y2ks2k

This is true. I've said this many times here about my S2000 when I first got it. I got it the first day it came out and had a LOT of attention in it for that first 6 months. People running up to see it on corners and such. A guy asked me once "you must get a lot of chicks with that thing" and I told him strait up "no, the majority of attention I get for this car is the 10 to 16 year old boy range and I aint interested in that". Oddly enough, my Sti appealed to a lot older audience. That was really odd. As gas stations, the 18 year olds would ask about my S2000 and the middle age dudes would stop to talk about my Sti.

rai

oh, the price is not out but I have been hearing mid-$60s to mid-$70s NOT $85K which is getting up there (as in a 600hp Viper etc.).

I think it's vital this car isn't priced too high.

I mean it's great at what-ever price. But the point for me would be it's price/performance is great at a similar to M3 price (also still not established) but I mean something around the price of a Z06.

Now there is talk of the GT3-ified verson with 530hp etc.. in the $80s but the base/normal GTR hopefully will be significantly less than a 911S.

Iceman1

He is Lebanese, but born in Brazil... he's a citizen of France...

rai

I was reading something about the GTR it can send 98% of the power to the rear wheels.

Also they really did benchmark the performance of the 997 TURBO which I think is cool.

They don't intend this to be the same as the Turbo by any means. I think it's got +16 inch longer wheelbase and just maybe +5 inches longer overall, wider, heavier, etc..

I think it will be interesting to see real numbers once they are out, see how this is as quick as the turbo while being less powerful (on paper) but heavier and having less rear weight (which should favor the Turbo accleration). Or how (if it is) almost as quick as the more powerful Z06 which weighs (?) 600 lbs less.

I wonder what's wrong the claimed times or the claimed power


I also want to see the darn rear seats if they are for real or just basketball size shelf that look like seats.

Slamnasty

I agree with others that regardless of looks, if this car performs like it's been projected to, looks are pretty much off the table as a major consideration. Personally I think that while it doesn't look exotic, it looks good overall. The face is the only iffy part IMO, and the rest of it is damn tight. Hell even the Z06 isn't the prettiesst thing in the price point. I think Moslers look horrible for what they cost, and even the Zonda ain't that great visually. Limiting the decision to looks alone IMO is ignoring so many other positive reasons to buy it. Some people think the Enzo is ugly, and its variants reach past the 7 figure mark.

If Nissan really delivers at the level projected, it'll be one hell of an engineering achievement for them, perhaps their biggest ever.

kumainu

What's wrong with the GT-R? On top of my head, some of these are "wrong" but very subjective:

1) Styling: some think it looks ugly, while others think it looks interesting. So in general, its style is not considered universally beautiful.

2) Branded as a non-luxury marque.

3) Heavy weight: some are turned off by its heavy weight even though a heavy GT car is almost always safer than a light-weight sports car.

4) It's made a grand tourer instead of pure sports car. But the previous GT-Rs were also GTs instead of light-weight sports cars, even though they were monsters on tracks, and extremely easy to get more power.

Iceman1

So I'm pretty sure performance isn't the number 1 concern for most people.

i agree with that though... the reason premium brands became premium brands, is due to being affiliated with excellant cars...

but its true that many owners dont know how to appreaciate them for those reasons...

rai

[QUOTE=kumainu,Nov 7 2007, 02:27 PM] Heavy weight:

dyhppy

i somewhat disagree. premium brands mostly became that way cuz of price. if honda charged 100k per car and threw in some fake wood, they'd be premium too.

Mystiqueskillz

I think it will sell well.