Epic battle: Carmagazine goes to N-ring with Nissan GTR and Porsche 997 GT3

[Mr Robert]

Sport Auto "proper test" would only be valuable in benchmarking other cars using the same procedure and would likely not tell us too much about the (in)validity of Nissan's claim, much like this test.

Valid or invalid, it is not for comparing with anything. Sport Auto can be used for comparison and that is what counts. At least for me. I'm not interested in f*nboy masturbation laptimes set in circumstances that makes Chinese athletics championships, closed to the public, with athletes that "disappear" a couple of months after setting an impossible record seem fair and square...

 

[Guibo]

Valid or invalid, it is not for comparing with anything. Sport Auto can be used for comparison and that is what counts. At least for me. I'm not interested in f*nboy masturbation laptimes set in circumstances that makes Chinese athletics championships, closed to the public, with athletes that "disappear" a couple of months after setting an impossible record seem fair and square...

That analogy might make more sense if those athletes stick around and continue to be competitive with and/or beat other athletes at various other venues worldwide who by all accounts should whup their asses everywhere. Suzuki is still around, and setting seemingly impossible lap times.
The point about the 'Ring time is that the GT-R is not only fast beyond expectation there, it is fast just about everywhere else. And, as edmunds.com and Car have found, as fast as a ZR1 or LP560-4 on real-world mountain roads. This is likely to be more relevant to the typical consumer than 'Ring lap times. And that's not marketing. It's the direct result of fine-tuning on tracks like the 'Ring and others.
If you don't care, fine. Let's not discuss that ever again.

 

[Mr Robert]

I think that seems fair, those things are more interesting to many. It is as fast as the ZR-1 and the LP560-4 in many cases. We all know that the GT-R is performing very well, just as expected. But this thread is about the ring.

I think most of us agree that in order to make comparisons, as many variables need to be equal and as many circumstances as possible need to be known. Therefore, Nissans claims are nothing but marketing until they can be reporoduced by an independent source. Is that not fair also?


Problem is, if the independent tests does not show what some want them to do, there will be endless whining and calls of foul play.

 

[Beemer B773ER]

I think most of us agree that in order to make comparisons, as many variables need to be equal and as many circumstances as possible need to be known. Therefore, Nissans claims are nothing but marketing until they can be reporoduced by an independent source. Is that not fair also?

Actually, by having as many variables equal by an independent source does not prove or disprove Nissan's claims, because the key factor of Nissan's dedicated test-driver is not there.

BUT, what an independent test with as many variables kept equal would succeed in determining is which is the faster car for someone who is equally new to both vehicles.
Just because some SportsAuto tester can't get the Nissan to lap the 'Ring in the same time that Nissan have claimed, it does not mean the GT-R is incapable of going that fast (and does not mean that Nissan blatantly lied)...all it means is that the independent tester could not make the GT-R lap the ring as fast as the Nissan test driver. I'd find it very hard to believe that an independent tester would be able to make the Porsche lap the 'Ring in the exact same time as the dedicated Porsche test-drivers, simply because the endless laps on the track and a very intimate knowledge of the car's characteristics would definitely make a BIG difference on a track which has a +7-minute lap time.

I'm with NarutoRamen, the BEST way to really put these 2 cars to the test is to have the respective test-drivers for each car there at the track on the same day, and let them loose the entire day and see who has the best lap time by the end of the day.

What I'm wondering is, what if at the end of the independent test the Nissan GT-R ends up with the faster lap time.... what then of all the excuses against the GT-R?

 

[Mr Robert]

Actually, by having as many variables equal by an independent source does not prove or disprove Nissan's claims, because the key factor of Nissan's dedicated test-driver is not there.

...and the driver should be the same for all cars as the driver is one of the key parts of a lap. I'm not interested in killing Nissans lap, they probably did a lap in that time. I just say it is uninteresting when it comes to comparing with other laptimes. For one thing, we know almost nothing about the car used.

BUT, what an independent test with as many variables kept equal would succeed in determining is which is the faster car for someone who is equally new to both vehicles.

What an independent test show you is which car in standard form is the fastest with a highly skilled driver. That is the most interesting.

Just because some SportsAuto tester can't get the Nissan to lap the 'Ring in the same time that Nissan have claimed, it does not mean the GT-R is incapable of going that fast (and does not mean that Nissan blatantly lied)...all it means is that the independent tester could not make the GT-R lap the ring as fast as the Nissan test driver.

If something cannot be reproduced, or even close, it is irrelevant. If only one man, with a car of unknown status, on a closed track can manage it one time, well, then it is irrelevant.

I'm with NarutoRamen, the BEST way to really put these 2 cars to the test is to have the respective test-drivers for each car there at the track on the same day, and let them loose the entire day and see who has the best lap time by the end of the day.

That is of course great fun! Only, dont let anyone of them bring their own car.

What I'm wondering is, what if at the end of the independent test the Nissan GT-R ends up with the faster lap time.... what then of all the excuses against the GT-R?

Should an independent test show that the GT-R manages a 7:30-ish lap, then there are no excuses. Then it has been proven, nothing to discuss other than giving credit where it is due. How will it sound if it gets a very good 7:45?

 

[NarutoRamen]

Should an independent test show that the GT-R manages a 7:30-ish lap, then there are no excuses. Then it has been proven, nothing to discuss other than giving credit where it is due. How will it sound if it gets a very good 7:45?

Lets just put it this way. I don't trust those folks when it comes to cars that are not European. Just like I don't trust Best Motoring guys when the cars are not Japanese.

The only thing I'm looking for now is to see who bullshitted. Let me explain that. Porsche test driver, I'm guessing Walter Rohrl, got a 7:54 in the GTR. We all can pretty much agree we can expect a faster time than that. So now, if SportAuto gets a faster time than Porsche, that will be disgracing a HUGE German company and if they don't get that time it will give Porsche leverage. Now, I don't know about you guys, but I think they will do a lap that will "magically" be close in time to Porsche.

 

[Mr Robert]

Now, I don't know about you guys, but I think they will do a lap that will "magically" be close in time to Porsche.

I don't agree with much of what you wrote, but, this last part I think will prove itself very correct (if you mean the 7:40-something time, SA said they could shave a good deal of the first time they got which was 7:50, if I remember correctly). Everything points at it...



I will rely on SA until they give me reason not to.

 

[Zafiro]

Lets just put it this way. I don't trust those folks when it comes to cars that are not European. Just like I don't trust Best Motoring guys when the cars are not Japanese.

The only thing I'm looking for now is to see who bullshitted. Let me explain that. Porsche test driver, I'm guessing Walter Rohrl, got a 7:54 in the GTR. We all can pretty much agree we can expect a faster time than that. So now, if SportAuto gets a faster time than Porsche, that will be disgracing a HUGE German company and if they don't get that time it will give Porsche leverage. Now, I don't know about you guys, but I think they will do a lap that will "magically" be close in time to Porsche.

No other have been down to 7.26 min except for Nissan themselves. Others been around 7.50 min with the GTR. I expect Sportauto doing about the same laptime. If no other carmagazine been down to 7.26 min, then why should Sportauto?`

If the guys from Nissan tested the exact same car as Sportauto, Autocar and Carmagzine did and then did 7.26 min then the time would be more trustworthy. Im certain that the car Nissan used had more power and another suspension setup than the version being sold on the streets. Of course I cant proove it but as long as Nissan havent prooved me wrong, then its a dead heat.

I have used Sportauto times for several years and I sure wont be using factory times (and Im surprised so many suddenly care about factory time, it havent been an issue as long as I have visiting carboards). BMW claim they did 7.52 min with a M5 E60, Sportauto did 8.13 min. My response to BMW - "whatever!" For a comparison with other cars the time is useless. Same driver need to be used or its just another "whatever!".
Sportauto is the most unbiased and fair source we have. Period!

 

[HighestOfHigh]

Like I said before -

Checkmate!

 

[Mr Robert]

Haha, good one!

 

[lambornima]

Yep usually for all cars +/- 0.1 sec.

depends. in the case of the Z06 it has to shift in between 96 and 100 km/h into second gear. so the difference might even be 0.3 or 0.4seconds.

 

[NarutoRamen]

No other have been down to 7.26 min except for Nissan themselves. Others been around 7.50 min with the GTR. I expect Sportauto doing about the same laptime. If no other carmagazine been down to 7.26 min, then why should Sportauto?`

If the guys from Nissan tested the exact same car as Sportauto, Autocar and Carmagzine did and then did 7.26 min then the time would be more trustworthy. Im certain that the car Nissan used had more power and another suspension setup than the version being sold on the streets. Of course I cant proove it but as long as Nissan havent prooved me wrong, then its a dead heat.

You keep bringing up BMW when I'm not even talking about them. The NSX-R in the hands of the Best Motoring guys, who are not even on the same level as Horst Von Surma, got below 8 min, but Sport Auto couldn't, yet people bash the Best Motoring guys as "they can't properly drive european cars", which is the same case for SportAuto for non-european cars.

Did I say that since Nissan got 7:26 that SportAuto must get it? Please show me where I said that and I will never come back on this board again. All I said was that they won't even get close to Nissan's time. I don't expect them to get Nissan's time simply because of the fact that unlike SportAuto, Toshio Suzuki knows EXACTLY what the car is capable of. Nissan has proven time and time again that they did not cheat and even Toshio himself has said that he expects other drivers to get around 7:45-7:50 with the GT-R since they don't know the car as well as him.

Nissan didn't cheat because you're forgetting that the GT-R's driving dynamics were designed by Toshio himself working with the engineers. He knows EXACTLY how the car will behave in any situation because it was designed that way. I don't expect SportAuto to know exactly how far the car can be pushed and initially the car will not be as solid to drive. More than anything else, a driver must have confidence in his car and must understand how it behaves in any situation before that situation occurs. I don't expect ANYONE in the world to know that as well as Toshio. So with all this, to keep on saying that Nissan lied is a lie.

Another position on this is by the ZR1 squad. When Jim Mero drove the ZR1, the team said that he could've gone faster. And guess what they came back and took off 4 seconds from it's time. So did they cheat too? Just because companies who build supercars got their ass beat by companies that don't doesn't mean they cheated. The first example of this is when Ford commissioned the GT and raped the ferrari's in Le Mans back in the day.

Please stop your bias and just admit that Nissan did the time without bringing in retarded conspiracy theories.

 

[Guibo]

If the guys from Nissan tested the exact same car as Sportauto, Autocar and Carmagzine did and then did 7.26 min then the time would be more trustworthy. Im certain that the car Nissan used had more power and another suspension setup than the version being sold on the streets.

If the car Nissan used had more power, then why did the GT-R tested by TopGear against a 997TT end up being slower than the Porsche during autobahn roll-on tests? That was one of the Nurburgring test mules. It seems to me that if Nissan really wanted to crush Porsche, they'd use a mule that was noticeably faster than the Porsche, not slower.
As far as suspension, you can't be certain either. What we do know is that the GT-R (unlike many track-oriented street cars) comes delivered from the factory to the dealer with a track alignment. Some of the mags have noticed fairly rapid (and uneven) tire wear as a result. And the suspension is pretty hard. But then it would need to be to keep 1740kg's in check around the Nurburgring.


Porsche's suspicion has been about the tires used, not the power. Nissan responded and invoked the name of Sumitomo Rubber Industries, which has in their possession the Dunlops that set the 7:29 time. So now two companies are (apparently) in collusion to "deceive" the general public*. Meanwhile, Porsche has not disclosed anything about the Turbo that set a 7:38 at the hands of an unnamed engineer.
*IMO, it is the general public's inability (and sometimes downright refusal) to read between the lines and examine the context of the GT-R's lap time which is the crux of the issue. Not any cheating done by Nissan, because we've seen the GT-R being fast just about everywhere else. Nissan released details of their testing procedure, the date of the test, track conditions, telemetry showing throttle position, vehicle speed, steering angles, and have been fully transparent in acknowledging that the time came at the end of hundreds of laps and many different test sessions.

BTW, there is only one legit time for the ZR1 thus far. The faster time noted on various websites has been found to be a hoax.
ZR1 7:22.4 lap time: Re. "Lords of the Ring" - RoadAndTrack Forums
Not that the ZR1 with a racing driver and hundreds of laps could not pull that time.

 

[Sunny]

This debate will never end unless some magazine gets a customer car and hands it to Suzuki and asks him to set a time. That will probably never happen and so everyone is going to bear their own bias on this situation and make whatever suits them.

What I do find irritating is where did all this collective cynicism go when Porsche/Walter Rhorl claims numbers for their cars? I don't remember anyone saying, "oh, Porsche must be using a ringer to set those times". What is indeed BS is the 7:54 time Porche claims is the best they could get for the GTR when multiple magazines have got better times now.

 

[NarutoRamen]

T

What I do find irritating is where did all this collective cynicism go when Porsche/Walter Rhorl claims numbers for their cars? I don't remember anyone saying, "oh, Porsche must be using a ringer to set those times". What is indeed BS is the 7:54 time Porche claims is the best they could get for the GTR when multiple magazines have got better times now.

It's because majority of the people on this board are biased as hell towards anything european. I think it has more to do with pride than anything, they just think that nothing else can be better. Anytime any other car from some other country does something better, they decide to discredit something about it. I'm not a blind fanboy of German or european cars as much as many people on this board are. Since Porsche is european and they have a long history or sports cars no one will ask question...as soon as some company from another place comes along all the questions are being raised. It sickens me that there weren't that many questions raised about the ZR1 or the Viper ACR cuz they are american, but since Nissan is japanese people just started to hate.

 

[CarGuy]

depends. in the case of the Z06 it has to shift in between 96 and 100 km/h into second gear. so the difference might even be 0.3 or 0.4seconds.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

It's like right on.

Edit:

drivetrain
Transmission 6-speed manual
Gear/Ratio/Overall/(Rpm) Mph
1st,:1 2.66/9.10/(7000) 61 (98 km/h)
2nd,:1 1.78/6.09/(7000) 91 (146 km/h)
3rd,:1 1.30/4.45/(7000) 125 (201 km/h)
4th,:1 1.00/3.42/(7000) 162 (261 km/h)
5th,:1 0.74/2.53/(6300) 193 (311 km/h)
6th,:1 0.50/1.71/na*
Final drive ratio 3.42:1
Engine rpm @ 60 mph (97 km/h) in top gear 1300 rpm
*Top speed reached in 5th.

 

[Sunny]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

And GTR doing 0-170 mph.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Up to 150, there is hardly anything between them, but after that I think Z06 is faster - though both accelerate really slow after that.

 

[NarutoRamen]

^^Something seems fishy about the Corvette vid. The camera shakes a lot more during dual clutch gear change in the GT-R yet it barely shook in a manual Corvette? Doesn't make sense.

 

[Sunny]

^^Something seems fishy about the Corvette vid. The camera shakes a lot more during dual clutch gear change in the GT-R yet it barely shook in a manual Corvette? Doesn't make sense.

Yea I noticed that too. Could be cause the camera was mounted properly in the Z06 vs hand held like in the GTR. Not sure.

 

[Sunny]

I found a version the info that Guibo posted that also has a Spec V time.

"CAR Magazine test results on the Nurburgring (Driver Andy Gulden):

2010 GTR - 7:51.08*
Porsche GT3 Series 2 (3.8) - 7:49.91*

GTR Spec V - 7:44*+

* Times were measured over a full lap, not from the end of the pits to the start of the pits.

+ Sport button not used. Sport buttom adds 0.1 bar for 80 seconds in the mid-range and is available again 80 seconds after last 80s period.

Obviously the times are a product of the driver, the conditions (some road works, damp patches) and the amount of practice. With the GT3 he had one practice lap and one hot lap. With the 2010 GTR, he had just one hot lap, "I was unfamiliar with the car and I'm not used to RHD.'"

I noticed that some of the pics like the one below had the Spec V while some had the normal one, so I guess CAR tested both.