Nissan to Porsche on GT-R Ring Run: Don't Be Dissin' the Dai-San!

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

While we await Andrew Dederer’s (or similar) translation, we are assured that Nissan has released this higher quality official version of their record-setting Nurburgring run to refute Porsche’s claims that their Japanese rivals were cheating. says that “Nissan go on to say that the GT-R used in the official laptime was actually at a disadvantage due to up to 50 kilograms of testing equipment along for the ride. Offering Porsche some driver training lessons if they want to give it another try.”

Join the conversation
4 of 29 comments
  • on Oct 15, 2008
    And what kind of douche do you have to be to base a car purchase on what some mystery driver could perform on a track you’ll never visit? BRILLIANT! It's all about the experience, not a couple of seconds here or there (on a street car). As you mature as a driver, you begin to understand this viewpoint.

  • Niky Niky on Oct 15, 2008

    Note: The dynos don't say nuthin.' I'm a tuner-in-training with Unichip, and I'm familiar with nearly all the dynos involved in the GT-R power scandal. The Japanese runs with the Dynapack were hilarious. They read 475 bhp and people claim that it's whp, simply because they don't understand what torque correction factor means. The Dastek ones in the UK, where they claim it's 500+ because it's 440 or so on the Dastek... Laughable to me, because I work on a Dastek sometimes, so I know the proper conversion works out to more like 480... (I have dozens of pulls on the Dastek) the Dynojet ones which agree with the Dastek and have the same conversion rate... Face it... different dynos read differently. Any tuner or engine builder worth his salt knows that absolute numbers don't really count for anything unless they're in comparison to another car on the same dyno. The most telling dyno is the one Edmund's did. They took a GT-R and put it on the same dyno as a 911 Turbo (rated at 480). Guess what? near identical numbers. Has anybody else tried this? No. Does anybody else cite this as proof that the GT-R only makes about 473 hp? (though given Nissan's claimed 10% power loss through the transmission, that means it actually only makes 460)... No. Do any of the internet publications know the difference between a brake dyno and an inertial dyno, or what SAE corrections and Manifold Absolute Pressure sensors mean when used in the same sentence? Apparently, only Edmund's does. Car and Driver is addicted to SAE. Which is why they always get faster 0-60 times than anyone else. Also note: if the GT-R made more than 500 hp, don't you think Porsche, with its own testing equipment, would have said that the reason it was fast around the ring was because of some hidden power boost?

  • Zuka Zuka on Oct 20, 2008

    We live in an age of electronic enhancements. Does everyone want to see a perfect example? All you have to do is look to Ferrari. The F430 Scuderia ran the same time around Fiorano as the Enzo. Same factory driver on the same track. They weight within 30lbs of each other but the Enzo has an additional 150hp. The GT-R has great power delivery, a slick tranny and physics defying maneuverability. Before you go jumping to conclusions about being Nissan bias, I own a 6-speed black '07 Porsche Turbo. Being in Phoenix, I have the advantage of being so close to EVOMS that's helped add "a couple" extra HP to the car; so to all GT-R's...bring it ;). I've driven a few different GT-R's and it's a fantastic machine...amazingly fast, great handling and incredible brakes. I think for Porsche to test a GT-R themselves to prove Nissan's wrong is a little petty. Honestly, now I'm sure there are some, but how many potential buyers are out there going "should I buy that GT-R or this GT2(or even a Turbo)"? You're talking about a two completely different buyer pools. Most Porsche buyers are passionate about Porsche and wouldn't consider any other. And one last's all about the driving experience not about the numbers. Not to mentioned what percentage of GT-R or 997 owners are going to be on the Nurburg anyway? Let it go...

  • Myenzo Myenzo on Oct 24, 2008

    Ok September 2008 issue of road and track. They did a huge test of a bunch of cars on four different cources: an auto cross, a road course, the willow springs race track, and the oval. On each course they had a driver that was a specialist at that course test all the cars. For the auto cross the driver was Gary Thomason, for the road course Steve Millen was the driver, for willow springs Steve Millen was the driver, and for the oval the driver was Roger Yasukawa. Each car got one warm up, two hot, and one cool down lap. And the driver jumped immediately from one car to another to make it as fair as possible. Here are the results: at the auto cross the GT2 finished in 40.61 seconds the GT-R in 40.63 seconds. On the road course the GT-R finished in 68.90 seconds the GT2 finished in 69.77 seconds. At willow springs the GT-R finished in 91.23 seconds and the GT2 finished in 93.57 seconds. At the oval the GT2 finished in 50.94 seconds and the GT-R finished in 51.85. These tests were fair and prove that the GT-R can hold its own and beat the GT2 when it is in its element. The GT-R lacks the top speed of the GT2 but it makes up for it in the corners. A GT-R can beat a GT2. I believe the times.