Car and Driver: GTR vs M3 vs 911 Turbo

[mbukukanyau]

Originally Posted by a_v_s

Doesn't matter if you do or not, it matters if the person on the receiving end perceives it that way. Otherwise, I could say that I don't find the phrase "cotton-picking" to be offensive, but that doesn't mean that it isn't.

It's like if somebody doesn't like something, and he calls it "g-a-y" He might not think it is offensive, but it could still be offensive to somebody else.

so what? we cannot be everything to everybody. The eyes of a frog will not stop animals from drinking from a stream.
And I am glad the GT-R did not win this comparo

[a_v_s]

Originally Posted by mbukukanyau

so what? we cannot be everything to everybody.

I'm just over-reacting (it's late ok )

I just got offended, because in one line, you basically told me I wasn't welcome on this board, told me to go join another board, and told me to realize how much rice I could've purchased for $30,000. I normally don't get offended when someone calls a car rice, but when you tell a person to go buy a bunch of rice, that's different

And the GTR didn't win, becuase Car and Driver is biased and in bed with BMW... lol.. j/k.... OK, ok, I'm going to bed now....

[JBsZ06]

Edmunds:

GTR = 1:25.68
R8 = 1:26.92

Car and Driver also trapped only 115mph in the GTR. They trapped 116 mph in a LS3 Corvette.

The Z06 absolutely wrecked the R8 and 911 Turbo at VIR:

LS2 Corvette - 3:03.6
Audi R8 - 3:04.6
Z06 - 2:58.2
GT3 - 3:01.8
911 Turbo - 3:05.8

---------

I don't hear or see corvette enthusiasts going over to audi sites or porsche sites and drone on and on about how the Corvette is better than their cars. I would call that inappropriate behavior.

GTR fans that drone on and on...seem to be packing that "little DIC" syndrome..

I believe thats what the backlash towards the GTR is about..

[chevrobill]

Just received my copy in the mail. Did anyone else notice the condecending remarks about Z06 and its fans in the last two paragraphs just above the page 57 marker? "And consider this, Corvette dudes: Maybe there is a Z06 in the test-its just too awesome to see" Why do I still subscribe?

[a_v_s]

Originally Posted by JBsZ06

Edmunds:
I don't hear or see corvette enthusiasts going over to audi sites or porsche sites and drone on and on about how the Corvette is better than their cars. I would call that inappropriate behavior.

Please show me where I said the GTR was better. And how was I droning on and one, I had one relevant post in this thread, and I didn't even mention the GTR being better in that post.

And even if somebody did say that, where in the forum rules does it say you are not allowed to badmouth GM?

[Ach]

As for BMW bias...the 3 series is the only BMW that wins comparos at C/D. The e60 5-series, including the M5, has lost the last few comparos (I believe the M5 came in last in the most recent, behind the E55 and S6-also, the 550i lost to the Infiniti M45) and I don't think the current 6, 7 or X5 has ever won a C/D comparo. If anything, MB has been faring well in C/D comparos of late.

As for the GTR- the ringer allegations were, I think, the result of the performance figures being WAY out of whack with the power-to-weight ratio. We now know that Nissan hugely underrated the output of the car.

[Htay7500]

c&d are gaga into BMW. I think the 911 or the gtr and if possible, the z06 would've won.

[redTT]

Originally Posted by Ach

As for the GTR- the ringer allegations were, I think, the result of the performance figures being WAY out of whack with the power-to-weight ratio. We now know that Nissan hugely underrated the output of the car.

I think it's the huge differences in time and performance between each car. Some have already been dynoed and the figures hasnt exactly been consistent between each cars.

Some people might call these higher hp GTR as ringers while some say that Nissan under rates cars. All these should disappear when the SAE figures are released.

[JBsZ06]

Lets just agree to disagree..

Enjoy

[PMC the 1st]

Originally Posted by JBsZ06

Lets just agree to disagree..

Since we're agreeing to disagree, that means there's no reason for these forums to exist. Let's just stop posting on them altogether.

[PMC the 1st]

What strikes me as qweer is that the GT-R often gets compared to the M3, which is a luxury car. Not just with C/D, but Car and EVO magazine,a s well. Does this mean that the GT-R doesn't have the mojo to compete with things like the GT3 RS, Z06, Viper and the F430?
I mean, I never see the GT-R up against these cars with exception to the Z06, which was done only once by Road and Track...

[PMC the 1st]

http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...6911_chart.pdf
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...echDetails.pdf

Road and track still gave the Porsche lower marks on 'driving excitement' than the GT-R (Vette maxed out at 20 points).
Don't ask me how or why but the GT-R easily beat the 911 in overall handling. Car and Driver said the opposite, right?
What's really odd is Road and Track got a Z06-like quarter mile in their GT-R but Car and Driver couldn't get below 12 seconds. I wonder why, especially since the GT-R has more hp than all four cars.

Notice the article, which is typical Car and Driver drivel. First, they alledge that the M3 is better than the GT-R because it's not as sportscar-like. Then they immediately contradict by saying their dream car is the very sportscar-like Lotus Elise. Then they dig themselves further in the hole by claiming that with the BMW you can "have it all," despite the BMW being deficient (in some cases vey deficient) in all performance categories versus the other two cars. How can you "have it all" if 'having it all' includes inferior performance compared with the GT-R and 911? Then they say the BMW is 'near perfection', but admit to bad steering feel in the car not to mention iDrive. Is the M3 nearly perfect, Car and Driver? Or is the steering feel bad and is iDrive still maddening? Which one?
With journalism like this, you'd be surprised that Car and Driver still has a readership base.

[redTT]

Wasnt the Road and Track test driven by a well known Nissan test and former racer? Hardly fair if you ask me.

For me the Car and Driver made perfect sense. The BMW had the practicality of a larger non sports car however the steering, handling and car behavior was also the best. The car obviously wasnt the fastest since it's lacking in torque, power and had allot of weight to lug around. Still enjoyment wise and driver connection when it comes to handling BMW was by far the best in the group.

The slower track time is actually more in line with it's low trap speed and quarter mile. This one is definitely more believable than the early numbers we were swamped with. Dyno numbers in the GTR has been all over the place and for me anyway couldnt be trusted.

[JBsZ06]

High altitude of car and driver test negatively affected (slightly) the BMW performance or so they said in the article...

The BMW would never be as fast as the Porsche or the GTR but its still a fine vehicle.

It was an interesting article and it clearly showed the GTR is not quite the "revelation" it was originally claimed to be..

I dig the launch control and DSG technology on the GTR but the car's a bit too heavy and the styling..is not looking too good ...IMO

There was mention that the GTR has 10 percent drivetrain loss with the DSG setup and special bearing design.

[PMC the 1st]

Originally Posted by redTT

Wasnt the Road and Track test driven by a well known Nissan test and former racer? Hardly fair if you ask me.

For me the Car and Driver made perfect sense. The BMW had the practicality of a larger non sports car however the steering, handling and car behavior was also the best. The car obviously wasnt the fastest since it's lacking in torque, power and had allot of weight to lug around. Still enjoyment wise and driver connection when it comes to handling BMW was by far the best in the group.

The slower track time is actually more in line with it's low trap speed and quarter mile. This one is definitely more believable than the early numbers we were swamped with. Dyno numbers in the GTR has been all over the place and for me anyway couldnt be trusted.

The BMW M3 is a sportscar that has compromises.
For example, BMW compromised supercar cornering ability for luxury by increasing the ground clearance of the car versus the other cars in the test.
They compromised supercar handling by adding two doors and having two useable rear seats.
They compromised supercar acceleration for luxury by adding a quieter, less powerful engine than in the other two cars.
They compromised supercar skidpad performance for luxury by making the suspension a bit softer than the other cars in the test.
They compromised supercar braking and road feel by adding all kinds of luxury goodies, such as the aforementioned rear seats, electronics, etc that makes it necessary for the car to have a high-speed limit of 155 MPH. The other two cars are significantly faster.

Come to think of it, the BMW M3 is such a compromised car that it does not surprise me that it falls behind in every single performance statistic. It handles well, but so does a 1998 Mazda Miata.