7:29 is 11 seconds faster than 7:40, just under a 2.4% difference.
UK's CAR magazine: 82.2 sec vs 83.2 sec around Rockingham, despite this: "I played it slightly safer with the Nissan, driving within the factory safety settings and never feeling the traction control trigger." 1.2% difference
Road & Track magazine: 1:56.9 vs 2:02.1 around Buttonwilow (configuration 13), a 4.3% difference
Those are direct comparisons, same day, same driver, same conditions.
There are a bunch of ones that are close (same conditions, same driver, different days).
There are many more (which you can find on thecarlounge.com). However, a 2.4% track time difference isn't outside of the realm of possibility, depending on the track, the conditions, and the drivers.
Some of these times do show a big difference/superiority for the GT-R. I'll agree these do show the GT-R is definitely the superior track car, and maybe by quite a bit. If that is so, then the question is, why hasn't anyone been able to come even remotely close to the GT-R's 7:29 Nurburgring time?
Until somebody else besides the manufacturer under 'closed' conditions' shows that this time is achievable, I don't consider it a valid representation of what the stock car can do.
__________________
Mike
2006 E60 M5 Silverstone II/Silverstone/Aluminum, All Options, 35% tint, Aluminum Pedals, Valentine V1 and Passport 9500i Hardwired, Blinder Xtreme M40, Michelin PS2's on 20 inch BBS RS-GT's, Winter Pirelli Sottozeros on OEM 19 inch wheels, Resonator Delete, Charcoal Filters Removed, Eibach Springs and Spacers, Active Autowerks ECU, BMC Filters, RPI Air Intakes, Evosport Pulley. Retired from track duty 10/08. Dinan diff replaced with OEM at my cost due to failure at 56,000 miles.
Last edited by Wolverine; 31st December 2008 at 22:38.
Some of these times do show a big difference/superiority for the GT-R. I'll agree these do show the GT-R is definitely the superior track car, and maybe by quite a bit. If that is so, then the question is, why hasn't anyone been able to come even remotely close to the GT-R's 7:29 Nurburgring time?
Until somebody else besides the manufacturer under 'closed' conditions' shows that this time is achievable, I don't consider it a valid representation of what the stock car can do.
And yet the same can be said for every claim re: 'Ring time. Do we now not believe a Porsche stated time of for example, 7:49 unless they are able to repeat that time for more than one lap? I agree that reproducibility is a very good thing, and would give times that are far more likely to be believed; however nobody does that to my knowledge; i.e. gives an average of let's say 3 laps. It's always the time for one flying lap; no more.
Yeah, but isn't nurburgring a pretty good all-around indication? It has quite a few long straights but that would only favour high horsepower cars, which makes it even stranger the GT-R out-performs the GT2 according to Nissan.
It is a very good all around track, however there are tracks that stress some things more than others. Just because one car does a few percentage better than another on one track, doesn't mean that advantage will hold constant on other tracks.
Regardless though, I think the big unknown here is that car's boost level. It's something we'll probably never know. Then again, we can point to any commonly accepted 'ring time and have the same type of questions.
I think the question is:
Given the car was driven by an ex-F1 driver who spent a LOT of time in the car (so is very familiar with it), and given the car was spec'd out properly (suspension probably checked, least options possible to keep weight down, best OE tires selected, etc), is it possible that they were able to run it 2.4% faster than a car that it typically beats by upwards of 4-5% or so?
I'd say it's at least within the realm of possibility.
Even if the SAME driver driving the SAME car under the SAME road/weather condition, there may be 2-5% time discrepancy in consecutive laps running the ~14 miles, 73-turn Nordschleife N-ring...
I don't know why ppl get so hung-up about the few seconds diff unless an AVERAGE laptime for at least FIVE runs can be compared among all the cars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitechjunkie
Unless you average out a bunch of laptimes of a given car, either one "freakishly" fast lap or a "misgearedfully" slow lap is not a representation of how fast that car is...
In addition, how familiar a given driver to the track and the car can make a HUGE difference to the laptime. And the driver's mental/physical ability on that given day, not to mention his skill level?
Also, dual clutch can always shave off a few tenths during EACH and EVERY gear shift. Did we count how many gear-shifts were done in that 7:29 run? Porsches are notoriously hard to shift fast (the antithesis of a Honda Civic) due to their longish travel clutch pedal and the stick. Even if the Porsches CAN run faster around the Ring, the little "tenths" they give away CAN add up to a slower time. It's not physics here, just the reality of progress.
There are other factors to consider, i.e., was the GTR that Porsche took to the Ring "broken-in"? (we all know a few thousand miles of driving actually improves performance to a car); what about the "fressness" of the tires? (a slightly used/shaved tire can outstick a brand new one); was the IDENTICAL fuel used? (esp. for a turbo, a few octane off can mean big hp diff), etc....
Unless most if not all the factors/conditions can be set constant, comparing any ONE single laptime of a car to ONE single laptime of another should be taken very lightly.
Even at Top Gear Track, the GT-R matched the F430 SCUDERIA lap time! just 0,7 seconds slower than Enzo Ferrari.... I can't imagine what future, more powerful GT-R editions will do to the Enzo.... And you still compare the GT-R vs GT2
recently spending a good month and a half driving the gtr as my daily driver i can tell you that the transmission is strong and the warranty issues are coming from abuse. any car company that can prove that you have launched the car over and over will deny you warranty. in europe my m6 launches at 4500 rpm here in the states its 1500 rpms why because of warranty. i love my m6 and currently fought tooth and nail over guess what tranny warranty issues...back to the car the gtr is truly a technical marvel. its just so well put together as a race car...but here is my issues with the car of the year. interior is not as nice, the ride is very stiff i think our m6/m5 racing mode is this cars comfort mode. needs HUD seats not as good as the m6 as far as adjusting for lumbar support. No parking distance sensor. enough with the bad the car is super fast and brakes like nothing i have ever driven. i love the fact that this car is out and so should everyone who loves cars. this is the kick in the mouth that the M division and all super cars need to give us whatever crazy bar they want to exist. I love my m6 and its just the perfect balance of power and comfort but the gtr is the weekend car that will have people staring walking up to you and drooling,
You are right, I also own a GTR and a ZR1 and I just sold my '08ACR. The only reason the ACR was the fastest of the 3 is it comes with Sport Cups. Put a set of those on the ZR1 or GTR and see what they do. I have to say that with all the cars I own, the GTR and the M5 are my favorites. I will never track the GTR or ZR1, I have a ZO6 for that, but it is a real pleasure to drive everytime. The tranny breakage comes from a few guys abusing the hell out of them, anything will break if you abuse it. After I get the 1000 mile service, I plan on doing the HKS 570 kit, 600+ hp. Just like my M5,I never plan on launching it so the warranty issue shouldn't be a problem. I have a mid-pipe on it already and my Dealer said they would take care of it no matter what I do to it if I don't launch it too much.. It is a wonderful car.
Even at Top Gear Track, the GT-R matched the F430 SCUDERIA lap time! just 0,7 seconds slower than Enzo Ferrari.... I can't imagine what future, more powerful GT-R editions will do to the Enzo.... And you still compare the GT-R vs GT2
Point is that if the GT-R is slower than the Enzo on the top gear test track (which favours nimble cars over power since there aren't many straights), how on earth can the GT-R then whoop the Enzo's arse on the nurburgring? You're not going to tell me that the GT-R is faster than the Enzo on a straight line are you? I for one still can't believe how people can be so ignorant that they can't realise that 1700-1800 kg and 480 HP will never get you around the nurburgring in less than 7:30 - physics still rule and the japs have NOT found a way to beat Newton's laws.
__________________
2005 BMW M5, it's not on order, it's here!
Sepang Bronze/Sepang Leather/Aluminium - It's in the garage!! And not so much on the road, stupid clutch!!
To clear something up that has been bothering me; my name is Gustav (hello board leader ), my dad's name is Morten. I post 99% of all posts under the MortenDK account - so call me Gustav
Last edited by MortenDK; 2nd January 2009 at 12:46.
I don't like Porsche because they refuse to be defeated and if done, they become suspicious. I also don't like Nissan either because they just imitate others and this by introducing the M letter to their Infinity models' range and by typically copying few designs from here and there and pasting them on their models i.e. the rear window's design from the BMW M6 has been copied and pasted on their Infinity G35. Both companies, Porsche and Nissan/Infinity lack maturity.
one more thought...
), my dad's name is Morten. I post 99% of all posts under the MortenDK account - so call me Gustav 
Linear Mode
