Nissan GT-R might not be as under-rated as we all had suspected:

[footie]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

But hey, I digress. Let me turn that quote around on you. You and lucid did some very nice work on corellation between power to weight and 'Ring times, but you needed (and still need) a bunch more data for you to declare with any conviction at all that the GT-R is a ringer. The Porsche gets around a couple of seconds slower, but of course we all know the Turbo is a real handful at the limit, and as Danny Ongais once said, "You need three feet to drive this car fast."

There simply aren't enough cars around like the Nissan and Porsche for you to draw any reasonable conclusions from 'Ring times and power to weight.

Bruce

You are right on the money mate.

There is a lot more the ring than simple power to weight can define, without a decent top speed on those long straights the time wouldn't be that amazing (just look at the R8 for an example), I think things like acceleration up to say 175mph is a requirement and lateral G grip should also be included along with braking distances. The only factor which is harder to define is the ease of driving which surely plays it's part in any final result.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

It was the overall kicking and screaming on your part as you were drawn to the obvious that makes me grin when I remember it.

I say obvious because for me the issue was more or less closed when a couple of testers reported that the Porsche could pull the Nissan from a roll, and that the two were closely matched in top speed. That fact has since been reported over and over, the latest example of which is in a multi-car comparison test in the current issue of "Car". The Nissan gets around the track quicker, but the Porsche has the highest speed (by around four percent or so) on the straight. Of course, you and I know just what a four percent speed advantage means in terms of power to weight.



You'll get no fight from me regarding Sagan. I thought we all lost when he died. Nobody before or since has been able to capture the public the way he did with his fascinating observations on interesting things in the universe. I've dabbled with astronomy since I was a kid, and from time to time, I still drag my long-suffering bride outside on a cold night to view some damn cloud or other a few million light years away.

But hey, I digress. Let me turn that quote around on you. You and lucid did some very nice work on corellation between power to weight and 'Ring times, but you needed (and still need) a bunch more data for you to declare with any conviction at all that the GT-R is a ringer. The Porsche gets around a couple of seconds slower, but of course we all know the Turbo is a real handful at the limit, and as Danny Ongais once said, "You need three feet to drive this car fast."

There simply aren't enough cars around like the Nissan and Porsche for you to draw any reasonable conclusions from 'Ring times and power to weight.

Bruce

Good deal another agreement.

Our regression work did not prove that the GT-R is or is not anything. It simply provided another piece of evidence for one of many things happening with the car, my list (posted about 4 times by now) of four or five items which could explain the time are still ones I stand by to this date. Under-rating is just one of those. Another, which I believe to be mostly verified is the those 20" o-rings on the car are as good as or better than MPSC tires.

Furthermore there is enough data used in the regression to draw a ton of conclusions from. The data covers such a wide range of variables, many of which are in essence random (temp, driver, tires, track condition) further it covers a wide range of very high performance cars and an enormous range of the primary variable, power to weight. You do not need 100 variants of a modern, AWD, turbo charged, elite performing car to make conclusions about those particular instances of a car like that in the data set. It seems you still don't really get it.

[southlight]

Thanks for the , bobbo.

[sayemthree]

just read in Rand T how the GTR spanks the Turbo and the Z06. by like 5 seconds around BW. the AWD system on this car must be pure magic because there is really nothing else that stands out in the specs. HP and TQ are same or less. wieght is much more. tires just street Dunlops. its not the fastest in a straight line was slowest to 120 mph), its noseheavy (not 50-50)..... but it sure gets around the track fast.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

...You do not need 100 variants of a modern, AWD, turbo charged, elite performing car to make conclusions about those particular instances of a car like that in the data set.

You need more than two.

Originally Posted by swamp2

It seems you still don't really get it.

Backatcha. Taking very good general data and applying it to any single vehicle (or in this case two vehicles) is dangerous, at best. Any single variable can skew the results.

Bruce

[OzCarfreak]

2 - 1 to bruce

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

You need more than two.



Backatcha. Taking very good general data and applying it to any single vehicle (or in this case two vehicles) is dangerous, at best. Any single variable can skew the results.

Bruce

No Bruce, you do not get it. Let me be painfully clear.

Without a statistical approach and to have a very high degree of certainty about what contirbutes to a cars lap times you would need many very similar vehicles. Since not that many exist close enough in spec to the GT-R you MUST and CAN ONLY use statistics. The statistics DO NOT PROVE anyhting. They only point you in the right direction and tell you there is a high probability of something strongly countering the established regression trend.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

No Bruce, you do not get it. Let me be painfully clear.

Without a statistical approach and to have a very high degree of certainty about what contirbutes to a cars lap times you would need many very similar vehicles. Since not that many exist close enough in spec to the GT-R you MUST and CAN ONLY use statistics. The statistics DO NOT PROVE anyhting. They only point you in the right direction and tell you there is a high probability of something strongly countering the established regression trend.

OK, we'll each soldier on with the understanding that the other guy doesn't get it. I'm comfy with that.

Bruce

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

OK, we'll each soldier on with the understanding that the other guy doesn't get it. I'm comfy with that.

Bruce

Yeah, I guess you are just bored, that's cool. However, you could spend your time replying telling us all specifically what you disagree with in my last post.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Yeah, I guess you are just bored, that's cool. However, you could spend your time replying telling us all specifically what you disagree with in my last post.

Can't see a thing in that post that I would disagree with. As I said, I'm comfy with each of us being convinced that the other guy doesn't get it. We've already been through this in some detail, remember back a ways? Sheesh.

Bruce

[msing]

swamp is correct, guys. the GT-R is under rated. it's actually a bugatti veyron disguised (and priced) as a nissan.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by chitosing

swamp is correct, guys. the GT-R is under rated. it's actually a bugatti veyron disguised (and priced) as a nissan.

Do recall that I have posted a succinct list of the factors that have or may have contributed to the cars N'Ring time in particular. I have posted this list about 3 times. I have also agreed that the evidence behind my prior view of a massive under-rating is pretty much bogus, hence my discarding of that point of view.

[Buschy]

Why didnt Nissan jsut put this into the Z? the Z looks ten times as good as the Gtr

[sayemthree]

Originally Posted by buschy

Why didnt Nissan jsut put this into the Z? the Z looks ten times as good as the Gtr

the Z is not AWD. apprently the AWD is the magic that makes the GTR faster then the compitition.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by sayemthree

the Z is not AWD. apprently the AWD is the magic that makes the GTR faster then the compitition.

As far as the N'Ring goes AWD is one of many factors others, many of which are almost for sure more significant than AWD are:

-Tires likely as sticky as MPSC
-Ace driver
-Nissans specific AWD ATTESA-ETS system
-Dual clutch transmission

[sayemthree]

Originally Posted by swamp2

As far as the N'Ring goes AWD is one of many factors others, many of which are almost for sure more significant than AWD are:

-Tires likely as sticky as MPSC
-Ace driver
-Nissans specific AWD ATTESA-ETS system
-Dual clutch transmission

well the GTR whooped the 911 turbo and Z06 at Buttonwill my 5 sec. same drive. the GTR appears to have no advantage in any spec, wieght, distribution, tires, HP etc. yet it still whooped them.

[luckistryke]

i trackday 2 wheelers. thats crazy, 5 sec. is a world away.....good lord thats fast

[footie]

Originally Posted by swamp2

As far as the N'Ring goes AWD is one of many factors others, many of which are almost for sure more significant than AWD are:

-Tires likely as sticky as MPSC
-Ace driver
-Nissans specific AWD ATTESA-ETS system
-Dual clutch transmission

All of the times which are posted by manufacturers are with Ace drivers, the stickiest tyres. Nissan are only copying what everyone else does.

The thing that is making the GTR so special is the confidence it gives the driver and that is down to the way the car behaves at the limit, I have little doubt that it's awd system is playing a very big role in this but also it's sheer grunt and incredible braking power.

Look at the other cars which perform outside of the box so to speak, the R8 has out performed it's power specs on every track apart from the ring and this has to do with it's lack of grunt more than anything else, next is the CSL which is another car which performs beyond it's output. The only difference is that the CSL does perform brilliantly on the ring which means it's cornering ability it even higher than the R8 and possibly the GTR as well, but I reckon the real difference that the CSL has over all others is it's ability to deal with the bumpiness of the track, again all of this builds confidence to push that bit harder.

I myself don't believe the DCT will make that much of a difference on the ring, maybe 3 seconds but if it's more then all you trackday toyboys are getting a hack of an advantage over your manual brothers.

[footie]

If anyone is interested, the GTR opened it books and in the first two days they took deposits for 700 units, amazing or what.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

All of the times which are posted by manufacturers are with Ace drivers, the stickiest tyres. Nissan are only copying what everyone else does.

The thing that is making the GTR so special is the confidence it gives the driver and that is down to the way the car behaves at the limit, I have little doubt that it's awd system is playing a very big role in this but also it's sheer grunt and incredible braking power.

Look at the other cars which perform outside of the box so to speak, the R8 has out performed it's power specs on every track apart from the ring and this has to do with it's lack of grunt more than anything else, next is the CSL which is another car which performs beyond it's output. The only difference is that the CSL does perform brilliantly on the ring which means it's cornering ability it even higher than the R8 and possibly the GTR as well, but I reckon the real difference that the CSL has over all others is it's ability to deal with the bumpiness of the track, again all of this builds confidence to push that bit harder.

I myself don't believe the DCT will make that much of a difference on the ring, maybe 3 seconds but if it's more then all you trackday toyboys are getting a hack of an advantage over your manual brothers.

I agree with most of this EXCEPT the point about drivers and times. You are wrong about this. Sportauto with Horst at the wheel has become a sort of de facto N'Ring time that is accepted by the manufacturers themselves. For better or worse it is a standard. Recall his time was 7:50 in the GT-R. Again it is only fair to note that the track had some wet spots during this run.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I agree with most of this EXCEPT the point about drivers and times. You are wrong about this. Sportauto with Horst at the wheel has become a sort of de facto N'Ring time that is accepted by the manufacturers themselves. For better or worse it is a standard. Recall his time was 7:50 in the GT-R. Again it is only fair to note that the track had some wet spots during this run.

Well, I guess you're both right. SportAuto has in fact established something of a standard - as you say, for better or worse. I would say for better and worse, because I think it's both, but that's just wordsmithing.

However, the fact is there are a bunch of hired guns out there running Vettes, Porsches, the GT-R, etc., and none of those manufacturers seem inclined to just hand it over to Horst and hope for the best.

So there's a SportAuto standard and a balls-to-the-wall, hired gun "standard", both of which have merit. I personally would love for BMW to hand the keys to Auberlen or Said, for instance, and let either (or both) of those guys hammer away at the 'Ring with standard PS2s and pads, to see what they get to. Then we could compare those times with, say, the 7:59s done by the 400 HP Vette and 355 HP 911S, both accomplished with fast guys.

Not gonna happen, I guess, but it would add to our general knowledge.

Bruce

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Well, I guess you're both right. SportAuto has in fact established something of a standard - as you say, for better or worse. I would say for better and worse, because I think it's both, but that's just wordsmithing.

However, the fact is there are a bunch of hired guns out there running Vettes, Porsches, the GT-R, etc., and none of those manufacturers seem inclined to just hand it over to Horst and hope for the best.

So there's a SportAuto standard and a balls-to-the-wall, hired gun "standard", both of which have merit. I personally would love for BMW to hand the keys to Auberlen or Said, for instance, and let either (or both) of those guys hammer away at the 'Ring with standard PS2s and pads, to see what they get to. Then we could compare those times with, say, the 7:59s done by the 400 HP Vette and 355 HP 911S, both accomplished with fast guys.

Not gonna happen, I guess, but it would add to our general knowledge.

Bruce

Yup, +1 on that. The more data the better. I'd like to see many combinations. Including the best "OEM" M3 car set up with BMW OEM "track" pads, MPSC+, M-DCT AND a phenomenal driver!