RE: Nissan Hits Back At GT-R Cheat Claims

[GravelBen]

Dagnut said:

GravelBen said:

danielj57 said:

...but when they're releasing statements like this...

..And another person who obviously hasn't bothered to read the thread, or the original point of the matter. So I'll remind you all again:



Porsche did not 'release a statement', one of their engineers let slip in a conversation with an aussie journalist that they'd been testing a GTR against their own cars trying to figure out where the claimed advantage was coming from, and had been unable to replicate the GTR NS time. After much prompting the engineer also gave up the times they achieved on the day.

Porsche are not making a big deal about it at all, in fact the only people really doing that are hordes of car geeks on the internet (ETA:yes I have to include myself in this category too), and now Nissan. Surely its not really that hard to understand?

Edited by GravelBen on Saturday 11th October 12:53

Another person who obviously hasn't used any logic at all...so if taking a competitors car to a race track and trying to disprove laps time isn't making a big deal I'd like to know what is

You mean taking a competitors car to a race track to see how it compares to your own? Just like every other manufacturer does...

[Joecooool]

DiscoColin said:

Joecooool]Corvette ...[racing said:

...
Push rods and leaf springs still reign supreme.

I'll have to nitpick here as my Corvette devotee colleague at work assures me that racing 'Vettes most certainly do not have stone age leaf springs or anything like them...

The Corvette ZR1 that beat both Porsche and the GT-R around the ring has the same transverse composite leaf spring that the rest of the Corvettes do. The C5R that runs Le Mans has a coil over setup.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/detroit-2008-co...

[GravelBen]

I must say it amuses me the number of people (figuratively) jumping up and down shouting "Porsche are lying" and yet willing to accept any statement from Nissan as indisputable gospel.

For sure it goes both ways, but GTR fanboyism seems to outweigh Porsche badge-snobbery by a significant margin on here.

Edited by GravelBen on Monday 13th October 22:56

[bobthemonkey]

Joecooool said:

DiscoColin said:

Joecooool]Corvette ...[racing said:

...
Push rods and leaf springs still reign supreme.

I'll have to nitpick here as my Corvette devotee colleague at work assures me that racing 'Vettes most certainly do not have stone age leaf springs or anything like them...

The Corvette ZR1 that beat both Porsche and the GT-R around the ring has the same transverse composite leaf spring that the rest of the Corvettes do. The C5R that runs Le Mans has a coil over setup.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/detroit-2008-co...

Its also worth noting that the transverse composite leaf springs on the 'Vette are quite unlike your common - or - garden live axle and leaf spring setup.

[sjc]

GravelBen said:

I must say it amuses me the number of people (figuratively) jumping up and down shouting "Porsche are lying" and yet willing to accept any statement from Nissan as indisputable gospel.

Surely,that cannot be a serious comment.

[Dagnut]

GravelBen said:

Dagnut said:

GravelBen said:

danielj57 said:

...but when they're releasing statements like this...

..And another person who obviously hasn't bothered to read the thread, or the original point of the matter. So I'll remind you all again:



Porsche did not 'release a statement', one of their engineers let slip in a conversation with an aussie journalist that they'd been testing a GTR against their own cars trying to figure out where the claimed advantage was coming from, and had been unable to replicate the GTR NS time. After much prompting the engineer also gave up the times they achieved on the day.

Porsche are not making a big deal about it at all, in fact the only people really doing that are hordes of car geeks on the internet (ETA:yes I have to include myself in this category too), and now Nissan. Surely its not really that hard to understand?

Edited by GravelBen on Saturday 11th October 12:53

Another person who obviously hasn't used any logic at all...so if taking a competitors car to a race track and trying to disprove laps time isn't making a big deal I'd like to know what is

You mean taking a competitors car to a race track to see how it compares to your own? Just like every other manufacturer does...

Show me an example of another manufacturer retro testing against one of their models already released trying to disprove performance figures? yes they test against competitors in what industry would you not...this is a pointless test to disprove performance figures and not for development work.

[davegsxr]

That amused me a lot! Offering Porsche engineers a driving course, brilliant!!!

[tbops]

This might entertain you guys. Good comparison

http://www.torque.tv/?player=TorqueTV_27_copy&...

piutty he didng get better tyres

[Streetrod]

Joecooool said:

Streetrod said:

Wolfsbait said:

Surely what hasn't been properly covered in this strand is the matter of style and image...brand even.

The 911 has evolved organically over the years, without deviating to far from that original form, whereas each Skyline has been largely scrapped at the end of its product cycle....with the exception of the pseudo-Ferrari rear lights. People like visible heritage...well I do.

Therefore it matters to buyers who don't want to drive at ten tenths everywhere, but instead want a car that looks rather understated and dare I say it...classic.

The Nissan just doesn't. As wonderful a piece of engineering as you'll find on the road anywhere I don't doubt, but the fact remains it looks...well 'cheap', 'brutal' and 'derivative' of many other shapes...not unique like the 911.

Utterly subjective I admit, but in reality I don't think Porsche are losing any sleep over losing sales to Nissan...I firmly believe that the markets are subtely different and image will continue to be a major deciding factor.

To say that Porsche are not losing any sleep over the Nissan I think is very naive. Porsche cars sales are down well over 30% this year so far with no signs of recovery. If this was their only problem that might be bad enough, but when you factor in the GT-R as a new competitor in their market then they would be foolish to ignore the potential impact which is why they tried to rubbish the GT-R's ring times as they could be seen as a threat.
Now a lot a people have said that these cars appeal to different markets and up to a point they do, but as has been shown on this site we have a number of 911 owners or potential 911 owners who are now buying the GT-R. I was one of them but for my own reasons I have gone for an Audi R8.
Porsche make great cars and have had an excellent business model over the years but the market has caught them up and in some cases has taken over.
I would like to have faith that Porsche will not roll over on this but will up their game, if not market forces will move against them.

Porsche will be fine. People are coming in now and trying to make a big deal that a less expensive car supposedly put up bigger numbers than they did and this will spell their demise.

Corvette has been doing it for 55 years. Corvette has absolutely waxed the floor with Porsche in every race series where they compete directly against each other. At Le mans, Porsche won't even compete against Corvette. Corvette is left to compete with Aston and Ferrari, neither of which has offered much competition.

Push rods and leaf springs still reign supreme.

But there are still those who think that more complicated engines and suspensions somehow translate into a better car. Its the scam German car companies have been pulling for years and many people get suckered into it. Nissan with the GT-R have taken this techno scam even farther. The new whiz bang transmission is giving all the fan boys a hard on while they completely ignore the fact that it is fragile and incredibly expensive to replace. Meanwhile Corvette owners get their car serviced at GM dealers at the same hourly rate as any other Chevrolet. Last week I had my transmission fluid changed, an oil change and a complete brake job (new rotors and pads) on my Corvette. My out the door price was $725. That same service on the GT-R would have been more than $12,000.

If you want a GT-R, there is good news though. A year or two out when the transmission failure start racking up and the general public finds out about the $20,000 transmission repairs (or even clutch replacements), as well as the general price for basic services, resale value will be utter crap and you will be able to pick one up for half the sticker price.

Edited by Joecooool on Monday 13th October 16:02

Mr Coool, the problem with you is that you are making comments based on conjecture and hearsay. You are a fan of Corvettes and good luck to you on that, I on the other am a car fan. I have driven many 911's over the years, as well as a few late model Ferraris and other so called fast cars. At the moment I have an R8 on order which I can’t wait to get. On the flip side I am also very old school and have been drag racing and building streetrods for over 25 years so the small and big block Chevy’s are very familiar too me. On recent trips to the states I spent a couple of weeks in Hertz Mustangs and a new Z06, see the attached pics:





The first thing I did once I picked it up was to drive round the back of the Hertz office and disable the traction control, I then smoked past the office waving as I went by, the looks on their faces was priceless, but I digress.
What I am trying to say is that all cars can be fun, was the Mustang a good car? Hell no but is was fun, great noise, lairly tail slides but the small block topped out just under 140MPH on the causeway between Tampa and St Petes and it handled like a drunk camel.

The Vette was also OK, great engine but the fact was I felt like I was driving around in a big yellow penis and that I should have chest wig and medallion.

The problem the US has had is that it has suffered from a lack of domestic chose when it comes to sports cars, it was either the Vetted or go European, and a lot of Americans would rather shot off their right foot than do than seriously

The main reason that GM has stuck with the push rods and the leaf spring is because of cost. And also the US road network is mostly grid based so the need for cars that handle was never high up the order. Yes they have done a good job with the late model Vette's but as has been seen the V8 in the states is now looking very rocky which is a shame as I love them.

It will be interesting to see how the vettes cope when the GT-R's start racing against them.

Do yourself a favour get out and drive a 911, an R8 and a GT-R, then come back here with some informed comment, at that point people might start to take you more seriously

Edited by Streetrod on Tuesday 14th October 14:13

[Niffty951]

DiscoColin said:

Joecooool]Corvette ...[racing said:

...
Push rods and leaf springs still reign supreme.

I'll have to nitpick here as my Corvette devotee colleague at work assures me that racing 'Vettes most certainly do not have stone age leaf springs or anything like them...

Push rods - despite being considered older tech and comparatively troublesome to reliably coax high revs out of do still have some fundamental packaging and weight distribution advantages too, however I think that you will find that the reason that Porsche do not race against them has more to do with the rules favouring large displacement NA engines at the moment rather than turbos...

And while respect is unquestionably due to the boys from Detroit - they are all wrong hand drive so they will never be selling me one I am afraid.

All this talk of Vettes is making me want one! I don't know what it is but there's something about the simple and brutal 'axe murderer' approach to building a fast car that I really like.

I would also buy one (not sure how long I'd keep it, because I do love Porsche cars on a day to day basis but), I'd definitely have one if they were available in RHD

[Joecooool]

Streetrod said:

Joecooool said:

Streetrod said:

Wolfsbait said:

Surely what hasn't been properly covered in this strand is the matter of style and image...brand even.

The 911 has evolved organically over the years, without deviating to far from that original form, whereas each Skyline has been largely scrapped at the end of its product cycle....with the exception of the pseudo-Ferrari rear lights. People like visible heritage...well I do.

Therefore it matters to buyers who don't want to drive at ten tenths everywhere, but instead want a car that looks rather understated and dare I say it...classic.

The Nissan just doesn't. As wonderful a piece of engineering as you'll find on the road anywhere I don't doubt, but the fact remains it looks...well 'cheap', 'brutal' and 'derivative' of many other shapes...not unique like the 911.

Utterly subjective I admit, but in reality I don't think Porsche are losing any sleep over losing sales to Nissan...I firmly believe that the markets are subtely different and image will continue to be a major deciding factor.

To say that Porsche are not losing any sleep over the Nissan I think is very naive. Porsche cars sales are down well over 30% this year so far with no signs of recovery. If this was their only problem that might be bad enough, but when you factor in the GT-R as a new competitor in their market then they would be foolish to ignore the potential impact which is why they tried to rubbish the GT-R's ring times as they could be seen as a threat.
Now a lot a people have said that these cars appeal to different markets and up to a point they do, but as has been shown on this site we have a number of 911 owners or potential 911 owners who are now buying the GT-R. I was one of them but for my own reasons I have gone for an Audi R8.
Porsche make great cars and have had an excellent business model over the years but the market has caught them up and in some cases has taken over.
I would like to have faith that Porsche will not roll over on this but will up their game, if not market forces will move against them.

Porsche will be fine. People are coming in now and trying to make a big deal that a less expensive car supposedly put up bigger numbers than they did and this will spell their demise.

Corvette has been doing it for 55 years. Corvette has absolutely waxed the floor with Porsche in every race series where they compete directly against each other. At Le mans, Porsche won't even compete against Corvette. Corvette is left to compete with Aston and Ferrari, neither of which has offered much competition.

Push rods and leaf springs still reign supreme.

But there are still those who think that more complicated engines and suspensions somehow translate into a better car. Its the scam German car companies have been pulling for years and many people get suckered into it. Nissan with the GT-R have taken this techno scam even farther. The new whiz bang transmission is giving all the fan boys a hard on while they completely ignore the fact that it is fragile and incredibly expensive to replace. Meanwhile Corvette owners get their car serviced at GM dealers at the same hourly rate as any other Chevrolet. Last week I had my transmission fluid changed, an oil change and a complete brake job (new rotors and pads) on my Corvette. My out the door price was $725. That same service on the GT-R would have been more than $12,000.

If you want a GT-R, there is good news though. A year or two out when the transmission failure start racking up and the general public finds out about the $20,000 transmission repairs (or even clutch replacements), as well as the general price for basic services, resale value will be utter crap and you will be able to pick one up for half the sticker price.

Edited by Joecooool on Monday 13th October 16:02

Mr Coool, the problem with you is that you are making comments based on conjecture and hearsay. You are a fan of Corvettes and good luck to you on that, I on the other am a car fan. I have driven many 911's over the years, as well as a few late model Ferraris and other so called fast cars. At the moment I have an R8 on order which I can’t wait to get. On the flip side I am also very old school and have been drag racing and building streetrods for over 25 years so the small and big block Chevy’s are very familiar too me. On recent trips to the states I spent a couple of weeks in Hertz Mustangs and a new Z06, see the attached pics:





The first thing I did once I picked it up was to drive round the back of the Hertz office and disable the traction control, I then smoked past the office waving as I went by, the looks on their faces was priceless, but I digress.
What I am trying to say is that all cars can be fun, was the Mustang a good car? Hell no but is was fun, great noise, lairly tail slides but the small block topped out just under 140MPH on the causeway between Tampa and St Petes and it handled like a drunk camel.

The Vette was also OK, great engine but the fact was I felt like I was driving around in a big yellow penis and that I should have chest wig and medallion.

The problem the US has had is that it has suffered from a lack of domestic chose when it comes to sports cars, it was either the Vetted or go European, and a lot of Americans would rather shot off their right foot than do than seriously

The main reason that GM has stuck with the push rods and the leaf spring is because of cost. And also the US road network is mostly grid based so the need for cars that handle was never high up the order. Yes they have done a good job with the late model Vette's but as has been seen the V8 in the states is now looking very rocky which is a shame as I love them.

It will be interesting to see how the vettes cope when the GT-R's start racing against them.

Do yourself a favour get out and drive a 911, an R8 and a GT-R, then come back here with some informed comment, at that point people might start to take you more seriously

Edited by Streetrod on Tuesday 14th October 14:13

Did you even look at my profile? I own one American car and several foreign cars. I've had several Porsche's including a 944, 928 and a Boxster S. My only Nissan to date has been a Pathfinder which was built quite well.

Regardless that isn't what this thread is all about. Its about a company selling a car based on facts and figures that are simply impossible. Japanese companies have a history of providing ringer cars to auto testers to get good press only to then sell a more subdued car to the general public. Mazda did it with the RX8, Toyota did it with the Supra and many, myself included, believe Nissan are doing it now with the GT-R.

The ring time to me is a dumb issue. Nissan already stated that if you drive the car without the traction control on - like they did to get the 7:29 claimed time - you void the warranty. If you want to get the advertised 3.5 second 0 - 60 time - you void your warranty. Who the hell would buy a performance car that you have to "void the warranty" to get the performance?

[hairykrishna]

Joecooool said:

Nissan already stated that if you drive the car without the traction control on - like they did to get the 7:29 claimed time - you void the warranty.

This is not true, as far as I can see. Autoblog (who you link to in the other thread where you're bashing Nissan) certainly don't think so. It would seem that if you break your car with launch control, with traction control off, the warranty is voided. Simply switching off traction control does not.

[peterpeter]

hairykrishna said:

Joecooool said:

Nissan already stated that if you drive the car without the traction control on - like they did to get the 7:29 claimed time - you void the warranty.

This is not true, as far as I can see. Autoblog (who you link to in the other thread where you're bashing Nissan) certainly don't think so. It would seem that if you break your car with launch control, with traction control off, the warranty is voided. Simply switching off traction control does not.

Its not true. Warranty is only voided if you keep raping the LC.

You can drive with VDC off.

[Streetrod]

Edited by Streetrod on Tuesday 14th October 14:13

[/quote]Did you even look at my profile? I own one American car and several foreign cars. I've had several Porsche's including a 944, 928 and a Boxster S. My only Nissan to date has been a Pathfinder which was built quite well.

Regardless that isn't what this thread is all about. Its about a company selling a car based on facts and figures that are simply impossible. Japanese companies have a history of providing ringer cars to auto testers to get good press only to then sell a more subdued car to the general public. Mazda did it with the RX8, Toyota did it with the Supra and many, myself included, believe Nissan are doing it now with the GT-R.

The ring time to me is a dumb issue. Nissan already stated that if you drive the car without the traction control on - like they did to get the 7:29 claimed time - you void the warranty. If you want to get the advertised 3.5 second 0 - 60 time - you void your warranty. Who the hell would buy a performance car that you have to "void the warranty" to get the performance?


[/quote]


Sorry , Have I missed something, which impossible figures are you talking about and what evidence do you have that the car was a ringer, and I mean real evidence?

[sjc]

Thanks for your conrtributions Streetrod, al last someone from youir side of the pond, who has added some unbiased balance. Rest assured your comments will be taken seriously,even if "JOEIonlywanttocherrypickbitsofarticlestomakemypointCOOL" isn't.

[Joecooool]

sjc said:

Thanks for your conrtributions Streetrod, al last someone from youir side of the pond, who has added some unbiased balance. Rest assured your comments will be taken seriously,even if "JOEIonlywanttocherrypickbitsofarticlestomakemypointCOOL" isn't.

Damn, doesn't anyone read profiles? He is from the same side of the pond as you.

[Joecooool]

hairykrishna said:

Joecooool said:

Nissan already stated that if you drive the car without the traction control on - like they did to get the 7:29 claimed time - you void the warranty.

This is not true, as far as I can see. Autoblog (who you link to in the other thread where you're bashing Nissan) certainly don't think so. It would seem that if you break your car with launch control, with traction control off, the warranty is voided. Simply switching off traction control does not.

You need to read them again. The warranty claim Nissan denied happened to a vehicle that broke with launch control (VDC) ON. Nissan voided the warranty because the car had previously been driven with the traction control off.

Get your facts straight.

[Joecooool]

Streetrod said:

Sorry , Have I missed something, which impossible figures are you talking about and what evidence do you have that the car was a ringer, and I mean real evidence?

The fact that both BMW and Porsche claimed foul. Porsche bought and tested a GT-R and came no where close to the advertised numbers. BMW on the other hand interviewed the team doing the testing and were told it had 693 hp.

Oh, and then there are the laws of physics...

[sjc]

Joecooool said:

sjc said:

Thanks for your conrtributions Streetrod, al last someone from youir side of the pond, who has added some unbiased balance. Rest assured your comments will be taken seriously,even if "JOEIonlywanttocherrypickbitsofarticlestomakemypointCOOL" isn't.

Damn, doesn't anyone read profiles? He is from the same side of the pond as you.

Well that explains it doesn't it.

[sjc]

Joecooool said:

Streetrod said:

Sorry , Have I missed something, which impossible figures are you talking about and what evidence do you have that the car was a ringer, and I mean real evidence?

The fact that both BMW and Porsche claimed foul. Porsche bought and tested a GT-R and came no where close to the advertised numbers. BMW on the other hand interviewed the team doing the testing and were told it had 693 hp.

Oh, and then there are the laws of physics...

Here we go again. So because BMW and Porsche say something it must be gospel, if Nissan do then its a blatant lie. You really are maiking your self look a fool with your continued vendetta. Here's something for you to try and understand. If the Porsche driver was just 1/10 of a second slower through each bend at the 'Ring in the GTR compared to the Porsche (in which he has 100's of hours of experience with)it would equate to approx 15 seconds on a lap.And as for any of the 693BHP even if it did ( which it didn't because according to you the transmission is crap,and you can't have it both ways can you?)it doesn't explain the fact that untouched dynoed personal imports loaned to all the car mags have continually posted similar amazing stats against its opposition. I don't expect you to answer that as you never do when the same fact has been put in front of you several times.