View Single Post
      05-29-2009, 01:59 PM   #359
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
215
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Said I was done, I guess I just can't quit...

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoreHead View Post
By that logic altering tyre pressures etc is also cheating as it is not the same as when the car came out of the showroom and that's done to every car that does a track timing session.
Technically speaking that is correct. However, I draw my "line in the sand" as excluding from cheating something that is so absolutely routine and required by all users over time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoreHead View Post
Every manufacturer cheats to get their ring times.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Many manufacturers don't even bother posting any ring time - they let Sportauto do it. See my post just above on that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoreHead View Post
Magazines are no better. In the US all the magazines quoted 0-60mph times are nonsense. They don't measure the first foot which doesn't sound like a lot but ends up knocking around 0.5secs off the time. Car and Driver fessed up to this 2 months ago and now in the reviews show both times and even call it the real time and the cheating time (mostly).

Everyone cheats to make headlines.
Well many do, but definitely not all.

Also the time difference for a sub 5 second 0-60 car based on the 1 foot thing is significant but is more like 0.3-0.4 not 0.5.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoreHead View Post
They're hand built engines so they'll never get them exactly the same so err on the side of more power. I haven't read of any of them actually putting out less than 500bhp.
That is more nonsense. The variation in engine outputs using modern CNC manufacturing with very precise tolerance control can be below 1%. That is obvious when you think about the SAE Certified Power standard (not that Nissan would or could meet this particular standard). Furthermore, the variation in engine power comes primary from part size variation and the resulting tolerance stack up, not from variations in assembly. And trust me, the GT-R engine components are manufactured with very top of the line equipment, as good or better than the equipment used for high volume engines. It seems you are arguing that Nissan needs and extra 50 hp to insure no car makes below 480 hp and that is truly nonsense. The car is very purposefully under rated and given the same hp spec as the car it was meant to dethrone.

Last edited by swamp2; 05-29-2009 at 03:02 PM.