monaroCountry

Nissan has again lowered their time to 7:26.7 with an average speed of 165.69 km/h (103mph). Someone should really do a proper independent and stock test with the GTR. They hould also do a proper comparison against the other 7:20's car. Aparently there was an independent modified GTR that was privately ran at the same time, they recorded a time of 7:57. So what is that 2 very fast times all set y Nissan and around 7 7:50's time all set by independent testers?



7:24.29 168.53 km/h - Maserati MC12, 632 PS/1335 kg, Marc Bassenq
7:24.65 168.40 km/h - Pagani Zonda F Clubsport, 641 PS/1230 kg, Marc Bassenq
7:25.21 168.19 km/h - Ferrari Enzo, 660 PS/1365 kg, Marc Basseng
7:26.4 167.74 km/h - Corvette ZR1, 648 PS/1519 kg Jim Mero
7:26.7 165.69 km/h - 2010 Nissan GT-R (base), 478 PS/1750 kg Suzuki

Silver05GTO

LOL, the GTR clearly has alot left in it! I'm sure Nissan probably said there was water/sand/ice on the track so times can still improve. This is the CRAZIEST drop and varied times I've ever seen.

And you know what? The publicity is working, cause everyone is talking about this. Just weird noone else can come close to reaching the times Nissan is able to run consistently.

JustinStrife

And they won't either.

TBIRD57

gt-r-v and bugatti only real trailblazers.

Viper_Vette

Cant touch this.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p...ord/index.html

motogib1

The Viper ACR looks cool as hell. ZR1 looks reasonable. The GTR is so damn ugly I wouldn't buy one no matter how fast they are. Still not convinced the GTR ring times are kosher after Porsche called them out. Where there is smoke there is fire.

Silver05GTO

Only a matter of time.......

BTW the GTR has been doing all this on winter Blizzack tires, it doesn't need a racing tire like the ACR. The GTR has dropped like 3 secs in 2 days......like global warming....it can't be stopped, in another week it'll be running 7:10's.

GTR: Like Kevin Garnett-anything is possible

yellerz51

There is nothing I can add to the dialogue regarding anything automotive. Anything that I or anyone else would share there opinion on is simply an opportunity for you to create a controversy. Your just hell bent on shoving your opinion down everyones throat and creating a controversy so you can be responded to.

You make the connection that others remember how you explained what a car does specifically to me? You confuse your opinion with fact and once stated assume that I and everyone else should accept it as such. Can you see how narcissistic that is?

You talk about coming to the forums to defend various Corvettes. Can you see how absurd that is? Can you see how delusional your statement is? Your defending an inanimate object in cyberspace.

You make the connection that "you guys seemed to like it". Can you see how delusional and self centered that statement is?

It's obvious your simply creating a controversy to center the attention on yourself and I don't think you can even see it.

You contribute zero to these forums. You don't offer advice or share your personal experience with your Corvette, assuming you even own one. Your obviously just here to fill your need to have others pay attention to you.

Guibo

Nothing disconcerting about it. Anyway, aren't we talking about whether the DR test GT-R was a Series 1? You stated as if it were fact that it wasn't. How do you know it wasn't?

I wonder why you left out these parts:
"Ten, perhaps - fifteen with a set of those gummy Dunlops fitted, Suzuki-san driving, using his sublime skills and telephathic knowledge of the car's handling traits.
On days that seemed climatically identical but were months apart, [race] cars have seen up to a five second dispcrepancy in lap times. Including ours."

So, Harris concedes as much as 15 seconds is possible with just the Dunlops fitted and Suzuki's knowledge of the car. He also concedes 5 seconds in what we'd think are identical conditions. Nissan's test was in ideal conditions, while the DR test was far, FAR from it:
"Flugplatz: line was part damp.
Lauda Kink: damp patches under the trees.
Uphill kink (no name): damp bits...the kink was even slower than usual and very slippery. Lost heaps of time here from the official GT-R lap.
Galgenkopf: a few damp spots.
Antoniusbuche: It's still damp on the line here [Harris drops 8.2 mph from his peak speed on Doettinger Hohe].
This was never going to be an exact exercise. The track wasn't completely dry, the ambient temperature was 7C, and we didn't have the luxury of successive flying laps.
Arranging this exercise in November and expecting anything like useable track conditions is a bit like inviting R. Meaden around for tea and expecting that the biscuit jar avoids a heavy assault.
the Monday after the [final VLN] race came, it rained. And after it had rained buckets, it rained some more. And by encouraging the oil that had been deposited all the way around the 12.9-mile lap by an incontinent BMW M3 during Saturday qualifying to reappear from the pavement, a lethal emulsion was formed. In places, you couldn't stand on the track."

If Harris concedes 5 seconds for identical conditions (and he does), why not accept that at least 10 seconds could be the difference between this test in the cold with damp portions of track, whereas Nissan's test was done in the dry under ideal conditions? 10 + 15 = ??

Thank you for explaining (partly) why Harris was slower than Suzuki: Suzuki doesn't give a crap about warranty, since it's just a company car. Harris is driving a production vehicle, generously lent to him by a friend. How great would it be if he stuffed this friend's car into the barriers just to see what it will do at 10/10ths on the Nordschleife, where he had never even driven a GT-R before?
If they really wanted to see if this car was as fast as Nissan claims, why would they take it to the 'Ring in November, on Bridgestones, and with the VDC still on? Like I said: APPLES and ORANGES.

Of course I'm speculating. If you're going to start comparing Nissan's lap after hundreds of laps and with perfect conditions to GM's time for the ZR1, are you going to simply stop at the ZR1's 7:26 time? Quite obviously, there's more time to be gained by the ZR1. Nothing wrong with speculating about that.

When they claim the GT-R is no faster than a 997.2 w/PDK, and claims that a Ferrari F599 GTB is no faster than an automatic-equipped CTS-V (both 7:59's), you don't start to wonder? Test after test has shown that the GT-R rips the 997.2 w/PDK a new a-hole on just about any circuit.

Dodge advertises a feature, which (if used) will void the warranty on the part. And as the Dodge engineer told R&T, it could void the warranty on the vehicle.

If you are saying GT-R fanbois believe the car is exempt to the laws of physics, then you are clarifying that I am not a fanboi. I don't think the car is defying the laws of phyics at all. (Go review the C&D comparo like I said.) It is slower in acceleration than all of these cars. But is the Nurburgring (or any road course) all about acceleration only? The thing about sports cars with high hp/wt is that they tend to have their suspensions and brakes also optimized for track work; they could be disastrous if they didn't. Some have their suspensions, brakes, downforce, and gearing better optimized than others. Which is why a car with a relatively low hp/wt ratio can beat the Koenigsegg CCR (which I see you've conveniently omitted from your above list; very clever!).
How can a front-engined Viper ACR with galactic gearing outlap a mid-engined Zonda F?

Take a look at these two, both driven by the same driver, and tell me how this is possible:
7:50 BMW E46 M3 CSL (sport auto); 253 hp/tonne
8:13 Dodge Viper SRT-10 (sport auto); 319 hp/tonne

Is the CSL defying physics? Actually, no. It's not. And if you had read some comments by those who have read the Viper's supertest, you'd know why it set that lap time.

Also this:
Sport Auto, 4/2006
Test driver Jochen Übler
Viper SRT-10 convertible
Power: 500 hp
Weight: 1600kg
Power/wt: 313 hp/tonne
Hockenheim club circuit: 1:13.7

Sport Auto, 10/2008
Test Driver Jochen Übler
Viper SRT-10 Coupe
Power: 600 hp
Weight: 1563kg
Power/wt: 384 hp/tonne (+23%)
Hockenheim club circuit: 1:14.2

Guibo

And aren't you paying attention to me? Hook, line, and sinker.

Debate the topics at hand. Not the people behind the topics.

rideintothesun

LOL they should have stated
7:26.7 165.69 km/h - 2010 Nissan GT-R (base -ringer edition), ??? PS/???? kg Suzuki

yellerz51

Now that the 2010 ZR1 has the performance traction management system if they can find the budget to return to the ring my bet is that they will break 7:20, maybe even lower.

It's the same system that the CTS-V uses.

Here is a bit of information on it:

A car as potent as the CTS-V demands a robust series of technologies to apply its power precisely. It’s
much the same challenge faced in championship motor sports, so that’s where Cadillac turned for technical
assistance. CTS-V will feature a new Performance Traction Management system that is borrowed from the
CTS-V racecar that won two of the last four Manufacturer’s Championships in the SPEED World Challenge
GT racing series.
Performance Traction Management ensures that engine torque is instantly matched to the allowable tire
traction to enable maximum acceleration. In a situation such as a corner exit, this new technology allows the
driver to maintain throttle pressure without losing traction. Performance Traction Management, using
electronic controls, directs torque to maximize acceleration and traction in conditions, such as hard
acceleration when more power is commanded by the driver. Where stability controls tend to manage wheel
slip in an effort to slow or steer the car, Performance Traction Management regulates torque delivery to
enhance acceleration and provide an optimized launch. The system maximizes acceleration by instantly
matching torque to the available tire traction.

Slowgoin

Just like the GT-R?

yellerz51

Exactly like it.. I think the control module probably says "Licensed technology from Nissan Motors Corp Japan"

Whatever it is it allowed the CTS-V to swing the ring in 7:59. Not too bad for a 4250 LB sedan.

Imagine what it will do when applied to a ZR1 that weighs 900 pounds less and has 82 more HP not to mention much better breaks and suspension.

And guess what else?

2010 brings true launch control. When it’s engaged, you push the accelator pedal all the way to the floor - the computer will find the right RPM - usually around 4K and then you pop the clutch…and off the car goes…no bogging down or stalls…the car does everything.

This too is licensed from Nissan Motors I am sure. They had to do something with the pesky modules.

monaroCountry

Nissan has complained that Porsche doesn't have a good enough driver to pilot the R35 GTR around the Nurburgring. The b/s story and excuses Nissan is coming up with exactly mirrors that of the previous GTR's. Can Nissan explain how the same record setting factory driver (Dirk Schoysman) cant get close to his own time even when using a more powerful V-Spec GTR?

Can Nissan also explain how everyone else cant seem to achieve a time remotely close to their record 7:59 time (which again mirrors the R35)?

TTRotary

It is one awesome machine. Serious aero, serious tires, seriously focused. It is the real deal, unlike the Nissan fake. I really hope Viper survives the Chrysler meltdown. There is a rumor that Daimler-Benz is considering purchasing the Viper / 300C / Charger / Challenger / Jeep brands, but Fiat is not out yet either.

Guibo

CTS-V's performance on the 'Ring is very impressive, especially considering it was with an automatic. Lap could have been even tidier too. Porsche claims the Ferrari 599 is no faster than the CTS-V; the best they could do was a 7:59, and they had Rohrl driving that car too. PTM sounds a lot like the F1-trac system found on the 599 too.
Anyone here thinks the GT-R can do hardly better than an automatic CTS-V, as Porsche is claiming?

The R33's time was bogus and I called that on these forums back in 2006. The 'Ring climate is a lot different now than it was 20 years ago. There's a lot more scrutiny, not only by the various mfrs who do testing or even have facilities at the 'Ring, but by members of media who can get the information out much more quickly. Nissan could just have released a bogus time for the R34 too, but they didn't. Probably for 2 big reasons: the R34 wasn't all that fast (barely faster around a track than an E39 M5 in same day testing), and more people were paying attention after the R33 claim. It stands to reason that if you're going to send a tweeked car to set the "production car lap record", you'd do it in 1 or 2 test sessions. Not after 7.

rideintothesun

Wow those times are just off! way off!

The more I read about this I can only see this as a marketing tactic aimed at consuming the fanbois and naive minded into buying a product which i think is going to be the ultimate in bait and switch scam known to the automotive industry.

It is clear that the base STOCK r35 GTR will never hit these times, and while the fanbois and the naive will fall in line and say "no one else knows the car like he does" which is a pretty demeaning comment to all the other professional drivers out there who have dedicated their life driving different cars and fine tuning their techniques, and couple that with the fact that Nissan comes out and makes arrogant statements like "do you need driving lessons?", shows that Nissan is just playing games here. Also Suzuki, a f1 driver whose past is less than impressive per se in terms on track performance, but yet here he is breaking lap record after lap record.

Given that Car and Driver openly said that there were technicians tuning the software of the car before tests when Nissan does not openly claim you can tap into the ECU or transmission algorithm and alter it or skew it for better performance, another source quoting a 693hp GTR setting the 7:29 laptime and couple this in with Nissan's shady past with the R33 times, I just fear what Nissan has done at the ring will set a dark cloud over all the testing done by other manufacturers as well who actually are using production model vehicles.

monaroCountry

The Ferrari 599 lap with Walter Rohrl driving was not done to determine the best lap time but was instead done to see what made the new Ferrari tick. Walter Rohrl also had to contend with traffic especially against the agitated Ferrari test driver (Michael Schumacher).

The CTS-V is a far more powerful car which should help it on a long Nurburgring track. At least it is far more believable than the GTR being able to run with the Enzo and Zonda's of this world.

What makes the ring different? Porsche both then and now has called out Nissan for using a ringer. In both cases the run was videod, in both cases Nissan claimed that the car run was stock, in both cases the GTR ran an unbelievable time, in both cases boost level and proper independent scrutiniy was not determined, and in both cases no independent European publications with expert drivers got anywhere near close to Nissan's time.

Silver05GTO

What's even more interesting is the GTR's part claim to fame is how easy it is too drive. How almost anyone can get comfortable in the car and drive it hard........yet apparently the driver is the HUGE variable in this. Nissans driver can click off amazing times.....noone else can. Porsche needs the driver mod i guess....