Did I say the ring? The Z06 is really the GTR's competition, but for those of us that don't have a " Ring " in our backyard the Z06 is better at some things than the GTR.

 

No, you did not. But that's what we were talking about. How come Nissan can be called for cheating, based on top speeds reached on the 'Ring, but GM can't?
Agreed, the Z06 does do some things better. And it's top speed is not 295 kph.

 

Nissan's credibility is what's in question, not the competence of the GTR.

 

The two are connected. Nissan showed telemetry indicating their GT-R hit ~277 on the straight where DR, Sport Auto, and AMuS take their readings. DR got 271. AmuS got 275. Sport Auto got 276. What is the credibility issue here?

 

Trust me when I say its not unwarranted. This issue isn't and R35 or even an R34 specific thing. By the way just so you know there is no such thing as a Nurburgring production car record.

 

I don't even know you. Why would I trust you over the word of anyone else. We are discussing whether Nissan did in fact lie about the capabilities of the R35 GT-R, so if you have compelling evidence I'm all ears.
BTW, you've told me something (again) that I already know. Frankly, I'm not concerned about the proclamations Nissan has made about the GT-R, outside of whether it could have set that time without cheating.

 

The Z06's Nurburgring top speed has not been vefiied or supported by anyone in our known universe. HVS was 25km/h slower than GM's claim.

In terms of boulevarde racing or highway pulls, yeah, the Z06's speed has been well documented.

Unfortunately the Nordschleife is no boulevarde, if it was then manufacturers would not spend millions of dollars sending development teams half way around the globe to use it. What looks like a straight line on youtube is, in reality, the most technically demanding stretch of straightaway on any racetrack in the entire world.

Right now, in the real world, HVS has come closer to Nissan's top speed claim (-14km/h) than either GM (-25km/h) or Porsche (-17km/h).

So if the 7:29 car was a ringer, then the Z06's 7:43 lap time should be permanently struck from the record.

 

Provide proof. Nissan's own press statement contradicts you.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There's been some confusion over the tires used on the GT-R during its 7:38 lap of the Nurburgring. Various sources have reported that cut slicks were used. This is incorrect, and stems from a language barrier at a press conference during the GT-R's debut at the Tokyo Motor Show.

Senior GT-R development engineering staff on hand at the 'ring trip I attended confirmed that production-specification (including the tread compound) Bridgestone RE070 tires were used on the 7:38 lap."

By Jason Kavanagh, the engineering editor at Edmunds, Posted exactly one month after Toshio Suzuki recorded the 7:38 lap time.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And some more if thats not enough for you.

"Nissan claims its testers have recorded a 7min 37sec lap of the Nurburgring but, apparently, certain sections of the lap were wet when the time was set. They also have data for a 7min 38sec lap on which the driver was blocked by a slower car for several corners. Both laps were recorded using original equipment Bridgestone RE070A tyres, in other words with the car containing no secret tweaks or tricks. In reality they reckon it’ll do a low seven-thirty – maybe a 31 or 32 – whereas a 911 Turbo wearing far more trick rubber with Walter the wheelman at the controls, could ‘only’ manage 7min 40sec. Truth is the GTR is a good 10sec quicker round the ‘Ring, maybe a little bit more."

By Steve Sutcliffe of Pistonheads, Posted less than 2 months after the the 7:38 lap time was recorded
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My question is: When was the press release you are referring to issued?

 

^I am guessing October 9, 2008.

"For the tests conducted at the Nurburgring where the lap times of 7:38 and 7:29 were recorded, the Dunlop tires were used."
--Nissan Press release (rebuttal to Porsche)

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/10/09/n...hurt-yourself/

Consensus I've seen is that Nissan made an error in this statement and did not correct it.

 

In 2008, after those two claims. Nissan was very specific in stating that while they do indeed offer 2 different tires, Dunlops were used for both the 7:38 and 7:29 times. This is the press statement where they are "correcting facts that were not accurately represented". So now you guys are claiming they screwed this up? That's rich.

 

How many times has HvS driven the much harder to drive ZO6 and Turbo? anyway Sport Auto has gotten extreemly close to the CGT and GT2 time.

 

The problem with this arguement is that the ZO6 can actually take the GTR on a straight line, and even a fellow forumer has achieved a high 10 sec stock quarter mile. The GTR isnt a top speed performer, it never has been. Nissan fans also try tconvince us that the car has 0.27Cd it turns out that Nissan was optimistic again with Sport Auto only getting 0.31.......

More weight, less power and similar Cd to the GT2 and ZO6.....now again how can it keep up in a straight line?

 

Well CH has said that he can see the GT2 achieving Porsches time but not the Nissan.......clear as day Guibo, how are you gonna twist this around again? CH has also said that tires, weather and driver would get his roughly 15 sec which has now been proven by HvS. He still thought that the GT2 was clearly faster, especially with a better driver and conditions.




Clear as day buddy, the GTR had the advantage in that condition yet still lost. The GT2's sports tires, higher power and RR config isnt really suited to a wet track. Again what do you say about that? I believe CH far more than someone who didnt drive both cars around the same track at the same time.

Skill wise HvS would have gotten the best out of the Nissan especially since he already had two bites of the cherry. I think that HvS's time in the GT2 is as good as it gets. I cant see and many people would back me up of ex F1 chicane Suzuki can drive better than HvS.



Thats the thing it didnt run close to the GT2's time, its far closer to the much less powerful GT3. Now another problem for the GTR is that I wont last more than 1 lap at full tilt, even the Vspec with its 25k CC brakes can only hold up for 3 laps total. The GTR isnt really a good track car in many regards.

 

But it beat the Scuderia, which is faster than the GT2 in most other tests.