RE: Chris Harris video: R8 V10 vs 911 Turbo S vs GT-R

[tjlees]

Or something British like a road legal Radical SR8 - which is £20ishk cheaper again and would leave all the above well behind on a track.

Anyway before I get called back to the playground and top trumps with my school boy chums, I think neither the turbo s nor R8 owners really cares for stats - they all grade A weapons and are chosen for different reasons other than ultimate traffic light performance.

The R8 sounds fantastic and makes me really regret selling my m6 v10, however 4wd does allow all weather fun! Not sure about the R8 front Audi look but the inside, mid engine layout and v10 more than make up for this.

I think it's worth monkey or ph doing a piece on modified sports cars such as the gtr, 911, RS4 etc to show what you can have without comprising a cars balance too much. 996 turbos are relatively cheap now.

[Nedzilla]

macky17 said:

Yawn, not this again. In case you missed it, he was on a track. I have no doubt the GTR is awe-inspiring in such a setting (not as fun or involving as an Ariel Atom or Radical, etc. but no doubt a level above the other two). Get it on the road however and unless you drive like an idiot, it's dull. I owned one for 5 months. I now have a Tuscan S - yes it's flaky and about half as fast cross country - it's also about 10 times more fun. The R8 is more fun also - Chris even agrees with me. It's not about numbers folks - it has to be about fun or what else is there?

Edited by macky17 on Sunday 12th May 17:55

I don't know why this argument always seems to concern only the GTR.Yes they are far to capable to be exciting on the public roads but so are most sport/supercars today R8 and 911 turbo included.

70 mph speed limits,traffic jams and potholed roads are hardly the place to stretch the legs of any modern 190+mph sports car to be honest.

If you really want to wring the neck of a cars limits on the public roads in the UK then a 80's hot hatch is probably your limit.

[kambites]

Nedzilla said:

I don't know why this argument always seems to concern only the GTR.Yes they are far to capable to be exciting on the public roads but so are most sport/supercars today R8 and 911 turbo included.

70 mph speed limits,traffic jams and potholed roads are hardly the place to stretch the legs of any modern 190+mph sports car to be honest.

If you really want to wring the neck of a cars limits on the public roads in the UK then a 80's hot hatch is probably your limit.

Indeed, so the important question becomes "what else does the car offer except for speed?". What many people seem to be saying in this case, is that the Audi offers more than the GTR.

Edited by kambites on Sunday 12th May 18:25

[Dblue]

I had a GTR for 14 months and 15000 miles and the only thing it was definitely NOT was dull.
Its a "right hoot"

So devastatingly fast, such an ally to the driver, LOL good. Its frankly nonsense that you can't use the performance on the road the same as any very quick car or superbike.

If that were actually true no one would buy one and keep it.

[macky17]

kambites said:

Indeed, so the important question becomes "what else does the car offer except for speed?". What many people seem to be saying in this case, is that the Audi offers more than the GTR.

Edited by kambites on Sunday 12th May 18:25

Exactly. Interaction, theater - these are things the GTR (and 911 turbo, had one of those also) really don't have. Daily drivers but not weekend cars.

[NomduJour]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Not the point, is it? Performance like that is about being able to drop a couple of gears and pick off a big line of cars, or accelerate silly-fast just for the sake of it, not just to count how many seconds you can hold your foot to the floor.

[Troubleatmill]

Less computers = More fun.
More computers = Less fun.

Fun > Outright speed.

Competitive racing drivers will take the speed advantage all day long.
I'd prefer to take the fun route.

The most fun cars I have owned have not had electronic gimmickry to save your blushes.
Even Granny can be a driving God with the electronic wizardry these days.

[Dblue]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

So your cool with 120mph (and youve never for a moment exceeded that) but you feel the need to air your very best sanctimonious sarcasm.
Fact is that I don't drive around at 150mph routinely but where the car is fast enough I use it's performance where appropriate.And I'm talking about acceleration here rather than even the most fleeting of 3 figure speeds.
I reckon a 600 bhp GTR would use a LOT less road getting to 150 mph than a 2.5 Boxster would getting to 120.

[macky17]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Beautifully put. If I were a moderator I'd freeze the thread right there as there is no intelligent counterargument to this. Next.

[Petrolhead95]

I've got two questions about this video.

- Why have a tuned GT-R if you're making comparisons?

- Why have a brand new car (the R8) and a tuned car against the older Turbo S. Surely it would be fairer to wait until the 991 Turbo comes out.

Other than that, what a great video.

[NomduJour]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You can attach the too-many-electronics label to most modern cars - the GT-R is by no means the worst culprit, despite what the internet says - and there's absolutely no reason why you can't have a car with proper feel and feedback which is also mental-fast.

If any of the three cars above had similar performance to a 2.5 986 (which is hardly a Caterham or an Atom in terms of a bare-bones driving experience anyway) I'm not sure they'd have much appeal.

Slow cars generally aren't much fun, however "telepathic" the steering or whatever is.

[crazy about cars]

Always seem to be a thorny debate if the GTR is involved Personally I respect the GTR as a car that punches above it's weight, a real performance bargain for the price. If I can afford the new R8 V10 I'd definitely would have chosen that as I've always fancied a mid-engined sports car. Not very sure about the Porker as I would've preferred the GT3 if I am going for a Porsche. Performance aside, I wished the GTR is more refined inside where I spend most of my time. The interior build quality could've been much better for the price the GTR is commanding now but I guess most of the budget went towards the performance bits.

Yes, there are a lot of performance-related tech in the GTR but most modern cars come with them so this is not something you can avoid. I will not say driving the GTR is dull but then again my car is lightly tuned

[NomduJour]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

So - would the Boxster be more or less appealing with more power, ceteris paribus?

[Dblue]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I am not suggesting that it is possible or safe to use ALL the GTRs (Or Turbo or R8 V10) in terms of big 3 figure speeds on the public road, I am telling you that it is possible to use all of their acceleration potential a fair amount of the time and that whilst those moments are neccessarily brief they are thrilling.
Its the same reason that people buy Superbikes.

I've owned a fair few decent cars and I'm telling you its entirely possible to use them on the public roads.

BUT

I do actually agree with your fundamental point. There is a point at which performance (nothing to do with top speed ) in a straight line can be considered to be "sufficient"
I would put it at 300bhp/ton or thereabouts and at that point other considerations become more important.
Feel, balance, breakaway characteristics, engine noise and delivery. Perhaps a manual change though I like paddle shifts.
So , yes, a GT3, and Evora/Exige, a 355 or 360 all have adequate pace and bring all of the above to the party too. A GTR can still be and is enormous fun just because of its outrageous abilities but the point Chris Harris makes here is that the GTR may have its measure and be much cheaper but the R8 but the noise, feel and adjustability of the Audi is the clincher.

[big_rob_sydney]

Wills2 said:

big_rob_sydney said:

In this company, the GTR for me every time. Imagine the Audi or Porsche driver out and about with a friend thinking they've got a nice car, and then seeing the GTR come up behind them to line them up at the lights.

That sinking feeling is just about to get a whole lot bigger, and I bet most guys would just bug out knowing their pride and joy was about to get rodgered senseless.

Poor diddums.

And they get to be smashed in the wallet as well, paying far over the odds to be in the slow lane. Step aside fellas, GTR coming through.

Yep I can really imagine the TurboS and R8 V10+ drivers feeling miserable about life, when they realise just how st their cars are.

BTW your primary school playground has called, as they want their mentality back, you forgot to hand it in when you left.

Meh, I couldn't care less about precocious r8 / turbo s drivers and their dispositions, other than laughing at them for buying a stupid car.

As for the tech arguments, again, thats just daft. If you guys think tech is so bad, go back to carbies, no abs, no power steering, no esp, and even no seat belt. Seriously, some of you lot are just ridiculous.

No, tech has its place, its making cars better, and the market has responded accordingly. Supply and demand. If you think your way is better, fine, go and build cars yourselves, offer them to the market, and see how long you last before going bankrupt.

[BlackPrince]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

i generally agree with what you say, but I'm curious as to whats wrong with doing 150mph? ANY Sports car is quick enough to be doing 100mph in almost no time...heck even a VW GTi can hit 100mph easily on a normal road, so I don't really understand whats the difference materially between getting a ban in a GTi for doing 110mph or in a Turbo S for doing 170mph. Some might argue that the bloke in the GTi is working the car harder and getting more enjoyment, whereas others might argue that the bloke in the Turbo S is feeling immense kidney pummeling acceleration down the straight and getting his fun that way, even if he is more of a "passenger."

On biker banter, there's a saying "more power decreases the amount of time between corners"

That being said, the 1988 911 I drove at 40mph was far far more engaging than the 2012 911GTS with PDK that I drove recently at 100mph (not trying to troll any GTS owners, its a wonderful car, but just my personal subjective opinion). The 964? I drove had wonderfully feelsome steering, a great mechanical noise, and a nice gearshift. The 997 had steering that wasn't as feelsome if not exactly numb, was much quieter, and a rather 'boring' PDK imo. Undoubtedly however, the 997 is more relaxing to drive, more reliable probably, more comfortable and faster but for around town at 30mph the 964 was a revelation whereas the 997 may as well have been a Lexus GS or any modern somewhat numb luxury car.

[tjlees]

911s, GTRs and fast audi quattros have always not been fully useable on the road - even in 1987 with 205 1.9 GTI it was borderline. Anyway doing 70+ on A/B road and possibly trying to take the racing line with a bike or car is inviting a major accident or a serious chat with the local plod.

Personally a trackday is the perfect answer for any supercar owner who whats to get close to balls out driving and is 200% better than the road, significantly safer and lots more engaging - regardless of flappy paddles, electric steering, ABS etc

I would drive cars like the GTR, R10 and 911s for their iconic nature, heritage, feel, handling and quality over and above a vanilla A to B car. They are all special cars. The almost ultimate power is good for overtaking but only really completely useable on the track. The occasional use on track of these cars again adds the emotional excitement of owning such a car.

Even with these cars, I would have to have a specialist trackday car otherwise the 1.5 to 1.7t weight, relatively soft suspension and huge bill for consumables starts to get in the way!

If you want a challenge, buy a road going radical, atom or caterham

[Wills2]

big_rob_sydney said:

Wills2 said:

big_rob_sydney said:

In this company, the GTR for me every time. Imagine the Audi or Porsche driver out and about with a friend thinking they've got a nice car, and then seeing the GTR come up behind them to line them up at the lights.

That sinking feeling is just about to get a whole lot bigger, and I bet most guys would just bug out knowing their pride and joy was about to get rodgered senseless.

Poor diddums.

And they get to be smashed in the wallet as well, paying far over the odds to be in the slow lane. Step aside fellas, GTR coming through.

Yep I can really imagine the TurboS and R8 V10+ drivers feeling miserable about life, when they realise just how st their cars are.

BTW your primary school playground has called, as they want their mentality back, you forgot to hand it in when you left.

Meh, I couldn't care less about precocious r8 / turbo s drivers and their dispositions, other than laughing at them for buying a stupid car.

Amusing point of view.

[madcaplaughs]

Great video and very entertaining. Road and Track timed the 997 Turbo S at 2.7 secs 0-60. The Audi looks a great car but it is a 2013 model and the Porsche 997 Turbo S as featured was launched 3 years ago. Although it was fun watching the GTR it wasn't a standard car. There are many tuned versions of the 911 available with 750 plus BHP which would have been fairer.

[toppstuff]

madcaplaughs said:

Great video and very entertaining. Road and Track timed the 997 Turbo S at 2.7 secs 0-60. The Audi looks a great car but it is a 2013 model and the Porsche 997 Turbo S as featured was launched 3 years ago. Although it was fun watching the GTR it wasn't a standard car. There are many tuned versions of the 911 available with 750 plus BHP which would have been fairer.

A tuned 911 wild be a lot more expensive than a GTR. Even with the Litchfield additions, the GTR was still a good deal cheaper than the others. I think it was therefore fair.