You guys are just a bunch of GM nut-swingers ..... you can't appreciate the GT-R for the great car it really is!



Oh, silly GT-R .

 

Yeah the GT-R is the greatest piece of technology in the course of human history. It in fact beat out fire and the wheel in importance.

 

The fact that you have to hit 3rd gear before you even make it to 60mph says a lot

 

GT-R
Great Turd Racecar.

Could care less if it stood on it's own merits, but to base you reputation on BS spouted by your parent company, leaves a real bad taste in my mouth.

 

So, the car was the quickest around the racetrack, and it beat out the $50,000-pricier 911 Turbo, and it lost to a BMW in a comparison run by a magazine that has a long history of favoring BMWs. What an absolute piece of sh*t! BTW, of the 14 point difference between the M3 and the GT-R, a full 10 of those had to do with rear-seat room and comfort, trunk room, and ride comfort. Clearly, if a performance vehicle can't do well in those categories, it sucks and should be ridiculed.

I've spent some racetrack time with the 911 Turbo. If a car - any car - can outperform that thing and costs $50,000 less, it's one hell of a serious effort and deserves the utmost in respect... regardless of the badge.

 

I have a suspicion that even when the production GTR is tested, it will not live up to the hype, and all the blame will be laid on the fact that no test driver can master GTR's technology to achieve its true performance...

Seriously, this car is a great performer. But Nissan is manipulating its data to feed its fans.

And no amount of analysis or dissection from this point onward will convince GTR's fanbase otherwise - that factory stock GTR on stock tires is capable of delivering 7:29 second time at the track, and they'll argue about it to the death, I'm sure. Nissan knows this, it knows what it achieved and how it achieved it.

 

I would respect it, if they hadn't been so sketchy about all their "factual testing" .

Does the car perform?? I'm sure it does. Is it going to give a Corvette, more specifically, a Z06 a run for its money?? Let's see, similar horsepower, more weight, but the advantage of AWD ..... yep, it's still going to make the 'Vette sweat a little .

Does the car "deserve" respect? Not unless it earns it the right way.

"Allegedly" running "record setting" runs around the 'Ring, according to the OEM is NOT earning anything other than doubt and skepticism.

THAT'S why I don't care for the GT-R anymore. It's no different than the Mustang GT500 ..... IMO, it's a blatent UNDER-PERFORMER. A 500 HP car should be faster than a ~350 HP LS1 Camaro . The '03/'04 SVT Cobra, however, has my utmost respect (killer performance, from "merely" ~395 HP).

Don't try to baffle me with B.S. and expect me to "respect" something. If the GT-R can wipe out the competition in the real world, I'll reconsider my stance .

 

I thought that was retarded as well.

 

Comparative Nurburgring claims.
7:29.03 Nissan GT-R
7:42 Ford GT
7:42.9 Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z06

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/06/06/v...-in-super-lap/

 

What the heck is the "real world" to you? It put a full second on the 911 Turbo on a 1.5-mile course. I don't care if this car isn't deserving of mythical Godzilla status, and I don't care if some engineer decided to stretch the truth (or perhaps outright lied) - putting the smack down on a 911 Turbo is damn respectable.

As I've stated before and I'll state again, I've spent some time in a 911 Turbo. It's a hell of a vehicle, and anything that goes faster - and especially something that goes faster for $50,000 less - has earned my respect. This doesn't mean that I like the GT-R better than the Z06, and it doesn't mean that Nissan has become my new favorite car company to nut-hug. It does mean that if for some reason I find myself with an extra $75K of walking-around money, I'd certainly give this car serious consideration.

If others want to have an irrational dislike of this car to counteract my rational lukewarm feelings, then I guess we'll all just be creating some sort of natural balance

 

^ ^ ..... oh great, stirring up the bees' nest again!!

You know something else that's interesting, and while it's never really discussed, it should be mentioned ...

... every car that the GT-R has been put up against has been a MANUAL transmission (well, unless the Porsche or BMW were tip-tronics?). But certainly the Z06 and the GT are full manual. The GT-R is essentially an "automatic"?! (tip-tronic / paddle-shifted, right? ). There is NO clutch to have to push, so NO time wasted there. The transmission does INSTANT shifts, no waiting for the driver input.

We're back to comparing apples to oranges. And yet, as shown in that video, the manual car can STILL pull away from the GT-R. BUT, a place where the GT-R looked like it had some advantage was going into the braking zone ..... and THAT is a place where clutching, heel-toe rev matching becomes very important, AND it takes a lot of concentration ... concentration that could otherwise be focused solely on the braking instead of braking AND clutching AND downshifting .

..... what's my point?? The GT-R is "easy" to drive compared to the other cars.

ALSO, it held a tigher line through the slalom. But it wasn't going as fast, and a slower car is easier to maneuver!!

In the hands of average drivers though, the GT-R will certainly be fast ..... especially against manual cars in the hands of average drivers (who cannot operate the cars at the same level as pros).

It's still ugly though, and I have not seen compelling PROOF that it is any faster than a Z06 Corvette, so I'm reserving judgement 'til I see more concrete evidence .

 

It also costs a good deal more than the M3. I think they said if you only care about track times then go with the GT-R. But for a car you will actually use the M3 is a better value and that is reflected in the scoring.

Also to be fair to the GT-R, the article did say that they have since tested another GT-R that performed as well as the one they tested initially, so the one in this comparo probably doesn't indicate that they will all be this slow.

 

and you void the warranty if you turn off traction control.
http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index....=post&id=17628
I think the video gamers will have trouble vicariously drifting this car

 

I can tell you that many of the test cars in the country have upwards of 30-40K hard-driven miles on them...I'm not at all surprised that some are starting to wear a bit considering the thrashing they've been getting!

I'd say you've got it wrong with saying go with the GT-R only for the track times...the GT-R was designed to be a daily driver/four season car...while it's also intended to be a great track car, that doesn't mean it isn't also extreemly livable.

 

anyone see this in the lounge? Still not an owners car..


https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=616530

If they are brining these cars around with a little tweeking..or a Vspec debagged..sure is wonderful marketing to get it out there that the cars that fast..but again if its not just a GTR and people are not running these times and only the factory..someones got some explaining to do..

But damn if these times are for the regular GTR..