It's not it doesn't perform, it's that it doesn't perform to what Nissan said it would.Originally Posted by Capt._Ron
It's not it doesn't perform, it's that it doesn't perform to what Nissan said it would.
I can understand that but it seems that if Nissan had just understated the capabilities of the GTR then we would all be saying how awesome it performs similar to how the earlier GTR's had understated capabilities.
No shit... Talk the talk... walk the walk right?
Plus you risk a lot of money by making it perform, since nissan doesn't honor warranties if the VDC has been turned off. At least Porsche stands by their product.
Exactly.
No one can deny that point I bet Nissan will resolve that problem soon though after the amount of flak they have taken about it.
They did. On the newer ones, there isn't launch control!
What BS!
UGA: Everybody is laughing at us this year.
say this to my face sometime plz...
I'm open minded, but i'm done taking this forum, and the ppl in it seriously. So I choose to be as stupid as I want to be on here. Who cares, itz de internetzzzz fooo
porsche gt2 is better than a gt-r, but it costs more....the gt-r outperforms every porsche in its price range
Sooooo until there is a valid point here.....
Lets not sit here and discuss how much faster a vette is from a miata, it obviously is, but it's also a lot more expensive...I don't think you ppl understand that yet....
I would take a porshe gt2/gt3 over a gt-r who wouldn't, it costs a lot more.......
I don't remember any Mazda ads saying that the Miata was a Vette killerporsche gt2 is better than a gt-r, but it costs more....the gt-r outperforms every porsche in its price range
Sooooo until there is a valid point here.....
Lets not sit here and discuss how much faster a vette is from a miata, it obviously is, but it's also a lot more expensive...I don't think you ppl understand that yet....
I would take a porshe gt2/gt3 over a gt-r who wouldn't, it costs a lot more.......
I also don't remember Mazda posting track lap times for the Miata that nobody else could come close to reproducing.
UGA: Everybody is laughing at us this year.
The GTR was marketed as performing better than the competition while retaining a much lower price tag.. It failed on the performance aspect. I don't think you understand that yet....porsche gt2 is better than a gt-r, but it costs more....the gt-r outperforms every porsche in its price range
Sooooo until there is a valid point here.....
Lets not sit here and discuss how much faster a vette is from a miata, it obviously is, but it's also a lot more expensive...I don't think you ppl understand that yet....
I would take a porshe gt2/gt3 over a gt-r who wouldn't, it costs a lot more.......
They were comparing it to the GT2 because of the claims that nissan made about the times at "The ring".
I thought that Nissan used a 911 Turbo when they were developing the GTR, I didn't thing that they ever claimed that it was as fast as the GT2 or GT3. I wouldn't think that they were that stupid, I mean, it makes sense to go after another AWD/Turbo car market.
I just like to pick on cars that come out with promises of a feature or certain specs, then they run off and cancel the feature or don't match the specs. I'm sure they can find a driver that can match the numbers at the 'ring, but taking launch control away instead of devising a way to fix it, that's just mean, it ruins all of the acceleration numbers. This is what makes me mad about the RX-8, Mazda lying about the horsepower numbers so that we don't know about how slow it really is. It may be a good car, but now I'm mad at them for lying, even after they were on showroom floors.
Some say that his politics are terrifying, and that he once punched a horse to the ground...
if a GTR cant even beat a american car,how can it beat a porsche.....lol
or maybe the GTR driver sucked.......bahaha
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYvLI...eature=related
now i know this is just straight line,but u gotta agree 90% of GTR will never see a roadcourse
"GTR driver"
LOL oxymoron!
UGA: Everybody is laughing at us this year.
first comparison i've seen of the gtr losing to porsche.
Good for Porsche.
Launch control is for pussies anyways
The GTR was marketed as performing better than the competition while retaining a much lower price tag.. It failed on the performance aspect. I don't think you understand that yet....
They were comparing it to the GT2 because of the claims that nissan made about the times at "The ring".
lol it does where are you all getting this information from.. name 1 car that can do what the GTR does and can do.. for the price. And that is streetable, and legal.
its like saying the srt4 failed at being the best bang for the buck, but it cant beat a 350z...
i dont bother with disputing opinions, but some of you all are just spiting out crazy facts taht arent true about the GTR and its annoying.. not because its the gtr just because its bad info..
I don't remember any Mazda ads saying that the Miata was a Vette killer
I also don't remember Mazda posting track lap times for the Miata that nobody else could come close to reproducing.
miata isnt a vette killer..it wasnt made to be one.. it was made to be a lite weight underpowered fun roadster.. But it CAN BE MADE to be a vette killer.
Exactly, but Nissans claims were total BS, this is for the Nurburgring claims, not just the GTR vs Porsche.
There are tons of cars you can build for that much money and be legal and walk a new GTR.......
remind me if I see you..say this to my face sometime plz...
Jay Leno: "[Comes] with a proper 6 speed gear box, does this come with paddle shifting? "
Andy:No
Jay Leno:Thank you! Thank you very much, makes this a driver's car.
so anything with paddle shifters isn't a "driver's car" according to Leno? Man, Ferrari is gonna be pissed when they find that out...
He's right though.
Remember, Jay claims he bought the Carrera GT only because the car came with the clutch.
I respectfully have to strongly disagree with Jay. He may be right to himself but to say that the Carrera GT is a driver's car and the Enzo is not is just silly.
you are silly.. The paddle shifting might be faster, but its less of a driver's car.. That's the truth..
F1 cars: Driver's cars or not.....discuss.
Racing as a whole is a bad example. Modern F1 is an overload of electronics. Aryton Senna De Silva (the greatest driver ever) even said it was too much.
The main reason for paddle shifters in F1 is because they are much softer on power delivery and are much more reliable. If you go into the making of an F1 gearbox, it is nothing like what you see on the road. Same story with the engine.
And as this argument seems to always make its way into the racing front.
If i race a car, and i know i want to win at any cost, i will take any possible advantage. This eventually backfired in F1 as traction control, launch control and even active suspension systems made the driver a passenger. All of those systems have been banned because the sport realized it was computers racing computers instead of what it should be.
On the street, we drive, not race. Therefore, i want to drive my car the way it was meant to be.
Many racing series don't allow the use of paddle shifters.
I totally get what your saying bro. I'm just playing devils advocate. What about limited slips and power steering? My point is this: What is the definition of a driver's car? I think it is different to many people. Is an F430 more of a driver's car than my Evo even though it has paddles? I think so. Some may not. Is my Evo less of a driver's car because it has an active diff (however basic it may be) or AWD? I don't think so. Even though cars like the Enzo have paddles I still think all the performance characteristics it has make it a driver's car. There is still LOTS of things for you to pay attention to while driving even though the computer does your rev matching for you. That's just how I see it though...
Granted, but.... electronics take away from the skills. Yes, they keep you on the road but they take away from the experience. Modern exotics have more power than the race cars of the 70's and 80's. The difference, these modern cars are babying the driver so he won't make a mistake. Again, it all comes down to personal opinion but i say that in order to drive a car, you have to be providing traction control with your right foot and clutch pedal.
I totally agree with that. I think some of the babying is necessary to prevent idiots from wrecking on the 405!
Well I would have to say yes and no..
The "no" is far fetched, but the reason being is one's definition of "Driver's car".. The term, off course for the most part, as everyone knows how complex cars are, "driver's car" refers to the idea that the car is built around (not solely, obviously) the "feel" of the drive and the "pleasure" that one gets from it.. The car is really centered around this philosophy.. It cannot be argued that manual gearboxes are much more satisfying to drive than paddles..
The F1 is not centered around this philosophy.. The feeling the driver gets after/during driving it is not what the manufacturer cares about, but its the time the driver completes the track that they worry about.. The driver's preference of manual gearboxes is overlooked as the car is built solely on performance and lap-time based benchmarks..
The "yes" because of many reasons. First, you cannot deny the thrill that anyone would get driving a F1 car.. It is a different class and to compare with anything else is illogical; but for the sake of this argument it is justified.. Every F1 driver will drive other cars with a slight presence of boredom..
From a different stand point, when defining the term "driver's car" differently, a F1 car HAS to be a driver's car.. This because if it wasn't, if the car was not perfectly tuned for that specific driver: the performance of the driver and the car would lack efficiency.. The car and the driver really have to be in unity to achieve success..
Yea, now go watch him drive the GTR and rave about how great it is, and how he's so emotionally attached he doesn't want to see his wife. SHUT THE..
Doesn't change the fact that Manual > Paddle shifting..
Its funny how you took this as an attack to the GTR when nowhere in my post did I mention anything about a GTR..
Not only the GTR has paddle shifting, you know Ferrari's have it too.. So don't get you panties all in wad when all I was pointing out is that paddle shifter's on ANY car is not something to be particularly be happy about..
How did this turn into paddle shifting debate? lol
F1 cars are drivers cars, because half of this website couldn't even take a turn in one. I personally don't think paddle shifting is bad. For some reason I would take it in a Ferrari or something, but in a Japanese car? That just seems dumb to me lol. BUT it's not bad. Maybe it's I have driven paddle shifted Ferrari and liked it, it didn't seem as non driver like as I thought.
Don't you think you would enjoy driving a F40 more than an Enzo? Make it an F40 LM to make them even..
i thought F430s came with normal 6sp? just like lambos
Yes I would like the F40 more, due to the.......more raw driver feel.
It's options, some do. Lambos come with paddle shifting as well though, e-gear. Depends what you want.
yea,well aslong as u can get the car in a regular manual........who cares bout the paddles.
this one the reasons i love american cars,thier just so much raw compared to say a new ferrari or lambo.
Eh not really. I mean the driving feel of a Ferrari or Lambo feels so much better then a Corvette. You can turn any driving aids off. But they just feel more stout and raw. Lamborghini not as much as Ferrari (at least a Murcielago) but it's just raw and nasty. The loud scream of the engine and just brute acceleration.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
