- 185
- Los Angeles,
This car was the fastest JDM aside from the R34 Skyline. In game, stock to stock, it beat the R32 Skyline GTR from 0 to top speed and left the FD3 TTs and especially the Z32 TTs in the dust.
I have an overwhelming amount of video and magazine evidence, but it also covers the USDM1994-1999 3000GT VR-4, another car I'd love to see.
Links/Vids:
*Best Motoring* is a famous Japanese television show that’s focuses on Japanese performance cars. *They’re drivers are actual race car drivers that have WON AWARDS* They tested all the performance cars of the era. *In 1994 Mitsubishis 3000GT VR4 beat the R32 Skyline GTR a car that weighs 3100 lbs and dynos 270@whp* ! *And then in 1996, the GTO MR, which is identical to the 2G VR4, with 67 less pounds, bested an R33 Skyline GTR pulling a 12.8 quarter mile* *The 1990 300ZX Twin Turbo got 14.1 to the 1/4m for a TT 2+0 Slicktop, the lightest year*
*The Skyline GTR was the fastest model Nissan made, their Halo car. The J spec VR4 is identical to the USDM version, how would it lose to a 300ZX Twin Turbo which is a much less powerful and heavier car than the Skyline GTRs above? These videos alone prove how much faster the VR4 is*
*1990 to 1993*
1. *Road and Track 1989 300ZX Twin Turbo Debut* http://www.300zx.cl/ga2/300zx2/images/ryt895.jpg *0 to 60 / 6.5s. / 0 to 100 16.5s, quarter mile of 15.0@96mph*
2. *Road and Track 1990 3000GT VR4 Debut* https://www.google.com/imgres?imgur...ubOzvpBK3qrEuS6PU=&docid=t4yeibB8a0bzPM&itg=1
*0 to 60 6.3s / 0 to 100 16.2 / quarter mile 14.5@95.0mph* In Road and Track, the VR4 consistently got more praise and better times
4. http://www.300zx.cl/ga3/300zx3/images/car3005.jpg -
*Car and Driver, 1992, Slide the High Country*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 0 to 60 5.5, quarter mile 14.2@101mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 0 to 60 5.4, quarter mile 14.0@99mph*
Considering the VR4 is 350+ lbs more than the Z, this is a win for the VR4. It also won in handling, the Z pulled .89 and the VR4 .91 in the slalom
5. https://www.caranddriver.com/review...e-stealth-r-t-turbo-archived-comparison-test/ - The 300ZX Twin Turbo won with a faster ET and trap. The Stealth weighed 200 lbs more. *Car and Driver states this is the fastest Z they've ever tested, and can't ever get these numbers again from the Z for over 4 years of testing*
6. http://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/mopar/91_4.html -. 1G VR-4 running to 60mph in 4.89 seconds and the quarter mile in 13.67 ET taken from various road tests, with comparisons to other cars' times.
*1994 to 1999*
1. - *MotorWeek, 1994*
*3000GT VR4 0 - 60 in 4.9 and the quarter mile in 13.5@103mph. MW couldn't get the Z faster than 13.7@103, so the VR4 is 3 to 4 car lengths ahead at the same trap speed*
2. https://www.motortrend.com/news/virtual-velocity/
*MotorTrend 1995 Virtual Velocity*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 13.9@102.0mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 13.5@101.6 mph*
The Z is 4-6 car lengths away and moving .4s mph faster - it physically cannot pass up that much ET difference.
3. -
*Stock 1999 3000GT VR4 quarter mile of 13.2@102.7* This is a thoroughly stock car. It took him over a month to get the launch down.
4. http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt10.jpg -
*Road and Track 1994 The 300 HP Club*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 14.4@99.7mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 14.2@99.0 mph*
Another instance of the VR4 being too far ahead for the Z to catch up to with under a single mph. *It lost by 2 SECONDS around a track to the VR4* http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt07.jpg
5. https://www.motortrend.com/news/mitsubishi-3000gt-vr4/ -
The launch was bad for both the Supra TT and VR4, *yet the VR4 did 0-60 in 4.8s* and tied the Supra TT in the 1/4m @ 13.6s, with the Supra trapping substantially higher (Obviously).
6. https://archiv.3000gt.org/viewtopic.php?t=2582 –
*Popular Mechanics 1999 Acceleration Nation*
*1999 3000GT VR-4 - 0 to 60 in 5.00s, 1/4m in 13.44s @ 101.79mph*
They could have had a better launch, but who cares, no 300ZX Twin Turbo is pulling a 13.4 ET without bolt ons and definitely slick rubber.
7. Seems the Z32 isn't all it's shaped up to be, it lost to a 250HP Corvette by a SECOND around a track and ran identical numbers. QUOTE: *When all was said and done, the Cor¬vette turned laps in the one-minute 38-second range, at an average speed of 64 mph, while the Nissan was almost a second per lap slower. "No big deal," you're saying? On the contrary. It is a big deal in a two-hour race. Far more important, the Corvette—with its hip-hugging seats, smooth power delivery, and neutral handling—is far easier to drive for long peri¬ods at those speeds. To put the Cor¬vette's racetrack prowess into per¬spective, remember that the big V-8 produces 50 fewer horsepower than the twin-turbo terror* (LOL) https://www.caranddriver.com/review...fx3-vs-nissan-300zx-archived-comparison-test/ http://www.300zx.cl/ga2/300zx/images/cvsg4.jpg - *300ZX Twin Turbo - 0 to 60mph 5.6, 0 to 100mph 16.3, quarter mile in 14.6@96mph*
*Car and Driver never got this slow of a time in a 1G VR4 or Stealth Twin Turbo*
8. Publications notice the VR4 being markedly faster than the 300ZX Twin Turbo.
*Since 1996, it became 320 hp and 315 lbft. It feels decisively more punchy than the contemporary 300ZX turbo yet without adding turbo lag* -AutoZine Magazine https://www.autozine.org/Archive/Mitsubishi/old/GTO.html
9. Wikipedia states that the 2G VR4 is faster. *The new 6-speed, while notchy, was geared well and the extra horsepower and torque allowed it to out-accelerate most of its' rivals from a standing start to top speed. Road tests at the time showed the second generation 3000GT VR-4 to be capable of 60 mph (97 km/h) in 4.8 - 5.4 seconds[18] and the quarter mile in 13.5 seconds at 101 to 105 miles per hour (163 to 169 km/h), making it faster in a straight line than the Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo and Mazda RX-7 Twin Turbo.[19][2][20]* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_GTO Wikipedia has to have sources to prove the above to be true, or it gets taken down.
10. *Where are all the stock Z’s running mid 13s stock? It never tested below a 13.7 ET with a professional driver* The proof is overwhelming - after 1994, the Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo couldn't touch the Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4.The 1994-2001 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4, with it’s 320HP and 315TQ, is faster than any version of the 1990-1999 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo, including earlier models that were slightly lighter.
11. https://www.modernracer.com/mitsubishi3000gtvr4 -. This site averages out *every single time recorded for each car*
*The 2G VR-4 got a 13.5@105.0. Yes, the VR-4 traps higher than the Z most of the time*
12. The gear ratios are better in the VR-4 and the Z32 TT *cannot physically pass the VR4 after the brutal AWD launch that leaves the ZX flailing and two car lengths behind at 150mph.
*Ratios, 1990-1996 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo: 40/67/100/130/155 (OD), 3.69:1 final ratio*
*Ratios, 1994-1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4: 40/69/106/143/155/159 (OD), 3.87:1 final ratio*
As anyone can guess, the VR-4 holds more boost and for longer. *The VR-4 has 12.5 PSI, the Z only holds 9.5 PSI* To top it off, the Z when stock doesn’t hold boost for long and it drops off before redline; the VR-4 holds boost from 3K-RPM to redline at 6.5K on the tach. Redline shifts on the VR4 make sure it stays in boost, the Z again starts to lose boost at 6,000-RPM, 400 RPM before it’s at it’s 6.4K Redline.
Sources: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.zc...ion-forum/164530-300zx-stock-boost.html?amp=1
https://www.nissanforums.com/threads/300zx-tt-stock-boost.65627/
http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt08.jpg
*The proof is OVERWHELMING that the 1994-2001 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 is faster than the 1989-1998 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo stock for stock, and that goes for any model Z, Slicktop to T-Top to 2+2*
I have an overwhelming amount of video and magazine evidence, but it also covers the USDM1994-1999 3000GT VR-4, another car I'd love to see.
Links/Vids:
*Best Motoring* is a famous Japanese television show that’s focuses on Japanese performance cars. *They’re drivers are actual race car drivers that have WON AWARDS* They tested all the performance cars of the era. *In 1994 Mitsubishis 3000GT VR4 beat the R32 Skyline GTR a car that weighs 3100 lbs and dynos 270@whp* ! *And then in 1996, the GTO MR, which is identical to the 2G VR4, with 67 less pounds, bested an R33 Skyline GTR pulling a 12.8 quarter mile* *The 1990 300ZX Twin Turbo got 14.1 to the 1/4m for a TT 2+0 Slicktop, the lightest year*
*The Skyline GTR was the fastest model Nissan made, their Halo car. The J spec VR4 is identical to the USDM version, how would it lose to a 300ZX Twin Turbo which is a much less powerful and heavier car than the Skyline GTRs above? These videos alone prove how much faster the VR4 is*
*1990 to 1993*
1. *Road and Track 1989 300ZX Twin Turbo Debut* http://www.300zx.cl/ga2/300zx2/images/ryt895.jpg *0 to 60 / 6.5s. / 0 to 100 16.5s, quarter mile of 15.0@96mph*
2. *Road and Track 1990 3000GT VR4 Debut* https://www.google.com/imgres?imgur...ubOzvpBK3qrEuS6PU=&docid=t4yeibB8a0bzPM&itg=1
*0 to 60 6.3s / 0 to 100 16.2 / quarter mile 14.5@95.0mph* In Road and Track, the VR4 consistently got more praise and better times
4. http://www.300zx.cl/ga3/300zx3/images/car3005.jpg -
*Car and Driver, 1992, Slide the High Country*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 0 to 60 5.5, quarter mile 14.2@101mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 0 to 60 5.4, quarter mile 14.0@99mph*
Considering the VR4 is 350+ lbs more than the Z, this is a win for the VR4. It also won in handling, the Z pulled .89 and the VR4 .91 in the slalom
5. https://www.caranddriver.com/review...e-stealth-r-t-turbo-archived-comparison-test/ - The 300ZX Twin Turbo won with a faster ET and trap. The Stealth weighed 200 lbs more. *Car and Driver states this is the fastest Z they've ever tested, and can't ever get these numbers again from the Z for over 4 years of testing*
6. http://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/mopar/91_4.html -. 1G VR-4 running to 60mph in 4.89 seconds and the quarter mile in 13.67 ET taken from various road tests, with comparisons to other cars' times.
*1994 to 1999*
1. - *MotorWeek, 1994*
*3000GT VR4 0 - 60 in 4.9 and the quarter mile in 13.5@103mph. MW couldn't get the Z faster than 13.7@103, so the VR4 is 3 to 4 car lengths ahead at the same trap speed*
2. https://www.motortrend.com/news/virtual-velocity/
*MotorTrend 1995 Virtual Velocity*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 13.9@102.0mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 13.5@101.6 mph*
The Z is 4-6 car lengths away and moving .4s mph faster - it physically cannot pass up that much ET difference.
3. -
*Stock 1999 3000GT VR4 quarter mile of 13.2@102.7* This is a thoroughly stock car. It took him over a month to get the launch down.
4. http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt10.jpg -
*Road and Track 1994 The 300 HP Club*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 14.4@99.7mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 14.2@99.0 mph*
Another instance of the VR4 being too far ahead for the Z to catch up to with under a single mph. *It lost by 2 SECONDS around a track to the VR4* http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt07.jpg
5. https://www.motortrend.com/news/mitsubishi-3000gt-vr4/ -
The launch was bad for both the Supra TT and VR4, *yet the VR4 did 0-60 in 4.8s* and tied the Supra TT in the 1/4m @ 13.6s, with the Supra trapping substantially higher (Obviously).
6. https://archiv.3000gt.org/viewtopic.php?t=2582 –
*Popular Mechanics 1999 Acceleration Nation*
*1999 3000GT VR-4 - 0 to 60 in 5.00s, 1/4m in 13.44s @ 101.79mph*
They could have had a better launch, but who cares, no 300ZX Twin Turbo is pulling a 13.4 ET without bolt ons and definitely slick rubber.
7. Seems the Z32 isn't all it's shaped up to be, it lost to a 250HP Corvette by a SECOND around a track and ran identical numbers. QUOTE: *When all was said and done, the Cor¬vette turned laps in the one-minute 38-second range, at an average speed of 64 mph, while the Nissan was almost a second per lap slower. "No big deal," you're saying? On the contrary. It is a big deal in a two-hour race. Far more important, the Corvette—with its hip-hugging seats, smooth power delivery, and neutral handling—is far easier to drive for long peri¬ods at those speeds. To put the Cor¬vette's racetrack prowess into per¬spective, remember that the big V-8 produces 50 fewer horsepower than the twin-turbo terror* (LOL) https://www.caranddriver.com/review...fx3-vs-nissan-300zx-archived-comparison-test/ http://www.300zx.cl/ga2/300zx/images/cvsg4.jpg - *300ZX Twin Turbo - 0 to 60mph 5.6, 0 to 100mph 16.3, quarter mile in 14.6@96mph*
*Car and Driver never got this slow of a time in a 1G VR4 or Stealth Twin Turbo*
8. Publications notice the VR4 being markedly faster than the 300ZX Twin Turbo.
*Since 1996, it became 320 hp and 315 lbft. It feels decisively more punchy than the contemporary 300ZX turbo yet without adding turbo lag* -AutoZine Magazine https://www.autozine.org/Archive/Mitsubishi/old/GTO.html
9. Wikipedia states that the 2G VR4 is faster. *The new 6-speed, while notchy, was geared well and the extra horsepower and torque allowed it to out-accelerate most of its' rivals from a standing start to top speed. Road tests at the time showed the second generation 3000GT VR-4 to be capable of 60 mph (97 km/h) in 4.8 - 5.4 seconds[18] and the quarter mile in 13.5 seconds at 101 to 105 miles per hour (163 to 169 km/h), making it faster in a straight line than the Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo and Mazda RX-7 Twin Turbo.[19][2][20]* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_GTO Wikipedia has to have sources to prove the above to be true, or it gets taken down.
10. *Where are all the stock Z’s running mid 13s stock? It never tested below a 13.7 ET with a professional driver* The proof is overwhelming - after 1994, the Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo couldn't touch the Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4.The 1994-2001 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4, with it’s 320HP and 315TQ, is faster than any version of the 1990-1999 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo, including earlier models that were slightly lighter.
11. https://www.modernracer.com/mitsubishi3000gtvr4 -. This site averages out *every single time recorded for each car*
*The 2G VR-4 got a 13.5@105.0. Yes, the VR-4 traps higher than the Z most of the time*
12. The gear ratios are better in the VR-4 and the Z32 TT *cannot physically pass the VR4 after the brutal AWD launch that leaves the ZX flailing and two car lengths behind at 150mph.
*Ratios, 1990-1996 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo: 40/67/100/130/155 (OD), 3.69:1 final ratio*
*Ratios, 1994-1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4: 40/69/106/143/155/159 (OD), 3.87:1 final ratio*
As anyone can guess, the VR-4 holds more boost and for longer. *The VR-4 has 12.5 PSI, the Z only holds 9.5 PSI* To top it off, the Z when stock doesn’t hold boost for long and it drops off before redline; the VR-4 holds boost from 3K-RPM to redline at 6.5K on the tach. Redline shifts on the VR4 make sure it stays in boost, the Z again starts to lose boost at 6,000-RPM, 400 RPM before it’s at it’s 6.4K Redline.
Sources: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.zc...ion-forum/164530-300zx-stock-boost.html?amp=1
https://www.nissanforums.com/threads/300zx-tt-stock-boost.65627/
http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt08.jpg
*The proof is OVERWHELMING that the 1994-2001 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 is faster than the 1989-1998 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo stock for stock, and that goes for any model Z, Slicktop to T-Top to 2+2*