rao Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/coupes/2008_bmw_m3_vs_2009_nissan_gt_r_vs_2008_porsche_911_turbo_comparison_test Not only does it lose the comparison test, but it seems to have gotten slower since the intro tests Rob IF YOU CARE ABOUT YOUR CAR YOU SHOULD NEVER DRIVE IT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim1969 Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 I'll still take one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VTGT Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 This one couldn’t crack 12 seconds and was a stunning 9 mph slower. (We’ve since tested a third GT-R that was as quick as the first car.) From Page 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panamajack Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 Car and Driver are BMW snobs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenc544 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 This one couldn’t crack 12 seconds and was a stunning 9 mph slower. (We’ve since tested a third GT-R that was as quick as the first car.) From Page 3 I wonder if the first car they tested is a media vehicle that had been beat on pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JessterCPA Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 This is what I was worried about. Almost like the Lexus IS syndrome. All good press, all good pre-production tests. Not quite up to snuff in the real world. I hope I am wrong though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gire Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 They have to throw out a reverse-ringer to the press sometimes just to keep the car from totally decimating everything. Must have been running on 5 cylinders or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panamajack Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 it was the NA version Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilT Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Why not read this instead: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=126453 Fact is, we asked Chevy for a 2008 Corvette Z06 and we asked Dodge for a 2008 Viper SRT10, but both refused to loan us their cars — presumably because we'd be testing their best metal against the almighty GT-R. Sniff, sniff. Does somebody smell chicken? Deny all you like, there can be only one Double Award Winning Legacy GT Wagon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panamajack Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I wonder what section of GMR they ran? I bet they did an uphill run. The lotus may have scooted on the downhill with driver with some balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camber Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 You don't know how much flack that C&D is getting for that article. It's one thing to crap on a Japanese car but to have an M3 beat out a 911 TT:lol: It's a little weird review. Let's take two sport cars and compare them to a GT coupe but judge them mostly on amenties, daily driver duties and comfort versus handling:confused: What was weird is that C&D didn't experience major brake fade with the M3. Most other major publications have experienced horrible brake fade when tracking the M3. Anyways, I guess you can't win all the reviews and get all glowing comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattg Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 C&D FTL I have driven the new M3 and while it is a great car, it really didn't excite me too much. My Legacy felt much more powerful down low and in the mid range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05GT Guru Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I wonder if the first car they tested is a media vehicle that had been beat on pretty good. That could be part of the factor but i have never see na 9mph gain from a non borken in engine to a broken in one. thats a pretty huge gain in power like 150hp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godwhomismike Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v227/brussell328/unamusedpirate.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawl Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 they're talking about how stiff the suspension is on the GT-R? its a performance car. it's like reviewing the ITR and then complaining about the lack of air conditioning blatant car and driver bmw fanboyism FTL car for sale. PM me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tytek Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Here is a nice response to the C&D articule from Autoblog: "Car & Driver is a common choice as bathroom reader around Autoblog HQ, though thumbing through the latest issue had us contemplating using the glossy pages for TP. C&D got its hands on Nissan's new GT-R and its development benchmark, the Porsche 911 Turbo. That's great so far, as everyone wants to know how the Nissan stacks up against its bogey. The trouble comes when a BMW M3 gets tossed into the mix. What? The M3 is a hell of a car and it clearly earns its perennial 10-Best status, but it's outgunned and mismatched in this company. Somehow it managed to win a three-way comparo with two supercars anyway. The explanation given was that the M3 attended as the "voice of reason" and gosh, just happened to be everyone's favorite. It's no great leap to imagine that the smallest, lightest car with sedan lineage would feel lighter on its feet and be a better everyday conveyance than two purpose built supercars. Thanks for the detective work, guys, but we think the M3 is a bit wide of the bullseye at which the GT-R and 911 were aimed. It's long been grumbled that C&D is in cahoots with this automaker or that one (an accusation that's been levied against every one of the big four major auto publications at one point or another), and the outcome of this comparo will surely fan those flames. We call foul on a few levels. The larger issue is the poppycock categories of "Fun to Drive" and the even more preposterous "Gotta Have It Factor" that arguably allow comparison results to be twisted one way or another, but also the reasoning for bringing the M3 knife to a big, turbocharged coupe gunfight is flawed. GT-R and 911 Turbo buyers don't strike us as the type of folks who might cross shop the M3. They want a range-topper, not a segment-pole-sitter. Here's the real deal - ignoring the noise of the M3, the GT-R spanks the 911 Turbo on the track, while the Porsche feels like a more quality piece (at double the price, it'd better). While both cars sport AWD chassis that vector torque, the Nissan is quicker on its feet and dramaless where the Porsche is swinging wide. Both are a total hoot to drive, but the GT-R team definitely bested its development target as far as raw performance goes." Pretty much what I was thinking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KartRacerBoy Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Read the R&T story: GT-R vs 911 Turbo vs. Z06. The cars were comparable in performance except on the track (buttonwillow) where the GT-R SPANKED the other two by 5-6 seconds/lap. Mommy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05GT Guru Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Yeah it was more like 2 seconds in other mags, which one to believe, im not sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItalynStylion Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 http://i30.tinypic.com/21o3tj5.jpg The results clearly show they have a BMW bias. Who the efff cares about back seat room when purchasing any of these cars? Rebates was a category....seriously? And how exactly does one define the "gotta have it" factor? The GTR ran a slower time in their test than the one they had tested before and times from other tests too. Tell me, how is that possible on a car that has launch control and is an automatic? I receive C&D monthly and I might end the subscription after this BS....sellouts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JessterCPA Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Any chance I can get a toddler/booster seat in the beackseat of one of these? If so...hmmm....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItalynStylion Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Yeah it was more like 2 seconds in other mags, which one to believe, im not sure Different track lengths and styles will yield different lap differences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JessterCPA Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 It's like when they popped the LGT in comparo tests when they didn't like how the door sounded when it closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IwannaSportSedan Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 No wonder I don't touch US car rags anymore. biased sycophants. morons. Autoblog, a bit of Winding Road for the photography, an a very occaisional UK rag... Who needs the sophomoric and generally weak US mags... Why spend the money, really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05GT Guru Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Each magazine seems to be biased to a different company or style of car, its strange. We need something that tells it like it is. There is no way there shoudl be a 9mph difference in the 1/4mile with a auto car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JessterCPA Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 ^^ True Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.