Hello all,

This was about the dumbest tests I have ever seen. Not that I am really bias towards any one of these cars, it just seemed clear to me that Car & Driver wanted the results to show the M3 winning before they even wrote the article. I thought Motor Trend was bad…

The 911 lost 12 points to the M3 due to the back seat and the truck? The M3 beat the turbo on performance and tied the GTR?

Just silly,

The way Car & Driver assigns points in these comparison tests just seems completely arbitrary. They can pronounce any winner they want by the weight they give to various categories. I remember an egregious example a couple of years ago where they were comparing a GT3 to a Z06 Corvette (among others) in a comparison of track-focused cars. The GT3 beat the Z06 in just about every single performance category, with the GT3 typically getting, say, 9 points on steering as compared to 8 points for the Vette. All of these various performance differences added up to something like a 12 point advantage for the GT3 based on the stuff that mattered for a track-focused car. It was a decisive victory. But then they gave 18 points to the Z06 based on it being less expensive!!! How did they come up with that? The way it was set up it would have been impossible for the GT3 to win, no matter how good it might have been, just based on the points given to the Vette from the price differential. It was a useless comparison - if price was that important then they should not have compared cars with such dissimilar prices. Looks like they're up to the same-ole-same-ole on the latest... does a Turbo buyer really care about the trunk?

2008 BMW M3 vs. 2009 Nissan GT-R vs. 2008 Porsche 911 Turbo - Coupes/Comparison Test/Reviews/Car and Driver - Car And Driver


Poor LIL' GT-R gets spanked by an M3!.. LOL. Too funny. It's amazing what professional spin doctors will come up with in order to make a few sales..

__________________
Seat of the pants dyno

If I wanted spin, I'd buy the "Enquirer"

Now I'm really confused. Should I get a GT-R, a Turbo or an //M car?

As I posted in another thread, C&D admits (right in the article) that the GT-R they used was low on power compared to the first GT-R they tested. They even say that they tried a third car that was AS FAST AS THE FIRST one, but they still used the car that wasn't running right in the comparo tests. I guess that's "part of the test," but pretty funny that they disregard data from 2 out of 3 examples that they themselves tested.

-Chris

Actually, I think the 997TT is exactly where it should be. Price plays a huge role in the car, why would anyone pay so much money for a car that just does not live up to its price. This is exactly why they are coming out with the power boost and facelift with the PDK in a few months for the 997.

I understand that Porsche cars are high up the food chain in terms of class, but dollar for dollar, they cannot compete with the other companies.

Although an M3 is heavy, it has a lot of technology to compensate for it, similar to the GT-R. One disadvantage the 997TT has is that it is way too butt heavy, which is a serious setback at the track.

Will a 997TT owner/buyer care about a trunk or extra room in the back? Of course not, but the minute they get burned either on the street or the track they will ask themselves why they paid so much for their car.

Once PDK and the extra power comes into play, assuming they keep the MSRP the same, this result will probably be different.

You cannot hate on C&D, since they include the Boxter and Cayman cars in their 10 best list year after year. You need to also look at the first page of the review, they are ranking the cars with practicality and civility as being factors as well, not just performance alone. I am sure if it was performance alone, the GT-R would be topping the list.

For a daily driver, either the M3 or Audi S5 are very interesting cars. Unfortunately, neither was available when I got my CS.

Using these ridiculous subjective measurements, was the only way that Car & Driver could have contrived. and thus justified their intended goal,..which was to show a controversial defeat upon the GT-R in order to boost their magazine sales. With this article being the only 'responsible' report written that shows a 'weakness' in the GT-R, Car & Driver hopes to be at the top of ALL popular GT-R vs the World, discussions. It is a slimy and contrived trick that dishonors honest journalism.

Of course this 'quality' of spin journalism has become the modern accepted standard everywhere.

I think CD's plan is working. They have you outraged, talking about them, reading their stuff, posting about them, and wondering about the meaning of life in the Porsche world. Of those three cars which would you rather own and drive everyday? My take - none of the above, so I don't care. Journalists generally don't buy high-end sports cars, so who cares what they say? The best opinions come from people that live with them and bought them.

Good insight, If I had enough $$, I'd get the TT, or even better the GT2, practicality my a**

________________________


"Sir! We're surrounded!" - "Excellent! We can shoot in any direction!"

A good car will get you from point A to point B. A great car... will just get you into trouble!

Everytime a comparo comes is in a car mag everyone comes out of the woodwork to bash it unless it's your car that won. Face it, these journalists exist to sell magazines, it's that simple. They may have genuinely preferred the M3 as well, as it stated they were comparing cars with a modicum of practicality so that had some weight. At the end of the day they all respond to these "letters to the editors" the same way. "We give you all of the data and we add it up our way but you can come to whatever conclusion YOU like"

__________________
2008 Cayman S, Black, Floormats

Well, when the topic is switched to journalist ethics, and away from the cars, this is a significant blow to the magazine's future credibility. Sensationalizing the story at all costs, is now the way of modern journalism. It is the legacy started by Rupert Murdock, and it slimes itself into all types of media today.

__________________
Seat of the pants dyno

Every time I read one of those comparisons I do a thought experiment or two. For the comparison test in question, the car I would probably want if I were spending that much would be the Aston Martin V8 Coupe. There's no doubt in my mind it would place dead last if it were added to the test. Nonetheless, I got an opportunity to drive one and it truly seduced me. Choosing a car by specs and measurements is like choosing your significant-other the same way. The subjective experience is everything, unless your goal is winning competitive timed track events.

The problem w/ that is that owners' opinions are typically biased in favor of their car. An owner's opinion would be more valuable if he/she owned all the cars being prepared, but what's the likelihood of that.?

__________________
'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