Link: http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/18/nissan-gt-r-laps-the-top-gear-test-track-in/

...and I guess the time was put up on Wikipedia and quickly removed. Here is the info, though:

1:17.3 – Ascari A10

1:17.6 – Koenigsegg CCX (with "Top Gear Spoiler")

1:18.4 – Pagani Zonda F

# 1:18.9 – Nissan GTR (WTF?!)

1:18.9 – Maserati MC12

1:19.0 – Ferrari Enzo

1:19.5 – Ariel Atom 2 300

1:19.7 – Ferrari 430 Scuderia

1:19.8 – Porsche Carrera GT

1:19.8 – Lamborghini Murciélago LP640

1:20.4 – Koenigsegg CCX [6]

1:20.7 – Ascari KZ1

1:20.9 – Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren

1:21.2 – Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano

1:21.9 – Ford GT

1:22.3 – Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale

1:22.3 – Porsche 911 GT3 RS

1:22.4 – Chevrolet Corvette Z06

whatever, the Ultima and Caparo both smoked those numbers, granted the Ultima is the only one even close to the build price of a GTR, the impressiveness just doesn't do it for me, but hey that's track time bias...

(even though they are both not qualifying the ready-built (ultima) and the speed bump (Caparo), both of those caveats were overcome a few years ago on both cars, so what's with the top gear bias toward not allowing those vehicles records to stand?)

My beef is that the Top Gear lap board might as well be the 'cool wall' - there's no way to objectively measure cars against each other under totally different track conditions. Heck, some of the cars best times were run in the wet! If track conditions can change from lap to lap during a race, how realistic can it be to rank cars - many of whose placement was decided by just a tenth or two or a second - which were raced on different years?!

It's just entertainment though.. they don't exactly recommend you purchase the cars based on the lap times.

As far as the GT-R, I don't know. Seems amazing for the price, but... I'm not sure of the history... didn't it get smoked by the ZR-1 on the Nuremberg?

would you prefer if they had no list at all? yes its flawed, but its a TV show, meant for entertainment.

I still would take a R32 GTR over the new one, just like the looks of the old more

nderwater wrote: My beef is that the Top Gear lap board might as well be the 'cool wall' - there's no way to objectively measure cars against each other under totally different track conditions. Heck, some of the cars best times were run in the wet! If track conditions can change from lap to lap during a race, how realistic can it be to rank cars - many of whose placement was decided by just a tenth or two or a second - which were raced on different years?!

Dry vs. dry seems to be a damn level playing field--especially w/ Stig behind the wheel.

So much naysaying being thrown @ the GT-R it's alarming. If Stig's lap time is meaningless (along w/ every other recorded leap that these cars have done) then really--there's no appeasing ANYONE.

I think the competition between the GTR and C6 'Vette is pretty fun. Two completely different mentalities competing for the same prize.

gamby wrote: Dry vs. dry seems to be a damn level playing field--especially w/ Stig behind the wheel. So much naysaying being thrown @ the GT-R it's alarming. If Stig's lap time is meaningless (along w/ every other recorded leap that these cars have done) then really--there's no appeasing ANYONE.

We do what we must . . .LOL! Seriously though, I just got through watching Episode 4 of Top Gear and while I am impressed with the gadgetry of the GTR, I will say that the technical interference will leave me a bit weary until I am able to actually drive one around. Once that happens, I'm sure my views will change.

-Stig

I'll let you all know how the GT-R drives next weekend...

bastard

2.0dohc wrote: would you prefer if they had no list at all? yes its flawed, but its a TV show, meant for entertainment. I still would take a R32 GTR over the new one, just like the looks of the old more

Damn right! The R35 could never look as good as the R32, no matter how drunk you get...

Also it'd be a lot more fun to drive a proper, straightforward RWD car with no nannying devices to second-guess or correct your inputs or tell you that you're not in a 180kph+ approved area. Also you'd have to fit 3-4 people in an R32 to make it weigh as much as an R35.

I'd take any of them.

Impressive time!

While Top Gear's track conditions change day to day, its still a decent basis of comparison. I would like to see all those cars run the track on the same day once though. Even on the same tires

While the leaked time was a lie, the actual lap was still quite fast:

1:17.3 – Ascari A10

1:17.6 – Koenigsegg CCX

1:18.4 – Pagani Zonda F

1:18.9 – Maserati MC12

1:19.0 – Ferrari Enzo

1:19.5 – Ariel Atom 2 300

1:19.7 – Nissan GT-R

1:19.7 – Ferrari 430 Scuderia

1:19.8 – Porsche Carrera GT

1:19.8 – Lamborghini Murcielago LP640

The video of the lap makes it look like a stunning piece of driving as well: video @ autoblog.

nderwater wrote: The video of the lap makes it look like a stunning piece of driving as well: video @ autoblog.

Holy E36 M3. I think that may have made a believer out of me. I highly doubt I will ever try to own one though:

• $$$. This car will never depreciate to a level I'd be comfortable with.
• Being the fastest thing on the track because you bought the right machine is less satisfying than out-driving people in fancier machines.

In short, I can have just as much fun in something cheaper. If I had the scratch, this might very well choose this over an M3 for a DD/track weapon.

Dude, any car that can f' up your neck cornering is OK in my book.

I wonder how they define "production car". If "available to the public" is a criteria, then scratch the Enzo, MC12 and every other new Ferrari. The waiting list is years AND you have to know someone. (after being filthy ritch of course) Not exactly public in my opinion. And how many Pagani and Ascari dealers have you seen lately? Please.

The Nissan is the only MASS-PRODUCED, publically, available, series production car on the second list, and one of two (Z06) and the first. That's pretty impressive no mater what. You should have seen how much I....I, I mean the Stig...enjoyed it out there!

looks like one hell of a rallycrosser...

i admire what the car does, but rwd is the right wheel drive. i believe every other car up there minus teh lambo is rwd. don't correct me if i am wrong. i would take a r32 before the new one any day, presuming of course that neither is free.

the zr1 is pure magic, without the nannies.

I'm in no position to buy anything on that list, but I think Nissan deserves some credit for coming out with a car that's almost obtainable, and able to run with the best in the world. And I'm not going to argue over whether the Nissan is better than the Enzo for example, as I'm not likely to drive either anytime soon. It's pure fantasy from this point, so what's the point.

And for it being AWD, isn't that what people rave about in the WRX and EVO? Why is this car different? As far as the Nannies, a car that fast is sure to end up in the hands of people that simply can't drive, its one way to avoid lawsuits. Even the new Turbo Porsches, RX8s, BMWs, etc. have Nannies, and I'm sure we'll hear that there is a way to turn them off, it may not be public knowledge, but I'm sure there's a way..

Its certainly not ugly, and you could argue that a couple of more on that list were left out of the beauty contest as well. And personally, the lap times are all for fun on Top Gear. They don't take themselves too seriously, so I don't either. They never claimed it to be an official anything, but it is interesting to note the times.

Just watched the video...about 3 times. This car is fundamentally different...and cool.

It might be good enough to make me forget about the lack of a clutch pedal.