Dyno-Tested: 2012 Nissan GT-R

Harman motive's dyno got sold there.

Who said 911 Turbo is really faster?

I thought Edmund's time is not

@blackdynamite - what kind of race? On the track? 0-60? 1/4 mile? The Turbo S is quicker, but the plain turbo, I think they will be about dead even.

On the track, the GT-R kills the Porsche.

On the track, nothing kills a Porsche.
The CTS-V was treated like God's sedan and was said to be the fastest production sedan. Until the Panamera beat it around Nurburgring.
The GT-R and ZR1 duked it out on the Ring and almost tied. The Viper ACR beat both of them at once. The Porsche 911 beat all three of them.
They may not be the prettiest cars, but Porsches are serious performers.

I have to agree w/ you mkboyardee, nothing beats a porsche. The company is always pushing the boundary of what is possible in a car. The turbo S goes to 60 in like 2.7 sec , and will outrun a veyron to 100. I am already starting to grow tired of the styling of the GT-R, I am sure it is a fantastic car, but for comparable money I would buy a porsche any day of the week and twice on sunday.

@mkboyardee says:

02:37 AM, 02/ 3/11

"On the track, nothing kills a Porsche."

LMAO - where did you come up with this crap?

"The CTS-V was treated like God's sedan and was said to be the fastest production sedan. Until the Panamera beat it around Nurburgring."

Since when? I've never seen an official Nurburgring time showing a Panamera beating a CTS-V. That's because Porsche never made an official run with the Panamera on the Nurburgring. There was one unofficial run, but there was nothing documented.

"The GT-R and ZR1 duked it out on the Ring and almost tied. The Viper ACR beat both of them at once. The Porsche 911 beat all three of them. "

Yeah, just recently. For nearly 4 years the 911 was WAY behind the GT-R, ZR1, and ACR on the Nurburgring. Porsche was so pissed with the GT-R they cried foul, as if Nissan cheated, and yet they couldn't prove anything. It took Porsche 4 years and $245,000 just to barely beat these cars on Porsche's home track today! And to top it off, the 2011 GT2 RS is the only 911 that can beat these cars (barely), and it's already sold out with only 133 to be built. That sux! Meanwhile, anyone with around $100k can walk into most Nissan, Chevrolet, or Dodge dealers and take home a beast that will certainly make a GT2 RS driver sweat on the track.

There is no substitute
BD

since the beginning of human writing, the porsche has been faster. And it will always be so, as it was created so.

stingray454 is absolutely correct.... and what happens when you take just a little bit of the money you saved buying the nissan, chevy, or dodge mentioned and modify those cars?

haha nothing kills a porsche. ha. haha. hahahahaha

oh and after you buy your porsche, and a slightly modified version of the the cars we are talking about beats it, good luck trying to modify it to be better. because the aftermarket support is far more rare than any of these cars and more expensive.

@blackdynamite0 says:

"This is all very nice, but the 911 Turbo would beat it in a race"

Not in 2008. http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/comparison/2009-nissan-gt-r-vs.-2008-chevrolet-corvette-z06-vs.-2008-porsche-911-turbo/2009_nissan_gt-r_page_4

As mentioned before, there is no documented N'ring Panamera time. Usually this means that the manufacturer deviated too much from stock car levels. Until Porsche manages to document a stock Panamera time of less than 7:59, the CTS-V is still God's sedan :)

Sub
Thanks for the link
BD

It is interesting to see that the HP/Torque curves of the '09 and '12 cross at nearly the same RPM. My question is: where is the correct RPM to upshift? Traditionally it has been where the lines cross, but both GT-Rs have a lot more HP beyond the crossing point, so I wonder if there is a theoretically better RPM to use for upshifting.

I don't really like the sound of the dyno testing. It always sounds like there are a lot of components that didn't get greased. Is some of the squealing from the dyno itself?

You guys are all acting like the keyboard warriors this article talks about.

Having said that, most of the people who buy these things probably won't even take em to the track, and track times mean nothing in the real world, regardless of how cheap or expensive the car that makes those times is.

I really like the gtr. Would take one in a heartbeat. But if someone gave me a choice, a 911 turbo it'd be. Anyone who talks about how much money they saved when they drive the slower car is silly, just enjoy what you have and don't make excuses.

ed124c
HP/Torque curves always cross at the same rpm for every car/engine. I believe is is 5252 rpm (the constant that is used in the formula). That's because HP is calculated from the torque. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but dyno measures torque and HP is calculated from it. HP = (Torque x RPM)/5252 where torque is in lb-ft.

You want to shift when the HP drops off significantly (HP Peak). In the case of the GTR, it looks to be the 7000 rpm redline is the ideal shift point.

Yes the gtr is an impressive car and yes it does do very well on the nurburgring *FACT*. It is a great car but in my OPINION the fact that alot of the car is automated sucks, when it comes to refinement and driver skill...I will always take a porsche over the gtr, hell ill take a Zr1 over the gtr and you better believe i'll take a noble m400 or 600 over any of those... the more skill it takes a driver to operate the beast it what its all about. I drive a 6spd 370z and 90% of my driving is done with VDC (traction control) off.

Again this is just my opinion

just to slap caddy in the face, nissan should take a R33 GTR sedan around the track with a nice set of summer tires and see what time it can come up with.

back in the day the R33 gtr ran a 7:59. R33 GTR sedan shouldn't be much heavier, and todays tires have come a long way. im sure it could beat the caddy's time.

You want to really judge a car on its mechanical merits. Run a race with no stability or traction control and no launch control. Pick drivers that have around the same ability and skill set and let's see what happens. People seem to forget that Porsche has been building sports cars much longer than Nissan. Someone even mentioned that Porsche was 4 years behind Nissan! LMFAO!...so what happened to the 30 years that Nissan was behind Porsche?!? Never has Nissan produced a vehicle that was comparative to a Porsche until they decided to BUY one and benchmark it. Problem with Nissan Fan Boys is that they don't give credit where credit is due. The GT-R biggest problem was that it benchmarked the wrong car...it should have benchmarked the new 2012 911 replacement...oops!...my bad...they couldn't wait that long to buy one. Porsche has proven that it is more than capable of matching the GT-R...and making a profit while they're at it. The GT-R is a good performance car for the money...but that's about it. If money is your issue then you know where to shop...otherwise you go with the tried and true performer that has been doing this the longest.

First off, kudos for getting the car on the dyno so quickly. That's one of the reasons so many of us come here. And kudos to Nissan for producing what looks to be a smoother and stronger power curve. Finally, way to keep the comparisons apples to apples - same dyno, both cars. However....

Those numbers seem a little bit low for the acceleration numbers you recorded. Judging by the length of the run, I'm assuming the test was run in 4th or 5th gear. That means that the numbers recorded in the lower gears would be even worse (higher inertial losses). One of the great things about roller dynos is that we should be able to draw a pretty good correlation between the dyno numbers and precision recorded acceleration numbers.

Using your recorded acceleration numbers, I show an average acceleration in 2nd gear (at the track) of 0.69g vs. a calculated 0.73g (using the 45-60 mph data). Here at least, the real world _was_ worse, but that's second gear which is experiencing an acceleration rate about 3x faster than the dyno, which should result in huge increases in inertial losses and, I would suspect, substantially worse accel than predicted in a 4th or 5th gear dyno test.

However, in second to third gear, I show 0.63g vs. a calculated 0.56g from the dyno (using weighted average 60-75 mph data with 0.2 sec deducted for a shift as per Nissan's press info). Since your acceleration rate in 3rd gear is substantially faster than what is seen on the dyno, and aero effects will start to play a role, this is surprising. Even averaging the 2nd and 3rd gear acceleration from 30 to 75 mph shows slightly better acceleration (3-4%) than predicted by the dyno test averaging for the two different gears.*

*Assumed weight of 4000 lbs with driver and atmospheric conditions close to standard. I suspect the 4000 lbs weight estimate is conservative and atmospheric conditions at Fontana are rarely ideal given the elevation. More weight or worse atmospherics should reduce real world performance relative to the dyno.

This indicates to me that in the real world the engine is producing substantially more power than it does on the dyno. Perhaps its an airflow thing, but the acceleration of the vehicle is better than the numbers would suggest. I'd love to see a detailed acceleration breakdown from 70-90 mph in 3rd gear (no shifts to mess with the calcs). With aero drag building, you'd expect real acceleration to trail predicted dyno results by a lot, but I'll bet the airflow through the intercooler is more than making up for it in terms of power produced.

The gtr has been around for quite some time too.^ don't be such a stereotypical porsche fan.

my comment was for speedercr

Porsche this. GTR that. WHO CARES?!
Nissan continues to improve the model. Good for them.

BTW, thought it would be worthwhile to point out that running the same calcs for the diesel truck test and dyno results (I just used the GMC since 4th gear covered 60-75 mph perfectly) showed a predicted acceleration of 0.21 g vs. an actual of 0.19 g. This makes more sense to me as there are going to be some aero losses even at 75 mph (especially for a brick of a truck), and atmospherics were definitely not great for the accel testing (baro was low, and there was a headwind).

This is much more in line with what you would expect from a roller dyno vs real world accel.

@church123...

"Those numbers seem a little bit low for the acceleration numbers you recorded..."

You do realize that GT-R 0-60 and 1/4 mile times are recorded using launch control right? I mean...if you raise the RPM and boost pressure and let loose with AWD and excellent traction...you would expect to have a better 0-60 time than merely flooring the pedal from standstill, which I might point out is the way you would do it on a Dyno (never seen anyone brake torque on a dyno either). In all fairness...a 0-60 times are not directly correlated to the power a car produces...especially nowadays when you can simply press a few switches to improve your acceleration. So I'm not quite sure you why you comparatively speak about peak HP and acceleration in a linear fashion when in fact there are other mitigating factors that will relate to HP.

Proof this GTR is popular and a true formidable threat? Look at the size and contents of the posts whenever the GTR is featured. Love it or hate it, I believe the impact speaks for itself. Well done Nissan. Well done.
RE the 20th century Corvette and Porsche comment. I entirely disagree. The R32-R34 GTRs were never offered outside of Japan. Most westerners prior to Gran Turismo, Fast and Furious have never heard of this car. But race drivers for the 911, Murcielago, F430, and Corvette knew about this legend through GT300 and GT500 racing in Japan under the former JGTC (now SuperGT) This car single handedly dominated GT500 racing for a decade and still continues to be a formidable threat in that racing series.
Again, to underestimate this car would be a big mistake. It has a racing pedigree much longer and more successful than you may think. Again. Well done Nissan. Thank you for finally bringing Godzilla over.

Even as a 911 owner I find a lot of these Porsche comments ridiculous. The GT-R is a stellar car. I'm not a huge fan of the styling but you can't ignore it's performance capabilities. I believe one of the primary reasons Porsche has bumped the performance of all the 911 models is because of the GT-R. Competition improves these cars and we benefit from it. All good in my book.

speedrcr, I was not calculating acceleration from 0-30 where launch control would have any effect. I was only using the in gear times above that speed as I detailed in my post. At low speeds, even the GT-R has enough torque being sent to the wheels (using torque multiplication from the gearbox) to overwhelm traction, so simulations in those ranges are problematic at best without tire slip models, etc.

However, once underway, especially on an AWD car with excellent traction, piecewise measurement of acceleration rates should correlate closely to what is measured on a roller dyno (hub dynos are difficult to correlate because the wheels/tires are removed - all you can hope to do there is match the shape of the curves). Variances should increase as speed builds and aero comes into play, but the real world results should vary increasingly in the negative direction vs dyno results. In this case, the results are the opposite.

The GT-R has but one purpose:

To blow away all the Beetle-loving fanboys (aka Porsche 911 fanboys) and make them cry about it.

Seems like Nissan is doing a good job.

Who cares about dyno numbers. If the car was faster but you found out it made less hp, would you suddely say its slower? Conversely, what if you tested a slow car and found it made huge power. Would you now think its fast? Strange.

@KOSMO69 - well said.

you can see the (great looking) motor in the GT-R, another point to Nissan

@compressor - your statement doesn't make compute. The dyno numbers by themselves don't make a car fast or slow. 700 lbs-ft at the wheels from a Ford SuperDuty doesn't make it even remotely quick. But it is useful to understand how a car making so little hp (relatively), and weighing so much, is so fast. Is it the transmission (not so much shift times, but the fact that boost tends to spike on shifts, giving it an extra burst)? Is the airflow on the dyno insufficient to realize its maximum power (all that turbo boost requires lots of charge air cooling)? Does the ECU limit power on the dyno (based on my past experience with GTRs, I doubt it)?

Some of us are technically curious about not just the end result (a wicked fast car by any measure or price standard), but about how you get to those end results. As a dyno owner myself I like to understand how my equipment relates to the real world because no one drives on a dyno. When measuring power at the contact patch as on a roller dyno, you would expect real world acceleration to be no better than predicted on the dyno in a best case scenario. In most situations you would expect it to be worse.

I know it's not the same dyno same day but IL Challenger dyno of 470 hp/470 lb-ft SRT8 392 showed 452 hp/443 torque @ wheels. 563 hp/479 lb-ft Mercedes SLS AMG put down 527/447. 540 hp/510 lb-ft Shelby GT500 put down 511 hp/488 lb-ft on dyno. All similarly powered cars (vs GT-R) that whooped GT-R on the dyno. I know awd takes a few horses but it seems like a 100-hp (18.9%) loss is a little excessive. Can't argue with track numbers though just curiously low numbers IMO.

For people who try to compare it to Porsche Turbo 911, think about it, is it four seaters? For people who try to compare it to Ferrari, think about it, is it four seaters and priced at $92K? Before compare GTR to any car, think about the price range and is it four seaters or two seaters. Sure two seaters might look nice, but it simply take up same parking space as four seaters. Plus, you can carry three women instead of one. Now that's what you should be thinking about.

For people who try to compare it to Porsche Turbo 911, think about it, is it four seaters? For people who try to compare it to Ferrari, think about it, is it four seaters and priced at $92K? Before compare GTR to any car, think about the price range and is it four seaters or two seaters. Sure two seaters might look nice, but it simply take up same parking space as four seaters. Plus, you can carry three women instead of one. Now that's what you should be thinking about.

"ziggerman says:

07:12 AM, 02/ 3/11

....Until Porsche manages to document a stock Panamera time of less than 7:59, the CTS-V is still God's sedan :)"

Do your research.

2011 Subaru Impreza WRX STi Does the 'Ring in 7:55. CTS-V is no Gods' Sedan if by "Gods' Sedan" you mean the fastest at lapping the Nurburgring. And I wonder what would happen if Mitsubishi could send Tommi Makinen (same driver who ran Subaru's current record time) to drive a 2010 Evo X SE (with the same turbo swap as Subie's MY2011 STi for the one lap run) which keeps beating the 2011 STi Sedan in EVERY SINGLE test they put them against each other... and by seconds... how many? try 2 seconds in a a dirt-track and 3 seconds during the C&D Lightning Lap.

Yeah... CTS-V Gods' Sedan... pfff.. laughs out loud.

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times#Production_vehicles

Moving back on to the big dogs... Lots of Porsche fanboys lol; you all have to recognize that Nissan has a Porsche beater... nothing comes close to it except for Porsche's top dogs (GT2 RS, GT3 perhaps... Turbo, Turbo S...) Give credit where credit is due please stop being such fanboys.

My heart is literally split between an R35 and a 997 Turbo/Turbo S. I wouldn't want to own one without the other. I must have both in my garage... a Turbo S in sky blue and White GT-R please, thanks!

And when it comes to racing, I still believe a 2011 Turbo S will still beat the 2012 GT-R around a track and in a drag-strip. Oh god... I just sounded like a Porsche fanboy myself!

Hopefully James, Hamster and Captain Slow are planning to pit these two against each other soon!

"godofgambler says:

04:12 PM, 02/ 3/11

For people who try to compare it to Porsche Turbo 911, think about it, is it four seaters? For people who try to compare it to Ferrari, think about it, is it four seaters and priced at $92K? Before compare GTR to any car, think about the price range and is it four seaters or two seaters. Sure two seaters might look nice, but it simply take up same parking space as four seaters. Plus, you can carry three women instead of one. Now that's what you should be thinking about."

I am baffled by your comment...

I can't imagine a true sports car driver/lover/enthusiast showing up at a Nissan dealership and saying:

"Ah... I want to buy me a nice, fast sports coupe, I just came from a Porsche Dealership... they showed me a 911 Turbo and I didn't want it cause it wasn't a 4 seater... Do you have anything around 100k that can go really, really fast, and seat 2 adults in the back as well?"

Sorry if I offend you but I'm not sure whether you're being sarcastic or if that's really the only opinion you have for these kind of vehicles... seriously.

RAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH

jazzor says:

04:25 PM, 02/ 3/11

"ziggerman says:

07:12 AM, 02/ 3/11

....Until Porsche manages to document a stock Panamera time of less than 7:59, the CTS-V is still God's sedan :)"
jazzor says:
"Do your research.
2011 Subaru Impreza WRX STi Does the 'Ring in 7:55. CTS-V is no Gods' Sedan if by "Gods' Sedan" you mean the fastest at lapping the Nurburgring. "

This is funny because "everyone" knows that STI time does not count since it was not a production car ( that car had many prototype and spec c parts and can not be bought at any showroom in the world ). The CTS-V's time still stands (from an EVO owner). You also quote the LL which have a CTS-V comparsison to the EVO you think would be the fastest in the world BTW.

They sound pretty equivalently fast. I'm pretty sure the Nissan would be cheaper to track as pieces wear and break.... so slightly faster Porsche that rarely tracked or Nissan driven hard on 3-4x as many track days (assuming you have a fixed amount of money for fun).

Also, isn't the GT3 the worst car for having track day incidents? They seem to always warn about this on DE days.

AND...
""On the track, nothing kills a Porsche."

LMAO - where did you come up with this crap?"

+1
here a couple - not racing (just DE) so hard to say "kill" but passed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpRpT4euwE8

There's always someone faster, more so on my budget :).

What I like about the Nissan is that with its awd and electronic nannies a normal guy like me doesn't need to go to racing school to have fun in it.

"jazzor says:

Do your research.

2011 Subaru Impreza WRX STi Does the 'Ring in 7:55. CTS-V is no Gods' Sedan if by "Gods' Sedan" you mean the fastest at lapping the Nurburgring. And I wonder what would happen if Mitsubishi could send Tommi Makinen (same driver who ran Subaru's current record time) to drive a 2010 Evo X SE (with the same turbo swap as Subie's MY2011 STi for the one lap run) which keeps beating the 2011 STi Sedan in EVERY SINGLE test they put them against each other... and by seconds... how many? try 2 seconds in a a dirt-track and 3 seconds during the C&D Lightning Lap."

Umm, Lancer Evo SE ran the C&D Lightning Lap in 3:10.6. WRX STI sedan in 3:13.8.

CTS-V was 3:04, so.....

A 911 that can even come close to matching the performance of the GT-R costs $25k more. But it looks the same as one that costs $20k less than the GT-R.

Nobody in their right mind would buy a 911 over a GTR. And a Turbo S barely beats the new 2012 GTR, i'd buy the GTR invest that extra $25 grand from the price difference under the hood and just embarrass anything that has wheels.

Ahem,

C&D Lightning Lap
....
10 2:55.6 NISSAN GT-R LL3 11/08
11 2:55.9 PORSCHE 911 GT3 RS LL4 2/11
12 2:57.4 DODGE VIPER SRT10 LL3 10/07
13 2:57.5 PORSCHE 911 TURBO S LL4 2/11

--------------

TG Power Laps:

Nissan GT-R - 1:19.5
Porsche Carrera GT - 1:19.8
Porsche 911 Turbo - 1:22.2
Porsche 911 GT3 RS - 1:22.3

Certainly faster does not equal better, but considering the price penalty for the so-called "P-car" I'd definitely opt for the faster GT-R...

To all you Porsche haters, here's some truth:

I had a 997.1 Carrera S, sold it for an RS4... When I went to trade it in on a GT-R (2009), the Nissan dealer was MISERABLE when it came to customer service, no test drives, etc. I commented that I was considering the GT-R and a 911 Turbo and they had the brilliance to say, "Go take it to the Porsche dealership." I returned that afternoon in my new 997.2 Carrera 4S. That is seriously poor work.

People buy Porsches (and other "overpriced" cars) for more reasons than ridiculous 0-60 numbers, etc. There is heritage, customer support, etc. - i.e. things Nissan will NEVER figure out. Nissan's biggest error IMO was not putting the GT-R in Infiniti dealerships. When I bought my FX45, it was by far the BEST customer service experience I've had in a car dealership. Night and day...

No hate from me on the GT-R - I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I just need to find a Nissan dealer that isn't a bunch of ding-dongs too jaded from shifting Sentras at a discount...

I agree, I am in the market for an '07-'08 911 Turbo, while I love the GT-R, it just lacks the prestige and other innumerable attributes of the Porsche. The GT-R is a nice car and puts up good numbers; but, I actually want the prestige associated with 'that's a Porsche' vs. that's a Nissan - because the majority of the population does not know or care about the GTR - unfortunately. I want to feel like my $90K went to something special. When I have the conversation with people that are not really into cars about the GTR...countless minutes are wasted convincing them that the GTR is a bargain and not an overpriced Nissan. Also...the absolute worst dealership experiences I've had have been at Nissan dealers.

drerx8,

Are you buying a car for you or for everyone else? Personally I like some "prestigious" cars for the looks, but after owning a few, I'm back to the durable fun cars that other people dont see as prestigious.

just sayin

blackdynamite0 says:

09:04 PM, 02/ 2/11

This is all very nice, but the 911 Turbo would beat it in a race
It has more torque and is about 250 lbs lighter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, don't forget the extra 2500 pounds of quarters you'll be carrying around in your car if you get a GT-R over a 911 turbo.

And a turbo will not consistently beat a GT-R, that would be a turbo s. That's an extra 1000 pounds of quarters BTW.

blackdynamite0 says:

09:04 PM, 02/ 2/11

This is all very nice, but the 911 Turbo would beat it in a race
It has more torque and is about 250 lbs lighter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, don't forget the extra 2500 pounds of quarters you'll be carrying around in your car if you get a GT-R over a 911 turbo.

And a turbo will not consistently beat a GT-R, that would be a turbo s. That's an extra 1000 pounds of quarters BTW.

gtrguy2012 says:

06:54 AM, 02/ 5/11

Nobody in their right mind would buy a 911 over a GTR. And a Turbo S barely beats the new 2012 GTR, i'd buy the GTR invest that extra $25 grand from the price difference under the hood and just embarrass anything that has wheels.

And the guy that bought the Turbo S would take an extra 50K and invest in his car to embarrass your now $115K GTR that will " embarrass anything that has wheels"..........My point isnt to slam you , but to make the point that someone out there is always faster. To some people , dropping $150K on a car is like going out and picking out a new sweater.Talking about modified cars is senseless .How much money do you want to dump into a car?. Someone will always be willing to spend more. But stock for stock , you yourself said the Turbo S beats the GTR. For some people , thats enough reason to go with the S. That takes nothing away from the GTR. So why not just enjoy it for the monster of a car that it is. I know I do.........
I guess in a perfect world, only those who truly love to drive would be allowed to own high performance cars , but unfortunately it never works out that way.The majority of people buy these cars to (a) be seen in them , or (b) pretend they have the fastest car in the world.Rarely do people buy a car because THEY love it.