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

[Leonidae]

then why exclude GT-R either?

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

I find it really hard to not classify the F430 as a supercar if you think the Ford GT is a supercar.

The GT, like the new Charger, has no legacy. It hasnt done much in racing, and while is fast, is not really groundbreaking.

At least the F430 has been pretty damn good in racing, and with the Scud you get a car that can match supercar performance.

I like the halo car idea, but i don't know how well that works, cuz i would consider the Audi R8 fast, beautiful, and the Audi halo car, but its far from a supercar.

 

[the Interceptor]

It didn't live up to all of the hype at all. Nissan hyped the hell out of the GT-R when it ran the 'Ring, purposely trying to point out that the GT-R could run with the best supercars, without actually saying that. But once the GT-R was on other tracks, the hype was nothing but hot air, showing that a GT-R isn't a competitor amongst Zonda Fs or Carrera GTs.

As far as I know, Nissan was out to beat the Porsche Turbo. They did that obviously. The rest of the hype was generated by the media, which is purely made of hypes and scandals.

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

I think the fact that there has been this much debate about the GT-R being a supercar and being close to the F430, GT2, SLR, etc. speaks to how good of a value the car is, and probably helps its case as the best car for the money.

Though i still think the EVO X can give the GT-R a race, value wise.

 

[niky]

It didn't live up to all of the hype at all. Nissan hyped the hell out of the GT-R when it ran the 'Ring, purposely trying to point out that the GT-R could run with the best supercars, without actually saying that. But once the GT-R was on other tracks, the hype was nothing but hot air, showing that a GT-R isn't a competitor amongst Zonda Fs or Carrera GTs.

Oh... let's see... there's the 1,000,000 magazine articles where the GT-R came out on top in on-track comparos... The GT3 lagged in many, but still beat the GT-R in a few... but it was starting to show its weaknesses against the GT-R... similar ultra-sticky tires which were no good in cold conditions... the tendency to push out into understeer more... etcetera... I still respect the GT3... and in fact, I think the GT3 is the only Porsche variant worth having... but the GT-R has it outclassed in terms of sheer pace.

It took the Porsche GT2 to finally put the GT-R back in its place... of course, it has more turbocharged power and less weight... considering it makes more power than the 911 Turbo, which dyno'd at around the same power as a GT-R and loses the Turbo's AWD weight... then it was the Gallardo Superleggera (ultra-lightweight Gallardo with more power) and the Dodge Viper ACR... (a track ready Viper)

But for the first year of testing... nothing in the price class or the price class above it beat the GT-R... and even now, it's the "hardcore" versions of its competitors that are beating the "standard" GT-R... which will soon be superseded by a V-Spec version.

Nissan never claimed the GT-R was in a class with the McLarens or Zondas of the world... yet it laps the Nurburgring faster than many supercars due to its amazing traction, grip and stability.

It's this one feat that has brought it the most controversy... and which has spawned the most ridiculous raft of conspiracy theories I have ever seen about any performance car.

Face it... Porsche's GT2 time? No one contests it... the Zonda? Yeah... we believe you... The C6 ZR1? No problem... Corvettes do LeMans, so its possible... Nissan? No freaking way! They must be lying! (And I note that someone has edited the Wiki page on the Nissan lap-time... adding stuff without citation... just to further rumors of the car not being "stock"... note that the time was on a revised suspension tuning that was introduced for the second batch of GT-Rs... so revised or not... it was still "stock"...)

People just don't get it. Nissan has a racing history. They've dominated the JGTC so badly that they carry more handicaps than anyone else... they've been banned from Australian Supercars, and they've competed in prototype racing with the R390 and its like.

So what if the GT-R is fast? It should be! Nissan tested the car on the ring and it drove like a brick. Terrible. That forced them to go back to the drawing board and rebuild the suspension and electronic control systems from the ground up. You can tell the car was tuned for lap times... road tests report it as uncommonly stiff... it has sticky tires... it has an extremely wide torque band, as it hits maximum boost at just 2500 rpm. It has a great AWD and stability control system.

It's an overweight pig, yeah. And just as VW did with the Bugatti... Nissan made the porker fly. Whether you accept it as a "desirable" car or not is your call... but to deny its capabilities out of hand is nothing more than being an Anti-GT-R fanatic.

C'mon... I still don't like the Veyron, but I'm not going to go out there proclaiming that "VW is full of bull... the Veyron isn't really that fast!"

I think most automotive enthusiast like the GT-R. I just think the problem lies with the uber anti-fanboys that think the car in the next worst thing to the Prius. This irritates some people who think the car is alright and as they go back and forth their opinions become more and more distant from one another.

fixed. So far as I can see... the GT-R actually has more anti-fanboyism on this board than fanboyism. Nobody's claiming it's the best thing since sliced bread, but every time someone says anything about it, people automatically shoot them down.

Maybe it's that everyone is basically telling the truth about it, whether they be saying that it's a giant-slayer or saying it's an ugly Datsun. People then pick and choose the truths they want and inevitably the two sides meet...

+1 👍 Although I see nothing wrong with being a Datsun. The 240Z was a Datsun, and I think that was a pretty swell car...

 

[gator of kana]

The only time I think when a car isn't a supercar is when it can't beat or is in direct competition with Japan's top sport cars in the past (Skyline, Impreza, Legacy, Lancer, NSX, RX-7, Fairlady Z33). Anything faster than these is a supercar in my book.

 

[homeforsummer]

The only time I think when a car isn't a supercar is when it can't beat or is in direct competition with Japan's top sport cars in the past (Skyline, Impreza, Legacy, Lancer, NSX, RX-7, Fairlady Z33). Anything faster than these is a supercar in my book.

I have an interesting article from the October 1997 issue of Top Gear Magazine. They took seven high performance cars to the 'Ring to figure their lap times. The actual laps were done by professional racing drivers - Dirk Schoysman, who won the 'Ring 24h race in 1991, came second in 92 and in 95 started 'Ring courses for the public, and Barrie "Whizzo" Williams, who at the time of writing had competed in over 700 races and 250 rallies and got a number of 'Ring "1st in class" prizes in the 24h race.

I'll furnish you all with the cars and their laptimes:

Ferrari 355 GTS: 8'31.42
Honda NSX 3.2: 8'33.80
BMW M3 Evolution coupe: 8'36.42
Nissan Skyline R33 GT-R: 8'37.10
Chevrolet Corvette: 8'44.83
Porsche 911 Carrera S: 8'46.27

Not to shabby really those lap times are they? I expect a handful of them are what you consider supercars?

They also included Schnitzer's CLS II, basically a track tuned M3, and it's laptime was done by Manfred Wollgarten, who had achieved 4 "1st in class" places at the time of writing. He took the CLS to an 8'17.37 - comprehensively thrashing all the standard cars. As you'd expect - it's basically a race car he drove.

Now comes the good bit:

The Renault Megane R26.R (sorry for the small pic):

This has recently gone around the Nürburgring in an 8'17. This I think makes a mockery of your definition because by that reckoning the Megane should be a supercar. It's comprehensively thrashed the NSX, the R33, a 911, a 355, and matched what was basically a racing car in the Schnitzer around one of the toughest tracks in the world, and a place that people bang on about again and again when claiming that the GT-R is as good as it is. It can't be simply put down to driving talent either because the drivers in the Top Gear article were all professionals with a lot of 'Ring experience.

And yet, emphatically, the Megane is not a supercar. Speed, and certainly a Nürburgring lap time, are not the only definitions we can use to say what a supercar is and what it isn't. That's why emotion, exclusivity and anything else a number of people have mentioned in this thread need to be considered too, and even why next to things like the Enzo and the Zonda, impressive performance cars like the F430 struggle to match my personal definition of supercars.

Incidentally, if anyone would like a photocopy of the whole Top Gear article, go ahead and PM me 👍

 

[Joey D]

fixed. So far as I can see... the GT-R actually has more anti-fanboyism on this board than fanboyism. Nobody's claiming it's the best thing since sliced bread, but every time someone says anything about it, people automatically shoot them down.

No, not fixed, I don't really like it when people do that during a serious discussion.

I've seen many people on these boards (obviously not naming names), other boards, blogs, and some magazines that think it is the best thing ever and when you make a comment against the car they think you are hating on it for no reason. As I've said, I like the GT-R as a performance vehicle (it's pointless as a normal car, but most sports cars are). Granted I think it's ugly as sin, overpriced (with the mark-ups mind you), and has the wrong badge (sorry Nissan and performance don't go together for me), but I still think as a sports car it's awesome.

I more dislike the people who are fans or the car, thus ruining the car for me. It's one of the reasons I hated the PS3 for so long (when in reality I love it).

 

[Jay]

I usually keep out of the GTR discussions (cause they are all the same and never end, much like the good 'ol Veyron discussions) but..

I more dislike the people who are fans or the car, thus ruining the car for me.

I am a fan of the car, I am sorry you dislike me because of it. I have to agree with Niky on this one.

 

[Joey D]

Guess I should have worded it better, I don't dislike all fans of the car (same goes with any product with an uber fan base). I've never seen you post an absurd comment about the car or defend it tooth and nail so to me you aren't an uber fan of it. I don't know at what level you like the car however.

 

[McLaren]

The only time I think when a car isn't a supercar is when it can't beat or is in direct competition with Japan's top sport cars in the past (Skyline, Impreza, Legacy, Lancer, NSX, RX-7, Fairlady Z33). Anything faster than these is a supercar in my book.

then why exclude GT-R either?

I find it really hard to not classify the F430 as a supercar if you think the Ford GT is a supercar.

Because you all base the definition of a supercar on performance alone. If that was how supercars were defined, the Veyron, SLR, & LP640 would not become supercars since their weight plays a major factor in their performance.

You claim, Blacked, that the R8 isn't a supercar. I'm agreeing with you, it isn't, but why isn't it a supercar to you?

 

[TheCracker]

It's incredibly difficult to define what a 'supercar' is exactly these days. I would say as a rule of thumb - if a car is practical in any shape or form, then it can't really be a supercar. For me, a supercar has to be uncompromising.

 

[McLaren]

It's incredibly difficult to define what a 'supercar' is exactly these days. I would say as a rule of thumb - if a car is practical in any shape or form, then it can't really be a supercar. For me, a supercar has to be uncompromising.

In other words, excessive, over the top, useless (all of these meant in good terms) for anything but going fast?

 

[TheCracker]

In other words, excessive, over the top, useless (all of these meant in good terms) for anything but going fast?

Pretty much so. I'd also throw 'exotic' into the mix too.

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

Because you all base the definition of a supercar on performance alone. If that was how supercars were defined, the Veyron, SLR, & LP640 would not become supercars since their weight plays a major factor in their performance.

You claim, Blacked, that the R8 isn't a supercar. I'm agreeing with you, it isn't, but why isn't it a supercar to you?

Going back to the F430scud, i think it has the performance, elegance, price, etc. of a supercar as much as a Ford GT does. I think 10 years ago each would be hands down supercars, but relative to todays cars they fall just short.

The R8 has a unique look that imo is stunning, it looks like a supercar but falls short in performance with a 0-60 over 4 seconds and top speed under 190. Maybe that will change with the V10 and hopefully a V12 variant

Regardless this argument is so subjective because we still don't have any kind of set of definitions to determine what a supercar is. So i dont think someone is wrong to call a GT-R a supercar because its more opinion than anything, as long as we are talking about a car as well engineered and fast as that.

 

[Tornado]

fixed. So far as I can see... the GT-R actually has more anti-fanboyism on this board than fanboyism. Nobody's claiming it's the best thing since sliced bread, but every time someone says anything about it, people automatically shoot them down.

I would agree with that. The way I see it, barring the one purely pro-Nissan fanboy I can think of, the main problem with the pro-GTR group is the way they conduct some of their arguments rather than their attitude towards the GT-R. There are far more people who trash it at every opportunity than their are who view it as the car Jesus created.



On the F430 issue: I would consider that to be a supercar, personally speaking. It exhibits all of the supercar qualities, with the fact that it is somewhat liveable (compared to the Ford GT and Lamborghini Gallardo) being seemingly accidental.

 

[///M-Spec]

I would agree with that. The way I see it, barring the one purely pro-Nissan fanboy I can think of, the main problem with the pro-GTR group is the way they conduct some of their arguments rather than their attitude towards the GT-R. There are far more people who trash it at every opportunity than their are who view it as the car Jesus created.

Both groups are equally irritating. The real problem is the way they enable each others' behavior.


M

 

[YSSMAN]

Now comes the good bit:

The Renault Megane R26.R (sorry for the small pic):

This has recently gone around the Nürburgring in an 8'17. This I think makes a mockery of your definition because by that reckoning the Megane should be a supercar.

Then we'd have to include the Chevrolet Cobalt SS (the previous compact record holder at 8:22 and the Chevrolet Camaro SS (which is reported to do it in 8:20). If anything, Nurburgring times just complicate the definition further.

====

RE: Fanboys & teh GT-RZ

Enabling is a big part of it, most certainly. I think what it comes down to is that neither side is really all that willing to find any sort of middle-ground on the issue. While I may not like the GT-R per-se, I at the very least respect it, and that's that. Its not my style, and I see no reason to fight much about it these days. Its a fast car, so what? Its still out of the reach of most of us here, many of us will likely never see one out on the streets, much less even drive one.

As much of a die-hard Corvette guy I am, I know, understand and accept the problems of the car. At the very least, I'd hope that eventually some of the GT-R fans could do the same.

 

[BlackedoutRX7LM]

Then we'd have to include the Chevrolet Cobalt SS (the previous compact record holder at 8:22 and the Chevrolet Camaro SS (which is reported to do it in 8:20). If anything, Nurburgring times just complicate the definition further.

====

RE: Fanboys & teh GT-RZ

Enabling is a big part of it, most certainly. I think what it comes down to is that neither side is really all that willing to find any sort of middle-ground on the issue. While I may not like the GT-R per-se, I at the very least respect it, and that's that. Its not my style, and I see no reason to fight much about it these days. Its a fast car, so what? Its still out of the reach of most of us here, many of us will likely never see one out on the streets, much less even drive one.

As much of a die-hard Corvette guy I am, I know, understand and accept the problems of the car. At the very least, I'd hope that eventually some of the GT-R fans could do the same.

What are the non-subjective problems with the GT-R? I've heard stiff ride and such, but its kinda supposed to be like that...

 

[Jim Prower]

I've quite fearing the GT-R head-to-heads. It's not so much You (YSS) and Joey who are haters...there's people who are ignoring the fanboy debate who are much more vocal.

I know the car's limitations, or think I do, and I don't really consider it on the same level as some other cars. It's up there, and you could spend a lot of money for a car that's just as fast, but the primary alternatives speed/price-wise are a couple American sports cars, one much cruder than the other. Oh, and a little cyclecar from Britain with a honda engine. You can get many much more practical cars for the same price that'll still shuffle along at impressive speeds, too. Also, (hopefully for me,) the car probably wont' hold it's value like a Porsche or Ferrari, or even a Corvette. I UNDERSTAND this.

What I don't understand is why a handful of people INSIST upon niggling over the tiniest things. Like whether it's a Supercar or not...which correctly answering is nigh impossible, since everybody's definition is different. There Is Not One Correct Answer.

I personally am a terrible debater. I'm shy, often drop my point in favor of the opposition, no backbone, get drawn into subjects that I dont' know much about...or get fooled into believing wrong information, etc.

 

[homeforsummer]

What I don't understand is why a handful of people INSIST upon niggling over the tiniest things. Like whether it's a Supercar or not...which correctly answering is nigh impossible, since everybody's definition is different. There Is Not One Correct Answer.

Guilty as charged However, I quite enjoy provoking debate. Let me say for the record that I don't enjoy "argueing". To me, debate is generally more intelligent than argueing and the only thing that really annoys me is when someone comes out with unjustified comments, claims something without backing it up or comes out with a load of tosh with no grounding in reality whatsoever...

This forum would be pretty dull if people agreed on everything. And lets face it, this thread would have been dead by page three without the supercar debate.

Incidentally, if you aren't much of a debater then you wouldn't understand why people niggle over what you may consider tiny things. A molehill to one person could be a mountain to another.

 

[Greycap]

As much of a die-hard Corvette guy I am, I know, understand and accept the problems of the car. At the very least, I'd hope that eventually some of the GT-R fans could do the same.

If you accept my entry at the Best Car of Japan thread about the GT-R being too heavy (and I hope you do) I think we're about even. There's people on "your side" who will never say the GT-R is good and similarly there's people on "my side" who will never say the GT-R has flaws in it. I doubt it can be changed.

The one thing I'd like to see would be allowing the GT-R crowd to defend the car without immediately being called fanboys, the discussion might even get a lot more sensible when both sides would be treated similarly. In the current form the "other side" says something negative about the car, the GT-R side answers, the other side fires a broadside on them for being fanboys and that's it, the GT-R crowd was once more shouted silent. In the name of fairness it can't work like that.

 

[McLaren]

The one thing I'd like to see would be allowing the GT-R crowd to defend the car without immediately being called fanboys, the discussion might even get a lot more sensible when both sides would be treated similarly. In the current form the "other side" says something negative about the car, the GT-R side answers, the other side fires a broadside on them for being fanboys and that's it, the GT-R crowd was once more shouted silent. In the name of fairness it can't work like that.

That's fine that you want to put down the idiot remarks made by the haters (I've done it enough on FChat & 6Speed & I have been called a GT-R fanboy for it, so I do understand the GT-R fans' side), or show the true facts of a debate.

But the remark you made towards YSSMAN's comments (in the Vote Japan thread) just because he was pointing out the fact the GT-R was dominating the poll and that there could be some blind, biased GT-R fans as part of the voters, seemed to be the exact opposite of anything but a GT-R fanboy jumping on the defense too early.

 

[Greycap]

But the remark you made towards YSSMAN's comments (in the Vote Japan thread) just because he was pointing out the fact the GT-R was dominating the poll and that there could be some blind, biased GT-R fans as part of the voters, seemed to be the exact opposite of anything but a GT-R fanboy jumping on the defense too early.

Well, it did seem a bit odd that the first conclusion of the huge lead was that the fanboys had been voting instead that the car is good. This is just what I'd like to get out of the discussions, the fanboyism is brought up far too easily while the other side has basically an unchallenged freedom of speech.

 

[///M-Spec]

Well, it did seem a bit odd that the first conclusion of the huge lead was that the fanboys had been voting instead that the car is good. This is just what I'd like to get out of the discussions, the fanboyism is brought up far too easily while the other side has basically an unchallenged freedom of speech.

Oh, gimme a break Quit playing the victim already. There has been PLENTY of name calling on both sides of the fence. I had to remove three posters, two temporarily and one permanently from the original thread because of this problem. So don't act as if the anti-GT-R camp has been given carte blanche to do whatever they want around here.

Your charge is an overstatement and exaggeration of the situation and frankly it's quickly become tiresome to me and many others. If you feel you can not have a "fair" conversation about the GT-R here, then by all means, feel free to to discontinue your participation in the threads. I say this because you have now stepped past the boundary of contributing anything anyone wants to read and are now just complaining. Enough, I say.



Oh, and Reventón, quit jerking his chain. All you're doing is provoking him.


M

 

[Joey D]

So any ways, how about getting back on topic?

What would be the best car in the world for the money? I think we need to look at all things, and stating which vehicle we think is the best all arounder. I highly doubt many sports car meets that category but I can think of a few performance orientated vehicles that might fit the bill.

 

[Greycap]

If you feel you can not have a "fair" conversation about the GT-R here, then by all means, feel free to to discontinue your participation in the threads.

Very much my pleasure. I really should have believed it earlier that this fight is destined to be impossible to win seeing the odds.

 

[///M-Spec]

Very much my pleasure.

I assure you, the pleasure will be all mine.

I really should have believed it earlier that this fight is destined to be impossible to win seeing the odds.

And therein lies your problem. There is no winning or losing. It's not supposed to be a battle. It's supposed to a discussion. By continuing to view it as a confrontation, you will get nothing but what you ask for.

Your insinuation here is laughable, btw. Just because I'm tired of your complaining, you're going to assume I'm suddenly in the anti-GT-R camp, right? Go check the Best Car Japan poll. I was one of the first people to cast my vote for the GT-R. So when even someone who likes and appreciates the GT-R gets tired of your dog and pony show, what does that tell you?


M

 

[homeforsummer]

So any ways, how about getting back on topic?

What would be the best car in the world for the money? I think we need to look at all things, and stating which vehicle we think is the best all arounder. I highly doubt many sports car meets that category but I can think of a few performance orientated vehicles that might fit the bill.

Well I still think, personally anyway, that something like the Alpina BMW I mentioned on the first page of this discussion is pretty damn good for the money. £25k in the UK, around 200bhp, 45+ mpg combined (UK gallons), 5 seats, good luggage space, subtle but still good looking (in my opinion), and comfortable.

Unless I was genuinely after out-and-out performance I can't see needing any more from a car really. Certainly not as affordable (I mean, a C63 AMG would be nice but it'd do less than half the MPG and cost over twice as much to begin with).

 

[Tornado]

I wish Dodge still sold the SRT-4. That was good performance/money. Not that that technically answers the thread question, but whatever.

Screw it:

LOOPHOLE!