GT-R: 0.96Isn't that the same g-force that the Cobalt SS pulls on the track?
7:59 as best effort is sad.And I may be a bit biased but I certainly don't remember this much gaga over the Viper on it's introduction.
I don't want to be dismissive of the GT-R in the way that you seem to be towards the Viper.7:59 as best effort is sad.
Their last 911 turbo tested at 0.92g, being $120K german supercar and all.That's <censored> pretty close, torsion beam rear suspension and all.
But you asked why Viper don't get R35 GT-R press, not R33 GT-R or 997 Carrera S, right?I don't want to be dismissive of the GT-R in the way that you seem to be towards the Viper.
A 7:59 track time is the same as Nissan Skyline, a C6 Z51, and a Porsche 997.
It's only about the time for production street-legal cars, not sport prototypes like this:Using your rationale, the 7:38 GT-R should be considered blindingly slow, especially when compared to laps dating back to the 70's.
I mean if it's only about the time then the GT-R doesn't even merit a footnote in Ring history.
You asking what's easier - to build 7:30 car or to build 125 trap car? The latter of course.The truth is, track times at the ring are impressive, but are not the be and end all.
In this case, the 1/4 mile comparison is far more favorable to the Viper.
Does that make the GT-R any less of an achievement?
Dunno, but it's listed as 2005 result. I have a feeling 2005 was 3 years ago, not 10.And if the Viper track time you threw out is true, for its age and what the Viper was, looking back 10 years, that's not a bad track time at all.
I heard it cost Nissan 1 billion $ to produce GT-R. Not sure that GM or Ferrari or Lambo or Porsche have a cash laying around. Toyota ... may be, if their budget for LF-A can swallow it.But, I have to give it to Nissan. Their dog can run.. but like all else, they will soon be history.
I am sure everyone from porsche to ferrari to lambo to GM, to toyota are studying this car, its software and its awd system, or trying to build their own version. In two years, It will have to shed alot of weight to keep up.
But for now, its king..
That was exactly my point. Everything comes with a context.It's only about the time for production street-legal cars, not sport prototypes like this:
If we want to talk about pure trap times, no holds barred......You asking what's easier - to build 7:30 car or to build 125 trap car? The latter of course.
Btw GT-R time is 11.7 vs 11.8 for 600hp Viper and 12.0 for Z06. Not so shabby for big fat Nissan. Far more favorable to the Viper? We'll count that as wishful thinking.
GM doesn't need to spend $1B to develop anything new.I heard it cost Nissan 1 billion $ to produce GT-R. Not sure that GM or Ferrari or Lambo or Porsche have a cash laying around. Toyota ... may be, if their budget for LF-A can swallow it.
V-Spec will be here in 2009, a stripper like GT2 - no a/c etc, but weights ~3600.
Do you still living in it's time or you are in 2008?The fact that the GT-R has a better Ring time takes nothing away from the Viper in it's time.
Where was Ferrari Enzo or McLaren F1 in 1920? They suck and Ford Model T FTW.Where was the GT-R in 1992?
Why should we bother with times from different sources? These 7-9s Vipers are obviously not stock. What's your point then?If we want to talk about pure trap times, no holds barred......
Because I appreciate history, the steps that brought us to this point.Do you still living in it's time or you are in 2008?
Where was Ferrari Enzo or McLaren F1 in 1920? They suck and Ford Model T FTW.
No one ever claimed the Viper had any advantage.Why should we bother with times from different sources? These 7-9s Vipers are obviously not stock. What's your point then?
We have legit times from edmunds, with 600hp stock Viper and production USDM stock GT-R. And Viper doesn't have any advantage. What a drama and reality check for some folks.
Again, kudos to the GT-R.Another reality check will be at the actual strip, where GT-R can be launched ten times in a row and get results within 0.1s. Good luck doing that with stick.
Agreed. But youtube wasn't here 10 years ago. Hell, even this forum wasn't up 10 years ago. Press scene is much wider now.For you to compare the current GT-R to a design that was put forth over a decade ago, based on a comment that I made about historical press reviews was a bit off the mark to begin with.
Ok, so Viper is closer to GT-R on dragstip than track.No one ever claimed the Viper had any advantage.
Just that in at least one measure, it compared more favorably to the GT-R than your ring time comparison.
We have time slips that show that the much older, far less exotic Viper will run with the GT-R. Stock.
That's true. Amuse GT-R already running 600 whp with 3700 lb weight. R33 and R34 GT-R proved to be fast dragsters in the past.We also have time slips that show very clearly stock only begins to determine the performance characteristics for a vehicle. So while we may bandy about ring times for a strictly stock mass-produced vehicle, that is in and of itself a very limited perspective and is far exceeded in many ways.
By F1 super cars as well as lowly Vipers with NOx.
GT-R doesn't even use half-slicks. And I never heard of full slicks on production cars.When you start looking at slicks on a production vehicle to be able to lay down power, AWD makes much more sense.
We all need to enjoy this car because it forces ALL manufacturers to continue to bring their A game. In the same way that these same people used to (still does) hate on the Camry and Accord I welcomed the improved competition because now we have the Chevy Malibu. CAFE is not going to kill every fun car out there because these cars sell in such small quanities that they will not even put a slight dent in the CAFE numbers and will put a huge profit in the car makers pocket.Instead of hating this car we need to enjoy this latest round of sports cars that are coming out, because cafe will soon put a damp towel on them. I look forward to what the ZR1, LF-A, and NSX have to say in response to the GTR and GTR Victory Specification.:drive:
Unlikely. The Turbo X is quick, but not that quick. For example stock STis and Evos which are lighter and of similar power won't hit 4.0I am wondering, What would happen if you revved a Saab Turbo X to about 5000 RPM and let go, would it not also run like this dog? even if not that stupid fast, It might be able to break the 4.0 to 60
Wow. You have a 5000 posts and still don't know the difference between skidpad g's and track measured g's?