http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/comparison/culture-clash

"'Is the GT-R still the king?' No, it's not. But with first and third places separated by only two points, this was one of our closest comparison tests ever. It's remarkable that three very different sports cars can deliver such similar top-notch performance."

Rankings, price independent
1st: 997 Turbo (378.3 pts)
2nd: ZR1 (376.5)
3rd: GT-R (376.3)

Rankings, price dependent
1st: GT-R (576.3)
2nd: ZR1 (564.4)
3rd: 997 Turbo (556.9)

LAP TIMES

ZR1 1:20.1

GTR 1:20.9

911 1:21.3



GTR remains faster than 997.2 Turbo! The least expensive car of the comparison is NOT the slowest!

911 turbo is the slowest (on the track) and the most expensive car! ZR1 interior is...crap and GTR is accused of lack of driver involvement..... Right.......

+1

wow $149,000.00 for the 911 !!! (price as tested)

thats just about 2 gt-r's

I wouldnt say that at all, its just become cool to say that if you have the 3ZR its pretty damn good..

This is an accurate statement. Turn off VDC though and it changes a bit, but lap times may get worse for less experienced drivers...

As a young kid, I believed everything road and track, car and driver and motortrend said. Now, i think these magazines are biased and just marketing scheme. For example, all the hennessey cars they feature, I thought hennessey was a god tuner until finding out what they were really about from the forums.

This.

They had the GT-R winning last time, so I don't think you can say it's bias. That being said, the test wasn't perfect. For the GT-R to place that strongly even before price consideration, and lapping that well even on the slower of its high performance tires, is somewhat remarkable. IMO, the Porsche should have been tested with PDK; now that we've seen tests of the Porsche accelerating beyond its on-paper spec, the cries of "Ringer!" are eerily silent.

Road and Track, really????
Anyways this was just one of those 'subjective' tests. If I like a car, no matter what another car does better, the car i chose is still better

The new turbo 911 is nothing to mess with. Insanely fast,

It's the "digital camera" of the sports car world. Just point and shoot.

agreed, in a straight line, yes

around a track, a buddy of mine has a gtr for a year, just picked up a 911 turbo, took it to the track to bed in his brakes, then a few laps, said "i'm selling this"

GT-R still faster around a track......

Then he needs to drive more....that sounds like a drama queen.

you should tell him to try out a GT3. way better at the track then a turbo - the track is the GT3's main playground

i still want a 911 TT though..

Another odd comparison.

It seems as though they threw the Vette in there cause it can beat a GT-R. Lighter, More HP, Better Brakes, etc, etc. Not to mention 30k more.

There are NO similarities between the two.

The new Turbo is Sick. I do not look at the Turbo as a track car, but more of a classy GT. My brother is about to get a 11 C4S or Turbo. Turbo PDKs are sick, however The C4S with PDK is also a sweet ride. (with 40k in your pocket)

I find these supercar-only tests to be really misleading.


When the GT-R is put up against the snarling ZR1, or the new 'more GT3-like' Turbo, yeah its going to feel a little less involved. I'll give you that.

But I find the GT-R to be just as involved and have steering feel on a par with a BMW M3 or Audi RS4. As in, its still effing phenominal acceleration, lots of fun in the corners, and still practical.


Remember the test of ZR1, GT-R, 599GTB and GT2? Okay, so compared to those its not 'visceral.' But what a lot of people take from these articles that just being the least visceral in a test of the 4 most visceral cars on the planet, makes it no fun at all.

Umm.... its still a 4-seater that is meant to be an everyday supercar. Its not going to be as scary to drive as the widow-makers of the car world, but still is more fun than 99.999% of all cars on the road, IMO. And that's something I think doesn't come across well in these articles to the general reader.

Me too. I test drove a 997.1 Turbo last week with my dad and had a blast. I enjoyed rowing my own gears and hanging the tail out a bit. I love my GT-R, but the 911 Tubro has been on my wish list since the 993 Turbo hit the streets. It happened to be my 35th birthday that day so I will always remember that b-day as my first drive in a 911 Turbo.

I think the GT-R would have taken the ZR1 if it weren't for the run-flats.

it was barely faster

You mean the runflats on the ZR1? ;)

It's interesting that they ran the ZR1 both with and without its PTM traction control system on, but did not mention doing the same for GT-R. From the lapping videos, it looks like it was pretty much steady-state understeer in most of the corners. They also mention the course being tight; tight turns tend to hurt the GT-R against lighter competitors.
Also interesting that the GT-R, often noted for its rock-hard ride, fared better in the Ride department than the ZR1 (which has magnetic shocks).

I think GT-R could have done better on its Dunlops. Still not a bad run by any stretch.

But as Guibo pointed out, those, the RE070s and the PS2s on the Vette are all runflats.


I know Corvette fans appreciate the TLS's for their light weight and compactness, but after driving a C6, I'd imagine those magnetic shocks are fighting the roughness of those springs the whole time, to try to achieve decent high-speed stability.

Does appear to be some problem in the calibration or with the springs themselves. The R8 V10's (standard) and TT's (optional) magnetic shocks appear to work brilliantly, as do those on the 599.

I think it is spring setup that will never quite be 'tamed' by even really advanced shocks.

I am thinking that Nissan might one day release another variant (Spec V II maybe?) with magnetic shocks. As Mizuno-san said he is making the GT-R better in increments.

This 'test' and others only show how good the BASE GT-R is against even the TOP of the food chain of most of these 'super cars'. Looking forward to the Spec V test against these big boys. Please remember the Spec V isnt and was never about gobs of power over the base.
The only thing remotely wrong with it is the price. But then the base GT-R is $90, 000 US over here any way.....

If you read the magazine it states that the 911 wins (price independent) but after price is figured in the GT-R wins by far! And I love have the GT-R can stop better then all the cars and doesn't even have the carbon ceramic rotors like the ZR1.

Jerry

^^^ why did the 911 again? design? involvement? more comfortable? better interior? what? Oh i know the highest price!! The rest of this story is so 'subjective', I 'll stick with the objective part of the test...

The 911 won because it was more fun and was the best all-around car. I wonder if a PDK model instead of 6-speed manual would have gotten the same review. I say this because the Porsche Turbo PDK and Nissan GT-R have a similiar feel, IMO. They obviously have some big differences, but as far as steering feel and the driving experience goes, I think they're both very compatible as they are both excellent in this regard. Was the manual tranny what gave the Porsche the edge because it's "more fun?" If it was a PDK model would it have been too boring for R&T? The PDK is a better comparison to the GT-R and they should have used that. For this comparison, for them to choose a 6 speed over a PDK, it seems like they were judging this comparison more on which car gives you the most enjoyment and not which one is the best performer, best bang for your buck, best ride, etc.

If they would have run with the PDK would the 911 then be as "uninvolved"?

nope. Only nissans can be uninvolved because they are...nissans! porsches are expensive and luxurious so they cannot be uninvolved

You clearly don't know much about tires so

This is what I'm thinking...

If the GT-R runs against the 6sp Turbo, and wins, it is uninvolved and boring.

If the GT-R runs with the PDK Turbo, and wins, it's the computers doing all of the work.

If the GT-R runs against the PDK Turbo, and loses, the PDK is an engineering marvel that makes the car accelerate extremely fast - nothing being mentioned about how involving or uninvolving it is...

I've grown tired of these ignorant comments from reviewers when the car that they wanted to win - didn't. I'm actually starting the doubt the cars even go around a track anymore. I'm starting to think that people just start writing this up, and make up their own times, and then write about it.