Nissan GTR's new ring time improved.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Good discussion on the "involvement issue". We have talked on this point in the past. It is a fine line between easy to drive and involving and boring. Of course each rating depends on the level at which you are pushing as well. I agree that it is a good thing that cars continually progress and in general become easier to drive and easier to drive faster. All along they offer better lap times yet they can get even more comfortable. Easy to drive fast vs. rewarding and engaging is a difficult and somewhat blurry distinction. None of us wants a car so sterile and safe when driving at 9/10ths that it feels like a video game. Somehow the M3 seems to always find a great balance here. I would love to drive both hard at a track, back to back and experience what so many have so vehemently criticised about the GT-R and praised so stongly in the M3.

I have never read a review that criticized the GT-R's on-track behavior. What reviewers tend to say (and not with vehemence, unless memory fails me) is that the car is not involving in everyday driving. From my point of view, that kind of thing is unlikely to show up in a test drive, or even the first few days of ownership, as one gets familiar with all the cool features and the outstanding performance.

I'll be interested to see how all this pans out over the next year or eighteen months. Will a bunch of used GT-Rs start showing up on ebay and the back pages of Autoweek?

Interesting stuff, all right.

Bruce

[footie]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Have you seen one in the flesh yet? I dislike it in pictures, but in the flesh it's pretty impressive. Not beautiful, but far from ugly, and very purposeful.

Bruce

This comment read in full to understand where I am coming from, first it's a Nissan and in my eyes that meant it's a peg or two below anything German, two it's pig ugly compared to say an M3 or an S5. That's is why if BMW chose to fit an awd system to their M3 I would jump at it because I know it would be a better car than it is already.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

I have never read a review that criticized the GT-R's on-track behavior. What reviewers tend to say (and not with vehemence, unless memory fails me) is that the car is not involving in everyday driving.

Here is the review I was referring to:

He never says it is boring. But, he does say that "it's like a video game". I think that is a compliment and criticism at the same time.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

I have never read a review that criticized the GT-R's on-track behavior. What reviewers tend to say (and not with vehemence, unless memory fails me) is that the car is not involving in everyday driving.

Not sure you have been reading the ones I have. This fellow did high speed street work and some track work and had negative things so say, again qualitative, not quantitative.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/200...n-gt-r-review/
(discussed here on the forum: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2657194)

Then there was the LA Times review, decidely negative as well:
http://www.latimes.com/classified/au...,1179971.story

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Not sure you have been reading the ones I have. This fellow did high speed street work and some track work and had negative things so say, again qualitative, not quantitative.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/200...n-gt-r-review/
(discussed here on the forum: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2657194)

Then there was the LA Times review, decidely negative as well:
http://www.latimes.com/classified/au...,1179971.story

Also Jason Plato in the Fith Gear review said it had understeer in high-speed corners. Also said the same thing about it being sterile.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Not sure you have been reading the ones I have. This fellow did high speed street work and some track work and had negative things so say, again qualitative, not quantitative.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/200...n-gt-r-review/
(discussed here on the forum: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2657194)

Then there was the LA Times review, decidely negative as well:
http://www.latimes.com/classified/au...,1179971.story

OK, I stand corrected. While the second review didn't actually have any criticism of the car that I could see, he did in fact seem to prefer the GT2's ability to kill you instantly if you get it wrong philosophy to the GT-R's philosophy of getting it right no matter what (unless you turn the nannies, off, of course).

The only thing I could see in the first review was : "While the helm’s quick and precise, it’s strangely numb and electric-feeling." while on track.

Fair enough, but this is "vehement" criticism?

OK, let me vehemently criticize you:

"Swamp is not even close to being the most physically attractive human being on the planet."

There. Got you good.

Bruce

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

OK, let me vehemently criticize you:

"Swamp is not even close to being the most physically attractive human being on the planet."

There. Got you good.

I almost never get your attempts at humor or sarcarsm.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I almost never get your attempts at humor or sarcarsm.

I know. But trust me, that last one (excised by the thought police along with footie's reference quote) was funny.

Bruce

[footie]

I found this on youtube and thought some of you mightn't have seen it.

It's the 7:29 lap of the GTR.

P.S.

Bruce, nice one.

[hellrotm]

The GT-R and ZR-1 ring times are a complete joke.

The truth will come out, it already is.

If ring times are going to be weighted so much all of sudden, we need standardization.