Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Nissan GT-R Article Comments - 2009 Nissan GT-R vs. 2008 Porsche 911 Turbo
990 messages, Last post on Sep 05, 2009 at 6:04 AM
You are in the Nissan GT-R Forum. Your Host is claires
2009 Nissan GT-R vs. 2008 Porsche 911 Turbo - Balance and body control of the GT-R are extraordinary through faster, bumpy bends that will have the 911 unsettled enough to make the driver lose confidence. I had a number of heart-in-mouth moments in the Turbo trying to keep up with the GT-R, even with the Porsche's suspension set to its harder Sport setting. (more)
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Oct 02, 2008 5:30 am) Nissan weighs 3800 lbs and has 480 hp. Porsche weighs 3550 lbs and has 480 hp. Nissan trap speed is 116.5 mph. Porsche trap speed is 121.2 mph. Your conclusion is that the Nissan is understating their HP? I don't see how. Here is a calculator that I use as a basic sanity check. http://www.tunercalcs.com/hp-from-quarter-mile-trap-speed.html
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lemmer (Oct 02, 2008 5:55 am) http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0803_2009_nissan_gt_r_dyno_test/i- - - - - - - ndex.html "we intend to answer them with rigorous testing of a fresh, production-ready U.S.-spec GT-R" And I can already prove that your trap speed calculator is useless. Exactly what wheel horspower did you come back with? 470whp? You'd be making a big mistake by contesting that the GT-R is then making less than 480hp at the crank. Please tell me you just made a typo, and don't really believe that BHP = WHP. That would pretty much make my day  Wheel horsepower is always less than Brake Horsepower due to drivetrain loss. The most likely estimate for the GT-R would be 15%, even though Nissan claims their drivetrain loses only 11%. According to your calculator, the GT-R is making at least 525 bhp, and as much as 550 bhp. Besides, that is WAY more than what was actually proven by Motor Trend. Your little calculator is more of a reverse-sanity check. You'd have to have questionable sanity to believe it. And those are the stock US-spec versions. It still has yet to be proven, but there's a chance that every single GT-R is far more powerful than the Turbo. Was the Ring record setter at a higher power output than 480hp? Possibly, but so are bone-stock GT-Rs. Proving that every GT-R is extra powerful does NOT prove that the Nurburgring one was 'dialed up'. As I already said, this car was developed at the Ring. Whatever they discovered there, they use on production cars.
|
|
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Oct 02, 2008 6:58 am) I am not sure where you are going with your response above. I was more interested in the comparison of the 911 and the GT-R, like in the title of the discussion here. My only point is that if the GT-R HP is underrated, the 911 is similarly underrated. Also, if the GT-R is so great, how come it is 20 seconds behind the 911 Turbo on the 'Ring?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Oct 02, 2008 5:38 am) A little more thinking needs to be done on this claim. The R35 GT-R is at the least, a 30% power/weight improvement over the R33 GT-R. The Corvette ZR1 by contrast, is at most a 16% power/weight improvement. The extra added weight of the ZR1 didn't stop it from shaving off 17 seconds from a Nurburgring time. Chassis stiffness was a necessary evil. And the new GT-R has twice that big of an improvement? If power/weight is your only argument, you'd better come up with something else quick. I, on the other hand, also give credit to chassis improvements a further reason why the new is better than the old. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lemmer (Oct 02, 2008 7:36 am) Don't pout. You said you didn't see how the GT-R could be underrating. So I showed you. They may both be underrated, but that does not mean the final output has to be similar. And regardless, I don't put all my stock in power/weight ratios like some. Also, if the GT-R is so great, how come it is 20 seconds behind the 911 Turbo on the 'Ring? Simple, thats a rumor coming from a highly biased party, Porsche. Its slightly less believable than Nissan's claim of being 11 seconds faster than the Turbo. Neither of them is to be 100% trusted. Only a reliable third party should be making that determination. And even then, any track in the US? GT-R is going to win. You already said you could believe that. |
|
|
|
|
I was looking on the internet, and I found THIS And THIS Attempting to blow a hole in the conspiracy theory. The GT-R uses a special rim, which only special tires can be mounted to. And they are near R-comps as it is. According to Porsche, Nissan either developed a separate special R-comp tire to fit these rims, or they developed a different sized rim (TPMS compatible) to fit other R-comp tires for the sole purpose of getting a good time. Right... and where are these specialty products now? Seems highly unprofitable to have your product used for setting a record... but nobody gets to know about it or buy it. Considering the RE070R's are the only tire upgrade Nissan currently has planned for the GT-R, I think they are more than satisfied with them. They come with the NISMO Clubsport package, and will be standard on the V-spec. Porsche really is a conspiracy theorist, that's for sure. I wonder what they think about crop circles? 
|
|
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Oct 02, 2008 12:35 pm) The Porsche experiment is not so much a conspiracy theory. I like to think of it as the only controlled comparison test between these two we've seen on the 'Ring. The only unbiased source, Sport Auto, only has an estimate for the GT-R from their main driver - he says it should be in the 7:50s. Sport Auto does a little better than that in the 911. I'd love to see a completely unbiased controlled test other than Porsche's. Until such a test proves otherwise, the GT-R clearly is slower than the 911 Turbo around the 'Ring. Case closed. Nothing else to say about the 'Ring. You'll have to go back to the other track results to prove your point.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Jul 23, 2008 2:28 pm) When you buy a GT-R you have to bring it in for inspection after the first 1000 miles/ 12 months/ 24 months / 36 months.... It is all free of charge. If you miss one of these schedule check ups your warranty is invalid  GP |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lemmer (Oct 02, 2008 1:00 pm) Because the wheels themselves are a performance enhancement. The 'knurling' along the edge prevents excess tire contorsion. And they didn't develop the tires themselves. They contracted Bridgestone to build them a run-flat with tremendous grip and pliability. They literally took the fact that it would be an AWD car and its weight into account when building the tire. They didn't develop a rim just to get around the tire monitor, but it is linked into the ATTESA system. The system measures feedback directly from the wheels so it knows when to engage the traction control. The tires are made specifically for those wheels. They are borderline R-comps as it is. About the same as the Pilot Sport Cups used on the GT2. The point is, there never were any slick-cut R-comps on this car. They don't exist. I don't know how you didn't pick up on that. Never developed, never marketed. The RE070R's are the best tire Nissan had specially developed for this car. The other likelihood is that there was no dialed-up boost. All GT-Rs coming from the factory have in excess of 480hp. Whatever power/weight ratio you think this car has is probably way off. How is it 'case closed' if it hasn't been verified? And no, Porche's claim reeks of bogus conspiracy theory. It CAN'T be the way they say it is. The slick-cut tire myth is beyond the realm of logical possibility. And Sport Auto's test in the wet proves it could be faster. So the default is that the GT-R remains significantly faster than the Turbo everywhere but a drag strip. So your post was pretty much all backwards.
|
|
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Oct 03, 2008 3:45 am) Porsche is just backing up what we've all been thinking. Something isn't quite right here. I have read just as many magazine articles that claim the GT-R isn't quite as fast as all the hype made it out to be. Why would Nissan do this? Because they get more press! That's a really simple reason. They had every magazine talking about how they were the next Porsche Killer. It's a nice car, just not that nice.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Nissan GT-R Article Comments - 2009 Nissan GT-R vs. 2008 Porsche 911 Turbo
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Nissan GT-R
2010 Porsche 911
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
