Quote:
Originally Posted by robains
mopho,
You have to be kidding, you would turn away a Nissan GT-R - the looks will grow on you, give it time? We'll not be able to find one in the US for $70K, but this car seriously puts the Lotus Exige S (even modified) to shame considering the price is about the same. And, you get the benefit of 4 seats, quieter ride, and big ass sub woofers so you don't have to endure the rap crap thumbers who pull up next to you. It's only disadvantage is MPG 16-19 city which isn't horribly bad compared to other exotics that aren't as fast.
Top Gear, it ran a 1:19.7 around their tight test track this is 0.2 slower than an Arial Atom. That good sir, is freakin' impressive for a 4000 lb car. It ran a 1:56.9 bone stickin' stock on stock tires at ButtonWillow -- FF 380 ran 1:55 and you know how highly modified the FF car is. Hate to see how fast the GT-R would be with good rubber. And would really hate to see what the Spec-V version would do with 300lbs less weight and 60+ more HP. Spec-V 0-60 is sub 3 secs.
As for the Cobalt SS, seems like a fun package, but no matter how you slice it, front wheels are doing everything and that will be it's fundamental flaw -- this would be one car I would NOT want to do any moderately extended track time in as I couldn't afford the bill for new front rubber. But for a street car, it does seem like a nice package.
|
No, I am not kidding you, you need to stop looking at just the numbers. What a professional driver does around some arbitrary track is meaningless to me, I have no need to
buy lap times.
I have driven the GT-R and I found it not that interesting. And compared to my Caterham (which is nearly as fast with the
smaller engine in it), the GT-R is a complete snooze. So why would I want one?
Additionally, for MSRP, I could have my Caterham and a nicer daily driver that is far more practical than the GT-R, and have the best of both worlds.
And like I just said yesterday in another thread, it's a nice car, but I take issue with other things:
A) Automatic transmission. You can claim all you want that it is a manual, but if you can put it in "drive" and it will change gears itself, it's an automatic. Period!
Sure it shaves seconds off your lap time (again, you're buying a lap time), sure you can do a manual override and it shifts when you want it to and does nice (artificial) throttle blips on the down shift, but it is not as engaging and takes away a lot of the fun in driving. A true manual transmission car can make even a boring drive a bit more entertaining. A manual transmission also makes the acceleration more exciting too because you really have to work it
B) It doesn't sound very good. A nice sounding car adds to the experience. Sure you can put an aftermarket exhaust on it, but the aforementioned automatic transmission upshifts so seamlessly that the car will sound like a Honda Accord with a fart can
C) It is not all that visceral and there is not much sense of speed. One of the parameters in the design of the car was to be able to have a conversation at 150mph. Why? I don't need to have a conversation at 150mph! If I buy a fast car, I want it to knock my socks off, I want it to be exciting, and I don't want to have to drive at absurd speeds (i.e. go to jail speeds) in order for it to be so. And this is the problem with a lot of these supercar types, they are so competent at really high speeds, they are boring to drive at realistic speeds. So what's the point really? Bragging rights?
For me, if I am going to buy a performance car, I prefer a lightweight car that is responsive, gives lots of feedback, and is a visceral experience, even if it is not the fastest car in the hands of a professional driver on the block
Edit: To add, the maintenance costs to track the GT-R will be tremendous