Dear Unregistered, the permission changes should be complete, if you notice any issues with your access on the site please let us know and we will check into it.
Hey Unregistered it seems that you haven't posted a message in our forums yet. Please join in on the fun and post a message!
Dear Unregistered,
We've noticed that you are not yet a member of our Cayman Insiders group. This group provides a number of additional value-add services via this website for a very low annual fee. You can find out more about this group here:
Insider Announcement
You can join the Cayman Insiders Group here:
Insider Enrollment Form
We hope to see you "Inside" soon!
General Off-TopicItems of a general nature, however, No Religious topics, no Politics, and nothing of a sexual nature. All forum rules still apply, this is not a free-for-all.
Your Donation Will Be Used To Pay For our ever increasing bandwidth costs, our hosting Service, domain registration, software licensing fees, maintenance costs and product evaluations Only!
Please enter your donation amount above, and then click on the donate button below.
I am a sucker for Porsches and I will buy any magazine that has a Porsche on the cover. Yesterday I went to Barnes and Noble and bought the February 2008 copy of "Redline" magazine because it had a beautiful neon green 997 GT Street car on the front, plus an article inside about the 225 mph monster. While perusing through the issue I found a side bar on page 27 titled "Nissan GTR Nurburgring lap controversy" regarding the seemingly amazing 7 minute 38 second lap time the new car was said to achieve on that track. Well, it seems that the chief Nissan engineer allegedly admitted that the lap was done on "cut slicks" rather than standard road tires. It doesn't stop there. The article goes on to state that a German magazine recently tested a GT-R at the 'ring and was 20 seconds slower than Nissan's best time. Nor does it stop here. The article reports that this is not the first time Nissan has been associated with controversial 'ring times in that the R33 GT-R's (must admit I am not familiar with that car) time was allegedly achieved using "cut slicks", a freer flowing exhaust, and remapped ECU. There was even debate about where the lap timer stops, some claiming it did so before the end of the correct lap. Perhaps it is not so easy to match or surpass the performance of a Porsche Turbo after all.
Perhaps it is not so easy to match or surpass the performance of a Porsche Turbo after all.
I'm waiting for a few of these things to get in the wild before I pass judgment. It is pretty clear that this is a great starting platform and variants are already starting to appear. They are talking about a tuned model and a race (lighter) model.
I will be interested to see what these things can really do. If they ever actually sell for $70k - they will be disruptive on the price/performance curve. I'm wondering though how much of the promise will be delivered. At only 1500 units per year the 'dealer premiums' could continue for some time. If they have inflated the performance numbers - that would also be bad.
When we see someone objective running the ring - I'll update my nurburgring analysis and plot it again.
__________________
Completed: Softronic ECU; Quaife LSD; TPC Swaybars; Bilstein PSS9s; Das Schild; Aluminum Gas Cap; Softronic Plenum; RemoteKEY; Capristo Exhaust;
Planned: Mythical Long Delayed Clear Engine Cover ; Blinging up the interior with Basalt Black
I wonder if there is a cause of action here for anyone who has put a non-refundable deposit down on the car based on statements made thus far by Nissan? Perhaps even a class action? While I'm not one to toss such things out lightly, if and it is still an if at this point, if Nissan has artificially changed the GTR's numbers in the hope of selling out all 1500 units in a pre-sold fashion to say move revenue forward, line dealership's pockets, etc. then I would think anyone who was mislead into placing a deposit on the car based on these statements that they cannot get back would have a cause of action for fraud. I don't see why Nissan would risk such a thing, but car companies have done stupid stuff before...
I wonder if there is a cause of action here for anyone who has put a non-refundable deposit down on the car based on statements made thus far by Nissan? Perhaps even a class action? While I'm not one to toss such things out lightly, if and it is still an if at this point, if Nissan has artificially changed the GTR's numbers in the hope of selling out all 1500 units in a pre-sold fashion to say move revenue forward, line dealership's pockets, etc. then I would think anyone who was mislead into placing a deposit on the car based on these statements that they cannot get back would have a cause of action for fraud. I don't see why Nissan would risk such a thing, but car companies have done stupid stuff before...
Interesting idea. If Nissan is fudging a little, I think an individual would be totally justified in at least getting their deposit back. Weren't some of the Japanese automakers caught inflating horsepower figures at one time? I guess it is just very difficult trying to keep up with the likes of Porsche.
You'd have to be an idiot to ask for your deposit back. I'd put one down if I could get one at MSRP - being able to do so is a sure-fire way to make some $$$, even after taxes and fees.
If anything, Nissan is under-rating the car's performance w/ regards to published specs (i.e. HP) as opposed to unofficial "news" that's spread across the web.
__________________
'07 Guards Red Cayman S
'08 Honda Ridgeline RTL
'99 Miata 10th Anniversary Edition
'07 KTM Super Duke 990
'07 KTM 300 XC-W / '06 KTM 450 XC
You'd have to be an idiot to ask for your deposit back. I'd put one down if I could get one at MSRP - being able to do so is a sure-fire way to make some $$$, even after taxes and fees.
If anything, Nissan is under-rating the car's performance w/ regards to published specs (i.e. HP) as opposed to unofficial "news" that's spread across the web.
Chris,
I wasn't suggesting deposits for MSRP I was suggesting deposits that were non-refundable and for market price. Of course anyone with a deposit down for the car at MSRP right now would simply flip the car given the $50k+ inflated sales numbers being tossed around.
The Car magazine website has a two part video of the first GT-R in England on a shortish track against a Turbo, same driver, back to back. The GT-R beats the turbo by a second and the test driver said how effortless it felt to do so. He also said that he could have driven it faster be it would have started to become lairier but because it was somebody elses and that the owner was standing on the pit wall car he considered caution to be the better part of valor. ALl I know is that if I had the choice between a GT-R and a Turbo, I'd take the Turbo and sell it and by a GT-R and pocket the fifty plus grand difference. IF it were a GT3 RS, THEN I'd keep the Porsche.
Mazda overstated the horsepower in the current generation RX8 when it was first released. They offered to buy back the customer cars that had already been sold. Hardly anyone sold them back. The car performed how it performed, regardless of the "rating."
__________________
Scott
2006 Cayman S
2008 MINI S
When they first attempted to land the space shuttle by hand it was just about impossible-they had to let the computer do it. I have read that the electronics in the GT-R are what make it such a great handling car and that the turbo takes a skilled driver to go really fast. Anyway, I would not purchase a turbo and I definitely would not buy the GT-R. I would go for the GT3 or GT2. Jeez, I would love a GT2. Or a turbo Cayman (one engineered by Porsche, that is). The Audi R10 was supposed to be the car to dethrone Porsche, but that hype has died down. I suspect this will be the case for the GT-R also. Also, I don't doubt that Nissan resorted to some trickery to run a hot lap. I see no reason not to believe the article in Redline magazine. Afterall, Nissan has a history of trickery.
IMO Nissan fudges a bunch of numbers. I have never driven one of their cars that felt like it had all the advertised HP. Whereas any Porsche I have driven feels like it had equal or more than stated.
The Car magazine website has a two part video of the first GT-R in England on a shortish track against a Turbo, same driver, back to back. The GT-R beats the turbo by a second and the test driver said how effortless it felt to do so. He also said that he could have driven it faster be it would have started to become lairier but because it was somebody elses and that the owner was standing on the pit wall car he considered caution to be the better part of valor. ALl I know is that if I had the choice between a GT-R and a Turbo, I'd take the Turbo and sell it and by a GT-R and pocket the fifty plus grand difference. IF it were a GT3 RS, THEN I'd keep the Porsche.
The 911 displays its typical tail happy self and the GTR shows better composure while being faster.
Anyone who gets the GTR for over sticker knows what they are getting into...and they aren't going to complain. The 1500 cars a year for the US is an estimate based on preliminary planning. Nissan can easily ramp up production or shift cars from different markets as conditions warrant.
; Blinging up the interior with Basalt Black
