GT-R breaks its own Ring record

[rapistwit]

Originally Posted by Boosted335

I am sorry if i have mis spelled the cars name i was in a rush, rest assured i know how to spell it.

I dont have any experience driving it nor do i consider it a race car or a track car because of its weight, if the car was built solely for track purposes it would be way liter. Nor, would i ever consider purchasing it. As i said i would rather buy a 911 4 then this car. <my opinion.

Un Biased reviews? PLZ, its all marketing.

So let me get this straight:

-you have never driven , nor plan to drive a GTR
-all reviews that show the Nissan winning a race off are marketing
-you repeatedly misspelled "Zonda" in different posts the same way ("Zonga")
yet it was a total accident


Did I get that right?


So why do you comment on something you refuse to experience first hand or accept the reviews of others second hand?
There's some weird disconnect with you.

[1cleanm6]

Originally Posted by SoreHead

+1000 (is that the normal agreement sign on here?)

My guess is boosted is not a native English speaker so I made no comments on the spelling. Boosted if you are native English speaking then I suggest you go back to school. Quick. If not then I take all that back and congratulate you on your English as I have no second language (I'd love one) so will never put someone down that has learned one.

As for 335 tuned??? Why bother. I think most BMW drivers would look down on the japanese tuning car scene. Buying a 335 and doing it is worse because you started by overpaying for a car you're about to abuse.

As for warrantees on GT-Rs??? Do BMW still cover cars that are modded??? I don't think so. I'd be driving one now if there were any around to buy. To suggest that Nissan fudge their test figures any more than any other manufacturer would suggest you're a conspiracy idiot. All Manufacturers do performance testing with the absolute best example of the car in question.

I'm going way off topic but I had to wade in there. You can't know a car you haven't tried and unless Nissan have bought off every car mag and show in the world the GT-R is every bit as good as people are saying. Just accept it. And for God's sake take a chill pill.

Now. What was it you said.
THE END/GAME OVER/ END THE THREAD.

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry if i have mislead all of you with my spelling, i type fast and dont look back...however i can spell, eventhough you might think otherwise. Its cool

As far as your 335 comment, why is it overpRICED? I dont believe so at all. But thats your opinion its all good. Actually i have a lot of respect for evos and stis, i LOVE them. My friend use to have a MR and i loved it!!!

I believe they did pay every magazine off.

Whatever honestly i dont even know why im wasting my time on here. Im done.

[rapistwit]

Originally Posted by SoreHead

+1000 (is that the normal agreement sign on here?)

My guess is boosted is not a native English speaker so I made no comments on the spelling. Boosted if you are native English speaking then I suggest you go back to school. Quick. If not then I take all that back and congratulate you on your English as I have no second language (I'd love one) so will never put someone down that has learned one.

As for 335 tuned??? Why bother. I think most BMW drivers would look down on the japanese tuning car scene. Buying a 335 and doing it is worse because you started by overpaying for a car you're about to abuse.

As for warrantees on GT-Rs??? Do BMW still cover cars that are modded??? I don't think so. I'd be driving one now if there were any around to buy. To suggest that Nissan fudge their test figures any more than any other manufacturer would suggest you're a conspiracy idiot. All Manufacturers do performance testing with the absolute best example of the car in question.

I'm going way off topic but I had to wade in there. You can't know a car you haven't tried and unless Nissan have bought off every car mag and show in the world the GT-R is every bit as good as people are saying. Just accept it. And for God's sake take a chill pill.

Now. What was it you said.
THE END/GAME OVER/ END THE THREAD.

I generally don't get uptight about spelling or punctuation because I make those mistakes all the time but I do think it's fair game when someone starts calling other people "idiots".

[SoreHead]

Originally Posted by Boosted335

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry if i have mislead all of you with my spelling, i type fast and dont look back...however i can spell, eventhough you might think otherwise. Its cool

As far as your 335 comment, why is it overpayed? I dont believe so at all. But thats your opinion its all good. Actually i have a lot of respect for evos and stis, i LOVE them. My friend use to have a MR and i loved it!!!

I believe they did pay every magazine off.

Whatever honestly i dont even know why im wasting my time on here. Im done.

No don't go. Come back.
What I mean about overpaying is that you could buy a lot cheaper cars with the same or better performance and then tune them for less money and have a faster car.
What you're saying about the GT-R makes no sense. Basically its like me saying the 335 is actually a 0-60 in 10secs car but BMW paid off all the road testers in the world to say it could crack 6secs. That's exactly what you're saying about the GT-R. It's nonsense.
I believe a lot of the performance potential of the car is the ability of the chassis and electronics to flatter the driver but fact is it does the times. I would put money that you could stick me in a GT2 and then the GT-R and I would savage my GT2 time in the Nissan. And lets face it. We're not all race drivers so it's what we can actually do with the car that counts. Not what some racer can squeeze out of them. Put 1500bhp in a viper and the potential would be incredible but good luck to anyone trying to get a decent lap out of the thing.

[jaeS4]

Originally Posted by Boosted335

I am sorry if i have mis spelled the cars name i was in a rush, rest assured i know how to spell it.

I dont have any experience driving it nor do i consider it a race car or a track car because of its weight, if the car was built solely for track purposes it would be way liter. Nor, would i ever consider purchasing it. As i said i would rather buy a 911 4 then this car. <my opinion.

Un Biased reviews? PLZ, its all marketing.

First of all, the M3 at 3600lbs is not actually that much "LIGHTER". But i do agree that the GTR is a pork for a track car, but considering how heavy it is makes it even more impressive how fast it can be in The Ring or any other track for that matter.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

I welcome any additional opinions/data to the discussion but the opinion that Suzuki's GTR was somehow different in output over the one Chris drove and this is all down to their respective peak speeds reached at the end of this straight is simply grasping at straws in my opinion. There is too many variables and unknowns to make a concrete conclusion on this.

Bring me hard facts and I will keep an open mind but until then I am still with the belief that it was a stock GTR that was driven exceptionally well and in favorable conditions.

Big contradiction here footie. If you can show a significant difference in GAINED speed across the same distance you can very much infer and even calculate a power difference. Since when are straights not simply hp contests. Since when is hp not the largest factor at speeds above 100 mph with such huge drag forces?

Originally Posted by Garissimo

A car's velocity curve goes to an asymptote - it flattens out at those speeds. You can see this on the velocity data trace for the GT-R. A 10mph faster exit speed out of the curve doesn't translate to 10mph more terminal velocity at the end of a long straight.

Absolutely correct. I ran some sims with the "550 hp rwd" GT-R I had been using previously and found the following in a long WOT straight much like this one. Do keep in mind this general principal here has nothing do with any particular car. It is about a fixed amount of power, a few gears and drag. The car getting on WOT at 100mph at corner exit would take some 5080 ft to reach 180 mph. The same exact car exiting at 110 mph will cover that same distance ending at a mere 182 mph. So the only assumption would be that the throttle lift or braking points were identical and that winds, if any, were identical.

So, in other words foot, the following is entirely incorrect.

Originally Posted by footie

if Suzuki exited quicker which I believe he did then that speed difference would be carried the entire length of the straight

You are confusing speed at a given time vs. speed at identical distances.

550 hp with a true 100% "RWD like" AWD system under hard acceleration (for the loss calculation) in the straights is looking more likely than 530 hp. Oh well what is 80 hp among friends...

[swamp2]

Come on guys, keep it on topic, drop the insults and emotion.

[Dascamel]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Come on guys, keep it on topic, drop the insults and emotion.

+1


Dragging a 335i into the topic and insulting it really doesn't apply to this thread.

[SM_M3]

Originally Posted by jaeS4

Finally saw one up close inside the parking lot in Borgata Hotel in Atlantic City this past weekend. Pictures don't do this car any justice at all. The GTR is a beast and i'm shock how really nice looking it is on every angle, what a car.

Saw one yesterday in Marina Del Rey, way down Bora Bora Drive parked outside the condos by the big yachts...Black on Black looked very good, menacing, huge wheels and exhaust...I liked! Would have taken a picture, but didn't have a convenient camera...I didn't get too close, I was parked nearby and just admired it for a minute. Wonder how it works as a daily driver? I think I'm better off in my E90 M3 in that regard, but it sure looks fun!

[devo]

Originally Posted by jaeS4

First of all, the M3 at 3600lbs is not actually that much "LIGHTER". But i do agree that the GTR is a pork for a track car, but considering how heavy it is makes it even more impressive how fast it can be in The Ring or any other track for that matter.

The M3 is actually sub 3500 lbs. This is well documented. I'd say that a 350-375 lb disparity is quite substantial.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by devo

The M3 is actually sub 3500 lbs. This is well documented. I'd say that a 350-375 lb disparity is quite substantial.

Fuel and driver, i.e. reporting standard makes all of the difference. Those two together are ~250 lb. There is no E9X M3 sub 3500 with either driver and/or full of fuel.

[rapistwit]

Originally Posted by Dascamel

+1


Dragging a 335i into the topic and insulting it really doesn't apply to this thread.

Oh yeah that was the overly emotional insulting part of this thread. Sheez

[footie]

Originally Posted by swamp2

The car getting on WOT at 100mph at corner exit would take some 5080 ft to reach 180 mph. The same exact car exiting at 110 mph will cover that same distance ending at a mere 182 mph. So the only assumption would be that the throttle lift or braking points were identical and that winds, if any, were identical.

So, in other words foot, the following is entirely incorrect.



You are confusing speed at a given time vs. speed at identical distances.

550 hp with a true 100% "RWD like" AWD system under hard acceleration (for the loss calculation) in the straights is looking more likely than 530 hp. Oh well what is 80 hp among friends...

I don't know why but I disagree with those findings.

I know that two stock examples of the same car can throw up close to 4~5mph differences at these speeds. You need to check out some Youtube videos of even the new M3 and compare examples, you will see upto 10Km/h differences at 260~270km/h mark. Factor in a possible higher exit speed on to the straight and possible differences in wind speed and direction and it's very probable that such a speed difference could be seen.

No need for a difference in power, what ever the true figure happened to be.

P.S.

I second the need for people to stop with the insults. All that does is close a thread and get people banned, and there has been enough of that lately.

[Dascamel]

Originally Posted by rapistwit

Oh yeah that was the overly emotional insulting part of this thread. Sheez

Emotional no, very off topic yes.

[rapistwit]

Originally Posted by Dascamel

Emotional no, very off topic yes.

It may have been OT but it was deserved. It is a little strange that the voices of reason only come out after boosted got taken down a notch.


I'm all for sticking to the topic but if someone is going to get insulting about a car choice I have made don't be surprised if I make an observation or two about their choice.

[jaeS4]

Originally Posted by devo

The M3 is actually sub 3500 lbs. This is well documented. I'd say that a 350-375 lb disparity is quite substantial.

BMWusa.com says 3704lbs unladen weight. I'm guessing that doesn't mean dry weight, so that's with fuel in the tank.

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Conte...fications.aspx

EDIT: My mistake.

unladen weight of vehicle: the weight of a motor vehicle without fuel, cargo, passengers, or equipment

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861718428/tare.html

[lucid]

BMW figure includes fuel and passanger, and probably steel roof with sunroof and loaded DCT sedan. Meaning the worst case. A 6MT coupe with tech and pre package and full tank will weigh more like 3600lb. Take the fuel out and it will be < 3500lb.

[SoreHead]

There was no insulting of the 335. I was merely pointing out that the comments being made about other cars actually also applied to his car. To be honest when someone is implying a car manufacturer is bribing magazines and car programmes around the world it's almost too hard not to get stuck in.

I couldn't care less what car anyone drives and have no in-built national pride based fanboyism as I'm from Ireland and we have no car industry.

Other than that it was a post on the GT-R and led to arguments about the GT-R. Isn't that the point. Like rapistwit it was only after boost start calling people idiots that I felt it only fair to point out that someone doesn't appear to know basic English and I don't mean spelling. Read the first message to see what I mean.

P.S.
I love you all.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

I don't know why but I disagree with those findings.

I know that two stock examples of the same car can throw up close to 4~5mph differences at these speeds. You need to check out some Youtube videos of even the new M3 and compare examples, you will see upto 10Km/h differences at 260~270km/h mark. Factor in a possible higher exit speed on to the straight and possible differences in wind speed and direction and it's very probable that such a speed difference could be seen.

No need for a difference in power, what ever the true figure happened to be.

You are still missing the point and are absolutely incorrect. Up to lower speeds and therefore early in the battle when one car exits faster the differences at a given distance will be about equal to the initial difference. As the cars progress with time and distance, just due to the acceleration constantly decreasing, the speed gap at a given distance will continue to close until it reaches a very small value. It is simply an asymptote - all cars have a Vmax. My figures are not inconsistent with your 4-5 mph variations those would simply happen at shorter distances and/or with lower powered cars that would reach Vmax sooner. For a 550 hp RWD GT-R (or other similar Cd/power/weight vehicle) an exit speed difference of 10 mph will only translate to a 2 mph difference in 5000 or so feet, which is just about the distance from corner exit to the bridge.

[footie]

Honest Swamp I am not missing the point, I know that with each mph that the car puts on it takes longer and as both cars approach their peak speed the car that entered the corner slower will eventually close this initial speed difference. But I think you aren't taking into account all the other possibilities that will effect the overall outcome from each run.

Look at Suzuki's two runs, on the 7:38 lap he peaked at 177mph but on the 7:29 lap he hit 180mph, a small difference but when you are talked about this caliber of driver the exit speed on to the straight will not be measured in single mph units but in points of mph. So that 3 mph difference was probably all to do with the direction of the wind and the additional drag it was causing.

I am telling you that it is highly likely that chris's car was little different in output from the one the Suzuki drove and the difference in peak speed was all determined by other factors, be it not getting on the power quite as soon as Suzuki, maybe difference wind conditions and possibly a slight variation in output but inside normal production guidelines.

I think we all need to sit back and wait for both the press and Porsche to release their statements on these latest lap times before we either accept or disregard Nissan's times as true or fake.

[SoreHead]

Originally Posted by footie

I think we all need to sit back and wait for both the press and Porsche to release their statements on these latest lap times before we either accept or disregard Nissan's times as true or fake.

Am I to take it that we feel that Porsche are going to be the ones telling the truth and Nissan are liars???
Why is it no one ever questions times claimed by other manufacturers but now that Nissan have built a car that is challenging them for less money everyone is on the band wagon accusing them of cheating???
I, personally, think that every time posted by a manufacturer is a little (or lot) on the optimistic side.

I've never owned a Nissan but have always had a hankerin' for a Skyline and now I have an urge in my trousers for the GT-R but I don't believe they are fudging their times any more than anyone else.

As for your calculations for straightline speed based on exit speed, wind direction and velocity.... STOP My head is starting to hurt

[devo]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Fuel and driver, i.e. reporting standard makes all of the difference. Those two together are ~250 lb. There is no E9X M3 sub 3500 with either driver and/or full of fuel.

Thanks. I realize this. I was making a point that the M3 sans fuel and driver was sub 3500 lbs. Of course, it doesn't really matter much considering that it is relative. Although, I am not confident that each manufacturer measures their vehicle's weight in the same fashion. Sorry to get O.T.