GT-R? ZR1? Try Zonda, Enzo, & MC12.

[McLaren]

Porsche is the one who owns the Evo version. The only street legal GT1 in the US belongs to Don Wallace, and it has traveled the globe since it was made. The other silver one is the Middle Eastern one and it's traveled as well.

I'm also not sure why the last picture is on ExoticSpotter considering that photo has been around for a long, long time.

 

[Alex.]

Because the owner of Exotic Spotter is a complete idiot. he doesnt accept pictures of Zondas from me but he accepts photos taken from the Top Gear website.

 

[niky]

RE: Mclaren F1... Evo had one around a racetrack faster than an Enzo... of course, this is with the same tire type as the Enzo... so patently not "stock", but good luck finding brand new McLaren tires...

And that was the standard F1, AFAIK... with shoddy brakes and a tendency to pitch sideways for no apparent reason. Just imagine what the one with the aero would do.

 

[Greycap]

In this month's Evo, driver Marc Basseng has driven to the Ferrari Enzo, Maserati MC12, & Pagani Zonda F to new records, all just falling a few seconds off the ACR, but still showing the GT-R isn't that big of a threat.

Absolutely wonderful results! Many people probably never could have believed that $600k+ supercars with about 650 bhp and 1350 kg are capable of beating an $80k grand tourer with about 500 bhp and 1750 kg and it's definitely something that proves the GT-R isn't all that good.

Is it just me or does something need to be put into perspective here...

 

[homeforsummer]

Absolutely wonderful results! Many people probably never could have believed that $600k+ supercars with about 650 bhp and 1350 kg are capable of beating an $80k grand tourer with about 500 bhp and 1750 kg and it's definitely something that proves the GT-R isn't all that good.

Is it just me or does something need to be put into perspective here...

You're right, but at the same time, the amount of tedious drivel posted about the GT-R on forums and websites all around the world does give the uninformed the opinion that the GT-R is the fastest car in the world, some kind of unbeatable God of lap times that all supercars have to bow down to

For this reason, it's also important to give some perspective to those type of people, that the Nissan GT-R may well be quick and damn good value for the speed you get, but it can still get it's rear-end thoroughly kicked by some proper supercars from the manufacturers who specialise in it and have done throughout their entire history.

 

[Jim Prower]

But are there many of those on this Forum? I get the impression that the Audi R8 tends to garner that reputation around here.

 

[homeforsummer]

But are there many of those on this Forum? I get the impression that the Audi R8 tends to garner that reputation around here.

There have been a fair few but I think the common sense and facts seem to cover up the BS fairly quickly. The R8 has it's share too, but I think with that car people are more aware that it really doesn't have the performance of a full-on supercar. With the GT-R, the misconception still hangs.

 

[Tornado]

Absolutely wonderful results! Many people probably never could have believed that $600k+ supercars with about 650 bhp and 1350 kg are capable of beating an $80k grand tourer with about 500 bhp and 1750 kg and it's definitely something that proves the GT-R isn't all that good.

Is it just me or does something need to be put into perspective here...

I agree. Its much more indicative of the actual performance level when they completely obliterate the GT-R like they do at most other tracks.

 

[Milliethemutt]

Good to see the Zonda doing well, like homeforsummer said I think people quite often see it as a posing type supercar but it has come up with the goods here.

No mention that the Koenigsegg got stacked during it's last attempt.

 

[Keef]

You might see the F1 LM have something of a competitive time (That All Important Downforce) But I can't see the S7, particularly the TT model, doing all that well, as it likely has the same problem the Koenigsegg has. TOO. MUCH. POWER. FOR. GRIP.

Bah! The 750hp version would be blazing on the Ring. The car has enourmous downforce and could fly through the 100mph+ corners with ease. It might even prove slower down the straight than cars like the Enzo because of all the aero drag.

 

[McLaren]

Absolutely wonderful results! Many people probably never could have believed that $600k+ supercars with about 650 bhp and 1350 kg are capable of beating an $80k grand tourer with about 500 bhp and 1750 kg and it's definitely something that proves the GT-R isn't all that good.

Is it just me or does something need to be put into perspective here...

I've loved watching the GT-Rs fans react to any GT-R news from the claims it wasn't stock to Porsche accusing it of cheating to this.

Seriously, don't act like this is nothing. You & many other GT-R fans are the same folks who had the attitude that once the GT-R held the lap 'Ring record, it was the greatest performance car ever. You GT-R guys are the same ones who touted it was the best car for the price because it could beat $300,000+ cars. But now that this has been shown otherwise, you all turn your heads, and say, "Meh". I'm not even surprised you came to the GT-R's defense. What's wrong, Grey? Don't have anything to type about how fast & great the GT-R is like you have in the past?

You GT-R guys seem to be willing to go to any length to cover up the fact the GT-R wasn't really that fast when it was first shown.

BTW, I've never said the GT-R isn't that good. I said this shows it's not the threat folks exactly like you pushed it as, that it was a "supercar killer" when it clearly wasn't just because of one lap record.

 

[Leonidae]

Nice flamebaiting there, Reventon. I don't think that this little post of yours really deserves an answer, but I'll give it a try.

Accept it or not, GT-R is a good car.. a fast car for what it is, a 1740kg heavyweight GT car that is hanging within few seconds of these world class supercars. And how come it is not a thread? V-spec will be lighter and more powerful, with revised aero and powertrain, just like superleggera-models of your precious Lambos, which means that it will probably pounce right in the middle of these supercars and hypercars, maybe even further. And if you would had bothered to note my post on previous page, you'd understand how these supercars were able to improve their times. their previous times, just like GT-R's 7'38 was done on the old pavement which is far from ideal. the next time that caused spasm and foaming from other supercar manufacturers was 7'29.. after parts of Nurb got new pavement. You can't ignore that obvious factor.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

Accept it or not, GT-R is a good car..

He doesn't have to accept that,your idea of a good car might be different from his idea of a good car.

 

[Tornado]

And you still don't get Reventon's point. The problem is not the fact that the GT-R is fast around the 'Ring. The problem is that Nissan (and the pro-GTR crowd) are acting as if its 'Ring times are directly indicative of its performance overall, which it is not.

 

[McLaren]

Nice flamebaiting there, Reventon. I don't think that this little post of yours really deserves an answer, but I'll give it a try.

Accept it or not, GT-R is a good car.. a fast car for what it is, a 1740kg heavyweight GT car that is hanging within few seconds of these world class supercars.

I never said it wasn't.

And how come it is not a thread? V-spec will be lighter and more powerful, with revised aero and powertrain, just like superleggera-models of your precious Lambos, which means that it will probably pounce right in the middle of these supercars and hypercars, maybe even further.

I never said this either. I, like everyone else, already expect this.

And if you would had bothered to note my post on previous page, you'd understand how these supercars were able to improve their times. their previous times, just like GT-R's 7'38 was done on the old pavement which is far from ideal. the next time that caused spasm and foaming from other supercar manufacturers was 7'29.. after parts of Nurb got new pavement. You can't ignore that obvious factor.

That's irrelevant. No one can help the fact these times were set on the new pavement. If you want to make a big issue out of this, get every car that ran the 'Ring previously, and run it. Otherwise, don't try to make it as an excuse. No manufacturer, no magazine, no one but the 'Ring's owners could help that the 'Ring needed to be repaved.

 

[Leonidae]

then, what do you consider indicative? 0-60 times? how many siberian tigers had to die for the interior? or is it just the badge? and as far as the tests by magazines tell, it has been beating others in it's class, so it must have something done right.

 

[Tornado]

and as far as the tests by magazines tell, it has been beating others in it's class, so it must have something done right.

That isn't the issue here.

 

[McLaren]

then, what do you consider indicative? 0-60 times? how many siberian tigers had to die for the interior? or is it just the badge? and as far as the tests by magazines tell, it has been beating others in it's class, so it must have something done right.

Yes, on certain tracks like the 'Ring. On other tracks though, it has been beaten by others in class. Is it still doing something right and being the best car, or like every performance car before it, just level & not the king of its class?

 

[Tornado]

Yes, on certain tracks like the 'Ring. On other tracks though, it has been beaten by others in class.

Wait, what? I haven't seen such occurences.

 

[McLaren]

Wait, what? I haven't seen such occurences.

At Vairano, it was easily beaten by the 997 GT2 (they have been compared previously; but I'm positive you know this), and just milliseconds off a F430. A similar outcome was shown at Bedford Autodrome's West Circuit where the 997 GT2 beat it by .10. Noteworthy, it was also beaten by the LP560-4. Autoclub Speedway showed the same results, though the LP was slower by .01. Silverstone was the same.
At Laguna, even though it beat them, the GT-R was only able to outrun the Z06 & Turbo by under or just at a second. The 997 GT3, though, did manage to stay ahead of the GT-R. A little trivia for this course btw, shows the Turbo was faster than a previous GT-R time at one point.
At El Toro, it was beaten by the LP & GT2 again, but this time, it did not quickly dispatch the Z06 & R8.
And at Anglesey national, while not a victory, the GT2 & a GT3 RS just got beat by a second.

Some of these are obviously not wins, but I wouldn't go as far to say the GT-R is the best in its class. I'd say, personally, again, it beats out the competition on some tracks, but on others, it either edges out, ties, or gets beat by them.

 

[Leonidae]

^while being cheaper. and am I wrong if I claim that those tracks prefer power over cornering abilities?

Vairano

Rrriiight.. how about other tracks?

Bedford

Autoclub speedway

Silverstone

I think I made my point. on tracks like this, GT-R is down on power. It does accelerate well for it's weight, but it lacks in straight line performance after 120mph.

 

[Greycap]

You GT-R guys are the same ones who touted it was the best car for the price because it could beat $300,000+ cars. But now that this has been shown otherwise, you all turn your heads, and say, "Meh".

I still do consider it to be the best car for the price, not the outright best car out there but the best in its price class. The fact that it takes $600k supercars to beat it fair and square tells a lot in itself. If it was totally slaughtered by 911 Turbos, Z06 Corvettes and such I would admit that it's not a good car for its price tag but it comes out on top in comparison to those ones and thus my opinion hasn't changed.

I'm not even surprised you came to the GT-R's defense. What's wrong, Grey? Don't have anything to type about how fast & great the GT-R is like you have in the past?

Compare it to cars it competes with and I'll have a lot of arguments about how fast and great it is. Pitting the GT-R against cars such as the MC12 when it comes to track performance only is just as smart as comparing the ride quality of a VW Polo to that of an Audi A8. On the other hand it's a lot more useful as an everyday car and in bad weather, much like the Polo tops the A8 as a downtown driver and as a grocery getter. Apples to oranges, simple as that.

 

[Tornado]

At Vairano, it was easily beaten by the 997 GT2 (they have been compared previously; but I'm positive you know this), and just milliseconds off a F430.

I don't believe that the GT2 is in the same class as the GT-R. LP560? Sure. F430? Yeah. GT3 and 911 Turbo? Yes. Z06? Yup. Audi R8? Of course. But the GT2 is really the next class up. I would say that the GT-R is the best (or near the best) in its class, but the problem is that people look at The 'Ring times and think that it is better/faster/whatever than cars that would completely obliterate the GT-R at other tracks.

 

[MustangSVT]

At Vairano, it was easily beaten by the 997 GT2 (they have been compared previously; but I'm positive you know this), and just milliseconds off a F430. A similar outcome was shown at Bedford Autodrome's West Circuit where the 997 GT2 beat it by .10. Noteworthy, it was also beaten by the LP560-4. Autoclub Speedway showed the same results, though the LP was slower by .01. Silverstone was the same.
At Laguna, even though it beat them, the GT-R was only able to outrun the Z06 & Turbo by under or just at a second. The 997 GT3, though, did manage to stay ahead of the GT-R. A little trivia for this course btw, shows the Turbo was faster than a previous GT-R time at one point.
At El Toro, it was beaten by the LP & GT2 again, but this time, it did not quickly dispatch the Z06 & R8.
And at Anglesey national, while not a victory, the GT2 & a GT3 RS just got beat by a second.

Some of these are obviously not wins, but I wouldn't go as far to say the GT-R is the best in its class. I'd say, personally, again, it beats out the competition on some tracks, but on others, it either edges out, ties, or gets beat by them.

Your own claims show that the GT-R is best in its class. The GT2 is like what, twice the price of the GT-R? F430 is like three times the price. Same would probably go for the LP560.

Again in my opinion, the simple fact that the GT-R is being compared to cars like the GT2, like the LP560, like the F430 (and even F430 Scuderia), just shows how good this car really is. Even if it falls short in some categories or is slower sometimes against all of these cars, I'd say Nissan has done its job very well seeing how much press this car gets. I've only seen 2 on the road here (alberta, canada), but hopefully I'll be seeing more.

 

[McLaren]

^while being cheaper. and am I wrong if I claim that those tracks prefer power over cornering abilities?

I think I made my point. on tracks like this, GT-R is down on power. It does accelerate well for it's weight, but it lacks in straight line performance after 120mph.

Except your point is nullified considering a huge chunk of the 'Ring prefers power over cornering. The test this thread is about averaged Marc at 103Mph. That's pretty fast for many of the corners on this course.

BTW, get the right course before you try to make a point. This is the West Circuit, not the Gran Turismo one.

Vairano's test are also held on the handling course.

Yeah, that track sure looks it's built for speed.

I don't believe that the GT2 is in the same class as the GT-R. LP560? Sure. F430? Yeah. GT3 and 911 Turbo? Yes. Z06? Yup. Audi R8? Of course. But the GT2 is really the next class up. I would say that the GT-R is the best (or near the best) in its class, but the problem is that people look at The 'Ring times and think that it is better/faster/whatever than cars that would completely obliterate the GT-R at other tracks.

If the GT2 isn't in the same class, why the LP560-4? That car alone has already put the GT2 away, yet its comparable to the GT-R, and the GT2 isn't?

I do agree with the last part, however. 👍

Your own claims show that the GT-R is best in its class. The GT2 is like what, twice the price of the GT-R? F430 is like three times the price. Same would probably go for the LP560.

And? Nissan & its loyal fans are the ones who continuously tout it's a better car for the money because it can beat cars in these price ranges. But now that it can't, they're no longer comparable? Hog wash.

 

[Tornado]

If the GT2 isn't in the same class, why the LP560-4?

I don't know.

 

[Dave A]

Are these GT-R "debates" really neccesary every time the car is mentioned. For it's price the GR-R is arguably the fastest mass producded 4 seater car available. End of. If any GT-R fans think it's better than cars that cost 6 times it's price and up so be it, let the be the fools. But likewise anyone that trys to put the GT-R down because it's been beaten by a handfull of far more elite cars despite it regularly displaying the ability compete with cars that are 2-3 times it's price are no better.

Bah! The 750hp version would be blazing on the Ring. The car has enourmous downforce and could fly through the 100mph+ corners with ease. It might even prove slower down the straight than cars like the Enzo because of all the aero drag.

I agree, I can't see any reason why the S7 TT wouldn't be competetive in this company, if it would be the fastest or not is open to debate I can think of arguments for and against the car but I can't see any reason why it should be dismissed.

 

[harrytuttle]

I thought the Enzo couldn't physically go around the 'Ring.[SIZE]

Although they got it to go around on two runs, the electronic suspension packed up both times. It got stuck in some form of "limp home" mode and made driving a bit challenging.

 

[the Interceptor]

What I am missing in this thread is the differentiation between fanatic, blind GT-R followers and simple GT-R fans. I consider myself to belong to the latter group, yet, I'd like not to be considered to belong to the former by others simply because I don't bash the car. Just because I like it I don't have to misjudge its capabilities. Thank you.

 

[niky]

And this simply isn't the thread for this argument.

If you guys want perspective, here it is:

The supercars all performed around mid-7:20s... to put that in proper perspective, an Enzo would likely be a second or two faster than the GT-R on other racetracks, while, may I reiterate, the GT-R has proven even in independent tests with NON-PRESS cars (many UK and owner tests I've read are with private cars or cars directly imported by tuning shops) to be a few tenths slower than a GT2 and from a few tenths to a second or two faster than the 911 Turbo.

The only "non-supercars" proven categorically faster than the GT-R on a "handling" track are the Gallardo LP560-4 Superleggera (much lighter... and personally, i consider it a supercar... fantastic machine), the Viper ACR (which wears DOT-legal R-compounds... sure... but they ARE road-legal) and the 911 GT2 (which is more powerful). And, by dint of the same logic where the GTR "barely" beats its competitors... they "barely" beat the GTR. What's a second or two? Note that some who have driven both the GT2 and the GTR are of the opinion that the GTR handles better, but this may be a difference of rubber and "feel"... others have shown that the GT2 is categorically faster, as long as the track is dry (this factor might be why it hasn't broken 7:30 yet... needs proper conditions). And these impressions go back and forth when you consider GTR testers and private units come in two flavors... Bridgestone and Dunlop, which affects their lap-times greatly.

Handling matters more on the Nurb than top speed, given cars of this class... don't believe me? The Viper ACR is aero-limited at higher speeds... in its record-setting run, it hardly got over 150 mph and never went into 5th gear down the long straight. The Radical is likely similarly handicapped. But these cars have something others don't. Grip and downforce.

Which is where the Maser won the comparo. It was designed with more useable downforce than the other supercars in the bunch. The CCX just didn't count. It was a tuner model, and hopelessly set up... more of a dyno-queen than anything else... maybe a production spec CCX-R could post sub 7:20 times.

That said, given the MC12 is at 7:24, I'd full expect a GT-R to be around 7:30 - 7:35 or thereabouts, with the GT2 a second or two quicker and the 911 Turbo a few seconds slower than the big Nissan, given all other non-manufacturer evidence. This is in the same conditions as the 7:24... since it's October, there may be a few seconds left for a summer run, and the supercars can likely beat 7:20 in optimal conditions.

But now silly season is over... conditions are no longer optimal for testing, and we can expect the same circus next year as Nissan pulls out the V-Spec and attempts a 7:25 in production spec.

Of course, we should expect times to fall even more next year... with the upgraded asphalt in some areas making the Ring a bit more liveable, and the taunting from Nissan making Porsche a bit more livid. I think they're just pissed because they can't get the GT2 under 7:32.

I care about Nurb times because they're a tremendous accomplishment... but the bickering over "cheating" and "impossible" times is just getting old.