|
|
|
View Poll Results: Porsche's test of GTR vs GT2 and Turbo | |||
Believe Porsche's test was true | 35 | 63.64% | |
Believe it was pure marketing BS | 17 | 30.91% | |
Or can't comment and don't care either way | 3 | 5.45% | |
Voters: 55. You may not vote on this poll |
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
12-14-2008, 12:11 PM | #1 |
Major General
1133
Rep 8,020
Posts |
Is Porsche's comparison test of GT2 vs GTR true?
Hands up who here believes that Porsche's recent comparison test dismissing Nissan's lap time was a true reflection of each cars respective performances on the ring, bearing in my that DR almost match their (Porsche) time with the GTR on a shitty, wet day but was 17 seconds slower than what they achieved in the GT2.
|
12-14-2008, 08:13 PM | #2 |
Second Lieutenant
22
Rep 288
Posts
Drives: E92 M3 AW/Blk sunroof 19s
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
|
It was BS when others have seen Walter (Porsches Herr greatest test driver) do a 7min45s.. They and Nissan are losing the plot seriously
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-14-2008, 10:33 PM | #3 |
Lieutenant Colonel
140
Rep 1,597
Posts
Drives: MY2022 X5 M-Sport 45e White
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brisbane - Australia
|
Porsche have been caught before for lying, they stated that there cars had a cetain amount of HP and infact they were down 50HP in England some years back.
So I think that all these big players will say and do anything and everthing to gain the upper hand!
__________________
MY22 X5 M-Sport 45e White, 22"rims, Red Calipers, Ceramic Pads. Better off saying what it does not have and that's a B&O Audio System, otherwise all option boxes are ticked. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-16-2008, 03:18 PM | #4 |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
1. Not a very unbiased way to present a poll. You selectively choose evidence that pushes people to choose a particular side of the event. An unbiased approach would have ended the question right at the comma.
2. Don't vote on your own poll until well after the conclusion is made about the percentages are either way. Classic way to bias folks. 3. Despite the points about the poll is still not looking good in terms of most folks siding with your personal point of view on this. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-16-2008, 03:31 PM | #5 | |
Major
122
Rep 1,401
Posts
Drives: 2003 HPF 2.5, 2008 M3 (Sold)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pearl District, OR
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-16-2008, 04:08 PM | #6 |
Major General
1133
Rep 8,020
Posts |
swamp,
I would be very surprised if anyone didn't know my opinion on this by now, like it's not that I haven't commented on it. So to assume I am pushing people my way by posting isn't likely to happen. I fully expected this kind of result, most people feel more comfortable thinking that Nissan cheated because it makes their decision for picking the M3 easier to swallow, especially as the two are so closely priced. But it good to see that not everyone is buying into Porsche's stunt. The thing people are missing with their test is not that the GTR can't do the 7:29 but it's so much slower than the GT2 and it's that I am wanting people to post on. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-16-2008, 07:42 PM | #7 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
How many folks that actually chose and purchased an M3 were seriously considering the GT-R? You think the number is much higher than it is, pretty much guaranteed. They are much less competitors that you believe as well. Lastly, the close in price thing was never accurate considering base cars at a different spec, and that is a fair comparison even if the cars are different. It is important for BMW to offer the M3, albeit a stripper, at a fairly low price. Now two large price increases later the similar price idea is simply out the window. Nissan is done losing money on every single GT-R the rolls off the line. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-16-2008, 07:45 PM | #8 | |
Major
122
Rep 1,401
Posts
Drives: 2003 HPF 2.5, 2008 M3 (Sold)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pearl District, OR
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-16-2008, 10:26 PM | #9 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-16-2008, 11:23 PM | #10 | |
Major
122
Rep 1,401
Posts
Drives: 2003 HPF 2.5, 2008 M3 (Sold)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pearl District, OR
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 02:51 AM | #11 |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Poll has been dead for about a week. I'd say the conclusion of the members herein who bothered to vote is abundantly clear, by over a 2-1 margin. Porsche is to be believed in their results and claims concerning GT-R N'Ring times. I guess the majority is with me on this one foot.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 03:36 AM | #12 | |
Major General
1133
Rep 8,020
Posts |
Quote:
At least there is 8 other posters who aren't easily guided sheep. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 10:48 AM | #13 |
Private
12
Rep 72
Posts |
Unless Porsche can come up with any proof of their run in the GTR, i say it's completely BS. And if you go by with DR's test run of only 7:55 on the GTR and 7:49 on the GT2, does that mean it also proves that the 997TT couldn't possibly do 7:38 or 7:40 that Posche's claims. It almost seems like it's a matter of what you would like to believe or which car or car company you like more.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 11:17 AM | #14 | |
Colonel
108
Rep 2,279
Posts |
Quote:
I think Porsche's test was BS, but I'm not voting for the second option in this poll because it's a loaded question aimed to give some legitimacy to Nissan's original test, which was also BS. I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
__________________
'09 Interlagos Blue E92 M3 (sold to a good home)
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 12:06 PM | #16 |
Racying Dynamics
118
Rep 4,391
Posts |
GT2 is a light car with lots and lots of power. It would be interesting to see what were the test conditions.
__________________
==================================================
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 12:50 PM | #17 |
Second Lieutenant
12
Rep 294
Posts
Drives: 2010 CTS-V sedan, black raven
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hainesport, New Jersey
|
I think the fact that Porsche even went to the trouble to "verify" Nissan's results demonstrates that Porsche got "tilted" (to borrow from poker terminology).
You don't see them verifying ACR Viper times, or ZR-1 times, or Ferrari times. This in itself is a win for Nissan, because Porsche comes off as a sore loser, IMHO. I feel the track prowess of the GT-R has been scrutinized to the Nth degree, and the majority of opinion is that the Nissan is truly a track monster.
__________________
Current rides: 2010 CTS-V sedan, black raven; 2010 Cadillac Escalade ESV, black raven
Gone but not forgotten: 2008 M5, metallic sapphire black, SMG; 2004 645ci, metallic sapphire black, SMG |
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 01:11 PM | #18 |
Major General
1133
Rep 8,020
Posts |
TLud,
It is not meant as a loaded question and was not to give weight to Nissan's claimed time. Only an opinion that the times Porsche got for both cars tested supposibly on the same day does not stack up. And the reason being the amount of independently varified tests comparing all three cars (GTR, GT2 & 997tt). |
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 02:14 PM | #19 | |
Colonel
108
Rep 2,279
Posts |
Quote:
The whole thing really backfired for Porsche. Nissan is already shooting themselves in the foot by producing cars with suspiciously divergent and inconsistent test results, refusing to honor certain warranty claims, significantly raising prices, and now removing LC. Porsche should have just remained on the sideline and let consumers put two and two together. This article sums it all up pretty nicely, including the silliness of the bench-racing epidemic that has struck the internet and fuels this type of behavior from manufacturers.
__________________
'09 Interlagos Blue E92 M3 (sold to a good home)
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 03:31 PM | #20 | |
Private
12
Rep 72
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 03:41 PM | #21 | ||
Major General
1133
Rep 8,020
Posts |
Quote:
Certain people feel I have a hidden agenda regarding the GTR but that isn't the case. I just wanted to see how many people were sucked into by this Porsche BS, maybe because they just can't get their heads round the idea of Nissan being able to build a better/quicker car than Porsche or most probably the idea of a Nissan that is so much quicker than the equally priced M3 makes them feel cheated. Quote:
I believe DR's test is a truer reflection of both cars abilities, if both cars were equally matched with the desired rubber the GT2 would have been slightly quicker, it's the kind of results that is shown with other tests else where. The problem with the Porsche test is the margin of the win against the Turbo, never mind the GT2. Both Porsche cars all but equalled their all time best runs, this proves that on that day track conditions were damn near perfect but their GTR could only muster an extra 2 seconds over the DR run on a wet, cold November morning. I haven't dodge the question of the GTR's true time, I have openly stated that I think the most likely time for the car is somewhere between the low 7:3x and 7:40 because I believe it was a one-off this 7:29 lap. Heaven knows how many laps were required to achieve this magical one and I reckon if you had seen Nissan's data the true average would be closer to the 7:38 than the 7:29. But none of this matter or gets pass the fact that the times Porsche put forward as proof positive are total BS. I rest my case. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-23-2008, 03:43 PM | #22 |
Major General
1133
Rep 8,020
Posts |
I think you are getting sucked in to marketing BS from Nissan here. No GTR makes only 480hp, the true figure is somewhere between 520hp and 530hp.
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|