Motor Mag Gtrvsgt2

[godspd]

Hey guys,

New Motor out today good review on GTRvsGT2.

[martz]

do tell?

I'm glad I bought the mag which came with the national geographic DVD documentary on the GTR

[Godcla]

Hey guys,

New Motor out today good review on GTRvsGT2.

Yea...Better reading then the Herald Sun mini review......

Obviously this guy actually drove the GTR the way it was built

to be driven and from the detailed comparison for more then 5 minutes.

I now have 4000 k's on my 35 and agree with all said in the article....

Just can't stand it when articles come to conclusions and force opinions

in their articles without building towards them with detailed information

and facts.........This is why I prefer long term reviews.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Godcla

[Sammy-qld]

Yep got the mag today after your post, good read. They loved the GT2's raw power and driveability. And said the GTR was great but didn't compete with the GT2 because of its massive extra Kilo's and less horsepower. Funny they mentioned Targa Tasmania GTR guys who were going to go up against the likes of GT2's. And nice to see a cut down powered up GTR beat the GT2 in that race.

Ultimately the GTR was built to compete with the GT3 cause both are everyday driver cars, it beats the GT3 in every test & is almost half the price. And obviously with some tuning & weight reduction it can beat the GT2's as well.

[Godcla]

" And obviously with some tuning & weight reduction it can beat the GT2's as well."

Yep....

and having looked at Porsche performance bits/upgrades........will be a lot cheaper

and at the rate of mods hitting the market (like a Virus) many more options will be had.

I loved his opening comments.....pointing to the huge price difference between the GT2 and the GTR

but it had to be as the 911 Turbo just was not up to the task ....

Yea....GT3 would have been a fairer comparison ..(only twice the price of the GTR.... )

[LSX-438]

i havent read the article, but a friend has told me the GTR performance numbers are off, apparently they couldnt get the launch control to work?

There is a little trick to getting it to work (with LC2) and i think that has possibly skewed the straight line peprformance outcomes in this article.

[GT-Ricer]

Yep got the mag today after your post, good read. They loved the GT2's raw power and driveability. And said the GTR was great but didn't compete with the GT2 because of its massive extra Kilo's and less horsepower. Funny they mentioned Targa Tasmania GTR guys who were going to go up against the likes of GT2's. And nice to see a cut down powered up GTR beat the GT2 in that race.

Ultimately the GTR was built to compete with the GT3 cause both are everyday driver cars, it beats the GT3 in every test & is almost half the price. And obviously with some tuning & weight reduction it can beat the GT2's as well.

Actually the GT-R was built to compete only with the 911 Turbo as a bench mark to beat. I says so in all its publicity and media releases. It is the only Turbo AWD sports car Porsche makes (apart from the Cayenne Turbo)

Now that the 911 Turbo has been comprehensivelly defeated, the media have trotted out the GT2. What next, an F1 car, Bugatti Veyron, the Space Shuttle? Eventually something has to be better than this Japanese upstart, hang the expense!

Read this article very carefully. It's very biased towards the Porsche and not very factual. It states, for instance, that GT-R has brake rotors 360mmF and 330mm R when the actual size is 380 F & R.

The journo could not even launch it properly. You lose at least 0.5 sec holding onto the brake and revving it the way he did. GT-R shuts down for a split second when you let go of the brake. You are supposed to use one foot only: from the brake straight on the gas.

I got my car last week and already did 700km. Even though it isn't fully run in, I can safely say it is the fastest and best handling car money can buy. You can spend 2,3 or 4 times the price but you won't get much more performance.

[DCIEVE]

Come on, just because someone finds the gtr isn't as quick as a Porsche worth significantly more its instantly biased?

It's not uncommon for mags to compare cars with wildly different price but similar performance, makes for great reading - btw normally its owners of the more expensive car that get upset!

(hmm it seems the magazine might have burst your 'the gtr is the fastest/best handling car money car buy' bubble)

[LSX-438]

It doesnt matter how fast you think you are there is always someone faster! Heck, there are stripper MX5's which will teach a GTR a lesson around a race track. Anyway, I can think of a few tests where the GT2 marginally beat the GTR, so yeah the GT2 is faster, and i would hazard a guess a better built car. It would want to be for about $500k drive away too. The fact they are even comparing them is incredible really.

Edited May 13, 2009 by LSX-438

[handbrake]

yeah despite being a massive GTR fan and owning one, I would absolutely love a GT2, shame they price themselves out of the market though

Edited May 14, 2009 by handbrake

[ras1983]

Actually the GT-R was built to compete only with the 911 Turbo as a bench mark to beat. I says so in all its publicity and media releases. It is the only Turbo AWD sports car Porsche makes (apart from the Cayenne Turbo)

Now that the 911 Turbo has been comprehensivelly defeated, the media have trotted out the GT2. What next, an F1 car, Bugatti Veyron, the Space Shuttle? Eventually something has to be better than this Japanese upstart, hang the expense!

Read this article very carefully. It's very biased towards the Porsche and not very factual. It states, for instance, that GT-R has brake rotors 360mmF and 330mm R when the actual size is 380 F & R.

The journo could not even launch it properly. You lose at least 0.5 sec holding onto the brake and revving it the way he did. GT-R shuts down for a split second when you let go of the brake. You are supposed to use one foot only: from the brake straight on the gas.

I got my car last week and already did 700km. Even though it isn't fully run in, I can safely say it is the fastest and best handling car money can buy. You can spend 2,3 or 4 times the price but you won't get much more performance.

Nice AMG. Got any more pics?

[godspd]

Having read the article carefully I would have to agree that some pretty trivial comments where stated by the article. Such as how the GTR does not turn in as sharp as the GT2; well given the fact that the GTR is 4 wheel drive, weighs 300kg heavier and the engine is at the front of course it is not going to be as sharp.

I think as GTR fans we should be humbled that it is now being compared to the mighty GT2.

I terms of acceleration times the GT2 didn't do much better, I believe manly due to the gravely surface on the run way as indicated in the mag.

As for the track times, the GTR is only a little over a second slower running on Bridgestones instead of the grippier Dunlops.

[handbrake]

correct me if I'm wrong but they quoted a spec V putting out the 7 min 27sec time at the ring, wasn't it a base model with spec V wheels?

[Max_ST-R]

I had a quick squiz at the article the other day. I guess on a tighter track the GT2 will stay ahead ahead of the GT-R, however it seems on a longer flowing track (like the Nurburgring, i'm sure there are others) the GT-R has what it takes to overcome the GT2.

Interesting to note the very slow acceleration times for the GT-R compared to EVERY overseas test!. Sub 4sec 0-100 km/h are common place as are mid to high 11 sec 1/4's. 4.09 0-100km/h and 12 sec quarter are roughly 0.5 secs slower than nearly every test I've seen. that half a second would have put it in front of the GT2 but never mind...

As it stands they are a close match...but only in absolutely perfect track and weather conditions. As was seen in the Wheels test earlier this year, in windy and dusty conditions, the GT2 didn't stand a chance against the GT-R. All that said i LOVE the GT2. GT-R and GT2 definately make it into the Max ST-R dream garage!.

The conclusion I come to is that on some tracks the GT2 will win, on others the GT-R will win...it's been mentioned before but the fact that the heavy 'comfort' spec GT-R can clash on near equal terms to Porsche's ultimate stripped down motorsport track weapon, says a HUGE deal for the GT-R's abilities. As someone mentioned the REAL Porsche competitor, the 911 Turbo, is truly outclassed by the GT-R which incidentally is still a good $210,000 cheaper than that car!.

..yet is the GT-R really inferior to Porsche in terms of quality and engineering as some have suggested COULD be the case? I reckon there would be little in..certainly not $330,00 worth of difference when compared to the GT2.

I can only speak as some one who has physically examined the GT-R up close and the fit finish, quality is absolutely outstanding.

[Max_ST-R]

Actually the GT-R was built to compete only with the 911 Turbo as a bench mark to beat. I says so in all its publicity and media releases. It is the only Turbo AWD sports car Porsche makes (apart from the Cayenne Turbo)

Now that the 911 Turbo has been comprehensivelly defeated, the media have trotted out the GT2. What next, an F1 car, Bugatti Veyron, the Space Shuttle? Eventually something has to be better than this Japanese upstart, hang the expense!

Read this article very carefully. It's very biased towards the Porsche and not very factual. It states, for instance, that GT-R has brake rotors 360mmF and 330mm R when the actual size is 380 F & R.

The journo could not even launch it properly. You lose at least 0.5 sec holding onto the brake and revving it the way he did. GT-R shuts down for a split second when you let go of the brake. You are supposed to use one foot only: from the brake straight on the gas.

I got my car last week and already did 700km. Even though it isn't fully run in, I can safely say it is the fastest and best handling car money can buy. You can spend 2,3 or 4 times the price but you won't get much more performance.

GT- Ricer..all I can say is WOW!, congratulations, magnificent GT-R Premium and E55 AMG. Love the dark SL65 AMG rims on the Merc, your GT-R defines the word tough!

[handbrake]

fit and finish is pretty good, couple of rattles from the dash, inevitable with suspension such as this car has

[skyline_man]

Actually the GT-R was built to compete only with the 911 Turbo as a bench mark to beat. I says so in all its publicity and media releases. It is the only Turbo AWD sports car Porsche makes (apart from the Cayenne Turbo)

Now that the 911 Turbo has been comprehensivelly defeated, the media have trotted out the GT2. What next, an F1 car, Bugatti Veyron, the Space Shuttle? Eventually something has to be better than this Japanese upstart, hang the expense!

Read this article very carefully. It's very biased towards the Porsche and not very factual. It states, for instance, that GT-R has brake rotors 360mmF and 330mm R when the actual size is 380 F & R.

The journo could not even launch it properly. You lose at least 0.5 sec holding onto the brake and revving it the way he did. GT-R shuts down for a split second when you let go of the brake. You are supposed to use one foot only: from the brake straight on the gas.

I got my car last week and already did 700km. Even though it isn't fully run in, I can safely say it is the fastest and best handling car money can buy. You can spend 2,3 or 4 times the price but you won't get much more performance.

+1. Motor magazine has always been biased towards Porsche and Holden and aren't much of a fan with any of the GTRs. They hated the handling of the R34 GTR when they first test drove it from my memory!

Correct me if im wrong but the 'performance' comparison wasn't even a proper performance comparison at all. All they did was drive the 2 cars on local roads, did a straight line drag and that's it. No proper laps by a pro driver around a circuit, no skid pad, no braking tests, no lateral G tests and so on. Their 0 - 400 meter test wasn't even done properly in the GTR, and they even made the false statement that the Bridgestone runflats are "cut slicks" They even said that the 7:27 Nurb time was done with a Spec-V disguised as a normal GTR!

They start to bitch about the stiffness of the GTR's suspension on local roads. For god's sake, it's a supercar - not a shopping trolley!

They whine about the size of the GTR's back seat. As if the GT2's back seat is any better - oh wait, what back seat?

No mention of the superb awd system and the dual clutch transmission, just a lot of bitching about unimportant stuff.

And at the end, they say that the GT2 is better - where's the proof? I'm sure the GT2 is better, but please show us how you come up to that conclusion with proper 'performance' testing. At almost 3 times the price of the GTR - the GT2 better as hell be better.

Wheels magazine however, has a better story on the GTR. This time it's the new GTR vs the legendary R32 Gibson race GTR. The bad thing with this story however is that they seem to focus more on the history of the R32 with Skaife and didn't pay too much attention on the R35.

[GT-Ricer]

Nice AMG. Got any more pics?

Thank you. Wrong forum for AMG, but here you are...

Edited May 14, 2009 by GT-Ricer

[GT-Ricer]

Come on, just because someone finds the gtr isn't as quick as a Porsche worth significantly more its instantly biased?

It's not uncommon for mags to compare cars with wildly different price but similar performance, makes for great reading - btw normally its owners of the more expensive car that get upset!

(hmm it seems the magazine might have burst your 'the gtr is the fastest/best handling car money car buy' bubble)

I stand corrected...: "GT-R is the fastest and best handling car for the money". Can I now re-inflate my bubble?

[Taso84]

sorry double post

Edited May 15, 2009 by Taso84