Article Comments - 2009 Nissan GT-R

93 messages, Last post on Jun 03, 2008 at 6:06 PM

You are in the Nissan GT-R Forum. Your Host is claires

What is this discussion about? Nissan GT-R, Coupe

First Look: 2009 Nissan GT-R - Due for its much-anticipated unveiling at the 2007 Tokyo Auto Show, the 2009 Nissan GT-R will finally arrive in the U.S. next spring. Nothing will ever be the same again. (more)

A Lap of the Nurburgring in the 2009 Nissan GT-R - One of the primary performance objectives set forth by the Nissan GT-R's development team is to lap the Nürburgring's Nordschleife faster than a 997-based Porsche 911 Turbo. The 2009 Nissan GT-R had circled the famed circuit in 7 minutes and 55 seconds during endurance testing earlier in the year, trailing the 911 Turbo by 15 seconds. (more)

First Drive: 2009 Nissan GT-R (JDM Spec) - Unlike most supercars, the GT-R doesn't sit only 2 inches off the ground, so it's easy to slide into the driver seat. This is a Japanese-market car, so we're on the right-hand side, which makes everything feel awkward. The seat is firm and narrow, and the high center console gives the cabin a tight, cockpit-style feel. (more)

Full Test: 2009 Nissan GT-R (Japanese-Spec) - We know you want the numbers and we're not going to waste your time. Neither is Nissan. Its 2009 GT-R hits 60 mph in 3.3 seconds, quicker than the last Dodge Viper, Corvette Z06 and Porsche 911 Turbo we tested. (more)

Full Test: 2009 Nissan GT-R - Bottom Line:The GT-R delivers a rare combination of speed, agility and technological sophistication. It's a bit of a cold fish, but for $76K, we'll deal. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 7 of 10: 1; ...; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; Prev; Next; Last

#60 of 93 Re: 0-60 Time [drft] by bigmclargehuge May 27, 2008 (6:40 am)
Replying to: drft (May 26, 2008 9:35 am) To my knowledge, only the Motor Trend test uses a 1' rolling start for all their tests. They did get a 3.2 second 0-60 time using their typical method. That 3.2-second zero-to-60 mph time ties our best runs in a Porsche 911 Turbo and a 911 GT3-R, and trails only the Ferrari Enzo (3.1 sec) and Bugatti Veyron (2.7 sec) among production test cars. Our 11.6-second quarter-mile time ties the mighty Mercedes-Benz McLaren SLR's, but 13 other supercars manage to squeak ahead of our GT-R's elapsed time. Its trap speed of 120 mph is neck-and-neck with the Porsche 911 Turbo's, but at least 20 different models we've tested can top that figure. Perhaps that's the revelation here: Nissan's everyday-usable supercar is at its most super at everyday speeds. Beyond 110 mph the mythical beast becomes increasingly mortal, as illustrated in this graph. I saw at no point where MT claimed it was the fastest car they ever tested. I think you might have them mixed up with Edmunds,which tested it at 3.3 seconds from a standing start. Their claim was that it was the fastest production car they've ever tested. And they might be telling the truth. Perhaps they've never tested the Veyron or the Enzo. Or perhaps the GT-R's launch control + AWD covers that first 1' in 0.1s, whilst the competition has more wheel spin. That's probably why they differentiate themselves by testing from a rolling start: to measure the 0-60 time, not just the launch control. Replies to this message: drft (May 27, 2008 11:57 am) bigmclargehuge (May 27, 2008 1:01 pm)
#61 of 93 Re: 0-60 Time [bigmclargehuge] by drft May 27, 2008 (11:57 am)
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (May 27, 2008 6:40 am) Sorry I wasn't clear. I was refering to Edmunds. Replies to this message: bigmclargehuge (May 27, 2008 1:01 pm)
#62 of 93 Re: 0-60 Time [drft] by bigmclargehuge May 27, 2008 (1:01 pm)
Replying to: drft (May 27, 2008 11:57 am) Edmunds: Its 3.3-second 0-60-mph run and 11.6 at 120.9 mph performance make the GT-R the quickest car we've ever tested. MotorTrend: Employing our customary one-foot rollout and SAE weather correction we get: That 3.2-second zero-to-60 mph time ties our best runs in a Porsche 911 Turbo and a 911 GT3-R, and trails only the Ferrari Enzo (3.1 sec) and Bugatti Veyron (2.7 sec) among production test cars. I think you actually have 2 quotes entwined, but I could be wrong.
#63 of 93 Re: Road Trip! [claires] by mik3ymomo May 27, 2008 (6:35 pm)
Replying to: claires (Mar 26, 2008 8:18 pm) I have to agree that the Nissan is truly the new King. And I might add for nearly half the price of the Porsche. Fact is there are faster Porsches for even more money and the new ZR-1 Corvette will likely beat the Nissans times but remember the GT-R is Nissans first offering but its highest trim level the "V-SPEC" GT-R model has yet to emerge as of yet. This will be the Equivalent of the Corvettes ZR-1 or Porsches GT2. Also I am sure for less $. So the question really remains. Whats the best car for the $? Nissan I say. Also track times are usually made by the best drivers in the world. Real world times would be typically slower and what car would really perform better in the hands of a novice on the street? Nissan with its all wheel drive would hands down be the easiest for the laymen to wring out on the street with more consistent results.
#64 of 93 Re: The Numbers do not add up [mbukukanyau] by ace47 May 30, 2008 (5:21 pm)
Replying to: mbukukanyau (Oct 20, 2007 5:51 pm) Have you people ever heard of cars like the EVO VII? A high hp rating does not equal more acceleration for Japanese cars. It does that for only American cars. The GT-R uses every bit of the power that is available which is why it is faster than all it's competition not to mention better looking. Their are other factors that come into play, all of which the GT-R has to make it the worlds greatest supercar.
#65 of 93 Re: Vent Function? [trueteller] by ace47 May 31, 2008 (3:48 am)
Replying to: trueteller (Feb 17, 2008 8:24 am) Just by that comment you have shown how much you know. Yes the 911 Turbo was the benchmark car but that is only because it is considered the best German AWD car ever. Nissan has never, nor will it ever have to reverse engineer a car, especially the ones made by Germans and Americans. Replies to this message: bigmclargehuge (May 31, 2008 5:46 am)
#66 of 93 Re: Vent Function? [ace47] by bigmclargehuge May 31, 2008 (5:46 am)
Replying to: ace47 (May 31, 2008 3:48 am) You are just over 3 months overdue on that comment. I think it has been established that 'reverse engineer' is not the correct term.
#67 of 93 GT-R? hp equals acceleration? by ace47 Jun 01, 2008 (3:34 am)
Reverse engineer, or any term like that is just stupid, considering that the Japanese are the best in tecnology. Yeah I did make a comment after a long time buit I joined only a couple of days ago. And yeah, I should have read all the comments but I just got sick of people badmouthing this car and said what I thought after the first few comments. Replies to this message: bigmclargehuge (Jun 01, 2008 6:33 pm)
#68 of 93 Re: GT-R? hp equals acceleration? [ace47] by bigmclargehuge Jun 01, 2008 (6:33 pm)
Replying to: ace47 (Jun 01, 2008 3:34 am) Actually I think that was a defense of the GT-R. But lets give credit where credit is due, the idea for an AWD supercar was not a Japanese brainchild. Reverse engineering (RE) is the process of discovering the technological principles of a device, object or system through analysis of its structure, function and operation. Its not a stupid comment. The Japanese often do things 'best', but not always 'first'. The Europeans actually do come up with a lot of technologies first, but the Japanese spend countless hours, days, years fine-tuning and quality controlling them to perfection. Acura NSX. In some respects better than the Ferrari's of its day, true enough. Thats reverse engineering done right. The Porsche 959 was Nissan's target when designing the GT-R. Without the Porsche 959, AWD might never have made it onto the R32, and thus it wouldn't have made that dramatic leap forward in performance. Looking at any parts, schematics, data, designs, or drawings of another car and using that as a basis for your own design IS reverse-engineering on some level. And at that time there was only 1 AWD supercar on the road, the limited-production 959. Perhaps thats not exactly what happened with the R35 vs. 997T. But its still neither stupid nor insulting to say that 'anything Porsche can do, Nissan can do better 2 years later.' Because thats what happens. Call it what you will.
#69 of 93 GT-R by ace47 Jun 01, 2008 (7:57 pm)
Anyone can come up with something but its another to perfect it. And when did I say anything about AWD? But is that the reason that the Japanese are the undisputed automative masters of car makers, cosidering the performance per price? The R32 was built for the sole purpose of winning races in Japan, something which it did in a manner yet to be accomplished by Porche. I believe they won 29/29 races and the Europeans pulled up a protest as the GT-R was first from start to finish even with load penalties. Yeah, on some occasions the Europeans come with the ideas first but than they have the financial backing to put it to work before others considering the money they make from overpriced cars. And the NSX wasn't built to compete with Ferraris, it was built to showcase Hondas Vtec tecnology. Pretty good for a car delivering 95hp/L in those days considering the 3L displacement. Maybe you have more patience than I do but you don't have to look hard to see that those badmouthing the GT-R seem to think that hp equals acceleration as if other factors don't get taken into account. Replies to this message: bigmclargehuge (Jun 02, 2008 5:10 am)