# NEW TARGET FOR THE GT-R



## the King (Sep 23, 2007)

*NEW UPDATE:*

New GT-R now sets its sight on the times of the Carrera GT :bowdown1: The 991 TT is no longer its target, having being surpassed by a wide margin. Reports have the GT-R running lower than a 7:35.:chuckle: 
This is not far off from the 7:28 of the Carrera GT. There were wet patches on the track on the GT-Rs last run. They will attempt another assault at the record::flame: 
For more check:
Nissan GT-R Clearest Shots Yet


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

OMG, but anyway I need this number official confermation or else I'll take this info as a grain of salt














































Partly interior revealed 



















The shape looks much more clear now even though the black cover is there, revealing something?

This shapes to be a good car non the less, love it 













Stop clocks, could this mean 7:35 as the article said?


----------



## andreasgtr (Jul 2, 2003)

Holy jesus, these tires are nowhere near road legal.
they look like designer tires from the motor show.
And wow, that car looks fat and agressive. I like it a lot.


----------



## shane 01782 (Feb 22, 2006)

does anyone know a list of the fastest laps by which cars


----------



## andreasgtr (Jul 2, 2003)

I could post the latest list of the "sport auto" Supertest.
A very complex testing on a high professional level.

Or you look here:

Sport-Auto Tuning + Zubehör Supertest-Liste ist online

* means updated
** means : With sport tires


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

I predicted this in THIS thread and was largely laughed at. 

All who laughed at me can Fk off.


----------



## Mookistar (Feb 5, 2004)

is he lapping in reverse?


----------



## andreasgtr (Jul 2, 2003)

You know we drive the other side of the road...and he didn't realise it then.


@ bonzelite: if you call that being laughed at, do a search for sixspeed's threads 
I was reading it as a friendly discussion with different opinions. Quite common on such boards don't you think so?


----------



## GTR RGT (Aug 29, 2006)

bonzelite said:


> I predicted this in THIS thread and was largely laughed at.
> 
> All who laughed at me can Fk off.


lmao


----------



## NickTO (Sep 26, 2007)

andreasgtr said:


> Holy jesus, these tires are nowhere near road legal.
> they look like designer tires from the motor show.
> And wow, that car looks fat and agressive. I like it a lot.


What? 

Look at the tread on the front tire: 










Then look at the tread on this product picture:










The tires appear to be DOT street legal , and 'soon to be' Original Equipment Potenza RE070 that will be fitted on the car at the dealer...


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

When the issue of "tires this, tires that" is pulled out, it indicates an insecurity and denial in the one raising the issue. The GT-R must somehow, in some manner, always be denied or dismissed. It just can not be so that the GT-R is for real. 

The GT-R will absolutely _destroy the 997tt_ with or without designer tires.


----------



## DCD (Jun 28, 2001)

Same tyres as sed on the Honda NSX-R and GDB Impreza WRX STi, albeit not RF. Compound might be different but exactly makes these not road legal? Have you seen the tyres Porsche GT3's and BMW M3 CSL's run?


----------



## andreasgtr (Jul 2, 2003)

Right Dino, some of them can't be used to drive in the wet.
All I was saying is that the tread looks strange in the picture. Like tyres look at motor shows.
And bonzelite... who's saying I'm denieing the GTR??? Just the tyres look strange to me. 
Man you act like you designed the GTR...calm down man.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Sorry, I've just heard the tires bit so many times now as an instrument of avoidance. I will err on the side of I jumped the gun about your post and took it too far. I've taken several sleeping pills and had a few shots of whiskey. So I am chill now.


----------



## Godspd (Dec 12, 2001)

I don't know if the times are pure speculations or in fact the real coming of god...either way I am excited!!!:squintdan


----------



## bazooqa (Jan 22, 2006)

If thats true the Impier of the kings will be making its true come back!


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

Doesn't anyone find it odd that the car has performed countless beauty parades on the ring but, unlike every other manufacturer, there has not been any confirmed times to cement the rumour mill?


----------



## Philip (Jan 17, 2002)

Not really.

Phil


----------



## tekknikal (Sep 22, 2007)

Blow Dog said:


> Doesn't anyone find it odd that the car has performed countless beauty parades on the ring but, unlike every other manufacturer, there has not been any confirmed times to cement the rumour mill?


nissan is timing it but they're not ready to release times yet. so, even if they did turn it over to someone else to independently test, that other party wouldn't be allowed to discuss it. 

as far as others timing it goes, sure people have stopwatches.. that's where we got word of a 7'38 time from.


----------



## Shin (Jul 4, 2001)

I've "heard" that Lexus LF-A timed 7'20ish...


----------



## Redlineash (Jul 16, 2007)

*LFA - 7:20*

Now that sounds very quick for a car that, last time I "heard", didnt weigh much less than a GTR, with about the same BHP.

I know nothing about 'Ring lap times but that seems a touch optimistic unless its got some technological ace-card up its sleeve. 

Perhaps it did a 7:20 with the Toyota F1 engine in it... 

As an aside does anyone know what a Nismo R34 Z-Tune laps the 'Ring in? Im guessing that the new GTR wont be able to match a Z-Tune straight out of the box given the huge efforts that Nismo went to on that car?


----------



## psd1 (May 15, 2004)

Blow Dog said:


> Doesn't anyone find it odd that the car has performed countless beauty parades on the ring but, unlike every other manufacturer, there has not been any confirmed times to cement the rumour mill?


I dont think it's strange at all. For one we are dealing with the Japanese who operate differently than most folks when it comes to this stuff, secondly if they are still tweaking on the car why would they release it before it's a solid fact based lap and third...where would all the suspense be for it's world debut?:smokin: 

See ya


----------



## MeLLoN Stu (Jun 9, 2005)

Blow Dog said:


> Doesn't anyone find it odd that the car has performed countless beauty parades on the ring but, unlike every other manufacturer, there has not been any confirmed times to cement the rumour mill?


Very, which is while I'll remain sceptical until someone times a proper lap with a standard production car.


----------



## Guy (Jun 27, 2001)

There's only one time that counts and thats when Sport Auto magazine finally test the car themselves with Horst Von Saurna driving, other than that the other times from press/websites/manufacturers etc are all just 'interesting, but not fact'.

None of the R32-R34 was ever tested by SportAuto, who are the definitive testers on the ring ie same track length/same driver for every test they've ever done.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Edmunds, an independent source, timed it at 7:38. That already supercedes the 997 by 2 seconds. 2 seconds is acres of time on a Nurburgring time attack trial. Those are hard-won seconds. Yet the skepticism is as robust as ever. 

Had this been reversed, with a new model of Porsche beating it's own record by 2 seconds, this would have been loudly heralded in a fanfare as a fantastic celebration and confirmation of supremacy. 

To then take an elevator up to the Carrera GT-level of GT-R time attack (which was most likely the engineering goal the whole time and not just something Nissan "just decided to do at the last minute") is then questioned and made to be something to have contempt for. 

The rationale of skeptics must be that:

1) Nissan is a liar
2) Outside sources are a liar
3) every lap time is a lie and cannot be proven no matter who has taken the time or from what source or mode of measuring
4) special tires have made the lap times possible but nothing else, the car itself is lacking


----------



## mifn21 (Mar 19, 2007)

It doesn't matter what they timed it at, the only credible lap time will be when a standard dealer-supplied etc car goes round there

As Guy said, when Sport Auto test it, then we'll know for sure


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

bonzelite said:


> Edmunds, an independent source, timed it at 7:38. That already supercedes the 997 by 2 seconds. 2 seconds is acres of time on a Nurburgring time attack trial. Those are hard-won seconds. Yet the skepticism is as robust as ever.
> 
> Had this been reversed, with a new model of Porsche beating it's own record by 2 seconds, this would have been loudly heralded in a fanfare as a fantastic celebration and confirmation of supremacy.
> 
> ...


LOL I kinda like what you said here


----------



## JapFreak786 (Aug 29, 2003)

when were the lap times of the pre-production R32,R33 and R34's released,before or after release?


----------



## Zakira (May 5, 2007)

bonzelite said:


> Edmunds, an independent source, timed it at 7:38. That already supercedes the 997 by 2 seconds. 2 seconds is acres of time on a Nurburgring time attack trial. Those are hard-won seconds. Yet the skepticism is as robust as ever.
> 
> Had this been reversed, with a new model of Porsche beating it's own record by 2 seconds, this would have been loudly heralded in a fanfare as a fantastic celebration and confirmation of supremacy.
> 
> ...


Hey Bonz, don't forget the other "favorite" excuse:

5) Nurburgring lap time doesn't "matter" :chuckle: 


Sorry guys, this is like an inside joke from nagtroc. Sorry.


----------



## MeLLoN Stu (Jun 9, 2005)

bonzelite said:


> The rationale of skeptics must be that:


Either that or rather than appear as die hard fans of something they've barely seen, who believe it'll be the fastest car on the planet, we're just happy to sit on the fence until a post-release road model is able to produce a time like that? 

Until then I'm very much looking forward to seeing it and potentially owning one but I just don't see the point of all this speculative hype until it's in a production car, post release.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

MeLLoN Stu said:


> Either that or rather than appear as die hard fans of something they've barely seen, who believe it'll be the fastest car on the planet, we're just happy to sit on the fence until a post-release road model is able to produce a time like that?
> 
> Until then I'm very much looking forward to seeing it and potentially owning one but I just don't see the point of all this speculative hype until it's in a production car, post release.


The cool and collected veneer of sophistication of sitting back and having the "it's no biggie, we are chill and aloof" schtick is exactly the dismissing and marginalizing tonality of the crowd who --_when at long last, after the "real" times and the "real production" cars are assessed-- *will STILL deny and remain cold and prickly and "too cool"*, with their flesh as warm as a corpse, as contrarian as a nagging mother-in-law._

And the Nurburgring times matter a great deal when the hi-brow elitists discuss Ferraris and Porsches _--but wait--_ these times suddenly "don't really matter much" when discussing a GT-R! 

Isn't that peculiar?


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

Nurburgring time is VERY important. Nurburging is a naturel track close with similarity to a normal road we drive everyday (at least me in Norway). How well a road car do at the Nurgburgring is the ultimate proof of how well that car is built as a high end performer. Those who say that Nurburgring time is not important or doesn't matter for a production high end performance road car is a fecking idiot, sorry for the straightness!


----------



## skyline69_uk (Jan 6, 2005)

I'm sure most have seen the new website and some other articles here

Nissan GT-R Official Global Site

Nissan GT-R Japanese pricing announced; 'Ring runs continue | Car News Blog at Motor Trend

More Details, New Images of 2009 Nissan GT-R


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

bonzelite said:


> The cool and collected veneer of sophistication of sitting back and having the "it's no biggie, we are chill and aloof" schtick is exactly the dismissing and marginalizing tonality of the crowd who --_when at long last, after the "real" times and the "real production" cars are assessed-- *will STILL deny and remain cold and prickly and "too cool"*, with their flesh as warm as a corpse, as contrarian as a nagging mother-in-law._
> 
> And the Nurburgring times matter a great deal when the hi-brow elitists discuss Ferraris and Porsches _--but wait--_ these times suddenly "don't really matter much" when discussing a GT-R!
> 
> Isn't that peculiar?


Without turning this into a match of wits, do you not find it peculiar to be championing a car you know nothing about?

There's no questioning the loyalty of those on this site, most are current or previous owners of GTR's. The huge difference you seem so keen to dismiss is that when owners of Ferrari's or Porsches discuss Nurburgring times, it's normally as a result of a publicly announced figure that can be classed as official! Not some speculative figures bandied about on internet forums accompanied by the odd photo of a stopwatch on tarmac of a racetrack!

I digress, there may come a time where the figures are realised, but until then we can ONLY treat them with speculation and limited cynicism. Nissan are known for the massive hype machine that they are and the absurd fact that the car is still being tested on the ring with the ridiculous car bra is tantamount to the fact that Nissan are kings of titilation and they enjoy the fact that we, as proud supporters and loyal subjects, are keen to discuss and aid the hype machine in the name of marketing excellence.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Blow Dog said:


> Without turning this into a match of wits, do you not find it peculiar to be championing a car you know nothing about?
> 
> There's no questioning the loyalty of those on this site, most are current or previous owners of GTR's. The huge difference you seem so keen to dismiss is that when owners of Ferrari's or Porsches discuss Nurburgring times, it's normally as a result of a publicly announced figure that can be classed as official! Not some speculative figures bandied about on internet forums accompanied by the odd photo of a stopwatch on tarmac of a racetrack!
> 
> I digress, there may come a time where the figures are realised, but until then we can ONLY treat them with speculation and limited cynicism. Nissan are known for the massive hype machine that they are and the absurd fact that the car is still being tested on the ring with the ridiculous car bra is tantamount to the fact that Nissan are kings of titilation and they enjoy the fact that we, as proud supporters and loyal subjects, are keen to discuss and aid the hype machine in the name of marketing excellence.


Look, darling, the subsequent times that will be given will as well be dismissed, discredited, and otherwise undermined. That is part of the whole point! :chuckle: 

Here is a recap of the philosophy among us:

1) Nissan is a liar
2) Outside sources are a liar
3) Every lap time is a lie and cannot be proven no matter who has taken the time or from what source or mode of measuring
4) Special tires have made the lap times possible but nothing else, the car itself is lacking


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

I kind of a little bit agree with bonzelite that some here is being a bit unnecessary pessimistic but let me say that being too optimistic is not good either.

Speculation is speculation but we have to try to stay realistic and logical, how can we do that? Well as we've known for months that the new GTR is targeting the new 911 Turbo. We've seen video examples of the new GTR seemly being sharper and a bit quicker then the 911 Turbo in the performance. NOW that we know the fact that the new 911 Turbo does 7:40 at the Nurgburgring. Tell me then from a logical view point, "why the fowk does 7:38 seems so unbelievable for some?" Speculation? Yeah in some degree for sure but for some it's easy to use "the word speculation" as an cover for being negative, pessimistic and a hypocrite.

My opinion try to stay logical, realistic and look beyond your bias for once, this is too all that argues on this thread.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

GTRJack said:


> I kind of a little bit agree with bonzelite that some here is being a bit unnecessary pessimistic but let me say that being too optimistic is not good either.
> 
> Speculation is speculation but we have to try to stay realistic and logical, how can we do that? Well as we've known for months that the new GTR is targeting the new 911 Turbo. We've seen video examples of the new GTR seemly being sharper and a bit quicker then the 911 Turbo in the performance. NOW that we know the fact that the new 911 Turbo does 7:40 at the Nurgburgring. Tell me then from a logical view point, "why the fowk does 7:38 seems so unbelievable for some?" Speculation? Yeah in some degree for sure but for some it's easy to use "the word speculation" as an cover for being negative, pessimistic and a hypocrite.
> 
> My opinion try to stay logical, realistic and look beyond your bias for once, this is too all that argues on this thread.


Yes, indeed, Jack, you have a voice of reason. And I will tell you EXACTLY why "2 seconds" seems so "unbelievable" -----> German sports car bias. Simple as that. 

The 2 seconds better, had it been reversed in favor of Porsche (as stated earlier), would have been met with cigars, wine, women, and song in the exclusive inner sanctum of the Posche-phile congnoscenti circle, drunk with arrogant sophistication at the country-club. 

This is why "2 seconds," _despite how actually noteworthy this time is for the Nurburgring,_ is being _denied_. 

Wait until the GT-R nears or exceeds the Carrera GT ---this is when the mocking and jeering will _worsen and become highly exaggerated in the press and popular culture circles of motorsport._ The ruthless aloofness and dismissals of naysayers has barely begun! 

:chuckle:


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

My thought is that I just don't understand the sceptism from some. This is a GTR site and I think that people should be open minded and enthusiatic about this car- a little bit of speculation doesn't hurt. We should be happy for what Nissan is trying to make.

In terms of bank for buck performance I have no doubt that this car would do good but saying it will beat the Carrera GT is way over the line of being optimistic; close or not, we shall see.


----------



## andreasgtr (Jul 2, 2003)

Well spoken Mr Blowdog exactly what I'm thinking at the moment.


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

If the Nissan GT-R really is that close to matching the Carrera GT time on the Nurburgring what is the point of even thinking about buying it 
I wonder what is going to happen in the tuning world for the car. That is where my focus is not being stock but being modified. Sooner or later it will get to the point of being heavily modified like the old ones best believe that. I seriously can't see top companies like HKS, Tomei etc not making parts for the car. But as everything else....time will tell all.


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

That means if it was 4 seconds off the Carrera GT time then that means it can almost BEAT a Pagani Zonda F!


----------



## AndrewD (Jan 25, 2006)

Why would you want to modify the car further anyway? What do you think you could do better than a team of professionals?


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

the main problem is hacking into the goddam computers these days. Someone would have to create a standalone ECU that could handle all the OBD-II crap, the fly-by-wire everything, the transmission shifting, as well as fueling, ignition, and boost maps. We're talking a whole nother realm of complex beyond a simple 16bit Power FC. Parts is easy. Engine parts haven't changed much in ages. Its the computer control that's the problem. Getting everything to work together is hard enough on an ancient straight six design like the RB, where a tuner controls an honestly small amount by software (injectors, ignition, and boost solenoid, maybe a couple electric fans). New-wave tuning won't just be mapping, they'll have to sync computer-controlled compenents together. I'm sure it can be done. Just not by me


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

I guess...But regardless if it is "perfect" in most peoples eyes it is a heavy car. It isn't the fastest thing on the streets and it won't take much power for the old GT-Rs to beat it plain and simple. What is the point of having a bigger more powerful engine and you can't use it. Everyone knows 480ps won't be enough to last forever. I am sure someone will come out with aftermarket support for the car if it is basic to the most extreme and wild. It may be 6 months from release date to 4 years from now but it will happen.


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

I guess it looks to be like tuners have to start to hire computer geek squad


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

GTRJack said:


> I guess it looks to be like tuners have to start to hire computer geek squad


It will have to be that way. Think about it....a stock GT-R besides upgraded wheels? driving around a stock GT-R for the next 5 years or whenever the next GT-R comes out and that car won't even be able to be tuned at all because it is even more technologically advance is rediculous. I just can't wait to see the car. I want to know how that thing sounds! Japan is going to go crazy for it. A geez and to think it will be open to the world  Well there goes the TRUE exclusive feel :chuckle:


----------



## andreasgtr (Jul 2, 2003)

King Nismo said:


> Well there goes the TRUE exclusive feel :chuckle:


Yep, now every little fecker will know about the GTR.
And imagine the 'discussions' between GTR- owners and the real "Nissan Skyline" ownersopcorn: 

"ahh hi mate, I see you're still driving 'round with the old thing?!"
...


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

Exactly...The entire first reason that turned me on to skylines was that it was never sold world wide...now this hunk of sh!t will be in the coming months...ha! I can see it already in the USA. Rich bastards with NO knowledge of its history at all will buy it...think they are they sh!t and a bag a chips. So if it can't be modified that makes it better for me to blow them away at a traffic light. All well ends well and I can sleep at night :chuckle: :smokin:


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

King Nismo said:


> If the Nissan GT-R really is that close to matching the Carrera GT time on the Nurburgring what is the point of even thinking about buying it


WTF?! Who in phek instilled this into you? "If it's close to the CGT time, what is the point of buying it." That's about the dumbest and most reversed-psychological naysaying I've ever heard yet!! 




> I wonder what is going to happen in the tuning world for the car. That is where my focus is not being stock but being modified. Sooner or later it will get to the point of being heavily modified like the old ones best believe that. I seriously can't see top companies like HKS, Tomei etc not making parts for the car. But as everything else....time will tell all.


???? And this is to the detriment of the GT-R?! wahahahahahahahahaha!! 

So you _do entertain_ the possibility of a CGT time from the GT-R, but this is used to bash the car anyway! Unreal!

So we must update the list!!

here is the latest update:


1) Nissan is a liar
2) Outside sources are a liar
3) Every lap time is a lie and cannot be proven no matter who has taken the time or from what source or mode of measuring
4) Special tires have made the lap times possible but nothing else, the car itself is lacking
*5) Is pointless to buy it because GT-R has proven to overtake the Carrera GT and modification is discouraged; renders GT-R undesirable.*


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

^^ I think you should take it a little bit easy here buddy. I don't think he's being negative to this new GTR, he just has a different philosophy and perspective in this matter saying there's too much technology into the new cars today it makes them diffecult to high end tune them.

Please calm down buddy, this thread is fine so far as we don't want it to cook over..


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

bonzelite LOL. when I said whats the point of buying it I meant the CARRERA GT! Not the GT-R.


----------



## DCD (Jun 28, 2001)

Let's keep this civilized gents


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

GTRJack said:


> ^^ I think you should take it a little bit easy here buddy. I don't think he's being negative to this new GTR, he just has a different philosophy and perspective in this matter saying there's too much technology into the new cars today it makes them diffecult to high end tune them.
> 
> Please calm down buddy, this thread is fine so far as we don't want it to cook over..


Yes exactly! I am not bashing the car even though I am not the biggest fan of it. But the GT-R most go on. I should have made myself more clear on what I meant by that. I myself was thinking of a true to the bone supercar one day in the near future. But as I said...what is the point of buying it when it is close to the Carrera GTs time. $330,000+ USD for a Porsche that was almost beaten by a Nissan isn't something I would like to hear when putting out that kind of money for a car. I guess my dreams of having a real supercar one day are crushed due to this new beast. Still no godzilla but it works for me. If the aftermarket support is strong for it one day I probably will settle for it. And to think Nissan is having something come out to target the GT2 isn't something to I wouldn't love to see. But at this point in the game...if the GT-R is so close to the CGT time....I am sure the 08 GT2 can beat the Carrera GT. Until 9ff puts the 1000bhp twins on there but even then whats the point of that? You will never take it to its top speed plus the fact you won't have traction at all. The car has poor traction in my opinion already and a extra 300bhp won't help. LOL Bonzelite take no offense! I am not talking bad on the new GT-R but I still stand behind the 2nd generation GT-R's and I am sure everyone on the forums will agree with me :smokin: I just can't wait to see it thats all...see if it performance matches its looks.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

King Nismo said:


> Exactly...The entire first reason that turned me on to skylines was that it was never sold world wide...now this hunk of sh!t will be in the coming months...ha! I can see it already in the USA. Rich bastards with NO knowledge of its history at all will buy it...think they are they sh!t and a bag a chips. So if it can't be modified that makes it better for me to blow them away at a traffic light. All well ends well and I can sleep at night :chuckle: :smokin:


I guess I misunderstood your sarcasm and the way you phrased buying it. To me you say "hunk of sh!t" and "what is the point of buying it" in context of the car being undesirable due to it's growing complexity and generally upped performance in terms of it being a negative, ie, the "tuning fun" is all over. It's already "tuned." So "what is the point of buying it." 

Sorry that I'm totally reading this incorrectly, then! 

This:

"If the Nissan GT-R really is that close to matching the Carrera GT time on the Nurburgring what is the point of even thinking about buying it" was not clear, then, as to which car is pointless to buy, as the GT-R is a "hunk of sh!t." 

and this:

"I wonder what is going to happen in the tuning world for the car. That is where my focus is not being stock but being modified. Sooner or later it will get to the point of being heavily modified like the old ones best believe that" --is not pejorative?

You want to modify it or you do not want to modify it? 

AndrewD then replies thusly:
"Why would you want to modify the car further anyway? What do you think you could do better than a team of professionals?" --as he, too, feels that you are talking negatively about the GT-R. Yes? or no? 

------

Anyway....sorry for the misunderstanding, then! 

I still come off not understanding whether you like or dislike the car  ; my apologies, matey!


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

lol no harm. It is like a good day and a bad day with this car in my opinion. So days I hate it some days I like it. I hate it because it is newer, more refined, no RB, going to be sold worldwide, Can't be tuned like the old GT-Rs. the list goes on and on. I like the car because it is newer (same reason why I hate it) Bigger engine displacement, looks somewhat better (on a good day) seems faster but for how long against a BPU R32~R34 GT-R and this list goes on and on. Like I said...the main reason why I got a GT-R was because it was a car not just anyone can go pick up when they get ready to. You have to know who, how, when, where to get it. But take no harm to my words I am a down to the bone 2nd gen GT-R purist thats all and knowing it could stomp out the old GT-R flames because it is "newer" and "fast as a bullet" pisses me off more than anything. I take it somewhat personal, I waited over 5 years to get my 34 and when I finally get it this things just tries and takes its shine so thats why I come off sometimes as a jerk when it comes to this car. I hate it and love it at the same time which is really hard to live with. I will soon see if it lives up to the old GT-Rs the feeling I got when I first saw a GT-R. If it doesn't then it doesn't but I will respect it at least. But don't be suprised if I join this forum with that thing in a few years having a Nissan GT-R lol But I bet you it won't be left hand drive either. If I were to get it I would try and beat everyone to it before it got to the US. The car looks funny and sexy and the same time...But out of everything this car has done videos of it beating the 997 turbo on the tracks, high power output, bigger engine and stronger than the old RBs people STILL love the old GT-Rs over it and I don't think that will ever change. I guess since the car isn't "Forbidden Fruit" anymore it really isn't interesting to me at all...


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

bonzelite said:


> Look, darling, the subsequent times that will be given will as well be dismissed, discredited, and otherwise undermined. That is part of the whole point! :chuckle:
> 
> Here is a recap of the philosophy among us:
> 
> ...


OK now you're being ridiculous and assume to know my reaction, or indeed that of others, in response to a future announcement. 

You are unable to comprehend the difference between:

1) Internet user: "I heard the Nuremburg-ring times are going to beat a CGT!!! LOL INTERNET!"
2) Nissan Press Release: "Our new GTR has lapped the Nurburgring in 7.28, eclipsing the time of even that set by the CGT"

One is pure fact, the other is speculation. You cannot criticise those for erring on the side of caution and wanting to see the proof before bandying Nissan flags at the next car park meeting.

Now, to para-phrase you as you do everywhere else:
1) Nissan is a liar
Have Nissan made an official announcement about this?? I've missed it!

2) Outside sources are a liar
Who are these outside sources and what are their credentials?

3) Every lap time is a lie and cannot be proven no matter who has taken the time or from what source or mode of measuring
It's fair to assume that if a lap time is to be assessed or accredited, then we need to apply constants so that comparisons can be made. Lap times at different days, by different drivers, with different contents inside the car during different weather conditions are utterly irrelevant and in the world of those who KNOW, can only be dismissed as media sensationalism.

4) Special tires have made the lap times possible but nothing else, the car itself is lacking
Tyres make a huge difference and I would hope any times recorded are done so with production tyres.

I want a GTR, I really do and chances are I will buy one (but I will wait for the hot version first). The latest production mules are starting to look fantastic. I'm also keen to see them in colours other than silver and without that bloody bra! But I'm not willing to be the guinea pig 

My hopes are high but I'm trying to be a bit realistic


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

In a way I feel the same way...Since it will take a year for the Vspec to come out maybe the car can grow on me some more.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

King Nismo said:


> when I finally get it this things just tries and takes its shine so thats why I come off sometimes as a jerk when it comes to this car. I hate it and love it at the same time which is really hard to live with.


Okay, I understand you much more clearly now. Please accept my apologies for coming off as a total pr!ck as well. I mean you no further injury to character. 

I see the cynicisms brewing not only here but on my American home front as well. I am a bit puzzled over it but moreover downcast. It seems nothing is ever good enough for anybody even if it's good. And nobody believes anything, a crying shame.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Blow Dog said:


> OK now you're being ridiculous and assume to know my reaction, or indeed that of others, in response to a future announcement.
> 
> You are unable to comprehend the difference between:
> 
> ...


I have maintained these beliefs prior to release of the press briefings to such effect. I'm not on the bandwagon of internet ga-ga. Much of it has been inaccurate, not only on the internet, but in reputable motor publications. 

The CGT time has not been overtaken and I'm not carrying on as if it has already been. Nissan is carrying a big stick and they intend to use it to it's fullest extent that will garner such accolades in headlines. They were never going to "barely beat" the 997tt. They were going to slaughter it and then go beyond what is thought possible. 



> You cannot criticise those for erring on the side of caution and wanting to see the proof before bandying Nissan flags at the next car park meeting.


Yes I understand that with full 20/20 vision. Yet where, for example, are all of the "VQ in the GTR" flag-wavers? It was NEVER going to be an engine they dropped into a Maxima or 350Z --to be put into a GTR? You've got to be kidding me. Yet nobody listened to dissenting opinions about that either, ie, the engine would be a uniquely designed proprietary unit exclusive to a supercar. But no. It was "VQ this" "VQ that" ad nauseaum. Those sheep erring on the side of caution were erring on the side of lack of foresight and vision and reality. 



> Now, to para-phrase you as you do everywhere else:
> 1) Nissan is a liar
> Have Nissan made an official announcement about this?? I've missed it!


They are perpetually a liar. They lied about the Z-Tune and they lied about the 8:00 barrier broken. Now they will lie again about any other record taking at the Nurburgring. Point #1 is fully in effect. The 7:38 time is already held in contempt and as fable. 



> 2) Outside sources are a liar
> Who are these outside sources and what are their credentials?


Edmunds lies, too. They printed 7:38. That is fake. 



> 3) Every lap time is a lie and cannot be proven no matter who has taken the time or from what source or mode of measuring
> It's fair to assume that if a lap time is to be assessed or accredited, then we need to apply constants so that comparisons can be made. Lap times at different days, by different drivers, with different contents inside the car during different weather conditions are utterly irrelevant and in the world of those who KNOW, can only be dismissed as media sensationalism.


The sub-8:00 R33 is a lie, the Z-Tune's alleged 2004 trap time exceeding McLaren F1 is fake. 



> 4) Special tires have made the lap times possible but nothing else, the car itself is lacking
> Tyres make a huge difference and I would hope any times recorded are done so with production tyres.


... and if not the whole car in it's entirety of engineering and design is a lacking failure and charlatan. 



> I want a GTR, I really do and chances are I will buy one (but I will wait for the hot version first). The latest production mules are starting to look fantastic. I'm also keen to see them in colours other than silver and without that bloody bra! But I'm not willing to be the guinea pig
> 
> My hopes are high but I'm trying to be a bit realistic


I agree with you here and want one as well. I'm also being realistic. 

By the way, you are very well-spoken and articulate. You get props, buddy :smokin:


----------



## andreasgtr (Jul 2, 2003)

"Quote" : "By the way, you are very well-spoken and articulate. You get props, buddy"

He is supposed to be so as he is this board's owner


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

bonzelite said:


> I have maintained these beliefs prior to release of the press briefings to such effect. I'm not on the bandwagon of internet ga-ga. Much of it has been inaccurate, not only on the internet, but in reputable motor publications.
> 
> The CGT time has not been overtaken and I'm not carrying on as if it has already been. Nissan is carrying a big stick and they intend to use it to it's fullest extent that will garner such accolades in headlines. They were never going to "barely beat" the 997tt. They were going to slaughter it and then go beyond what is thought possible.
> 
> ...


Hah. I wanna see more posts by you, they make for great reading despite my (original) reluctance to agree. 
Seriously speaking though, I think I got you wrong - I understood your four points as sarcasm but you were actually being legitimate? OK, now this makes a lot more sense to me! Or have I got that completely wrong too?


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

andreasgtr said:


> "Quote" : "By the way, you are very well-spoken and articulate. You get props, buddy"
> 
> He is supposed to be so as he is this board's owner


Then it's an honor to be in debate with him. Right to the top :bowdown1: 

Thank you for this neat-o Skyline site. I've lurked here for years and have been a member for a while.


----------



## Philip (Jan 17, 2002)

Guy said:


> There's only one time that counts and thats when Sport Auto magazine finally test the car themselves with Horst Von Saurna driving, other than that the other times from press/websites/manufacturers etc are all just 'interesting, but not fact'.


Nissan already have von Saurna onboard, so at least he'll know what he's doing with it.

Phil


----------



## Howsie (Feb 25, 2002)

Hyperbole


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Blow Dog said:


> Hah. I wanna see more posts by you, they make for great reading despite my (original) reluctance to agree.
> Seriously speaking though, I think I got you wrong - I understood your four points as sarcasm but you were actually being legitimate? OK, now this makes a lot more sense to me! Or have I got that completely wrong too?


You're about on track, mate. Overall, I've seen every version of the "disputed claims" dog-and-pony show, so I figured I'd simply just make a neat laundry list of all points to summarize what is popularly believed. It is sarcasm based in truth. 

It just seems to me that there are no moves to be made on the chessboard of double-standards when it comes to citing sources and basing views on these points. 

You say "the GT-R will be a world-beater." Nope. That is speculation.

You then say "the GT-R just beat the 996tt's Nurburgring record." And ---> nope. That's a preliminary time and not substantiated as credible. 

You say "both Nissan and Edmunds corroborate this trap time." Nope. They are exaggerating for marketing hype. Nissan is discredited by default as they are avowed liars; Edmunds used a manually-controlled stopwatch and are discredible as a 3rd-party source.

You say "Walter Rohl drove the Ring last week in the GT-R and got a 7:28 lap time --equaling the CGT. Edmunds and Nissan and Road & Track were all keeping time and corroborate this to be true." ----> Nope. Nissan affixed spray adhesive compound film to the tires, Edmunds was using a hand-held obsolete device, Walter Rohl's time is not official as he was unaware of the spray adhesive glue to the tires and he did not have his official lap-timer online as he mistakenly reset the onboard telemetry by accidentally hitting the rev limiter in the Carousel thus shorting out the readings inadvertently.

You say "the GT-R just surpassed McLaren F1 --again-- on the standing 1/4 mile." Nope. That is an unofficial time done on a press day event with stand-in drivers taking test runs that were not properly optimized for clarity of vision and accuracy of cyclical documentation. The staging cycles were haphazardly conducted by unofficial sideworkers with inproper flags and pencils.


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

Well indeed, we're both singing from the same sheet then. 

It's kind of ironic, really, given the historic reputation of the GTR is based purely on legend (my mate has a 1000bhp chipped one), yet here we are creating the myth and hyperbole that will no doubt construct the folklore and bard tales of the future whenever discussion of this forthcoming GTR awakens.


----------



## psd1 (May 15, 2004)

King Nismo said:


> In a way I feel the same way...Since it will take a year for the Vspec to come out maybe the car can grow on me some more.


Welcome back...oh, by the way, speaking of cars do you have pics of yours yet? Been waiting almost a year now...opcorn:


----------



## rasonline (Mar 24, 2005)

i've got a feeling Nissan have done this all wrong.. too much "teasing" the public and being super-secretive. Now all this speculation and rumours are going to dilute the real thing.. all this talk about thrashing a 997 and now in the Carrerra GT league. what if the car doesn't match a Carrerra GT? Then it's going to seem less impressive.. there are way too many rumours floating around on the net for goodness knows how long.. first it was the engine configuration, wheel size, naming convention blah blah blah..

bloody hell i wish Nissan would get on with it by now.


----------



## Howsie (Feb 25, 2002)

In an interview with Porsche and 911 World, Walter Rohl confirms he got 7:29 out of the 997 GT2 on an industry test session, despite nearly hitting an Audi at 310kph through Tiergarten.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

rasonline said:


> i've got a feeling Nissan have done this all wrong..


The cynicism and pessimism is very strong for a supercar that is designed to supercede all expectations and slaughter the 997.


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

lol man bonzelite you are all go for this new beast! By the way...what will happen to the R33? I have plenty of people in my area that will take her off your hands for the right price but knowing it is a car thats already in the US it won't run cheap either.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

It's an R32 not 33. But yes she's here in California. I'm keeping it forever. It isn't even built up yet. Had to be stripped down and gutted to make it through customs. The R32 is my all-time favorite GT-R aside from perhaps the KPCG110 (1973) GT-R. They run neck and neck for my affection. 

Yes, this new GT-R is going to _annihilate most Nurburgring records to date for a car in it's class ---ooops! I mean --for a car that has *defined it's own class! *_

The bare-bones rationale of superceding what they have otherwise already accomplished in the R34 GT-R has been a foregone conclusion. The cynicism and outright denial of this premise is beyond my understanding, paticularly when the writing was on the wall since the Z-Tune --and for all purposes beforehand when statements from Nissan to the effect of "...the next GT-R will be several levels above the R34 GT-R" were surfacing at the time just after the official shut down of R34 production (the reemergence of that car in 2004 notwithstanding).

Instead of avid connect-the-dots sleuthing and enthusiasm for Nissan, there is instead a widespread hostility, at the very least an aloofness, towards any notion that the GT-R will set automotive history. 

Alas, the dominoes are already falling robustly and inexorably towards annihilation of Porsche 997tt as a dominant force and figure. The King has risen and returned, and it is Japanese.


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

Time will tell. One thing's for sure, if Nissan do not deliver, there's going to be a lot of hat eating.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

there is DEFINITELY a Skyline mystique, particularly in the United States, and especially around people who have never actually seen one in person. Maybe Ohio is just a backwards state, but when I was visiting my hometown and old friends, and I'd mention my car, jaws would literally drop. The average motorhead in the US has grossly inflated ideas of what a Skyline can do.

Anyways, the big tease show is certainly making it interesting. If you were marketing your company's halo product, would you do it any other way, given the Skyline's history?


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

I am sure Nissan will deliver. Now this is my opinion...I personally wouldn't get the car because it shares many parts like the R34 and the guys at Nissan said this. Like it or not Nissan got it right with the R32 and R34. I don't know what the R33 was I loved that one first before any of them. I just want to see the face of it. Like bonzelite said one of my personal favorite GT-Rs is the KPGC10 Hakosuka(1972) I saw a few for sale. But anyway I just hope the car can hold its own because it will need it in the times we are living in. More and more powerful cars are coming out. I say probably by 2115 or sooner they will all be 1000bhp right out of the factory.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Blow Dog said:


> Time will tell. One thing's for sure, if Nissan do not deliver, there's going to be a lot of hat eating.


haha yes, indeed. I will be on a standard diet of hats for years, then.


----------



## MeLLoN Stu (Jun 9, 2005)

bonzelite said:


> The cool and collected veneer of sophistication of sitting back and having the "it's no biggie, we are chill and aloof" schtick is exactly the dismissing and marginalizing tonality of the crowd who --_when at long last, after the "real" times and the "real production" cars are assessed-- *will STILL deny and remain cold and prickly and "too cool"*, with their flesh as warm as a corpse, as contrarian as a nagging mother-in-law._
> 
> And the Nurburgring times matter a great deal when the hi-brow elitists discuss Ferraris and Porsches _--but wait--_ these times suddenly "don't really matter much" when discussing a GT-R!
> 
> Isn't that peculiar?


You couldn't be more inaccurate in your assumption, and I believe you have somewhat misinterpreted my feelings towards the new GTR. To predict my reaction is a little presumptuous given that prior to this subject we've had little if any discourse that I can recall.

Frankly the aforementioned recorded lap time of the nurburgring is of little interest to me at this stage due to the previously mentioned rumour mill that has emerged. The hype surround this car is becoming unbearable. Yes I have been sceptical, perhaps cynical in my replies in this and other threads, why shouldn't I be? It's not like we're swamped with cold hard facts.

For starters the original poster has a grand total of 1 post, the article linked to is riddled with speculation, no time was given, but apparantly the time was *hinted* at, and so far there's nothing to suggest it was anything more than a couple of folks from the press with stopwatches. Thus far there has been mention or question of whether it was BTG or a full lap, and despite it being reasonably obvious it's difference is fairly important. 

I'm more than a little keen to see the new model do well. I openly admit being excited at the prospect of its imminent release and yes, if it lives up to half of my expectations I'll be buying one, if not I'm happy to keep my current GTR and purchase a stablemate from another marque, there's pleanty of options out there, and a few which I'm seriously interested in. 

So as I hope you can now understand, I won't be looking to jump from the nearest bridge if it turns out to be a big disappointment, but in stark contrast I'll be more than a little excited at the prospect of owning a more potent version should the base model be as good as the build up suggests. 

I'm already seriously considering one once the initial few have rolled out and have been properly evaluated, and have long been contemplating the non-speculative merits of placing a deposit even at this early stage. 
So apologies again, however contrary to your somewhat poetic and metaphorically colourful assumptions I'm really rather excited about this car and relishing the prospect of it's release, however much like Cem, I'm not willing to be a guinea pig for something I know incredibly little about thus far, especially when there's the prospect of a higher spec later. 

I've long been a huge aficionado of the Skyline, and more specifically GTR marque, and expect my enthusiasm will long continue, I'm just happy to remain indifferent until cold hard facts emerge. Then and only then will I make my judgement. 
If this is in contrast to other people who are more excitable, so be it, I really don't care. I look at this car not only as a new model for which my pallette is already sufficiently whetted, but potentially as _my_ new car, for which I want to know real world figures, real statistics and real performance figures, not speculative if's, but's and maybe's from people who hold little credability to my opinion. 
So excited, and somewhat reserved in judgement best describes my feelings, all I know for certain at this stage is it has mighty large boots to fill if not only is it going to live up to half of the hype surrounding it, but if indeed it is to follow on the legacy of it's predecessors. I'm also more interested to see how the car will respond to tuning than I am interested in what a standard car is capable of; for me a standard car is merely a benchmark by which the effectiveness of modifications can be judged. 

Here endeth the sermon, so to speak.


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

MeLLoN Stu said:


> You couldn't be more inaccurate in your assumption, and I believe you have somewhat misinterpreted my feelings towards the new GTR. To predict my reaction is a little presumptuous given that prior to this subject we've had little if any discourse that I can recall.
> 
> Frankly the aforementioned recorded lap time of the nurburgring is of little interest to me at this stage due to the previously mentioned rumour mill that has emerged. The hype surround this car is becoming unbearable. Yes I have been sceptical, perhaps cynical in my replies in this and other threads, why shouldn't I be? It's not like we're swamped with cold hard facts.
> 
> ...


I really couldn't agree with you more Mellon. AMEN bother!~:bowdown1:


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

if I could ask a question here, how does the Mines R34, the "Ultimate Response Machine", or more accurately, "The Second Coming of Christ", fit in with all this?


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

kismetcapitan, good question...I would love to see them duke it out on a track...but I am sure I know who would win!


----------



## Bean (Oct 12, 2001)

kismetcapitan said:


> if I could ask a question here, how does the Mines R34, the "Ultimate Response Machine", or more accurately, "The Second Coming of Christ", fit in with all this?


You're talking about a pitting a purpose built track car against a normal (albeit very good) production car - what do you think will happen ?
Or , to put it another way - do you think the cost to purchase an R35 GTR comes anywhere near the cost of Mines' R34 demo car ?


----------



## stealth (Jul 6, 2004)

Who cares if a super car like Porsche is 2 seconds faster on the Nurbergring than the new GTR ,how many people buy a car on that info Lol!Big deal,maybe the anoracks or trainspotter types ..What about Lambo and Ferrari owners ,I should imagine they dont give a flying fuk about lap times .So the GTR will be sold world wide ,if it's a good car it's a good car simple .
All this bitching about a car no one knows nothing about ,or ever sat in let alone driven is so funny,Christ sake dont lose your rag about it .It will be nice to see it when it's here and even better in a couple of years when there are a few second hand for sale ,I should imagine this thread will look totaly daft then


----------



## 1POET (May 28, 2007)

...time to move on...this thread is getting a tad too long....and its giving me a :chairshot


----------



## Howsie (Feb 25, 2002)

Howsie said:


> In an interview with Porsche and 911 World, Walter Rohl confirms he got 7:29 out of the 997 GT2 on an industry test session, despite nearly hitting an Audi at 310kph through Tiergarten.


On the full circuit :bowdown1:


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

MeLLoN Stu said:


> there's pleanty of options out there, and a few which I'm seriously interested in.


Me, too. I like Ferrari. 



> So as I hope you can now understand, I won't be looking to jump from the nearest bridge if it turns out to be a big disappointment


hahaha I laughed while reading that line. that's brilliant and hilarious. yes, I will not be jumping from a building or out of a window either! 




> So apologies again, however contrary to your somewhat poetic and metaphorically colourful assumptions I'm really rather excited about this car and relishing the prospect of it's release


No worries. It's kind of you to even mention that I attained a level of poetic metaphor at all with my words considering the scathing bite they may intone. 



> however much like Cem, I'm not willing to be a guinea pig for something I know incredibly little about thus far, especially when there's the prospect of a higher spec later.


Understand, yes. 



> I've long been a huge aficionado of the Skyline, and more specifically GTR marque, and expect my enthusiasm will long continue, I'm just happy to remain indifferent until cold hard facts emerge. Then and only then will I make my judgement.


Sure, that is a valid choice as well. I suppose i found the aloofness disconcerting as it did not mirror my own optimism. I see more apathy or flat-lining of the expectations than the other way around on the chat forum circuit. Many people (not you) actually hate the car. 




> If this is in contrast to other people who are more excitable, so be it, I really don't care.


 HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I enjoy your blatant detachment and unwavering apathy. It could be construed as even droll humor even if it was not intended as such. The stone face is funny as hell! 



> I look at this car not only as a new model for which my pallette is already sufficiently whetted, but potentially as _my_ new car, for which I want to know real world figures, real statistics and real performance figures, not speculative if's, but's and maybe's from people who hold little credability to my opinion.


Sure I can see that to be of importance to someone potentially wanting to examine actual numbers and play by them. Sure. Some are very fact-savvy and inclined to empiricism. Particularly when nothing is actually known except for lots of flowery promises.



> So excited, and somewhat reserved in judgement best describes my feelings, all I know for certain at this stage is it has mighty large boots to fill if not only is it going to live up to half of the hype surrounding it, but if indeed it is to follow on the legacy of it's predecessors. I'm also more interested to see how the car will respond to tuning than I am interested in what a standard car is capable of; for me a standard car is merely a benchmark by which the effectiveness of modifications can be judged.


That is perhaps the most interesting thing of this post. That is a good way of seeing it. 



> Here endeth the sermon, so to speak.


Indeed I enjoyed your sermon. Well said and spoken.


----------



## King Nismo (Sep 22, 2006)

Yeah I have to agree with most people on this thread. Bonzelite you are a very poetic person and thats from the heart :thumbsup:


----------



## gtrlux (Mar 8, 2006)

My ad to this very long thread:
Can`t wait to own a 600HP R32GTR,　 . . . . then wait for the first encounter with the new GTR . . .








. . . . and smoke it with tenderness.
HUUUUSSS DA DADDY.......???:chuckle:


----------



## the King (Sep 23, 2007)

MeLLoN Stu said:


> Either that or rather than appear as die hard fans of something they've barely seen, who believe it'll be the fastest car on the planet, we're just happy to sit on the fence until a post-release road model is able to produce a time like that?
> 
> Until then I'm very much looking forward to seeing it and potentially owning one but I just don't see the point of all this speculative hype until it's in a production car, post release.


The point about it is that the GT-R is indeed lapping the Ring Faster than the 997TT. What is so hard in that to believe? This being said then the GT-R is then set at a higher target because it has exceeded the expectations. Why is that so hard to believe? 
I am sure most of you here at some point or another owned a GT-R. Yes the car is heavy,but does that stop it from going like stink. You all thought the R34s came with 280 hp until it was found out to be a bit more than that. 
What is trhe ethos of the GT-R? 
When the first Skyline passed a Porsche in the 60s, it was hoped that people whould have taken it seriously. Now almost 50 years later we still have even the so-called 'GT-R fanatics' questioning whether or not it is capable of beating a Porsche!! You all need to stop buying into this bullshit!!!

Youall saw what a FQ400 380+ bhp (3300lbs) did to a Lambo 550hp (3100 lbs). The Evo is hailed as one of the best handling cars in the world, the GT-R is that much better!! Yet you remain skeptics that the EVo is a better handling car to an M3 . Why? It is from the elite who say: "How dare Nissan or Mitsubishi try to compete with the German wundermachines?" "Preposterous!":blahblah: 

I call all of you skeptics out on your bullshit reasoning!! Find the facts. Follow the trail (hint) You will find the truth!!!
The car deserves every accolade.
-The second production car to lap the Ring in less than 8 mintues (the Jag been the first) The 400R WAS a production car!!
-Still up to this point the fastest production car through the quarter mile: 10.006 sec (Z tune) Yes that is a fact!!!!
-AWD World record holder (quarter mile) tuned.

Another note: Although the Evos have been dominating the Time Attack circuit, these have mostly been carbon fibre cars. Mine's GT-R and HKS has been able to keep pace while running in pretty much street packages though in highly tuned specs. Is that possible without having an exceptional blueprint to work with?
You all need to check yourselves.uke:


----------



## the King (Sep 23, 2007)

MeLLoN Stu said:


> Either that or rather than appear as die hard fans of something they've barely seen, who believe it'll be the fastest car on the planet, we're just happy to sit on the fence until a post-release road model is able to produce a time like that?
> 
> Until then I'm very much looking forward to seeing it and potentially owning one but I just don't see the point of all this speculative hype until it's in a production car, post release.



I am sure there are people here who will defend the GT-R. We need those: not blind followers who belive the GT-R is the second coming.


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

the King said:


> The point about it is that the GT-R is indeed lapping the Ring Faster than the 997TT. What is so hard in that to believe? This being said then the GT-R is then set at a higher target because it has exceeded the expectations. Why is that so hard to believe?


Take your blinkers off for a second and you may see.

Nobody is doubting the ability of the GTR to perform better laptimes. Fact is, nobody has PROVEN this categorically to be the case. As a result, we wait like patience adults until such time where we can bloody well quash this speculation!
Don't go championing a result that hasn't been authenticated!

Finally, the reason the Evo beat the Murcielago was because it weighs a fraction of itself - a small detail you omitted for the purpose of your own argument.


----------



## the King (Sep 23, 2007)

Who gave you that info? The Evo is NOT lighter than the Lambo. I dont where you got that. Anyway I am highlighting the fact that the Porsche's time of 7:40 is an unofficial time yet it IS taken to be GOSPEL by the PUBLIC> The Porsche's UNOFFICIAL TIME is accepeted yet the Nissan's isn't ? 
Now that is elitism if you ask me. I am tired of that crap.
NEXT!!!


----------



## ru' (Feb 18, 2007)

the King said:


> ...The Evo is NOT lighter than the Lambo....


According to Evo (just happen to have a copy nearby) FQ340 = 1,400kg, Murcielago = 1,650kg.


----------



## madadd (Jan 30, 2004)

the King said:


> The point about it is that the GT-R is indeed lapping the Ring Faster than the 997TT. What is so hard in that to believe? This being said then the GT-R is then set at a higher target because it has exceeded the expectations. Why is that so hard to believe?
> I am sure most of you here at some point or another owned a GT-R. Yes the car is heavy,but does that stop it from going like stink. You all thought the R34s came with 280 hp until it was found out to be a bit more than that.
> What is trhe ethos of the GT-R?
> When the first Skyline passed a Porsche in the 60s, it was hoped that people whould have taken it seriously. Now almost 50 years later we still have even the so-called 'GT-R fanatics' questioning whether or not it is capable of beating a Porsche!! You all need to stop buying into this bullshit!!!
> ...


Unfortunately even you are buying into the bullshit.

"GT-R is indeed lapping the Ring Faster than the 997TT" - Source - the media. How factual is this? May be true. May be moo!

"You all thought the R34s came with 280 hp until it was found out to be a bit more than that" - Says who? With regard to the R34 I know a well respected tuner who has dyno'd a couple of factory standard R34's here in the UK. Both were within a couple of bhp of the quoted 280PS (276bhp). Another Skyline myth?

"Youall saw what a FQ400 380+ bhp (3300lbs) did to a Lambo 550hp (3100 lbs). " - I don't know which you refer to, but I saw this on Top Gear. The Lambo never got chance to stretch its legs. From memory, It was a small, and very tight circuit. I am sure my new mini could give said Lambo a good spanking on the back roads near my house. But I still know which is really the quicker! The Top Gear test was done to prove a point. Under certain conditions the FQ400 is an equal. Under many it certainly is not.

Remember the UK TV review of the R33 vs Jag vs 911? (was it on channel 4?). Everyone saw the R33 murder the other two. Therefore R33 was a far faster car.... Or maybe not .. Said car was handed to them by Middlehursts. And I have it on good authority (from the above mentioned people) that this car ran really well (approx. 120bhp extra well) to guarantee a good result! :chuckle: :chuckle: 

Me, I believe enough of the Hype to have put down a deposit on the New GT-R. And I am happy to go back to Nissan (previous Skyline owner) trading in my 911 (997) in the process.

...Mad


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

madadd said:


> Unfortunately even you are buying into the bullshit.
> 
> "GT-R is indeed lapping the Ring Faster than the 997TT" - Source - the media. How factual is this? May be true. May be moo!
> 
> ...


We may well be over optimistic about the new GTR's performance however a few corrections on the above:

1) A standard R34 produces more than 280ps. Explain to me how an R32 allegedly produces 280ps with 0.75bar and an R34 produces 280ps with 0.93bar? I believe someone will have a dyno graph somewhere too. 

2) An FQ-400 has 405bhp not 380bhp.

3) Assuming you're referring to the Top Gear test, the Murcielago had 580ps back then and weighed around 1650kg (~3530lbs).


----------



## Guy (Jun 27, 2001)

Anyone who believes that a standard Z-Tune did a 10.0 1/4 mile is insane and simply does not deserve detailed responses, in the same way that a stock R33GTR has never done sub 8mins.

As for new GTR vs 997TT, I would expect it to have a very similar if not slightly better time, since it has the same power 480bhp and a similar weight and both 4wd with sticky tyres (Porsche quote 7:42 on sticky, 7:47 on normal). I therefore have no problem with the concept that a new GTR could just do a 7:38. HOWEVER, dropping down another 10 secs to CGT level is a whole new ballgame and that I do not believe.


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

^I agree. 10s is about half a click distance-wise.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

King Nismo said:


> Yeah I have to agree with most people on this thread. Bonzelite you are a very poetic person and thats from the heart :thumbsup:


That is very kind of you to say. Many thanks. I enjoy the camaraderie here. I will be posting more.


----------



## gavman (Apr 12, 2006)

psd1 said:


> Welcome back...oh, by the way, speaking of cars do you have pics of yours yet? Been waiting almost a year now...opcorn:


lol

perhaps he's sold it so he can order his R35 V-spec


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Guy said:


> Anyone who believes that a standard Z-Tune did a 10.0 1/4 mile is insane and simply does not deserve detailed responses, in the same way that a stock R33GTR has never done sub 8mins.


And I think Nissan wants to nail the coffin lid on these, the urban legends, the doubting, and go all the way. I _do_ believe that. I think this is the re-emergence of Godzilla from the deep. 



> HOWEVER, dropping down another 10 secs to CGT level is a whole new ballgame and that I do not believe.


It would be believable in a Nismo variant, I will concede. 

But hey, mates --we have about 25 days left! So until then, it's stone-faces, funerals, and apathy! Bring on the dismissals and depressed heart rates! Woo-hoo! :chuckle:


----------



## madadd (Jan 30, 2004)

R33_GTS-t said:


> We may well be over optimistic about the new GTR's performance however a few corrections on the above:
> 
> 1) A standard R34 produces more than 280ps. Explain to me how an R32 allegedly produces 280ps with 0.75bar and an R34 produces 280ps with 0.93bar? I believe someone will have a dyno graph somewhere too.
> 
> ...


Of No's 2 & 3 the figures you quote were both those of "TheKing" and only copied from his message. Not my mistakes :runaway: :runaway: 

As for item 1 .. Is this not a prime example of how people distort what they believe to be facts?

Everyone knows the R33 and R34 had more than 280PS. But isnt this because the media has printed it so many times. We all now take it as fact. If 280PS is incorrect, what is the correct figure? And what is the source of this information?

You believe someone will have a Dyno graph. Do you know that person, and can you guarantee the accuracy of that information? And more importantly, will it be a standard factory car, as it left Nissan. 

Personally, I would trust Nissan to be truthful on power outputs. Why lie? The only person I know who has tested an R34 (well 2 of them) confirmed that they both ran pretty much what Nissan quoted. He had no reason to lie to me.

As for your boost question. I have no idea, so would not even attempt to answer your question. I am sure someone on here will have an answer.

At times, people do seem to believe pretty much anything they are told. And people love to believe their car has more power than it does.

But to keep on topic..

This car circling the ring... Surely the final production car is signed off already? If we are to believe these laptimes - Has anyone confirmed that the car doing them is the same car some of us will be shortly be buying?

...Mad


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

madadd said:


> This car circling the ring... Surely the final production car is signed off already? If we are to believe these laptimes - Has anyone confirmed that the car doing them is the same car some of us will be shortly be buying?


1) Nissan is a liar
2) All 3rd party sources are a liar
3) Every source of information about the GT-R is discredible and heresay.
4) If Nissan relays any information, it is considered a conspiracy
5) If a 3rd party discloses independent testing of Nissan GT-Rs, this information is fabricated and illegitimate.
6) Any thought about a GT-R is to be monitored and reported.
7) A GT-R is a ghost and does not exist and is a fabrication.
8) Discussion of GT-R performance characteristics is akin to discussing Big Foot or the Yeti and carries no credible sources of proof or worthiness.
9) GT-R sightings on the Nurburgring are disinformation campaigns conducted in collusion between Nissan and any 3rd party entity.
10) the 997tt seen on the Nurburgring with the GT-R is a rebodied decoy bearing no provable resemblance or mechanical performance to a Porsche.
11) Porsche is in collusion with Nissan to fabricate any and all information about both cars.


----------



## the King (Sep 23, 2007)

Ask UK's GT-R Club, maybe they can help you with the R34's actual output :328hp seems about right. I wonder how many of you have actually owned a GT-R, especially V-Spec and above?
I made an error with the weight of the cars: the Lambo is indeed 1650kg while the Evo 1451kg. The Lambo wasnt the only car beaten by the Evo but here again the skeptics raise their ugly heads because some "POS" Japanese car dare to invade their rarified air. Do you see how may people where ready to jump @ me and my assertions? Proof of the elitist B.S!!! 
No one commented on this: Anyway I am highlighting the fact that the Porsche's time of 7:40 is an unofficial time yet it IS taken to be GOSPEL by the PUBLIC> The Porsche's UNOFFICIAL TIME is accepeted yet the Nissan's isn't ? 

And there in ladies and gentlemen is the lesson of the day. I no longer have to prove anything. You all just did it for me.
Enjoy the GT-R when it arrives!! I am out. From now on I will be an observer.


----------



## Fuggles (Jul 3, 2001)

the King said:


> I wonder how many of you have actually owned a GT-R,


On this site? Probably quite a few


----------



## stealth (Jul 6, 2004)

Fuggles said:


> On this site? Probably quite a few


Lol! thats funny ,it is quite amazing that there are GTR owners on this board and probably not many on something like the Greenpeace site :chuckle:


----------



## stealth (Jul 6, 2004)

the King;Enjoy the GT-R when it arrives!! I am out. From now on I will be an observer.[/QUOTE said:


> Cheers then ,can you lock the door on the way out:wavey:


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

Guy said:


> Anyone who believes that a standard Z-Tune did a 10.0 1/4 mile is insane and simply does not deserve detailed responses, in the same way that a stock R33GTR has never done sub 8mins


There's a video proof of a stock R33 GTR that did flat 8 minute at the Nurburgring by "Best Motoring", NOT by Dirk Schoisman (famous for doing 7:59). Surprise me that people here wasn't aware of that.

Sorry for being straight forward without mentioning the name, this thread used to be ok to read but now it sucks, some people here are being over optimistic and over pessimistic, sounds like bunch og hyporites to me.


----------



## moleman (Jun 3, 2002)

GTRJack said:


> There's a video proof of a stock R33 GTR that did flat 8 minute at the Nurburgring by "Best Motoring"


----------



## the King (Sep 23, 2007)

stealth said:


> Cheers then ,can you lock the door on the way out:wavey:


Silly boy you will not get rid of me that easily:smokin: Though I know you would love that wouldnt ya? No I just wont be posting anyhting until YOU ALLL have seen the truth for yourselves. Then I hope you will be willing to say: "I was wrong.":bawling: 
IF I am wrong about the times I will alllow myself to be :lamer: and :banned: 
Aint mad at ya

Cheers


----------



## psd1 (May 15, 2004)

the King said:


> Silly boy you will not get rid of me that easily:smokin: Though I know you would love that wouldnt ya? No I just wont be posting anyhting until YOU ALLL have seen the truth for yourselves. Then I hope you will be willing to say: "I was wrong.":bawling:
> IF I am wrong about the times I will alllow myself to be :lamer: and :banned:
> Aint mad at ya
> 
> Cheers



Thought you left a few pages ago...opcorn:


----------



## the King (Sep 23, 2007)

psd1 said:


> Thought you left a few pages ago...opcorn:


NEXT!!! How many basher can I get in a day? :chairshot Start the count: 1, ..., ..., 
Dont spend so much energy responding to me and miss the date : October 23


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

GTRJack said:


> There's a video proof of a stock R33 GTR that did flat 8 minute at the Nurburgring by "Best Motoring", NOT by Dirk Schoisman (famous for doing 7:59). Surprise me that people here wasn't aware of that.


I posted it a while back. I'd debate whether that R33 is standard either. I can't prove it either way but I'd love to see the boost gauge. I'd also love to know if the speedo is accurate. If it is then the R33 in the video isn't standard.


----------



## moleman (Jun 3, 2002)

R33_GTS-t said:


> I can't prove it either way


Quite.

I've always been sceptical about the 7'59" lap, although I want to believe it.

Best Motoring do use stock vehicles though. Not a lot of point of the time attack comparisons that they do otherwise.


----------



## gavman (Apr 12, 2006)

the King said:


> Ask UK's GT-R Club, maybe they can help you with the R34's actual output :328hp seems about right. I wonder how many of you have actually owned a GT-R, especially V-Spec and above?
> I made an error with the weight of the cars: the Lambo is indeed 1650kg while the Evo 1451kg. The Lambo wasnt the only car beaten by the Evo but here again the skeptics raise their ugly heads because some "POS" Japanese car dare to invade their rarified air. Do you see how may people where ready to jump @ me and my assertions? Proof of the elitist B.S!!!
> No one commented on this: Anyway I am highlighting the fact that the Porsche's time of 7:40 is an unofficial time yet it IS taken to be GOSPEL by the PUBLIC> The Porsche's UNOFFICIAL TIME is accepeted yet the Nissan's isn't ?
> 
> ...


jesus

where do we get these muppets?

go back to the playground :chairshot 

starting to think we need a minimum age to post on here


----------



## skyline69_uk (Jan 6, 2005)

moleman said:


>


The thing about the Best Motoring laps is that they are half standing start laps not "flying laps" as quoted for normal Ring times. You can normally knock 1 to 2 seconds of those times to get the flying lap times i.e. R32 8'22" for BM and 8'19" in other tests etc. The R33 V-Spec would be more like a 7'59" for a proper flying lap. The R33's were more than capable of getting sub 8 mins in the right hands, I have always found it difficult to understand why it was impossible for some people to believe this  .


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

skyline69_uk said:


> The thing about the Best Motoring laps is that they are half standing start laps not "flying laps" as quoted for normal Ring times. You can normally knock 1 to 2 seconds of those times to get the flying lap times i.e. R32 8'22" for BM and 8'19" in other tests etc. The R33 V-Spec would be more like a 7'59" for a proper flying lap. The R33's were more than capable of getting sub 8 mins in the right hands, I have always found it difficult to understand why it was impossible for some people to believe this  .


It's a matter of physics. The original 911 GT3 made about 7:57. +60bhp, RWD and -200kg. And I don't believe that an R33 is 20+s faster than an R32.


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

^^ You can't just think about the weight factor all the time. Some cars suits better for spesific track more then others; as for example the GTR the Nurgburgring is a natural road track that suits very well for the GTR to perform good. Matter of physics isn't just about weight and horsepower, it's about grip, traction and road condition as well. Doubters disepoint me, I don't understand why you woun't believe the GTR abow is a fully stock car, the Best Motoring is a truethful, trusted and respected Japanese automotive show and I don't see the reasion why they would lie about it. Keep also in mind that these people are pro drivers, they can maintain that speed on a track without driving off the road unlikely what we common driver could ever achieve..

Both stock R33 is faster then R32 on a race track EVEN though the R33 is heavier. You must also remember Nurburgring is a long track, so 15 - 20 seconds isn't that much of a gap as what you would think on i.e. 8 minute long track


----------



## Bean (Oct 12, 2001)

GTRJack said:


> ^^ You can't just think about the weight factor all the time. Some cars suits better for spesific track more then others; as for example the GTR the Nurgburgring is a natural road track that suits very well for the GTR to perform good. Matter of physics isn't just about weight and horsepower, it's about grip, traction and road condition as well. Doubters disepoint me, I don't understand why you woun't believe the GTR abow is a fully stock car, the Best Motoring is a truethful, trusted and respected Japanese automotive show and I don't see the reasion why they would lie about it. Keep also in mind that these people are pro drivers, they can maintain that speed on a track without driving off the road unlikely what we common driver could ever achieve..
> 
> Both stock R33 is faster then R32 on a race track EVEN though the R33 is heavier.


I wasn't going to waste my time posting on this thread however, I have to agree with you there.


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

Bean said:


> I wasn't going to waste my time posting on this thread however, I have to agree with you there.


I know it can be frustrating sometimes, but in my experience, I have been witness to many occassions where Nissan have been extremely secretive with regards to lap times and their specific mule cars when testing on the ring.

I know for a fact a few years ago Nissan brought a Nur to the 'ring in order to attempt a Dirk S. lap time. This car was definately not showroom spec and sported a few extra items which we were very quickly asked not to look at.

It just so happened that there was no time set on that day and as a result, the attempt at setting the record straight was not met.

Finally, I know Nissan sent over an S-Tune when doing the promotional video and that was also supposed to be out on the ring. It had a full complement of Nismo staff and engineers on hand acting as pit crew. It is unfortunate that that particular car hit another head on in Germany because the driver of the S-Tune forgot that they drive on the right over in Europe, subsequently resulting in my car being used instead.

Unless anybody has driven a GTR with any anger on the circuit and is able to draw comparisons with other track cars, then there really isn't any point in debating as your opinion on its merits on the ring are pretty academic.

The GTR IS a heavy car and like it or not, weight and transmission are the most obvious of points and it takes a crap load of work to make a standard GTR out of the box into an effective track tool, LOTS of work.


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

GTRJack said:


> ^^ You can't just think about the weight factor all the time. Some cars suits better for spesific track more then others; as for example the GTR the Nurgburgring is a natural road track that suits very well for the GTR to perform good. Matter of physics isn't just about weight and horsepower, it's about grip, traction and road condition as well. Doubters disepoint me, I don't understand why you woun't believe the GTR abow is a fully stock car, the Best Motoring is a truethful, trusted and respected Japanese automotive show and I don't see the reasion why they would lie about it. Keep also in mind that these people are pro drivers, they can maintain that speed on a track without driving off the road unlikely what we common driver could ever achieve..
> 
> Both stock R33 is faster then R32 on a race track EVEN though the R33 is heavier. You must also remember Nurburgring is a long track, so 15 - 20 seconds isn't that much of a gap as what you would think on i.e. 8 minute long track


You may be right. I guess the R32 lap was in the wet after all. I'm just suspicious at the way it hit 300km/h, even if the clock is out a bit.


----------



## Blow Dog (Sep 4, 2001)

Re-reading that, that's not supposed to come across as dismissive as it has!

Despite my current choice of car, GTR is my life for obvious reasons - I want it to be successful more than all of you put together


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

Blow Dog said:


> It is unfortunate that that particular car hit another head on in Germany because the driver of the S-Tune forgot that they drive on the right over in Europe


:chuckle:


----------



## Fuzzy (Jun 2, 2007)

R33 GT-R lapping the Nürburgring in under 8 minutes.
This is what i read from the new official webpage from the new GT-R .


----------



## R33_GTS-t (Apr 27, 2005)

Here's another target for the GTR:

YouTube - New supra mkV racing at nurinburg ring


----------



## psd1 (May 15, 2004)

R33_GTS-t said:


> Here's another target for the GTR:
> 
> YouTube - New supra mkV racing at nurinburg ring


Sounds awesome!!!


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Fuzzy said:


> R33 GT-R lapping the Nürburgring in under 8 minutes.
> This is what i read from the new official webpage from the new GT-R .


Yes, but you missed item 1 on the list:

1) Nissan is a liar

Heh, didn't you know that? here is the whole list for your review:

1) Nissan is a liar
2) All 3rd party sources are a liar
3) Every source of information about the GT-R is discredible and heresay.
4) If Nissan relays any information, it is considered a conspiracy
5) If a 3rd party discloses independent testing of Nissan GT-Rs, this information is fabricated and illegitimate.
6) Any thought about a GT-R is to be monitored and reported.
7) A GT-R is a ghost and does not exist and is a fabrication.
8) Discussion of GT-R performance characteristics is akin to discussing Big Foot or the Yeti and carries no credible sources of proof or worthiness.
9) GT-R sightings on the Nurburgring are disinformation campaigns conducted in collusion between Nissan and any 3rd party entity.
10) the 997tt seen on the Nurburgring with the GT-R is a rebodied decoy bearing no provable resemblance or mechanical performance to a Porsche.
11) Porsche is in collusion with Nissan to fabricate any and all information about both cars.


----------



## Howsie (Feb 25, 2002)

You are very touchy about the GT-R aren't you. Why is that?


----------



## Z1LLA (Sep 24, 2007)

There are afew of you that are very touchy about the gtr allright, they have always been the underdog though, and it probably helped give them the reputation they have EARNED. And yes the r33 is heavier, but it is also better balanced than the r32, with the battery above the rear axle and the fuel tank in front of the rear axle (among other things) it is noticable. Having an r32 gtr myself and having a close friend with an r33 gtr who trusts me to drive his car every bit as hard, if not harder than he does, and that are in very similar (near stock) tune, i have no doubt that the r33 is a faster and better balanced car in stock form. well around corners anyway. after all, nissan wouldnt have spent thousands of hours and dollars if they didnt think that the car they were relasing was going to be any better than the one before it. As for the power output of later gtrs, there was an article in (the australian) Wheels magazine afew years ago that compared a r34 vspec to a monaro. both cars very dead stock and only just run in, and out of interest they dynoed them among other tests, the result, the gtr had more horsepower the the back wheels than it did in the brochure, dead stock. but that was on 98 octane fuel, take note. i cant remember the exact figures but i also remember the car ran a high 12 second pass. but as someone pointed out, changing the turbos, and the tuning as nissan did over the years, even though the number never got higher on the brochure, there is no way it didnt get higher in reality. think about it... you would be asking what was wrong if you made those changes and didnt make more power, wouldnt you???


----------



## rasonline (Mar 24, 2005)

that Toyota supercar looks awesome.. hate to say it, but those lines look more supercar-like than the new GTR does and the car sounds fabulous... but let's wait and see what the final product is like.. hope the wait doesn't turn out anythign like the new GTR


----------



## psd1 (May 15, 2004)

rasonline said:


> that Toyota supercar looks awesome.. hate to say it, but those lines look more supercar-like than the new GTR does and the car sounds fabulous... but let's wait and see what the final product is like.. hope the wait doesn't turn out anythign like the new GTR


I totally agree, anyone have stills of the Supra?opcorn:


----------



## tekknikal (Sep 22, 2007)

its not a supra. its the lexus lf-a:










V10, 500+hp from <5.0L
mid engine mounted in front of passengers but behind front axle
rear radiators
carbon ceramic brakes, etc. 


here's a thread about it on the club lexus website:
Official LF-A (II) thread (Tokyo Motor Show Oct 26/27, more info 2 b released) - Club Lexus Forums


----------



## gavman (Apr 12, 2006)

my god, that looks (and sounds) awesome


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

Thank you, tekknikal, for clearing that up for our brothers. The NAGTROC.com moderators are in the house now :chuckle: ...with heavychevy making a guest appearance.


----------



## MuXBoX (Feb 27, 2007)

R33_GTS-t said:


> It's a matter of physics. The original 911 GT3 made about 7:57. +60bhp, RWD and -200kg. And I don't believe that an R33 is 20+s faster than an R32.



Beleive it. It is officialy stated on nissans website. Nissan GT-R Official Global Site then highlight the link to the r33 and read the writing under the photo. 

And also if you think about it, a good driver will have more bottle in a skyline than in a porsche because the porsches are a lot more hairy to drive with the weight being in the back the porsche 911 design is flawed from day 1 for many drivers. Slow in fast out is the way to drive a 911 and i never liked that and if you go too fast in and you get it wrong your back end will overtake your front.

Skyline is also the wrong setup having engine in the front but nissan have figured out how to get the best out of this setup and it doesnt need you to be hyper on caffeine with concentration lvls set to maximum to drive it well.

Obviously the best setup in the world is to have the engine in the middle with a light car and only rear wheel drive for increased lightness. These are truly the fast cars around the circuits of the world.


After all that is said. I own an r34 and i love it to bits and i am flying out to tokyo and will be putting my name down for an r35 so long as it proves to be as good looking as the concepts, has an interior to at least try to keep up with bmw (love the leather dash in some of the spyshots) and can do a respectable time around the ring.


And this will get you guys going  something in the region of 7 mins 15 like autoexpress stated on their website a few months back lol. (link: Nissan GT-R | Auto Express News | News | Auto Express )


----------



## heavychevy (Oct 2, 2007)

MuXBoX said:


> Beleive it. It is officialy stated on nissans website. Nissan GT-R Official Global Site then highlight the link to the r33 and read the writing under the photo.
> 
> And also if you think about it, a good driver will have more bottle in a skyline than in a porsche because the porsches are a lot more hairy to drive with the weight being in the back the porsche 911 design is flawed from day 1 for many drivers. Slow in fast out is the way to drive a 911 and i never liked that and if you go too fast in and you get it wrong your back end will overtake your front.
> 
> ...


It's not the car that's in question it's if the car had more power than a normal R33. And if you drove a GT3 you wouldnt make the comments on it being hairy to drive, it's challenging as is any other platform, but engineering has come a long way.


----------



## MuXBoX (Feb 27, 2007)

Yeah it probably would have had some more power. Don't all the manufacturers bend the rules a little for the sake of marketing?


----------



## revs210 (Aug 7, 2004)

Nissan claim the sub 8 minute time officially and I watched the R33 GTR in the jap vid doing the 8 minute ring work and from my experience owning these cars it was clearly stock mechanically. The in cabin noise isn't there for even a fairly quiet aftermarket exhaust. It also doesn't seem to have even a high flow panel filter replacement (as you can hear the BOV noises quite well once upgraded). 

Tyres? well that ones open for debate, actually who cares? I say let them all set times on slicks and be done with it.


----------

