GTR owners?

[scheherazade]

Originally Posted by crackberry

i cant believe this car beats almost every p car and f car out there. what a bang for the buck.

For a stock car, the GTR is pretty sweet.

Amusing twist is that you can grab a used evo, throw 10k at it in upgrades, and you'll spank a stock GTR - and way cheaper too.
(I mean : bang for the buck engine build + suspension + tires)

Stock performance is expensive.
Modified performance is cheap.

But modified no longer lets you compare manufacturers, since the performance is up to the owner, and not the brand.

-scheherazade

[Cdnrockies]

Originally Posted by BBCar

so are the e92 M3's up north, especially if you consider the currency exchange rate

You are correct about the pricing but are you aware our dollar is now worth a couple cents more than yours?

[Jon@Bimmersport Automotive]

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies

You are correct about the pricing but are you aware our dollar is now worth a couple cents more than yours?

[achenator]

Originally Posted by Nine

GTR lacks the 'appeal' of a 911, R8, Maserati, etc...I think if you are going to pay for a supercar, you might as well get the full package. GTR has great stats, it's got numbers, numbers and more numbers, but I promise you it will never give you the smile you get when firing up a GT2 for example.

The GT-R mops the floor with the new Porsche that you're gonna get for the same price.

[Drew1204]

Originally Posted by Nine

Why not change your little avatar/icon picture to a GT-R?

I bet money was a factor when deciding to get the GT-R, actually I'd love to hear what you would get if you had 25-30% more budget to procure a vehicle, I bet it would not be a GT-R.

[/[/COLOR]

Definitely douche comments right there...

[Shuttlegoose]

Originally Posted by scheherazade

For a stock car, the GTR is pretty sweet.

Amusing twist is that you can grab a used evo, throw 10k at it in upgrades, and you'll spank a stock GTR - and way cheaper too.
(I mean : bang for the buck engine build + suspension + tires)

Stock performance is expensive.
Modified performance is cheap.

But modified no longer lets you compare manufacturers, since the performance is up to the owner, and not the brand.

-scheherazade

great post. If your going for an extremely fast stock/ yet semi luxurious, the gtr is full of win. If you want raw speed, power, handling, and noisy for a lot less, an evo is a great car.

[snowmants]

One thing I am surprised has not been touched on is the general stigma attached to the GTR. I was looking at the GTR but need something more professional looking to drive to the office. The M3 seems to check that box for me.
I also already have a caged Nissan track car albeit a bit older.... So I really wanted something more comfy and easier to live with as a daily driver than the GTR since my daily would never see the track.

If money was no object I would get both the m3 and the GTR and just drive the GTR on weekends and at the track!

[scheherazade]

Originally Posted by snowmants

One thing I am surprised has not been touched on is the general stigma attached to the GTR. I was looking at the GTR but need something more professional looking to drive to the office. The M3 seems to check that box for me.
I also already have a caged Nissan track car albeit a bit older.... So I really wanted something more comfy and easier to live with as a daily driver than the GTR since my daily would never see the track.

If money was no object I would get both the m3 and the GTR and just drive the GTR on weekends and at the track!

It's too expensive and too fast to carry 'inadequacy stigma', even if it is 'not german'.

As far as the 'I'm driving a kids (sports/gt) car' stigma, I found that to be a personal problem.
I thought the 3 series would be more 'professional' than my evo... turns out no one could give a rats ass what I drive - so that thought went out the door. I went back to driving what I like driving (fun stuff).

-scheherazade

[Cabinetman]

Originally Posted by scheherazade

It's too expensive and too fast to carry 'inadequacy stigma', even if it is 'not german'.

As far as the 'I'm driving a kids (sports/gt) car' stigma, I found that to be a personal problem.
I thought the 3 series would be more 'professional' than my evo... turns out no one could give a rats ass what I drive - so that thought went out the door. I went back to driving what I like driving (fun stuff).

-scheherazade

I completely agree. I have found that even guys in my demo (35-45) like and respect the GT-R. As an example, today I drove by a buddies house and he was out in the lawn talking to his neighbor. I didn't stop at this time as I was in a hurry to get to the bank before it closed. When I came back by I stopped to talk to my friend and he told me that his neighbor went nuts because a GT-R had just driven past his house. He was telling my buddy how awesome the car is and couldn't believe that he had a friend with a GT-R. This guy is just your average generic early 40s white dude.

Regardless of what your peers think when it comes to spending this kind of money you should get what you want. I've had Porsches, BMWs, Lexus, etc... and never really found that I was impressing people that really matter with what I was driving.

[rai]

I just read an interesting evaluation in this latest issue of CAR magazine about the M3 v GTR v Cayman R and the Lotus Evora

so they say the Porsche and Lotus were the sportier cars but not long on room comfort etc..

But what I was interested in was that they picked the M3 above the GTR. I don't mean the GTR was bad, but more or less the GTR is a car that is great for going fast, real fast. They say it could do 200 mph, but the problem is in the real world we can't drive that fast. The M3 will get you where you are going as fast as you need to go. What I take that to mean is in the real world and on real roads without racing (which I never do) the M3 is fast enough.

Then the M3 has the more alive (or more interesting) engine, the M3 has more useable rear seats (and trunk) and is ~$20K cheaper.

Again, I don't think the GTR is anything short of amazing, but without getting into absolute contests of speed, in the real world, it sounds like the M3 is probably the nicer car. Plus not to mention the GTR has the Nissan experence and the higher cost.

One thing really going for the GTR is they don't seem to sell many, this to me is good since you can go a lifetime without seeing yourself, one day I was parked at a McD and another M3 pulled up next to me. In my whole life I have only seen one GTR.

Also, the GTR is a rocket. CAR magazine says in a drag race or roll-on race between the GTR and M3 is looks like two guys skydiving and one guy pulls the cord for the parachute (the M3) and the other guy takes off (the GTR) leaving the M3 for dead.

I have not seen an on-line copy of the CAR magazine article but it's worth a read.

[Cabinetman]

Originally Posted by rai

I just read an interesting evaluation in this latest issue of CAR magazine about the M3 v GTR v Cayman R and the Lotus Evora

so they say the Porsche and Lotus were the sportier cars but not long on room comfort etc..

But what I was interested in was that they picked the M3 above the GTR. I don't mean the GTR was bad, but more or less the GTR is a car that is great for going fast, real fast. They say it could do 200 mph, but the problem is in the real world we can't drive that fast. The M3 will get you where you are going as fast as you need to go. What I take that to mean is in the real world and on real roads without racing (which I never do) the M3 is fast enough.

Then the M3 has the more alive (or more interesting) engine, the M3 has more useable rear seats (and trunk) and is ~$20K cheaper.

Again, I don't think the GTR is anything short of amazing, but without getting into absolute contests of speed, in the real world, it sounds like the M3 is probably the nicer car. Plus not to mention the GTR has the Nissan experence and the higher cost.

One thing really going for the GTR is they don't seem to sell many, this to me is good since you can go a lifetime without seeing yourself, one day I was parked at a McD and another M3 pulled up next to me. In my whole life I have only seen one GTR.

Also, the GTR is a rocket. CAR magazine says in a drag race or roll-on race between the GTR and M3 is looks like two guys skydiving and one guy pulls the cord for the parachute (the M3) and the other guy takes off (the GTR) leaving the M3 for dead.

I have not seen an on-line copy of the CAR magazine article but it's worth a read.

I really enjoy most of the British auto rags and even subscribe to Top Gear and Evo. One thing that seems common amongst most of the reviewers is that they take the approach of whatever car they are driving will be used for day to day transportation. If you compare the M3 and GT-R from that perspective then I can completely understand how one would chose the M3 over the Nissan. However, when you start comparing which car is the better weekend warrior then things might change depending on your point of view. I agree that the GT-R can't be used to its full potential on the road, but you can still have a blast with the car even below 100 mph.

[rai]

I agree, the view I am looking for is what CAR is talking about: 'road use and daily driving'.

I could not use a Bugatti or 911 TT or GTR anywhere near their limits. I drove a 911 TT for an hour and it was very quick but also was hard to get near the limits almost seemed a little too tame at 8/10ths which was all road use allows.

At least where I live and the way I drive with all the law enforcement, I never go above 100 mph, so in some regards even the M3 is overkill.

I never go the track and while I agree it's interesting to compare cars based on lap times and such, that is less important to me than real world fun-to-drive or easy-to-live-with metric.


CAR said if you had room for only ONE performance car in you life (for all around use) the M3 was the clear winner. Presumably this means from time to time on occasion you may need to transport someone in the rear seats and they pointed out the GTR for being such a LARGE car is very short on rear seat room.

[snowmants]

Originally Posted by scheherazade

It's too expensive and too fast to carry 'inadequacy stigma', even if it is 'not german'.

As far as the 'I'm driving a kids (sports/gt) car' stigma, I found that to be a personal problem.
I thought the 3 series would be more 'professional' than my evo... turns out no one could give a rats ass what I drive - so that thought went out the door. I went back to driving what I like driving (fun stuff).

-scheherazade

That is an excellent point, and a funny one, as it hits somewhat close to home. I have had 2 evos and in fact just sold my last one in preparation for an m3. I would get "rice rocket" comments all the time despite my attempts to argue the cars merits/ downplay it as just a very fast, fun cheap, four door... My company is a smaller one and I always felt that the other guys thought I was somewhat immature for driving an evo. I am 27, soon to be 28 which doesnt help either. I really have no idea how the average person precieves a nissan GTR. I think that as a car guy I am way too close to the car to have any idea what the normal everyday person thinks when they see it... The m3 though (esp the 4 door e90) is a much more professional, mature looking car.

[persian54]

Originally Posted by snowmants

If money was no object I would get both the m3 and the GTR and just drive the GTR on weekends and at the track!

that's my goal

[Prophizee]

Thought I would throw my 2 cents on the gtr debate. 6 months ago I was actually on the verge of buying a GTR red one premium edition 2010. It had 600 miles on it ( manager drove for a month). It was going for 60k, drove it loved it wanted it mind you I have a BMW z8 and a 360. My brother asked me to test drive the m3 for laughs. Well In 2 days my m3 will arrive. The reasson for this decision, pure and simple nothing is more appeling to a driver then a rear wheel v8 engine. I love the GTR but I don't want a car that drives me I want a car that I drive. The GTR felt to me like an extremely sexy women. It tells you what to do it has a great ride and looks great but it doesn't have that lasting appeal that girl you actually love. Gents M3 for the pure driver and the GTR for drivers who just want attention and be able to look like they know how to drive.

(I'm going to get destroyed by someone on this forum for what I said aren't I lol)

[ScotyH]

Originally Posted by Prophizee

Thought I would throw my 2 cents on the gtr debate. 6 months ago I was actually on the verge of buying a GTR red one premium edition 2010. It had 600 miles on it ( manager drove for a month). It was going for 60k, drove it loved it wanted it mind you I have a BMW z8 and a 360. My brother asked me to test drive the m3 for laughs. Well In 2 days my m3 will arrive. The reasson for this decision, pure and simple nothing is more appeling to a driver then a rear wheel v8 engine. I love the GTR but I don't want a car that drives me I want a car that I drive. The GTR felt to me like an extremely sexy women. It tells you what to do it has a great ride and looks great but it doesn't have that lasting appeal that girl you actually love. Gents M3 for the pure driver and the GTR for drivers who just want attention and be able to look like they know how to drive.

(I'm going to get destroyed by someone on this forum for what I said aren't I lol)

If you feel that the GTR drives you, you're not pushing it hard enough.

People tend to forget that it has limits, you need brass balls to get the GTR there though.

Curious to know what other "electronic nannies" the GTR has that other cars don't.

[991GT3]

^^^+1. People that say a GTR "drives itself" really haven't driven one.

[Polo08816]

Originally Posted by HREM3

I Love the 2012 GTR, but its worth is questionable at 90 Thousand Dollars.

Well, it's also questionable whether the E90/92 M3 is $25,000-30,000 more than the 2012 Mustang GT Premium (Brembo, HID, 3.73) when they are just about as fast as each other...

[991GT3]

Originally Posted by shift@red

It doesnt drive itself, but it does manage and mask bad driving. Thats why its so easy to drive fast; everything you would normally need to think about in mostly any other car is done for you in the GTR.

The GTR is probably more stable than most but thats a good thing.
Its always baffled me as to why something (ie better stability) that all car manufacturers strive for is suddenly turned into a negative in the GTR.
The way some people argue you'd swear M3s and 911s have no computers controlling traction, suspension, or shifting(in the respective dual clutch versions).

BTW, you can't mask bad driving.

[Prophizee]

Originally Posted by ScotyH

If you feel that the GTR drives you, you're not pushing it hard enough.

People tend to forget that it has limits, you need brass balls to get the GTR there though.

Curious to know what other "electronic nannies" the GTR has that other cars don't.

It's not that the electronics differ from any modern sports car it's the feeling of the road you and car. When I drove the gtr I never had that feeling of the road car and me. Now I wanna make it clear the GTR is a gorges car and deserves praise for what it's done. But the gtr is a super car for dummies. The amount of forgiveness it has makes me feel it's a car for an 18 year old who doesn't know how to drive and can afford that kind of car via parents and that Is what the gtr is to me. I'm a track guy and not drag strips, the gtr from what I have seen make drivers who can't even shift properly look like michael schumacher and that my friends Is why I feel the gtr is not a drivers car but a car for... Let's not beat around the bush pissed off teenagers

[wwjd15]

Originally Posted by Prophizee

It's not that the electronics differ from any modern sports car it's the feeling of the road you and car. When I drove the gtr I never had that feeling of the road car and me. Now I wanna make it clear the GTR is a gorges car and deserves praise for what it's done. But the gtr is a super car for dummies. The amount of forgiveness it has makes me feel it's a car for an 18 year old who doesn't know how to drive and can afford that kind of car via parents and that Is what the gtr is to me. I'm a track guy and not drag strips, the gtr from what I have seen make drivers who can't even shift properly look like michael schumacher and that my friends Is why I feel the gtr is not a drivers car but a car for... Let's not beat around the bush pissed off teenagers

remember to give those dummies in GTR's point-by when you see them coming in your driver's car. J/K

GTR does make driver go fast because the confidence it gives, it's also more forgiving even when you miss the apex and the front tires just have too much grip to prevent you from spinning. But again, don't think that you can drive the GTR fast enough without some skill. For example, Just like comparing S2k to Miata, you can not say S2k is less driver's car because less skill driver in S2k can beat up driver in Miata.

[attila]

It is amazing that someone can say, based upon a testdrive, that certain car is not a drivers car, or how forgiving that car is. Maybe I am a bad driver but during a testdrive it is hard for me to establish any of these 'facts". I did testdrive the GT-R and liked it a lot. In fact I may get one after driving the new '12 model next week. (problem is I do not have the garage space right now and do not want to sell any of my toys)
As I remember the GT-R had a hard ride, steering was precise - and at that time it seemed to have more feedback than the M3, and it seemed very fast. But again I would not be sure about any of these findings based upon 15min drive.
Almost all GT-R owners seems to be happy with their car. Granted few people will list/say bad things about their car - I am one of them.