Finally: Some facts on the GT-R's Ring time
Discussion
noumenon said:
Dr S said:
One of the features of the GT-R is that it is fairly easy to drive at the limit. A 997TT is much more tricky by comparison with the way power is often unpredictably shifted between wheels.
Everyone seems pretty much in agreement on that. Isn't that another reason the GT-R is better? How fast would the TT be if they put the engine in the right place?
Anyone who read my posts on this thread should come to the conclusion that I rate the GT-R highly. I only doubt Nissan's claims on the 07:29 which are fishy at best.
noumenon said:
Dr S said:
One of the features of the GT-R is that it is fairly easy to drive at the limit. A 997TT is much more tricky by comparison with the way power is often unpredictably shifted between wheels.
Everyone seems pretty much in agreement on that. Isn't that another reason the GT-R is better? How fast would the TT be if they put the engine in the right place?timmo said:
Guys,
Just back from a 2 day RMA trackday at the ring and was driven around in the Japanese Nissan GTR with Lambo style doors by Wolfgang Weber
the car had KW 3 way suspension but with all the electronic diffs still attached
he said he did a 7:45 last week and is still developing the car !!!
I have met him before at the Sachenring and have no reason to doubt his time
BTW - the car only does 2 and half laps of the ring before it needs refuelling ( hence why it does not race there )
tim
That's the reason why Wolfgang has all the incentive to be as fast as possible to prove that the KW suspension set-up makes the car substantially faster than stock. He also did rounds in stock set-up after his runs on KW to establish the delta. That's where the 07:45 comes from.Just back from a 2 day RMA trackday at the ring and was driven around in the Japanese Nissan GTR with Lambo style doors by Wolfgang Weber
the car had KW 3 way suspension but with all the electronic diffs still attached
he said he did a 7:45 last week and is still developing the car !!!
I have met him before at the Sachenring and have no reason to doubt his time
BTW - the car only does 2 and half laps of the ring before it needs refuelling ( hence why it does not race there )
tim
eclou said:
Sam is shown drifting thru each corner of the video in the 997GT3. He might as well be applying the handbrake to throw the test, as he is essentially braking out of each corner instead of accelerating with grip.
We have seen durometer testing on the Bridgestones here showing they are roughly equivalent to a Toyo R888 or Michelin Cup in compound softness.
Just because he is drifting does not mean that is the actual footage that set the lap time. Applying the handbrake is not quite the same, as he'd be far down in the revs as the track straightens. With a bit of wheelspin, he'd be right in the meat of the powerband to launch down the straight.We have seen durometer testing on the Bridgestones here showing they are roughly equivalent to a Toyo R888 or Michelin Cup in compound softness.
Seriously, how many more excuses can you guys come up with? If it's not Millen's bias (despite C&D showing similar results on an obviously underperforming GT-R), then it's always something else. How about SCCA racer (in C5 Z06 and GT3) Gary Thomason's bias against the GT-R in the autocross portion of R&T's track test? Yet he was still faster in the GT-R. The point is that the GT-R is clearly faster than the GT3. You can claim these drivers don't know how to drive rear-engined Porsches, but that claim falls flat on its face when Meaden and Harris are concerned. Drifting does not in any way explain how the GT-R demolished the GT3 in a straight line dragrace, with the GT3 getting the jump at the start.
Do you have a link to this durometer testing? A picture would be nice. Good to know that those who discount the cold weather testing by Evo, citing it as disadvantageous to the GT3, don't have a leg to stand on. In either case, the Dunlop is the faster tire. That's the one that was used for the record runs. That's the one that Porsche and Webber should be using. The softness of the Bridgestone, whether true or not, is irrelevant.
Edited by Guibo on Wednesday 12th November 17:38
Dr S said:
noumenon said:
Dr S said:
One of the features of the GT-R is that it is fairly easy to drive at the limit. A 997TT is much more tricky by comparison with the way power is often unpredictably shifted between wheels.
Everyone seems pretty much in agreement on that. Isn't that another reason the GT-R is better? How fast would the TT be if they put the engine in the right place?Anyone who read my posts on this thread should come to the conclusion that I rate the GT-R highly. I only doubt Nissan's claims on the 07:29 which are fishy at best.
Guibo said:
Just because he is drifting does not mean that is the actual footage that set the lap time. Applying the handbrake is not quite the same, as he'd be far down in the revs as the track straightens. With a bit of wheelspin, he'd be right in the meat of the powerband to launch down the straight.
I was using the handbrake as an analogy. When 2 cars do straight line acceleration if one spins the tires at launch the other car will be farther ahead. Navigating thru a turn on a roadcourse already scrubs off speed even without flicking out the rear end. The drifting will be an even slower maneuver. Can you explain how a Pro in a GT3 can barely beat an amateur driver in a 1989 civic?noumenon said:
Dr S said:
noumenon said:
Dr S said:
One of the features of the GT-R is that it is fairly easy to drive at the limit. A 997TT is much more tricky by comparison with the way power is often unpredictably shifted between wheels.
Everyone seems pretty much in agreement on that. Isn't that another reason the GT-R is better? How fast would the TT be if they put the engine in the right place?Anyone who read my posts on this thread should come to the conclusion that I rate the GT-R highly. I only doubt Nissan's claims on the 07:29 which are fishy at best.
eclou said:
Guibo said:
Just because he is drifting does not mean that is the actual footage that set the lap time. Applying the handbrake is not quite the same, as he'd be far down in the revs as the track straightens. With a bit of wheelspin, he'd be right in the meat of the powerband to launch down the straight.
I was using the handbrake as an analogy. When 2 cars do straight line acceleration if one spins the tires at launch the other car will be farther ahead. Navigating thru a turn on a roadcourse already scrubs off speed even without flicking out the rear end. The drifting will be an even slower maneuver. Can you explain how a Pro in a GT3 can barely beat an amateur driver in a 1989 civic?Civic (obviously modified) vs GT3 on a different day doesn't prove anything.
Also, could you clarify your statement (with a source) for this?:
"His [Millen's] best laps in the GTR have been surpassed by other less famous drivers such as Craig Stanton by 1-3 seconds in a 997tt and 997GT3."
Edited by Guibo on Wednesday 12th November 18:49
Guibo said:
It is a bad analogy; doesn't apply in the least. I'd bet if he didn't drift a bit, people would be complaining that he wasn't trying, or that the car was understeering. Anything to fit. And you still have no idea if that footage is of the timed lap.
I don't know your experience with regards to road course work, but you are making a statement that is simply wrong. Anytime you drift thru a turn in a road course you are losing time and distance. Do you see HvS or WH drifting thru the NRing on their laps?Guibo said:
Getting off the line, you need a little bit of wheelspin to make best use of the car's powerband. If not, you can very well bog. It was pretty clear from the video that the GT-R was pulling away strongly even after the launch. Was the GT3 spinning its wheels 3/4 of the way down the straight too?
I am not arguing the results of the drag race, just pointing out that a standing burnout will yield lost time.Guibo said:
Civic (obviously modified) vs GT3 on a different day doesn't prove anything.
A 110hp Civic will not run equal to a well driven 997GT3 at Willow Springs. GT3 times are typically in the 1:28-1:32 range depending on the competency of the driver. My point is 1:36 is so off the mark as to be laughable. As you have astutely inferred the video does not necessarily show the lap of the Gt3 driver. To continue your line of reasoning, there is no proof of the H2H lap times at all!Guibo said:
Also, could you clarify your statement (with a source) for this?:
"His [Millen's] best laps in the GTR have been surpassed by other less famous drivers such as Craig Stanton by 1-3 seconds in a 997tt and 997GT3."
On Oct 30th, Stanton drove a 997tt on street tires with a passenger to a 1:32.2 lap. He estimated that he could have gotten into the 1:29's. He also lapped the course at 1:28.9 in a standard 996Gt3. Unlike Millen, Stanton is not sponsored by Nissan."His [Millen's] best laps in the GTR have been surpassed by other less famous drivers such as Craig Stanton by 1-3 seconds in a 997tt and 997GT3."
Edited by Guibo on Wednesday 12th November 18:49
eclou said:
Do you see HvS or WH drifting thru the NRing on their laps?
Not on the the Ring, as the in-car vids you see won't show subtle drifting. But on Sachsenring, on paved rallies, and on HRing, you can catch them drifting.Looks like drifting going on here, at ~1:03.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiUHPxAnRLk
The point is your statement about pulling the handbrake is absurd.
eclou said:
I am not arguing the results of the drag race, just pointing out that a standing burnout will yield lost time.
Standing burnout? Where was there a standing burnout?? The GT3 lept off the line while the GT-R just sat there.We *should* be discussing the results of the drag race, because according to experts of Sir Isaac Newton's theories, the GT-R should not be able to pull away like that. Isn't that the whole gist of the argument against the GT-R? That it's too heavy, too weak? The race wasn't won at the start, the GT-R was pulling steadily away at speed. Go look at the Evo telemetry at Bedford and you'll see the same thing, and that's without any standing starts. Explain that to me.
eclou said:
A 110hp Civic will not run equal to a well driven 997GT3 at Willow Springs.
I won't pretend to know that that car is 110 hp, nor will I pretend to know that it's not on race slicks. So a 1:40 = 1:36? If you're saying a well-driven GT3 laps in high 1:20's, then the fact that a "stock" 110 hp Civic is even within 15 seconds is pretty astounding, no?eclou said:
As you have astutely inferred the video does not necessarily show the lap of the Gt3 driver. To continue your line of reasoning, there is no proof of the H2H lap times at all!
No, now your inference is wrong. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying we know the 2 cars in the H2H test were stock and tested in identical conditions. Trying to draw meaningful conclusion from a comparison of one video of a car of unknown provenance in unkown conditions against another car somewhere else is pretty foolhardy.BTW, that Civic is hardly stock:
http://solo2.org/forums/storage/14/130426/240vsciv...
For all his "showboating" against an obviously comitted Civic driver, Hubinette was still 4 seconds quicker.
eclou said:
On Oct 30th, Stanton drove a 997tt on street tires with a passenger to a 1:32.2 lap. He estimated that he could have gotten into the 1:29's. He also lapped the course at 1:28.9 in a standard 996Gt3. Unlike Millen, Stanton is not sponsored by Nissan.
That's not a source. Didn't that 997tt have some mods? ECU+intake+exhaust, good for around 550 hp? So an awesome PROFESSIONAL Porsche racer* can lap a couple of seconds quicker in a modified Turbo than Hubinette in a car that's pretty much brand new to him. What's your point? That the GT-R is easy to drive fast right off the bat?
Based on Hubinette's performance with the GT-R, I'd say Millen's performance wasn't that all impressive either.
So there are drivers that can go faster. Big deal. The point is that on the same day, in identical conditions, the Porsches have come up short. This is not just in H2H, R&T's multiple tests (did you forget my comment about Thomason in the autocross), but in C&D, Evo, Drivers Republic, Car, Motor Trend, Autocar, AutoExpress, TopGear (both UK and Australia), and god knows what else. The result is almost always the same: GT-R crushes 997 Mk2 w/PDK, beats GT3 and Turbo, and trades places with the GT2. Can you accept that the GT-R is noticeably faster than the 997? I mean von Saurma, in only his preview laps with the GT-R on Bridgestones and a couple of wet sections, already matched his full-tilt supertest of the 997 w/PDK, and he's no stranger to rear-engine Porsches. Don't you think he'd be faster yet on Dunlops with the full supertest treatment in the dry?
It's got to suck to have to keep coming up with excuses to show Nissan's mass consiracy. If Nissan are so good at coordinating all of this, they are obviously in the wrong business.
BTW, for anyone interested, here's the background on Craig Stanton, which eclou conveniently forgot to mention:
"Racing and driving INSTRUCTOR at Willow Springs..."
http://www.craigstanton.com/resume.shtm
This thread will NEVER reach a conclusion
The Nissan IS an amazing piece of kit and the Ring lap time is debatable but then so was the 150mph Jaguar E type test all those years ago that no one could replicate yet everyone still calls it a 150mph car so there nothing new in what Nissan MAY have done
Accept it for what it is a fast car and move on
The Nissan IS an amazing piece of kit and the Ring lap time is debatable but then so was the 150mph Jaguar E type test all those years ago that no one could replicate yet everyone still calls it a 150mph car so there nothing new in what Nissan MAY have done
Accept it for what it is a fast car and move on
I love the GTR and I look forward to seeing plenty of owners turning up at trackdays up and down the country - which lets face it, is the only place you can exploit the dynamic potential.
When this happens I think the debate will move on from "The GTR is half the price of a Porsche" to "the GTR costs twice as much to track as a Porsche".
When buying cars with this level of performance, assuming you plan to use it as intended, the purchase price is just the start of the process.
When this happens I think the debate will move on from "The GTR is half the price of a Porsche" to "the GTR costs twice as much to track as a Porsche".
When buying cars with this level of performance, assuming you plan to use it as intended, the purchase price is just the start of the process.
S2red said:
This thread will NEVER reach a conclusion
The Nissan IS an amazing piece of kit and the Ring lap time is debatable but then so was the 150mph Jaguar E type test all those years ago that no one could replicate yet everyone still calls it a 150mph car so there nothing new in what Nissan MAY have done
Accept it for what it is a fast car and move on
Best post of the thread, I was begining to think that I was in America. The Nissan IS an amazing piece of kit and the Ring lap time is debatable but then so was the 150mph Jaguar E type test all those years ago that no one could replicate yet everyone still calls it a 150mph car so there nothing new in what Nissan MAY have done
Accept it for what it is a fast car and move on
S2red, I salute you.
Guibo said:
The point is your statement about pulling the handbrake is absurd.
When a "Pro" drifts thru a road course for a timed run - I'm not talking about momentary oversteer but drifting as shown in the video - it is akin to punting the lap. Might as well have pulled the handbrakeGuibo said:
Standing burnout? Where was there a standing burnout?? The GT3 lept off the line while the GT-R just sat there.
We *should* be discussing the results of the drag race, because according to experts of Sir Isaac Newton's theories, the GT-R should not be able to pull away like that. Isn't that the whole gist of the argument against the GT-R? That it's too heavy, too weak? The race wasn't won at the start, the GT-R was pulling steadily away at speed. Go look at the Evo telemetry at Bedford and you'll see the same thing, and that's without any standing starts. Explain that to me.
again I am not arguing the drag race. My argument is that drifting thru a road race is similar to pulling a standing burn out in a drag race. It is a timely and in this case intentional mistake.We *should* be discussing the results of the drag race, because according to experts of Sir Isaac Newton's theories, the GT-R should not be able to pull away like that. Isn't that the whole gist of the argument against the GT-R? That it's too heavy, too weak? The race wasn't won at the start, the GT-R was pulling steadily away at speed. Go look at the Evo telemetry at Bedford and you'll see the same thing, and that's without any standing starts. Explain that to me.
Guibo said:
I won't pretend to know that that car is 110 hp, nor will I pretend to know that it's not on race slicks. So a 1:40 = 1:36? If you're saying a well-driven GT3 laps in high 1:20's, then the fact that a "stock" 110 hp Civic is even within 15 seconds is pretty astounding, no?
Falken Azenis rt-615 tires are street tires, not R-compound, and even blueprinting a 110hp motor is not going to magically unleash another 50hp. Willow Springs is a 2.5 mile course. Boxsters are capable of 1:34. In the Civic video the car ran 1:37-1:40 laps. Given similar platforms, 100hp is worth roughly 2 sec/lap at WS. The Civic would need another 400hp or so to catch the GT3/GTR.Guibo said:
No, now your inference is wrong. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying we know the 2 cars in the H2H test were stock and tested in identical conditions. Trying to draw meaningful conclusion from a comparison of one video of a car of unknown provenance in unkown conditions against another car somewhere else is pretty foolhardy.
If you dismiss the video as not representative of the timed lap, you might as well dismiss that the laps were properly timed at all since there is no telemetry and on-board timing data shown - a natural extension of your line of reasoning.Guibo said:
BTW, that Civic is hardly stock:
http://solo2.org/forums/storage/14/130426/240vsciv...
For all his "showboating" against an obviously comitted Civic driver, Hubinette was still 4 seconds quicker.
Hubinette's best lap (1:36) was 1 second faster than the best lap of the Civic (1:37). If Hubinette was not "committed" to producing a good timed lap, what was the point of the competition?http://solo2.org/forums/storage/14/130426/240vsciv...
For all his "showboating" against an obviously comitted Civic driver, Hubinette was still 4 seconds quicker.
Guibo said:
It's got to suck to have to keep coming up with excuses to show Nissan's mass consiracy. If Nissan are so good at coordinating all of this, they are obviously in the wrong business.
I think Carlos Ghosn would have an excellent political career, after a long stint in insurance (claim denials dept) and viral marketing. BTW by Ben Linney's own admission his GTR was not stock for the UK tests.Guibo said:
BTW, for anyone interested, here's the background on Craig Stanton, which eclou conveniently forgot to mention:
"Racing and driving INSTRUCTOR at Willow Springs..."
http://www.craigstanton.com/resume.shtm
And here is Hubinette's resume - drifting champion, stunt driver for Fast and Furious"Racing and driving INSTRUCTOR at Willow Springs..."
http://www.craigstanton.com/resume.shtm
Are you even curious as to why Sam "Drift King" Hubinette didn't drift the GTR in the video?
eclou, I think Guyr's comment sums up why you can't ever accept this kind of comparison, and why your inference is flat out wrong. Unless a program shows only the timed lap, it doesn't meet your standard, and should thus summarily be dismissed; unless the Porsche wins, naturally. For you, unless it's a professional Porsche racer driving a modified Porsche on a track in which he is the instructor, the Porsche's time won't count.
The handbrake comment is absurd. Period.
Regarding the Civic, I counted 3 laps of 1:40, not a 1:37. Point about the Civic is that you passed it off as stock when it's far, far from it. Not comparable to a guy who was brand new to the GT-R. And maybe that explains why he wasn't drifting the GT-R. Maybe he had all default settings on. If you're going to say he was slow in the GT3, then the case can be made that he was slow in the GT-R; that should also quell concerns about Millen's sandbagging. The point is, the *difference* is comfortably in the GT-R's favor, just like it's been in the UK tests. You can arbitrarily add 2 seconds to the GT-R's time if you wish, and it's still noticeably faster.
I ask you again: Do you honestly think a GT-R is no faster than a Mk2 997 C2S w/PDK?
Also, you missed his line on the bottom of that build-up page:
"I did a few extra things to my own car (suspension powdercoating, wing, extra wheels and tires, etc.)"
The handbrake comment is absurd. Period.
Regarding the Civic, I counted 3 laps of 1:40, not a 1:37. Point about the Civic is that you passed it off as stock when it's far, far from it. Not comparable to a guy who was brand new to the GT-R. And maybe that explains why he wasn't drifting the GT-R. Maybe he had all default settings on. If you're going to say he was slow in the GT3, then the case can be made that he was slow in the GT-R; that should also quell concerns about Millen's sandbagging. The point is, the *difference* is comfortably in the GT-R's favor, just like it's been in the UK tests. You can arbitrarily add 2 seconds to the GT-R's time if you wish, and it's still noticeably faster.
I ask you again: Do you honestly think a GT-R is no faster than a Mk2 997 C2S w/PDK?
eclou said:
BTW by Ben Linney's own admission his GTR was not stock for the UK tests.
Really, where did he say this. Point me to a link, not some BS quote like you provided last time.eclou said:
again I am not arguing the drag race.
You should be. As should anyone claiming to be an expert on Newton's theories. How did the GT-R, with its worse hp/wt ratio, blitz the GT3?eclou said:
If you dismiss the video as not representative of the timed lap, you might as well dismiss that the laps were properly timed at all since there is no telemetry and on-board timing data shown - a natural extension of your line of reasoning.
No, that's your absurd extension by way of mis-interpreting my point: I'm saying they're not comparable because the cars are not stock, driven by obviouly different drivers in their familiarity with the car, track conditions, etc. To try to pass that off as a stock 110 hp 1989 Civic was misleading and you know it.Also, you missed his line on the bottom of that build-up page:
"I did a few extra things to my own car (suspension powdercoating, wing, extra wheels and tires, etc.)"
Edited by Guibo on Thursday 13th November 18:54
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff