Godzilla (as they call it) Vs whatever it seems

[NSXType-R]

Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead

it's a public road. but there're track that require a maximum noise level, because of the houses around the track and other reasons. The F1 Monza Grand Prix was going to be deleted for such a reason.

Oh. Didn't know that.

[P4g4nite]

Originally Posted by leonofthedead

in a private test in a small circuit in italy, Franciacorta, the lapped a bmw 320si with standard tires (which are already sportier than standard ones) with the same car but equipped with the slick tires of the WTCC cars. considering the road car is setted specifically for those "standard" tires so it wasn't tunned to fit slicks, they managed to cut the lap time by almost 10 seconds, on a track which is long something like 2,8 km. i am wondering what a semislick can cut from the time on the Nordshleife, almost 21 km long.
opinions?
Nissan used Dunlop SP Sport 600 DSST tires instead of the standard Bridgestone Potenza RE070R

But the 320Si went from a normal road tyre to a racing slick, the GTR went from high performance road tyre to a different high performance road tyre.
The DSST suffix stands for Dunlop self supporting technology, meaning the Sport 600's were runflats. I don't think a huge amount of time was gained by the tyre switch, and even if they did it's still easily available runflat rubber.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen

Do the Caparo or Radical come with height-adjustable suspension? But speed bumps are a piss-poor reason to say it's not a road car, especially when you consider the giant list of other problems the 2 cars have on the road.

not my rules

Originally Posted by P4g4nite

The DSST suffix stands for Dunlop self supporting technology, meaning the Sport 600's were runflats. I don't think a huge amount of time was gained by the tyre switch, and even if they did it's still easily available runflat rubber.

they both appear to be "ultra high performance all-season tires" and I can't say how much difference there is between them, but for example BMW doesn't offer run flat tires on its M Division cars, as that kind of tires lack of sensibility more than of performance.
My point is just that the car isn't exactly standard, since, imo, the tires are very important in a high performance car lapping a track. See what happens in a lot of races. A good car and all his development can be ruined by the wrong set of tires.

[P4g4nite]

Originally Posted by Leonofthedead

they both appear to be "ultra high performance all-season tires" and I can't say how much difference there is between them, but for example BMW doesn't offer run flat tires on its M Division cars, as that kind of tires lack of sensibility more than of performance.
My point is just that the car isn't exactly standard, since, imo, the tires are very important in a high performance car lapping a track. See what happens in a lot of races. A good car and all his development can be ruined by the wrong set of tires.

Just did a bit more reading, apparantly the Dunlops are the standard tyre on the standard version of the GTR while the Bridgestones are standard on premium "Black" spec car.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by P4g4nite

Just did a bit more reading, apparantly the Dunlops are the standard tyre on the standard version of the GTR while the Bridgestones are standard on premium "Black" spec car.

Dunlop SP Sport 7010 A/S DSST, I found this as the standard equipment but at Compare Tire Search Results not an official source.
btw, where did you read that? can you post the link or something?
In the same way, the Zonda F which set the record is equipped with the "Clubsport" optional pack, which include carbon ceramic brakes, 650 bhp, adjustable sport suspensions and some other details. I later figured out that almost all the F are equipped with that optional, but this doesn't count.
If the tires used by Nissan are just one of those offered as standard, it would be ok. Still I hardly believe it achieved that time.
Considering Nissan has a very limited experience in modern racing cars, since they raced only the R390 ten years ago and the old R34 GT-R until 2003 IIRC, it makes, if true, all the other manufacturers with more experience in high performance cars and racing simply stupids. Of course the development of such a good car as the R34 was is a good reference, but it seems just too much.
I read a extract from a test of "Car-and-driver" in which the GT-R was confronted with the 997 Turbo and the M3. The "winner" was the M3, since it was the right compromise between the astonishing performance of the GT-R and the refinement and better feeling of the Turbo.
So, my opinion, is that the GT-R is for sure really fast, but that maybe they went a little too far, and the car is more of a racing car about pure performance and that it lacks of involvement and fun.

[The_Canuck]

It lost to the new M3 in a Car and Driver comparo, but beat the 911 turbo. Apparently the M3 is just too much fun.

[Kitdy]

Originally Posted by The_Canuck

It lost to the new M3 in a Car and Driver comparo, but beat the 911 turbo. Apparently the M3 is just too much fun.

I read about that on Autoblog. They said it was pretty fishy and or bogus possibly.

[The_Canuck]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

I read about that on Autoblog. They said it was pretty fishy and or bogus possibly.

How can an opinion be bogus?

[Kitdy]

Originally Posted by The_Canuck

How can an opinion be bogus?

If BMW agrees to provide Car and Driver with a lucrative advertising contract in exchange for favourable reviews.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

If BMW agrees to provide Car and Driver with a lucrative advertising contract in exchange for favourable reviews.

in that case, they would have provided them with a car equipped with the EDC electronic suspensions.

[The_Canuck]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

If BMW agrees to provide Car and Driver with a lucrative advertising contract in exchange for favourable reviews.

That's always a possibility...but BMWs don't always win.

So Im assuming it's just fanboy whining.

[Kitdy]

Originally Posted by The_Canuck

That's always a possibility...but BMWs don't always win.

So Im assuming it's just fanboy whining.

I would think a GT-R to be a better car than the M3.

What I am interested in seeing is the breakdown of the score.

They have the fun to drive category as well as gotta have it category, which is pretty stupid. In all the objective performance categories, the GT-R would have the M3 whipped, so that means the M3 must have made up ground for practicality and subjective things.

[The_Canuck]

M3 is first column, GTR second

Vehicle
Driver comfort: 9/10 - 8/10
Ergonomics: 7/10 - 9/10
Rear Seat Comfort: 5/5 - 2/5
Rear Seat Space: 5/5 - 3/5
Trunk Space: 5/5 - 4/5
Features/Amenities: 10/10 - 9/10
Fit and Finish: 9/10 - 7/10
Interior Styling: 7/10 - 8/10
Exterior Styling: 8/10 - 8/10
Rebates/Extras: 1/5 - 0/5
As Tested Price: 20/20 - 19/20
SUBTOTAL: 86/100 - 77/100

Powertrain
Quater Mile Accel: 15/20 - 19/20
Flexibility: 3/5 - 3/5
Fuel Economy: 4/5 -4/5
Engine NVH: 10/10 - 6/10
Transmission: 9/10 - 8/10
SUBTOTAL: 41/50 - 40/50

Chassis
Performance: 19/20 - 19/20
Steering Feel: 3/5 - 4/5
Brake Feel: 4/5 - 4/5
Handling: 10/10 - 10/10
Ride: 9/10 - 5/10
SUBTOTAL: 45/50 - 42/50

Gotta Have It: 23/25 - 24/25
Fun to Drive: 25/25 - 23/25

GRAND TOTAL: 220/250 - 206/250


Some notes: M3's acceleration was 2 seconds faster from 30-50MPH
GTR noted as feeling heavy, or big.

Remember this review is trying to express waht they think is the best car, OVERALL, obviously tastes differ, and objective reviews are dull.

[Ferrer]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

I would think a GT-R to be a better car than the M3.

I haven't driven the GT-R, but the M3 is a very good car. Certainly much more interesting for me than the Nissan.

[P4g4nite]

Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead

Dunlop SP Sport 7010 A/S DSST, I found this as the standard equipment but at ... not an official source.
btw, where did you read that? can you post the link or something?
In the same way, the Zonda F which set the record is equipped with the "Clubsport" optional pack, which include carbon ceramic brakes, 650 bhp, adjustable sport suspensions and some other details. I later figured out that almost all the F are equipped with that optional, but this doesn't count.
If the tires used by Nissan are just one of those offered as standard, it would be ok. Still I hardly believe it achieved that time.
Considering Nissan has a very limited experience in modern racing cars, since they raced only the R390 ten years ago and the old R34 GT-R until 2003 IIRC, it makes, if true, all the other manufacturers with more experience in high performance cars and racing simply stupids. Of course the development of such a good car as the R34 was is a good reference, but it seems just too much.
I read a extract from a test of "Car-and-driver" in which the GT-R was confronted with the 997 Turbo and the M3. The "winner" was the M3, since it was the right compromise between the astonishing performance of the GT-R and the refinement and better feeling of the Turbo.
So, my opinion, is that the GT-R is for sure really fast, but that maybe they went a little too far, and the car is more of a racing car about pure performance and that it lacks of involvement and fun.

Full spec of the car.
Motorauthority article on the lap.
Motorage article, the 7010's are the all season tyres with the RE070R being the summer tyre for the US market. They will come standard filled with nitrogen. That poo poo is serious.
Nissan have also had quite a lot of success at the SuperGT post GT-R, running the 350Z. I believe the car is quick because it makes considerabley more power than stated, it's gearbox is losing no time, it has all the grip it needs to apply the power more of the time and finally it has some aerodynamics.. I read that it was hitting 290km/h on parts of the 'Ring.