Vs Road and Track - Comparison Test: GT-R vs. Corvette Z06 vs. 911 Turbo

[lambornima]

the reason the gap between the GTR and the other two is so huge on the track is because of the tires on the other two cars. give porsche its optional semi slicks and it would be MUCH closer. also, ive noted that many rennteam members have said that the awd system of the 997TT isnt that great.

that said, the GTR is great bang for the buck, but as more tests come in, is showing that it isnt living up to the huge hype it created.

in the straight line is gets completely WHIPED after 60 mph (and its important to note that in order to keep up to 60 mph it has to use its LC system which hurts the clutch big time). so much for a mini Veyron that Top Gear talked about.

from a 30 mph roll to 120 its >1 seconds behind the Porsche and 2.5seconds behind the vette. thats HUGE. in a straight line from a roll I wouldnt be surprised if a regular C6 vette was able to keep up (still weighs 500 lbs less than the GTR). looking at the trap speeds we can see the GTR gets huge traction off the line but thats it.

overall, good showing for the GTR but I like how they rated the traditional 6 speeds of the vette and 911 to be superior to that of the GTR's ubergearbox

in terms of looks I think the GTR looks great except for the front. what the hell were they thinking? the rear is good and so is the side. not the front though.

 

[Poverty]

Yeah sure, that's why the Lamborghini Murcielago 6.2 pulls up - source: Sport Auto - from 200 km/h faster than a Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale; the latter of which is not only much lighter, but unlike the Lamborghini, features ceramic brakes. And in Sport Auto's supertest, the SLR had a shorter stopping distance than the Carrera GT despite being a great deal heavier. Oh, and the 599 GTB pulled a braking distance from 200 km/h near identical to the Enzo.

Tyres certainly play a factor in braking distance, but then so does weight distribution and actual brake size. Your simple black and white ("this car's heavier than that") logic simply does not fit here.

And now go compare the size of the brakes of the GTR to that of the lighter 911

 

[Poverty]

the reason the gap between the GTR and the other two is so huge on the track is because of the tires on the other two cars. give porsche its optional semi slicks and it would be MUCH closer. also, ive noted that many rennteam members have said that the awd system of the 997TT isnt that great.

that said, the GTR is great bang for the buck, but as more tests come in, is showing that it isnt living up to the huge hype it created.

in the straight line is gets completely WHIPED after 60 mph (and its important to note that in order to keep up to 60 mph it has to use its LC system which hurts the clutch big time). so much for a mini Veyron that Top Gear talked about.

from a 30 mph roll to 120 its >1 seconds behind the Porsche and 2.5seconds behind the vette. thats HUGE. in a straight line from a roll I wouldnt be surprised if a regular C6 vette was able to keep up (still weighs 500 lbs less than the GTR). looking at the trap speeds we can see the GTR gets huge traction off the line but thats it.

overall, good showing for the GTR but I like how they rated the traditional 6 speeds of the vette and 911 to be superior to that of the GTR's ubergearbox

in terms of looks I think the GTR looks great except for the front. what the hell were they thinking? the rear is good and so is the side. not the front though.

Magazines are currently only hyping up the GTR because doing so sells magazines. Its clearly obvious this test was unfair, and comparing it to sportauto data one can see so. The Z06 really dominates around hockeheim and the 'ring but for some reason a porky GTR can be 6 secs faster arond it on a track? Oh please.

 

[Sunny]

Don't know how the GTR tires compares to the ones on Z06 and 911TT, and that might explain some of the 6 secs lead. But they are definitely not R tires going by the thread wear rating and GTR has already proved to be faster than GT3 on cups which are R tires (in the Evo test).

 

[coolraoul]

Magazines are currently only hyping up the GTR because doing so sells magazines. Its clearly obvious this test was unfair, and comparing it to sportauto data one can see so. The Z06 really dominates around hockeheim and the 'ring but for some reason a porky GTR can be 6 secs faster arond it on a track? Oh please.

Magazines are hyping the GTR because it's a Nissan that is faster than a Porsche 911 Turbo for half the price.
The 6 sec are maybe too much, the tyres on the Nissan were surely better for this test.
But every single test said the GTR was faster than a 911 Turbo, and even than a 911 GT3. For half the price.

So call it porky or what you want, complain on the tyres, I'm sorry the GTR is one hell of a car and it's currently putting the best Porsches to a shame. And so does it with the super-powerful Z06. All that for a unique price.

 

[Poverty]

Magazines are hyping the GTR because it's a Nissan that is faster than a Porsche 911 Turbo for half the price.
The 6 sec are maybe too much, the tyres on the Nissan were surely better for this test.
But every single test said the GTR was faster than a 911 Turbo, and even than a 911 GT3. For half the price.

So call it porky or what you want, complain on the tyres, I'm sorry the GTR is one hell of a car and it's currently putting the best Porsches to a shame. And so does it with the super-powerful Z06. All that for a unique price.

The two best porsches are the GT3 RS and the GT2 and secondly do you know what porsches profit margin is for their 911 range. If they wanted to sell their vehicles for no profit it would cost about the same as the GTR

Remember nissan arent making a profit with their GTR.

Oh and lastly since when was the GTR faster than the 911's and Z06 in every test when in sportauto its been shown that the GTR is not as fast as people like to make out and slower than the porkas and Z06.

 

[Poverty]

Don't know how the GTR tires compares to the ones on Z06 and 911TT, and that might explain some of the 6 secs lead. But they are definitely not R tires going by the thread wear rating and GTR has already proved to be faster than GT3 on cups which are R tires (in the Evo test).

Yes but in the auto car test and evo test the cups would not be working at their most effective level due to the wet/damp track which affects cups big time. The GTR is a easy car to drive fast and the GT3 is not so much, so given to the professional hands of a racing driver and the GT3 is faster.

Oh and the tires on the GTR are said to be similiar in grip levels to track tires, evo and scooby drivers love them, guy down my road has them on his evo and he says they make GSD3's look crap.

 

[coolraoul]

The two best porsches are the GT3 RS and the GT2 and secondly do you know what porsches profit margin is for their 911 range. If they wanted to sell their vehicles for no profit it would cost about the same as the GTR

Remember nissan arent making a profit with their GTR.

Oh and lastly since when was the GTR faster than the 911's and Z06 in every test when in sportauto its been shown that the GTR is not as fast as people like to make out and slower than the porkas and Z06.

Yes but in the auto car test and evo test the cups would not be working at their most effective level due to the wet/damp track which affects cups big time. The GTR is a easy car to drive fast and the GT3 is not so much, so given to the professional hands of a racing driver and the GT3 is faster.

Oh and the tires on the GTR are said to be similiar in grip levels to track tires, evo and scooby drivers love them, guy down my road has them on his evo and he says they make GSD3's look crap.

So what? Porsche wins money so you're happy to pay twince the price for the same performances? I'm sorry, the fact that Porsche earns a lot of money is very good, but if a competitor is that good and that cheap they have to react. For now they are slightly embarrased by the GTR.

Okay, maybe one or two tests said the GTR was only as fast, or maybe a very very little slower on certain conditions...but still, it's a Nissan, and it's half the price. And it's easier to drive.

As far as the tires are concerned...well kudos for Nissan to give fabulous tyres, and Porsche, too bad, next time maybe?
So you pay twice more, have to put better tyres, and what? add a third turbo, replace the body with carbon-fiber, and then you have a faster 911?

No, I am a Porsche fan, but I've always said the actual Turbo is not good enough. And I don't like the GTR, honestly, but it's a superb piece of engineering. First attempt, already even or better than Porsche's masterpeice...

The only domain where the Porsche still is better, is the driving pleasure, and it's a very important point. But still, kudos to Nissan, the GTR is a great great achievment. And I saw a lot more reviews where it was faster, than reviews where it was slower than the 911TT. That is a phenomenon.

 

[Sunny]

Yes but in the auto car test and evo test the cups would not be working at their most effective level due to the wet/damp track which affects cups big time.

No, the EVO test was done in completely dry track. But don't let little messy things called facts get in you way of finding excuses. May be the sun was too bright or the wind was too strong or the tides were too low.

And here is the fantastic video of the two fantastic cars battling it out in a very dry track for those who do care about facts. Nissan GT-R v Porsche GT3 | Planet evo | Videos | evo

 

[Merc1]

A real good case of European car defeat denial going on here. All anyone has to do is watch the video of the GT-R in action. I don't see why the GT-R's victories are so hard to accept. They set out to outdo the 911 Turbo which in turn would make it at least competitive if not outright better than the Z06 too. When a company openly benchmarks another car and builds their car to beat it they can do it quite easily. If the Porsche does this at this level, we build ours to do it at this level and so on. Easy to understand why the GT-R performs the way it does IMO. Plus these are sports cars, somewhat simplier job than building a luxury car IMO. Porsche will FL the 911, Corvette ZR-1 is coming and so goes on....


M

 

[bmwrules]

In the hands of a average driver the GTR will win hands down. Give all 3 cars to a professional racing driver who doesnt lack confidence in any vehicle and im sure it would be a very different story.

You do know that in this test where the GTR spanked the other two cars, the driving was done by professional race car driver Steve Millen.

From Wikipedia:

Millen began his racing career in hillclimbing in 1969. He then moved to the Formula Ford series. He started competing in rally cars in the mid 1970s. He switched to off-road racing in the Mickey Thompson Entertainment Group (MTEG) stadium series in the early 1980s. He won the 1986, 1988, and 1989 Mickey Thompson Off-Road Grand Prix Grand National Sports Truck Championships. He also won two Indy Lights races in the series' inaugural 1986 season.

Millen switched to the IMSA Camel GT series in 1990. He was the 1990 24 Hours of LeMans Rookie of the Year. He won 3 races and 5 poles in 1990. He had seven poles and five wins in 1991. He also drove for Allan Moffat Racing in the 1991 Tooheys 1000 at Bathurst, partnering Gary Brabham in a Ford Sierra RS500. He run ended in a DNF (Did Not Finish).

Millen won the 1992 IMSA GTS championship in a Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo car. He won the 12 Hours of Sebring, and had Top 5 finishes in the first four events before his 1993 season ended with injuries at Watkins Glen International.

Millen returned in 1994, and won the IMSA GTS championship. He won the 1994 24 Hours of Daytona and 12 Hours of Sebring, and was first in class at the 24 Hours of LeMans.

In 1995, Millen won the 12 Hours of Sebring. He was invited to the International Race of Champions (IROC). He was leading the IMSA GTS championship, when he had a professional career-ending crash at Road Atlanta. He had competed in three of four IROC races.

Millen is the all-time winningest driver in IMSA GTS history with 20 victories. His 23 pole positions are also a series' record.

 

[Poverty]

Yes I have found out that millen is a professional race driver now with ties to nissan. I have also found out from the Road and track editors that it was the GTRs superior tires that give it the 6 second difference.

I so then proceeded to do research on the the Evo test and guess what. their editor has ALSO commented that the GTR has a big advantage due to its super grippy tires.

Stick super grippy tires on the porsche and the Z06 and im sure the Z06 would have come first.

The tires explains why the GTR stopped quicker even though weighing more and having inferior brakes, and why it was 6 seconds faster.

Once again im proven to be right. The GTR is not as good as the mags are trying to trick people it is to sell magazines. Remember this car was barely faster around the evo track than the much less powerful audi R8 by less than a second so why all of a sudden would the GTR be 6 secs faster than a Z06 and 911TT around a equally short racetrack?

Its all down to tires, tires tires.

Since the video mentions deeper/later braking for the GTR, can you please let us know if the Porsche had ceramics or steel brakes ?

The guy who specs the UK press cars has a habit of ticking all the boxes so yes, the GT3 had ceramic brakes fitted.
Seen the comments discussing whether the GT3 had a compromise lap compared to the GT-R. Rest assured, we had several attempts at extracting the best time from the GT3 and there was no way it would ever match the GT-R's pace on track that day.
Seems the GT-R produces well over the quoted 480bhp (according to independent tests I've read), it's 4WD, has a turbo enhanced torque curve, super-trick tyres, a wider track and a DSG gearbox.
Add that little lot up and it's not surprising it set a better lap time.

 

[Poverty]

No, the EVO test was done in completely dry track. But don't let little messy things called facts get in you way of finding excuses. May be the sun was too bright or the wind was too strong or the tides were too low.

And here is the fantastic video of the two fantastic cars battling it out in a very dry track for those who do care about facts. Nissan GT-R v Porsche GT3 | Planet evo | Videos | evo

This is england,and I know england.The track was extremley cold and damp in places. This does not suit the GT3's cups at all.

 

[Merc1]

So there haven't been any comparos in which all the cars wore the same type/spec tire?

M

 

[Poverty]

So there haven't been any comparos in which all the cars wore the same type/spec tire?

M

No not yet sadly. We will probably have to wait for sportauto to do so.

 

[Merc1]

No not yet sadly. We will probably have to wait for sportauto to do so.

If the GT-R bests the establishment in that type of test, then what?

M

 

[Poverty]

If the GT-R bests the establishment in that type of test, then what?

M

Its the best in its class.

But really nissan cant loose with this car. They are not looking to make a profit with the GTR, and so have made a great car that they sell for a really cheap price and so have a advantage over the competition straight away.

 

[martinbo]

Ok - I'll tell you all what: form your own opinions about the thoroughly speculative discussions around, tyres (note the spelling if you live in the land of the Queen!), brakes, weight distribution, launch control - whatever.

As far as I'm concerned there is overwhelming empirical evidence from far too many credible sources that the GT-R sets another performance benchmark for a car of its price, specification and configuration. But really don't take my word for it. People like Barker, Meaden, Bovingdon, Millen, Plato, and so on know absolutely nothing about cars - yet get paid to - and we should all rather listen to one particularly well informed member on this site. The GT-R is an ugly, heavy, hyped up piece of rubbish. What on Earth have we been thinking?

 

[coolraoul]

I agree with you martinbo.
I personally would pick the Porsche over the GTR, but that's my opinion. I think it can be seen as a fact now that the GTR is faster while costing half the price.

Some tests were made with private GTR, without taking risks, and the GTR was still faster...

However, laptime is only half the story. Because the GTR is faster, does not mean the Porsche is crap. The driving emotions are important too.

But nobody can deny the fact that the GTR is a wonderful achievment, a superb peice of engineering and has somehow beaten Porsche at its own game.
And it merits a .

 

[Guibo]

Yes I have found out that millen is a professional race driver now with ties to nissan. I have also found out from the Road and track editors that it was the GTRs superior tires that give it the 6 second difference.

I so then proceeded to do research on the the Evo test and guess what. their editor has ALSO commented that the GTR has a big advantage due to its super grippy tires.

Stick super grippy tires on the porsche and the Z06 and im sure the Z06 would have come first.

The tires explains why the GTR stopped quicker even though weighing more and having inferior brakes, and why it was 6 seconds faster.

Its all down to tires, tires tires.

I agree that there is a conflict of interest issue with Millen doing the driving; he also seems overly enthusiastic about the great feedback from the GT-R, saying it's the best he's ever experienced from a street car on a racetrack. Sort of hard to believe considering the cars he's driven (and considering comments by European testers to the contrary involving the same vehicles). He is also a tuner of primarily Nissan/Infiniti vehicles. Also interesting to note that C&D editors were a bit faster than Millen around the same track configuration with the Z06. R&T have at their disposal a vast array of racers they could have hired (and whom they have in the past), so they should have avoided this situation.

However, I don't think the tires themselves explain everything. In braking, yes, they are vitally important, but the GT-R has more swept area/tonne than the Z06. I too have read some comments by the R&T editors about the GT-R's tires. They do admit they are phenomenal, and not like the OE Sport 600's that come on the STi. However, I don't remember them saying that is the sole reason for the GT-R's performance. And of course the GT-R is available from the factory with even softer Bridgestones, so there's time left on the table still.
The Evo article you quoted mentions more than just tires:
"Seems the GT-R produces well over the quoted 480bhp (according to independent tests I've read), it's 4WD, has a turbo enhanced torque curve, super-trick tyres, a wider track and a DSG gearbox."