^You absolutely have NO PROOF that it was running stock boost, upgraded bushings, and other suspension mods. Just cause everything APPEARS to look stock does not mean it is.

 

On the other hand. I'm glad we got this thread going in the RIGHT section. Also, the GT-R times were running on par with supercars; carrera gt, zr1, etc. Explain how a 3800 lb, 480 hp car hits 180 mph in the same section of the track as a 6xx hp ZR1? I know what you guys are going to say: gearing, aero, whatever else is printed in the brochure, and cause we hate the car. <-- LOL that's a good one! No doubt the GT-R performs well, but there is no way the Ringer was stock.

 

Easy. I've already explained to HC that the CTS-V recorded a 175mph top speed at the same point where the GT-R recorded a 180mph top speed on the Nurburgring.

The CTS-V has the same p/w ratio as the GT-R but has greater drivetrain losses (about 3% worse) and is pushing 32% greater Cda (drag area) with only 15% more power. So beyond 140mph, where aerodynamics determine acceleration the GT-R will be faster. Even more so because the CTS-V they used had a slushbox automatic with only 5 usable ratios versus the GT-R's 6 usable solidly linked ratios.

Knowing this, the GT-R's 180mph top speed makes perfect sense and there is simply no reason why the GT-R should be slower than the CTS-V.

It is the ZR1 which is the anomaly in this whole mix. It's top speed should have been much higher.

 

Well when it comes to the offical press release from Nissan they said that the Dunlops were used on BOTH runs.

http://jdmwave.wordpress.com/2008/10...-cheat-claims/

Nissan says it offers two tyre choices for the GT-R - Bridgestone POTENZA RE070R and Dunlop SP SPORT 600 DSST CTT - and for the tests conducted at the Nurburgring where the lap times of 7:38 and 7:29 were recorded, the Dunlop tyres were used.






Straight from NISSAN!!! Sorry but Edmunds has been in Nissan's back pocket since the GT-R came out, I'll take the press release with actual quotes from Nissan Officials. Besides, Nissan knew a long time ago that the dunlops were faster, it was mentioned prior to the first Ring Video showing at the unveiling. They did run it on the Dunlops.

Next excuse.

 

Gp, I want you to really sit back and remember something. You are talking to people that have looked at this whole thing from an objective, purely scientific approach based on numbers and physics ( which, yes the GTR is affected by). Numbers don't lie, but for those of us that remember....Nissan does. They invented the whole hoopla over " Ring " numbers.

With your approach they should redo the world records, they should let people record theirselves and just say they did something. In fact yesterday I did the worlds fastest time on a public road 323 mph. I have it right here...I set the record so its true.

The example you give , and I want you to take no offense here. But that example shows that you really truly don't understand and really should not be trying to carry the GTR torch with your misunderstanding of how cars and acceleration works.

Maybe you don't know the dirty little secret about how the ZR-1 is geared relative to other Corvettes. Or maybe you don't know the history of when Nissan said the R33 would do sub 8 minutes and no one got even close. And maybe you don't know that at very high speed HP is king.

Your blatant fanboyism is truly disgusting, lighten up and let the car speak for itself. If the GTR was the next coming of Jesus you fanboys thought it was you would not have to defend it.

 

How many times do I have to tell you the max speed on the straight is not the whole story. The GT2 hit 182 or something with Chris Harris driving on that straight but was still only just as fast from the exit of galgenkopf to the end of dottinger as the ZR-1 which only hit 176-177 or so before the bridge.

IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT TOP SPEED!!!!!!!!!

The GT2 on the same day beat the GT-R from the exit of Galgenkopf to the end of Dottinger by 2 seconds which is long ways when you consider how fast they are going at the end of the straight. The ZR-1 even with a headwind matched that GT2.

However Nissan's GT-R ran same straight only .6 behind the ZR-1 which is 1.6 seconds faster than Chris Harris's GT-R.

Can you even start to fathom how much hp it would take to cover that distance 1.6 seconds faster in the same car!!!!!!

 

So by this logic a Lotus Exige S with 240/260 hp but the same pwr/weight should hit close to that same number on that straight. Power to weight can only go so far as POWER is the more dominating variable in higher speeds.

 

A time of 7:24 is what, 2 seconds slower than the Viper ACR? Many tests have shown that the Viper already smacks the GTR by several seconds on a smaller/tighter track. Something is definately wrong with a 7:24 time.

 

And 2 seconds faster than a ZR-1. At least PB&J has run out of excuses and fled the thread.

 

Nope ZR1 has now ran 7:22's such a few 10th's off the ACR

 

The Viper ACR is a "track car" barely suitable for the street.

Any ACR comparision to a stock sports car would require...

"leveling the playing field".

The results posted by Nissan clearly prove the GT-R was a "Ringer" and not at all comparable to a GT-R brought off the showroom floor.

The only people who find Nissan's results believable are the GT-R fanbois...

and Facts certainly won't sway their opinion.

 

That 7:22 time was not confirmed by GM and was released right smack in the middle of rainy season at the ring. I'm almost positive it was a rumor and not true. I think it's certainly possible, but not true in this case.

 

Your right, thanks for the info....

 

I don't agree, most of the cars we have today are bordering on street cars. Just as easy to bust the front lip on many of the other cars. And you see half wings on many other cars where this is the real thing. The only level playing field is tires IMO, after that it's fair game for a street legal production car. Otherwise leveling the playing field will make the circus even bigger because X person has forced induction or more cubes, or adjustable coilovers and the list goes on.

While I think the ZR-1 would beat the ACR with similar aero, it should because it has lots more hp. But the ACR is still better for it's intended purpose. NA > SC all day on the track.

ACR fanboy FTW.

 

all this talk about hp/weight ratios...

i'm sure it has nothing to do with all of those panels underneath the car, equal downforce on both axles, and the ability to apply that power to the ground when most cars can't.

but, hey, don't let me get in the way of all you mag racers... uh hmm (heavychevy) cough...

get your face out of the magazines and out of the web's rumor mills, and come back to reality (you know, where people drive the cars, and make their own informed opinions - and not reading numbers in a magazine that makes you an expert on the car).

i'd like to hear about these many other drivers you mentioned.

and this was brought up in one of our other forums - how would you explain stig's time?