So we're talking [globally] at most 360 cars a year. Thats LIMITED.

If thats a real number, thats $193,000 US.

If its only a 50% increase in price, thats still over $100,000. Why not increase power? If the engine is so well built (as we assume it is) why not up the boost a few psi? Cause for that price you've jumped and are now against the ZR1 Corvette...

 

The MSRP for the car will likely never be that high in the U.S. The price it actually takes to buy one - wouldn't surprise if it's well north of that figure.

These cars (any GT-R) will be very, very hard to come by, which is one of its most attractive features as far as I'm concerned but as always, exclusitivity has its price.

The likely aren't going to boost the psi much - remember these cars will be under warranty. What the consumer wants to do is up to them.

 

If the GT-R beat up the Z06 with 480 HP and weighing ~3800 lbs, that would REALLY be impressive. Since day 1, I've been skeptical of EVERYTHING to do with the GT-R. Every piece of "evidence" and "PROOF" has been botched, skewed, debunked, you name it. Nissan's own Chief Engineer has been quoted and mis-quoted (basically, two opposing statements from the same person, on the same subject, ie: tires used, etc.).

Now we hear the car is putting ~480 HP at the WHEELS!? ("hubs") ..... and again, at several more hundred pounds, runs "quicker" (time) and almost as "fast" (speed) as the Z06. This is becoming less and less "impressive", and more and more "expected". ~550 HP vs. ~505 HP, I would EXPECT those numbers. Congratulations Nissan .

Do the same as you're doing with 480 flywheel HP, and I'll crap my pants. But "apparently" that's not the case. No kidding .

This is why I hate Ricers. They "hype" the stupidest of things, and everyone gets completely hyped right along with the BS. I prefer the more cut & dried, real-world numbers we get from the domestics. Here's the car. Here's how much HP it makes. Here's what it runs. No "voo-doo" magic, breaking "laws of physics", and mis-communicated/falsified "FACTS" .

You know, it's funny because it's true!!!

Looking forward to seeing REAL WORLD tests. I fully EXPECT the GT-R to blow the Z06 away off the line, even with ONLY "480 HP". That's the beauty of AWD. A full "win" beyond that?? Smoke and mirrors .

 

So the GT-R's performance for the dollar and engineering ceases to be impressive in your mind because the motor looks like it was under rated?

I don't see how expecting a car to whip *** at a low price point should change its impressiveness.

Everybody knew the Z06 was going to be an awesome car with its power to weight ratio - but I don't think that made it no longer impressive.

GM under rated the LS1 f-bodies by 50 horsepower or so. Was that smoke and mirrors and 'BS' too?

Or are you just trying to find something to complain about this car no matter what it takes?

 

When all else fails, lets show your intelligence and start name-calling...yeah...that's the ticket!

It looks to me that the only voodoo magic going on here is being used to find ways to criticize the GT-R.

I don’t think Carlos or anyone else at Nissan is going to loose any sleep over not having “impressed” you.

 

Yes, the car's performance is very impressive. Low 3's 0-60, 11-second 1/4 mile times, and ~7:38 around the 'Ring. Awesome. Phenomenal. And you're right, for the money? Not too shabby . Is it a better all-round performer than the Z06?? Quite possibly, it may be . But I'm tired of all the warped, twisted "facts" on the car. There are pages and pages worth of nonsense, trying to convince the majority of us here that this car accomplished all it did with merely 480 HP. It "seemed" out-of-this-world. But we were just supposed to put the blinders on, and take everything at face value??

Am I impressed/un-impressed by the GT-R? I still haven't decided 100%! Is it a "Z06 killer"?? Well, it's not really an apples-to-apples comparison. At least with a 20 HP defecit, it "seems" impressive for the new-comer to beat the standing "champ", but with a 50 HP advantage, it takes away from wonder and amazement .

We all know why they were under-rated (not to step on Corvette's toes). However, I would never DENY that the car in fact makes ~345 - 350 HP, and anyone who believes it only makes ~305 - 310 is living in denial . But really, there's nothing to "brag" about, beating a ~260 HP Mustang with a ~350 HP Camaro. We all do though, but I think it's more in jest (not "bragging") and to give incentive to step it up a notch, and try to compete.

Same thing happened between Z06 & Viper. Viper was a tough competitor, Z06 stepped it up a notch. Z06 became "king of the hill", Viper stepped it up. And now GM is answering with the new ZR1.

I'm not trying to "name call" ... I'm referring to a behaviour, common of a certain group of car enthusiasts .

I'm not trying to criticize the car. I'm criticizing the leg-humping going on, and "bragging" about how great a car is, for its ability to beat another car that has less HP.

Probably not.

 

Well, if this is such a concern of yours, wouldn't you want both the cars that are being compared to have been tested together, at the same time, under the same weather conditions, etc? Something tells me that if the results were the other way around, you would cry foul.

By the way, you are most definetly a troll. You may have been registered for 10 years, but almost all of your posts have been in the last few months, and exclusively to the GTR threads.

This is a good example of a troll comment. No where was anyone talking about the Camaro, but you decided to interject with this statement in an obvious attempt to get people riled up here.

 

Point taken. The problem is that I think we all know that the term “ricer” is intended by most of those who use it be a derisive name; there are ways to identify a group without using a term that, on its face, is usually intended as an insult.

As to the behavior of certain groups, I’m sure we can all be pleased that those groups who will only buy a “Vette or only buy a Chevrolet or only buy “domestic” have no behavior patterns that anyone could find objectionable.

It’s a shame that car enthusiasts can’t just appreciate a car for what it is without getting into the “my Dad can beat up your Dad” sort of arguments that seem to arise; especially if the Corvette is perceived to be in any way threatened by the existence of another car – as good as the Corvette has been and is; it would be a hell of a dull world if our only choice for a performance car was the Corvette!

 

Because I purchased a TransAm which is better looking over a Camaro your calling me a troll? Grow up.

 

I'm not going to call you or anyone else a "troll" but your reading comprehension skills could use some polish...RussStang's comments didn't have anything to do with you owning a TransAm or Camaro or anything else; it had to do with the overwhelming majority of your posts coming at the end of your 81/2 years of being a member and all being about the GT-R; made even worse by the gyrations you’ve gone through to make your points (not to mention the name calling, etc.).

The GT-R is a great car…it doesn’t need your help to make it that way nor is shoving it down peoples throats on a Camaro/Chevy enthusiast site going to help anyone warm up to it.

 

Your post is pointless. He won't read it. He would probably just tell you to grow up after your reading comprehension comment. I really, really doubt this guy is an adult. Gotta love the internet.

 

http://2009gtr.blogspot.com/2007/12/...-with-r35.html



Tarzan Yamada drove the car to a 2:22.8 lap time. How does that compare to other cars at Suzuka ?

1. Ferrari F40 2:25.26 Best Motoring

2. Ferrari F50 2:26.52 Best Motoring

3. Porsche Carrera GT 2:28.42 “Best Motoring”

4. Porsche 993 GT2 2:29.148 “Best Motoring”

5. Porsche 993 Turbo (3.6) 2:31.165 Best Motoring

 

Those are all old models though. If I am not mistaken, the F430 runs a better lap time on just about every course it has been pitted against an F50.

Also, for the comparison to be better validated, shouldn't Tarzan Yamada have driven some of the cars in question? There is no known driver parity here.


Do you spend all day long looking up nothing but GTR information online?

 

This section of this forum is about automobiles. If you don't like discussing other automobiles, please go somewhere else.

 

I am not really shocked that after taking a few days off the forums, I see this thread ending with a useless and pointless comment like this. You ignored the point of his comment (as usual) and simply moved on to make a childish response.

The point is, that information isn't consistent. A page ago you were complaining that you cannot compare the Z06 performance between one magazine and another - that they have to be from the same source.

And NOW you post information that does not properly correlate similar times, drivers, or similar conditions. Heck, I'd be willing to bet good money that the F40 was put on the track *years* before some of the other cars. So by your own requirements, the numbers are invalid.

Not to mention it supposedly puts the GTR 6 seconds faster than a Carrera GT. Not a 911... but the ultimate Porsche. And that I will not believe without substantial proof.