GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 20 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
1st place: GT-R
2nd place: 911 GT2
3rd place Viper SRT10 ACR
4th place: Corvette Z06

Buttonwillow Raceway, 2.7 miles
1:55.7 Viper SRT10 ACR
1:59.7 911 GT2
2:01.1 GT-R
2:01.7 Corvette Z06

ACR and GT2 were on Pilot Cup semi-slicks. GT-R was on second-best Bridges.

ACR would win if was more civil. GT2 would win if price was no object. They found Z06 too soft.



Article
Scans
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,064 Posts
If only the Z06 came stock with Michelin PS2's...

So the GTR got a free 5 points for having F-Body like rear seat room... And of course GM lost no less than 10 points in the Gotta Have It/Fun to Drive factors... That makes too much sense!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
If you subtract the subjective criteria: gotta have it/fun to drive/exterior styling/interior styling and the stupid 5 points they gave the GTR for having a backseat, the final score is:

GTR - 139 points
Z06 - 135 points
GT2 - 129 points
Viper - 129 points

Basically a 4 way tie and too close to call without the subjective factors. The Z06 is nearly 3 years old so mags aren't going to swoon over it like they do newer cars.

BTW - judging by the GTR's 7:29 'Ring time, isn't it supposed to ***** slap the GT2 and Z06 on the track?? Waz up wit dat? :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
Another test with the GTR not performing as expected:

Quattroruote tested the following cars at Vairano Track (Italy)
Ferrari 430 Scuderia

Lap time: 1.15,375
0-100km/h(62mph): 3.76s
0-200km/h(124mph):11.64s
(3207lbs)1458kg + driver


Lamborghini Gallardo LP560-4

Lap time: 1.15,714
0-100km/h(62mph): 3.65s
0-200km/h(124mph):11.09s
(3498lbs)1590kg + driver


Porsche 997 GT2

Lap time: 1.15,528
0-100km/h(62mph): 3.87s
0-200km/h(124mph):12.04s
(3410lbs)1550kg with driver

Nissan GT-R

Lap time: 1.17,600
0-100km/h(62mph): 3.87s
0-200km/h(124mph):13.15s
(3960lbs)1800kg + driver


The GTR was over 2 seconds slower than the GT2 on a 1:15 second track....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
BTW - judging by the GTR's 7:29 'Ring time, isn't it supposed ***** slap the GT2 and Z06 on the track?? Waz up wit dat? :confused:
Nissan said Dunlops SP worth 4-5 secs on the 'Ring over more comfort Bridgestones. They used base GT-R with Dunlops for record setting runs.

Substract ~1 sec on Buttonwillow and base GT-R would go toe-to-toe with semi-slicked GT2.

The GTR was over 2 seconds slower than the GT2 on a 1:15 second track....
Not bad, considering that GT2 is $120,000 more expensive and weared semi-slicks.

These guys at Italian mag should be really desperate to compare $70K car to $200K cars. But looks like they don't have a choice, GT-R would kill anything european close to it's price.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,921 Posts
I guess I'm having a hard time why anyone but a <censored> would crave the GTR?
It's not putting up track dusting numbers.
Sadly, it's not King of the Ring.
The styling is vintage '70's box cutter - not an appealing line in sight.
And it took reviewer preference and a back seat to put it over the top in this comparo.
WTH?
If that isn't standing behind momma's skirt, nothing is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,682 Posts
ZO6 is too soft? :lmao:

Maybe they should put some Pilot Cups on the GT-R and ZO6 to even it out, or perhaps put PS2s on the GT2 and ACR.

Any test with "gotta have it" points isn't work reading anyways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
Nissan said Dunlops SP worth 4-5 secs on the 'Ring over more comfort Bridgestones. They used base GT-R with Dunlops for record setting runs.

Substract ~1 sec on Buttonwillow and base GT-R would go toe-to-toe with semi-slicked GT2.
The Bridgestones have a 140 treadwear rating compared to 200 for the Dunlops. I doubt the Dunlops would pick up 1 second on a 2 minute track. What Nissan says means nothing to me (they've been known to lie). Regardless, it would still be slower.

Not bad, considering that GT2 is $120,000 more expensive and weared semi-slicks.
But didn't the GTR run 7:29 around the 'Ring? The best time I've seen for the GT2 is 7:32 with Walter Roehrl :eek: behind the wheel. Now the GT2 is 2.1 seconds (a lot) faster on a 1:15 track. Something doesn't add up.

These guys at Italian mag should be really desperate to compare $70K car to $200K cars. But looks like they don't have a choice, GT-R would kill anything european close to it's price.
Not really. The Italians have never tried to compete on price. The Corvette has been embarrassing the best European cars in track comparisons for years...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
  • Nordschleife in 7:29.03
  • 0-60 in 3.2s, 1/4 in 11.6s (with launch control)
  • $70K
  • Seats four



It's in a class of its own.
In the test you made this thread about, the GTR did:
In other words, it would get beat by a base C6 in a straight line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
The Bridgestones have a 140 treadwear rating compared to 200 for the Dunlops. I doubt the Dunlops would pick up 1 second on a 2 minute track.
The Dunlop is a little noisier and not quite as good in the wet as the RE070R, but in the dry it's worth 4-5 seconds around the 'Ring.
http://drivers-republic.com/news/article.cfm?articleid=e04a6f0c52264345be7226968d680bdf&page=1

If it's 4-5s on 12.9 mi:
2.7mi / 12.9mi --> 0.8-1 sec

What Nissan says means nothing to me (they've been known to lie). Regardless, it would still be slower.
What lie you talking about?
May be slower. Lightweight V-spec with 550hp and semi-slicks will be GT2 fighter, not base GT-R.

But didn't the GTR run 7:29 around the 'Ring? The best time I've seen for the GT2 is 7:32 with Walter Roehrl :eek: behind the wheel. Now the GT2 is 2.1 seconds (a lot) faster on a 1:15 track. Something doesn't add up.
Suzuki drives GT-R for months. How much time Quattroroute test driver was given? Couple hours?

Not really. The Italians have never tried to compete on price. The Corvette has been embarrassing the best European cars in track comparisons for years...
Yeah, they are more in boutique business than in auto business. Lambo lives only because Germans feed them.

In other words, it would get beat by a base C6 in a straight line.
In other words, they should use launch control next time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
The Dunlop is a little noisier and not quite as good in the wet as the RE070R, but in the dry it's worth 4-5 seconds around the 'Ring.
http://drivers-republic.com/news/article.cfm?articleid=e04a6f0c52264345be7226968d680bdf&page=1

If it's 4-5s on 12.9 mi:
2.7mi / 12.9mi --> 0.8-1 sec
As I said, I don't care about what Nissan says.

What lie you talking about?
I remember something about a GTR running 7:59 and some great drivers running 8:20s. It also looks like this GTR isn't running like a 7:29 car...

May be slower. Lightweight V-spec with 550hp and semi-slicks will be GT2 fighter, not base GT-R.
But didn't the non V-spec run the 'Ring in 7:29? How in the world could it be 2.1 seconds slower in a 1:15 track?

Suzuki drives GT-R for months. How much time Quattroroute test driver was given? Couple hours?
This makes no sense. What should they do...let the drivers practice in the GTR for a couple months and then do a comparison test??? LOL.


In other words, they should use launch control next time.
How do you know they didn't? BTW - no amount of launch control will make a 111 mph car run 11.6.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
E.Haskell, all I know is there's something awful fishy about the GT-R and people driving the thing.
I mean, when it first came out, people marvelled at its 7:39 Ringtime. Then Edmunds was saying they were getting 126 @ 11.6 in the car.
Then both Edmunds and Car and Driver proved that Nissan is lying to us, saying the engine makes well over 510 crank horsepower, which I believe.
Now, Car and Driver is getting worse numbers than competitors on the Buttonwillow track, and the car can barely amnage 111 MPH trap speed.
Then, Nissan alledges the GT-R just got 7:29 on the Ring.
Fishy, fishy, fishy.

Now if Nissan is lying to us about the amount of power the engine makes (far more than their claimed 480 crank horsepower), how can we trust that their 7:29 Ringtime is not a lie?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,971 Posts
E.Haskell, all I know is there's something awful fishy about the GT-R and people driving the thing.
I mean, when it first came out, people marvelled at its 7:39 Ringtime. Then Edmunds was saying they were getting 126 @ 11.6 in the car.
Then both Edmunds and Car and Driver proved that Nissan is lying to us, saying the engine makes well over 510 crank horsepower, which I believe.
Now, Car and Driver is getting worse numbers than competitors on the Buttonwillow track, and the car can barely amnage 111 MPH trap speed.
Then, Nissan alledges the GT-R just got 7:29 on the Ring.
Fishy, fishy, fishy.

Now if Nissan is lying to us about the amount of power the engine makes (far more than their claimed 480 crank horsepower), how can we trust that their 7:29 Ringtime is not a lie?
GM has always underestimated the hp the LS family puts down but you trust their Ringtime so you cannot really correlate the two. The first car (silver) was a factory fresh car that Nissan even said was a preproduction unit that was still going through final calibrations. With a turbo car that could mean serious hp differences. The second car (red) that has been tested by many magazines has been more thoroughly tested and has a much closer to production tune and has been thrashed for every single mile from the 1st to the 4000th. It also makes some funky tranny noises and most people do not know how to use the launch control, all of which combine to create subpar performances as compared to the silver car.

I'm not really sure why so many people get so worked up about "Ring" times since these times only marginally correlate to what the real world experience will be like. Both cars will be far more capable than all but a select few of the owners and will never even see the last 10% of their full capabilities. It will be more of a lifestyle pic than a capabilities pic in my opinion.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
Absurdities with Car and Driver's "comparo" test:

  1. [*]"Nissan GTR Lows: Not Pretty, Constant tire roar, a robot seeking more soul." Final Results: GT-R Interior styling: 8 of 10. Exterior styling: 7 of 10.
    So, is the GT-R is butt-ugly? or is it an 7 and 8 out of a 10?
  2. What Car and Driver said about the Porsche GT2 in early 2008:
    "But what's darn clear now is what a spectacular achievement the new GT2 is, comprising perhaps the most complete and capable performance package for road or race course in the 911's four-decade history."
    Sounds good. Looks like the GT2 is a fabulous sportscar, indeed!
    What they said about the exact same car July 2008, in this "Comparo":
    "Three days in the GT2 brought forth gushing praise. Not for the GT2 but for the 415-hp 911 GT3 RS. Besides being more than $65,000 less, the equally stiff GT3 is remembered as a more entertaining harmony of power and rear-engine eccentricity. At times, taming the GT2 feels suspiciously like work."
    Ah, perhaps I spoke too fast. Or, they tested an entirely different GT2?
    Is the GT2 the best 911 in Porsche's 40-year history? Or, is it such a bad car that Car and Driver yearned to drive the GT3 instead?
  3. In early 2008:
    After coming back down to earth, we took a few opportunities to test the GT2's Launch Assistant, the first such system on a Porsche, which basically makes achieving Porsche's astounding standing-start acceleration times not only possible but also easy enough that you could teach your grandmother to use it in three minutes. Just step on the clutch, floor the gas, and the engine will rev to 5000 rpm, where it will stay, allowing turbo pressure to build. Simply sidestep the clutch, and blam! After a touch of wheelspin, you'll feel as if you'd just been rammed from behind by an F-16. We had no timing equipment with us, but we're relatively sure we were past 100 km/h (62 mph) after 3.7 seconds.
    Now, in the July 2008 issue:
    While big-bore power is instant, big-turbo power is a process. The windup to GT2 detonation starts at 3000 rpm, the full wallop arriving around 5000 rpm when up to 20.3 pounds of boost explode in neck- wrenching fury. Employing the launch control, the GT2 ties the high-drag Viper for briefest quarter-mile time—11.8 seconds—with the Viper hitting 126 mph to the Porsche’s 121. However, all that heaving and surging thrust also revives old 911 demons, especially the tail-wagging and the sudden steering faintness under acceleration as the weight rocks rearward.
    Sounds like it takes more than just "Just stepping on the clutch" and not so "easy enough that you could teach your grandmother to use it". Or is it?
    The problem with worthless journalism is it's hard to keep your lies straight. In addition to comparing cars, you also have to see if your comparo jives with the lie you wrote about earlier.
  4. The Corvette is a luxury cruiser, according to what we read on the lines:
    A “grand touring” badge belongs on this relatively plush and button-filled cruiser, certainly far more than the slingshot Porsche GT2. In the deep foxhole of the driver’s seat, everything feels softer, from the flat, foamy buckets that allow sideways sliding to the artificial steering to a suspension tuned for compliance. Long road legs were less punishing in the Z06, thanks to the easy clutch and shifter, a fast-cooling air conditioner, and satellite radio, but the ****pit’s acrid aroma of curing resin made it smell “like driving a body shop,” groused associate editor Tony Quiroga. Cabin noise at full whack is turned down the most, though no car here would be confused with a Lexus.
    So far, so good. Sounds like a comfy, serene drive in the countryside. But wait! We have to read between the lines to see where Car and Driver blunders yet again:
    Final Results: Corvette Driver Comfort: Last Place. 7 out of 10. GT-R Comfort: First Place. 9 out of 10.
Last month, Car and Driver tells us that the BMW M3 is the best sportscar in the world. I suggested on their forum that the Porsche GT2 would have won that comparison if and only if the engine was replaced with a weaker unit and the shocks get replaced with spongier ones.
(look at posts #6 and #7, where I point out Car and Driver absurdities, and do my usual parody of that magazine. I'm Morpheus1, by the way
http://forums.caranddriver.com/auto/board/message?board.id=5&thread.id=173720 )
Now we're told that the GT-R is the best car. Tons of absurdities. Tons of Car and Driver discrepancies.
If you guys ever wondered why Car and Driver is a hard find at the local newsstand, this post explains it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
As I said, I don't care about what Nissan says.
Whatever floats your boat.

GT-R was faster on the track than Gallardo SL, 997 GT3, 997 turbo, Ferrari 430, Z06 at EVO mag.
Faster than 997 turbo and Z06 at R&T.
Faster than 997 turbo and R8 at Car.
...

If you only care about results which make you happy, why arguing?

I remember something about a GTR running 7:59 and some great drivers running 8:20s. It also looks like this GTR isn't running like a 7:29 car...
You have a video proof of the 7:29 run. Where Nissan lied?

Some great drivers running 8:20?
May be they should reevaluate their greatness.
Even SportAuto runned 7:50 on November. On dry track with very agressive driver like Suzuki 7:29 is definitely possible.

But didn't the non V-spec run the 'Ring in 7:29? How in the world could it be 2.1 seconds slower in a 1:15 track?
Because drivers aren't created equal. Let Suzuki have GT2 for a couple weeks and who knows how fast he can go on it.

This makes no sense. What should they do...let the drivers practice in the GTR for a couple months and then do a comparison test???
Invite Toshio Suzuki for a test?


How do you know they didn't? BTW - no amount of launch control will make a 111 mph car run 11.6.
Transaxle gearbox to "R" mode will.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
So far, so good. Sounds like a comfy, serene drive in the countryside. But wait! We have to read between the lines to see where Car and Driver blunders yet again:
Final Results: Corvette Driver Comfort: Last Place. 7 out of 10. GT-R Comfort: First Place. 9 out of 10.
You making stuff up like usual.
Comfy drive is "Ride" category and Z06 got first place on it - 9/10. " Drivers comfort is seats, etc.
 
1 - 20 of 78 Posts
Top