26 Votes

GT-R vs Porsche at Thunderhill Park Raceway

dlin submitted on 9/22/2008 Official Bell & Ross Timestamp: 12:54:48 AM

53 user comments | Category: Reviews | Source: | SOURCE: www.gtrblog.com

Quite a number of Porsche owners have gone out and purchased a new GT-R since it’s launch in the US in the middle of this year.

There’s various reasons to do this but hopefully, some do it because they are open minded and are interested in driving fast over what badge is on the front of the car.

Chris over at NAGTROC owns both a 700hp 997 turbo and a new GT-R and has had the chance to run both cars at Thunderhill Park Raceway on the same day in the same conditions and has had the chance to measure it with a TraqMate GPS recording device.

In his first day out at this track in the GT-R he managed a laptime of 2:05 which was two seconds faster than his previous best in the 997.

The same day in the same conditions in the 700hp 997TT he managed a 2:07 in the Porsche but in an untimed session (due to the TraqMate becoming unplugged) may have managed a 2:05 or 2:04.

Read Article

About the Author

— dlin (View Profile)

User Comments

No difference!
— kpaxx (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 9:23:58 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

Modified Porsche vs. stock GT-R, $100,000+ for a Porsche that is barely any better performance-wise than a $70,000 Nissan, big difference! If you cannot see that difference then you're nothing more than a badge whore.
— F1_Driver (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 3:53:07 PM | | Votes: 3

There is much more to Porsche than just #s. Not sure why people only focus on #s. GT-R has shaken the sports car world for the better and in the end will improve the entire segment, because competitors will look to go past what the GT-R has established. I just hope they do it without breaking our banks!
— Porschinator (View Profile)

Posted on 9/24/2008 3:49:45 PM | | Votes: 2

I dont agree at all if you have a nissan sports car that is pretty much equal to a porsche 997 turbo then I think thats pretty impressive for nissan now the GTR is a spin off of the skyline and even that car was hanging with the porsche's I just think your a HATER for real
— B7FAN (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 10:59:30 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

From the drivers comments:

In previous threads I compared (using old GPS data) myself driving my 997TT and my GT-R on the same track (Reno-Fernley). The GT-R was 2-3 seconds faster, but there were a lot of other variables (weather, driver skill (GT-R test was a year later-- I hope I got better) etc.).

I just got back from a day at Thunderhill with Hooked on Driving. I had both cars with me.

Some pics: http://gallery.me.com/cnicholson1#100144

I am not a super hardcore track driver (let alone racer). Just a guy that enjoys DE days. My previous fast lap in 997TT was a 2:07. That was before they resurfaced the track. There is debate in the paddock as to whether new surface is faster (because smoother) or slower (because still too new and grip is still building).

Anyway, here are the results:

First session out on GT-R: tires squealing. Car felt heavy. Had to turn in later. I was sure I was slow. But I did a 2:08!! On my third session, I did a 2:05. Two seconds FASTER than my previous fastest lat in 997TT (after 12+ track days in the 997TT on that track).

Best lap in GT-R: http://www.viddler.com/explore/Cnicholson/videos/2/

After lunch, I switched to 997TT. First session, best lap 2:07. Next (last) session, I was gridded up next to a buddy who is very fast and has a very fast 993TT. We where tearing it up. I got back in to check my times and noticed that my TraqMate had come unplugged!!!! So no solid data. My friend's traqmate showed him doing 2:04s with one lap at 2:03.9. We were pretty evenly matched, but I think he is a a bit faster.

Using a bit of judgement, I am going to say that on that day, by the end of the day, I was a bit faster in the 997TT (perhaps by a second-- maybe 1.5 seconds). But: My 997TT has 700HP and hits 140MPH on main straight (versus 135 for GT-R) and I know I am getting closer to limits on 997TT.

It is amazing how easy the GT-R is to jump in and drive fast very confidently, but I still need to learn the car.

Conclusion: Stock for Stock, the 997TT HAS NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER versus a stock GT-R. GT-R versus a modded 997TT would be a driver's race.
— 222max (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 10:17:24 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4

I don't think the upcoming 911 turbo will have any problem besting the GT-R but in the mean time Porsche should take their racing GT3-RSR which is currently leading in the ALMS series and add a full leather interior and sell it as a GT-R eater.

— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 10:42:07 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

dont forget about the SPEC-V edition btw
— KZ258 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 12:51:52 PM | | Votes: 2

Will no doubt also be eaten by cars from a company that knows better than any other how to win actual races on the race track.
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 1:42:21 PM | | Votes: -1

you mean the company that dropped out motorsports after 1998 because of the competition from audi, bmw, merc, toyota and honda?

come on, Porsche's motorsports days are long gone for at least 10 years.
— ghosthunter (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 2:55:37 PM | | Votes: 1

Ok, Porsche at the 24 Hours of Le Mans since it took the overall win in 1998.

1999 - Porsche (Manthey Racing) wins the GT category with a 911 GT3-R.

2000 - Porsche (Team Taisan Advan) wins the GT category with a 911 GT3-R.

2001 - Porsche (Seikel Motorsport) wins the GT category with a 911 GT3-RS.

2002 - Porsche (The Racer's Group) wins the GT category with a 911 GT3-RS.

2003 - Porsche (Alex Job Racing - Petersen Motorsports) wins the GT category with a 911 GT3-RS.

2004 - Porsche (White Lightning Racing) wins the GT category with a 911 GT3-RS.

2005 - Porsche (Alex Job Racing - BAM! Motorsport) wins the (renamed) GT2 category with a 911 GT3-RSR.

2007 - Porsche (IMSA Performance Matmut) wins the GT2 category with a 911 GT3-RSR.

---

Porsche’s American Le Mans Series class wins since 1998

2000 - Porsche 911 GT3-R wins GT class

2002 - Porsche 911 GT3-RS wins GT class

2003 - Porsche 911 GT3-RS wins GT class

2004 - Porsche 911 GT3-RSR wins GT class

2005 - Porsche 911 GT3-RSR wins (renamed) GT2 class

2006 - Porsche RS Spyder Evo wins LMP2 class

2007 - Porsche RS Spyder Evo wins LMP2 class

So now please list Nissan’s wins in major international races since 1998. And … go!
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 7:38:28 PM | | Votes: 1

Kazutoschi Mizuno - main nissan GT-R engineer was before working on GT-R leading nissan`s racing teams in 90`s in various races including 24h le mans with nissan r390 gt1 car and took 3rd spot in 1998 so he has some knowledge how to build sports car , what he proved with nissan gt-r .
If you think that this is to small racing experience could you also list Ultimate Driving Machine victories in major international races becouse they`re known of their sports cars .
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 5:03:31 AM | | Votes: 1

BMW took the overall victory at the 24 Hours of Le Mans in 1999 and they have had a Formula One team for just the past three seasons. Last year they finished second in the F1 constructor's championship and they are currently in third place in this year's constructor's race only 17 points behind Ferrari. Toyota and Honda's F1 teams have not been able to match BMW F1's performance in the past couple of years.

— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 6:34:51 AM | | Votes: 0

Toyota and Honda's F1 teams have not been able to match BMW F1's performance in the past couple of years but at the same time they didn't buy out a whole team in the past couple of years like how BMW bought out Sauber.
— F1_Driver (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 7:44:25 AM | | Votes: 0

Speaking of F1, where is *almighty* Porsche in F1?
— F1_Driver (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 7:46:35 AM | | Votes: 0

Honda F1 bought the British American Racing team in 2005 - the same year BMW bought Sauber. And Sauber wasn't exactly a top team in F1 were they?

"During its history in Formula One, Sauber never scored a race win, pole position, or fastest lap."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sauber

And Toyota bought the best engineers and engineering facilities in Europe that they could. Porsche races in other series. Where's Nissan in major international racing?
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 3:23:38 PM | | Votes: 1

TurboSpyder , as you listed , BMW hadn`t had "Ultimate Racing Machines" in major international races ( except one ) until 3 years ago , then they bought Sauber F1 team with engineers and refinance this team and are working for success . So without this racing experience until 3 years ago in major int races they were producing their "Ultimate Driving Machines" , exactly like nissan with their ultimate fast GT-R now .
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 4:03:16 PM | | Votes: 1

abcd, Nissan has been chasing BMW for 40 years. See:

http://dimequarterly.tierranet.com/Autoweek.html

and (1:20 mark) here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91WVgzP_XS0&eurl=http://www.autospies.com/video/Has-AutoSpies-com-finally-proved-Infiniti-has-beaten-BMW-261/
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 9/24/2008 1:39:10 PM | | Votes: 1

So you agree with me . That`s good that you see the facts .

"http://dimequarterly.tierranet.com/Autoweek.html"

And what ? Are MacPherson struts in front, semi-trailing arms in back BMW invention ? I don`t think so . BMW 2002 like Nissan 510 were introduced in 1968 so how could Nissan`s 510 suspension be influenced by BMW`s 2002 suspension . NONSENSE .
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 9/24/2008 5:52:18 PM | | Votes: 1

The BMW 2002 evolved from the BMW 1500 which was introduced in 1961 and had MacPherson front struts and rear semi-trailing arms.

[Quote]
BMW had lost money in 1959, and the company fought off successive acquisition attempts by American Motors, Britain's Rootes Group and Daimler-Benz. Major shareholders Herbert and Harald Quandt knew that Munich badly needed an affordable midsize sedan, a project known internally as "the family car." Believing in the marque's potential, they astutely elected to invest in this concept—on the condition that BMW would build the 1500.

Engineer Alex Von Falkenhausen was given a green light to upgrade one of his earlier engine designs. The resulting 80-bhp, 1499cc, 30-degree slant hemi-head four was mated to a 4-speed manual featuring Porsche synchromesh on all forward gears. A complete departure from the bigger, classically styled BMW 502 V-8 "Baroque Angels," the new 1500 boasted a modern unit body/chassis and fully independent suspension with MacPherson front struts and rear semi-trailing arms. Styling was conservative, but contemporary. The 1500's "kidney" grilles, tall greenhouse, low beltline, slim pillars, flat hood and deck, and straight-line bodylines were styling cues that soon became BMW hallmarks.
[/Quote]

http://www.automedia.com/Modern_Classic_1962_BMW_1500/res20030201mc/1

And that's why the quote below is accurate.

"For engineering, Datsun looked to Germany. In addition to its sohc engine, its suspension featured MacPherson struts in front, semi-trailing arms in back-a common arrangement now, but in 1968 only commonly associated with BMW 2002s. (Hence, the 510 came to be known as 'the poor man's BMW.')"

http://dimequarterly.tierranet.com/Autoweek.html

Japanese copy.
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 9/30/2008 2:56:23 PM | | Votes: 1

Wow , I see that thought persecute you for last 6 days .
If you so much like this word "copy" , I will also use it :
First of all BMW copied MacPherson struts from Ford Vedette and who first used semi-trailing arms in I don`t know but I will do research in future .
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 9/30/2008 4:07:54 PM | | Votes: 1

abcd, here's a picture of a 1966 BMW 1600 which evolved from the BMW 1500. They both had the MacPherson struts in front and semi-trailing arms in back arrangement and as I already mentioned the 1500 debuted in 1961. Datsun new a good thing when they saw it and copied this combination from BMW.

http://www.usautoparts.net/bmw/pics/vintage/14110_1024.jpg

— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 10/1/2008 1:19:33 PM | | Votes: 1

[Quote]The BMW 1600-2 won many fans among enthusiasts, not least Yutaka Katayama. Not only did Katayama like the 1600 -- which was definitely his kind of car -- he saw it as an achievable goal. Before, Japanese carmakers had modeled their efforts on the small British sedans of the previous decade. Now Katayama lobbied to make the compact Bavarian their new target.

Nissan had begun work on a successor to its 410 sedan (the 1963 replacement for the 310/311) in mid-1965. The development of the new model, the PL510, got a shot in the arm with Nissan's merger in January 1966 with **Prince**, a small automaker that also did a great deal of aircraft design work. From Prince, Nissan acquired engineers with considerable experience in building monocoque (stressed-skin) bodies, which enabled the PL510 to be lighter, stronger, and roomier than a body-on-frame structure of comparable dimensions. The PL510 was bigger than the 410, but it was still quite a small car: 162.2 in long on a 95.3 in wheelbase, weighing a little over 2,000 pounds. Like the BMW, it got fully independent suspension, with MacPherson struts in front and semi-trailing arms in back. Front disc brakes and a fully synchronized four-speed were standard, with a three-speed automatic optional.
[/Quote]

http://ateupwithmotor.livejournal.com/8382.html

— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 10/1/2008 1:24:43 PM | | Votes: 1

"Prince's engineers had taken an deep hard look at the *Mercedes engines of the early 60's, and had come up with some nifty little SOHC engine designs of their own. Princes engineers where also really good at putting together light strong body shells, something that would become invaluable with the development of the 510."

-

"The first Nissan engine similar of the L series engine came out in mid 1967 in the 2000 roadster. This 2 liter powerplant, the U20, was designed by the new combined engineering team at Nissan, put a Prince *Mercedes based head on a modified and stroked Austin based roadster 1600 block and came up with a SOHC engine capable of 150 horsepower. The 510 was given a 1.6 liter L series engine, a design not far from the U20, with 1.3, and 1.4 liter versions in some markets. The L16 was rated at 97 horsepower, but most agree that that number was probably a bit optimistic."

http://www.the510realm.com/510history/car/index.html

-

See abcd, the Japanese copy long time.
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 10/1/2008 1:28:12 PM | | Votes: 1

Oops, I almost forgot this 2007 quote from Car and Driver:

"This thing goes way back. Nissan has been firing spit wads at BMW since the 1968 Datsun 510 sailed in, *seemingly on stolen blueprints for the BMW 1600-2 (later the BMW 2002)*. There were diversions, almost a bankruptcy, then a merger with Renault, and reboots of the priorities at Nissan. But of Japan's native automakers, none has been so hot for so long to sock it to the men from Munich."

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/sedans/2007_infiniti_g35_sport_vs_2007_bmw_328i_comparison_test
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 10/1/2008 1:35:41 PM | | Votes: 1

TurboSpyder , it wasn`t copy , even when you look at both cars they are looking very different , but it was definitelly following , like let say a Volkswagen Tiguan is now following a Toyota Rav4 , the 510 entered to the Bmw 1600 market niche , and it used similar suspension arrangement , and that`s all but other carmakers also used that suspension arrangement , not only datsun 510 . Here is about Datsun engines based on Austin :

http://www.earlydatsun.com/austin.html

That is what Clarkson said about first datsuns that arrived to britain ( 3:00 ):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3GFnI_T3_w

Do you see connection between two links above ? Quite innovative I think .

And I really curious what that Mercedes based head mean , SOHC design was then unique only for the Mercedes or something other , becouse that could mean almost everything , for example the same as Datsun based on Austin which was heavilly modified ( link above ) , that`s probably why they don`t used word "copy" but "based" or even " designs of their own" which clearly mean "not copy" .
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 10/1/2008 3:22:54 PM | | Votes: 1

And of course BMW didn`t invent MacPherson , there were also other cars before BMW with trailing arms ( semi-trailing is modified trailing arms suspension ) .
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 10/1/2008 3:43:14 PM | | Votes: 1

You're just fooling yourself.
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 10/1/2008 4:09:49 PM | | Votes: 1

No they copied *idea* of suspension arrangement ( copy is something identical if you don`t know ) , but car wasn`t a "copy" , where do you see they`re looking similar , not to mention about that engines what I wrote earlier . I think you have a problem becouse you try to prove that Japanese only copy but you can`t , they`re no like Chinese with exception of few cars and technologies . We have earlier discusion about Japanese innovations so I will not saying the same another time . I can also give you a link about most innovative countries , this have also connection with cars becouse car industry is generating a lot of patents ( certainly more connection with car industry than number of nobel prize winners what you so like to call when you haven`t arguments ) :

http://a330.g.akamai.net/7/330/25828/20070607182505/graphics.eiu.com/upload/portal/CiscoInnoSmallFile.pdf
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 10/1/2008 4:41:05 PM | | Votes: 1

abcd, denial ain't just a river in Egypt. Oh, and here's a link for you

http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20080629/380_CBOFC_innov_080630.jpg
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 10/3/2008 2:35:09 PM | | Votes: 1

TurboSpyder , a bit of objectivism from you would be good .

If you so like imitations theme , look where Germans looked for inspiration of their Porsche 924 :

Design:
Back:
Jensen Interceptor
http://www.wwebw.com/jensen/images/wDSCN0830.jpg
http://home.hiwaay.net/~tjhiggin/hwystar/tvmcbig_files/image002.jpg
Porsche 924
http://www.carlustblog.com/images/2008/03/24/porsche_back.jpg
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/porsche-924-2.jpg
Front:
Triumph TR7
http://www.adclassix.com/images/76triumphtr7.jpg
or Lotus Elcat
http://www.club-lotus.fr/typo3temp/pics/7b1912dd83.jpg
Porsche 924
http://www.carlustblog.com/images/2008/03/24/porsche_front.jpg
http://www.pistonheads.com/pics/news/16161/924a-L.jpg

So , designing it they took inspiration from British sports cars .
For engineering they looked to Italy for front engine with REAR TRANSAXLE arrangement .

I wonder if that journalist from Autoweek who wrote about datsun 510 would write something like that above .

924 had VW engine .
But this wasn`t of course 5 valve per cylinder 1.8 or 2.0 VW/Audi engine based on Mitsubishi`s concept of 5 valve per cylinder introduced in 3G8 engine in Dangan model several years before the VW/Audi .

"http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20080629/380_CBOFC_innov_080630.jpg"

What`s that , I can do something like that in paint .
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 10/4/2008 11:34:23 AM | | Votes: 1

Here`s article that separates facts from myths ( also some myths about design that are in 1986 Autoweek article that you quoted ) :

http://japanesenostalgiccar.com/article.cgi?section=profiles&article=datsun510rotary
— abcd (View Profile)

Posted on 10/6/2008 8:26:10 AM | | Votes: 1

The Spec-V edition will be pretty awesome. Can't wait to see what they put into it, as the normal GT-R already takes down the competition.
— PerformanceGuy (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 1:54:58 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

In a recent video comparison that included the GT-R and new 911 Carrera PDK they said that the GT-R used "sticky Dunlops" that the other cars didn't have. They should all be using similar tires and not one having stickier rubber than the others.
— TurboSpyder (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 1:55:05 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Oh, so the GT-R wins by cheating now?
— 222max (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 2:33:42 PM | | Votes: -1

GT-R didn't use slick tires, therefore, it's perfectly comaprable to other tires out there. The grip is from its AWD system and suspension tuning, not all from the tires.

Don't be naive to force eveyone to use the same tires. This is not F1. GT-R will beat 911 easily even w/ the same tire.
— dlin (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 4:09:47 PM | | Votes: 0

Right...let's compare the mighty Porsche with a...ha, ha, ha...Nissan...ha, ha, ha...
— Star (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 5:43:41 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

F1 driver-
GT-R can't be had for 70k. 90k more likely.
Outstanding performance even for that.
— strafe1 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 6:29:32 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4

I'm going by MSRPs.
— F1_Driver (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 11:33:47 PM | | Votes: 1

Let me say it's great numbers performed by both cars. First off I think the 700hp 997 had too much power for a track like that. Second I want to see a GT-R with a manual transmission so there is a MT vs MT. The GT-R with the DSG set up is almost too easy to drive. The Porsche takes more skill to drive and those who drive well will appreciate a car like the 997. However if the GT-R is in manual transmission I don't doubt that person who can drive can do great times as well. I'm not hating on the GT-R or trying to make excuses for Porsche. Lets be realistic here. Both those cars are very very fast but not every GT-R owner has to the skill level to drive a MT car well and that's why I always give Porsche owners credit. The GT-R is more of a point and shoot type of car and considering how close some of those times we have seen in other comparos it's pretty good.

Not hating so fanboys don't be deboosting me haha.
— Agent63 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 7:24:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

The whole manual transmission debate should no longer exist. Many racing Porsches now have sequential transmissions that do not require clutch engagement for upshifts. I've never understood the "too-easy-to-drive" argument. Isn't that one of the main reasons why the 997TT has AWD in the first place? And to be the devil's advocate, who in the world wants a car that is "hard-to-drive"? Isn't that why, over the years, Porsche has engineered all that wicked oversteer out of the 911?
— Jonathan (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 8:02:06 PM | | Votes: 1

Hear Hear.
— dlin (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 10:33:52 PM | | Votes: 2

I meant, an average Joe can drive a GT-R but an average Joe may not be able to drive the 911 because they don't know how to properly drive a MT car, that's all.

With a flip of a paddle shift is a lot more easy than switching gears with your arm while trying to maneuver around someone. The DSG allows the driver to concentrate more on the driving but it sacrifices that with the driving experience of an old fashioned manual. Like i said earlier, both are outstanding cars and anyone who owns one of those two are fortunate people. Although some Porsche owners have ordered the GT-R I still think it's a different market. European exotics and High Performance imports. You can't forget the Porsche is also a luxury car at the same time, whereas the GT-R is performance car first wearing an econobox nameplate, but not like that really matters. It never did and never will when it came to the GT-R. I just wished they made the GT-R more dramatic in design and make it sound like an actual super car to go with those performance figures. I test drove one this weekend, I was emotionless aside from the occasional heart beating fast.

My two cents.
— Agent63 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 2:08:38 AM | | Votes: -2

The semi automated transmission has been in use in F1 since the 80's. I don't think anyone running around the Hockenheimring is using a shift it yourself set up.
— E36er (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 2:51:04 AM | | Votes: 3

My car is a mt car and I must say it may be slightly faster if driven perfectly than the automatic version and thats because the automatic version isnt dual clutch or whatever you want to call it. Wouldnt you rather concentrate more on driving then shifting? I know i would and in traffic shifting stinks(after all this still is the real world) MT is like having a rotary phone. If you chose stick and get beat dont make excuses that it is because you had MT. Nobody told you to get MT
— markanthony0419 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 11:27:25 AM | | Votes: 2

The GT-R has great impressive performance.
But I'd still rather have a Porsche since I've always wanted one since I was a little kid.
Now if only I could comfortably afford either of them..
— audirevolution (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 8:31:28 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

Or both together like the guy in the article.
— 222max (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 8:36:00 PM | | Votes: 1

The R32 Gt-r dominated the porsche of the same time on the nurburgring by 25 seconds. Skylines have always held records on the ring. porsche is good but they are not unbeatable. why do people belive that sort of foolishness. ferrari, lamborghini, porsche, all of them are just cars, and at any point in time another manufacturer that has set theirs sights on beating them, CAN beat them. most manufacturers are just worried about the price involved in doing so. I am sure most of you will know that the Nissan Gt-r lapped the top gear test track just 10ths slower than an enzo. now thats a great car!
— slu1979 (View Profile)

Posted on 9/22/2008 10:14:36 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

Sadly the idea that one needs special skills to drive any car is just plain backwards. That’s like saying it’s better to fly a propeller plane because it takes more skill than a Fighter jet. If you put a competent driver behind the wheel of a car than can amplify your skills, such as a GT-R, then you will be able to go even faster. In the end it’s probably personal preference than anything else. They even make slush boxes that go shift faster than manuals now. Any way you look at it, you will never convince me that it’s better to drive a car that has “character” over a car that will leave you in the dust.
— E36er (View Profile)

Posted on 9/23/2008 2:42:22 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5

slu1979
The GTR is just a car like all the others, so it's beatable too!
— rawbux (View Profile)

Posted on 9/24/2008 1:56:57 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

Aren't any of you tired of this topic?

If you want a Porsche, you by a Porsche.

If you want a GT-R, you buy a GT-R.

There's nothing else to it.
— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 9/24/2008 11:02:02 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

Add your Comments

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters): [img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent001.myautospies.com/images/sample.jpg[/img]

Email Me When Someone Replies To My Message

GT-R vs Porsche at Thunderhill Park Raceway

About the Author

User Comments

Add your Comments

Submit an article

Photo Galleries

Cars

Autoshows

Latest Articles