RE: GT-R Laps 'Ring In 7min 30secs
Discussion
What I find amazing is that apparently you can lap the Ring faster in a modern transit (10.08) than you can in one of these (10:09) old GP cars:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LangH-MB-W154-1...
Even a Dodge Viper can only manage 9:02 - surely the Viper must be more than 10% better than a transit in every way that matters - acceleration, top speed and cornering speed - so how come the gap is so close?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LangH-MB-W154-1...
Even a Dodge Viper can only manage 9:02 - surely the Viper must be more than 10% better than a transit in every way that matters - acceleration, top speed and cornering speed - so how come the gap is so close?
Can we all stop talking about the GTR fullstop please, ordered mine months ago, still waiting for delivery date, and i just get it out of my head and another post appears.
Cant ruddy wait, happy days.
Rumour has it that anyone whos ordered one gets 2 track days later on this summer, silverstone and the ring they say, not saying im going to get round in 7.29, oh no.
Cant ruddy wait, happy days.
Rumour has it that anyone whos ordered one gets 2 track days later on this summer, silverstone and the ring they say, not saying im going to get round in 7.29, oh no.
JimSuperSix said:
What I find amazing is that apparently you can lap the Ring faster in a modern transit (10.08) than you can in one of these (10:09) old GP cars:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LangH-MB-W154-1...
Even a Dodge Viper can only manage 9:02 - surely the Viper must be more than 10% better than a transit in every way that matters - acceleration, top speed and cornering speed - so how come the gap is so close?
If you are talking about the transit lap that Top Gear did I'm pretty sure it was bridge to gantry which as I understand it misses a large portion of the main straight - something like 20 - 30 seconds worth.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LangH-MB-W154-1...
Even a Dodge Viper can only manage 9:02 - surely the Viper must be more than 10% better than a transit in every way that matters - acceleration, top speed and cornering speed - so how come the gap is so close?
Trommel said:
jdcampbell said:
Nice car but I can't accept any arguments for why we should be asked for £60k for this car when (I think) its closer to £45k in Japan.
It's more like £48k > £54k.If you want to see what rip-off Britain really means, have a look at how much an M3 costs in the States.
Well done to Nissan for achieving such performance with their new baby. Although I can imagine it being a pricey bugger to run. How much does a set of tyres cost for the GTR for example?
Not entirely sure where they got that extra time from though. It's not as if you can go out and set a 7:38 and then go out again and easily set 7:29. At this level every extra second below 8:00 is hard fought. Either they weren't trying hard enough the first time or something has changed.
Not entirely sure where they got that extra time from though. It's not as if you can go out and set a 7:38 and then go out again and easily set 7:29. At this level every extra second below 8:00 is hard fought. Either they weren't trying hard enough the first time or something has changed.
_dobbo_ said:
JimSuperSix said:
What I find amazing is that apparently you can lap the Ring faster in a modern transit (10.08) than you can in one of these (10:09) old GP cars:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LangH-MB-W154-1...
Even a Dodge Viper can only manage 9:02 - surely the Viper must be more than 10% better than a transit in every way that matters - acceleration, top speed and cornering speed - so how come the gap is so close?
If you are talking about the transit lap that Top Gear did I'm pretty sure it was bridge to gantry which as I understand it misses a large portion of the main straight - something like 20 - 30 seconds worth.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LangH-MB-W154-1...
Even a Dodge Viper can only manage 9:02 - surely the Viper must be more than 10% better than a transit in every way that matters - acceleration, top speed and cornering speed - so how come the gap is so close?
Rob_R said:
Well done to Nissan for achieving such performance with their new baby. Although I can imagine it being a pricey bugger to run. How much does a set of tyres cost for the GTR for example?
Not entirely sure where they got that extra time from though. It's not as if you can go out and set a 7:38 and then go out again and easily set 7:29. At this level every extra second below 8:00 is hard fought. Either they weren't trying hard enough the first time or something has changed.
I think they're putting the difference down to track/weather conditions.Not entirely sure where they got that extra time from though. It's not as if you can go out and set a 7:38 and then go out again and easily set 7:29. At this level every extra second below 8:00 is hard fought. Either they weren't trying hard enough the first time or something has changed.
Kieran XJR said:
Rob_R said:
Well done to Nissan for achieving such performance with their new baby. Although I can imagine it being a pricey bugger to run. How much does a set of tyres cost for the GTR for example?
Not entirely sure where they got that extra time from though. It's not as if you can go out and set a 7:38 and then go out again and easily set 7:29. At this level every extra second below 8:00 is hard fought. Either they weren't trying hard enough the first time or something has changed.
I think they're putting the difference down to track/weather conditions.Not entirely sure where they got that extra time from though. It's not as if you can go out and set a 7:38 and then go out again and easily set 7:29. At this level every extra second below 8:00 is hard fought. Either they weren't trying hard enough the first time or something has changed.
Dave
Mr Whippy said:
Kieran XJR said:
Rob_R said:
Well done to Nissan for achieving such performance with their new baby. Although I can imagine it being a pricey bugger to run. How much does a set of tyres cost for the GTR for example?
Not entirely sure where they got that extra time from though. It's not as if you can go out and set a 7:38 and then go out again and easily set 7:29. At this level every extra second below 8:00 is hard fought. Either they weren't trying hard enough the first time or something has changed.
I think they're putting the difference down to track/weather conditions.Not entirely sure where they got that extra time from though. It's not as if you can go out and set a 7:38 and then go out again and easily set 7:29. At this level every extra second below 8:00 is hard fought. Either they weren't trying hard enough the first time or something has changed.
Dave
senna786 said:
And to Porsche!! Watch out, you need to revisit your strategic roadmap for development and do something radical (like move away from the mistake of having the engine falling off the back of the car!!). Porsche seriously are in trouble. I cannot see anymore potential they can deliver from the 911 (ok, the new 997 GT2, is a great piece of engineering, but is one worth really 3 GT-R's? NO)
yeah totally. I'll bet everyone with £100k+ is going to go straight to their local nissan dealer. why pay £400,000 for a Zonda F when this nissan is only a second slower round the ringwith a race driver at the wheel*
on a Manufacturer only day*.
- assumptions
why are so many people against nissan? and the talk of the radical being faster, blah blah...
the gt-r is a performance cruiser, for all weathers and with a boot big enough for a set of golf clubs and 3 mates, i wouldn't like to take a radical out during the winter... would you? oh and two of your mates will have to get the bus!
i know saying you have a nissan isn't gonna make you feel big nor clever, but you have to hand it to the engineers, they had to reproduce the magic of the R32 and R33, and they've totally blown expectations away, simply amazing job
however i'm intrigued by the new supra having a 7:24 time, it could be back to the old days of the GT-R vs the Supra RZ... i just wish a 300ZX newbreed would come out, the 350Z disappointed me
the gt-r is a performance cruiser, for all weathers and with a boot big enough for a set of golf clubs and 3 mates, i wouldn't like to take a radical out during the winter... would you? oh and two of your mates will have to get the bus!
i know saying you have a nissan isn't gonna make you feel big nor clever, but you have to hand it to the engineers, they had to reproduce the magic of the R32 and R33, and they've totally blown expectations away, simply amazing job
however i'm intrigued by the new supra having a 7:24 time, it could be back to the old days of the GT-R vs the Supra RZ... i just wish a 300ZX newbreed would come out, the 350Z disappointed me
Trommel said:
ZeeTacoe said:
yeah totally. I'll bet everyone with £100k+ is going to go straight to their local nissan dealer. why pay £400,000 for a Zonda F when this nissan is only a second slower round the ring
Hardly the point. It makes a 997 Turbo look very silly for the money.Who would buy a huge barge Nissan over a 997 Turbo just because of the Ring/track times?
An Evo IX 360 would make a GTR look silly for the money, but we (people) are not buying them for their performance alone... if they are, then they are maybe missing the point...
Dave
Biccaroo said:
I have never, ever, wanted a car as much as I want the GT-R. It is simply outstanding. Don't get me wrong, there are lots of fantastic cars out there, but this machine does things which no one would've thought possible for a car that'll be worth around £60k in the UK. What an achievement. Both on track and off.
+1, in white 
Mr Whippy said:
Trommel said:
Hardly the point. It makes a 997 Turbo look very silly for the money.
No it doesn't.Who would buy a huge barge Nissan over a 997 Turbo just because of the Ring/track times?
An Evo IX 360 would make a GTR look silly for the money, but we (people) are not buying them for their performance alone... if they are, then they are maybe missing the point...
Dave
The GT-R is a little bigger than a 997 Turbo and weighs a little more, costs half as much and does everything better.
An Evo is an entirely different proposition, but I'm interested to know how it would make the GT-R look "silly".
Just a quick point on this......
I would not consider the GT-R a great car to carry yourself, and 3 mates - unless 2 of your friends do not have legs, or are under the aqe of 6.
I am not exactly what you would consider tall (5 feet 8) and when I'd adjusted the drivers seat, I would definately NOT be able to get my legs into the space behind for anything more than a bone crushing 2 minute journey.
I viewed the car at Middlehurst, and was tempted to buy, but this single 'feature' stopped me. Having got used to having decent rear seats in the RS4 (and many think they are tight!!).
Having said that, if you don't need the seats, then it is indeed a fantastic car - but a lot larger in the flesh that I imagined - just not in the back!
Cheers, Mark
I would not consider the GT-R a great car to carry yourself, and 3 mates - unless 2 of your friends do not have legs, or are under the aqe of 6.
I am not exactly what you would consider tall (5 feet 8) and when I'd adjusted the drivers seat, I would definately NOT be able to get my legs into the space behind for anything more than a bone crushing 2 minute journey.
I viewed the car at Middlehurst, and was tempted to buy, but this single 'feature' stopped me. Having got used to having decent rear seats in the RS4 (and many think they are tight!!).
Having said that, if you don't need the seats, then it is indeed a fantastic car - but a lot larger in the flesh that I imagined - just not in the back!
Cheers, Mark
Edited by bradders on Thursday 1st May 18:07
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff