Nissan clocks unofficial 7:26.7 'Ring time, gets dangerously close to ZR1
The Battle for top honors at the Nordschleife continues, with yet another revised 'Ring time for the Nissan GT-R. After a second day of testing, Nissan claims that the 2010 model hacked off nearly a second from its time on Wednesday, delivering an unofficial lap of 7:26.7 – a mere four-tenths of second behind the Corvette ZR1's official time and just over a second slower than the Ferrari Enzo. As always, unofficial times should be taken with the appropriate amount of NaCl, and the way things are going, we expect Porsche (or GM) to fire back, at which point Nissan may finally release the GT-R SpecV's lap time.
[Source: GTRBlog | Image: Kislik]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Pokey 7:32PM (4/24/2009)
What's up now, Porsche?
Reply
Valentino Amoro 2:47AM (4/25/2009)
Few thoughts.
While Porsche's cribbing is pathetic, a lot of folks are raising hell on how the GTR is so fast.
The competition is all 600+HP cars with solid aero, chassis and over 400-800 pounds less.
How is the GTR doing so well? Couple of theories based on reading reviews etc:
1) The GTR's tranny saves shifting time. Over the course of the ring this adds up (Compared to a Z06, ZR1, Z06, Carrera GT etc). Think of the number of shifts you save/continous power delivery.
2) The GTR's AWD helps put traction through corners. The trick rear diff is amazing.
The Evo X uses similar technology as points 1 and 2, is lighter (albeit with a softer suspension) and less power but manages to outlap/match lots of lighter and faster cars. (370Z for example)
Moving on...
3) Nissan is spending days (thats not a bad thing) camping at the Ring and has been doing so for a few years now to bring these times down. There have been multiple passes. Nissan drivers talk about 'wet patches' or 'areas of dust' in the lap. They are taking these runs very seriously. The Vette's has had some calibration here and a few hours of final timed rounds, the Viper just a day. Any 'driver' can see that there is a lot more potential in the Vette/ACR while the GTR is being pushed to its limits. Not saying the GTR is any less of a car, I'm saying that in its current version this is about where it tops out.
4) Nissan's engine provides more power in motion. The car is being dynoed to be 500+HP at the crank (dynos are happening in no-motion environs, keep in mind for turbo charged cars there is the added chance of the car actually making more power in motion due to increased air inflow. Finally, there is a slim although remote possibility the boost is variable and increases beyonf 480HP under certain situations, the mapping of which is not clear.
5) These are all unofficial runs. There is nowhere that they are claiming stock tyres, boost etc. It's not as legit as lets say Walter Rorh's laps or Jan Magunessens laps.
I'm not saying the GTR isnt an amazing car. Any car that laps the ring under 8 seconds is amazing. Anything under 7.45 is outright insane. The point is that bench racing based on Ring times doesnt tell the whole story.
Plus at these levels lap times for this class of cars (Z06, GTR, 911 GT3 RS, F430 Scuderia) is highly dependent on the driver and his comfort level. For example, Tiff Nedell may be able to extract better times in the mid engined rides out of habit.
Finally, one world about two times.
1) The z06. It's severely handicapped the Eagle F1 runflats. All car mags report it. Stick some R compounds on racing slicks (heck, even RE050Pole positions) and it will be a different story. That said it doesnt come with that stock or as an option so no point cribbing about that. I also dont think it would carry speed as fast through corners as the GTR although it's acceleration and top speed is faster.
2) The 911 GT3. If I'm not mistaken this car wears Pilot Sport Cup tyres, which are R Compounds. That plays a huge part towards a 430HP car pulling a 7.40 ring time.
Ray 11:43AM (4/25/2009)
"4) Nissan's engine provides more power in motion. The car is being dynoed to be 500+HP at the crank (dynos are happening in no-motion environs, keep in mind for turbo charged cars there is the added chance of the car actually making more power in motion due to increased air inflow."
What?! So every car with a turbo on every dyno isn't making full power because it isn't moving? WTF are you talking about? They shove fans directly into the rads and intercoolers for this very purpose. That's really making no sense. The amount of air the intake is getting to feed the turbos while moving isn't going to make a difference either. Especially on really winding parts of that track.
Face it, the car makes more than they say it does, alot of dynos around the US and the world are wrong, or it's just a fat pig that turns corners for you. I'm thinking the cornering speed is what makes it fast.
Tourian 1:06PM (4/25/2009)
@Ray
It is widely accepted amongst turbo car tuners that the fans "they" use aren't strong enough to simulate the airflow a car's intercooler receives while driving down the road at 60+mph. And that that same car will make a little more power out on the road. And besides, you are assuming that every dyno operator has the same fans. Some are better then others.
xpolarx 3:42PM (4/25/2009)
@ Valentino
Regarding the weight issue...I'm guessing that the weight is actually beneficial as far as keeping the car planted in the sweeping turns. In as much as it is a hindrance in tight chicanes (where cars like the ZR1, the GT3, and the ACR are dominating) I think the 'Ring has more sweeping turns than tight ones. This is purely conjecture, but if I'm right...it would certainly explain a lot.
Jake 10:27PM (4/25/2009)
And....
The Nissan is driven by a professional race-car driver on questionably stock tires, while the unofficial Corvette time was with one of the engineers at the helm.
Just sayin
naggs 11:04PM (4/26/2009)
nissan is totaly BSing
no third party has been able to get within 20 sec of that time
same crap as with the skyline, they will do whatever they need to claim fastest whatever
Matt 8:36AM (4/27/2009)
@xpolarx...
...More weight keeps it planted in the corners? No.
Nice Try.
Scooter 2:12PM (4/27/2009)
"Any car that laps the ring under 8 seconds is amazing. Anything under 7.45 is outright insane. The point is that bench racing based on Ring times doesnt tell the whole story."
You're not kiddin'.... 8 seconds around the ring, and my body would probably liquify.
Joe K. 7:39PM (4/24/2009)
Ironic that it comes a day after Porsche calls them out as being liars...
Reply
Kill The Fanboys 1:26PM (4/25/2009)
Very true, this is impressive. And getting interesting.
mil6es 7:40PM (4/24/2009)
let the interweb battles commence
Reply
elpepe 7:40PM (4/24/2009)
something smells fishy here... and I'm not really into seafood. So PLEASE, SOMEONE (car and driver? road and track? top gear?).... do an independent test of the GTR on the 'ring and compare it to an independent test of the GT3... and ZR1 while you're at it!
Reply
Adam Bruce 7:48PM (4/24/2009)
GT3 vs. GT-R. Same day, same track, same driver? That Question has already been answered. Here is a video of the two compared.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrd8VzfZzN8
The GT-R in the video is my personal car (it's no ringer as it was delivered to Nalley Nissan in Atlanta Georgia). The GT3 belongs to a guy that was the winner of the Unlimited Class at La Carrera. The Time that Sam Hubinette got with my GT-R (which was brand new) was only a second off Steve Millen's Willow Spring Lap Time in a GT-R with the stickier Dunlop tires and FASTER than the GT2
he tested.
Also the Margin of victory (in terms of Seconds per mile) was actually GREATER at Willow Springs than at the `Ring. Here is a very well written article that shows the consistency of the GT-R against the Porsche across multiple tracks.
http://www.gtrcenter.net/?p=2522
Franz 8:31PM (4/24/2009)
@ Adam Bruce:
Thanks so much for that. The haters will probably watch it and pretend they didn't, while continuing to talk smack, but for me that video pretty much sums it up. Both cars store bought and bone stock on the same track, and Sam Hubinette managed to get within a second of Steve Millen's time on the stickier tires... in a car that the anti-GT-R crowd were proclaiming a ringer when it handed the 911TT it's rear engined ass.
No disrespect to Porsche, of course. Anyone who's a regular here knows I don't talk smack about the 911, ZR1, Viper or any car for that matter. I respect them all, and what the respective manufacturers have achieved. I just think the GT-R is amazing for what it is, what it does and what it costs.
HotRodzNKustoms 8:31PM (4/24/2009)
@ Adam
Just reminds me of how slow both those cars are.
d4rez 9:37PM (4/24/2009)
*cough*
http://magazines.drivers-republic.com/driversrepublic/thetruth030/?fm=2
tekd 1:21AM (4/25/2009)
@d4rez
Two things-even driver's republic said the GT-R did better when the track started to get drier, and secondly it sounds like a lot of it was just their subjective opinion on how much further you could push each car-which makes it sound like they were pushing the porsche more to it's limits.
Ok three things, the 2010 GT-R is faster than the one they tested.
Clay Garland 9:47AM (4/25/2009)
An independent source needs to get a ZR1 in stock trim, and get Jan Magnussen to drive the bastard, that way, no one can complain that the car was modified, and no one can complain that the test driver didn't know what he was doing.
RJ 1:35PM (4/25/2009)
To be honest, I take for a grain of salt on any of the folloing Ring times: GTR, ZR1, and even the ACR.
An Enzo with better hp/weight than all of the above, has 2000+ lbs of downforce at speed (more than ACR), traps close to 190 mph on the main straight (20+ faster than ACR, has just as fast shifting time as the GTR, yet, somehow manages a 7:25 time also?
Untill all 3 Manufacturers let an independent source pick a random car for them (they can keep their same factory drivers), I'll stick to me belief that the cars have been modified. Seriously, how can you tell a few pounds of extra boost or camber on an internet video?