2012 Nissan GT-R officially goes 0-60 in 2.9 seconds

[ZilviaBot]

12-02-2010 12:01 PM

pFiled under: a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/coupes/" rel="tag"Coupe/a, a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/sports/" rel="tag"Performance/a, a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/nissan/" rel="tag"Nissan/a/pdiv style="text-align:center"img hspace="4" border="0" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/12/2012-gtr-accel.jpg"/divbrWhat's it take to accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in just under three seconds flat? According to a href="http://autoblog.com/make/nissan"Nissan/a, it takes exactly 530 horsepower and 448 pound-feet of torque, coupled to a sophisticated electronic all-wheel-drive system and a dual-clutch transmission.brbrPut more simply in actual dollars and cents, that will cost you $89,950. For those unaware, that's the sum Nissan is asking for its updated a href="http://www.autoblog.com/model/gtr"2012 GT-R/a, which recently a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/17/2012-nissan-gt-r-la-2010/"made its live American debut/a at the a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/la-auto-show/"2010 LA Auto Show/a. The Japanese automaker has kindly provided a digital readout from an electronic measurement device from Digitek to silence the doubters (above). As you can strikeclearly/strike squint and see, the GT-R hit 60 miles per hour in 2.9 seconds and 100 kilometers per hour (62 mph) in exactly three seconds.brbrYour move, a href="http://www.autoblog.com/model/zr1"Corvette ZR1/a.brbrbrdivpstrongGallery: a href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r"LA 2010: 2012 Nissan GT-R/a/strong/pa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/01-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/02-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/03-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/04-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/05-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/a/divbrdivpstrongGallery: a href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/"2012 Nissan GT-R/a/strong/pa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581684"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/03-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581698"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/16-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581695"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/13-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581696"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/14-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581697"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/15-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/a/divbr[Source: Nissan]pa href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/02/2012-nissan-gt-r-officially-goes-0-60-in-2-9-seconds/" rel="bookmark"Continue reading em2012 Nissan GT-R officially goes 0-60 in 2.9 seconds/em/a/pp style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both"a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/02/2012-nissan-gt-r-officially-goes-0-60-in-2-9-seconds/"2012 Nissan GT-R officially goes 0-60 in 2.9 seconds/a originally appeared on a href="http://www.autoblog.com"Autoblog/a on Thu, 02 Dec 2010 13:01:00 EST. Please see our a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/"terms for use of feeds/a./ph6 style="clear:both;padding:8px 0 0 0;height:2px;font-size:1px;border:0;margin:0;padding:0"/h6a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/02/2012-nissan-gt-r-officially-goes-0-60-in-2-9-seconds/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry"Permalink/a*|*a href="http://www.autoblog.com/forward/19741880/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email"Email this/a*|*a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/02/2012-nissan-gt-r-officially-goes-0-60-in-2-9-seconds/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry"Comments/apa href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/9ji3LY1eIG0aia8EAZYwPWmTmNs/0/da"img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/9ji3LY1eIG0aia8EAZYwPWmTmNs/0/di" border="0" ismap/abra href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/9ji3LY1eIG0aia8EAZYwPWmTmNs/1/da"img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/9ji3LY1eIG0aia8EAZYwPWmTmNs/1/di" border="0" ismap/a/pdiva href="http://feeds.autoblog.com/~ff/weblogsinc/autoblog?a=XltSYttXWcU:CiETaAbnmDA:wF9xT3WuBAs"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/weblogsinc/autoblog?i=XltSYttXWcU:CiETaAbnmDA:wF9xT3WuBAs" border="0"/a a href="http://feeds.autoblog.com/~ff/weblogsinc/autoblog?a=XltSYttXWcU:CiETaAbnmDA:V_sGLiPBpWU"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/weblogsinc/autoblog?i=XltSYttXWcU:CiETaAbnmDA:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"/a/divimg src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/weblogsinc/autoblog/~4/XltSYttXWcU" height="1" width="1"

More... (http://feeds.autoblog.com/~r/weblogsinc/autoblog/~3/XltSYttXWcU/)

[Silverstreek]

12-02-2010 12:01 PM

pFiled under: a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/coupes/" rel="tag"Coupe/a, a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/sports/" rel="tag"Performance/a, a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/nissan/" rel="tag"Nissan/a/pdiv style="text-align:center"img hspace="4" border="0" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/12/2012-gtr-accel.jpg"/divbrWhat's it take to accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in just under three seconds flat? According to a href="http://autoblog.com/make/nissan"Nissan/a, it takes exactly 530 horsepower and 448 pound-feet of torque, coupled to a sophisticated electronic all-wheel-drive system and a dual-clutch transmission.brbrPut more simply in actual dollars and cents, that will cost you $89,950. For those unaware, that's the sum Nissan is asking for its updated a href="http://www.autoblog.com/model/gtr"2012 GT-R/a, which recently a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/17/2012-nissan-gt-r-la-2010/"made its live American debut/a at the a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/la-auto-show/"2010 LA Auto Show/a. The Japanese automaker has kindly provided a digital readout from an electronic measurement device from Digitek to silence the doubters (above). As you can strikeclearly/strike squint and see, the GT-R hit 60 miles per hour in 2.9 seconds and 100 kilometers per hour (62 mph) in exactly three seconds.brbrYour move, a href="http://www.autoblog.com/model/zr1"Corvette ZR1/a.brbrbrdivpstrongGallery: a href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r"LA 2010: 2012 Nissan GT-R/a/strong/pa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/01-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/02-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/03-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/04-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/la-2010-2012-nissan-gt-r/"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/05-2012-nissan-gt-r-live_thumbnail.jpg" alt="2012 Nissan GT-R" title="2012 Nissan GT-R"/a/divbrdivpstrongGallery: a href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/"2012 Nissan GT-R/a/strong/pa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581684"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/03-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581698"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/16-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581695"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/13-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581696"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/14-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/aa href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-nissan-gt-r-4/#3581697"img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/15-2012-nissan-gt-r_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title=""/a/divbr[Source: Nissan]pa href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/02/2012-nissan-gt-r-officially-goes-0-60-in-2-9-seconds/" rel="bookmark"Continue reading em2012 Nissan GT-R officially goes 0-60 in 2.9 seconds/em/a/pp style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both"a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/02/2012-nissan-gt-r-officially-goes-0-60-in-2-9-seconds/"2012 Nissan GT-R officially goes 0-60 in 2.9 seconds/a originally appeared on a href="http://www.autoblog.com"Autoblog/a on Thu, 02 Dec 2010 13:01:00 EST. Please see our a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/"terms for use of feeds/a./ph6 style="clear:both;padding:8px 0 0 0;height:2px;font-size:1px;border:0;margin:0;padding:0"/h6a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/02/2012-nissan-gt-r-officially-goes-0-60-in-2-9-seconds/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry"Permalink/a*|*a href="http://www.autoblog.com/forward/19741880/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email"Email this/a*|*a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/02/2012-nissan-gt-r-officially-goes-0-60-in-2-9-seconds/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry"Comments/apa href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/9ji3LY1eIG0aia8EAZYwPWmTmNs/0/da"img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/9ji3LY1eIG0aia8EAZYwPWmTmNs/0/di" border="0" ismap/abra href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/9ji3LY1eIG0aia8EAZYwPWmTmNs/1/da"img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/9ji3LY1eIG0aia8EAZYwPWmTmNs/1/di" border="0" ismap/a/pdiva href="http://feeds.autoblog.com/~ff/weblogsinc/autoblog?a=XltSYttXWcU:CiETaAbnmDA:wF9xT3WuBAs"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/weblogsinc/autoblog?i=XltSYttXWcU:CiETaAbnmDA:wF9xT3WuBAs" border="0"/a a href="http://feeds.autoblog.com/~ff/weblogsinc/autoblog?a=XltSYttXWcU:CiETaAbnmDA:V_sGLiPBpWU"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/weblogsinc/autoblog?i=XltSYttXWcU:CiETaAbnmDA:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"/a/divimg src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/weblogsinc/autoblog/~4/XltSYttXWcU" height="1" width="1"

More... (http://feeds.autoblog.com/~r/weblogsinc/autoblog/~3/XltSYttXWcU/)


Cliff's notes?

[sloterg]

i think i'd have an easier time reading 0's and 1's

[ronmcdon]

just click on the link "More"

What's it take to accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in just under three seconds flat? According to Nissan, it takes exactly 530 horsepower and 448 pound-feet of torque, coupled to a sophisticated electronic all-wheel-drive system and a dual-clutch transmission.

Put more simply in actual dollars and cents, that will cost you $89,950. For those unaware, that's the sum Nissan is asking for its updated 2012 GT-R, which recently made its live American debut at the 2010 LA Auto Show. The Japanese automaker has kindly provided a digital readout from an electronic measurement device from Digitek to silence the doubters (above). As you can clearly squint and see, the GT-R hit 60 miles per hour in 2.9 seconds and 100 kilometers per hour (62 mph) in exactly three seconds.

Your move, Corvette ZR1.

It's a great car, I just wish the price hikes weren't so damn aggressive.
probably it's the shitty overpriced yen

[squeak]

sweet car, but i cant believe that for 90k you still get textured plastic rocker moldings

[swingsett]

^^^^^^ yes

the interior of this car is bullshit.

[Walperstyle]

sweet car, but i cant believe that for 90k you still get textured plastic rocker moldings


You've never driven one I'm guessing. It's not trying to be a custom suit for the Pope.

Most people that comment on the car, love or hate have never even been in one. Its a drivers car.

That said I agree that $90k could build about 5 insane s chassis cars. But if you are one of those business executives, the GTR should be more tempting then the other cars of the same price range.

[ronmcdon]

I can't see how anyone would buy a GTR for it's interior.
It can't possibly be worse than the C6 ZR-1 or the Viper.

Besides, if that's all you can fault it for, then it just goes to show there's not a whole lot to complain about.
Also, I don't see how that's relevant to this particular thread anyways.

[squeak]

You've never driven one I'm guessing. It's not trying to be a custom suit for the Pope.

Most people that comment on the car, love or hate have never even been in one. Its a drivers car.

That said I agree that $90k could build about 5 insane s chassis cars. But if you are one of those business executives, the GTR should be more tempting then the other cars of the same price range.

youre right, ive never driven one. i think the specs and everything ive read are awesome, and would love the chance to drive one. but sitting in front of a computer looking at pictures i can only comment on what i can see and read, and i can see that the black plastic rocker moldings just look cheap to me. makes me think of a work truck.

[VNG704]

youre right, ive never driven one. i think the specs and everything ive read are awesome, and would love the chance to drive one. but sitting in front of a computer looking at pictures i can only comment on what i can see and read, and i can see that the black plastic rocker moldings just look cheap to me. makes me think of a work truck.
have you seen a c6's interior?

[codyace]

have you seen a c6's interior?

I was just gonna say, anyone who dimissess the current Corvettes interior as no more than a Cavaliers either

A: Has never been near one
B: Certainly has never driven one
C: Spends to much time fapping to car rags who rate lesser cars better due to the 'fine alacentera cloth' not the performance.


A new C6 (zo6 and zr1 even moreso) has a badass interior...cockpit like for damn sure.

[codyace]

With that said I can't wait to see some '12 at the tracks this year....as I can say the previous GTR was a great run for the Z06's, both in section times/speeds and overall speeds and times.

[BOROSUN]

http://www.mitayani.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/2012NissanGT-R-interior-seater-625x416.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/32-2012-nissan-gt-r.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/24-2012-nissan-gt-r.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/11/29-2012-nissan-gt-r.jpg

vs

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/news/car/10q1/hennessey_venom_gt-official_photos_and_info/gallery/2010_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_interior_photo_22/3449538-1-eng-US/2010_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_18_2_cd_gallery.jpg

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/news/car/10q1/hennessey_venom_gt-official_photos_and_info/gallery/2010_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_ip_stack_photo_20/3449510-1-eng-US/2010_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_16_2_cd_gallery.jpg

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/news/car/10q1/hennessey_venom_gt-official_photos_and_info/gallery/2010_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_interior_photo_21/3449524-1-eng-US/2010_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_17_2_cd_gallery.jpg
boring & unaspiring
i like older vette interior better.

[Z33dori]

most cars today excluding exotics have pretty.... dull plastic interiors... what do you want heavy metal for your int?

[BOROSUN]

that be nice
http://image.motortrend.com/f/auto_shows/los_angeles/2009/2012_lexus_lfa/30931473+w750+st0/2012-lexus-LFA-interior-view.jpg

http://image.motortrend.com/f/auto_shows/los_angeles/2009/2012_lexus_lfa/27354679+w750+st0/2012-lexus-LFA-interior-view-3.jpg

[ronmcdon]

Ok, so I guess we're discussing interior design now.

I've actually been test driving some used C5 Z06's and C6 Z06's regular C6's throughout the recent years.
Honestly, the cars are wonderful overall, but the interiors are where they fall short.

I can live with a so-so interior, but the lack of lateral support on Vette seats (remind me of the lame Miata seats) is just difficult to ignore.
You can see in those seats that the side bolsters/cushioning/whatever is a bit wimpy.
It's not a deal killer, but you do have to factor in the cost & hassle of buying better seats.

The worst thing I can think of about the GTR interior is the Bose sound-system.
Oh and the fancy orange upholstery is pretty guady too.
Otherwise I admire the functional spartan approach.

[Limitless Ultd.]

Your move, Corvette ZR1.[/I]


Very nicely put. The Corvette has class, but as an avid Nissan fan, I'd vote GTR in heart beat.

[codyace]

Very nicely put. The Corvette has class, but as an avid Nissan fan, I'd vote GTR in heart beat.

I"m a fan of what goes fast. Zo6 does the job, ZR1 just makes GTR look silly.

[rb25_s13*CHUKI]

Zr1 Is a drivers car, Gtr Is a non drivers car. People drive Zr1, Computer drives Gtr

[ronmcdon]

Very nicely put. The Corvette has class, but as an avid Nissan fan, I'd vote GTR in heart beat.

Just to be clear, I quoted from said article.
I didn't say that.

I do agree with the article though and think it's very impressive that the '12 GTR is once again setting a higher bar.
I can't see the harm at all, if Nissan's provoking GM to do better.
It's undeniably great performance at a relative price steal.

Of course, C6 Z06's aren't bad either, if you buy some used examples @ $30k-ish.
Can't think of anything, new or used that will touch them performance-wise at that price-point.
Go find an R35 GTR w/ under 40k mi for $35k, probably not going to happen anytime soon.

[KOUKIboy]

[QUOTE=BOROSUN;3772014]http://www.mitayani.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/2012NissanGT-R-interior-seater-625x416.jpg

That interior is Boss!!! shit is nice, and thats fucken fast 0-60 in 2.9 seconds, I wish my car was fast like that LOL

[shadowhunter66]

Okay, lets look at some of the most talked about specs for both cars.
Price of the 2012 GTR: $89,950
Price of ZR1: $111,100
GTR Power: 530 HP/448 TQ
ZR1 Power: 638 HP/604 TQ
GTR lbs: roughly 3820
ZR1 lbs: 3352
GTR 0-60:2.9 Sec
ZR1 0-60:3.3 Sec
GTR 1/2 Mile: Unknown (2009 Model: 11.6)
ZR1 1/2 Mile: 11.2


Over all the GTR is more impressive seeing how they managed to pull the numbers and achievements they have through technological advances and research. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
The ZR1 is also damn impressive, but GM went with their usually formula of big power, balance, and grunt... for a lot more money though. <o:p></o:p>
I'm at work so I can't gather all my thoughts right now but I think thats the basics of what I was thinking. <o:p></o:p>

[fearlessKouki]

i actually like how the interiors in gtr looks...looks amazing to me!

[GenPac]

Okay, lets look at some of the most talked about specs for both cars.
Price of the 2012 GTR: $89,950
Price of ZR1: $111,100
GTR Power: 530 HP/448 TQ
ZR1 Power: 638 HP/604 TQ
GTR lbs: roughly 3820
ZR1 lbs: 3352
GTR 0-60:2.9 Sec
ZR1 0-60:3.3 Sec
GTR 1/2 Mile: Unknown (2009 Model: 11.6)
ZR1 1/2 Mile: 11.2


Over all the GTR is more impressive seeing how they managed to pull the numbers and achievements they have through technological advances and research. ffice:office" /><O:p></O:p>
The ZR1 is also damn impressive, but GM went with their usually formula of big power, balance, and grunt... for a lot more money though. <O:p></O:p>
I'm at work so I can't gather all my thoughts right now but I think thats the basics of what I was thinking. <O:p></O:p>

The 0-60 discrepancy is most likely due to the advantage in grip and the dual-clutch manumatic trans, though I would think the offset of weight (+472lbs) and Torque (-156ft.lbs.) would make it less. /shrug

[ronmcdon]

think that just goes to show what Nissan can accomplish,
given the substantial power/weight handicap & still coming out ahead.
ZR-1 will probably still come ahead in the 1/4 mi though.

[codyace]

think that just goes to show what Nissan can accomplish,
given the substantial power/weight handicap & still coming out ahead.
ZR-1 will probably still come ahead in the 1/4 mi though.

All of the HP and Torque disadvantge in the world is 'evened' by the amazing amount of traction and the substantial gearing advantage, especially below 80 mph that the GTR has. Look at the First gear...IIRC it's a 3.xx something! Nuts! That's how you get a 4000+ pig out of the hole.

Trap speed however does show the HP difference...Stock GTR are 118-120 car...all zr1 I've sen are 129/131 cars...HUGE


...lets not also forget that 'equalizing' the traction by putting crappy drag radials (wish they were slicks) on the ZR1 puts it into the mid 10.6/10.7 range at over 130 mph ;) I think there are guys with bolt ons in the upper 9's...how much money did AMS dump into that GTR to barley run 9's?

The better platform is the Vette, hands down. GTR is nice though. In the end they are totally different cars IMO.

[SuicidnS13]

All of the HP and Torque disadvantge in the world is 'evened' by the amazing amount of traction and the substantial gearing advantage, especially below 80 mph that the GTR has. Look at the First gear...IIRC it's a 3.xx something! Nuts! That's how you get a 4000+ pig out of the hole.

Trap speed however does show the HP difference...Stock GTR are 118-120 car...all zr1 I've sen are 129/131 cars...HUGE


...lets not also forget that 'equalizing' the traction by putting crappy drag radials (wish they were slicks) on the ZR1 puts it into the mid 10.6/10.7 range at over 130 mph ;) I think there are guys with bolt ons in the upper 9's...how much money did AMS dump into that GTR to barley run 9's?

The better platform is the Vette, hands down. GTR is nice though. In the end they are totally different cars IMO.


++++10000 for truth... I have to argue this to every nissan fanboy on every 240 board. Have you guys looked at the damn maintenance costs on the gtr. Its like you bought a ferrari with out the pussy magnet attached LOL... My buddy is on his third tranny, this time it was not warrantied ... 23k installed....lol wtf

[shadowhunter66]

++++10000 for truth... I have to argue this to every nissan fanboy on every 240 board. Have you guys looked at the damn maintenance costs on the gtr. Its like you bought a ferrari with out the pussy magnet attached LOL... My buddy is on his third tranny, this time it was not warrantied ... 23k installed....lol wtf
At the same time, any car with that type of performance will have high costs to keep it running. I don't know how the ZR1 is but I bet its also very expensive, maybe not as expensive as the GTR but you still need a lot of pocket change to afford either one.
As for your friend and his transmissions.. they've pretty much resolved most of people claims and transmission problems so if that's his third one then I'd be looking at the owner as opposed to the car hence why the last time wasn't covered under warranty. Yeah I am a nissan fan since my dad owned a Z, I've owned 2, and I just kinda grew up around em', but I'm not bagging on the ZR1, because it really does impress.

[rb25_s13*CHUKI]

Like I said computer drives gtr and human drives zr1

[superbike81]

We aren't all Michael Schumacher, and just from what I've seen on different magazine reviews and video reviews of the ZR1, you better be a DAMN good driver if you want to get anywhere close to the lap times they quote at any track.

With the GTR you can be just a slightly above average driver at the track and still go VERY fast.

I'll take the GTR for that very reason, I'm a decent performance driver at best, and I have no desire to spend the time or money to massively improve my skills. So for that one or two times a year I went to the track with my hypothetical 2012 GTR, I think I would have much more fun.

[codyace]

At the same time, any car with that type of performance will have high costs to keep it running. I don't know how the ZR1 is but I bet its also very expensive,

No denying the ZR1's costs, but lets all be serious...a Z06 is on GTR level...ZR1 is simply 'on another'.

With the GTR you can be just a slightly above average driver at the track and still go VERY fast.

I'll take the GTR for that very reason, I'm a decent performance driver at best, and I have no desire to spend the time or money to massively improve my skills. So for that one or two times a year I went to the track with my hypothetical 2012 GTR, I think I would have much more fun.

THe GTR will not hide a shitty driver, it will just cause his accident to be much more severe.

And your attitude simply sucks. 'I don't care to get better, I Just want to drive like a shmuck around track in a fast carand be mediocre' is awful.

[ronmcdon]

Idk know that the GTR would really allow any driver to just shit out Ring record times.
Just because some cars are forgiving doesn't mean they're also easy to master.

[codyace]

Idk know that the GTR would really allow any driver to just shit out Ring record times.
Just because some cars are forgiving doesn't mean they're also easy to master.

Most certainly, but in the end, the GTR (while easy to go fast fo ra capable hot shoe), takes a very trained driver to go fast.

I'm no Mario Andretti, but I will say to go fast with AWD takes a very special drivfer...sure it can make anyone 'quick' but to go damn fast takes a certain skill.

[shadowhunter66]

All in all, all we know about the new GTR is that it goes 0-60 in 2.9 secs. That's it. We'll have to wait and see what other numbers it pulls when its tested.
So, I say lets not jump ahead and say that the GTR is better over the ZR1, vice versa. We'll just have to see a new comparison test. But for me, the way I look at it.. if I were going to buy either car (for me personally) I would'nt be upgrading the performance much since the reason I'm purchasing the car in the first place is that you get "out of the box" performance to start with and possibly down the road I'll add things little by little.
Either way, both cars are great value for what you get.. we're talking super car numbers for a lot less coin.

[superbike81]

Every professional ZR1/Z06 vs GTR review has said the GTR is much easier to drive fast than the Vette. Now of course to drive one at it's absolute is peak is going to take incredible skills in either car. But a novice can be faster and safer in the GTR according to all the pro testers.

[bftII40]

Its just a very expensive video game guys.

[codyace]

Every professional ZR1/Z06 vs GTR review has said the GTR is much easier to drive fast than the Vette. Now of course to drive one at it's absolute is peak is going to take incredible skills in either car. But a novice can be faster and safer in the GTR according to all the pro testers.

And a good driver will be faster in the Vette.

Hmmm.

[Popscribble]

GTR vs ZR1
If I were to purchase either car based on the "fun factor", I'd go for the ZR1 hands down. If i wanted to go 0-60 in under 3 sec I'd throw on a 10 inch slick. I think the enthusiast would also lean more towards the ZR1, and leave the GTR for the ceo whos left foot has never touched a clutch . LOL

[superbike81]

And a good driver will be faster in the Vette.

Hmmm.

Probably so, but only marginally. But the fact is, 99% of drivers, and probably a good 95%+ of track day junkies aren't good enough to drive either car to the limit. So it's a moot point unless we are talking about professional drivers.

[krankanator]

r35 is my dream car !!!!!!!! and i will have it some day lol !!!!

[drift freaq]

GTR vs ZR1
If I were to purchase either car based on the "fun factor", I'd go for the ZR1 hands down. If i wanted to go 0-60 in under 3 sec I'd throw on a 10 inch slick. I think the enthusiast would also lean more towards the ZR1, and leave the GTR for the ceo whos left foot has never touched a clutch . LOL

This shows just how much you do not know about double clutch semi automatic trans. Just because it does not have a clutch pedal does not mean it drives like an automatic.

Seriously I get so tired of the punk asses that whine about paddle shifters and no clutch pedal. Are you even man enough to handle lightening fast gear changes? Have you ever driven a F1 car? Do you even realize this transmission is basically a F1 transmission. ? Mostly like no to those questions and that shows in your ignorant statement you make above.

To many people say that car drives itself. All of these people have never actually driven a GTR. I know many GTR owners and none feel the car drives itself.

I honestly think most people on those forum would not have the ability or the balls to drive the GTR at the limits it can be driven. Notice I said most and not all. There are a select few.

The rest need to shut the fuck up until they have actually driven one.

[superbike81]

GTR vs ZR1
If I were to purchase either car based on the "fun factor", I'd go for the ZR1 hands down. If i wanted to go 0-60 in under 3 sec I'd throw on a 10 inch slick. I think the enthusiast would also lean more towards the ZR1, and leave the GTR for the ceo whos left foot has never touched a clutch . LOL

Yeah, and then the 10" slick defeats the entire purpose that the car was built for, track racing.

[Wookie384]

If I really wanted a fast car I wouldn't be complaining about plastic rocker panels, I'd be driving the damn thing... that being said;

Corvette ZR1:
0-60: 3.3 Seconds
1/4 Mile: 11.2 @ 135mph
Price: $110,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.20.4

Nissan GT-R35:
0-60: 2.9 Seconds
1/4: 11.6 ('09 model Mph unknown)
Price: $90,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.19.7 ('09 model)

Ariel Atom
0-60 2.9 Seconds
1/4: 10.6 @ 128.4
Price: $50,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.19.5

I'll take the Atom, plus theres no crappy rocker panels, or cheap interior for anyone to complain about and even if you were complaining about anything, the engine noise would drown you out.:2f2f:

[superbike81]

I think cars like the Ariel Atom really are the "ultimate driving machines."

But they are just as impractical as a motorcycle and will never be anything more than a toy. While it would be a bit of a waste, the GTR or ZR1 could both be used in daily driving.

[Popscribble]

I never said the transmission was junk nor did I say I didn't like it so if I'm ignorant your a dumbass that can't read. I've raced the gtr it shifts ridiculously fast. The way I see it with the power that it claims it shouldn't be as fast as it is. Maybe it's the tranny maybe it's not either way I stated my opinion about both cars. You assume too much drift freaq.
And that comment about the slicks, again read the post.

[codyace]

I honestly think most people on those forum would not have the ability or the balls to drive the GTR at the limits it can be driven. Notice I said most and not all. There are a select few.

I'll be the first to admit that I think I"m a decent driver, and I goto 5-6 track days a year with my 240. (Pocono, Glen, NJMP, LR, Monticello etc etc...been to all of the Northeast tracks)

With that said, I will be the first to admit that even I do not think I have the balls to 'wring out' a GTR (or a ZR1) to their mechanical limit. They really do take a special driver, and a good one, to go fast.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Vettes are more capable cars, but in that same statement I'll also admit to 'cutting hairs' sort to speak there. It's also hard to compare a 600 hp 'light' car to a 400 hp 'heavy' one.


Also, I could give 2 shits if my car had a clutch. In theory, I'd love the GTR's gearbox in my 240...it would undoubtedly make me faster.

[drift freaq]

I never said the transmission was junk nor did I say I didn't like it so if I'm ignorant your a dumbass that can't read. I've raced the gtr it shifts ridiculously fast. The way I see it with the power that it claims it shouldn't be as fast as it is. Maybe it's the tranny maybe it's not either way I stated my opinion about both cars. You assume too much drift freaq.
And that comment about the slicks, again read the post.


I read what you wrote and I assumed nothing. perhaps you should read your own posts and realize what they are saying. Perhaps you do not realize what you are saying in your own posts?
Read your comment about ceo's and the double clutch setup. You claim you have driven it yet a you make that ceo comment. You have know contradicted your own original statement.
Or you really do not have a clue about what most CEO's usually drive. LOL


Honestly having known CEO's of Fortune 500 companies most would not want to drive a GTR. They are more akin to SEL 500's, S320's , 740IL's and whatnot.

When you make the comment about the CEO and the paddle shifters you put yourself in the same catagory as the ignorant people who really have no experience with the car.
Maybe you did not intended it that way but that is the way it reads.

[codyace]

When you make the comment about the CEO and the paddle shifters you put yourself in the same catagory as the ignorant people who really have no experience with the car.
Maybe you did not intended it that way but that is the way it reads.
No, you are right. 100 bucks he's a typical magazine sack rider who can't drive.

[Wookie384]

I think cars like the Ariel Atom really are the "ultimate driving machines."

But they are just as impractical as a motorcycle and will never be anything more than a toy. While it would be a bit of a waste, the GTR or ZR1 could both be used in daily driving.

Spot me 50 Grand and watch me daily drive that bitch. Most GTR's and ZR1's are garage queens anyways.

Funny thing is last week my buddy got married and he owns a R32, his GTR buddies were too afraid to drive their cars in the rain, shit I'll prolly get sick as fuck but I'll drive an Atom in the rain just to prove a point! lol

[VNG704]

Same vette/gtr arguements in every forum, lol. I'd drive the gtr everyday too. Probably because I couldn't affored a second car though.

[youngmoney]

people arguing over cars they've probably never driven...classic :duh:. i like how everybody acts like they're some sort of professional critic. 90K IS a lot of money for a car, but considering the fact that half of the 200k+ "super cars" can't perform half as well. To me it makes me realize just what a deal the R35 AND the ZR1 are. and for everyone thats hating on the gtr's interior give me a fucking break. what kind of decked out pussy magnet are you driving? get real...

[ghost_silvia]

As long as I can get a decent warranty I will pick up a GTR in 2012. You would figure with the revised model coming out that year the previous year models Should go for about 55k with low miles. We'll just see what happens!

[Xmax]

Since I live in Chicago, I probably would feel much safer driving the GTR with snow tires than the ZR1 with snow tires during the winter months. But that's just me.

[codyace]

Since I live in Chicago, I probably would feel much safer driving the GTR with snow tires than the ZR1 with snow tires during the winter months. But that's just me.

While true, I hate this argument that many bring up (not saying you are, just saying in general)

'Oh well the GTR can drive in a snowbank, sup ZR1"

ya know what, who cares! If that makes or breaks the 'better' of the two, then we are all dead when the zombies come.

[rb25_s13*CHUKI]

Zr1 all the way! The z06 Is in gtr class not Zr1. Could we sit here and Imagine if the zr1 had a gearbox like the gtr? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

2012 gtr! you look like a eclipse!!!!!!!

[RBMadess]

Lazy v8..........what???

[RBMadess]

I couldn't imagine spending 111k on anything that's 10 technological generations behind.

[codyace]

Lazy v8..........what???

1. Have you driven a z06? zr1? base?

2. Don't bother asking, I know you have't.

I couldn't imagine spending 111k on anything that's 10 technological generations behind.

10 technological generations behind? Please entertain me with your idiocy. Efficiency and simplicity >* Why package 4 cams and weight into something that is PROVEN not to out perform the traditional LSX???

I guess it sounds cool to say OHC. I'd rather say "it hauls ass".

[20 til 3]

1. Have you driven a z06? zr1? base?

2. Don't bother asking, I know you have't.



10 technological generations behind? Please entertain me with your idiocy. Efficiency and simplicity >* Why package 4 cams and weight into something that is PROVEN not to out perform the traditional LSX???

I guess it sounds cool to say OHC. I'd rather say "it hauls ass".


partially correct... the z06+ models(i would include the new gran sport shit they do to be very fast also) are a crazy beast to handle... the technology does work pretty well actually, most people dont realize that coil susp. is actually better than 99% of coil over strut setup on the market(sprung weight makes a hella difference)

but... the GTR has the technology to beat it... and when it comes to the corners, the zr1 cannot keep up.

and btw, i have ridden in both the GTR and the ZR1, and the ZR1 feels much faster, but the GTR brings a bigger smile to my face

[codyace]

but... the GTR has the technology to beat it... and when it comes to the corners, the zr1 cannot keep up.

It's the two fold answer

Does the GTR have the tech? Sure. Is the GTR faster? Depends on the driver. So with that said, what's really the 'faster' car? The capable one, or the one that needs to be driven?

I love both cars, I just find it hard to really say what is best. I will side on Take Vette though...to say the ZR1 can't keep up with a GTR is silly, as a Z06 is a fair 'track match' with the GTR...the ZR1 is on a true supercar level.


I've beein a new Zo6 and a GTR. The GTR is fun, the launch is second to none. But I prefer the beast mode of Z06. Can't beat the cubes, the sound, the feel, and the rawness IMO. Then again if I had to 'honestly' daily one, it would probably be the GTR.

[Wookie384]

I still say the Atom pwns all. =P

[codyace]

I still say the Atom pwns all. =P

Half as usable, and slower than a GTR, ZO6 or ZR1

[RBMadess]

1. Have you driven a z06? zr1? base?

2. Don't bother asking, I know you have't.



10 technological generations behind? Please entertain me with your idiocy. Efficiency and simplicity >* Why package 4 cams and weight into something that is PROVEN not to out perform the traditional LSX???

I guess it sounds cool to say OHC. I'd rather say "it hauls ass".

This is 2011... do you get direct injection?? NO. Do you get Variable cam timing??? NO Variable Valve lift? NO.

Any moron could take a high displacement v8, slap a supercharger and make 600hp.

I have driven a z06, c5 and c6. its about as exciting to drive as my infiniti.
How is a forced induction v8 engine that makes 102.9 hp per liter considered efficient?? a naturaly aspriraded honda F20 4 cylinder engine makes 123hp per liter... simple, yes. Simple as a truck engine invented in the 1800's. And if you want to divide those numbers by the number of pistons to paint a clearer picture of how efficient the ls9 is, well that would just be embarrassing. And just tho throw this out there... GTR makes 80.8 hp per cylinder, LS9 makes 79.5 and these are 2009 numbers, the 2012 GTR makes 530hp

Why package 4 cams?? because it makes for a better engine. You could manage valve event much better and yield much better powerband. Just because chevy can't make a proper DOHC V8 doesn't mean that a pushrod engine dominates the world, it just means chevy guys are lazy. Ask yourself why the rest of the world builds dohc engines, do a little research outside the chevy fanboy forums. I hope my idiocy entretained you. :rofl:

[RBMadess]

Here's what should happen in 2012: Ford should remake the GT with the GTR's Technology, boost up their modular v8 and tune it to about 700hp at 8k rpm. and a proper sports car would be born

[Jimbo_Moone]

If I really wanted a fast car I wouldn't be complaining about plastic rocker panels, I'd be driving the damn thing... that being said;

Corvette ZR1:
0-60: 3.3 Seconds
1/4 Mile: 11.2 @ 135mph
Price: $110,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.20.4

Nissan GT-R35:
0-60: 2.9 Seconds
1/4: 11.6 ('09 model Mph unknown)
Price: $90,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.19.7 ('09 model)

Ariel Atom
0-60 2.9 Seconds
1/4: 10.6 @ 128.4
Price: $50,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.19.5


Half as usable, and slower than a GTR, ZO6 or ZR1

while i whole heartedly agree on the half as usable thing... let's re-examine the numbers. I just want to know why we're comparing models that are $20,000+ apart? I want everyone to get along, so here you go. they are all the greatest thing ever in the whole wide world... in their respective price segments. YAY! everyone gets a slushee

[RBMadess]

I agree 100%. the GTR is just a little better.

[darkevildrifter]

I want everyone to get along, so here you go. they are all the greatest thing ever in the whole wide world... in their respective price segments. YAY! everyone gets a slushee
Holyshit a ziliva member whose not a DOOSH bag kid!
Good stuff!

[codyace]

This is 2011... do you get direct injection?? NO. Do you get Variable cam timing??? NO Variable Valve lift? NO.

No...but

-Do any of those features help determine the power output? Nope
-Do they help drivability? Nope.

You go find me a 'directed injected' 'variable cam' 'variable lift' 'overhead cam' V8 to even gear near the durability, and power potential of that GM engine in street form. This side of a pure compeittion based motor, it doesn't exist, and even then it's hard to find...look at GM being penalized for being dominant in their ALMS cars...and the Vipers before that.

But I can understand why you'd want that tech, I mean the new E92 M3 v8 is nice...if you like torquless, tapped out, and overly strung engines. BORING. They do sound nice though, so it's a push.

Maybe its' my track based and performance based background that clout my vision. I love simple. Simple is reliable. Simple is fast. Simple wins. Then again when you get involved with Nascar type tech, you'll realize that for a 50 year old design, it's probably got darn equal RD and tech that an F1 engine does. 10,000 rpm, 600 hp, that can go 500 miles of WOT and be ok? That's simply rediculous, especially from an engine platform that was NEVER designed to do that from the drawing board. Sure it's not as pretty as the 19,000 rpm F1 motors, specifically designed to spin high from the moment the CNC machine tears into the block of alumimum to build the one off motor, but damn it's just as impressive if you ask me. THe only thing more impressive in motorsports to me are Top Fueler's...they simply shouldn't work, but they do.


Any moron could take a high displacement v8, slap a supercharger and make 600hp.

Undoubtedly. The difference though is that NOT every moron can design a 600 hp blown engine to have 100,000 mile reliability. That's the difference...especially in factory form.


I have driven a z06, c5 and c6. its about as exciting to drive as my infiniti.

On track or on the street? I could care less about the highway honestly. Having also driven 35c and a 37c on track too, I can say that they are fun. To even remotely think (from a driver persepctive) they are near a Zo6 is laughable. FWIW, I could care less about all of the creature comforts on track.


How is a forced induction v8 engine that makes 102.9 hp per liter considered efficient?? a naturaly aspriraded honda F20 4 cylinder engine makes 123hp per liter... simple, yes. Simple as a truck engine invented in the 1800's. And if you want to divide those numbers by the number of pistons to paint a clearer picture of how efficient the ls9 is, well that would just be embarrassing. And just tho throw this out there... GTR makes 80.8 hp per cylinder, LS9 makes 79.5 and these are 2009 numbers, the 2012 GTR makes 530hp

Ahhh HP per liter, ricer math. My s14 makes 200 HP per liter, does that mean it's better than all of them? Not a chance. Efficiency should never be measured by liter power...it's sort of like slalom numbers. Neat figure but has ZERO relationship to real world performance.

...I can see now you're more of a magazine reader, less a track guy. Nothing wrong with that though so dont' get upset. In the end there is a reason you see people swapping LSX into everything, and not Ford Mod Motors, or BMW engines, or Hemi's (which are actually impressive engines, just heavy)...cost, simplicity, and ease of use. Hell there is a reason why people have been putting American Small blocks into everything since their onset. To date, a proper AC Cobra is one of the fastest cars you could 'build'. Why is it you don't see 4.0 audi engines? 5.0 Infiniti engines?


Why package 4 cams?? because it makes for a better engine.

Bigger and heavier too, not to mention weight higher in the chassis too Weight higher up sucks. Ever see how big a OHC to a OHV engine is?

http://www.codyace.com/albums/album122/50vs54.sized.jpg

That's a 5.4 ford and a 5.0 ford. Granted the 5.0 is not what I'm arguing about, but it's the same 'size' as a LS1 for sake of argument. Lets see, a 331 vs a 346. The ford is bigger, heavier, less cubes, less power, less torque, and 4x as expensive to build. BUt it's technologically superior so it's better? Package, weight, power, torque...LSX wins that all day. Scoring cool guy points on the forums, maybe not. Fast track times for sure though.


powerband. Just because chevy can't make a proper DOHC V8 doesn't mean that a pushrod engine dominates the world, it just means chevy guys are lazy. Ask yourself why the rest of the world builds dohc engines, do a little research outside the chevy fanboy forums. I hope my idiocy entretained you. :rofl:

Chevy did. LT5. 370 HP and Trq, in the mid 90's. These engines went on to help design modern Northstars, another fantastic overhead cam engine from them. You talk about me needing to leave the forums, maybe you should leave the Super Street magazine on the stand, and actually get involved with the performance world.

PS: I don't spend any time on Chevy Forums, well..limited. I'm a Ford guy. Even I can admit where my brand is flawed.

while i whole heartedly agree on the half as usable thing... let's re-examine the numbers. I just want to know why we're comparing models that are $20,000+ apart? I want everyone to get along, so here you go. they are all the greatest thing ever in the whole wide world... in their respective price segments. YAY! everyone gets a slushee

I agree 100%. the GTR is just a little better.

[codyace]

while i whole heartedly agree on the half as usable thing... let's re-examine the numbers. I just want to know why we're comparing models that are $20,000+ apart? I want everyone to get along, so here you go. they are all the greatest thing ever in the whole wide world... in their respective price segments. YAY! everyone gets a slushee

True for sure. I get this way when people try to compare Mustangs to Corvettes...they are simply different class cars in every degree.

Truthfully, there is a very short list of cars that could hold a candle to the ZR1. Thankfully the Zo6 and GTR are 'kinda close' in cost, and coincidentally equal performers on track.

[codyace]

RBMadness, dont' construe most post as trying to flame you, or insult you. You have your opinion, and I have mine obviously when it comes to car. But when you bring up some comments that have no backing, it obviously warrants correction. I'm not the best at typing things out in an organized fashion on a forum, so bare with my 'all over the place' argument.

In the end, I'm impressed by performance, reliablility, and cost to maintain. Doesn't matter how they do it, or what the brand is, or etc etc. If Nissan has an LSX I'd still love it the same; if GM had a GTR I'd be just as critical of it as well. In the end though, the overall 'factor' that does effect it the most is simplicity. Does the Veyron impress me numbers wise? Sure it makes a shit to of power. Does it impress me motor wise? No...

Technology is cool; it helps move us towards the future. But when it comes to my cars, I'm not going to 'be hung up' or 'not buy' one or the other because one has a pushrod engine, and one doesn't. That's pretentious to me.

[RBMadess]

Cody, you're being nieve. VTC, DI, and VVL make all the difference in power output and driveability. Those features aren't as noticeble with v8's but hop in a 4cyl sedan with them and you'll see. VTC and VVL offer different cam profiles at different rpm, which allows you to have almost all of your available torque in the lower rpm range. a nice torque curve is the deffenition of drivability and practicality in the streets. Faster off the line? better fuel economy? better emissions?? yes yes and yes please. As Far as output goes, Emissions regulations are tighter now then ever, wich means by having alternate cam profiles you can have a higher engine output while being cleaner.

Damn gotta run but I'l lbe back later, good food for thought tho. and no worries, I don't take anything to heart. But you're dead wrong about me being a magazine reader type, I build engines for a living, I'm a tech for an independently owned exotic repair shop. and you can guess what I do in the weekends.

[RBMadess]

Now.... Efficiancy: the ratio of the work done or energy developed by a machine, engine, etc., to the energy supplied to it, usually expressed as a percentage. When where talking about the "efficiancy" of an engine, the ONLY way it can be measured is hp/liter. A poorly engineered engine needs loads of displacement(leads to bigger, heavier engine) a well engineered engine needs little displacement to gain larger output. If the LS engine was engineered on the same level as the japanese engines, the ZR1 would have 638hp from a naturaly aspirated 5.3 liter v8 instead of a blown 6.2, or maybe even a 4.6 liter blown/boosted v8. OR hell, maybe even a highly "efficient" and highly advanced 3.8 liter TT V6. Wait......... ooops nissan already thought of that.

[RBMadess]

SO. is a more "efficient" engine with high hp/liter better then the rest?? you bet your ass it is. lower displacement comes with lower weight. Maybe its just me, call it pretentious, but I just don't think I would ever be ready to spend 110k on mediocrety. I'd want every last penny of my hard earnt money to buy the very best. I'd rather spend less money, and get more out of it. which would bring us to a different subject of investing the price difference on the GTR and bring them into the same "price category". The ZR1 would lose outright, but that's a completely different topic.

Lets also for the sake of argument bring the Ferrari 458 Italia into the comparisson...

LS1: 350hp, 365 ft-lb, 5.7 liters, ohv, 6700 rpm redline. BOOOOORRRRIING.
Ferrari Italia Engine: [email protected], [email protected] with 80% of torque available from 3250rpm WOOOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! from a 4.5 liter!!!!! heavy?? no..torqueless?? hardly. boring? what do you think.... for "ricer math" my arguments make yours look like "muscle ignorance"

Oh and I don't read super street I read Moddified Mag, Car&Driver and Road&Track. :) good discussion, I'm over it tho

[Corbic]

SO. is a more "efficient" engine with high hp/liter better then the rest?? you bet your ass it is. lower displacement comes with lower weight. Maybe its just me, call it pretentious, but I just don't think I would ever be ready to spend 110k on mediocrety. I'd want every last penny of my hard earnt money to buy the very best. I'd rather spend less money, and get more out of it. which would bring us to a different subject of investing the price difference on the GTR and bring them into the same "price category". The ZR1 would lose outright, but that's a completely different topic.

Lets also for the sake of argument bring the Ferrari 458 Italia into the comparisson...

LS1: 350hp, 365 ft-lb, 5.7 liters, ohv, 6700 rpm redline. BOOOOORRRRIING.
Ferrari Italia Engine: [email protected], [email protected] with 80% of torque available from 3250rpm WOOOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! from a 4.5 liter!!!!! heavy?? no..torqueless?? hardly. boring? what do you think.... for "ricer math" my arguments make yours look like "muscle ignorance"

Oh and I don't read super street I read Moddified Mag, Car&Driver and Road&Track. :) good discussion, I'm over it tho


GTR, Autotragic only... BOOORRRRINNG.


:cj:

[drift freaq]

GTR, Autotragic only... BOOORRRRINNG.


:cj:

Ya and I bet you have never driven one of those paddle shifting dual clutch semi auto's. If you think the transmission is auto tragic and boring you probably have no real ideal beyond reading. LOL

Its definitely not your fathers automatic.

[Corbic]

Ya and I bet you have never driven one of those paddle shifting dual clutch semi auto's. If you think the transmission is auto tragic and boring you probably have no real ideal beyond reading. LOL

Its definitely not your fathers automatic.

I've driven DSG and SMG cars... I'll keep my clutch, thanks.

If anything it comes down to options and preference. GTR does not give you the choice and that's a real shame.


If I'm dropping coin on a car its cause its a car I want. I could careless if its rival is a 10th faster, can be modded for another 100hp for $500 less or whatever other reason someone else may have to buy that car.

I dig the current R35 styling (not the 3rd Gen Eclipse update) and the interior is rad. V6 Twins are pretty groovy too... but its over when its DSG-style only (just like the new TT-S).

For 80k I'd be looking at a used Ferrari 360.

[SuicidnS13]

This thread is so full of misinformation now. First of all the tranny is the strong point and the weakness of the gtr. Its what makes it fast and easy to drive. Its also what limits it build capabilities for the average consumer of the car. The clutch packs hoefully have been revised as they are limited to around 500 ftlbs trq. Doesnt take much more than a tune and bolt ons to kill it. The rebuilds are in the tens if thousands, not thousands. I can afford it, but would I. But because I am a highly intelligent and prefer to invest in my play cars wisely a gtr is a bad investment for my needs. I need a car that can take 650-800whp all day and be cheap to maintain all while still being street driveable. The maintenance costs on zr1's and zo6's are less than a 5th the costs of the gtr. A few years of owning a gtr and you couldve bought a zr1. The next level of performance... Hands down.... A true drivers car

[projectdrifter]

ive driven both:) mr ace:)

my take on the whole situation... we are in a hp/tec race.. much like the muscle car era only this is the tec area... kinda of a blend of muscle and brains meet... where smog testing and general limits that were put on cars in the 60/70's have now been enhanced and pushed... to develope the motors of today... but now we have the import in the same mental state... and before u say but the price is diffrent for these cars.. its proportional to inflation .. the high end bb big dog cars of the era equal about the same as what the high end sports cars go for thesedays... just because u see a 1970 mustang dosnt mean it a cobra jet... or an r/t hemi or a 454 camero ect ect...
heck the ultra race cars of the day were pricde high to..

zr1... great car i dont care what people say its the top dog as far as muscle/domestic goes. the price is kinda steep.. but you can get one for a little less than msrp... you can throw slicks on and run killer times.. the car is sexy and hauls azz.... and it pulls it as well. it does look a bit difrrent than ur run of the mill z06 and it does get noticed...

r35... amazing peice of technology... padle shifter that rocks... you cant out shift fluid and for as creature comfort as the r35 is it pulls hard... they take to modds well.. an exhaust makes a world of diffrence... the ladies reconize the r35 as well.... the r35 does do 1 thing the r1 dosn't... rear seats comfortable ones to... the ladies love the back seat as well.:)

i seen a mention of 1 car ill comment on.

ford gt... now that is a beast of a car... but very crude... very track oriented yes its streetable and managable but i personally would not take it across country on a whim.. maybe to make a statment...its a 5.4 dohc (4 cams) and has a blower to.. much like the gtr... see domestics do it as well. and the ladies love the ford gt as well... and u know this.....


i dont really think the gtr was aimed at any specific group it is a well rounded car.. yup its bulky... but its very quiet,has nice layout and gadgets out the wazooo... its a pleasure to drive daily and for sport it demands similar maintance as the zr1 tho.. just not the trans itself.. the brakes are about the same and price point on maintance on them is roughly the same. the zr1 is a dry sump setup and holds sumthing like 9qts of oil and thats not a cheep oil change..


the price to modd a zr1 is much friendlier.. and does result in some stout numbers... and if ur put a modded r35 and zr1 u might want to keep the bets low... they roll out...

oh and gtr prices have come down... i have seen them up for sale in the mid 50/60 range for mild milage cars... cost of ownership takes a tole and when ur aproaching those big number thing to keep ur warranty you start to think of ways to get out from under it. boths cars have flaws but both are priced quite low for what they compete against and hold their own to... u want to have a exotic,Ferrari,lambo,Porsche, or be on the same level you should expect to pay close to those prices..

state ur view mr ace... u know ive driven all of them.. and thats how i see it... just my opinion and im entitled to it.

[drift freaq]

I've driven DSG and SMG cars... I'll keep my clutch, thanks.

If anything it comes down to options and preference. GTR does not give you the choice and that's a real shame.


If I'm dropping coin on a car its cause its a car I want. I could careless if its rival is a 10th faster, can be modded for another 100hp for $500 less or whatever other reason someone else may have to buy that car.

I dig the current R35 styling (not the 3rd Gen Eclipse update) and the interior is rad. V6 Twins are pretty groovy too... but its over when its DSG-style only (just like the new TT-S).

For 80k I'd be looking at a used Ferrari 360.


Hahahaha you have not driven a GTR and therefor are really not qualified to comment. You are comparing different brands tech and trying to say its the same. That is ignorance.

Oh and a used 360 still requires worse maintenance costs than a GTR. LOL and the GTR will still kick its ass.

Now a 458 Italia might be a better challenge. A 360 though. LOL my friend owns a 360 its ok but not amazing.

[Corbic]

Hahahaha you have not driven a GTR and therefor are really not qualified to comment. You are comparing different brands tech and trying to say its the same. That is ignorance.

Oh and a used 360 still requires worse maintenance costs than a GTR. LOL and the GTR will still kick its ass.

Now a 458 Italia might be a better challenge. A 360 though. LOL my friend owns a 360 its ok but not amazing.

GTR is not using a "different system". Its the same "computer controlled duel clutch system" as the others. Its the same Borgwarner system used in the the VAG products. It's better then a torque-converter automatic, but its not as fun as pressing a clutch in and rowing my own gears.

As far as the rest of your dribble, you obviously didn't understand my point in "if I'm paying 80k, its for the car I want and not "causes it's faster". If that is your criteria, why the fuck are you on a 240 board and not a Corvette one?

[drift freaq]

GTR is not using a "different system". Its the same "computer controlled duel clutch system" as the others. Its the same Borgwarner system used in the the VAG products. It's better then a torque-converter automatic, but its not as fun as pressing a clutch in and rowing my own gears.

As far as the rest of your dribble, you obviously didn't understand my point in "if I'm paying 80k, its for the car I want and not "causes it's faster". If that is your criteria, why the fuck are you on a 240 board and not a Corvette one?

Ok you are clueless if you think the internals of the GTR trans are an off the shelf Borg Warner system. Nissan is owned by Renault. Renault uses a dual clutch semi automatic in their F1 car the same technology is being used in the GTR . If you think its the standard Borg Warner stuff you need to do a more research.

Now to address you calling my comments dribble, it shows you really can't respond properly.

Dribble? No , accurate response to you stating you would a Ferrari 360 over a GTR yes. The Ferrari 360 is a entry level Ferrari that the GTR will make mince meat in practically all aspects of performance.
Plus you will pay 60k for one used and still not get the performance level.

Hence the comment of using a 458 Italia being a much more formidable challenge.

I really think you miss the point of a GTR all together. Its not about looks so much as performance. Sure some of us like the look of a GTR but most can agree its not the prettiest automobile to hit the showroom floor.

What it delivers dollar for dollar wise is beyond reproach. The closest thing to that value is a Corvette which I do happen to like in some aspects.
The difference is the Nissan is better in the fit and finish department and all out bang for the buck in my opinion.

Now to answer your whole why the fuck am I on a 240 board. This shows just how clueless you are.

The 240sx gives you quite a bit of dollar for dollar performance. In fact it was closer to the whole concept of the original 240z than most Z's. Even Mr K has commented that he feels the current generation of Z's while good do not quite get to the level of that concept.

A 240sx fastback actually does. I bought a 240sx fastback back in the day over a Z32. I am here because of that. I like these cars.



You go for a car because you like it. Not because its the prettiest or sexiest thing on the block.
If I had used your line of thinking? I might not even have bought a 240 because while not bad looking its not the sexiest car out there.

[Corbic]

Ok you are clueless if you think the internals of the GTR trans are an off the shelf Borg Warner system. Nissan is owned by Renault. Renault uses a dual clutch semi automatic in their F1 car the same technology is being used in the GTR . If you think its the standard Borg Warner stuff you need to do a more research.


Obviously you are unfamiliar with product development. Renault/Nissan deal is irrelevant as a F1 car uses a 7 forward gear transmission far different and far more expensive then a GTR trans.

Nissan contracted Borgwarner to build a DSG-style transmission for the new GTR, yes it's "unique" to it self, but that is like saying a T56 is "unique" and "revolutionary different" to a T5 so that if you didn't like driving a manual car, and your experience is in a T5 car, that a T56 is somehow going to be a different system all together.


Dribble? No , accurate response to you stating you would a Ferrari 360 over a GTR yes. The Ferrari 360 is a entry level Ferrari that the GTR will make mince meat in practically all aspects of performance.
Plus you will pay 60k for one used and still not get the performance level.

Hence the comment of using a 458 Italia being a much more formidable challenge.


Still Dribble. I don't give a shit that GTR is faster. If I'm spending that cash, I want a car I will enjoy. A 360 or 348, with an actual clutch and shifter, mid-engine screaming V8 and a prancing horse on the hood gets me far harder then "OMFG 0-60 IN 3 SECONDS!!!" or "omfg test driver did 15 seconds on nurgbineraingreaw!!!"


I really think you miss the point of a GTR all together. Its not about looks so much as performance. Sure some of us like the look of a GTR but most can agree its not the prettiest automobile to hit the showroom floor.

What it delivers dollar for dollar wise is beyond reproach. The closest thing to that value is a Corvette which I do happen to like in some aspects.
The difference is the Nissan is better in the fit and finish department and all out bang for the buck in my opinion.
.

No, for Nissan the point of the GTR is to make Money. The point of a Cup Car or Formula Car is to go fast and win races. The GTRs selling point is its performance, but with numbers so close to its competition, for many, like my self, its irrelevant in many cases.

At the end of the day, buying a car is about what the individual values and finds appealing. I want an honest to god manual in my car even it it means I'm .2 seconds slower. Deal with it.

[drift freaq]

Obviously you are unfamiliar with product development. Renault/Nissan deal is irrelevant as a F1 car uses a 7 forward gear transmission far different and far more expensive then a GTR trans.

Nissan contracted Borgwarner to build a DSG-style transmission for the new GTR, yes it's "unique" to it self, but that is like saying a T56 is "unique" and "revolutionary different" to a T5 so that if you didn't like driving a manual car, and your experience is in a T5 car, that a T56 is somehow going to be a different system all together.



Still Dribble. I don't give a shit that GTR is faster. If I'm spending that cash, I want a car I will enjoy. A 360 or 348, with an actual clutch and shifter, mid-engine screaming V8 and a prancing horse on the hood gets me far harder then "OMFG 0-60 IN 3 SECONDS!!!" or "omfg test driver did 15 seconds on nurgbineraingreaw!!!"



No, for Nissan the point of the GTR is to make Money. The point of a Cup Car or Formula Car is to go fast and win races. The GTRs selling point is its performance, but with numbers so close to its competition, for many, like my self, its irrelevant in many cases.

At the end of the day, buying a car is about what the individual values and finds appealing. I want an honest to god manual in my car even it it means I'm .2 seconds slower. Deal with it.

Blah blah blah you seem hung up on Image for Images sake rather than Performance for dollar.

Trying to have a intelligent discussion about performance with someone hung up on look and Image is useless. as they will always ignore Performance advantages for the sake of looks.


In the end I know you have never driven either car. So you really do not have a real life experience to back up your statements.

If you had I am sure you would not be so hung up on a 360. LOL

[Imarvin240]

i would take the zr1 over this anyday, at least the zr1 has a clutch pedal and a shifter. I love the GTR, i have not driven one, but i have road in one. its my personal opinion, but i dont like it.

[Corbic]

Blah blah blah you seem hung up on Image for Images sake rather than Performance for dollar.

Trying to have a intelligent discussion about performance with someone hung up on look and Image is useless. as they will always ignore Performance advantages for the sake of looks.


In the end I know you have never driven either car. So you really do not have a real life experience to back up your statements.

If you had I am sure you would not be so hung up on a 360. LOL

Either car? Which is the "either". Stop being a forum tool and living your life one quarter mile at a time. There is more to life and enjoying a car than "performance" in the sense of "speed".

And so fucking sorry Gurly Leep Nissan won't allow test drives on there GTRs. They've sold three, none of the owners got to drive them before buying it.... a drivers car indeed.

Whens the last time you took a GTR and 360 to the 'ring..,,GT5 need not apply.

[amaank]

2.9 seconds is fast but road and track has tested the 911 turbo s at 2.6 seconds.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezflow_site/storage_RT_NEW/storage/original/application/dda2f0d6624fac4e9da8da059e7c3413.pdf

I understand that 911 is much more expensive but it seems like its doing a lot more with its 530hp.

[Wookie384]

Half as usable, and slower than a GTR, ZO6 or ZR1

Please refer to my earlier post.

If I really wanted a fast car I wouldn't be complaining about plastic rocker panels, I'd be driving the damn thing... that being said;

Corvette ZR1:
0-60: 3.3 Seconds
1/4 Mile: 11.2 @ 135mph
Price: $110,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.20.4

Nissan GT-R35:
0-60: 2.9 Seconds
1/4: 11.6 ('09 model Mph unknown)
Price: $90,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.19.7 ('09 model)

Ariel Atom
0-60 2.9 Seconds
1/4: 10.6 @ 128.4
Price: $50,000.00
Lap time on Top Gear Test track: 1.19.5

I'll take the Atom, plus theres no crappy rocker panels, or cheap interior for anyone to complain about and even if you were complaining about anything, the engine noise would drown you out.:2f2f:

Usability is a relative term in this case, most people who own these types of cars can afford to (and do) own another car for daily use, so since their GT-R's and ZR1's for the most part are garage queens, one could argue the Atom to be a top contender.

[Silvia_Drift]

To the guy saying that the GTR has an F1 derived transmission, I am pretty sure you have no idea what you are talking about. The only similarity between an F1 and GTR transmission is that they are both shifted by paddles. An F1 car is purpose built to go as fast as possible whereas while the GTR is fast, it still has to be drivable, and be sold at a reasonable price. There are compromises that have to be made, including the transmission.

[2forty]

I have never seen a stock zr1 trap 135. can someone link me to this site? the fastest test ive seen is 130 trap speed. Im sorry for the power the zr1 does not impress me. the z06 was a different story. its trapped 127 on numerous occasions. 450whp. the zr1 put down 550whp and trapped 129 against the 997.2 turbo? come on. it trapped the same as the 997.2 turbo in the test. id take a z06 h/c over a zr1 for the money. now the 997.2 turbo is impressive. 0-60 in 2.8 and [email protected]

[Wookie384]

Ok you are clueless if you think the internals of the GTR trans are an off the shelf Borg Warner system. Nissan is owned by Renault. Renault uses a dual clutch semi automatic in their F1 car the same technology is being used in the GTR . If you think its the standard Borg Warner stuff you need to do a more research.

Sorry to do this to ya Dave, but some simple Google'ing took me to this Wikipedia page
Nissan GT-R - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_GT-R#Specifications)

...Which had this to say:
"A rear mounted six-speed BorgWarner designed dual clutch semi-automatic transmission built by Aichi Machine Industry is used in conjunction with the ATTESA E-TS system to provide power to all four wheels and along with Nissan's Vehicle Dynamics Control (VDC-R) to aid in stability. Three shift modes can also be selected for various conditions."

Either car? Which is the "either". Stop being a forum tool and living your life one quarter mile at a time. There is more to life and enjoying a car than "performance" in the sense of "speed".

And so fucking sorry Gurly Leep Nissan won't allow test drives on there GTRs. They've sold three, none of the owners got to drive them before buying it.... a drivers car indeed.

Whens the last time you took a GTR and 360 to the 'ring..,,GT5 need not apply.

Wait a minuite! Dave is too old to understand how to use A PS3 (I kid!):hide:
Honestly though, I know of the friend he mentioned earlier who has a 360 (unless he knows someone else who owns one), and that person admits that the 360 is crap. Don't get me wrong, looks wise, and since I'm a poor bastid, I'd still take one any day.

Back onto topic, I honestly believe that these two cars are incomparable. The GT-R does have all those fancy driver aids (see what you get in just the quote above), and the ZR1 it's just raw power. One is a refined sports car the other is just brute power, they do the same, but they go about it differently, They're just two different kinds of beasts. Everyone has their own opinion and we can't try to convince the other differently.

Now just give up the arguing and admit the Atom is better.:hsdance:

[thrOwsumDs]

damn... mad arguing...

[P-Funk alot]

ok ive just briefly read through this. now has any one addressed the safe tune on the gtr. ive seen jesus at cobb tuning do some pretty amazing things with stock gtr's. Also ferrari and lambo ran test on both the gtr and zr1 and both came to the conclusion that the gtr was under priced by 150 grand whereas the zr1 was said to be Fairly priced. now i have been in both cars and both are great. but if i had to choose id go gtr all day its cheaper in initial cost and if you felt the need to spend that extra 20k you could use it on performance parts.

[Loogah]

halogen plate lights