[QUOTE=BlackSwan;3678587]I'd like to chime in on this after reading most of these posts. And i will give my opinion on which to choose after I state my mind just a bit.

There are going to be many stereo-types given for all drivers of any car. I think it mostly comes from what people tend to experience when being around the driver/car. With that, id like to say i have only had one personal encounter with a GTR and its driver. I have seen many driving down the road, as well as at car shows. That one encounter I mentioned was while driving our Performante around in OC, I immediately spotted the GTR ('12 Black Edition) and he gave me a thumbs down . Since then, and i apologize to anyone who may be offended, i can't help myself but to judge most GTR drivers and their attitude towards other cars on the street. I have been around just as many Porsches and their owners and have never received any negativity of any kind. It has always been a pleasure to run into someone or anyone of that matter "old" or "young" driving a Porsche.

QUOTE]


Not to offend GTR owners here, but this only shows that GTR is bought by many only for its performance, and that is how they consider other cars - only based on performance, things like 0-60, 0-100 etc. If you buy a car for performance only GTR is nice choice, also because it is robotized so all you need to do is hold on to the steering wheel.
Personally, I considered GTR as well, because I could get a new one for the price of my 5yo Turbo. For me, though, Turbo is not just about the performance, I would probably say performance is the less considered part of driving Turbo. I lokve the looks, I love the rear-engine character, I love how it handles and sounds, the heritage of it, the heritage of Mezger, the fact that I have manual transmission.

 

Funny. Perhaps Nissan should apologize for good engineering?

The nerve of some companies - making a product that can be used as advertised (Anyone - anywhere, safe, fun, easy to control...)... Dammit!

 

The only problem is those functions are not officially sanctioned by the manufacturer. Other than its massive size, that's the reason why I hold out for the 991 Turbo instead of bridging with the GT-R.

 

Oh, really? Like what?

 

...... Try mentioning track at ur dealership and look at their response

 

Check. I fail to see your point.

Let me help out a little here.

2009 GT-R's had no issue about performance driving (or driving on a closed course including airstrips).

2010's+ have warranty statements that are directly in line with EVERY OTHER manufacturer about performance driving or racing.

Just because certain dealers say or act a certain way does not change warranty coverage, as dealers have no control (when it comes to GT-R's).

So I drive all I want. The only issue that 09's (and early '10's) have is the VDC issue being off during what is later noted as R-mode starts (launches). But now that you can only do R-mode starts with VDC-R (LC3+ or 2011+), this has become a non-issue as well. The car has become faster this way, anyway (2.8 0-60 & 10.7 1/4mile in R-mode).

Because this thread is about a 2012 GT-R, the warranty and car abilities are inline with every other manufacturer.

Were you being more specific about something?

 

You are certainly not offending me, but you are definitely posting hypocritical information.

Why do you think people pay extra for a Turbo or GT-series Porsche? Performance. If performance wasn't important to them, they'd stick to a base 911. Or maybe even a Mercedes E-Class.

You mean like a Turbo S PDK? Or a Tiptronic Turbo? Because they are literally just as computerized as a GT-R. Lol

Or a Veyron, or a 458 Itaila, or a MP4-12C, or a DCT M5, or any other car with either a dual-clutch or automatic transmision.

Good for you. I also LOVE the looks, character, handling, and sounds of my GT-R. I also love the heritage of the Skyline. I feel about my GT-R exactly as you feel about your car. If I didn't feel this way, I wouldn't be passionate about it. And if I wasnt passionate about GT-Rs, I wouldn't buy them.

As far as shifting manually, I have my 997 when I want to row gears.

 

1. Agreed on 2 points - GTR is very fast and Mizuno is a superb engineer. But here it is not Mizuno the engineer, but Mizuno the salesman trying to talk his way out of questions by journalists. People put weight in the back of a truck to increase traction in the snow; only a salesman would say he increases weight on a world class sports car to help with handling in the snow.
And only a salesman would utter non-sense like F1 car cannot handle snow because it's too light. It has to do with the tires!! F1 wear slicks and it's not the weight, but the tire width in relation to the weight, and compound, and surface construction that determine snow handling. Yes, I will believe what I want because just because he's a top-notch engineer doesn't mean I will blindly believe the non-sense he says while trying to sell the car.

2. Very good counterpoints. But...
**One, you are comparing apple to orange, these are cars purposely built with V/W12, and the heavy engines, drivetrains designed to handle the power, the GTR, a purposely built track car with a V6 has no business weighing 3900 lbs. There is a reason why the journalists ask him about this.
**Two, a 3800 Aventador is fast, but a 3200 Aventador will be faster. This is the law of physics that Mizuno the engineer (of course) knows but Mizuno the salesman does not.
**Three, how many non V12 cars on the top of this list weigh 3900 lbs? If Lamborghini could reduce weight, they *would*. They would not talk about snow handling makes them increase the weight. Weight is not elegant engineering (in case of V6 GTR, no doubt because of cost restriction) and the feel and maintenance of the car for customers will suffer in the long run. Weight is the enemy of motorsports and a GTR with PDK is not a car to own past warranty!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...eife_lap_times

3. To me, that the GTR is an outstanding sports car and Mizuno a talented engineer (silly salesman though) have not been the question. I just want to remind potential buyers (not you of course) that despite of the leaked video and the frequent pairing, a GTR should never be considered a cheaper 911 because the 2 cars are very diferent from each other (engine placement, 300-400 lbs weight difference, no manual, GTR is track tuned not a good daily driver due to heavy weight leading to stiff suspension). Buy the GTR on its own merits, but if one is curious about the 911 and whatever it is that makes enthusiasts come back times and again, there is only one way to find out, buy a 911.

 

No need to get angry. They're only cars.

Like I said, believe what you want. You're totally wrong of course, as the car was designed to weigh exactly what it does weigh, but it's certainly your prerogative to be wrong.

The funny thing is, your continual complaints about the GT-Rs weight sound strikingly similar to the arguments from Porsche 911 haters about their rear-engine design.

Got it. Lamborghini brilliantly designed the single-clutch Aventador to be heavy because it has a N/A V-12, but Nissan ended making the dual-clutch, twin-turbo GT-R heavy completely by accident. Imbeciles.

A 3200 lb GT-R would be faster too, but Mizuno wasn't trying to compete with 3200 lb cars. He wanted beat a 3600 lb car called the Porsche Turbo, and still have a Supercar that can be comfortably driven in all environmental conditions. Mission accomplished!

Scroll down to the 7:19.6 that was ran by the ZR1, and insert the 2014 GT-R above it, in 9th place. Note that it took a 620 hp, 3200 lb, RWD $245k GT2 RS on CUPS, to beat a 545hp, 3880 lb AWD $105k car on run flats by 1.1 seconds. Impressive engineering, Mizuno.

What first hand experience do you have with GT-R transmissions?

Or, those that are curious could actually listen closely to people who have actually owned both, since their opinions are based in personal experience, rather than bias and guesswork. As much as I love 911's (I really do love them), and as much as I feel that owning both cars is truly the best of both worlds, if I could only keep one...it would probably be a GT-R. Excess weight and all.

 

^^^If you could see me in person now, you would notice that I am neither mad, or shaking, or tachycardic. Nor am I trying to get anyone mad at me.

You might think that I am angry on these posts, but please let me emphasize that I boldface for attention only (usually when what I wrote didn't come across clearly the first time - in this case that Mizuno's nonsense about F1 snow handling and about adding weight to his car so it handles better in the snow). Weight is bad for motorsports because it adversely affects feel of car, handling, stopping, wear and tear on tire, brake, etc. and Mizuno is blowing smoke as a salesman. People do nutty things on racing forums, and on this very forum: radio delete, AC delete, sunroof delete, light battery, light wheel, light tire, for what one reason? Weight reduction. You will not find a tuner who would think I am wrong let alone "totally" wrong.

Good night.

 

Can,

In the video that I posted yesterday in the GT-R section, you can see that Mizuno uses it as a venue to basically call out what he feels is BS throughout the modern high performance automobile industry. His 2014 GT-R went 7.19 around the 'ring with a relatively low HP engine, on run-flats rather than R-compounds, and without the need for some super-light variant of a supercar. He uses standard base cars like they sit on the showroom floor for testing. No ringers.

Mizuno is not only speaking to the people sitting in that room during that video, he is also addressing automobile engineers all over the world on what he believes a high performance car is 'supposed to do'. The GT-R was designed to have dominating performance, be as safe as possible under all conditions and speeds (for example; to safely carry occupants comfortably at 186 mph (300 km/h), even if a blow out occurs), and be practical enough to be used as a daily-driver. He designed and engineered the GT-R car from the beginning to break all normal conceptions of what a supercar is supposed to be.

So yes, I believe the guy 100% when he explains his reasoning for keeping the car heavy. He's proven his philosophy with this car over and over....and over again, in the face of protests and arguments from GT-R haters. Love it or hate it, as a true car enthusiast who has owned 4 GT-Rs, I can tell you without any hesitation that he hit the mark in every way possible with the car.

Good night.

 

I've really appreciated the views in this thread. Will pass on rep points to you guys. I hadn't really seriously considered the GTR until now. It might be fun, incredibly fast and much less conspicuous than a turbo. Might fit the bill for me.
Adding to the recent comments, they even think of the car in such a practical sense that it can be equipped with all season tires! Bang for the buck, it is a hard package to beat. Want to hear another one? It would be cheaper for me to insure a 12 gtr than my 11 m3!

 

Who cares really? Drive what you want! It's your money, you earned it! (I hope)

If I were in the market today, I 'd get a 997 GT2, put rear seats in it and mod it....

 

Before we go on, please let me clarify again so no one gets mad at me: I am not here to belittle the GTR (it is a great car), prove that Turbo is better (absolutely not, different cars), nor criticize GTR owners (it fits their purposes). The thread is a good discussion of weight on motorsports and the relationship between cost cutting and weight, and I hope it doesn't bring animosity.

Scott, Mizuno the salesman is proven wrong when Nissan releases the $170,000 GTR Spec V that undercuts the previously claimed "perfectly weighted" GTR by 130 lbs. And is faster. Spec V GTR. I too believe Mizuno to be a very talented engineer, but picking the side of weight in motorsports is akin to bringing a knife to a gun fight. You would be fighting not just generations of engineers, racing teams, car enthusiasts, but Newton law of physics as well.

What is interesting about the spec V is that despite all efforts at weight cutting, Nissan engineer saved a paltry 130 lbs - meaning the next step would have to be chassis and drive train modification (nearly impossible unless there is a major redesign). Weight reduction is an expensive endeavor and this is partly what you pay for when you get a Porsche. As I have mentioned, 3900 lbs is a lot of weight, and drivers *will* notice the hefty mass. It is also partly the cause of why the GTR is so stiff: this is the only way they could control body roll. These are the "nuances" of owning a car that I would like to emphasize. The 3900 lbs GTR is a great car, but a 3500 GTR will be better.

Some more speculation for the fun of it: The 911's is Porsche's bread and butter and its development is obviously the primary goal of this loaded (for now LOL) company. The car has to be as perfect as could be or heads will roll, and this is what you get when you buy a Porsche 911 - the priority of the company. OTOH, as Nissan is fighting tooth and nail with the likes of Toyota and Honda and the GTR not being its primary goal, one wonders what corners they have to cut, as far as weight reduction, longevity of components, and interior design, (the little things) etc., to bring the car out at this lower price point. If sale in the US dips much below 1000, I would not be surprised if they cut the program, or that next generation, or lighter GTR, will not be here any time soon. The GTR is what 4-5 years old, does anyone know if all-new next generation GTR is concretely planned for?

 

I think our disagreement stems from your belief that Mizuno produced a car that weighed more than he planned for and is therefore making excuses for his mistake, versus my belief that Mizuno knew exactly how much the GT-R would weigh from the get-go, but wasn't concerned about it being heavy relative to other sports cars. Your argument requires one to believe the other companies can produce a lighter car at a set price-point, but Nissan engineers are far too inept to do so.

If you consider the amount of planning and research that goes into designing and producing a production car from any major auto manufacturer, it's almost 'impossible' that an engineering team would not know how much their car will weigh before they even begin production. Furthermore, the fact that Mizuno's initial performance goals (beating the 997.1 Turbo ) were achieved in every way possible, lends even more credibility to my argument. However, it seems that we are at an impasse with this specific point, so there's really no point in debating it further. You think he's lying, while I believe he's telling the truth.

Regardless of who is right, the GT-R outperforms 99% of every sports car available, regardless of it's weight. So to me, the weight of the GT-R is absolutely inconsequential as the 'daily-driveable supercar' that it's marketed as. Sure, less weight is almost always a benefit from a pure performance aspect, but so is more power. The fact is, the GT-R performs better than expected at a higher weight with a relatively low HP for that given weight.

With regard to the next-generation GT-R; yes, the R36 is set to be released in model year 2018 (which means they will be available in Jan 2017 here in the US). The GT-R program isn't going anywhere.