C/D picks M3 over GT-R in latest comparo
06-02-2008, 08:02 PM
#26
n00b post whore
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-02-2008, 08:49 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: University of Maryland
Posts: 2,510
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
if i remmeber correctly bmw has been beaten before on C&D, the 3 series lost to g35 a few years ago when it first came out. the 335 has since then reclaimed the throne.
the 5 series lost to the M45, but I am not 100% if it was C&D
the 5 series lost to the M45, but I am not 100% if it was C&D
06-03-2008, 12:34 PM
#28
Void Where Prohibited
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mineola, TX
Posts: 3,046
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The American car mags suck. Road & Track, and Automobile are not too terrible. If I get another Motor Trend or Car and Driver with yet more Challanger's or Mustangs on the cover (and SUV/Truck/Van tests in the rest of it), I'm gonna puke. If you want to read/look at a real car magazine with great cars/content/reading/presentation/high quality photos and paper you have to shell out a little more money ($10-12) and go with EVO or CAR or newly reintroduced and now my favorite: Performance Car. These are all UK mags I believe and make the US car mags look silly. Great track based comparo's, usually features older icon car content and seem not to be biased.
06-03-2008, 04:26 PM
#29
My Rex goes to 11!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
did any of you actually read the article? have any of you driven the 3 cars? I haven't driven them, but did read the article and it didn't seem all that bad.
Their drivers are also pretty young and they seemed to base it soley on the fact that the m3 was the most well rounded and that numbers weren't everything.
how many of us rx8 owners have been on that side of the fence before?
Their drivers are also pretty young and they seemed to base it soley on the fact that the m3 was the most well rounded and that numbers weren't everything.
how many of us rx8 owners have been on that side of the fence before?
06-04-2008, 11:19 AM
#30
THE BITCH IS DEAD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton, Texas
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or maybe the the M3 is a better enthusiast car , anyone ever think of that?
Look at the Rx-8, went up against the Mustang,Audi TT, 350Z, all those cars on paper and in real world applications, pretty much match if not exceed the RX-8 in all areas, yet the RX-8 is the car that comes out on top as the most enjoyable to drive out of the bunch. Another car(RX-8) that is all about balance, and when i say balance, I meen the complete package.Styling,performance,value, and fun factor.
Maybe BMW and Mazda has got something, were other manufactures are missing the mark? Why do one thing great , when you can excell in all things well.
Look at the Rx-8, went up against the Mustang,Audi TT, 350Z, all those cars on paper and in real world applications, pretty much match if not exceed the RX-8 in all areas, yet the RX-8 is the car that comes out on top as the most enjoyable to drive out of the bunch. Another car(RX-8) that is all about balance, and when i say balance, I meen the complete package.Styling,performance,value, and fun factor.
Maybe BMW and Mazda has got something, were other manufactures are missing the mark? Why do one thing great , when you can excell in all things well.
I agree, in that comparo, the 8 had alot of stiff competition and it still was chosen as the best
06-04-2008, 11:22 AM
#31
Mentalhealth is overrated
I saw this translation on another web site:
I'll do a translation of the article (the BMW part).
In this group of radical cars, the M3 emerged quickly as the voice of reason. The extremist voices of the Porsche and the GT-R are just not present in the M3. It never shouts, utters complaints, or makes any unbecoming demands. Road and tire noise are subdued, the fabric-covered seats are perfect, and there is a back seat and a real trunk. But even with those attributes, the M3 doesn’t skimp on supercar performance. It just happens to be dressed in a polished and practical package.
Translation: The M3's pretty boring, but I'll wrap it around some bullshit to make it look awesome.
Even without the optional adjustable electronic dampers, our M3 test car displayed a better ride-and-handling compromise than either the 911 or the GT-R. Handling, both on the track and public roads, matched the GT-R in our individual scoring. But the M3 goes about its business differently. The GT-R steamrolls the tarmac into submission in an eerie sort of way; the M3 allows the driver to use the car as an instrument. Not many cars can play the road—the car world has more fakers than a middle-school band concert.
Translation: The last gen M3, we accepted the rough ride because it gave us great handling. But now that BMW have softened up, we'll spin it so it's a positive and bash the harder rides of the other cars.
As one test driver put it, “The M3 is the car that the driver has the most control over.” Oversteer, understeer, and neutrality are all on the M3’s résumé, but they’re dependent on the driver’s inputs. The chassis has no surprises, no snap reactions, no bad habits—even midcorner bumps are sopped up without drama. Strong brakes have excellent initial bite and didn’t fade even after many, many laps. The BMW’s lap time lagged 1.5 seconds behind the 911 Turbo’s, but that translates to an average speed throughout the lap that was only 0.3 mph slower than the far more powerful Porsche. Thus the BMW, though suffocated by the thin air at 4200 feet, managed to make up most of the difference by cornering faster.
Translation: The BMW is so underpowered I can't get it to do stupid stuff! The GT-R kicked my ***, so I'll just compare to the 911.
Unlike the heavyweights, the BMW feels smaller the harder it is driven. Part of that feel is due to light steering, but the importance of having the lowest mass and the narrowest width also plays a huge role.
Translation: We used to bitch out all the AMG cars for light steering, but now that our *********** have that problem, well... it's no longer a problem!
It is immediately obvious (especially at altitude) that the M3 isn’t as quick as its turbocharged competition, but 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds is nothing to scoff at, either (other M3s we’ve tested have been slightly quicker). A naturally aspirated 4.0-liter V-8 can’t deliver the massive torque of the blown sixes, but the M3 delivers its 414 horsepower in a linear and consistent manner from idle to its 8300-rpm redline. No lurching, no drama, no sudden explosions of boost. And the sound the BMW V-8 makes is due a Grammy. It’s a V-8 note not often heard outside racetracks, while the Nissan and the Porsche both sound as though they could wear a Dyson label.
Translation: zZzZzZzZ
If you’ll overlook the now cliché complaints about the iDrive control system and the car’s light steering, the M3 didn’t draw any negative words in its logbook. And the iDrive gripe is easily solved by not ordering the $2100 optional navigation system.
Translation: If you ignore all the problems, we have no problems! What a concept!
Seriously, what a fucked up review haha.
I'll do a translation of the article (the BMW part).
In this group of radical cars, the M3 emerged quickly as the voice of reason. The extremist voices of the Porsche and the GT-R are just not present in the M3. It never shouts, utters complaints, or makes any unbecoming demands. Road and tire noise are subdued, the fabric-covered seats are perfect, and there is a back seat and a real trunk. But even with those attributes, the M3 doesn’t skimp on supercar performance. It just happens to be dressed in a polished and practical package.
Translation: The M3's pretty boring, but I'll wrap it around some bullshit to make it look awesome.
Even without the optional adjustable electronic dampers, our M3 test car displayed a better ride-and-handling compromise than either the 911 or the GT-R. Handling, both on the track and public roads, matched the GT-R in our individual scoring. But the M3 goes about its business differently. The GT-R steamrolls the tarmac into submission in an eerie sort of way; the M3 allows the driver to use the car as an instrument. Not many cars can play the road—the car world has more fakers than a middle-school band concert.
Translation: The last gen M3, we accepted the rough ride because it gave us great handling. But now that BMW have softened up, we'll spin it so it's a positive and bash the harder rides of the other cars.
As one test driver put it, “The M3 is the car that the driver has the most control over.” Oversteer, understeer, and neutrality are all on the M3’s résumé, but they’re dependent on the driver’s inputs. The chassis has no surprises, no snap reactions, no bad habits—even midcorner bumps are sopped up without drama. Strong brakes have excellent initial bite and didn’t fade even after many, many laps. The BMW’s lap time lagged 1.5 seconds behind the 911 Turbo’s, but that translates to an average speed throughout the lap that was only 0.3 mph slower than the far more powerful Porsche. Thus the BMW, though suffocated by the thin air at 4200 feet, managed to make up most of the difference by cornering faster.
Translation: The BMW is so underpowered I can't get it to do stupid stuff! The GT-R kicked my ***, so I'll just compare to the 911.
Unlike the heavyweights, the BMW feels smaller the harder it is driven. Part of that feel is due to light steering, but the importance of having the lowest mass and the narrowest width also plays a huge role.
Translation: We used to bitch out all the AMG cars for light steering, but now that our *********** have that problem, well... it's no longer a problem!
It is immediately obvious (especially at altitude) that the M3 isn’t as quick as its turbocharged competition, but 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds is nothing to scoff at, either (other M3s we’ve tested have been slightly quicker). A naturally aspirated 4.0-liter V-8 can’t deliver the massive torque of the blown sixes, but the M3 delivers its 414 horsepower in a linear and consistent manner from idle to its 8300-rpm redline. No lurching, no drama, no sudden explosions of boost. And the sound the BMW V-8 makes is due a Grammy. It’s a V-8 note not often heard outside racetracks, while the Nissan and the Porsche both sound as though they could wear a Dyson label.
Translation: zZzZzZzZ
If you’ll overlook the now cliché complaints about the iDrive control system and the car’s light steering, the M3 didn’t draw any negative words in its logbook. And the iDrive gripe is easily solved by not ordering the $2100 optional navigation system.
Translation: If you ignore all the problems, we have no problems! What a concept!
Seriously, what a fucked up review haha.
06-04-2008, 11:58 AM
#32
OMGITM!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 3,513
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Rx8 is not pretty.......it's infact pretty ugly to me! It's short and tiny..and what's up with the sucide doors???.. I bought it cuz of the handling..n rotary engine...I've always loved rotary engines..I didn't buy it cuz of the look...........
If I was looking for a look, I would buy a used NSX or S2000!
So you bought the rx8 for the look????
If I was looking for a look, I would buy a used NSX or S2000!
So you bought the rx8 for the look????
To OP -
Did you happen to see where the bimmer got its points? These tests include every day drivability (aka interior room, road noise, etc) - doesn't mean the m3 won because of better balance, it may just be much more luxurious. Without question I would take the gtr...
06-04-2008, 02:04 PM
#33
Registered Abuser
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Waco, TX
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The article is up on caranddriver.com. It comes across as very half-assed and boring. I am not even sure the cars were actually driven. The article reads more like a 16 yr old's fantasy-narrative submitted to a high school newspaper.
06-04-2008, 02:14 PM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: University of Maryland
Posts: 2,510
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
hahahaha this is some funny ish
I saw this translation on another web site:
I'll do a translation of the article (the BMW part).
In this group of radical cars, the M3 emerged quickly as the voice of reason. The extremist voices of the Porsche and the GT-R are just not present in the M3. It never shouts, utters complaints, or makes any unbecoming demands. Road and tire noise are subdued, the fabric-covered seats are perfect, and there is a back seat and a real trunk. But even with those attributes, the M3 doesn’t skimp on supercar performance. It just happens to be dressed in a polished and practical package.
Translation: The M3's pretty boring, but I'll wrap it around some bullshit to make it look awesome.
Even without the optional adjustable electronic dampers, our M3 test car displayed a better ride-and-handling compromise than either the 911 or the GT-R. Handling, both on the track and public roads, matched the GT-R in our individual scoring. But the M3 goes about its business differently. The GT-R steamrolls the tarmac into submission in an eerie sort of way; the M3 allows the driver to use the car as an instrument. Not many cars can play the road—the car world has more fakers than a middle-school band concert.
Translation: The last gen M3, we accepted the rough ride because it gave us great handling. But now that BMW have softened up, we'll spin it so it's a positive and bash the harder rides of the other cars.
As one test driver put it, “The M3 is the car that the driver has the most control over.” Oversteer, understeer, and neutrality are all on the M3’s résumé, but they’re dependent on the driver’s inputs. The chassis has no surprises, no snap reactions, no bad habits—even midcorner bumps are sopped up without drama. Strong brakes have excellent initial bite and didn’t fade even after many, many laps. The BMW’s lap time lagged 1.5 seconds behind the 911 Turbo’s, but that translates to an average speed throughout the lap that was only 0.3 mph slower than the far more powerful Porsche. Thus the BMW, though suffocated by the thin air at 4200 feet, managed to make up most of the difference by cornering faster.
Translation: The BMW is so underpowered I can't get it to do stupid stuff! The GT-R kicked my ***, so I'll just compare to the 911.
Unlike the heavyweights, the BMW feels smaller the harder it is driven. Part of that feel is due to light steering, but the importance of having the lowest mass and the narrowest width also plays a huge role.
Translation: We used to bitch out all the AMG cars for light steering, but now that our *********** have that problem, well... it's no longer a problem!
It is immediately obvious (especially at altitude) that the M3 isn’t as quick as its turbocharged competition, but 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds is nothing to scoff at, either (other M3s we’ve tested have been slightly quicker). A naturally aspirated 4.0-liter V-8 can’t deliver the massive torque of the blown sixes, but the M3 delivers its 414 horsepower in a linear and consistent manner from idle to its 8300-rpm redline. No lurching, no drama, no sudden explosions of boost. And the sound the BMW V-8 makes is due a Grammy. It’s a V-8 note not often heard outside racetracks, while the Nissan and the Porsche both sound as though they could wear a Dyson label.
Translation: zZzZzZzZ
If you’ll overlook the now cliché complaints about the iDrive control system and the car’s light steering, the M3 didn’t draw any negative words in its logbook. And the iDrive gripe is easily solved by not ordering the $2100 optional navigation system.
Translation: If you ignore all the problems, we have no problems! What a concept!
Seriously, what a fucked up review haha.
I'll do a translation of the article (the BMW part).
In this group of radical cars, the M3 emerged quickly as the voice of reason. The extremist voices of the Porsche and the GT-R are just not present in the M3. It never shouts, utters complaints, or makes any unbecoming demands. Road and tire noise are subdued, the fabric-covered seats are perfect, and there is a back seat and a real trunk. But even with those attributes, the M3 doesn’t skimp on supercar performance. It just happens to be dressed in a polished and practical package.
Translation: The M3's pretty boring, but I'll wrap it around some bullshit to make it look awesome.
Even without the optional adjustable electronic dampers, our M3 test car displayed a better ride-and-handling compromise than either the 911 or the GT-R. Handling, both on the track and public roads, matched the GT-R in our individual scoring. But the M3 goes about its business differently. The GT-R steamrolls the tarmac into submission in an eerie sort of way; the M3 allows the driver to use the car as an instrument. Not many cars can play the road—the car world has more fakers than a middle-school band concert.
Translation: The last gen M3, we accepted the rough ride because it gave us great handling. But now that BMW have softened up, we'll spin it so it's a positive and bash the harder rides of the other cars.
As one test driver put it, “The M3 is the car that the driver has the most control over.” Oversteer, understeer, and neutrality are all on the M3’s résumé, but they’re dependent on the driver’s inputs. The chassis has no surprises, no snap reactions, no bad habits—even midcorner bumps are sopped up without drama. Strong brakes have excellent initial bite and didn’t fade even after many, many laps. The BMW’s lap time lagged 1.5 seconds behind the 911 Turbo’s, but that translates to an average speed throughout the lap that was only 0.3 mph slower than the far more powerful Porsche. Thus the BMW, though suffocated by the thin air at 4200 feet, managed to make up most of the difference by cornering faster.
Translation: The BMW is so underpowered I can't get it to do stupid stuff! The GT-R kicked my ***, so I'll just compare to the 911.
Unlike the heavyweights, the BMW feels smaller the harder it is driven. Part of that feel is due to light steering, but the importance of having the lowest mass and the narrowest width also plays a huge role.
Translation: We used to bitch out all the AMG cars for light steering, but now that our *********** have that problem, well... it's no longer a problem!
It is immediately obvious (especially at altitude) that the M3 isn’t as quick as its turbocharged competition, but 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds is nothing to scoff at, either (other M3s we’ve tested have been slightly quicker). A naturally aspirated 4.0-liter V-8 can’t deliver the massive torque of the blown sixes, but the M3 delivers its 414 horsepower in a linear and consistent manner from idle to its 8300-rpm redline. No lurching, no drama, no sudden explosions of boost. And the sound the BMW V-8 makes is due a Grammy. It’s a V-8 note not often heard outside racetracks, while the Nissan and the Porsche both sound as though they could wear a Dyson label.
Translation: zZzZzZzZ
If you’ll overlook the now cliché complaints about the iDrive control system and the car’s light steering, the M3 didn’t draw any negative words in its logbook. And the iDrive gripe is easily solved by not ordering the $2100 optional navigation system.
Translation: If you ignore all the problems, we have no problems! What a concept!
Seriously, what a fucked up review haha.
06-04-2008, 02:36 PM
#35
zoom zoom
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i just read the thing on c/d's website, and i must say, pitching the m3 against gt-r and 911t is something motor trend would do. it's an odd comparison; an m6 might be more appropriate. the written review was odd and a bit trivial as well. and now i'm more convinced that c/d is on bmw's payroll. maybe some of us should start a new car magazine and always let anything wearing a mazda badge win
06-04-2008, 03:10 PM
#36
Administrator
iTrader: (7)
Rotten: those translations are spot on!
06-04-2008, 03:56 PM
#37
The Prototype
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me why they chose the 911 vs M3 vs GT-R, because all of them excell in the handeling department , and all three might be close on a road coarse. But other than that , the similarities stop there. Cost, acceleration, top speed,etc, are all over the chart.
Like someone mentioned, a M5 or M6 would have been better suited for the review instead of the M3.
Kind of reminds me of the RX-8 vs the Mustang , TT and the 350Z review. The Mustang is much faster than 8, the 350Z is a few car lengths faster than the 8, the TT is even ,if not a tad slower than the 8, one is a muscle car, the other is a sports car, one is a luxury coupe/sports car, the other is a 4 door coupe/sports car. All are in the price range of each other, unlike the M3 comparo, yet the RX-8 wins for over all balance like the M3.
And I don't think this review by C/D was a all out attack against the GT-R or Porsche 911 turbo. IMO, it seem like they were telling the general public here we tested 3 fabulous cars , all of them have there high and low points, all behave like they should ,but for the "overall" value we recommend the M3,something in the middle of the other two great contenders. Is that bad for the reviewers to do?
Now if this was a review on best performance car, we all know it would go to the GT-R hands down. If this was a review on most stylish car for the money, the Porsche 911 Turbo would win..... but it was none of these. This was just a soft core review IMO.
Trust me I am waiting for the performance review, where the GT-R stands off against the Z-06, Porsche 911 Twin turbo,ZR-1, Ferrari F430 Scudera, Lamborghini LP640. Thats going to be the review that will have everybody biting there finger nails to see who dominates as TOP DOG!
Like someone mentioned, a M5 or M6 would have been better suited for the review instead of the M3.
Kind of reminds me of the RX-8 vs the Mustang , TT and the 350Z review. The Mustang is much faster than 8, the 350Z is a few car lengths faster than the 8, the TT is even ,if not a tad slower than the 8, one is a muscle car, the other is a sports car, one is a luxury coupe/sports car, the other is a 4 door coupe/sports car. All are in the price range of each other, unlike the M3 comparo, yet the RX-8 wins for over all balance like the M3.
And I don't think this review by C/D was a all out attack against the GT-R or Porsche 911 turbo. IMO, it seem like they were telling the general public here we tested 3 fabulous cars , all of them have there high and low points, all behave like they should ,but for the "overall" value we recommend the M3,something in the middle of the other two great contenders. Is that bad for the reviewers to do?
Now if this was a review on best performance car, we all know it would go to the GT-R hands down. If this was a review on most stylish car for the money, the Porsche 911 Turbo would win..... but it was none of these. This was just a soft core review IMO.
Trust me I am waiting for the performance review, where the GT-R stands off against the Z-06, Porsche 911 Twin turbo,ZR-1, Ferrari F430 Scudera, Lamborghini LP640. Thats going to be the review that will have everybody biting there finger nails to see who dominates as TOP DOG!
Last edited by DailyDriver2k5; 06-04-2008 at 04:13 PM.
06-04-2008, 04:43 PM
#38
Void Where Prohibited
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mineola, TX
Posts: 3,046
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trust me I am waiting for the performance review, where the GT-R stands off against the Z-06, Porsche 911 Twin turbo,ZR-1, Ferrari F430 Scudera, Lamborghini LP640. Thats going to be the review that will have everybody biting there finger nails to see who dominates as TOP DOG!
Last edited by JRichter; 06-04-2008 at 04:46 PM.
06-04-2008, 08:56 PM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car and Driver might as well compare a M3 against say a Lexus LS600h. The LS will win out on ride, noise, comfort, etc. M3 will win on handling and acceleration. Completely different market. Someone who is looking for a 911 Turbo isn't looking at the M3. Those with 911 Turbo have other cars, which might be a M3, or something else. Buyers at the class is not looking for a well round car. They are looking for a specific need car. (I read this somewhere based on research done by Lexus.)
06-04-2008, 10:03 PM
#40
Ahhhh yes... i just read this yesterday also...
even though the power is uncomparable between both the 911 turbo and gtr, it still has great hadnling. They pretty much based it upon "C/D point score chart" that includes the looks of the interior and weight of the car etc.,"
but they obviosuly chose the m3 since its definitley alot less on the price tag and its handling is very nimble and the power for the size and weight is perfect. i agree also with C/D... if i was to go get a practical luzurious car, i would choose m3 over the 911 and gtr... but if i was to go all out performance and rip **** UP! ill definitley go with the GTR and 911.... no doubt about it.
but cant deny it, the m3 is a beauty =]
and the GTR is the BEAST!!!
even though the power is uncomparable between both the 911 turbo and gtr, it still has great hadnling. They pretty much based it upon "C/D point score chart" that includes the looks of the interior and weight of the car etc.,"
but they obviosuly chose the m3 since its definitley alot less on the price tag and its handling is very nimble and the power for the size and weight is perfect. i agree also with C/D... if i was to go get a practical luzurious car, i would choose m3 over the 911 and gtr... but if i was to go all out performance and rip **** UP! ill definitley go with the GTR and 911.... no doubt about it.
but cant deny it, the m3 is a beauty =]
and the GTR is the BEAST!!!
06-04-2008, 10:48 PM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The M3 win would be more defensible if the BMW double clutch transmission was installed.
Better (shorter) gearing, more appropriate for low lap times.
C&D should try again in thick air (<1000feet)
Better (shorter) gearing, more appropriate for low lap times.
C&D should try again in thick air (<1000feet)
06-05-2008, 08:20 AM
#42
The Prototype
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M3 can square off against a GT-R or a 911 Turbo? Trust me .... wait for the meat potatoes show down review!
That thread alone might shut down the RX-8club.com server because everybody and there grandmother will chime in on that review!
06-05-2008, 09:00 AM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the double clutch, I expect the M3 to be 12.5@115.
With tires like the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup, and an aggressive launch control 12@120 isn't out of the realm of possibilities.
With tires like the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup, and an aggressive launch control 12@120 isn't out of the realm of possibilities.
06-05-2008, 01:06 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Rohnert Park CA
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And that it was not the stock suspension set up as found currently on the GT-R in Japan but instead a tweaked suspension (probably similar to the rumored Spec V GT-R).
So, at this point that story really is that a prototype car went out on a flying lap, and made a great time. We will see when the Fanbois start driving if the car really is capable of a sub 7:40 there.
Last edited by Icemark; 06-05-2008 at 01:12 PM.
06-05-2008, 01:11 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Rohnert Park CA
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-05-2008, 01:31 PM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: University of Maryland
Posts: 2,510
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
rolling start is the standard on nurburgring for manufacture lap times. everything else you said are just groundless rumors of "he said she said", guess what? I heard from my roomates sister that the gt-R on that day was running NOS yo!
It would go a long way toward legitimizing your claim if you can actually provide proof from a respectables publication about this statement. If what you say were anything remotely legit, the likes of autoblog, leftlane news, world car fan etc would have been all over it
It would go a long way toward legitimizing your claim if you can actually provide proof from a respectables publication about this statement. If what you say were anything remotely legit, the likes of autoblog, leftlane news, world car fan etc would have been all over it
Yeah, there are some interesting comments coming out on that. The most interesting was the Nissan Project Engineer for the GT-R coming out and saying that the tires were cut slicks, and not street tires as the European Renault/Nissan PR team reported... and that the lap was a flying lap, rather than a start from 0 lap that most manufactures have been doing.
And that it was not the stock suspension set up as found currently on the GT-R in Japan but instead a tweaked suspension (probably similar to the rumored Spec V GT-R).
So, at this point that story really is that a prototype car went out on a flying lap, and made a great time. We will see when the Fanbois start driving if the car really is capable of a sub 7:40 there.
And that it was not the stock suspension set up as found currently on the GT-R in Japan but instead a tweaked suspension (probably similar to the rumored Spec V GT-R).
So, at this point that story really is that a prototype car went out on a flying lap, and made a great time. We will see when the Fanbois start driving if the car really is capable of a sub 7:40 there.
Last edited by playdoh43; 06-05-2008 at 02:01 PM.
06-05-2008, 02:29 PM
#49
SARX Legend
iTrader: (46)
Car and Driver might as well compare a M3 against say a Lexus LS600h. The LS will win out on ride, noise, comfort, etc. M3 will win on handling and acceleration. Completely different market. Someone who is looking for a 911 Turbo isn't looking at the M3. Those with 911 Turbo have other cars, which might be a M3, or something else. Buyers at the class is not looking for a well round car. They are looking for a specific need car. (I read this somewhere based on research done by Lexus.)
You are so right. My boss has six cars and he drives the AMG CL65 to work and the 911 is for the track days. Most People at that income level buy a car for each specific need (ie: mini van for the nanny, GL550 for the family trips, S500 for taking the wifey out, and the 911 or GT-R for funtime) My boss and I had a discussion about the M3 (because I love it) and he looks at that car the same way we would look at a Mazda 3. In his mind a 3 series is a 3 series and does not mean baller status in his eyes. Craazy.
06-05-2008, 02:45 PM
#50
zoom zoom
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts