Magazine Tests The GT-R At The Nurburging And Can't Come Close To Nissan's Claimed Time

Oh what a tangled web Nissan weaved, When first they practised to deceive!

:-(

— EL34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 10:53:45 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

This is so funny, who else but Turbosypder would give you this tip?

— _43LE (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 11:01:04 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 12   

How beautiful is that silver GT2?

— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 11:03:36 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -5   

The GTR wasn't using the stickier Dunlops and most likely did not have the new suspension geometry which was used in the GTR that set the 7:29 laptime.

In any case, I still think the GT2 is faster than the GTR around the Ring. It's more powerful and 600lbs lighter. It's laptime of 7:31 was set on a public day so it's possible it could do better. It could equal or best the GTR's laptime. But the analysis in this article clearly shows that the GTR is the better handling car.

For those interested, here's a few more laptimes for both cars on different tracks. Enjoy!

http://www.fastestlaps.com/index.php?page_id=compare&car1=4717b80e35715&car2=46a06c22ab41a&excludewet=true

By the way, the GT2 should really be comapred to the upcoming V-spec which will be out end of this year.

— Ingenieur (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 11:11:31 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 12   

EL34,
I probably couldn't get close to Nissan's claimed time, so for sure they're lying right.

I love Porsche but I doubt Nissan's lying. They don't make stuff up like BMW's marketing dept.

In the end its a choice between owning one legendary sportscar vs another legendary sportscar, and the person more than likely owns (or atleast can afford) both.

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 11:40:56 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -9   

For that matter, it sounds like you smoke a lot. Lay off the drugs and get with the program.

— Htay7500 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 7:46:19 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2   

sketchy, very sketchy.

this in embarrassing for nissan. 7:29 and 7:55 are worlds apart. not to mention, they've now discontinued the launch feature since the car can't handle it.

get a car to achieve something in a one-off situation like nissan's 7:29 time is not impressive. when they are able to CONSISTENTLY meet their claims on the track and on the road, the car will deserve respect.

— enthusiastx11 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 12:01:41 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

This stuff always makes me laugh.

The GT-R got 7:29. Deal with it.

Porsche acted like a baby with their public response. Deal with it.

Both cars are truly and utterly, awesome, but when testing like this you can never have truly duplicable results. No two drivers are the same. Course conditions change in a heartbeat. Through in all the "butterfly effect" jazz and you will really never be able to do a scientific apples to apples comparison.


What I find funny is that nobody posting here will ever drive a car anywhere near this level (let alone these actual cars), yet everyone feels a need to act like an expert or pull some irrelvant "industry commentary" out of their ass.

Even if the GT-R got a 6:29 it doesn't mean the Porsche is any less cool.

You fanboys suck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

— answer (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 12:21:19 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Ok, if the Nissan's time is suspect (bearing in mind that it was on the Bridgestones and the old suspension geometry), I don't hear anyone complaining about the GT2's time of 7.49, that's like 18 secs slower than Porsche's claims. On the Dunlops, the GTR would have tied or beaten the GT2.

Regarding Horst and Sport Auto, his wiener schnitzel. Sport Auto loves Porsches. There's a test they just concluded at Nardo where, wait for it, the GT2 beat the LP 560 and the almighty Zr1 to 300 km/h. Lolz, they are real credible.

Perhaps Walter drove the GT2 (and the Porsche fanboys prostrate at the very mention of his name) and a blue haired Grandma drove the Zr1. Lolz

— dhkss2002 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 12:23:24 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

After wasting time reading that article, it's very clear those drivers have no clue how to drive the GT-R correctly. Can somebody call Nissan to offer them some tip?

— Badgewhore (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 12:59:20 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

one thing that NOBODY is taking into consideration is the car to car variance. Nissan has already stated that new cars have less power and after their first service and software update the car is up to full power.
There have been some magazines which tested GTR's in the low 3 seconds range and then the same magazines achieved much higher (4+) times with different cars at different times.
This factor alone can be the reason for the time disparity, also keep in mind the Nissan test driver is an F1 ace who probably knows the car better than anybody, this could also be a large factor.
Hey I'm a Porsche owner (GT3) so I have no biase to the GTR but when I was at the track in Seattle there was a instructor driven GT3RS with full on slicks that had it's ass handed to it by a GTR stock! So if a GTR is seconds faster around a short track, it's not hard to believe how much faster it would be around the ring.
Porsche is just being cry babies, take it on the chin like a man and start building cars that can compete.

— jellybone (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 1:13:26 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4   

Don't really get what the big deal is. Not everyone can replicate certain times, some drivers are better than others and road conditions come into play. Either way, I will still take the GT-R!!

— PerformanceGuy (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 1:15:22 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

I don't care if the GTR isn't as fast as the 7.29 posted by Nissan. Its still an incredible car. However, what i do have a problem with is a car company knowingly misleading with false claims in order to market a car. I'm not suggesting that this is what Nissan did, but with the huge discrepency in times, its certainly worth investigating.

— golfer38 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 1:40:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Truth is known to be anti-japanese car.

— Brembo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 1:57:03 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Title should be:

" Magazine Tests The GT-R AND PORSCHE 911 GT2 At The Nurburging And BOTH Can't Come Close To Claimed Times "

And Nissan's driver T. Suzuki did officially 7:38 on the Bridgestones :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzBcZFWAi6Q

This is 17 sec faster than they say in the article , exactly the same situation as in the Porsche -> 7:49 in the artcle ( Michelin Sport Cup tires ) versus official 7:32 done by Walter Röhrl ( also Michelin Sport Cup tires ) . Maybe they both are lying about their Nurburgring lap times ?

— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 2:42:31 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

2 comments:
1) DR is the most underrated auto magazine period. People just don't know about it.
2) This is a bigger deal than they let on. People at the leading edge of performance will pay a huge margin just to go a little bit faster. Close is no cigar to people spending $100K on a car. I think this is a serious blow to Nissan's presumed racing cred.

— ucla95 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 3:27:42 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

The evidence continues to pile up against Nissan, but only GTR fanbois ever believed that 'ring number. I did see my first GTR today and I can absolutely confirm it is just as ugly looking as in the magazines.

— pcar4evr (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 4:02:23 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Porsche, need to suck it up, they got their ass beaten and beaten badly by a Nissan GT-R. Don't belief me, checkout the video below at youtube.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWcv7Zp0H78&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=qreQwTeaVWY&feature=channel

Please stop your crying and whinning. And you think the Nissan GT-R is scary because the much Fear, and Terror it cause in the Supercar segement. Just wait until the Nissan GT-R V-Spec come out and you will see what a Godzilla on Steroid can do.

— Lexus (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 4:22:23 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Hi Folks, this is Steve Davies from DR, the magazine that performed this test. Donald Buffamanti from Autospies has asked if I can clarify any points you may have about this review.

I will try and response to each point on a seperate post, so please bear with me.

Firstly abcd, in answer to your point about the GT2 being a 'special' ringers version. It wasn't. Porsche had no idea we were taking their GT2 to the 'ring, we had already borrowed this same GT2 several times previously driving it first back in March '08 on a trip to the Isle of Man. We know it's history and also know that it is standard, that's why we borrowed it. It was the nearest we could get to a customer car.

The GT-R was also standard, we'd driven it before (when we compared it with the new 997.2 PDK, R8 and Aston V8) and we had recorded acceleration times and lap times of Silverstone circuit, so again we knew its history and could rely on it being a standard car.

Had we asked either Porsche or Nissan for a car to perform this test they would have said no, since they would understandably have wanted to ensure they were in the best condition possible. As it was both cars were in as 'normal' a condition as we could ensure, neither were fitted with fresh tyres but were as any owner would expect of their own cars.

The objective of this test was not to find the 'ultimate' lap time, since we would need to have thrown a manufacturers size budget at the test, book the circuit for several days and replaced tyres and brakes. Instead we were more interested with 'how' they went about setting their laps, this provides us (and you) with far more useful data to draw our own conclusions from.

As it was, the biggest difference between the cars was in straight line pace - just look at the speed difference along the Döttinger Höhe straight.

Both cars would have lapped faster in ideal conditions, and with Suzuki doing the driving the GT-R would surely have gone quicker still. But hopefully we've unravelled this story a little more clearly than had been possible beforehand.

— DoctorD (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 4:34:51 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

jellybone, just to respond to your point. We've driven many GT-R's now and found that there are indeed variances in their performance. The white GT-R that we used for this test was representative of what we've found and we tested it at around 9 seconds (0-100mph). Incidentally this was on a par with the 997.2 C2S PDK that we tested at the same time.

We tested both GT2 and GT-R around our home circuit of Silverstone and both recorded a 2 minute 10 second lap (within one tenth of each other) - you can view the telemetry laps on DR - This was in dry and ideal conditions, and knowing how close they were on a GP circuit we were curious as to what kind of curve ball the Nurburgring would throw at their respective capabilities.

Nissan return to the ring next year when I assume they will be using an upgraded 2009 version of the GT-R. We look forward to being there and seeing what they achieve.

— DoctorD (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 4:54:57 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Okay, fanboys, I don't get it: the GT2, in their hands, was demonstrably quicker. The GT-R, in Suzuki's hands, was in another league. It is clearly down to driver as to which car is faster on a given day. These vehicles appear to be very evenly matched, with the corners belonging to the Nissan and the straights the territory of the Porsche.

Only one way to really settle it: Rohrl and Suzuki, same time, same place.

— gooch (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 5:12:13 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

once again LMAO @ Porsche

— Denali (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 5:30:28 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

I will assume this article is from a reliable source. With that said it's to bad Nissan felt the need to boost the GTR numbers. The GTR is one heck of a car. Test have shown the GTR with lauch control engaged will sprint to 0-60 mph in 3.3 sec and 11.3 sec in the 1/4 mile. If you want proof go to youtube and check it out. It's safe to say that is very quick for a production car. Now the bad news I just read that Nissan will no longer offer launch control on the GTR because of all the problems with the system. With out launch control I'm thinking the GTR can sprint 0-60 mph in 3.5 secs. That's still very quick for a production car and Nissan should be proud! Now for more bad news the BMW 335i (4 door sedan) with JB3 ($700 upgrade)will sprint from 0-60 3.5 seconds and 11.8 in the 1/4 mile. OMG I could not believe a 4 door sedan could put up those kinda numbers. Want proof go to youtube. The 335i coupe is 1 tenth quicker. GT-R Premium starts at $71,900. The 335i starts at $42,000. The Porsche 911 Turbo starts at $120,000.

— BM3W (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 7:53:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

$700? That's too much, for only $50, I got my 5 series to top 275mph. That's noticeably higher than what the 2 million dollar Veyron can manage. Unfortunately I paid 50K for this luxury beast and a 335i only start at 42K, so you win.

— Badgewhore (View Profile)

Posted on 11/25/2008 2:44:44 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2   

I can't understand the fuss in arguing where the 27 sec.s came. Who is he to say he could possibly match the time?
Well, he's right to point the "ball" factor

Just look at F1 or any other track races. different drivers make different times on the same car.

In F1, fastest and slowest car in 5km+ circuit can span around 3 seconds a lap.
And we see how the leader overlap the backmarkers.

Such gap will grow drastically over 20km.

In other words, If a driver is a second faster each kilometer, over 20km, mathematically he could end up with 20secs gap!

— mwrmmg (View Profile)

Posted on 11/25/2008 7:56:33 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Kids, please..

Why do you fight all the time? Why do you think that the GTR time is important or that GT2 time is the best ever to achieve.

Everything is written on the ice now, please wait for the NSX, then the fight for the second place will be important

— DoctorC (View Profile)

Posted on 11/25/2008 11:17:18 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

CommonSense01

I've never driven the GTR so I was just estimating at the 0-60 mph time without launch control. If Nissan said that it's a 4 second car that's still very quick. And they should be proud. Porsche 911 are some of best performace cars' on the planet period. I'm not sure which Juice Box(JB) version your 335i has but I just purchased JB3 for my 2008 335i. I was able to do 0-60 seconds in 3.9 seconds with Steptronic, JB3, 95 Octane, and Nitto NT255R tires. All else stock. You're correct, if one wants to get their time down to 3.5 seconds you'll need other small mods costing about 1K. That's still less than both of these cars's. With that said running BMS Downpipe Fix v2 ($65) on public streets is illegal so remove them before leaving the track.

— BM3W (View Profile)

Posted on 11/25/2008 5:47:45 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

@ Turbospyder

thanks for the info, but im not into "race wins" when im checking out my cars...race wins, 0-60 times and tires are not what im looking for...wrong guy or company

— Denali (View Profile)

Posted on 11/26/2008 4:42:55 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Did everyone forget that nissan is building the V spec aka "Ultimate production race car". Yes we all know that there is a series two comin out for the GTR and S line and nismo edition that follow but the real deal is the V spec. Talk to me when the results are in Blk And White. When you can compare Nissan's Top of the line against Porshe's and Chevy's.

— shiftless (View Profile)

Posted on 11/26/2008 11:37:29 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

If you get your head out of your ass and do some research the first official run was on a cooler and damp day. There was water on the track. The second run was done on a dry day that was a little warmer. 9 sec faster run is very believable and can be done on a 13mile track with better conditions.

— veyron1001 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/26/2008 7:05:33 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

One thing I do not get from all of this GTR cant do 7:29 hype. All the magazines and Porsche have yet to show a video of their slower lap times.

— veyron1001 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/26/2008 7:16:30 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Can we all stop arguing like pansy's and sit back and relax a little? Let's all reflect what you guys are arguing about. This is to all you fans of Porsche and Nissan. It's quite obvious you are all loyal and avid fans of both cars. Porsche for the ongoing iconic 911 with supreme build quality and fabulous weight distribution (with the rear engine placement) and the GT-R a big car that can zoom around utilitizing every bit of that 4 wheel drive system and the superb gear box.

So the question I'm asking. WHY ARE YOU ALL ARGUING? it's never going to end anyways. I test drove the 997 TT before I put deposit on my R8 order but the 0-60 time wasn't the selling point to me. So my point is, performance figures can only mean so much to an everyday auto consumer. You buy a Porsche for it's iconic styling with luxury amenities and outstanding performance and you buy a Nissan for it's performance and nothing more nothing less.

These two cars are so good in their own rights that the arguments will never end. Call a truce and get on with it. Anyone who gets to own either one of these cars for whatever reason is LUCKY!. Appreciate the technologies in today's automotive industry.

— Agent63 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/26/2008 8:25:22 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

TurboSpyder - don't you tire of trolling?

— Realpolitik (View Profile)

Posted on 11/27/2008 2:21:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

sounds like porshe is paying magazines.. HAHAHA

— pavcon (View Profile)

Posted on 11/27/2008 6:43:53 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1   

HOW COME.. ALL OTHE MAGAZINES TESTED THE GTR AND ACCHIEVED TIMES SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE PORSCHES AND THIS GUY IS MISSING 29 seconds.. I can understand a 12 second gap or better an 8 second. but this is just marketting tricks.. or the guy with the test doesn't even have a clue of what hes doing. OR as I said before porsche tipped

— pavcon (View Profile)

Posted on 11/27/2008 6:46:39 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1