Car and Bike Talk Discussions and comparisons of cars and motorcycles of all makes and models.

GTR article plus about 100 pics

Thread Tools
 
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 05:46 PM
  #11  
CKit's Avatar
Former Moderator
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,729
Likes: 8
Default

Originally Posted by rai,Jan 2 2008, 06:08 PM
people it's $70K which is peanuts for performance.
I completely agree.

But you or I will never tap into that performance, while we will enjoy a nicer interior for the daily driving.

So yay that you pay $70k for supercar performance that you'll never use.
Is it a bargain to spend money on something that you'll never use?

I could buy athletic shoes that look hideous but perform like world-class shoes... but the extra engineering would be wasted on me. And I wouldn't want ugly shoes.

I think you hit the nail on the head: It's a bargain for the money. Just like an Evo. An Evo would probably be a better performer than the more expensive RS4.

You know what? I still wouldn't daily drive an Evo. It is a fantastic car for what it is. But I just happen to not need what it is.

I would rather have a slower 997 C2S than a GT-R. Because honestly, who am I competing against?

I'm going to spend $70k on a GT-R for supercar performance with a minivan interior to prove something to whom? Or I can buy a $50k S5 and go "Aaaaah" when I step into it... and still get to my destination at the same time as the GT-R.
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 05:50 PM
  #12  
CKit's Avatar
Former Moderator
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,729
Likes: 8
Default

Originally Posted by sahtt,Jan 2 2008, 04:40 PM
Go buy a porsche if you want a better interior and worse performance for more money. It's still a nissan afterall, what do you expect it to look like? A ferrari?
I posted a poll last month that had people choosing a used 911 (997) TT over a similarly priced GT-R almost 2:1.

Performance will be similar. Prices will be similar in a few years between a used Turbo and a new GT-R.
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 05:53 PM
  #13  
Onehots2k's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,536
Likes: 0
From: Orlando
Default

That INTERIOR SUX!! OMG. Good thing for spectacular performance.

I mean 70k is nothing to sneeze at. And thats if you can get it at that..
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 05:54 PM
  #14  
Elistan's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,323
Likes: 28
From: Longmont, CO
Default

From the article:
[QUOTE]The GT-R teaches that sportiness doesn
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 05:56 PM
  #15  
TommyDeVito's Avatar
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,359
Likes: 490
Default

I'm sorry I'd be too busy enjoy the driving experience to worry about the interior or lack thereof. Give me a million dollars or 5 million and I'd still get myself a GTR because of the bang for the buck. Just like a Vette (bang for the buck) if all they can heckle about is the interior then that must mean it's one hell of a performance automobile. I'll take mine in grey or silver please
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 05:57 PM
  #16  
Diablo99V's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 4,849
Likes: 1
From: Caribbean
Default

BMWs interiors are not so great.
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 06:32 PM
  #17  
rai's Avatar
rai
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,981
Likes: 10
From: mount airy
Default

Originally Posted by Elistan,Jan 2 2008, 06:54 PM
From the article:
I think the writer is a GTR fan. IDK, but I don't take it to be an independent review.

BTW who thinks the 911 turbo has a great interior?

It's OK but not worth 2x the cost of a GTR (IMO)
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
xknowonex
California - Southern California S2000 Owners
2
Sep 23, 2009 12:55 AM
loki
The S2000 Gallery
146
Dec 29, 2008 07:31 AM
Graphtuner
The S2000 Gallery
72
Aug 12, 2008 05:37 PM
K2Rhiro255
California - Bay Area S2000 Owners
33
Jan 21, 2008 10:50 PM
rezeap1
The S2000 Gallery
38
Apr 25, 2007 08:30 PM




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:53 AM.