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 9 of 11: 1; ...; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; Prev; Next; Last

#72 of 93 Re: GT-R [ace47] by bigmclargehuge Jun 02, 2008 (7:10 pm)
Replying to: ace47 (Jun 02, 2008 3:32 pm) Elementary my dear Watson. I looked up the definition of 'reverse-engineering.' I found out you don't have to reverse-engineer an entire car. You can just pick and choose little bits and pieces and technologies. So no, you don't have to build from the ground up. And I suppose Mitsubishi and Subaru also came with AWD ideas from Porche? And Subaru also copied the boxer design? Well they sure didn't invent any of those things. Actually it was Audi's quattro system that was first developed AWD for on-road use. And it was Benz and BMW that developed the first flat engines and boxers. Get your facts straight. Actually you should check your own automotive history, because the first Skyline GT-R was in 1969. It was a performance version, not a luxury version. The R32 was just the first one to reach supercar status because they benchmarked it against the 959, at the time the world's only AWD supercar. If Nissan benchmarked against a 480hp car, and then decided to use 480hp, by definition they reverse-engineered the specs of the Porsche. They copied a few things, deal with it. Initial production of the car was the required 5000 to allow for homologation starting on May 22, 1989 which with critical acclaim by the motoring press along with heavy demand for the car, Nissan opted to allow an unlimited production run which went on sale to the public in August 1989, and began its Group A campaign in 1990. ^^^ see there, there was a huge media frenzy over the car before it was even sold. Very similar to the R35 hype of today. Umm.. if its the GT-R on the R35 chassis, it is in fact the R35 GT-R. Its like 997 Turbo. 997 is the current chassis, but each model from Carrera to GT2 has a different designation. Sure, I don't have a problem calling the EVO a supercar in its high-power versions. The Z51 Corvette isn't really a supercar. The 911 Carrera isn't really a supercar. But the Z06 and the GT2 are supercars. So if the FQ-400 crosses that fuzzy gray line in performance, it can be one too. And Porche can hardly be credited as the creators of AWD cosidering the Dutch came up with the first AWD car. You'd actually be wrong, Porsche can be credited as the creator of full-time 4WD for road vehicles, even though he never put it in an ICE 'car'. The Dutch Spyker did that 4 years later. Isn't it interesting how one of the first 4WD electric vehicles ever was invented by Ferdinand Porsche in 1899? Things that the Japanese may have perfected 100 years later, but they sure didn't invent them. And you might wanna do your research again. The Japanese are the world leader in automotive tecnology and machinery. Why don't you enlighten us all with examples? I'll start with aluminum monocoque chassis. Invented by Honda for the NSX. What else you got? I'm not sure who or what you're arguing against. The GT-R is a fine vehicle. But why do you think everything else ever made was crap? I wonder what do you drive, and is it crap because its not a GT-R?
#76 of 93 GT-R by ace47 Jun 03, 2008 (6:06 pm)
'So if the FQ-400 crosses that fuzzy gray line in performance, it can be one too.' I suppose the 0to60 in 3.5 doesn't cross the gray line. I suppose the Gallardo has better handling around a track?

#72 of 93: Re: GT-R [ace47] by bigmclargehuge; Jun 02, 2008 (7:10 pm)

Replying to: ace47 (Jun 02, 2008 3:32 pm)

Elementary my dear Watson. I looked up the definition of 'reverse-engineering.' I found out you don't have to reverse-engineer an entire car. You can just pick and choose little bits and pieces and technologies. So no, you don't have to build from the ground up.

And I suppose Mitsubishi and Subaru also came with AWD ideas from Porche? And Subaru also copied the boxer design?

Well they sure didn't invent any of those things. Actually it was Audi's quattro system that was first developed AWD for on-road use. And it was Benz and BMW that developed the first flat engines and boxers. Get your facts straight.

Actually you should check your own automotive history, because the first Skyline GT-R was in 1969. It was a performance version, not a luxury version. The R32 was just the first one to reach supercar status because they benchmarked it against the 959, at the time the world's only AWD supercar.

If Nissan benchmarked against a 480hp car, and then decided to use 480hp, by definition they reverse-engineered the specs of the Porsche. They copied a few things, deal with it.

Initial production of the car was the required 5000 to allow for homologation starting on May 22, 1989 which with critical acclaim by the motoring press along with heavy demand for the car, Nissan opted to allow an unlimited production run which went on sale to the public in August 1989, and began its Group A campaign in 1990.

^^^ see there, there was a huge media frenzy over the car before it was even sold. Very similar to the R35 hype of today.

Umm.. if its the GT-R on the R35 chassis, it is in fact the R35 GT-R. Its like 997 Turbo. 997 is the current chassis, but each model from Carrera to GT2 has a different designation.

Sure, I don't have a problem calling the EVO a supercar in its high-power versions. The Z51 Corvette isn't really a supercar. The 911 Carrera isn't really a supercar. But the Z06 and the GT2 are supercars. So if the FQ-400 crosses that fuzzy gray line in performance, it can be one too.

And Porche can hardly be credited as the creators of AWD cosidering the Dutch came up with the first AWD car.

You'd actually be wrong, Porsche can be credited as the creator of full-time 4WD for road vehicles, even though he never put it in an ICE 'car'. The Dutch Spyker did that 4 years later.

Isn't it interesting how one of the first 4WD electric vehicles ever was invented by Ferdinand Porsche in 1899? Things that the Japanese may have perfected 100 years later, but they sure didn't invent them.

And you might wanna do your research again. The Japanese are the world leader in automotive tecnology and machinery.

Why don't you enlighten us all with examples? I'll start with aluminum monocoque chassis. Invented by Honda for the NSX. What else you got?

I'm not sure who or what you're arguing against. The GT-R is a fine vehicle. But why do you think everything else ever made was crap? I wonder what do you drive, and is it crap because its not a GT-R?

#76 of 93: GT-R by ace47; Jun 03, 2008 (6:06 pm)

'So if the FQ-400 crosses that fuzzy gray line in performance, it can be one too.'

I suppose the 0to60 in 3.5 doesn't cross the gray line. I suppose the Gallardo has better handling around a track?