing the manual option) and a chassis optimized around these components. If history holds these will be outstanding components that will last Porsche another 15 years, but they are now overdue, and Porsche needs to bring them out ASAP.

I want to buy a car for what it does, not what the company that made it used to do. Time for Porsche to get it's act together.

-Pete

 

^^Sorry but I don't agree. If Porsche "gives in" and responds to the GTR, they will THEN lessen their image for having to compete with a seemingly inferior car brand/car. They should just ignore this and take pride in the customers they have, as well as their (top of the charts) build quality.

Also, all Porsche would have to do to beat the GTR is change gear ratios. Have you not noticed that the GTR has a VERY quick acceleration to 60...100, but then dies off? These are the speeds one's mostly doing on a track.

 

That's not correct. The GTR is relatively fast below 100 because it shifts so much faster than other cars. If you lower the Porsche's gearing you'd spend more time shifting, canceling out the improved acceleration. So you don't need shorter gear ratios, you need the GTRs gearbox.

Despite the gearbox advantage the point is the GTR is slower in a straight line, even below 100 mph, and yet it's still MUCH faster at the track. This is purely down to handling and vehicle dynamics, areas where porsche traditionally excels.

Porsche has tried not responding to the march of technology before... 20 years ago Porsche's flagship was the '88 911 Carrera, a wonderfully built car that was largely 20 years behind the times, and it showed. Sticking with is for so long almost killed the company. You'd think Porsche would have learned that lesson...

 

Nice post Pete, I agree.

 

I like pizza...

 

Yes I didn't think of that. But to digress a tad, there is no reason for the TT to change anything to beat a GTR. As far as I'm concerned, the GTR has never beaten a turbo. Until I see a non-biased, non-powersliding review, I cannot believe that the GTR is faster. It may end up truly being faster, but that would never change my opinion of a Turbo or the GTR. Uuntil there is a correct review, there is no basis for accepting any claim.

To prove to you that journalists are not fit to drive a Porsche, R&T has a Turbo/GTR time difference of 5 SECONDS. This is compared to the 1-2-max 3 second differences from other mags. There is too much of a difference between sources to credibly acknowledge any GTR superiority.

Back to my original point, since this was a digression, Porsche's image is of a rear-engined car that handles beautifully and that is completely different from any competition, in many ways. Whether Porsche needs to change its ways because of their aging traditions, has, to me, no basis in this comparison. Porsche does everything it does wonderfully, and the GTR does not present Porsche with a need to change. If they do change, it should be because they desire to, not because they were influenced to do so.

Also, if I was given a GTR, heck, I would take it! I may even keep it and not sell it for something else. If someone, however, gave me an option between a Turbo and a GTR, I wouldn't think twice. No, it has nothing to do with the price difference, it is because I have always loved Porsches and haven't necessarily liked Nissans. I think that, to a consumer that has decided to buy a Porsche, the news that a GTR is faster on a track would not sway their decision.

Lastly, I have heard (but cannot remember where, or if it's true...if not - disregard) that the GTR is cumbersome to drive at low speeds. If you can't drive an 1800kg car at low speeds, than the obvious choice would be to get the GTR as a track car. In this case, many other, better, lighter, and more focused alternatives present themselves.

 

back to my original premise for this thread....

wouldnt it be so easy for porsche to offer the turbo in its current form as 'luxury' model and then also give choice of a 'sport' model.

all the sport would need is to be lowered, firmer psam, and r compound tires. that car should cost no more and have no problem taking the performance title back.

what would be the downside for porsche? none, imo

 

-The Nissan GT-R's overall gearing (including tires) is among the shortest in supercardom.

- Our 11.6-second quarter-mile time ties the mighty Mercedes-Benz McLaren SLR's, but 13 other supercars manage to squeak ahead of our GT-R's elapsed time. Its trap speed of 120 mph is neck-and-neck with the Porsche 911 Turbo's, but at least 20 different models we've tested can top that figure. Perhaps that's the revelation here: Nissan's everyday-usable supercar is at its most super at everyday speeds. Beyond 110 mph the mythical beast becomes increasingly mortal, as illustrated in this graph.

 

Exactly. And the only way they can get away with such short gearing is that the don't take any penalty for shifting. Gear any of the other cars as short as the GTR and it would be slower due to all the wasted shift time.

The fact that it's so extremely fast around a track with such an ordinary power to weight ratio, tire to weight ratio and acceleration above 100 is what's truly impressive. Even a regular corvette has a better power to weight ratio than the GTR, but you don't see that being called a Supercar or threatening a GT2 or Carrera GT around the 'ring. The V spec is currently rumored at 550 hp and 3470 lbs, giving it a power to weight ratio approaching the GT2. If it comes anywhere close the that it should handily crush both the GT2 and CGT around the 'ring or most tracks.

The track R&T tested on favored the GTR, which excels at high speed transitions and slaloms. There was one particular curve complex that was effectively a 100 mph slalom- the GTR went through that over 10 mph faster than either the Vette or 997 TT, and it carried this advantage down the following straight. It the track hadn't had this feature the times would have been much closer- similar to other magazines. I have yet to see a test in which the GTR hasn't been handily faster than the obvious competition.

 

Have you seen any when they handled a Porsche correctly?

 

I don't think its appropriate to discredit a vehicle's performance based on its make/ manufacturer as seems to happen all too often with the GTR. For the past 5-6 years, Porsche have gloated on their sub 8 min laptimes of the nurburgring and all of a sudden when a 'Datsun' does better we knock it.

Frankly, Porsche are in the business of manufacturing some of the best performance cars in the world. And performance is basically determined by a combination of speed and handling. If a fat, heavy GTR can better the straight line and laptime figures (at most tracks tested to date) of Porsches twice its price (GT3 and turbo), we are being short changed somewhere along the line with speed or handling. We shouldn't have to spend three times (GT2) the price of a GTR to be competitive.

Lets not kid ourselves, Porsche are in the business of performance sports cars, NOT family cars and they charge enthusiasts big $$$ accordingly for the priviledge. Therefore if a fugly DATSUN can out do them, ain't it time the good folk at Porsche AG pulled their heads out of their backsides and ensured they put the effort into "remaining the benchmark" by which all others a judged? Its time for Porsche to answer the challenge and give their loyal customers what we deserve-the best barr non!

I have placed a deposit with my dealer for a 997 GT3 MkII and would like to think I will be receiving the best performance/part-time track car that money can buy, NOT A HAS BEEN! Especially considering I am paying almost twice the price of a fugly GTR. Otherwise maybe i'll buy the Datto and holiday for a year with the change!

For those individuals who believe that Porsche have no challenge to answer, all I can say is that the Porsche marketing /PR machine deserve every last cent they earn because they have succeeded in pulling the wool over our eyes nicely! Especially if the can convince us to spend that much money to be second best whilst saving their company million of dollars in car development. Porsche have spent 40+ years developing a loyal customer base by providing the BEST performance cars(arguably) at a reasonable price. I'd hate to put that loyalty to the test- with the exception of fanatics, most buy a performance car for just that, "PERFORMANCE"...

As the saying says" If you can't party with the big boys, don't show up!"