Is the GT-R the best car in the world right now for the money?

[homeforsummer]

so how would you classify what could be a supercar if it's not based on performance

I thought I'd been over that...

Well for a start I'd say that no supercar has four seats. And yes I'm including the 911 in that, the 911 is not a supercar. Really, the NSX and Ferrari F430 aren't really supercars either, they're just sports cars or sports coupes. Supercars are the Carrera GTs, Enzos, McLaren F1s, Koenigseggs and Zondas of this world.

...the wow factor, and either a beautifully crafted or scarily purposeful interior (think Zonda or F40 respectively - the GT-R is just another standard Japanese car interior), or badge kudos beyond petrolheads (say "Nissan GT-R" and "Ferrari" to the average Joe on the streets and see what gets more reaction), or "that supercar shape" that every true supercar shares - the GT-R looks like any other car in silhouette - or a sense of occasion... I could go on.

The GT-R is undoubtably very impressive. It's certainly very fast. But it's not a supercar. It's not a supercar in the same way an AMG S-class isn't a supercar. Lots of performance? Yes. Lots of presence? Yes. Lots of technology? Yes. Supercar? No.

Actually I have more defining criteria - mid engined, and usually outrageously expensive. The GT-R might humble supercars, but it isn't one itself.

...and Blackedout added another useful bit in his subsequent post:

Personally I think a supercar is something that is untouchable to 99.9% of people, the McLaren F1, Veyron, F50, Enzo and those likes. They are just so insanely fast that it's almost impractical for driving the speed limit.

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

totally off topic, but i my user name sucks. Something i created 5 years ago after winning a RX7 LM in GT3. Totally regret that and its something a 15 year old kid would come up with, which is exactly what i was

Anyhow, another thing about supercars is their origin and build intent. The Viper came from a truck engine, that just doesnt appeal to me and IMO is not at all what a supercar is about. The GT-R was purpose built to be the best track car around and still be relatively cheap, that may not push to supercar status but it certainly helps and makes it more exotic.

 

[McLaren]

Well for a start I'd say that no supercar has four seats. And yes I'm including the 911 in that, the 911 is not a supercar. Really, the NSX and Ferrari F430 aren't really supercars either, they're just sports cars or sports coupes. Supercars are the Carrera GTs, Enzos, McLaren F1s, Koenigseggs and Zondas of this world. And much as the GT-R is incredibly impressive, it will never come near the drama and lustability of these cars.

...and the wow factor, and either a beautifully crafted or scarily purposeful interior (think Zonda or F40 respectively - the GT-R is just another standard Japanese car interior), or badge kudos beyond petrolheads (say "Nissan GT-R" and "Ferrari" to the average Joe on the streets and see what gets more reaction), or "that supercar shape" that every true supercar shares - the GT-R looks like any other car in silhouette - or a sense of occasion... I could go on.

The GT-R is undoubtably very impressive. It's certainly very fast. But it's not a supercar. It's not a supercar in the same way an AMG S-class isn't a supercar. Lots of performance? Yes. Lots of presence? Yes. Lots of technology? Yes. Supercar? No.

Actually I have more defining criteria - mid engined, and usually outrageously expensive. The GT-R might humble supercars, but it isn't one itself.

"Did we just become best friends!?"

Anyhow, another thing about supercars is their origin and build intent. The Viper came from a truck engine, that just doesnt appeal to me and IMO is not at all what a supercar is about. The GT-R was purpose built to be the best track car around and still be relatively cheap, that may not push to supercar status but it certainly helps and makes it more exotic.

Maybe the original GT-Rs, but the R35 is far from being a car being purposely built as the best track car because it wasn't purposely built that way.

A car that is purposely built to be the best track around is a car that was built with nothing but the track in mind, a car like the 430 Scuderia, GT3 RS, Superleggera, etc. These are cars that are purposely built to be the best track car all around. The new GT-R is purposely built to be a grand tourer with amazing sports car performance.

 

[Leonidae]

way to go offtopic..

but, now, back on topic: is there anything with similar price/performance/practicality/comfort ratio as GT-R?

 

[Jim Prower]

Corvette Z06. That's about all I can think of. It has a bigger boot, er, trunk, but no rear seats, about the same amount of power, doesn't quite stick as well but is lighter, MSRPs for about the same price and probably will hold it's value...slightly...better. Might not stick in the rain as well, either, and about as good on gas. Both cars will ride firm, the GT-R probably a little softer in normal suspension mode than the Z06, and given that they probably won't be bad tourers, either. Not great, but tolerable.

 

[gator of kana]

"Did we just become best friends!?"

Maybe the original GT-Rs, but the R35 is far from being a car being purposely built as the best track car because it wasn't purposely built that way.

A car that is purposely built to be the best track around is a car that was built with nothing but the track in mind, a car like the 430 Scuderia, GT3 RS, Superleggera, etc. These are cars that are purposely built to be the best track car all around. The new GT-R is purposely built to be a grand tourer with amazing sports car performance.

the R35 GT-R was built to bring out as much performance as possible in all weather conditions, track cars focus too much on being quick on dry surfaces

 

[McLaren]

And? That still doesn't mean it was purposely built to be the best track car all around. If that was it's intentions, it wouldn't have been made like it was, with an extra 2 seats and a lot of weight.

 

[gator of kana]

And? That still doesn't mean it was purposely built to be the best track car all around. If that was it's intentions, it wouldn't have been made like it was, with an extra 2 seats and a lot of weight.

well maybe the V-spec GT-R will be more of a track car, it will have less weight and more power, besides some car magazines sometimes call it the Baby Veyron

 

[McLaren]

well maybe the V-spec GT-R will be more of a track car, it will have less weight and more power, besides some car magazines sometimes call it the Baby Veyron

Please share the names of said magazines so that I can avoid them in the near future. I'd rather not read anything that could write such stupidity as the V-Spec being a Baby Veyron.

 

[Tornado]

I can both see where they are coming from and laugh at their logic at the same time.

There is only one baby Veyron, and Porsche made it in the late 80s.

 

[gator of kana]

Please share the names of said magazines so that I can avoid them in the near future. I'd rather not read anything that could write such stupidity as the V-Spec being a Baby Veyron.

Autocar, Evo and Top Gear

 

[McLaren]

Autocar, Evo and Top Gear

You must have mis-read something or made that up. I doubt any of those 3 would call the V-Spec a Baby Veyron when the Nissan & the Bugatti are 2 completely different cars.

Calling the V-Spec a baby Veyron would mean it would have to somehow share a distinct feature with the Veyron. And from what I can tell by the GT-R alone, there's nothing that relates the 2 vehicles, or manufacturers for that matter.

 

[gator of kana]

You must have mis-read something or made that up. I doubt any of those 3 would call the V-Spec a Baby Veyron when the Nissan & the Bugatti are 2 completely different cars.

Calling the V-Spec a baby Veyron would mean it would have to somehow share a distinct feature with the Veyron. And from what I can tell by the GT-R alone, there's nothing that relates the 2 vehicles, or manufacturers for that matter.

that's what the journalists said

 

[Joey D]

that's what the journalists said

You need far more proof then that, a link to an article, a YouTube video, something. As a great astronomer once said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

 

[gator of kana]

You need far more proof then that, a link to an article, a YouTube video, something. As a great astronomer once said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

here's the proof

Several automotive journalists, including Chris Harris of Autocar, Jethro Bovingdon of Evo, and Jason Barlow of Top Gear (magazine) have compared the GT-R to the Bugatti Veyron. Harris and Bovingdon both labeled the GT-R a "baby Veyron" in their respective comparison tests of the car

 

[McLaren]

here's the proof

Several automotive journalists, including Chris Harris of Autocar, Jethro Bovingdon of Evo, and Jason Barlow of Top Gear (magazine) have compared the GT-R to the Bugatti Veyron. Harris and Bovingdon both labeled the GT-R a "baby Veyron" in their respective comparison tests of the car

I just looked at the supported sources for that claim on Wikipedia. Source 34 is a forum that scanned the Evo article. However, if you read the article, his reason for calling it a baby Veyron is because it manages its weight with exceptional performance. Harris, though, just says, "It's a baby Veyron" and then talks about the M3. Either way, both of their reasoning (1's lack of, actually) is rather amusing.

I can see how the GT-R's performance despite its weight is a great feat like the Veyron, but the GT-R is nothing like a baby version of it just because of that reason.

 

[gator of kana]

I just looked at the supported sources for that claim on Wikipedia. Source 34 is a forum that scanned the Evo article. However, if you read the article, his reason for calling it a baby Veyron is because it manages its weight with exceptional performance. Harris, though, just says, "It's a baby Veyron" and then talks about the M3. Either way, both of their reasoning (1's lack of, actually) is rather amusing.

I can see how the GT-R's performance despite its weight is a great feat like the Veyron, but the GT-R is nothing like a baby version of it just because of that reason.

what's wrong with the GT-R? I'm pretty much trying to save it's reputation as a great supercar

 

[McLaren]

what's wrong with the GT-R? I'm pretty much trying to save it's reputation as a great supercar

Nothing's wrong with it. But it is not a baby Veyron & it's not a supercar. It's a high-performance sports car like its competitors, the Turbo, R8, & M3.

 

[gator of kana]

Nothing's wrong with it. But it is not a baby Veyron & it's not a supercar. It's a high-performance sports car like its competitors, the Turbo, R8, & M3.

well I can't complain with that

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

Nothing's wrong with it. But it is not a baby Veyron & it's not a supercar. It's a high-performance sports car like its competitors, the Turbo, R8, & M3.

I don't see how that's the competition when the GT-R destroys those cars and most buyers in the market for them would be unlikely to buy a GT-R. A friends father just bought a Cayenne GTS and now he's looking at R8's or a 997 and i suggested the GT-R and he basically scoffed at it.

Anyhow, the competition based on performance, is really the 599, SLR, GT2, ZR1, etc., and i'll repost the chart that proves it.

As for baby veyron, i think you are taking it far too literally, all people are saying is that its a freaking fast car and of course they are going to try to link to one of the fastest cars in the world. Both have incredibly advanced 4wd and electronics, both had ground breaking debuts, and both somehow throw their massive weight around. Basically if you wanted a car like the veyron, but for under 100k, what else would you get besides a GT-R?

 

[McLaren]

I don't see how that's the competition when the GT-R destroys those cars and most buyers in the market for them would be unlikely to buy a GT-R. A friends father just bought a Cayenne GTS and now he's looking at R8's or a 997 and i suggested the GT-R and he basically scoffed at it.

Anyhow, the competition based on performance, is really the 599, SLR, GT2, ZR1, etc., and i'll repost the chart that proves it.

Nope. You're just another person who bought into the 'Ring-means-everything.

The GT-R is not a 599, ZR1, LP640, or SLR competitor. It competes directly with the Turbo/GT3/R8/Z06/Gallardo. Look at other track times and you'll see exactly where the GT-R really sits.

Laguna Seca:
Porsche 997 GT3 - 1:39.517
Nissan GT-R - 1:39.620
Porsche 997 Turbo - 1:39.890
Chevrolet Z06 - 1:40.900

Willow Springs:
Dodge Viper ACR - 1:29.33
Nissan GT-R - 1:31.23
Gallardo LP560-4 - 1:31.32
Chevrolet Z06 - 1:32.06

Rockingham:
Nissan GT-R - 1:22.20
Porsche 997 Turbo - 1:23.20
Audi R8 - 1:23.83
BMW M3 - 1:25.58

Auto Club Speedway:
Porsche 997 GT2 - 50.94
Nissan GT-R - 51.85
Gallardo LP560-4 - 51.86

It's why I dislike the 'Ring these days. It's too easy to set a time that makes your car look like it can take opponents it really can't. And btw, just because the GT-R is faster than the last 3 cars on that chart does not make them its competitors. Those cars retail $300-$500,000 a piece. A person looking at any of those cars is not going to look at a $70,000 GT-R. The giant price gap itself, keeps the GT-R from competing with them.

 

[gator of kana]

Nope. You're just another person who bought into the 'Ring-means-everything.

The GT-R is not a 599, ZR1, LP640, or SLR competitor. It competes directly with the Turbo/GT3/R8/Z06/Gallardo. Look at other track times and you'll see exactly where the GT-R really sits.

Laguna Seca:
Porsche 997 GT3 - 1:39.517
Nissan GT-R - 1:39.620
Porsche 997 Turbo - 1:39.890
Chevrolet Z06 - 1:40.900

Willow Springs:
Dodge Viper ACR - 1:29.33
Nissan GT-R - 1:31.23
Gallardo LP560-4 - 1:31.32
Chevrolet Z06 - 1:32.06

Rockingham:
Nissan GT-R - 1:22.20
Porsche 997 Turbo - 1:23.20
Audi R8 - 1:23.83
BMW M3 - 1:25.58

Auto Club Speedway:
Porsche 997 GT2 - 50.94
Nissan GT-R - 51.85
Gallardo LP560-4 - 51.86

It's why I dislike the 'Ring these days. It's too easy to set a time that makes your car look like it can take opponents it really can't. And btw, just because the GT-R is faster than the last 3 cars on that chart does not make them its competitors. Those cars retail $300-$500,000 a piece. A person looking at any of those cars is not going to look at a $70,000 GT-R. The giant price gap itself, keeps the GT-R from competing with them.

well at least you can see the GT-R is pretty competitive

 

[Joey D]

well at least you can see the GT-R is pretty competitive

No one is saying it's isn't, you just need to class it correctly.

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

Nope. You're just another person who bought into the 'Ring-means-everything.

The GT-R is not a 599, ZR1, LP640, or SLR competitor. It competes directly with the Turbo/GT3/R8/Z06/Gallardo. Look at other track times and you'll see exactly where the GT-R really sits.

Laguna Seca:
Porsche 997 GT3 - 1:39.517
Nissan GT-R - 1:39.620
Porsche 997 Turbo - 1:39.890
Chevrolet Z06 - 1:40.900

Willow Springs:
Dodge Viper ACR - 1:29.33
Nissan GT-R - 1:31.23
Gallardo LP560-4 - 1:31.32
Chevrolet Z06 - 1:32.06

Rockingham:
Nissan GT-R - 1:22.20
Porsche 997 Turbo - 1:23.20
Audi R8 - 1:23.83
BMW M3 - 1:25.58

Auto Club Speedway:
Porsche 997 GT2 - 50.94
Nissan GT-R - 51.85
Gallardo LP560-4 - 51.86

It's why I dislike the 'Ring these days. It's too easy to set a time that makes your car look like it can take opponents it really can't. And btw, just because the GT-R is faster than the last 3 cars on that chart does not make them its competitors. Those cars retail $300-$500,000 a piece. A person looking at any of those cars is not going to look at a $70,000 GT-R. The giant price gap itself, keeps the GT-R from competing with them.

Where's the data from? I didnt make the chart, so im not only about the Nur times, more important is the 0-60 and 1/4 mile which the GT-R is right with all those other cars. But im sure i can find tracks where the GT-R competes. Hell it's 9th fastest on top gear, and while driving conditions change, the driver doesnt so it seems more accurate than a Nur or any other track with variable drivers.

As for the price gap i agree with you, but the way i look at it, is the price gap keeps those cars from competing with GT-R. If im gonna spend 400k i want Carrera GT, but you don't get that at all with the SLR. And I don't want to judge a car on whether or not other people were buying it. If i had 500k to spend right now i would want the best car for the money. Ferrari is ferrari so they get a bonus so it'd either be the 599, 430scud, GT-R, or possibly ZR1 for me.

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

No one is saying it's isn't, you just need to class it correctly.

Well this gets back to that argument, what determines its classification? It seems we all have different stipulations. I wouldnt call the GT-R a supercar but i would say it competes with supercars.

 

[gator of kana]

No one is saying it's isn't, you just need to class it correctly.

I'm sticking with the GT-R being a supercar, I've never seen car classification turned out to be this twisty before, to me I feel it souldn't be classified below it's potential

 

[the Interceptor]

About the GT-R's 7:29 on the Ring: I just stumbled over an older article about this the other day, containg a few lines from the head of the Nissan crew that was there and did that time. The guy said that the 7:29 is to be understood as the quickest time the standard GT-R will ever lap the ring. He said the car was prepared perfectly (stock condition, but fresh rubber and everything in check), and that the conditions of the track were absolutely ideal. As the majority of cars doesn't meet such conditions on the ring, the 7:29 is to be seen relative to other Ring times.

 

[McLaren]

Where's the data from?

Laguna times are from Nissan, Motor Trend & Edmund's. Willow Springs times are all from Steve Millen except the Z06. Rockingham times are from Car Magazine. Auto Club are from R&T.

I didnt make the chart, so im not only about the Nur times, more important is the 0-60 and 1/4 mile which the GT-R is right with all those other cars.

Which are about as useful as car having 12 cup holders. The GT-R is not a 599, LP640, or SLR comp. just because it's faster.

But im sure i can find tracks where the GT-R competes. Hell it's 9th fastest on top gear, and while driving conditions change, the driver doesnt so it seems more accurate than a Nur or any other track with variable drivers.

So? At Willow Springs, Steve Millen drove 3 of the 4 cars I listed. And because the driver was Steve Millen, the GT-R already had a slight advantage considering Millen has been on the record of stating that other magazines aren't pushing the GT-R.

As for the price gap i agree with you, but the way i look at it, is the price gap keeps those cars from competing with GT-R. If im gonna spend 400k i want Carrera GT, but you don't get that at all with the SLR. And I don't want to judge a car on whether or not other people were buying it. If i had 500k to spend right now i would want the best car for the money. Ferrari is ferrari so they get a bonus so it'd either be the 599, 430scud, GT-R, or possibly ZR1 for me.

Then why try to state they are competitors? They're not. They're completely different vehicles marketed towards different consumers. Anyone in the market for a LP640, SLR, or 599 GTB is not going to be looking at GT-Rs because a GT-R is not the same kind of car as those. If the buyer wants a car with GT-R performance, then they'll look at a GT-R, Turbo, or R8, not any of the 3 supercars.

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

Then why try to state they are competitors? They're not. They're completely different vehicles marketed towards different consumers. Anyone in the market for a LP640, SLR, or 599 GTB is not going to be looking at GT-Rs because a GT-R is not the same kind of car as those. If the buyer wants a car with GT-R performance, then they'll look at a GT-R, Turbo, or R8, not any of the 3 supercars.

But a Turbo and R8 can't perform with any of the cars on the chart, the GT-R can.

I basically agree that most people buying lambos/ferraris would not look at the GT-R, all im saying is I would.

 

[homeforsummer]

I basically agree that most people buying lambos/ferraris would not look at the GT-R, all im saying is I would.

That's beside the point though, because you're not in the position to be able to choose. It's much easier to say what you'd want and not want from down here on planet Earth, but I wouldn't doubt that if you had millions burning a hole in your pocket you'd wonder what you ever saw in the GT-R in the first place, and then go and buy a garage full of Ferraris, Rolls Royce and Lamborghinis.

And for the people that can afford genuine supercars, then the GT-R is no longer a rival. If you can afford an Enzo for example, a GT-R is just pocket change and certainly isn't a rival. It'd be your town runabout.