Porsche accuses Nissan of cheating on the 'Ring

[Ramseus]

Did anyone else catch the line about the GTR being sooo much heavier... yeah 20 kilos heavier! Don't fill the tank and get a skinny driver behind the wheel - zomg whar did the wait difrence go!?!?

Ahh, I love it when big companies squabble. Ring times are obviously the most important thing ever.

Also GTR engines are hand built, so I call extra elbow grease going into Nissan's test car. Yay, evidenceless rumors are fun.

[the Interceptor]

Originally Posted by Electric-Mayhem

I'm getting kind of ticked off at all this "the GTR is only good because of computers" talk. Its far from the only car out there to be heavily controlled by computers. Porsche themselves use them extremely heavily to make sure that the car handles like they want it to. All the traction aids and yaw sensors that are on the GTR are also on the 911, so you really can't say that computers are the major difference between the two. The only difference I see is that one has a more obvious computer interface (the GTR for sure) then the other.

That's not quite right. I agree that it's the electronics that make the 911 driveable on the limit, even if chassis have improved over time. Still, there's no single car on the planet that uses electronics to help on-road performance to the extent the GT-R does. The Mitsubishi Evos and Subaru Imprezas come close, but the GT-R does this in perfect harmony.

Now, this does not mean that the GT-R is a bad car that needs electronic help to cure a bad chassis. The mechanics of the GT-R are fine throughoutly, there's no denying that. Without the electronic systems however, I strongly believe that the GT-R would be just as quick and as good to handle as the mechanics enable it to. It's the electronics that take it that one step further, that one step that makes it go faster on a track than the simple figures suggest. And there's no other car that does that to this extent.

[Karoug]

Originally Posted by Ramseus

Also GTR engines are hand built.

The engines in the Z06 and I would guess the ZR-1 are also hand built. But you don't see the LS7 engine vary massively in power output. I'm just pointing that out...

[aznkukuboi]

If you guys watch Top Gear, JC says that Lotus had some part of the development in the 'spine' of the GTR. I don't know what that means, but I know Lotus design great handling cars. Also, on the Top Gear test track, the Stig posted a faster time IN the GTR than any Porsche on the track to date... faster than the $440k USD GT as well, albeit 0.1 seconds faster. And we know how consistent the Stig is. I guess he is the '3rd party independent tester' most people want to see. Actually, on the Nurburgring, the GT was 7:28, one second faster than the GTR's 7:29. And I really don't see much difference in this one second.

Also, there's a video posted of the actual 7:29 online. It's on youtube somewhere.

If Porsche really wanted to accuse Nissan, they should have at least posted a more likely time. 7:54 is just rubbish. That's slower than the C6. I will admit the ZR1 (7:26) is an amazing car though. We know that the old GTR was so fast that some places banned the use of this car in a race because of how it would beat every other car (old school Top Gear). The new GTR's suspension is well tuned and we know that it has well over 480 hp. Nissan was actually conservative with this number. Many magazines have praised the GTR for it's speed and drivability. They have repeatedly shown the GTR is a faster car on a track. JC says it's quite comfortable too for its class.

I would get the GTR over the Porsche any day. Why? Because I'm not a man who's going through a mid-life crisis. However, I'd take an M3 over GTR anyday.

[hansvonaxion]

Originally Posted by Karoug

The engines in the Z06 and I would guess the ZR-1 are also hand built. But you don't see the LS7 engine vary massively in power output. I'm just pointing that out...

The GT-R engines don't vary either. They were just underrated which caused people to think that when they dynoed their car and got a better than expected figure. I think it was Edmunds that tested a number of cars and found all the production models were consistent and a pre-production model they had used was actually down on power due to a different ECU mapping.

[Arctor]

How many of you have driven either car? This rabid speculation about cars you've never driven is just ridiculous. People are going to favor one side of the argument or the other based purely on what car they like more, but the fact of the matter is you're not looking at this objectively. For Porsche to have publicly called out Nissan (who was caught cheating with R34 cars as well if you don't remember) is huge, they're not typically ones to do so.

I'm not saying either one is right but I see a lot of people talking a lot of nonsense about cars they've never driven. I honestly wonder how someone could comment on the feel of a car if they haven't experienced it first hand. Let us all remember that Jeremy Clarkson isn't exactly the first guy to turn to when it comes to these things.

[monaroCountry]

Originally Posted by Spectre

If you look at vid of the ZR1 on a tight course, you can see that it has problems getting the power to the ground without spinning the tires. There's a lot more power there than the rear tires alone can handle - but the GT-R is AWD and has a lot more drive traction.

There was a recent media event here in the DFW area where GM ran media members around the Texas Motor Speedway road course in various vehicles. The ZR1 was lighting its tires around every corner.

Are you absolutely sure about this? A stock Corvette ZR1 driven by a GM rep (Karen) blasted its way through n extreemly tight SCCA autocross circuit without putting a foot wrong.

What your forgetting is that although the GTR has 4WD it also has thinner and inferior tires, it is also far heavier, have a higher centre of gravity and doesn't have MSRC suspension.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaWSgYO7HRk


In a high speed track like the Nurburgring the GTR should have a chance in hell of matching the Zonda, ZR1, CGT and ACR. The GTR isnt geared or have the power for high speed tracks, yet it was able to achieve a similar velocity to the ZR1 on the main straight.

Nissan has been known to tweak their Nurburgring cars (R33) to achieve a fantastic time. The previous GTR was also suspected of cheating, all European magazines were around 30s slower using a production car - even when using the same record setting driver and a higher spec GTR (V-Spec).

Currently well respected drivers have questioned Nissan's credibility including:
Horst von Saurma
Alain Prost and
Steve Sutcliffe
along with other less skilled drivers.

[Suedschleife]

Very interesting. I wouldn't have double guessed this article a year ago, considering the R33 times that turned out to be run with a heavily modified car. With all the comparison in the meantime however, I suspect assume Porsche might have bought a lemon in the US.

On a different note, many reviewers don't seem to have a lot of experience with RR cars.

[dangonay]

Originally Posted by monaroCountry

The GTR isnt geared or have the power for high speed tracks, yet it was able to achieve a similar velocity to the ZR1 on the main straight.

This is one point GTR fans seem to constantly overlook. The back straight is essentially a drag race, and we all know even a Z06 will walk on a GTR in a straight line, especially from a rolling start where the GTR's AWD has no advantage.

For the GTR fans here, please explain how the GTR stays virtually even with the ZR1 in a drag race on the long back straight at the 'ring.


As to the electronics, I agree with 'the Interceptor'. The GTR takes electronic control to the highest level possible. The GTR's suspension & brakes are pretty standard stuff (in the sports car world). They didn't re-invent suspension geometry or come up with some completely new design. Same for the brakes. Yet this overweight car turns in some outstanding times. The only thing this can be attributed to is the level of control of the electronics which can extract every last ounce of performance from an already "very good" design.

[prizrak]

Originally Posted by Spectre

It is possible or probable that Porsche is feeling really nervous about this. A large percentage of their US sales goes to, let's face it, geeks who make out like bandits in software/hardware/other tech services. They're the ones who were enthralled by the GT-R mystique via Grand Turismo, but couldn't get one in the US... until now. So Porsche knows they have competition for their prized demographic.

The geek demographic would have a GT-R simply because its a GT-R. Ring times wouldn't matter to us. Tho while a geek I still don't like the damn thing >:O

[Leonidae]

Well well, isn't it Monarocountry, the other Anti-GT-R fanatic.. other being heavychevy. you guys have made yourselves a reputation as foam-mouthed lunatics on number of forums, being banned from most of them too due ridiculous conspiracy theories regarding the GT-R.. and you have been on this road from what, 2005? I have to admit, that's dedication.

anyway, you can see easily that Porsche's time on dry track is far off from what Horst von Saurma did on partially wet track. this time it's Porsche that's cheating and sandbagging, not Nissan. And why did Porsche let the engineer drive it instead of their by far fastest driver, certain Mr Röhrl, who set every single one of the Porsches lap-records? Hmm? could it be that they try to make their own cars look better, just before the launch of evil space bean, AKA Porsche Panamera?

I think that with this accusation, Porsche stepped on a landmine.. shall they be proven wrong, it'll blow up on Porsches face and make a big, ugly dent on that shiny shield of 911.. should they be proven right, it's Nissan that will suffer.. but until Nissan adresses this officially, Porsche is in trouble.

[bartboy9891]

As stated before, the GT-R has set quicker times than various Porsches on several other tracks. Even on the short Top Gear track the GT-R was .1 seconds quicker than the Carrera GT. Plus people working on the GT-R pretty much lived at the Nurburgring for the past few years tweaking the car until it could set the fastest lap possible. It sounds like Porsche is just annoyed that a car that doesn't look too hot on paper can be quicker than their cars.

[starfox07]

Originally Posted by bartboy9891

As stated before, the GT-R has set quicker times than various Porsches on several other tracks. Even on the short Top Gear track the GT-R was .1 seconds quicker than the Carrera GT. Plus people working on the GT-R pretty much lived at the Nurburgring for the past few years tweaking the car until it could set the fastest lap possible. It sounds like Porsche is just annoyed that a car that doesn't look too hot on paper can be quicker than their cars.

Could have Nissan have specifically prepared a GTR for top gear?

[Leonidae]

or more like, could they have prepared the cars for all the mags that have the results of GT-R being faster than 911? rriiight..

[starfox07]

I find it interesting how GTR's are so inconsistent. Must be the hand built nature. Or something.

[GraemeH]

"Waaaaahhh, they beat us, they must be cheating, even though we have no empirical basis for that conclusion, just anecdotal evidence in the form of 'We couldn't make it go faster, therefore it can't go faster'".

Porsche; the new Ferrari.

[bartboy9891]

Originally Posted by starfox07

Could have Nissan have specifically prepared a GTR for top gear?

Sure I guess it's possible, but you could say that about 90% of the cars that have been tested on the TG track. What's to say that the Carrera GT they got from Porsche was not tweaked to perform well on their track?

Either Motor Trend or Edmunds Inside Line has tested a customer GT-R and it performed almost identically to the cars they got from Nissan. Edmunds tested a JDM spec GT-R in Japan which was a tiny bit quicker through the 1/4 mile than the US model, but that was attributed to the difference in octane in the gas available in Japan compared to here.

[jayhawk]

Originally Posted by Gman333-X-ferrari

Oh yeah? Then why does Clarkson say: "When you get to these speeds, you expect it to feel detached like a playstation, but incredibly it feels mechanical, it feels analogue, it feels human, it feels fan-beeding-tastic..." (Episode 11x05)

Frankly, I think that you are just talking BS, with a baseless generalization of "it's a Nissan computer, it has no soul". Surely, something that is so superb to drive must have character? And by superb I mean, a car which feels like a driver's car, which the GT-R is.''

edit: Not trying to start an argument here, this is just my opinion.

You may want to read over your reply in an objective manner; I was criticizing the vehicle, not your family lineage, bud. It is just a car. No need to get defensive.

[teeb]

Originally Posted by stevanford1

Am i the only one who thinks "soul" is a word used to make a shit car sound good to someone ?

You're not the only one. Any press release or brochure with 'soul' in it, I start to disbelieve.

However, I honestly believe some cars do have soul. And that comes from having a personality. And that, in turn, comes from experience of them. Despite what you might think, I honestly believe the old Volvo estate we used to have has soul, despite being tempramental and Swedish. I've so many stories about it, I knew all of its little quirks and foibles...

[marcos_eirik]

I wouldn't be too surprised if Porsche turns out to be accurate on this, those blitzing fast times it posted on the Nordschleife seemed a bit fishy. It was even initially pointed out by none other that the Chief Engineer of the GT-R program that they ran cut-slick tires, but then they suddenly changed their mind about it. Anyway, if they did run it on slicks to get and "unfair" advantage, it wouldn't be the first time they have been caught doing so... (Cue; R33 GT-R, 7:59 and CAR Magazine as pointed out earlier)

Also, Porsche NEVER voices out on something, or against somebody unless it's blatantly going against the norms/"rules" or is unfair. The most recent example was the proposal for the new London congestion charge.

My speculation on this is that they did run on slicks to get a faster time to generate some hype, which gets printed all over the place and results in free marketing and money saved. They did the same thing with the R33.