Fantastic driving man , obviously GT-R+ tuning =business on the track

 

The car is a great performer, but it just doesn't have a sole. Too many gadjets can be a bad thing.

 

Well I guess everything is subjective as I own a GTR and I love it, I like the cars track ability, driver feedback, transmission and its looks! I also have a few capable cars that sit in the garage next to the GTR that I use as a comparison and I think as an all around car the GTR holds its own with any of them.

 

I own both, so Im either a loyalist or a troll or a trollalist. I agree with Jaime's point here. The 997tt and GT-R are both great cars for different reasons all of which can be argued to death and will be I'm sure once again. Im glad I got em both.

 

Vic, if you had to choose one. Which one would you choose? Turbo or GTR.

 

ditto

 

To each his own. While they are not my cup of tea, I'm glad you guys that bought them are happy with them.

 

Was surprised to see a thread this new on a topic this old.

If you love cars and technology, and enjoy getting a good value, you will really like the GT-R.

Take 100 "track day guys" and put half in 911TT and half in GT-R and the GT-Rs will smoke 90% of the Turbos. It is a very very composed/controlled car when pushed. Fun and, yes, easy to drive hard. If we are not optimizing on fun, what are we doing here?

Ugly? Yes. Fat? Yes? Too much plastic? Yes?

Better bang for buck versus Turbo? Yes?

Better, in general? Only you can decide.

I sold mine, but will likely own another one one day.

-Chris

 

For arguments sake, let's say the GT-R is quicker than the Turbo around any track, any day. Is it really superior if Nissan's AWD system can't do what it does without undesirable side-effects? Doesn't their system overheat easily and require expensive maintenance after every track day? AFAIK, a Turbo's AWD can run multiple track days without a problem and doesn't require constant fluid changes. I can see replacing fluids after a full-on race, but after a track day?

I mean, if the GT-R's AWD system is nearly destroying itself making the car perform physics defying acts, is it really deserving of all the praise it's received? After all, these are road cars, not temperamental race cars. IMO, what makes Porsche's cars so deserving of all the praise they've received over the years is their easy-to-maintain, reliable hi-performance.

Look, I'm not saying the GT-R isn't impressive or an achievement, but I'm not sure it's the new standard, either.

 

I hear stock brakes eat a set of pads/day on some tracks.

;-)

The initial stories about GT-R fluid changes after each track day are old/wrong.

Tranny fluid is (super) expensive, but if you don't run it hot, it lasts a long time (computer tracks when it needs changing).

Certainly more expensive than a manual tranny car.

I wonder what Porsche's policy is on PDK maintenance after really hard running.

For full disclosure, I blew up a GT-R tranny on the track, so I am not a fan boy--- just commenting that you dont really need the post-track service on the GT-R.

 

From all I've read the PDK launch control can be abused and not affected. Same cannot be said of the GTR. Nissan won't even warranty it if you use it. That is just wrong.

 

Not too fast. With the updated software, MY2010 GT-R haven't had ANY launch related issues. This is not to say the transmission is bullet proof though.

 

That's alright...brake pads are cheap and easy to install - and a normal track consumable on any car. Kidding aside, I haven't heard that. I assume you're talking about the standard iron brake system? I bet proper track pads would make a big difference.

Actually, my car has the iron brakes. True, at 13'' they are small compared to the current standard, but they feel strong and are plenty big for a 3300 pound road car. I don't track, so they're good enough for me. Personally, I think Ferrari intentionally made them look small in the 19'' rim so buyers would spring for the bigger, better looking ceramics (made a standard option on '08-'09 430's).

The only track experience I have with a GT-R is seeing one run at the track. Yet, it was parked in the pits most of the day and a few guys I talked to said it was having problems with the heat (I didn't ask for details).

I'm not a GT-R hater, just going by what I've read/heard since it came out. I like the car, I don't think it's perfect by any means, but it's a little unique and it does perform. I'm sure the newest versions are more than good enough for street use, which is where most owners use them, anyway.

 

sorry guys, didn't mean to begin a whole new gt-r defend-fest. my original thoughts were only that the stock gt-r kinda sucks to drive in terms of pedal feedback, brakes, slow acceleration, and overall heftiness. i didn't drive it on a track and i have read the reviews that say it's all that and more... however i was trying to relay a total amateur's impression of this so called porsche killer. now that you guys have brought it up however, i do question why someone would buy a huge street car like this just for track enjoyment. why not buy a lotus exige cup or a 996/997 cup car or a radical for that matter???

so if i'm understanding this correctly, gt-r owners are saying yea it may be ugly but we own it for track use. huh?? i'm really at a loss understanding the logic here. all i know is i drove it on some streets and it was awkward and mushy and gigantic. kinda the opposite of what any real track rats look for in a track toy, eg. 6/7 cup. help me understand???

 

GT-R is not a track car. It, like the Turbo, is a all-in-one GT car.

It's silly to compare street cars with track stats, but it is also silly to buy a 997TT, juice it to 700HP+ and drive it mostly on the street. It's silly to own any car with more than say 300HP.

Hell, it's silly for grown men (and women) to waste time on these forums obsessing about our expensive toys.

Three cheers for Silly!