When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The LFA Nürburgring package did 7:14. The standard LFA did 7:38
Totally apples to oranges. Manufacturers' records are always much faster than those from independent testers because drivers at the manufacturers have much much more familiarity with the car AND are given many many more attempts at setting the records (to eliminate factors of weather conditions and human errors).
The standard LFA should do no slower than 7:22 in the hands of Akira Iida, the driver who set the record for the Nurburgring Edition.
Very impressive for a 400hp 6cylinder especially that it beat the insanely fast 997 turbo but some of the claims of it beating certain cars don't seem to hold up or are debatable depending on what year/times you use. The 911 S is still over a 100K when you add just a few options where the GTR is well under 100K.
It continues to be funny to watch people post up without taking 30 seconds to even check their facts. Then they post in the debate forum
The GTR is a 100k car now, it is no longer the 70-80k car when it debuted.
Originally Posted by ydooby
Totally apples to oranges. Manufacturers' records are always much faster than those from independent testers because drivers at the manufacturers have much much more familiarity with the car AND are given many many more attempts at setting the records (to eliminate factors of weather conditions and human errors).
The standard LFA should do no slower than 7:22 in the hands of Akira Iida, the driver who set the record for the Nurburgring Edition.
Very impressive for a 400hp 6cylinder especially that it beat the insanely fast 997 turbo but some of the claims of it beating certain cars don't seem to hold up or are debatable depending on what year/times you use. The 911 S is still over a 100K when you add just a few options where the GTR is well under 100K.
GTR is 96K and black edition is 106K. Still a better deal than a 911 . I know its preference but there is no way that a 911(standard) can run with a GTR. I think the new 911 looks amazing but with the lack of power and performance relative to the GTR its a no brainer in my book ( although I am GTR biased)
GTR is 96K and black edition is 106K. Still a better deal than a 911 . I know its preference but there is no way that a 911(standard) can run with a GTR. I think the new 911 looks amazing but with the lack of power and performance relative to the GTR its a no brainer in my book ( although I am GTR biased)
Yeah I admit 991 prices have me ...I think R&T tested a Boxster S that was 94k!!! I think the GT-R is still a smoking deal for the performance even at 100k. Just was better at 70k
no matter how people slice it the gtr still doesn't do much to me. it's very fast and best bang for the money, but somehow it doesn't seem to have a soul in my eyes. porsche? one of those you gotta pay to play kind of toys
Funny that you chose to respond to his comment but ignore mine. Am I making too much sense to you? Tell you what, the LFA Nurburgring Edition did 7:34 around the 'Ring in the hands of the same test driver (from Sport Auto) that did 7:38 in the standard LFA. Are you therefore going to say 7:34 is the best that the LFA Nurburgring Edition can do?
The GT-R did 7:38 by the same Sport Auto driver and yet Nissan's test driver was able to set a 7:24 record with the car of the same model year. Are you going to say 7:38 is the best that the GT-R can do?
Funny that you chose to respond to his comment but ignore mine. Am I making too much sense to you? Tell you what, the LFA Nurburgring Edition did 7:34 around the 'Ring in the hands of the same test driver (from Sport Auto) that did 7:38 in the standard LFA. Are you therefore going to say 7:34 is the best that the LFA Nurburgring Edition can do?
The GT-R did 7:38 by the same Sport Auto driver and yet Nissan's test driver was able to set a 7:24 record with the car of the same model year. Are you going to say 7:38 is the best that the GT-R can do?
Think about it.
I ignored yours for two reasons.
#1 i totally agree that independent test vs manufacturer tests aren't equal. Someone disputed that the LFA and GTR never did 7:38 and I was simply pointing out those were some of the times posted by independent tests which is where they got the numbers. The times listed weren't false or made up.
#2 anyone that actually read the original article would notice that they specifically stated that the LFA, GTR, etc times were independent. You were only repeating what the article mentioned, didn't think i needed to reply to it again.
#1 i totally agree that independent test vs manufacturer tests aren't equal. Someone disputed that the LFA and GTR never did 7:38 and I was simply pointing out those were some of the times posted by independent tests which is where they got the numbers. The times listed weren't false or made up.
#2 anyone that actually read the original article would notice that they specifically stated that the LFA, GTR, etc times were independent. You were only repeating what the article mentioned, didn't think i needed to reply to it again.
True that it's the author of the original article that first wrongfully compared the manufacturer's times with independent testers' times, but you did go along the same line and mix up the two in your first post in this thread too.
Originally Posted by Ap1_Alan
The LFA Nürburgring package did 7:14. The standard LFA did 7:38
#1 i totally agree that independent test vs manufacturer tests aren't equal. Someone disputed that the LFA and GTR never did 7:38 and I was simply pointing out those were some of the times posted by independent tests which is where they got the numbers. The times listed weren't false or made up.
#2 anyone that actually read the original article would notice that they specifically stated that the LFA, GTR, etc times were independent. You were only repeating what the article mentioned, didn't think i needed to reply to it again.
I bet if I drove it, it would get 15 minute time, not 7:38... should we start listing every time anyone made? There is a reason only best times are used.
Yeah I admit 991 prices have me ...I think R&T tested a Boxster S that was 94k!!! I think the GT-R is still a smoking deal for the performance even at 100k. Just was better at 70k
My neighbor took me for a ride in his silver 2012 GTR and it's just INSANE!!! I have never felt anything pull like a GTR ever. Its violent acceleration. He got the black edition for a little over 100k . I actually think it sounds amazing and the seats and the car were not tight. I drove and 09 a while back, and I thought I was a GTR fan then. LOL
But the official time is what 7:14 and 7:23 or so. Who quotes the slowest times?
Poor LFA...has fastest time, one of fastest times, "oh that is stupid, Ring doesn't matter, who cares, its slower than Ariel Atom etc etc"
LFA has slower time "its a POS, overpriced, Fail etc etc"
I'm not going to get in Ring pissing match. The 911 S time is amazing, the GT-R time is amazing, the LFA is amazing.
And as fast as a750k Porsche 918
I haven't seen an official time for the standard LFA. The only published time i've seen was 7:38 by an auto mag. Do you have a link of anything lower for the non nuburgring edition? Seems like the only "official" times out there are for the ring edition.
I've never said the LFA is slower than the 991. Someone on here said the 7:38 time wasn't accurate, but so far it's the only time I've seen for the standard LFA. Don't jump all over the article for posting that time, he used what was available to him.
Last edited by Ap1_Alan; Oct 12, 2012 at 09:35 AM.