911 Carrera

[Quigonjay]

or she could just think you have a small knob

[mr2nut123]

Ha, ha, ha............ this thread has gone mental

Its back to the old thing that some one else said " it aint a supercar if you have to explain why its a supercar"

For that reason, the nissan gtr is NOT a supercar in my eyes.

I always think of when I go to pick a girl up for a date. If it was a gtr, she would nt know what it was, she would just think it was a bmw or some other "salloon".
If i turned up in zonda, it wouldnt matter she didnt know what it was, just she would be well impressed, because it looks like a supercar, the gtr doesnt.
Graeme

Just wait for the V-Spec with an even wider body, more power and a proper manual box

[mr2nut123]

I agree with you on the F40 and the Murci been better cars. Sports cars these days are too poncy and have too much glass for my liking.

But if a supercar makes you feel great and has to look great, then still the GTR is a better supercar than any Porsche.

How so?

So you'd rather have a GTR over a GT3RS? Are you completely mad?

Quite simply, yes. If everyone wanted a Porsche GT3 over a GTR the world would be a boring place...even more boring with the same looking car but with different power levels in each one, 911 version 1 911 version 2.......911 version 10000000

[Mike]

I've seen this debate raise its head on many occasions on various forums, however I'm yet to see the question "what makes a car a supercar?" ever satisfactorily answered.
Quite often the conclusion is that you simply cannot define "supercar" the term means too many different things to different people.
Some cars just have "it" and they tend to be ones with: great performance (for their era), unusual/exotic/outrageous styling, limited production run, a BIG price tag and I'm sorry to say a badge synonomous with all of the above.
Those factors are covered by the likes of Ferrari, Lamborghini etc and they are marques that have entered the public consciousness as makers of supercars. To the majority of the general public a car such as the Nissan GTR would be pretty anonymous, they'd probably assume that its a cheap coupe thats been chavved. However those who take an interest in performance cars know better, they know that barring the badge it is every bit the supercar that a 911 GT2, F430 or DB9 is.

MR2Nut said something along the lines of "they should have made it a mid-engined 2 seater". The reason being that to some those two details are the very essence of a supercar. The first time my now ex girlfriend saw my (admittedly very shiney ) MR2 she exclaimed "Oh my God, how can you afford that?" Why? because the SW20 has that accepted supercar shape, and sometimes to some people thats all you need.

IMO the MR2 in any guise is not a supercar, its just not special enough, ultimately it lacks exclusivity and a certainly elegance in its engineering.
BUT, If you turn it round though and ask if the MR2 Turbo was made by Ferrari in much smaller numbers, commanded a higher price and was marketed as an entry level model in the range back in 1989/1990 ala' Porsche 944, 968 would that make it more of a supercar? I think so, the badge a car wears makes a big difference.

[matt_mr2t]

I agree with you on the F40 and the Murci been better cars. Sports cars these days are too poncy and have too much glass for my liking.

But if a supercar makes you feel great and has to look great, then still the GTR is a better supercar than any Porsche.

How so?

So you'd rather have a GTR over a GT3RS? Are you completely mad?

I'd rather have a GTR than a GT3RS tbh.


What people like and what is and isnt a supercar seems to be the issue here.

How about this for a conversation with a chick.
Her: what car do you have?
You: Zonda
Her: Whats that?
You: Italian supercar
Her: knickers are already off love

OR

Her: What car to drive?
You Nissan GTR
Her: What, like a Nissan Micra, my nans got one of them
You: No it's a Nissan Supercar
Her: NISSAN? Like my nans car?
You: Yeah it's got special 4wd that makes it go round race tracks really fast.
Her: See ya.

Or the obvious ones.

You: I drive a Ferarri/Porsche/Lamborghini/Aston Martin
Her: I'll take it up the jacksie

Now I'm not saying owning a car is about pulling the girls, I'm just using the fact that even THE LEAST interested in cars knows what a Ferarri et al is.

But you lot obviously know alot about supercars with your pumped up tubbies with stickers on.

So it's all down to opinion.

[matt_mr2t]

I've seen this debate raise its head on many occasions on various forums, however I'm yet to see the question "what makes a car a supercar?" ever satisfactorily answered.
Quite often the conclusion is that you simply cannot define "supercar" the term means too many different things to different people.
Some cars just have "it" and they tend to be ones with: great performance (for their era), unusual/exotic/outrageous styling, limited production run, a BIG price tag and I'm sorry to say a badge synonomous with all of the above.
Those factors are covered by the likes of Ferrari, Lamborghini etc and they are marques that have entered the public consciousness as makers of supercars. To the majority of the general public a car such as the Nissan GTR would be pretty anonymous, they'd probably assume that its a cheap coupe thats been chavved. However those who take an interest in performance cars know better, they know that barring the badge it is every bit the supercar that a 911 GT2, F430 or DB9 is.

MR2Nut said something along the lines of "they should have made it a mid-engined 2 seater". The reason being that to some those two details are the very essence of a supercar. The first time my now ex girlfriend saw my (admittedly very shiney ) MR2 she exclaimed "Oh my God, how can you afford that?" Why? because the SW20 has that accepted supercar shape, and sometimes to some people thats all you need.

IMO the MR2 in any guise is not a supercar, its just not special enough, ultimately it lacks exclusivity and a certainly elegance in its engineering.
BUT, If you turn it round though and ask if the MR2 Turbo was made by Ferrari in much smaller numbers, commanded a higher price and was marketed as an entry level model in the range back in 1989/1990 ala' Porsche 944, 968 would that make it more of a supercar? I think so, the badge a car wears makes a big difference.

Except no matter how good we think the MR2 is, I dont think Ferarri would ever make something like one!
People are comparing highly modified MR2's against standard Supercars here. When was the last time Ferarri made a car with "only" 200-240 bhp?
I would guess early 80's?

The MR2 is a fine car in it's own right but it was never designed to have huge power. To a certain point it's fine but the more you put into one the worse the delivery and usability is.
Could you imagine having a stinking great turbo on one that kicks in full boost at 5k revs come on boost in mid corner?
You just dont have hideous power delivery like that in a supercar. They're designed almost obsessively to have beautiful power delivery from the whole rev range of the car.

There is just so much more on a supercar that just isnt considered on an every day road car.

They have to as they're designed to go that fast and keep doing it.

But this is a dead conversation as there seems to be a total split here.

One thing I will ask though, a friend of a friend once had a Focus RS with around 500bhp, it was break neck fast.
Is that now a supercar?

[Lauren]

Quite simply, yes. If everyone wanted a Porsche GT3 over a GTR the world would be a boring place...even more boring with the same looking car but with different power levels in each one, 911 version 1 911 version 2.......911 version 10000000

You need to go in a GT3 and then see what you think. It's not just another 911. Actually when I got a ride in a GT3RS around the Ring, I thought to myself how can you spend 90K on a car? It's bonkers isn't it? Well after going in one I can tell you that I appreciate where that 90K has gone and from my perspective it was worth every penny. It really is in another galaxy performance wise to any car i've been in before (excepting the Formula Renault I tested) which would include 355s, 600bhp RX7s, GTR's etc. On the track it just felt like a pure racer.

[matt_mr2t]

You've been in a Nissan GTR?

[Lauren]

You've been in a Nissan GTR?

Not a new one, no. I've driven Toni's old R33 GTR on track.

[Kongaroo]

Except no matter how good we think the MR2 is, I dont think Ferarri would ever make something like one!
People are comparing highly modified MR2's against standard Supercars here. When was the last time Ferarri made a car with "only" 200-240 bhp?
I would guess early 80's?

The MR2 is a fine car in it's own right but it was never designed to have huge power. To a certain point it's fine but the more you put into one the worse the delivery and usability is.
Could you imagine having a stinking great turbo on one that kicks in full boost at 5k revs come on boost in mid corner?
You just dont have hideous power delivery like that in a supercar. They're designed almost obsessively to have beautiful power delivery from the whole rev range of the car.

There is just so much more on a supercar that just isn't considered on an every day road car.

They have to as they're designed to go that fast and keep doing it.

But this is a dead conversation as there seems to be a total split here.

One thing I will ask though, a friend of a friend once had a Focus RS with around 500bhp, it was break neck fast.
Is that now a supercar?

I agree it is a bit of a dead conversation but only because a number of people cannot admit the possibility they might be wrong

Firstly if you are comparing highly modified MR2s to supercars then you are not comparing a car with only 200-240 BHP to a supercar - more like 350-400BHP so there's no need to look as far back as the early 80's ferraris for a low powered ferrari.

Secondly the size of turbo required to bring you to the 350 to 400BHP level is NOT excessively large or laggy. Look at Dan's (Gee man) recent TD06 dyno in the general section. He makes 342 BHP at just 1 Bar!

On his setup he is probably seeing 200ft.lbs torque at around 3500 to 3600RPM - hardly what people could call serious lag. Use something like a GT3071 and you get very similar power and torque for around the same boost level but at maybe a couple of hundred RPM earlier.

Secondly your comment about the bigger 5K RPM spooling turbo being more of a problem when going around corners is completely the wrong way around. A larger turbo that spools more slowly is going to be less likely to kick in while you're trying to go around a corner and remember you are going to have to be flooring that accelerator to get it to spool up - something most turbo owners that want to stay on the road don't do anyway

The real problem would lie in coming out of the corners onto the straight where I would agree that you would not want a big laggy turbo there but as we established earlier you don't need a really big turbo for 350 to 400 BHP. Plus if you have cams the power band is going to be more like 4K to 8K which is VERY useable. Add in masses of grip (tyre choice) and a suspension that isn't too hard/bouncy so you can actually put the power down and the car becomes very enjoyable to drive at this power level.

I still agree the MR2 does not tick the correct boxes to make it anywhere near any kind of supercar but could a very well modified one turn out faster laps on a track than some supercars? That's the question most of us Tubby modifying enthusiasts are interested in. And it's certainly possible I'd say... oh and we already know which would win on the dragstrip

[mr2nut123]

I agree with you on the F40 and the Murci been better cars. Sports cars these days are too poncy and have too much glass for my liking.

But if a supercar makes you feel great and has to look great, then still the GTR is a better supercar than any Porsche.

How so?

So you'd rather have a GTR over a GT3RS? Are you completely mad?

I'd rather have a GTR than a GT3RS tbh.


What people like and what is and isnt a supercar seems to be the issue here.

How about this for a conversation with a chick.
Her: what car do you have?
You: Zonda
Her: Whats that?
You: Italian supercar
Her: knickers are already off love

OR

Her: What car to drive?
You Nissan GTR
Her: What, like a Nissan Micra, my nans got one of them
You: No it's a Nissan Supercar
Her: NISSAN? Like my nans car?
You: Yeah it's got special 4wd that makes it go round race tracks really fast.
Her: See ya.

Or the obvious ones.

You: I drive a Ferarri/Porsche/Lamborghini/Aston Martin
Her: I'll take it up the jacksie

Now I'm not saying owning a car is about pulling the girls, I'm just using the fact that even THE LEAST interested in cars knows what a Ferarri et al is.

But you lot obviously know alot about supercars with your pumped up tubbies with stickers on.

So it's all down to opinion.

And you clearly know tons too saying that a supecar has to have a Ferrari badge and has to be able to pull easy milfs. Maccy D's anyone?

[matt_mr2t]

You've been in a Nissan GTR?

Not a new one, no. I've driven Toni's old R33 GTR on track.

Cant use that as a basis for comparing to a GTR then....

I'm sure Toni's GTR was lovley but a Skyline and a GTR are completely different.

[mr2nut123]

You've been in a Nissan GTR?

Not a new one, no. I've driven Toni's old R33 GTR on track.

Cant use that as a basis for comparing to a GTR then....

I'm sure Toni's GTR was lovley but a Skyline and a GTR are completely different.

Yea, the GTR is more like a Micra as it has a Nissan badge and doesnt look like a supercar

[matt_mr2t]

Glad to see you get it at last

[Lauren]

Cant use that as a basis for comparing to a GTR then....

I'm sure Toni's GTR was lovley but a Skyline and a GTR are completely different.

Oh I know. Was just going on a GTR costing what is it 57K and a GT3RS being 90K. That extra money will count for a lot I think.

[steve b]

The MR2 is a fine car in it's own right but it was never designed to have huge power. To a certain point it's fine but the more you put into one the worse the delivery and usability is.

As many people who have built big power ones have then realised. No one ever notice te big power cars that getbuilt and then sold on or have smaller turbo put back on.

Earls is a prime example, built big power turbo 2 huge spec and sold it and is now in a V6 n/a one with 200bhp and says its a MUCH better road car.

[Ekona]

I was reading the current issue of Car magazine earlier, and paid particular interest to their COTY piece as the GTR was the winner. After reading it I cam to the conclusion (as they did) that it's an utterly brilliant car not because it's a supercar, but because it's a supercar killer. For it to hold such a lofty title surely means that it's definitely not a supercar, rather a pimped-up turbo-powered barge that walks all over a GT2 on track or on road. That's why it's such a special car, and also why I'd never own one.

[Kongaroo]

Earls is a prime example, built big power turbo 2 huge spec and sold it and is now in a V6 n/a one with 200bhp and says its a MUCH better road car.

Not wanting to nit pick here Steve but it's a bit ironic that you mention anecdotal evidence means nothing a few posts up and then type the above as evidence against big power tubbies. So which is it to be?

[Lauren]

Not wanting to nit pick here Steve but it's a bit ironic that you mention anecdotal evidence means nothing a few posts up and then type the above as evidence against big power tubbies. So which is it to be?

The trouble is that even a stock mk2 turbo does suffer lag mid-corner. Is more or less completely unavoidable. That said you can drive round it, but the bigger the turbo surely the more this is going to be in effect? Certainly seemed the case on Toni's TRD when I was driving it.

[Kongaroo]

The trouble is that even a stock mk2 turbo does suffer lag mid-corner. Is more or less completely unavoidable. That said you can drive round it, but the bigger the turbo surely the more this is going to be in effect? Certainly seemed the case on Toni's TRD when I was driving it.

I would have thought the turbo kicking in mid corner is the last thing you would want happening as you'll be likely to have the rear come around on you.

Increasing turbo size and therefore lag makes this less likely to happen but it's unfavourable in a different way for when you are exiting the corner as you would want power to kick in as soon as possible at that point wouldn't you.

I'm no expert at driving but common sense would dictate in the turbo you would have to make up for the disadvantages in the corners by taking advantage of the power in the straights and braking hard again for the next corner?