It has nothing to do with price. To mirror another poster's response, people were using power to weight to determine a cars ability around a track. Also, people were suspecting the GT-R was making more power than suggested and that the tires weren't OE. The real problem is that Nissan built a brilliant car that nobody at the time fully understood! Now it's kicking ass everywhere and has become the core of fanboy fantasies all across the globe.
I disagree with "it has nothing
to do with price." Yes, people were using the "power-to-weight" argument, but that was just a cover for the deep-seated belief that since it is just
a Nissan that didn't cost $250,000 and didn't "look" like a super car with a pointy front-end and low profile...there's no way it could possibly handle that good and Nissan is absolutely cheating in some way, shape or form. The GT-R was guilty from the start, and you couldn't convince anyone otherwise.
You are right about people claiming it made more power and that they were using "cut slicks" though. That's what I'm talking about. Why is there no claim of this with the LFA? 7:14 is an insanely fast lap, yet nobody is doubting that the car did it in the same set-up that will be offered to the public. THAT is where the "price" of the LFA comes into play. Because the car is being sold at close to a half a million dollars, everyone just accepts it.
Of course, it may just be that I haven't ventured to other forums and all the members here aren't idiots. My blanket statements of "everyone..." and "anybody..." is really only referring to this forum, so there may
be controversy that I'm just not aware of. You gotta admit though...there's an obvious bias when it comes to "how much did you pay for it?"