So lets start with this guys uninformed or misinformed statements.
"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."
The 7:38 was shown in a video. Data showing a 7:37 lap was also found, however Nissan chose to show the slower time. A new press release went out recently with Nissan claiming a 7:29 time at the ring. Data has been released on that run, but no video yet. The changes to the suspension were after the 7:38 run and before the 7:29 run.
"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."
Who does a standing start ? GM did a standing start. Who else did a standing start? The Zonda did a flying lap. BMW does flying laps as put out in their Nurburging lap guide.
This part has already been explained. Its a partial misquote. Never mind the spec V( Vspec) ? Never mind the lighter and more powerful car. The one they have already said that will come on more aggressive tires ? I have seen lots of Z06's at the dragstrip. In most owners hands, a 12 second car. One guy, one day, at a track in Maryland, below sea level air day ran a 10.9 pass. Sure it could be done, the Z06 is a fast car. However most people are not that good. All wheel drive > RWD in 90% of the real world situations. Turbo car over NA car all day, everyday. I think many Z06 owners will be getting this lesson. "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."
He said the car would have been quicker if they used cut slick tires. The 7:29 run, Nissan was very clear to state the car was a production car, on production tires. They actually used the Dunlop summer tires, which are about 4-5 seconds quicker than the Bridgestone tires."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."
1 comment:
Seriously, Don't bother responding to TTAC. All over the world websites are being set up under false guise of "automotive journalism" partly because it side steps the difficulty of competing directly with well respected magazines and also because few people bother to question your credentials when discourse isn't in print. TTACs articles are purely rubbish and deliberately provocative. The most disturbing thing about all of this is that these fools have chosen an intentionally misleading url for the release of what is ultimately unsubstantiated and uncredited gibberish. Wait for the Sportauto Supertest next year. The numbers will do the talking and HVS's analysis is worth a considerable amount more than some little known web nutter.
Post a Comment