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

What is this discussion about? Nissan GT-R, Porsche 911, Car Comparisons, Coupe

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)

Outline

Messages Page 88 of 100: 1; ...; 85; 86; 87; 88; 89; 90; 91; ...; 100; Prev; Next; Last

#867 of 990 Re: My Test [spiritinthesky] by bigmclargehuge Oct 04, 2008 (5:20 am)
Replying to: spiritinthesky (Oct 04, 2008 3:40 am) But for a certain poster that has a bevy of narcisistic, arrogant and insulting tendencies, maybe it's time for you to upgrade your attitude. And perhaps consider cutting your posts in half and use the extra hour or two a day to focus on your career so you can drive the car of your choice, instead of reading reviews ad nauseum and posing as a couch potato authority. Versus pretentious for yourself and others. You know nothing about me. And that bullcrap just doesn't fly in the real world. Its laughable, because from what I know of you, you'd probably be surprised how far along the exact same path I am despite being several decades behind in age. We're not so different, you and I. A fact you'd probably never want to agree to. But a fact nonetheless. And as for your 'adding up'? Nobody in their right mind would have claimed the GT2 isn't faster than the GT-R in a straight line past a certain distance. Probability is 100% in the favor of Porsche on that one. No use arguing that against me, I'm in agreement. Just not when it comes to it 'adding up' in favor of Porsche's claim. As for arrogant and insulting, I'd like to point out that the 'irrational' comment, along with others pot-shots, were first directed at me. I'm sorry if the user didn't know what the word meant. I'm sorry that the information presented by the majority party is typically the opposite of reality. I'm also sorry if the 'gang' can dish it but can't take it. I do not, however, apologize in that having to do a lot of research for said business, I happen to bookmark information that I find interesting, if not useful. Posting is a break from all that, but the information presented is as factual as I can make it. If fact is not interesting to this group, just say so. It wouldn't be the first time they preferred subjective to the objective, and would prove my point about rationality. Based on probability the GT2 has a very good chance of beating the GT-R with a track time. Its a fast car, no misconceptions about that. The same logic does not apply to the Turbo. I would expect your friends' GT-R to make a good showing, not total domination on either side. Are you capable of shutting up about me and presenting hard fast times when it comes? Like I said, I would be curious to see what you discover. Replies to this message: madmanmoo (Oct 06, 2008 4:44 am) lemmer (Oct 06, 2008 6:20 am)
#868 of 990 Tone it down. by claires HOST Oct 04, 2008 (10:36 pm)
This is about cars, not posters.
#869 of 990 Re: My Test [bigmclargehuge] by madmanmoo Oct 06, 2008 (4:44 am)
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Oct 04, 2008 5:20 am) I can't vouch for everyone else, but I am interested in "fact". I presented Porsche's test of the vehicle and certainly believe them. Their engineers questioned the exact same things that I questioned. That was the reason I brought it to the table. Some people say they are just jealous, others think they are right. I'm siding with the latter. As I mentioned before, the times that Nissan posted never made sense to me for the exact same reasons that Porsche questioned them. I was pleased to see that I wasn't crazy. Replies to this message: lemmer (Oct 06, 2008 6:20 am)
#870 of 990 Re: My Test [madmanmoo] by lemmer Oct 06, 2008 (6:20 am)
Replying to: madmanmoo (Oct 06, 2008 4:44 am) I don't really have a dog in this fight either. In the interest of full disclosure, I've owned two Porsches and two Z-cars, and loved all four. As for being irrational and illogical, I am a middle-aged accountant for gawd's sake. There is probably a picture of me next to both rational and logical in a dictionary somewhere. Did everyone see the heavily modified GT-R in Car & Driver this month? I thought we had decided that this car couldn't be modified due to its complicated computer system? It whipped up on the others. One other thing - the big difference between the GT-R Porsche tested and all the magazine and Nissan tested cars is that Porsche purchased a car that nobody knew would be tested. Maybe they got a dud, but I doubt it. Here is an article that sheds some light on some of those early test cars.
#871 of 990 by bigmclargehuge Oct 06, 2008 (7:53 am)
I presented Porsche's test of the vehicle and certainly believe them. Their engineers questioned the exact same things that I questioned. That was the reason I brought it to the table. Not fact. Speculation. You are siding with 'myth', and 'rumor.' And it is quite illogical indeed to present that as fact. 'Questioning' is not fact. That's a really odd post there. Here is an article that sheds some light on some of those early test cars. Nope. You got that one backwards too. Thats just the author adding spin to Car & Driver's words. Car & Driver is the one you should believe when Car & Driver does the testing. Here's C&D's conclusion that your author decided to reverse on his mini-blog: Though we didn’t get a chance to dyno-test the two slower GT-Rs, three of the five were so close in performance that we believe they accurately represent the GT-R’s capability. Clearly, Nissan is delivering more than the advertised 480 horsepower. Even though C&D went out to prove the 'ringer' theory, they agreed with Nissan in the end. They agree the slower cars were the pre-production ones, the fast ones were all production-spec. No evidence supporting the 'ringer' theory and Car & Driver agrees with Nissan. If you don't understand dyno testing, you shouldn't be presenting it as fact. Just like that ' trap speed wheel horsepower calculator sanity check', that guys spin-factor makes that a useless article. We already had this discussion and you reversed your opinion that Nissan was overrating to underrating the GT-R, similar to how Porsche underrates their cars. I am a middle-aged accountant for gawd's sake. There is probably a picture of me next to both rational and logical in a dictionary somewhere. OMG! Wow, Seriously? Funny and illogical post there. One does not stem from the other. If I want some accounting facts, I'll know who to come to On this forum you present a lot of illogical stuff. And the complete opposite of fact. Repeatedly. No offense, but thats a really off statement. Again, say it as many times as you want, rationality and logic are not on your side for this conversation. Replies to this message: lemmer (Oct 06, 2008 8:20 am) madmanmoo (Oct 06, 2008 8:53 am) lemmer (Oct 06, 2008 11:04 am) and 2 more... bigmclargehuge (Oct 06, 2008 12:53 pm)
#872 of 990 Re: [bigmclargehuge] by lemmer Oct 06, 2008 (8:20 am)
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Oct 06, 2008 7:53 am) Here are my only conclusions so far: The 911 Turbo and GT-R test cars are similar in performance. The 911 is slightly faster in a straight line and the GT-R seems to be slightly faster through corners. On a high speed track, I would speculate that the 911 would be faster. On a tighter track, I would speculate that the GT-R would be faster. Maybe you have me confused with another poster... Replies to this message: madmanmoo (Oct 06, 2008 8:53 am) lemmer (Oct 06, 2008 11:04 am) lemmer (Oct 10, 2008 5:57 am) and 1 more... bigmclargehuge (Oct 06, 2008 12:53 pm)
#873 of 990 Re: [lemmer] by madmanmoo Oct 06, 2008 (8:53 am)
Replying to: lemmer (Oct 06, 2008 8:20 am) Must be me he's confusing you with. I'm not so sure why this discussion has gone off the deep end. I'm not presenting anything as 'fact'. I'm presenting a side of the story that I happen to believe. You obviously know more about cars than I do and for some reason that makes you angry. I am simply stating that I side with the Porsche engineers over a random Edmund's poster. Is that irrational and silly? Replies to this message: lemmer (Oct 06, 2008 11:04 am) lemmer (Oct 10, 2008 5:57 am) madmanmoo (Oct 10, 2008 6:09 am)
#874 of 990 Would you believe Edmunds? by madmanmoo Oct 06, 2008 (9:42 am)
How about Edmunds' own article stating that 0-60 from a standstill is at 3.9 and getting noticeably worse after 4 runs. The Turbo equipped with Tip does 3.5 seconds and it isn't even a dual clutch system which should shift 60% faster. Just some food for thought. Lots of numbers running around out there. http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/2008/09/2009-nissan-gt-r-0-60-in-35-and-274mp- g.html#more
#875 of 990 Re: [madmanmoo] by lemmer Oct 06, 2008 (11:04 am)
Replying to: madmanmoo (Oct 06, 2008 8:53 am) I think we got lumped into one big person. In any case, here is an Edmunds article that shares my point of view - a standard 911 can be considered a more satisfying car than a GT-R. Replies to this message: lemmer (Oct 10, 2008 5:57 am) madmanmoo (Oct 10, 2008 6:09 am)
#876 of 990 Re: [lemmer] by bigmclargehuge Oct 06, 2008 (12:53 pm)
Replying to: lemmer (Oct 06, 2008 8:20 am) I've been dividing my posts into halves, since you two seem to be able to finish each others' sentences . Just kidding. I'm too lazy to scroll back up to who said what. For that, I apologize. And since I'm already making a habit of it, you're going to get one lump response again, sorry to say. As for high-speed tracks, it is almost certainly the reverse of your estimate. The GT-R excels on high-speed tracks. On low-speed tracks and autocross courses, the GT2 beats the GT-R hands-down. Thats because of the acceleration difference. Having to slow down means having to speed up again. Check out RT's 4-track race. The GT-R I believe was second only to the Viper ACR on the high-speed cornering track. On the low-speed tracks where accel mattered, it didn't rank as high. The GT2 dominated where top speed mattered, the donut. If 0-60 is what matters to you, by all means go ahead and declare the Turbo the winner. But on high-speed courses, the GT-R owns this comparison. Thats happened enough times already.