Finally: Some facts on the GT-R's Ring time
Discussion
eclou said:
Guibo said:
Fragile as glass, eh?
The real issue now is what to replace the GR6 with. Bueller?No, I think the real issue still is:
The GT-R tranny isn't as fragile as everyone claims it is.
Since end of October how many new transmission failure cases have there been? Doesn't matter if owners are refraining from using LC or not, they are still running them hard on road courses, on drag strips, on highway pulls. Statistically, with more owners taking ownership and piling on more miles, we should see an increase in cases of transmission failures, because the GR6 is as fragile as glass. But we're really not.
Those high-profile cases of septskyline and Me_quacker (or whatever his name is) had holes so large in their stories you could drive a Cayenne through them.
gp900bj:
The GT-R was on the stickier Dunlops. Those are still run-flats, however. I don't think the Richards GT2 was on MPSC's. Based on some pics I've seen, he was running far more track-oriented rubber. The very bald shoulder and un-MPSC-like tread in this picture (along with the Hankook sponsor logo) indicates a very aggressive dry-weather tire:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3050/2830972740_8e3...
You who are not familiar with Jim Richards can look him up in wikipedia. He's had numerous tarmac rally victories to his name, many at the wheel of a rear-engined Porsche. He is also connected to GTR's of the past.
I think the point is, a person with Richards' experience in a 300kg lighter car with very sticky rubber should not be cocking anything up.
The GT-R was on the stickier Dunlops. Those are still run-flats, however. I don't think the Richards GT2 was on MPSC's. Based on some pics I've seen, he was running far more track-oriented rubber. The very bald shoulder and un-MPSC-like tread in this picture (along with the Hankook sponsor logo) indicates a very aggressive dry-weather tire:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3050/2830972740_8e3...
You who are not familiar with Jim Richards can look him up in wikipedia. He's had numerous tarmac rally victories to his name, many at the wheel of a rear-engined Porsche. He is also connected to GTR's of the past.
I think the point is, a person with Richards' experience in a 300kg lighter car with very sticky rubber should not be cocking anything up.
Danger_Mouse said:
freedman said:
gp900bj said:
GravelBen said:
Trommel said:
GravelBen said:
It also gives some balance to Trommels' claims about the GTR dominating tarmac rallies left right and centre.
I think you're confusing me with someone else - I've never mentioned anything about tarmac rallies. will edit the other post.It was gp900bj who said "The GT-R is crushing Porsche's best in almost every tarmac rally it is competing in." earlier in this thread, which is plain wrong. No denying that the GTR is doing remarkably well for a car that heavy, but it certainly isn't 'crushing' the competition.
Edited by GravelBen on Monday 24th November 23:32
Earlier this year a 24 yr old kid became the youngest ever to win the Targa West tarmac rally. He was behind the wheel of a privately funded R35 GT-R, his first ever ride in an R35 and amazingly, the R35 was driven on production road tires (BS Re070) because they simply could not source R-compounds in the GT-R's size in time for the event. Every other vehicle in his category was fitted with track prepped (shaved) R-compounds.
He beat Jim Richards by a cool 15 seconds outright, despite Jim having the advantage of factory support, 20 years of experience, Michelin Sport Cup R-compounds, 50hp more and 300kg less weight.
If this is not a result that you can acknowledge then I can't help you.
If the Jim hadn't have gone off the track and cocked lots of things up, he would have obviously beat the GTR. The GT2 was significantly quicker than the GTR and the Lambo was a lot quicker than both of them.
I was about to mention that. The same claim has been shot down on many different threads but he just keeps coming back with it. I'm sure Jim will appreciate that 'factory support' once he finds out about it though. But even without that, using his logic the Subaru Impreza is a much better car than the GTR as Tony Quinn (another hugely experienced and successful tarmac rally contender) was thrashed at Targa NZ by two of them (Group N rally cars, presumably with the restrictors removed), both with drivers commonly considered to be gravel specialists. One of them was even a woman driver (
)who took a different sponsor out as co-driver each day. Not to mention the GT3RS and R34 GTR that beat him as well...Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 23 December 00:36
Guibo said:
I think the point is, a person with Richards' experience in a 300kg lighter car with very sticky rubber should not be cocking anything up.
Just a second, wasn't the point before that the GTR should be unilaterally worshipped? At least you realise that he only won because a couple of faster drivers/car combinations made mistakes at opportune moments.
GravelBen said:
Guibo said:
I think the point is, a person with Richards' experience in a 300kg lighter car with very sticky rubber should not be cocking anything up.
Just a second, wasn't the point before that the GTR should be unilaterally worshipped? At least you realise that he only won because a couple of faster drivers/car combinations made mistakes at opportune moments.
gged.I've never said the GT-R will be faster than the GT2 in all conditions. Test after tests has shown that it runs the GT2 very close; on average, I think the GT2 has been faster. I'm just pointing out that the GT-R with a driver new to the car can be competitive with a Porsche veteran, when (if we worship at the feet of hp/wt) there should be no competition whatsoever. And ask yourself: why are the Lambo and Porsche driver making the mistakes that the GT-R driver isn't? Being new to the car, and with the car weighing that much more, shouldn't it be the GT-R driver making the mistakes?
GravelBen said:
Because the GT2 and Lambo were having their own battle out front and pushing a bit too hard?
Its also a bit of an assumption that the GTR driver didn't make any mistake, his may have just proved less costly than the others on the day.
That's possible. However, at the end of the first leg, the GT-R was already 9 seconds ahead of the GT2. Wouldn't the GT2 driver realize he'd have to take the GT-R more seriously? And it's not like this is wheel-to-wheel banging racing action; these cars are run at intervals against the clock.Its also a bit of an assumption that the GTR driver didn't make any mistake, his may have just proved less costly than the others on the day.
On the day? The event was held over 4 days. The excuse, as I've been hearing it, is that the only reason the others lost was because both of them (coincidence?) made mistakes while the GT-R somehow benefitted from a flawless performance. Now that we agree that isn't necessarily the case, then where is the advantage to be had by the GT-R? Not in power, not in weight, not in driver experience, not in tires.
Who said that there was any inherent advantage? The bloke in the GTR drove better for enough of the event to claim a well-deserved win. Others were faster, he was more consistent. All I'm saying is that the claims of some posters that the GTR is 'crushing the competition' in tarmac rallies are hopelessly inaccurate.
As I'm sure you know, 9s after the first leg of a 4 day rally is pretty meaningless - taking Targa NZ as an example, the Impreza which won made up 1:20 on the final (5th) day to win by around 20s overall.
As I'm sure you know, 9s after the first leg of a 4 day rally is pretty meaningless - taking Targa NZ as an example, the Impreza which won made up 1:20 on the final (5th) day to win by around 20s overall.
Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 23 December 01:45
GravelBen said:
Who said that there was any inherent advantage?
As I'm sure you know, 9s after the first leg of a 4 day rally is pretty meaningless - taking Targa NZ as an example, the Impreza which won made up 1:20 on the final (5th) day to win by around 20s overall.
It seemed to me that people were saying the inherent advantage for the GT-R driver was that the Porsche and Lambo driver were prone to cocking things up, and thus gifting the win to an unworthy car. Ie, the only way a GT-R can be competitive let alone win is to either a) cheat, or b) hope the planets align so that the competitors would effectively avert a foregone conclusion (that the lighter, more power cars on grippier rubber with more experienced drivers would win). As I'm sure you know, 9s after the first leg of a 4 day rally is pretty meaningless - taking Targa NZ as an example, the Impreza which won made up 1:20 on the final (5th) day to win by around 20s overall.
Then the precedent has been set: the GT2 and Lambo driver should have known better than to "battle it out" (not that that happened anyway) and take unnecessary risks that cost them the title. If they knew an up and comer could very well take the win on the last day, it seems reasonable (to me anyway) that they wouldn't "cock things up" in the final 3 days. If you've done it on the first day, don't make it 4 for 4.
kVA said:
gp900bj said:
If you are much of a Porsche fan then you would have heard of Jim Richards. He is regarded as somewhat of a God in Porsche racing circles as he has dominated the tarmac rally scene in Australia for the last decade, and ever since his signing up with Porsche. His current weapon of choice is a specially made 911 GT2 RS with full factory support and few cars, if any, have been able to take the fight to him at any tarmac rally event.
Earlier this year a 24 yr old kid became the youngest ever to win the Targa West tarmac rally. He was behind the wheel of a privately funded R35 GT-R, his first ever ride in an R35 and amazingly, the R35 was driven on production road tires (BS Re070) because they simply could not source R-compounds in the GT-R's size in time for the event. Every other vehicle in his category was fitted with track prepped (shaved) R-compounds.
He beat Jim Richards by a cool 15 seconds outright, despite Jim having the advantage of factory support, 20 years of experience, Michelin Sport Cup R-compounds, 50hp more and 300kg less weight.
If this is not a result that you can acknowledge then I can't help you.
Never heard of this Jim Richards by the way, [/small]Earlier this year a 24 yr old kid became the youngest ever to win the Targa West tarmac rally. He was behind the wheel of a privately funded R35 GT-R, his first ever ride in an R35 and amazingly, the R35 was driven on production road tires (BS Re070) because they simply could not source R-compounds in the GT-R's size in time for the event. Every other vehicle in his category was fitted with track prepped (shaved) R-compounds.
He beat Jim Richards by a cool 15 seconds outright, despite Jim having the advantage of factory support, 20 years of experience, Michelin Sport Cup R-compounds, 50hp more and 300kg less weight.
If this is not a result that you can acknowledge then I can't help you.
Edited by kVA on Monday 22 December 23:07
Have any of you guys actually done any rallying?
Rallying is much, much more a test of the driver and navigator partnership than the car... My rally car was off the road once and I won a 12-car rally in my Mums Civic Hondamatic, against an Escort Mexico and a few other properly prepared cars, simply because I was a bit braver in torrential rain and had a briliiant navigator.
When you only do each corner once it tells you nothing about the comparative cars, just about the skill, bravery, and determination of the driver - especially if the consequences of getting it wrong are too high. And that last point most likely explains the GT-Rs result... I would be much more likely to take a corner on a mountain road, with a 300 foot drop if I got it wrong, at 10/10ths in a 4WD car with all sorts of electronic wizardry to get me out of trouble, than a 2WD lightweight Turbo car with presumably fairly unforgiving tendencies! Especially if I was a young single man with no family!
So maybe, in real World conditions, the GT-R is quicker, as it probably gives 99.9% of drivers the confidence to push it to the limits - I certainly drove my Audi quattro a lot nearer its limits than I do my 996. But on a racetrack, in the right hands, I can't see it personally...
Rallying is much, much more a test of the driver and navigator partnership than the car... My rally car was off the road once and I won a 12-car rally in my Mums Civic Hondamatic, against an Escort Mexico and a few other properly prepared cars, simply because I was a bit braver in torrential rain and had a briliiant navigator.
When you only do each corner once it tells you nothing about the comparative cars, just about the skill, bravery, and determination of the driver - especially if the consequences of getting it wrong are too high. And that last point most likely explains the GT-Rs result... I would be much more likely to take a corner on a mountain road, with a 300 foot drop if I got it wrong, at 10/10ths in a 4WD car with all sorts of electronic wizardry to get me out of trouble, than a 2WD lightweight Turbo car with presumably fairly unforgiving tendencies! Especially if I was a young single man with no family!
So maybe, in real World conditions, the GT-R is quicker, as it probably gives 99.9% of drivers the confidence to push it to the limits - I certainly drove my Audi quattro a lot nearer its limits than I do my 996. But on a racetrack, in the right hands, I can't see it personally...
Edited by kVA on Tuesday 23 December 07:55
Guibo said:
GravelBen said:
Guibo said:
I think the point is, a person with Richards' experience in a 300kg lighter car with very sticky rubber should not be cocking anything up.
Just a second, wasn't the point before that the GTR should be unilaterally worshipped? At least you realise that he only won because a couple of faster drivers/car combinations made mistakes at opportune moments.
gged.I've never said the GT-R will be faster than the GT2 in all conditions. Test after tests has shown that it runs the GT2 very close; on average, I think the GT2 has been faster. I'm just pointing out that the GT-R with a driver new to the car can be competitive with a Porsche veteran, when (if we worship at the feet of hp/wt) there should be no competition whatsoever. And ask yourself: why are the Lambo and Porsche driver making the mistakes that the GT-R driver isn't? Being new to the car, and with the car weighing that much more, shouldn't it be the GT-R driver making the mistakes?
Are you they were only making mistakes because of the cars? Try good old Jim going the wrong way on a stage, was that the fault of the car too?
The GT2 and Lambo were miles quicker in the stages they successfully finished.
It's an achievement for the driver but certainly not the car that was a lot slower than the GT2/Lambo.
I've just read the Wiki on Jim Richards and the guy's a race driver - not a rally driver! He is also never going to see 60 again!
Racing is about being consistent on every lap, remembering the braking points and racing lines and knowing the limits of your car. Rallying is all about reactions, courage and commitment. In 30 years as a rally fan, I have never ever seen a race driver make the top 10 on an International standard rally competition, let alone anyone aged over 50!
Talking of Porsche heros - why do you think Walter Rohrl stopped rallying nearly 20 years ago? There's still few that can match him around the 'Ring though...
Racing is about being consistent on every lap, remembering the braking points and racing lines and knowing the limits of your car. Rallying is all about reactions, courage and commitment. In 30 years as a rally fan, I have never ever seen a race driver make the top 10 on an International standard rally competition, let alone anyone aged over 50!
Talking of Porsche heros - why do you think Walter Rohrl stopped rallying nearly 20 years ago? There's still few that can match him around the 'Ring though...
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff