Now THIS is spot on and something I agree with!! Stock vs. stock, the Porsche is a better built package overall. You have everything expected from a Porsche for $20-$30k less than the GT-R and instead of using the difference for durability mods, it can be used for performance mods instead. Then again we are comparing a $150k car (new 996 turbo) to a $80k one. You can't expect $150k quality and durability for $80k. If I was in the OP's predicament, the Porsche is clearly the winner.

Yes as far as reliability goes, continually tracking a heavy car does its toll on tires, brakes, rotors, fluids, and heat management. Costs will add up in this regard. The thing about the GT-R is that all the issues non-owners have gripes with have also been addressed in the GT-R community. The aftermarket have taken up on these issues and have developed cheaper, long lasting substitutes. At least with the Porsche, you don't have to worry about alternatives. Every thing is well built from the start, which IMO is a plus!

I do disagree that the 996 is a better track car when against the GT-R. The DSG gearbox is the best thing to happen to turbocharged cars. That along with its videogame AWD system is a killer combo for the track. With that being said, I can't wait until the new PDK turbo comes out and shows Nissan what $150k bring you. You get what you pay for!

 

I will agree that the new pdk box is a much better track investment than a 6 speed. It allows you to concentrate on your line, braking, accelerating and less on when to shift and what gear to be in. I just drove several pdk cars on a track and was quite impressed, it almost feels like forza in auto mode

I still prefer manual gear box

 

Me too! I love being involved with the car in all aspects and being responsible for whatever feedback it throws at me. That's what makes Porsche special; the driving experience! Just because a car is quicker around a track doesn't mean it's enjoyable around one. If track times were of concern, I'd pick the GT-R, but for me it's all about the pleasure of driving and the slower Porsche wins in that respect, any day!

 

For the GTR to win me over, it would have to loose about 300lbs from the factory, gain a 6 speed manual transmission, and be priced about 10k below where it is. This would go a long way to making it worth it to me. The specV which is priced above a new 997 turbo only drops 130 lbs off the std model but is still 3704 lbs.

 

Track investment I don't think is a good choice of words. You can concentrate on lines, but you don't concentrate on shifting, which is proper technique for learning amateur drivers. I'll bet the PDK is more maintenance than a manual too, and more to upgrade and replace as well. Paddles take the fun and part of the major challenging parts of driving out of it. Blipping down through the gears and hitting it right is one of the best feelings you can have. Beating a guy out of a corner because you can shift faster (manually) than him also begins to separate the boys from the men. Paddles to me is like watching Ferrari challenge drivers run all into each other because they have far more money than skills.

Mike if it was clear what people wanted the OP wouldn't have posed the question. Nothing is hardly ever clear with car guys, we change our minds all the time. If "NEW" has a bunch of baggage, guys are perfrectly ok going just as fast in "not so new" for less money with less worry and less collateral costs.

My problem with the GT-R is it's fundamental discrepancies in design and purpose. You design a heavy track car? That's the worst concept ever IMO, and more and more GT-R owners are realizing it's not worth the Ferrari maintenance to go to the track and overheat after a few laps and have to worry about mods breaking stuff. Add to that a gutted GT-R weighing in at 3450 lbs and it's like what is the point? Put 18 inch wheels on the car and they look like 12's and the car scrapes all over the place. Overloads brakes, overloads tires, overheats. I mean who would even consider making a track car with that to deal with. Rather retarded to me. The concept is great, the approach not so great. Then you have this huge car that's supposed to be a great DD with a stiff as nails ride and clunks all over the place from the transmission, and no room in the back seat (for a huge car) but a nice big trunk. Seems like it contradicts itself in almost every way.


I have no problem with the looks of the GT-R, not for me, but looks great with 22's on it. Aside from that though the car makes no sense to me.

 

What really gets to me is; why are GTR sympathisers simply ignoring the weight issue?

Anything over 1,350kg's for a serious sport-car / supercar is to put bluntly a ridiculous proposition. 996TT’s weighs 1,540kg's and if you ask me that’s about 200kg's too much! The one thing I truly miss in this new car era where cars are gaining weight is the handling of my 944 Turbo S, perfectly balanced weighing 1,350kg's. I can tell you it felt brilliant both on the road and on the track and the handling was way superior to my 996TT. However, 996TT get’s around the weight issue and blows the 944TS out of water performance-wise with more power and the sheer grip, but its handling in comparison to lighter true sport cars (996 GT3 for an example) is impaired. This shows especially in quick directional changes at high speeds (100mph+). You can throw suspension bits into the equation to counteract this to a degree but if you really want to make 996TT handle you must shed its weight. When I test-drove a GTR for 200km's this problem was even more pronounced, so it should; weighing 1,750kg's. Weight kills the car handling and that’s a fact. You can’t simply throw windows at it and defeat the laws of physics.

The way GTR supporters are going on; I fear the BMW X5 drivers will show up on this forum soon saying their brand new X5 is a 996TT beater. They will undoubtedly say that because they have brand new Microsoft Windows version 10 fitted into their dashboards and because their new X5 is pumping out 700bhp via it’s turbochargers that for sure 996TT is an old battered dog which needs to be put down as it can’t keep up with their 2.5 tonne beast. Honestly calling a 1,8 tonne car a true-sports car is the most dim-witted thing I have ever heard.

 

+1 for that being said....and on that note,i'm gone.....

 

Contemplating both cars as well. Still torn.

 

So no Bugatti Veyron for you at 1861KG. Are you kidding?

This thread and the preceding GTR bashing ones all end up the same way, the further you read them the more ridiculous they become. The only GTR that was built as a platform for a race car was the 1989 RB32, which was built to win the Bathurst 1000 in Australia as a touring car, which it did for in 1990, the racing authorities loaded it up with weight limited it's boost etc to make the GMH and Ford products competitive, the GTR still won winning the 1000 again in 1991. Thereafter is was banned in Australia and the later evolutions RB33 and 34 were just GT's.
As a GT (right, Grand Tourer not Great Track!!), the GTR is light years ahead on a 996TT the fact it is also quicker in a quarter mile, faster as a 1 lap race car is just a bonus. The 996TT was not built as a race car either, as a few guys who track them here will testify there are a number of mods needed to make them live on a race track for any length of time not to mention the huge amount of understeer that comes built in.
If you like a show pony or if want to build a big gokart, buy a 996TT, I've got one because my 11yr olds think it's cool. If you want a modern GT, the GTR is light years ahead IMHO.

 

light years heavier, wears down components light years faster, wears down tires light years quicker, has the same power to weight ratio of the car it is supposedly more advanced than. It has turbos that are integrated into the exhaust manifold so that replacing them becomes light years more costly if you want to upgrade. It falls light years flat on it's face at speeds above the 1/4 mile. More transmission issues in it's first year than the 996tt has had in it's entire life span making it light years more troublesome than the 996tt transmission. So yes it is more advanced, like a video game.

 

Ups my reply got screwed.
Veyron? You are kidding right? I would like to see you beating a non turbo 996 on normal twisty roads with a Veyron. It’s like bringing F22 fighter jet into a shallow hilly forest fight where a cobra helicopter will run circles round it. Wrong tool for the job man! I am glad you mentioned under-steer. Fit PSS10’s and it’s gone. Can you say the same for GTR?
What exactly is light-years ahead mate? What, a fraction of a second with a car where you can be an idiot where windows will enable you a quick launch, quick shifts and will drive you round corners poorly? Well if that’s the future you can have it.
However, as you put it so eloquently; it appears your 11 year old son is light years ahead of you, you should learn from him.

 

Most of this irrelevant diatribe is also true for the Veyron but you'd still prefer a 996TT, right?

 

You need to edit this again. Can you please put back that bit about PS10's completely solving the TT's understeer, that was too funny?

 

Not in my case it wasn't. ... 4 wheel drift on limit only. Would you like my seetings info? .

 

ROTFLMAO...now he's comparing the GTR to a veyron....lol. A nissan with Veyron complexity and nissan quality spells disaster. They do have one thing in common. They have tires especially made for them.