OK, lets start by saying that this was done by one very skilled Nissan racing driver and it would be doubtful that someone like Horst will match that time.
Now that's out of the way, let me congrats Nissan for producing the most amazing mass produced car on the planet, you don't have to like the looks or rate the brand, hack you might not ever want to own one but you can appreciate the achievement they have made and plain love the retail price they placed on it. Now that we know the basic car is capable of under 7:30, what does that not mean the V-spec will be able to achieve. :MTM:
Now what was the time that Horst did in the GTR?..... 7:50 I believe which even though there was the odd damp patch does put into perspective the huge gap in ability between him and a true professional. And puts into question whether his times for these cars are a true reflection on what they are capable of.
Sorry KersoF1, but that last statement had to be said.
Search and you will find the truth.
Horst times on the Ring are usually marginally slower then factory times... Do a little research about Horst von Saurma before bashing him...
About that fantasy GT-R time... Nissan claimed in late 1980s that(then) their first Skyline is able to do Ring in 8.20min(in late 1980s it was awsome time)... Seven race drivers tried to achive that time in 1989 with Japanese import Skyline... NONE was able to get closer then 8.50min...
Do you know what 7.29min? For car that officialy weights 1740kg and produces 480hp(known fact is according to FOUR independant dynos in UK and USA-close to 540hp aat crank)?
So, you really belive that GT-R is faster then any Zonda, 997 GT2, Enzo, Carrera Gt etc.?
Hmm... I DO NOT.
sorry guys. i don't believe the track time. one of these days they'll claim the spec V will break the 7:00 time and post a 6:52?
according to specs i cannot believe the car can be that fast.
Past- A4, TT, S4
Present- R8 V10
Do I believe that the GTR has done 7:29 in a stock GTR,well I believe it as much as I believe a stock CSL did it's time of 7:50.
It all depends on whether you believe that any of these cars are in fact stock when tested. I have voiced an opinion countless times that the E46 M3 acceleration times at and around it's official launch were unbelievable for a car kicking out 339hp. My opinion of the GTR is that Nissan are giving the car more than it's quoted output and that the one that was used for this time at the ring is also special, but the same has to be true of countless others.
I say if you don't take Nissan's time at face value then you have to question all the rest.
Search and you will find the truth.
Jesus Christ thats fast.Originally Posted by KresoF1
we have to be fair. all new cars this complicated are going to have teething issues. even i cannot hold this against the GT-R. in the end it'll probably come out being more reliable than a german sports car.
i think its outstanding performance has not been put into the proper perspective. we are all number whores. but most people don't seem to get that this car has a DSG. i think that in historical terms, particularly regarding ring times, this car needs a true manual transmision in order to really be apples to apples. and if any of you disagree that the DSG makes such a huge difference then you need to get your head out of your girlfriend's :bigeyes: and see reality. as different as an auto and a stick are- see 997 TT times- the DSG is that much better. people talk about how this 7:29 time is 1 second off the CGT. the CGT has a true manual for god's sakes. if it had a DSG the CGT would be in the 7:15 time zone. :MTM:
as the speeds increase and the curves and turns add up, transmissions like the DSG play an increasingly huge role in cutting performance times down. i mention this not to take anything away from the GT-R but to simply put things in perspective.
---------i hear nissan will be making a true manual for the car. i think these rumors are true.
Past- A4, TT, S4
Present- R8 V10
If Porsche offer GT2 with PDK... It will be interesting to see that ring time
Till GT-R sales start in EU(March 2009) its Ring time will be lowered to 7.10min...
Is reverse it will be 7.50min...
Revised chassis settings:“At last year’s testing, we were frustrated by the conditions at the Nürburgring, always believing that the GT-R could go under seven minutes 30 seconds,” said Kazutoshi Mizuno, Chief Vehicle Engineer for GT-R. “Below seven minutes 30 seconds, the GT-R proves it is among the fastest mass-production cars in the world. We set out to build a multi-performance supercar accessible to anyone, anytime and anywhere – I believe the GT-R has delivered that promise.”
http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsAr...llCars/232532/
Turns out that the 7:38 was done with preliminary suspension settings. So yes, the 7:38 time was a non-production R35. The production version is faster.The new Nissan GT-R has smashed the production car lap record at the Nurburgring Nordschleife. Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn announced that a production version of the GT-R driven by Tochio Suzuki posted a lap time of 7min 29secs during testing last week, nine seconds quicker than the previous test.
Ghosn confirmed that the time means the GT-R, a base-spec Japanese car running with revised chassis settings, has delivered on one of its original design objectives: to be the “fastest production supercar” in the world.
“This proves that Nissan can compete against anyone,” he said.
The news gives an interesting perspective on unofficial timings of a Skyline GT-R V-Spec prototype caught testing at the Nordschleife, where observers suggested it was lapping in around 7min 25secs. This news means that the production GT-R V-spec is likely to be even quicker than those figures suggest.
RXBG,
I can't agree that a gearbox can make such a big difference on the lap time, what you are talking about for the Carrera GT is more than 16 seconds per lap. Sorry but that is impossible, like Kreso said BMW are quoting 5 seconds for the M3 with dual clutch so my guess is that this would be the upper limits of improvement to be had for such a setup.
On something totally different, Kreso do you know if the M3's ring time was achieved with EDC or stock suspension?
Search and you will find the truth.
Leadie,
EDC suspension for M3.
Back OT... Simply said IMHO this Nissan claim is pure BS. Why? Physics... GT-R official weight is 1740kg, 480hp(OK, close to 540hp in reality) and Nissan claims 7.29min...
Gents, this is faster then ANY current supersports car. For the car this is slower then 997TT in 0-200km/h and much slower then 997TT in 0-300km/h...
I will stop here but, IMO Nissan claim is pure POS.
Correction on the above. The slowest GTR tested was slower than about the 'fastest' 997TT tested. The R&T car was slower than any other R35 tested to date. The C&D 0-200km/h time of 11.5s puts that into perspective. Now I could seize on the C&D time and say that proves it's faster than the Porsche but in reality the 2 cars are about the same in a straight line. The R&T car was a slow example and the C&D car was a fast example. The other GTRs coming in around 11.6 @ 120-121mph are about average.
As regards the 0-300km/h time, there is no evidence to back up that statement. The GTR's 6th ratio is shorter than that of the 997TT, it has more power and it has superior aerodynamics, so the result, when available, may prove otherwise.
I too thought both cars were pretty even on acceleration, though I knew the GTR had an advantage in the corner but didn't believe it could be this much.
I also didn't know about a new chassis setup but like I have said before I am not a GTR anorak, only Audis.
The interesting thing is that EVO tested the GTR on their usual test track (Bedford) and it was only 0.5s quicker than the R8. Does this mean it was a quick R8 and a slow GTR? Personally I believe Bedford suits the R8 very well indeed and the GTR, well it works well no matter where you take it because it's times were at the top of the table, just under the ultimate hypercars and trackday specials.
Whether you believe Nissan's time or not, the GTR is a truly amazing piece of kit, well worth the price in my opinion.
Though I still wouldn't buy one.
Search and you will find the truth.
The R8 is a remarkable car with great potential, especially if they sort out the engine cooling issues and get forced induction. It's impossible to say whether a car is a fast or slow example based on a track lap as there are too many other variables. The R&T GTR was a slow example yet posted a great lap time. Track laps tend to average out fast and slow examples.I too thought both cars were pretty even on acceleration, though I knew the GTR had an advantage in the corner but didn't believe it could be this much.
I also didn't know about a new chassis setup but like I have said before I am not a GTR anorak, only Audis.
The interesting thing is that EVO tested the GTR on their usual test track (Bedford) and it was only 0.5s quicker than the R8. Does this mean it was a quick R8 and a slow GTR? Personally I believe Bedford suits the R8 very well indeed and the GTR, well it works well no matter where you take it because it's times were at the top of the table, just under the ultimate hypercars and trackday specials.
Whether you believe Nissan's time or not, the GTR is a truly amazing piece of kit, well worth the price in my opinion.
Though I still wouldn't buy one.
I'm looking forward to the LP560 as it combines all lessons learned from the R8 with a 560ps V10 (and less weight). The results should be amazing.
.... and I still love the way the GTR looks, it's supposed to offend people.
I want to see a real Ring comparison test with the GT-R and the competition. Yes, it definitely has more than 480 hp. But you need some real magic to overcome 500 pounds and 50-100 less horsepower.
I don't think you can compare manufacturer supplied ring times to ones that are produced from the magazines.
I think Chevy is quoting some crazy times for the 260 hp Cobalt.
...look at recent big GT-R test at UK's EVO mag. They measured it on drag(against Z06) and on the Bedford track.I too thought both cars were pretty even on acceleration, though I knew the GTR had an advantage in the corner but didn't believe it could be this much.
I also didn't know about a new chassis setup but like I have said before I am not a GTR anorak, only Audis.
The interesting thing is that EVO tested the GTR on their usual test track (Bedford) and it was only 0.5s quicker than the R8. Does this mean it was a quick R8 and a slow GTR? Personally I believe Bedford suits the R8 very well indeed and the GTR, well it works well no matter where you take it because it's times were at the top of the table, just under the ultimate hypercars and trackday specials.
Whether you believe Nissan's time or not, the GTR is a truly amazing piece of kit, well worth the price in my opinion.
Though I still wouldn't buy one.
Test results are more then interesting... In acceleration GT-R did not beat Z06 on high speed runs. On Bedford track it achieved just 0.5s faster time then Audi R8! In fact its time is within of 0.1s of Gallardo SL time... So, it Godzilla is just 0.5s faster on Bedford then R8 how is it possible that it is more then 30s faster on the Ring? I know, I know Ring is different track just, something is wrong here. Big time wrong...
Look at situation with Gallardo SL. Same time on Bedford as GT-R just on the Ring GT-R is almost 20s faster...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote