• Sep 30th 2008 at 9:02AM
  • 233

Click above for high-res gallery of the Nissan GT-R

Sour grapes or legitimate complaint? That's the question we're left pondering after reading that Porsche believes Nissan must have cheated to record its 7:29:03 lap time of the famed Nürburgring race circuit. Porsche claims that it had been suspicious of the Nissan's lap times, so it acquired a U.S.-spec GT-R for testing back-to-back with its own 911 Turbo and GT2. The result? The mighty Godzilla was toppled by the Teutonic German duo, with the GT-R posting times a good 25-seconds slower than Nissan's claim.

How can Porsche explain the discrepancy? "This wonder car with 7:29 could not have been a regular series production car. For us, it's not clear how this time is possible. What we can imagine with this Nissan is they used other tires," says August Achleitner, the man in charge of the 911 program. There is footage of the GT-R lapping the 'Ring at high speed, but it's taken from inside the car where the tires cannot be seen.

Considering the fact that Nissan saw fit to issue a press release commemorating the car's fast-lap, we doubt this is something that will be taken lightly. There's a big can 'o worms here, and Porsche's in the corner holding the opener.

[Source: Carsguide]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 6 Years Ago

      Here is further evidence from a GERMAN magazine (yes, German magazines have access to the GTR in contrast to what some other commentator's claims) they clocked the GTR in the wet (without trying) at 7:50 mins around the 'ring, on OEM street (NOT Race compound) tires, let me repeat, in the wet!


      Yet the same magazine only managed 7:54 mins for the 911 Turbo on Race compound tires in the dry (where Porsche claim a 7:38 mins):


      In contrast to Porsche, they supplied a video + section times of their lap.

        • 6 Years Ago
        You should be comparing to the GT3, not the 911 Turbo.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Porsche as a company is not worried about Nissan. They have more pressing issues to deal with. If I had 80K, I am buying a 911. Would not even consider looking at a GTR or Z06 as impressive as the specs are. Already did the Vette thing and GTR does nothing for me. Ring times mean nothing and if you buy a car based on them, you are probably a poser anyway.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Yes, exactly, don't worry i got your point, which is why i called it a Handling Vs Power discussion and not a "Handling Track" Vs Power Track discussion, whatever that means.
        • 6 Years Ago
        "Porsche as a company is not worried about Nissan."
        Really? Do you read the title of the topic you post under?
        Buying a car for its performance and abilities makes you a poser? Well damn all auto-enthusiasts all to hell.

        If you're going to post vehicle times, i wish you had the courtesy to specify a source and weather said time was done on a stock vehicle(or in GT5).

        @Guys involved in Handling Vs Power debate
        None of you are going to win. The guy who pointed out the Radical was hoping to win the argument with a top handler at the top of the list, but conveniently forgot that if you look at power-to weight ratio, you'd think the Radical got it's edge through power.There's a reason it's called the "Green Hell" and used as a benchmark. The track is a test of everything the car can do in harmony with everything else. Certain sectors are going to favour power and vice versa.
        Nissan decided to use one approach, the ZR1 and the Viper the other, while Porsche sat in a corner crying.
        Since BigMc seems to be one of the few guys still making sense, if i had to make a choice between handling and power on this track, I'd choose handling.
        • 6 Years Ago
        @ Amien,

        Not to worry, I was correcting myself, not you.

        I should have thought of it sooner. But it seems rediculous that at some specific level a track becomes a 'power track'.

        I'm revising my argument not that the Nurburgring is one or the other, but neither.

        Its a high-speed road course versus a low-speed one. Oddly enough, vehicles that finish the 1/4-mile faster than anything on earth, sportbikes, have a really tough time here.

        Thats why I think the term 'power course' isn't only a misnomer here, I think its a convention that shouldn't even exist.
        • 6 Years Ago

        I think a little revision is in order.

        I don't really think 'handling track' versus 'power track' is valid.

        The only real 'power track' is a drag race and the only real
        'handling track' is autocross.

        Most any other track is either high-speed cornering or low-speed cornering. What I meant by 'handling track' is if your car can't corner at high speeds at the Ring, you're not going to do well.

        The GT-R is exceptional at high-speed corners. At low-speed corners, it lost to the Ford GT. Its not a 1/4-miler.

        Technically, the faster you can corner on a track, the better the GT-R will do. This best describes the Nurburgring.

        High speed corners are the most demanding on a chassis, which is why many 'fast' cars go there for development.

        Calling it a 'power track' is coming from those that think trap speed matters at the Ring. If that were the case, motorcycles would be running 5-minute Ring times. They don't have the TRACTION of 4 wheels to corner that quickly. And transitions can't be done as quickly while leaning.

        Granted, with tremendous skill, there are a few superbikes that have gotten nearly down to Supercar level.

        But c'mon! These are 8-second 1/-4 milers. Sorry, trap speed doesn't matter. If it did, the results would be a little one-sided in the 2-wheeler's favor.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Exactly, don't worry, i got your point, which is why i called it a Handling Vs Power debate as opposed to "Handling track" Vs Power track.
        Handling is a very wide spectrum, your superbike example is spot on.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Yes, exactly, don't worry i got your point, which is why i called it a Handling Vs Power discussion and not a "Handling Track" Vs Power Track discussion, whatever that means.
      • 6 Years Ago
      I can understand Porsche's feelings - being beaten by a mass-production brand isn't something that any upscale performance automaker wants.

      If cheating is proven to be true - shame on Nissan. However, even then it will be way too close to Porsche, something that it should (and already) notice.
      • 6 Years Ago
      That reminds me, perhaps I should take a ride in a GT-R for lunch today?

      A guy a few cubes away has the first one sold in this state. Got it a few weeks ago.

      Kinda unimpressive to look at, though.

        • 6 Years Ago
        like your face?
        • 6 Years Ago
        Do you like BMWs, too?
        • 6 Years Ago
        THe look of it when i saw it reminded me of the challenger, it was nicely styled but looked enourmous
        • 6 Years Ago
        The guys in my car, as it came up and passed me, all agreed it was lacking anything that makes it stand out.

        And it sounds/ed very average.

        But, hey, I still give it props that it's a good performer. That time of my life at the moment is in the past. I'm loving my 52 mpg I'm getting right now, personally.
        • 6 Years Ago
        This car is VERY impressive to look at. I was passed by one the other night in the dark... even in the dark it looked awesome! I went to Hoffman Nissan here in CT and they have two on the floor ($30k mark-up to boot) and even parked in a showroom this car is disgustingly beautiful!
        • 6 Years Ago
        like your face?
      • 6 Years Ago
      Nissan spent an awful lot of time at the ring (months it seemed). I'm leaning towards believing Porsche on this, but 30 seconds slower is a giant slap in the face. That would put the GTR down around Cadillac times.

      I like what the Viper team did, unload the car. 4 laps later they beat the record by 5 or 6 seconds, go home.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Every car has a development run. The Viper's run on the Nurburgring wasn't its first track outing, I assure you. Nor the Corvette, etc.

        Nissan gets results they like, dial them in, and then program all the production models that way.

        I don't know why people think they don't sell the car with the exact same specs that they agreed to during testing. Its not like Porsche and GM don't do that too.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Of course you are right, but still, a guy's 4th ever lap on the ring and he breaks the record by a huge chunk is impressive. I don't care what car you are driving, 4 laps is not enough to get the feel for a track.

        I'm just saying Nissan spent months to get the time they did, probably with a driver that had hundreds of laps on the ring under his belt.

        • 6 Years Ago
        What you have there is a better argument that the ACR is rediculously fast, not that the GT-R is any slower.

        If it runs the lap in that time, it doesn't matter how many attempts it took. It just means Dodge can take a few more cracks at it to up their bragging rights.
      • 6 Years Ago
      xploarx, we did precisely what you suggested. Last Tuesday we took a 911 GT2 (supplied by Porsche) and a Nissan GT-R (a customer car imported from Japan) and joined the RMA track day at the 'ring. Chris Harris was the driver and he drove each car for three laps (one out lap, and two flying laps). Naturally we recorded the laps on video and recorded the lap and section times on Racelogic telemetry. We are busy finishing the video and will shortly publish the feature story and full results.

      This is as close as you'll probably get to an independent and unbiased validation of their respective 'claimed' lap times and we will see if we can settle this story once and for all (unlikely, eh?).

      • 6 Years Ago
      OK, so Japanese are beating Germans in their own game.
      So what, they've been doing so for the past 15 years - in terms of built quality, reliability, driveability and design (sorry, but VW Golfs are incredibly dull). Now they're simply adding speed - the last thing the Germans had an upper hand - but only thanks to Porsche.

      As for Corvette, Porsche can easily choose to ignore that.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I love Japanese cars don't get me wrong. But when it comes to interior design and fit and finish, the Germans still know how to do it. The GT-R's interior is not up to snuff with European taste. It has the drabby Nissan feel. (cheapness). Everything else though is very good with it. the interior still needs work. BTW, a Golf has an amazingly nice interior than anything in it's class minus it's older sibling the Audi A3. You'd be surprised. Sit in a new one. The new GTI and R class car is going to be well put together car.
      • 6 Years Ago
      even IF Nissan cheated, I highly doubt that they would be so stupid to enhance their 'Ring car by so much that it would cause a 20sec difference between the one used at the Ring and production models. Pretty ridiculous, until Porsche can prove their claim I've lost any and all respect I've ever had for them as a performance/luxury car maker.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Just let the Stig have a crack at it. He'll display which one is faster.
      • 6 Years Ago
      well the gtr is a bad ass car ,,the porsche is also a monster ,,they just need to get the cars back to the ring together and settle it once and for all ,,,,,,the new ZR1 did the lap in 7 minutes 26 seconds,,,,,,,,,bye the way a porsche 956 lapped the ring in,,,,, 6 minutes and 11 seconds,,,,,, back in 1983 on a qualifying lap,
      • 6 Years Ago
      Great for Porsche... Only why did the GTR smeer the floor with them in all independent magazine tests too!?
        • 6 Years Ago
        According to some, it was a massive conspiracy that spanned nations.

        Because that's way more likely than the car they sell was programmed the same as their development car.

        I wonderwhat Porsche's theory is on Crop Circles?
        • 6 Years Ago
        Easy. It didn't "smear the floor with them in all independent tests".

        The GT-R did very well, and it won many tests. It didn't win all independent tests (although it did many) and it didn't "smear the floor" with them in all the tests, not by far.

        Furthermore, the ZR-1 (which has to be one of the "them") was not in any of the comparisons you refer to.
      • 6 Years Ago
      I'm not crying conspiracy here, but if you believe some other testing, there is a huge discrepancy from one car to the next in terms of horsepower. Question is WHY? Manufacturing tolerances don't explain it. If Porsche ran one of the cars that specs out low, it could give them these results.
        • 6 Years Ago
        2 production versions were tested. One at 415whp, the other at 420whp.

        Remember the whole big thing about the real conspiracy being that Nissan put too much power in the GT-R's pocket?

        Its like those reverse-pickpocket Burger King commercials. If anything, there's more horsepower in EVERY one than there should be. Ones with 480hp are the weak ones.
    • Load More Comments