New Rule:
From now on, whenever you quote FF, post your racing credentials, racing experience, cars you've raced, pix and vid, and lap times. Otherwise you are a poser and a wannabe.
Continue.
Road and Track. GTR vs Z06 vs 997
- Thread starter Vindication
- Start date
New Rule:
From now on, whenever you quote FF, post your racing credentials, racing experience, cars you've raced, pix and vid, and lap times. Otherwise you are a poser and a wannabe.
Continue.
omg i can't help but lmao at both those comments. You guys crack me up.
As you were.
it seems that there are alot of rice burnin nutswingers on this site who hate ford and all american cars in general or maybe they just hate me :shrug:
i don't have anything against people who have a lack of knowledge concerning vehicular physics and dynamics as it pertains to motorsports. in fact 20 years ago that used to be me. so when given the time i try and educate them. with that said i have no tolerance whatsoever for people who wanna call me a liar or who tell me that i have no idea what i am talking about when they have not done the particular type of racing that i am refering too. the people who can't get their head around what it is i am talking about here in this thread have never done the type of racing that i am referring to and therefore their comments are meaningless to me. they think that just because a car that wins on a slow speed road course will beat a car that is designed to race on a high speed track. this is total ignorance. cars that are setup for high speed tracks are different than cars that are setup for slower speed tracks. if you don't believe me then you have not been watching enough nascar, F1 and all the rest of the many Pro racing series. they even have different engines, etc that they use for qualifying than the actual race itself, etc.
as an owner of a japanese car that bein my Datsun 240-Z it should be obvious that i have nothing against foreign cars. i also currently own 4 japanese motorcycles and have owned just as many in the past. i even have my Kawasaki listed in my sig and the timeslip database here on this site. the first two posts that i made in this thread were positive in nature with respect to the Nissan GTR. the car is absolutely awesome when used for its intended role which is slower speed road courses and street racing from a dig on the street or strip. but when you take this car out of its element and put it up against the Ford GT on a HIGH speed track where the average lap speed is above 100 mph or a dig race from 0 mph to 191 mph which is the Nissan GTR's claimed top speed i believe that the Ford GT is gonna beat it. in fact not only have i offered to race two of the haters in this thread for $1000 each but i will extend this offer to any Nissan GTR owner for the previously mentioned race to which i have specified earlier in this thread.
:beer:
Last edited:
Betting people a grand on a race you know you're going to win isn't going to get anything accomplished. This entire time i've been saying that the GT-R is not built to compete on such "high speed" tracks you speak of. No one is doubting that. It is a 190mph car, but it is 3900 pounds and it has a 3.8 TT V6. Anyone in their right mind would be stupid to take up a $1000 bet saying it would beat a 5.4 S/C'ed FGT or any 600+whp domestic on a highway where speeds stay at or above 150mph.
The point of this thread in the first place was to compare it against its rivals on an actual road course with cars that were designed around road racing (btw I think your/our main confusion is from the term road racing which certainly does NOT include high speed events that hold little to no merit in the road racing motorsports community).
What makes the GT-R so competitive on a road course is its far advanced technology from say a Z06 or 997 as the thread says. It was built to run very fast lap times around pretty much any road course, where (you should know Fred) average speed is FAR less important than lap time. If you take ANY car out of its element its going to lose man. Its like taking Michael Jordon, putting him on the soccer field with David Beckham and saying Jordan sucks in comparison. Thats not how it works. If you took your FGT out of its element and put it on ice where the awd GT-R is better, you could argue a biased argument. That is why i'm saying there is no point comparing road courses vs. high speed events with the GT-R. It simply doesn't make any sense. So I think you strayed off topic and began arguing over a subject (high speed events) that we'd all agree on regarding average speeds, but that was never the point.
Whether or not there are "ricer-burner" nutswingers on this thread I don't know. But I do know that I am a realist. I've been around plenty of road courses, instructed dozens of drivers (including viper owners), and done enough racing to know a fast car around a track when I see one. The GT-R is definately one of them. Certainly you can appreciate that fact.
I'm going to go ahead and edit out my other bullshit, but one day if I ever decide to own an R35, i'll make sure to look you up with $1000 in my pocket.
The point of this thread in the first place was to compare it against its rivals on an actual road course with cars that were designed around road racing (btw I think your/our main confusion is from the term road racing which certainly does NOT include high speed events that hold little to no merit in the road racing motorsports community).
What makes the GT-R so competitive on a road course is its far advanced technology from say a Z06 or 997 as the thread says. It was built to run very fast lap times around pretty much any road course, where (you should know Fred) average speed is FAR less important than lap time. If you take ANY car out of its element its going to lose man. Its like taking Michael Jordon, putting him on the soccer field with David Beckham and saying Jordan sucks in comparison. Thats not how it works. If you took your FGT out of its element and put it on ice where the awd GT-R is better, you could argue a biased argument. That is why i'm saying there is no point comparing road courses vs. high speed events with the GT-R. It simply doesn't make any sense. So I think you strayed off topic and began arguing over a subject (high speed events) that we'd all agree on regarding average speeds, but that was never the point.
Whether or not there are "ricer-burner" nutswingers on this thread I don't know. But I do know that I am a realist. I've been around plenty of road courses, instructed dozens of drivers (including viper owners), and done enough racing to know a fast car around a track when I see one. The GT-R is definately one of them. Certainly you can appreciate that fact.
I'm going to go ahead and edit out my other bullshit, but one day if I ever decide to own an R35, i'll make sure to look you up with $1000 in my pocket.
Last edited:
Fast freddy your such a ****en shit bag. My point was you said your POS Nissan ran a 1.34 at big willow which i still call bull shit again becasue SCCA GT-3 race cars run that and there full race cars. But you say how fast your Ford GT is but you say you ran the same time in a pos Nissan, but a professional race car driver on best motoring ran a 1.34 with a Ford GT so your Nissan must not be such a peace of shit or the ford GT is slow as hell. I wonder which one is true the ford gt times or your times? :burn: :bs:
Hey fastfreddy what is done to your z?
The times your giving are what they ran in that Ford gt on best motoring, and I believe it was Gansan driving who is an amazing driver. please post some specs on that 240 of yours.
also a pretty high speed course is the Nurburgring.
7:42* – Ford GT
7.38* - Nissan R35 GT-R
The times your giving are what they ran in that Ford gt on best motoring, and I believe it was Gansan driving who is an amazing driver. please post some specs on that 240 of yours.
also a pretty high speed course is the Nurburgring.
7:42* – Ford GT
7.38* - Nissan R35 GT-R
That was a modified FGT by octane magazine. The stock FGT time was 7:52 (supertest) by sportauto.
I wonder what it's 60' is!
BTW, I think its funny how some people bring up the electronics. I remember reading years ago how people that ABS was cheating.. then they thought skid control was cheating.. now some think a manual transmission with paddle shifters is cheating
Wait another 10 years and see what the cars "cheat" with!
While I love the Z06 and would much rather have one, can you imagine what this car would do if it weighed the same as a Z? :lol1:
First, I am not taking sides in this, but I want to chime in on two things. One, there is no shortage of parts for the 240. It has a great power to weight ratio, and if properly modded (and I would have to see the mods), it may be possible.
I only chime in because I have seen folks come to track days, with a properly modded (and by that I mean matched coil-overs (sprung/dampened), corner-weighted, appropriate tuned, balanced brakes, good tires, competent driver) that have turned times faster than 'some' drivers in race cars. Heck, I have gone a 1:36 at Road Atlanta, before the repaving (which would be @3s faster now) in an Evo that I drove down, put on slicks (235/45), and ran in the TT group. I have gone sub 1:48's at CMP (carolina motorsport park) in the same Evo. Now, I spent @2g on performance mods for the motor (basically a good tune and cams), and about 4k on suspension
). So, don't be so quick to doubt, I am not saying he may not be lying, but there is a possibility. Heck, you never know what you will see at some track days.
Oh, and almost forgot.
Racing since 8 (go-karts), sprints, dirt-track, road course, over 15 years of experience, tested for McLaren and Hendrick before med-school (which I flunked out of
).What i am saying is he think's he is such a badass driver. Hey Fast Freddy what if i put you in a POS Dodge Neon what would you run willow in then 59sec? No wait what am i thinking it would be like 2sec your FAST FREDDY THE GREAT. :banana:
Fast Freddy has been owned so many times in this thread he should just move on.. I actually use to read his posts and think "hey, look at all these bad ass cars this guy has, maybe he knows his stuff"
After reading this thread I can see he's just another rich person without much sense.
Dyno numbers of the GTR Motortrend tested.The highest hp readin was 439 awhp but they avg all the runs and came up with this.
430 awhp ,425 tq on a dyno jet
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0803_2009_nissan_gt_r_dyno_test/results_analysis.html
430 awhp ,425 tq on a dyno jet
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0803_2009_nissan_gt_r_dyno_test/results_analysis.html
Last edited:
Was that a Mustang Dyno?
You know I might not own a GT500, Z06, or GTR but I do have a couple things to throw out there that has been touched upon already.
Who cares what these cars can do on a road course? 99% of the encounters between all these cars won't happen on a track but rather at the stoplight so who cares which one can take a corner better. Also people will spend their money however the hell they want to so if they want to pay a huge mark up on a Nissan they will, some of you are talking as if Ford and Chevy are right up there with Rolls-Royce.
Who cares what these cars can do on a road course? 99% of the encounters between all these cars won't happen on a track but rather at the stoplight so who cares which one can take a corner better. Also people will spend their money however the hell they want to so if they want to pay a huge mark up on a Nissan they will, some of you are talking as if Ford and Chevy are right up there with Rolls-Royce.
Dyno jet. cobb tuning got 409 awhp on a mustang dyno in 4th gear. Cobb tuning didnt dyno in 5th ( 1.00:1 ratio) due to it being a j-spec car and hitting the limiter.
just wait until they hit the streets and stop speculating. no one will believe anything until there is some vids of people racing.
Because Porsches and GT-R's are built with a road racing history maybe? I know what you're saying but you cant ignore that fact. Plus you're thinking a bit too much like an American LOL. In europe and Japan, 99% of their encounters will take place on the track.
....and my thoughts of it being severely underrated have been confirmed, the numbers just didn't add up. damn, good for nissan
Black94svt
New Member
Nice cars
Users who are viewing this thread
