[polargt]

So..... got a test drive in the Nissan Gt-R. Still can't believe they let me test drive it (the salesperson who took me out on the drive kept on asking me if I had any connections) but the Sales manager was cool enough to let it out for a drive. Thats a pretty high level of 'cool enough'.


Anyways... so they are TOTALLY different cars but as they are really both what I've been looking at purchasing I have to compare the 2.

Needless to say the GTR is fast... really fast. Tight handling and really solid feel on the ground. Pushed the gas a little (okay... maybe I floored it a bunch of times) and felt a little lag after which point I was pushed into my seat by g-forces. Back seats are for people whose feet don't reach the end of the seat (let alone the floor). Car is defintely better looking in person (especially the rear) than in pictures. Great track car but very spartan/barebone.

Don't even need to mention the cost... and has more gadgets than the Gran Turismo.


Performance was just as expected... everything else not so much.

There is no winner here.... only the car I'm going to buy. Which will be the Gran Turismo. Reason. Looks, luxury and surpisingly the ride. As this will be a daily driver, gtr would be very tough to live with on a daily basis. Gran Turismo allows flexibilty of sport/non-sport mode which, mind you, there is a button for that in the gtr as well but i think its really there for the placebo effect rather than actually making the ride 'comfortable'.


Nissan did an awesome job. But so did maserati... BIGGEST and ONLY REAL MAJOR issue I have with the gran turismo is power!!! It should've been at least at 460hp. Argh... so silly.

 

[BigFoot]

Thanks for the review

You must be indeed connected as Nissan is not letting anyone test drive the GT-R


Get the GranTurismo S with 440hp

 

[M!]

...But so did maserati... BIGGEST and ONLY REAL MAJOR issue I have with the gran turismo is power!!! It should've been at least at 460hp. Argh... so silly.

ditto. get the GT-S if you want more power. no reason to get the GT if you don't like the power output already.

 

[RussianGS_dude]

The GT-S should have been lighter, not more powerfull. Collin Chapman was right.

 

[BigFoot]

Colin Chapman was indeed right but he lived in an era without NCAP tests, in-car safety (seat belts anyone?) and big butted drivers

 

[Niteroi]

Viva the Lotus Elise/Exige!

 

[BigFoot]

Not sure you'll like them cars in Californian's gridlocked streets

 

[Niteroi]

I know, I'm just kidding. I test drove one and even though I had lots of fun, I couldn't use it daily as I do with my GS. It's very uncomfortable and getting in and out is a workout. And I'm a skinny dude.

BUT, it's amazing how fast it is with such a small engine. That was my point.

 

[BigFoot]

It's very uncomfortable and getting in and out is a workout. And I'm a skinny dude.

I have no chance then (see avatar )

 

[M!]

The GT-S should have been lighter, not more powerfull. Collin Chapman was right.

driving dynamics aside, for one, they (Fiat/Maserati/Ferrari/Alfa Romeo) already have a more powerful engine over the GT. so why now more powerful?

...440bhp at 7,000rpm (35bhp up on the standard version) and 361lb ft of torque at 4,750rpm (22lb ft more)...

it's about 8% more hp and 6% more torque.
how much weight reduction would be required to produce that power/weight ratio increase?
how much would R&D for lighter parts for a limited run of what, 2000 cars?

in this day and age when small lexus sedan and BMW M3 can have over 400hp, a maserati with 'only' 400hp seems little, and i would say all GT S owners welcome the higher hp, and not many will tolerate stripped interiors.

 

[M!]

4145 lbs weight...
so 8% = 331.6lbs
6%= 248.7 lbs

the F430 scuderia is about 300lbs less... so that would be the weight level of achievement required. i don't think they can offer a GT S at the price they are asking now.

porsche GT3 RS is 3031 lbs vs Carrera S is 3131 lbs... that's only 100 saved with quite a bit of modifications. granted the GT is porky, it would be a very tight dieting plan.

 

[RussianGS_dude]

That's because those cars lose weight AFTER they are developped. Weight reduction should be applied at the design stage, on the chassis and the platform.

 

[M!]

The GT-S should have been lighter, not more powerfull. Collin Chapman was right.

That's because those cars lose weight AFTER they are developped. Weight reduction should be applied at the design stage, on the chassis and the platform.

so how do you suppose the GT-S could be lighter and not more powerful?
go back in time at the design stage on the chassis and platform?

please give us some insight.

 

[M!]

and FYI since you mentioned colin chapman, look at the elvira, oops i mean evora.
it weights in at 1350kg or about 3000lb. that's as much as a GT3 RS. but it has only 280PS. they just designed it. and this is from a company that emphasize on light weight. would the buyers think 280PS is underpowered?