By on May 21, 2008

I agree with TTAC reviewer Stephan Wilkinson : the new Nissan GT-R is the old Honda NSX. Once people actually start driving Nissan’s “everyday supercar”– as opposed to simply jumping on the hype bandwagon and bench racing numbers supplied by Nissan– they’ll appreciate the parallel. Although I'm still looking forward to my first hands-on experience with the GT-R, the reality of the car’s true nature and importance in automotive history is right under the fan-boys’ noses.

The GT-R allegedly 'outperforms' thoroughbred supercars at a fraction of the price. Yes, but what price? The sticker price, or the in-your-garage price? Considering the hype surrounding the car and the limited production numbers, it will be years before a single new $70k GT-R will be sold for under $100k. At the moment, comparing the Nissan to say, a Corvette Z06, obfuscates the truth. But what the [Green] Hell…

No small part of the current GT-R lovefest can be attributed to the car’s 7:38 Nürburgring lap time. As TTAC has pointed out, there are real questions about the Green Hellmobile’s qualifications for the title “second fastest production car around the ‘Ring.” The GT-R's suspension was modified from the current Japanese production model, supposedly to reflect the American and European spec. Supposedly. Will anyone get a chance to compare the fabled ‘Ring runner and a final production car? I doubt it.

Meanwhile, the YouTube video of the Nissan’s “historic run” clearly shows that the GT-R had a flying start. All other manufacturers testing at the ‘Ring use standing starts for published lap times. The video also proves that the car's lap time was not measured at the exact same location (start and stop). Take these two factors into account, and the 7:40 claim seems highly dubious.

The icing on the cake: GT-R chief engineer Kazutoshi Mizuno’s subsequent admission from that "We used cut slick tyres." If that doesn’t cancel their claim, nothing does.

In fact, a regular Corvette Z06 would probably beat the GT-R on the Nürburgring. When Road & Track tested the GT-R against the Z06 on a track much smaller than the ‘Ring, they concluded that the GT-R was fast in the corners, but they didn't shed a whole lot of light on how the GT-R performed on the straights. Although the ‘Ring has an enormous amount of corners, it also has some of the longest straight-aways in the world.

In Road & Track’s technical comparo, the GT-R was just as fast to 60mph as the Z06 (despite being less powerful). What many have over-looked is the trap speed at the end of the 1/4 mile. The Z06 is about seven mph faster than the GT-R. When you look at the graph that accompanies these numbers, the GT-R’s AWD system gave it a clear advantage– but only at the start. Applied to the Green Hell, the Z06 would outpace the GT-R on the straights.

The Z06’s fastest recorded lap time at the Nürburgring is 7:42.9 This lap was driven in 2005 by Jan Magnussen in 'muggy' conditions. Last year, Chevy revised the suspension on all Corvette models including the Z06. In theory, the new suspension and better weather conditions should be enough for a Z06 to equal or even better the Nissan GT-R's true time of +7:40. When you consider that the Z06 can achieve this time with a GM-standard standing start and production tires, it seems obvious that the GT-R is no match for the Z06 around the ring.

But what does it all mean? Well, not much actually. Every racetrack is different and some cars are suited to some tracks while others are not. The GT-R is suited to smaller tracks like the one R&T used, and the Z06 is suited to longer and faster ones like the ‘Ring.

So why did I bother ranting about this? Nissan has chosen to flaunt its Nürburgring lap times to show the world that their new, high-tech Nissan GT-R is the new bang-for-the-buck Alpha. But it’s not true. The cheaper Corvette Z06 is still the worlds best [unmodified] performance car bargain. What’s more, if the GT-R cannot handle a stock Z06, then how will it fare against the upcoming ZR1? Never mind the 'almighty' spec V model.

Given the GT-R’s looks and oft-reported lack of driving feel, there’s only one reason anyone would buy the uber-Nissan: to own the fastest thing on the road. In the corners, maybe. If you were committed enough to drive at 10/10ths (never mind how “easy” it is), you could probably blow-off a 911 or similar. Down the straights (the great American pastime), there are faster and cheaper choices– and that’s without exploring relatively inexpensive modifications.

In short, the GT-R is an awesome achievement, but Wilkinson’s right: it’s not all that. 

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

59 Comments on “The Truth About the Nissan GT-R and the Nürburgring Lap Record...”


  • avatar
    tankd0g

    It has already been established the ZR1 is heavier, softer and slower around the turns than a Z06 and at $100k plus it’s going to have to go up against the V-Spec GT-R.

    By the way, what manufacturers are publishing standing start ‘ring lap times?

  • avatar
    Keef

    A bit of wikipedia indicated the manufacturer is actually claiming even lower times (7:29 on “standard Japanese market tires”):

    http://www.nissaneurope-newsbureau.com/nissanmedia/front?controller=SubRubrik&id=nissan_europe_press_room_10772091931250/news_and_events_10772871591872/presse_releases_10781508884370/corporate_10781511772180&pubId=gt_r_achieves_under______at_nurburgring_12095056384513968

  • avatar
    Steve_S

    So what car is faster, cheaper, seats four and has AWD? You all are going out of your way on this one. The GT-R isn’t for everyone, it isn’t better than PB&J, the wheel or the light bulb. It is very, very good and Nissan will sell every one so I don’t really see the problem here. 

  • avatar
    sightline

    Agreed that a lot of the GT-R’s appeal goes away if that Nürburgring time turns out to be massaged. The NSX comparison is apt, it will be interesting to see if GT-Rs hold their value like early NSXs have.

    Porsche should stick a turbocharger and the Turbo’s 4WD system in a Cayman, blitz the Nordschleife, sell a “special edition” run of 100, and settle this once and for all.

  • avatar
    Raskolnikov

    Don’t forget that the ZO6 EPA mileage #’s are 15/24.

    Corvette owners do MUCH better than the EPA numbers.

    The Z06 is truly a marvel.

  • avatar
    doctorv8

    The trap speed comment is spot on. A seven mph advantage in the quarter mile is exactly what you would expect in a car with a bit more power and 700 pounds less weight to cart around.

    Funny how most people fail to understand the importance of trap speed. Sure, the AWD will launch you off the line and out of corners like a bat out of hell, while the Z06 is struggling to get rolling (on stock runflats, anyway) but seven mph is HUGE…maybe a hair less the difference between a base Corvette and a Z06.

  • avatar
    tankd0g

    “Funny how most people fail to understand the importance of trap speed. Sure, the AWD will launch you off the line and out of corners like a bat out of hell, while the Z06 is struggling to get rolling (on stock runflats, anyway) but seven mph is HUGE…maybe a hair less the difference between a base Corvette and a Z06.”

    Unless you are buying these cars for drag racing, 1/4 time has no importance at all. Give me AWD and a 7 mph penalty on the 1/4 mile for every day use any day.

  • avatar

    tankd0g:

    Unless you are buying these cars for drag racing, 1/4 time has no importance at all. Give me AWD and a 7 mph penalty on the 1/4 mile for every day use any day.

    In that case, what relevance does a Nürburgring lap time hold?

  • avatar
    tankd0g

    “In that case, what relevance does a Nürburgring lap time hold?”

    I’ve seen many comments on here from people stating that the ‘ring is not a “real” track because it is just a public road.

    To them (and you) I say: EXACTLY

    Where were you planning to drive your new GT-R or Z06, a wind tunnel? Perhaps straped a truck mounted dyno??

  • avatar
    abcb

    I also would like to find out about the standing start lap timing issue. From all the lap timing video i have seen, they use a flying start.

    Pagani Zonda F
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APbrjvadVA0

    Cadillac CTS-V
    http://cadillac.gmblogs.com/2008/05/the_video.html

    Granted in the Cadillac video you can’t see when they start the timing, but if you look at when the video finished and subtract 8 minutes lap time, the car was already rolling and position about the same area as when nissan started their lap timing.

    Also, can you point to where to find the z06 lap video, atleast that would give us better comparison of track condition, starting/ending spot, running/standing start, etc.

    As for the slick tyres thing, nissan just did a 7:29 lap in base GTR + japanese market tires, so not sure how the math add up unless the click tyres are standard on consumer car.

    http://www.nissan360.com/releases/release-2.php

    While there is no reason to trust what nissan has to say about their product, soon or later someone is going to take a gt-r and conduct independent lap times. It just seems nissan is too ballsy to put out that kinda of time and wiling to stake their reputation on the 7:29 lap timing if all normal gt-r are going at best get 7:40+. I hope for everyone’s sake that nissan isn’t that stupid.

  • avatar
    Steve_S

    The Ring shows a car’s overall performance on a variety of turns and conditions. I’d like to see some independent tests of teh GT-R but in the end its all epeen anyway. Not as if any customer will achieve anything remotely close to it in the Z06 or the GT-R.

    You drive a Boxster RF, you know that driving in a straight line means little to a car’s overall performance.

    If that’s the case then Miata’s must be crap while Mustangs rule all.

  • avatar

    Sounds like some manufacturers have been trying harder than others to set the fastest times.

    Create a formal competition, and see what happens…

  • avatar
    yellowjacket

    Michael above is right.

    Nissan spent 5,000 miles on the Nurburgring last year (per their press release), and have been there all this year. Driving in circles over and over and over again with their time drivers.

    If all manufacturers did this, all the times for cars would come down. GM spent 1 hr on the course with their driver and came home. Only Nissan is truly obsessed with the Ring time.

  • avatar
    yournamehere

    Michael Karesh- that would one of the greatest things known to man!

    car has to be purchased from a dealership by an independent company. has to be 100% stock. o0o that would be great

  • avatar
    thetopdog

    I can’t understand why Chevy just doesn’t offer a non-runflat option on the Corvette. So many Vette owners (myself included) replace the stock tires with non-runflats. The runflats are pretty much garbage compared to the other options out there, which makes the Z06′s times even more impressive

    Raskolnikov :

    I disagree that Vette owners get much better mileage than the EPA estimates. While it’s true that it is very easy to beat the highway mileage estimate on an open highway with little traffic, I have yet to even come close to the city mileage in my non-Z06 C6. I’m sure some of that has to do with the atrocious road and traffic conditions of Boston though

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    Don’t forget that the ZO6 EPA mileage #’s are 15/24…

    …on the EPA cycle, with skip-shift et al in full effect. The Corvette is an amazing piece of engineering to be sure, but GM seriously games the EPA test to make those numbers; there’s a lot of throttle and transmission trickery (often circumvented by Vette enthusiasts five minutes after they drive off the lot) that goes into getting 15/24.

    If my car skipped three gears on the first upshift, I’d probably get better mileage, too.

    Independent tests don’t usually approach those numbers, and driving the Vette “the way it’s meant to be driven” will produce number as atrocious as any other supercar. Never mind that bringing up the “yeah, well, the Corvette gets better EPA mileage” in a comparison is like saying “The Honda S2000 has more trunk space than the Lotus Elise”: it’s true, but given what these cars are for, no one really cares. If you wanted mileage, you’d have bought a Prius,

  • avatar

    Steve_S : You drive a Boxster RF, you know that driving in a straight line means little to a car’s overall performance.

    Quarter mile trap speeds mean everything to running the ‘ring. If the Z06 is 7 mph faster after a 1/4 mile, its gonna eat the GT-R alive on the back straight that we all know from Gran Tourismo.

    Chevy needs to wise up and dump the run-flats for the limited production Corvettes. The Achilles Hell given to regular C6s is pointless at this price point.

  • avatar
    doctorv8

    tankd0g,

    Unless you are buying these cars for drag racing, 1/4 time has no importance at all.

    true, but the 7 mph trap speed indicates a huge advantage from a roll. I wouldn’t advise lining up with a Z06 at any speed greater than about 40 mph in a GT-R…unless you want to see 4 round tailights gradually fading away in the distance.

  • avatar
    Stephan Wilkinson

    Both cars have four round taillights…

  • avatar
    Antone

    As I appreciate your unending pursuit of the automotive Truth, I hope you are wrong. Nissan has everything to loose if it overstated its Green Hell Lap time. The rumors of the GT-R overstating its power rating would be counter intuitive (it seems to put-down 470 rwhp).

  • avatar

    psarhjinian :

    If my car skipped three gears on the first upshift, I’d probably get better mileage, too.
    It’s actually skipping two gears – first to fourth skips second and third. But yes, the 1-4 CAGS is totally about gaming the EPA test. Most people I know either install an eliminator or give it extra throttle to allow second gear. The latter surely defeats the purpose of CAGS.

    Stephan Wilkinson :

    Both cars have four round taillights…
    Ha ha, you beat me to it. At first, I was picturing the Vette in the lead, but then after two seconds of thought, I wondered if that was what he meant!

  • avatar
    Stephan Wilkinson

    Antone, Nissan has _never_ “overstated” the GT-R’s power rating. If anything, they’ve seriously understated it. If it seems to put down 470 rwhp (which I seriously doubt), that means the engine’s power at the flywheel would be way up in the 500s, since you typically figure a 25-percent power loss from crankshaft to drive wheels in a front-engine rear-drive vehicle, particularly with an awd system.

  • avatar
    ktm

    Show me a Z06 that is not marked-up at the dealership as well. You are really reaching to disparage the GT-R.

  • avatar
    netrun

    When Nissan introduced the 350Z they did a great PR stunt by flying around Prague in a stunt similar to the underground video “Rendezvous.” It’s too bad they thought they had to one-up themselves with this ‘Ring stuff. Makes them look dodgy instead of cool.

  • avatar
    Samir

    I dont know if this is treason, but I could honestly not care about the ring times put up by any of these cars. Firstly, I don’t have the skill to make it matter. Secondly, if I owned one of these cars, it would be on public roads most of the time where neither would be faster than a Honda Civic. Thirdly – they both look utterly cheesy.

  • avatar
    SherbornSean

    What ever happened to the good old days when the argument was “My ‘Vette is faster than your Porsche” vs. “Well, my Porsche handles better than your ‘Vette”?

    Has Porsche become the “overpriced, unreliable SUV vendor”?

    Then what does that make Range Rover?

  • avatar
    carlisimo

    Given the GT-R’s looks and oft-reported lack of driving feel, there’s only one reason anyone would buy the uber-Nissan: to own the fastest thing on the road. In the corners, maybe.

    That was the only part of the article I didn’t like. For one thing, I’d say its looks are appropriate for its class (souped-up sport-lux coupe, not sports car).

    But more importantly… we don’t really care how fast it is, as long as it’s fast. People buy Z06′s and GT-R’s because they’re in love with them, and that love was typically there before those cars came out. Some people simply want the ultimate Chevy, or the ultimate Nissan (and rarely both at the same time). That’s reason enough to be a fan.

  • avatar
    James Ansell

    ktm :

    http://www.corvetteconti.com/blog/?page_id=47

    If you look for someone who is a Corvette enthusiast as opposed to the usual slimy GM dealer it is possible.

  • avatar
    whatdoiknow1

    OK, another dude who has not driven the GT-R and is willing to makes performance claims in the negative, YET is calling anyone else who also has NOT driven the car a “fan-boy” for making positive performance claims about this car????????

    At the end of the day the GT-R still is what it is, a statement from Nissan that they do have the GOODS! It is a car that undeniable does out-perform many far more expensive cars. It is a car the does show the world that Porsche has been resting on it laurels of lately. Now, not for nothing but the Z06 and ZR1 do serve the same purpose for GM.
    Is the Z06 and will the ZR1 be faster in a drag race. Yes, but so freakin what!!!!

    I dont get it? I am really begining to believe a great deal of the “anti-hype” regarding the GT-R is because it is a Nissan or Japanese car. If this thing was a damn Porsche or home-grown domestic most of the detractors would be wiping up stains off the front of their jeans.

  • avatar
    rochskier

    After reading the Motor Trend article about the 2005 Corvette Z06′s best Nurburgring lap time I’d like to enter it into this discussion.

    One particular point made in that article goes straight to the heart of the author’s above contention that:

    “The car’s suspension was modified from the current Japanese production model, supposedly to reflect the American and European spec. Supposedly. Will anyone get a chance to compare the fabled ‘Ring runner and a final production car? Somehow I doubt it.”

    Next, the article in question:
    Z06 Hot Laps the ‘Ring

    From the beginning of the third paragraph:
    “Our man-on-the-spot says GM spent nearly two weeks testing at the Nuerburgring before Magnusson flew in to set a time. Engineers switched suspension settings and changed tires many times before finding the optimum setup.”

    Can it be proven that the optimum suspension and tire setup determined for the Z06′s 7:42 lap time are the exact same settings used for the Z06 production models?

    I ask, will anyone be allowed to examine the Z06 that ran the ‘ring in 7:42 and compare it to a production Z06?

  • avatar

    These debates are like eating popcorn – great fun while they last, but not much in terms of sustenance. The medieval equivalent was monks arguing how many angels could fit on the head of a pin, or perhaps once on the pin, how fast they might circulate on street tires.

    Seems like the general opinion is that Nissan did an amazing job of building a more-than-two-ton vehicle capable of very rapid transportation, but lacking the visual panache of the Corvette or the Cayman. I suspect that most of us reading this site don’t count on the fact that the latest green-hell-blast was done in a random [insert manufacturer and model] selected off the showroom floor. Any car capable of doing this run in 8 minutes or less has got to have a talented and fearless driver, some well connected parents and begin life as a reasonably competent chassis with a very strong motor.

    When a “stock” Civic SI or BMW 120d matches an 8 minute time at the ‘ring, then I’ll be REALLY impressed.

  • avatar
    rochskier

    In addition to the Motor Trend article, the German magazine Sport-Auto has posted a report on the Z06 and a video showing that the best lap their driver could achieve in a Z06 on stock run-flats was 7:49, from a flying start.

    Sport-Auto video on Youtube:
    Corvette z06 Nordschleife Nürburgring

    Accompanying Sport-Auto article (in German):
    Corvette Z06: Die Vette gilt

    There are stronger arguments to be made against the GT-R. One is Nissan’s seeming lack of imagination regarding the use of weight-saving materials for the chassis and body.

    Jig-welded steel chassis and some aluminum body panels? Compare that to some of the interesting techniques GM engineers came up with for the Z06 Corvette.

    Also, it would be interesting to know exactly what was going on inside the GT-R’s ECU during the hot lap. I’m sure it would be a trivial exercise for Nissan to raise boost pressure to make more power for the otherworldly AWD to put down. Wipe the ECU and no one would be the wiser.

  • avatar
    Stephan Wilkinson

    Au contraire, there’s a lot of die-cast aluminum and carbon-fiber composite in the GT-R. the thing might weigh as much as a Cayenne if there weren’t…

  • avatar
    quasimondo

    This is the wrong vehicle to argue about lap times over. It really is.

    What we need to find the truth about is GM’s claim of the HHR SS lapping the ‘ring in 8:43. To put this in reference, this is within 5 seconds of an Acura NSX, Lotus Exige, and Honda S2000.

    We need to get to the bottom of this. As for the GT-R, who cares? Most of us can’t even get sub 8-minute laps in a Z06 playing Gran Turismo.

  • avatar
    doctorv8

    Stephan Wilkinson,

    If you re-read my comment about seeing four round taillights, you would notice it was preceded by “I wouldn’t advise lining up with a Z06 at any speed greater than about 40 mph in a GT-R”

    Anyone who doesn’t know both cars have 4 round taillights probably doesn’t read TTAC.

  • avatar
    Stephan Wilkinson

    If you re-read my comment I hope you’ll figure out that I was kidding.

  • avatar
    biturbo

    Come on guys… why fiddling around?

    Nissan just put a 100% BS claim knowing that is cheap and effective advertising!

    How on earth anybody can ever prove them wrong? No way. That’s Nissan’s thinking.

    Simple: make lots of hype and sell lots of the porky GTR to people that will simply believe that they get a car up there with Porsche Carrera GT and the Pagani Zonda.

    GTR 7:29 Nordschleife record, right…

  • avatar
    tyndago

    Was this really posted today ? Welcome to October 2007. Way to stay up in the world. The truth about cars. More like “lets spit random crap to rile people up.”

    Everyone else, except GM uses a flying start.

    7:29 is the number.

    The GT-R uses run flats also. People love to say the ZO6 is on run flats. So is the GT-R….

    http://www.2009gtr.com

  • avatar
    abcb

    biturbo: Nissan has alot to lose and very little to gain by making false statements. Most people don’t buy cars solely of ring lap times.

    If the ring times turns out to be complete false, and no one can get within 5 second of posted time, then GT-R will gain a bad reputation. Furthermore, carlos ghosn and Nissan will gain a bad reputation for post these times. It’s just not worth it for them to stake their name on this.

  • avatar
    CellMan

    Simple. Source a stock GT-R and a Z06 independently and ship ‘em over to Germany. Fly in the Stig or get Sabine ready at the Ring. Run a few laps for each car. Compare results. Publish.

  • avatar
    hokuto

    Yeah because gm would never fiddle with the vette to get a better lap time, right?

    Biased, misinformed corvette flag waving? I’ve come to expect better from ttac. Respect -1.

  • avatar
    Steven Lang

    “What ever happened to the good old days when the argument was “My ‘Vette is faster than your Porsche” vs. “Well, my Porsche handles better than your ‘Vette”?

    Has Porsche become the “overpriced, unreliable SUV vendor”?

    Then what does that make Range Rover?”

    Recyclable Chinese beer cans…

  • avatar
    Antone

    Stephan Wilkinson :

    Follow the linky:

    http://www.nissan.co.jp/GT-R/R35/0710/XML/card/eq4isr000002y09r-att/eq4isr000002y0ac.swf

  • avatar
    vento97

    There’s one competitor that will eventually wipe both cars off of any track – steadily rising gas prices.

    Enjoy the ride while you can, because you are looking at a couple of (near) future museum pieces…

  • avatar
    celica_ryder

    This is all fine and dandy, and the corvette sounds like a fantastic car for the price. and although if i had money i could buy a corvette for a deep discount, and the gt-r would have a large premium, i’d still go for the gt-r. why?

    a few weeks ago at the car wash i witnessed a z06 driver wash and dry his car with great care and attention. after i was done my sloppy wash and began to pull out, i see him and another good samaritan in my rear view pushing the car out of the wash bay – the thing wouldn’t start.

    oh and i have no illusions of being a great race car driver. 4wd would probably keep me from hanging the butt end out and going into the ditch (which i’ve seen a couple of new vettes do).

    ’nuff said.

  • avatar
    DrBrian

    so celica_ryder one broken car means that all of them are pants? i’ve not seen a GT-r yet, do they even exist?

  • avatar
    jurisb

    I guess, my upcoming car will beat that Nurburgring lap time( hahahaha) http://stealth-juris.blogspot.com

  • avatar
    Pch101

    I’ll confess, I haven’t quite followed this article. I’m open to correction, but the train of thought seems to be:

    -Nissan got a lap time of X

    -Nissan used racing slicks and a running start to get lap time of X

    -Therefore, the Corvette is better because one magazine got a lap time of Y, under circumstances that we can’t quantify.

    Frankly, I don’t see how there is enough information to claim that Y is better than X, when we know less about Y than we do about X, and when lap times aren’t the only criteria for evaluating the vehicles. The author may be right, but there isn’t enough information here that I can see with which to form an opinion, either way.

    In any case, this comment strikes me as terribly flawed: No small part of the current GT-R lovefest can be attributed to the car’s 7:38 Nürburgring lap time.

    The reviews I’ve read make little or no mention of said lap time. Nor does this single event seem to be impacting the qualitative assessment of the car, other than to say that it’s fast, something that everyone has otherwise established.

    To argue that the Vette is better simply based upon an incomplete comparison of one lap time versus another is, in my mind, tough to defend. The worthiness of a car has more to do with just lap times, the reviews discuss these cars on a variety of levels, and I see little concern for one single data point among the whole. Maybe I’m just missing it?

  • avatar
    biturbo

    abcb,

    NOBODY can prove Nissan wrong. Even if somebody would try, which is very unlikely.

    Say reputable car magazine X tests the GTR at Nordschleife and gets only 7:50. Nissan can say: bad driver, different weather conditions, defective car, “2 damp corners”, etc. Very easy.

    That’s why they did the BS, cheap advertising with no risks. There are so many people that just believe it. I know lots of people that would believe anything Nissan says just because they are Nissan fans.

  • avatar
    abcb

    Biturbo: There might be circumstances that leads to no one able to duplicate nissan’s 7:29 lap timing, but if mutliple independent test lap around in the 7:50+ range regardless of condition, then there is a huge problem. Nissan might give the excuse for the first one, but the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, no way. That would turn many nissan fans and gt-r fans to ignore nissan brand for years to come.

    It’s all about the consumer’s trust in a brand. If i believed nissan cheated on gt-r specs, why the hell should i believe anything they have to say about any other cars they make. it’s a huge risk for nissan to make bold statement with a defined limit since it allows people to test for it.

  • avatar
    offroadinfrontier

    So much battling.. anybody ever think that maybe the GT-R and ‘Vette are, in the long run, pals?

    The ‘Vette, whether you like GM or not, has always been a cheap, crazy-powered rocket (all things compared equally). Not the best by any means, but for the price, impressive. Not saying that it corners bad, but ‘Vettes are more of a straight-line carn.

    The GT-R seems to be the ‘Vette for the “next generation” of car nuts (and as time has proven, the majority of defenders will never own one). While the ‘Vette is the Cheap-King of straights, the GT-R is the cheap-king of corners (and poor conditions).

    How many people will actually debate over which one to buy? As posted before, these are more fanboy cars than anything, so while in the same market, a lot of the buyers won’t care one way or the other (nor drive these cars to their potential). In the midst of this, GM will take some notes from the GT-R, and Nissan from the ‘Vette. Both of these cars will benefit from these improvements (GM might look more into the technology aspect, while Nissan might offer a larger engine or more “driver-feel”), while neither really compete.

    Hopefully (and these are some high hopes), these improvements will start to gently trickle down the line for those of us who can’t afford said cars. Maybe an AWD Z model (might cross more into Skyline territory, but semantics aside…), or a RWD small-car from either manufacturer, or something… Either way, I still don’t see this as a competition. They are both awesome cars for their intended purpose, and besides, who drives a sports car sporty anyhow? It’s always been and always will be about image more than anything.

    For those who DO buy these for performance, these cars will be modded anyhow..

  • avatar
    doctorv8

    Not saying that it corners bad, but ‘Vettes are more of a straight-line carn.

    Have you actually driven a Vette built since 1984 on a track or a curvy mountain road? Do you know how Corvettes dominated SCCA competition in the 80s, and how competitive modern Z06s are at any track in the States?

    People who mistakenly lump Vettes in the same “straight line only” category as a Mustang or Camaro really run the risk of sounding exceptionally ignorant.

  • avatar
    offroadinfrontier

    Did you even read the quote you put up?

    I never lumped this car in the “straight line only” category. I never said that the new ‘Vettes handled poorly – if anything, I said the opposite. And when did I mention anything about Mustangs or Camaros? Jesus, take a step back and chill – nobody can deny how great of a car the Corvette line is and has been, and I NEVER put down it’s cornering capabilities.

    Read my post again (and ignore the typo)..

    (What’s with the given hostility?! I thought my post commented positively on BOTH vehicles… that was my point, anyway.)

  • avatar
    doctorv8

    What does “more of a straight line car” mean to you?

    To me, that means it is better at the drag strip than the road course….nothing could be further from the truth.

  • avatar
    bonzelite

    for a site called “The Truth About Cars” there is nearly nothing truthful whatsoever about the content of the original article as posted here.

    There is no evidence of anyone doing a standing start, not GM, no one.

    All tires ever used on the R35 have been factory stock tires. Not cut slicks. And there is much more…

    There is so much false information that the article should be removed.

  • avatar
    jymjung

    Oh my god I cant stop laughing! What I don’t understand is this. Corvette Z06 features include: • LS7 7.0-liter/427-cubic-inch Gen IV V-8 engine with lightweight reciprocating components • 505 horsepower (373 kw) @ 6300 rpm • 470 lb.-ft. of torque (657 Nm) @ 4800 rpm • 6-speed manual transmission • 7000 rpm redline Curb weight 3130 Nissan R35 GTR The engine designation is VR38DETT (Twin Turbocharged 3.8-liter V6) 60-degree vee angle and bore spacing with Nissan’s acclaimed VQ-Series, which is used in everything from the 350Z to several Infiniti SUVs. Few parts are shared between the two engine series. 7000 rpm redline The engine performance of the 3 trims is the same IHI turbos with integrated exhaust manifolds 10.2 psi (Car and Driver) 473 horsepower @ 6400 rpms 433 pound-feet of torque from 3200 to 5200 rpm. Weight 1740 kg /3836 lbs ( 1730 with titanium muffler – 3814 lbs) (Autoweek – 3792 lbs) The corvette has more power, more torque….weights less. I guess there is a replacement for displacement…. Its called technology. Welcome to 2008. Big Ole V8s in cars don’t rule the world anymore! Corvette Acceleration, 0-60 MPH: 3.76 Quarter Mile 11.61@126.55 R35 Acceleration, 0-60 mph in 3.5 seconds Quarter Mile 11.7 seconds in the quarter mile Official nurburgring times http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?viewThread=y&gID=3&fID=0&tID=10073 don’t forget to look at the two lap times for the GTR… for a second i didn’t even think there was a Corvette time ;) They lied about this and propaganda that… What ever helps you sleep at night pal!

  • avatar
    DrBrian

    ironic he mocks people for being fat yet the pinnacle of technology 2 door coupe weighs 1735Kg

  • avatar
    James Ansell


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India