which is faster California or GT-R

My guess would be the GT-R is faster, as is has more HP and is lighter. But put it this way, like a dealer once said to me... At the end of the day you get out of a GT-R and say "WOW, thats a really nice Nissan." California on the other hand, you just got out of a FERRARI. It's the total driving experience!!

 

Um.



Two VERY VERY different cars.

 

One is a Nissan ... the other is a Ferrari ... I have been in a few Nissan's (no GTR though, darn) ... no feeling of an 'experience' there, like getting out of a Chevy. Its OK for the other car to be faster ... it still is a Chevy or a Nissan.

Plenty of people can make a car faster than a Ferrari. The 911 turbo seems to get better track times by all of the magazines. I was on the Mid-Ohio race course a week ago and there was not a single 911 that sounded anything like my Ferrari, nor got the attention and I pulled away from all of them (in my beginner class). Something tells me that there was a GT-R there too, not sure.

Rick

 

Hey Rick. I've never really sat in other sports cars, but I hear that other cars rarely sound like a Ferrari. I would think that replicating the sound would be relatively easy for competing brands, no?

 

Basically, it's all about philosophy and legacy/tradition.

You know how they always say you can tell immediately in a restaurant a german apart from an Italian... the germans are known to be more understated and low key and the italians as more garish (sometimes loudmouthed...)... I had a few Porsches and about to get a Ferrari and they have their merits. GTR also has its merits and you have to give it to the Japanese somehow sometime. Let's face it, no matter what, if Nissan can come up with a car like that, it is a real achivement. Enzo would be kicking in his grave seeing this... I wouldn't mind matching the performance to the sound as well. The California cannot match the GTR straightline or on a circuit. I am a California owner to be and I know so. However, since they are so different, it would be like comparing apples to oranges and I suspect GTR doesn't even come onto the radar screen of most Ferrari owners. Most would drive by with a big smile on his face.

 

who cares

 

A bottle rocket with a turd taped to it is damn fast............

 

Tom beat me to it. An ugly, grossly understeering car saved by all wheel drive and nanny band-aids. No thanks. Californias look like Ferraris, sound like Ferraris, go like Ferraris, and are, by God, real Ferraris. Park one in the middle of 20 GT-Rs and see which car attracts attention.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

I'd say GT R is faster.

 

Then, rev each car and see what gets more people to turn or look.

I was behind a TDF California and the downshift alone was intoxicating

Plus, it looks good in certain selections; 20" wheels and colors.

 

OP asked which is faster? The Nissan GTR is much quicker 0-60, 0-100, top speed, nurburgring time than the Ferrari California. It's not even close. These are two totally different cars, they should not even be compared (truly apples to oranges example). Better comparisons would be Cali versus Merc SL 65 AMG, AM DBS convertible and GTR versus Scud, Gallardo Superleggera. These are closer comparisons.

You would be foolish to not want a $250k Ferrari over a 70k Nissan. Anyone stating otherwise is lying.

 

Agree. However, the question was being posed for a reason. To be more apt and to the point, any California owner to be including myself would be foolish to not want our 250K (I assure you that I am an absolute imbecile... as I m worst off as mine is 420K USD with tax to not want what I m stating here) Ferrari as is with all the sound and look that also has the performance of a 700K Nissan. Stating otherwise is also a lie. Otherwise, why would the question be posed. While most of us are armchair SCHMACHER and I am too chicken to drive > 60 km/h for risk of losing my license on most usable roads (and that i will be using maybe 40% of the power of my california as I don't track), we do like talking about NURBURGRING times for a reason. Cars are pitted against each other for a reason and the question being posed means that people are concerned about performance as much as the sound of the engine.

Ferrari and Porsche make fast cars but with the existence of the ever physics defying heavy clunker gorilla GTR, these two brands must rethink what making fast cars mean and can mean.

My 2 cents, no one would mind having their existence Ferraris to have the performance of the
GTR. It defies me as well. The Gallardo and the Murc will have to worry when they see GUNDAM GORILLA GTR showing up in its rearview mirror. Yes, you would attract more attention with your engine noise but you would attract even more attention the moment you become a speck in the GTR's mirror. That's even more of an embarassment for those on German Autobahn.

I guess I am really tempted to after my California to come in March get the 2012 GTR if not for it not having a dealership here. It's a perfectly usable everyday car and I love it as well.

I always say, I love MAC, but I also use Windows, not a problem, they each have their merits... there's no one thing absolutely beats out the other car in my mind. They are different but GTR will blow my california away and yes it is embarassing as I know the GTR will pick on me.

 

Cal- It is just like any other car manufacturer, some models are faster than others. Take Corvettes, for instance. If your Vette is just for cruising and the occasional romp, the 430 hp standard engine is fine and plenty quick. If you do not want to run up against something faster too often, get a 515 hp Z06. If you cannot stand someone being faster, get a ZR1 and the odds are you will never run up against a faster car.

Ferraris are the same. The four seat GTs, the 612 and California are not the quickest, but great all around road cars and no slouches. If you have to have the fastest thing around, get a 599 or a 458, and the odds of seeing a faster car are very, very small. The GT-R is not in the same class, unless the road is wet.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

I have been away for a bit ... but others probably could duplicate the sound but have not done so that I know of ... but they still would not be a Ferrari.

At a recent Cars & Coffee a Porsche 928 pulled in ... I have had 3 928's ... the sound they make is really amazing ... and I turned and wished I had that sound ... for about 10 seconds then remembered what I drove in and am glad I have mine.

 

Rick- Hard to duplicate the sound of a 180 degree crankshaft V8 with 90 degree crank engines. The Maseratis sound good, but their 90 degree crank engines still sound different. The 928 had a 90 degree crank, too.

All the early V8s, like the Hispano-Suiza in the SPAD, were flat crank engines. The first production engines with a 90 degree crank did not come out until the 20s.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Faster in what way? Acceleration times, trap speeds, or track times? In a straight line they are probably similar but on a track with turns I'm sure the GT-R is faster. For example the 2011 GT-R model was tested last month at the Nurburgring and clocked a 7:24.22 lap. I cant find what the California has clocked but the fastest production Ferrari tested was the Enzo, it clocked a 7:25:7. I doubt the California can break the 7:40 barrier at best.
Reference : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times#Production_vehicles

 

I agree with Kyoso_Joey, but I'd still take the Ferrari

 

Yep

 

Me 2, I am taking the Ferrari but I would be lying to myself that I didn't want the Ferrari to sound like a Ferrari yet tracks like the GTR right?

It's like bandwidth, it is never broad enough.

There were days when 14.4 modem felt fast and now we are on 3G and it is still not fast enough. Just like hp, you can never get enough of it. Lambo says it all, 700 bhp to come for JOTA... what's next?

Actually, to me, the future is in electric motors and gas hybrid. In some driving the electric motor kicks in giving you no power loss and no lag driving the 4 wheels (with one motor per wheel) and gas for other situations.

HELE is only the first green Ferrari. There will be many more new ideas and hybrid/electricity and even HYDRO cars are all gonna be part of us for many more years to come. Just like stick shift, one day, it will no longer be offered on any Ferrari and it is a fact of life and starting with 458, there isn't any stick. Over here, there is NOT ONE california with stick despite the rumour that stick is being offered. Currently, I don't think my salesman knows a thing about a stick option.

 

A serious study on HELE would be interesting, that is how long must the engine remain off to make up for the extra fuel used to start the engine.

And the extra performance would be way cool. Hopefully I can sell my California in late 2012 to move to the California-M with more horsepower and less weight. Either way, I plan to keep a California.

Rick

 

Seems strange to say this, but the Cali might be better as a daily driver.Really. It's a more conventionally configured car.Also better maybe than next year's 911, because it seems to have better ergonomics, i.e., the 911 looks too small.Or I could be wrong.

 

Even though I'm not a fan of the GTR's looks (the rear looks nice, though), the California is probably one of the ugliest Ferraris made. The rear end is absolutely terrible...didn't think a Fcar would ever look like that from the back. I've seen them in person a few times and still doesn't do anything for me. I rather save my $$$ and get a GTR for daily driving along with a F355 for weekends (last good looking Fcar).

 

Yeah I have heard the same thing about Angelina Jolie's lips too... and same for Julia Roberts. I think the rear of the California is beautiful and voluptuous. Coming from a C4S nicknamed fat lady, the voluptuous rear looks absolutely sexy to me. Then again, some say the GTR is beautiful so I heard. The last time I checked, there were those who thought of Megan Fox as cheap and nasty so what gives?

Anyway, I would wanna own both a California and a GTR. The California grows on you and the GTR is good as a daily driver as well. As to 458, it seems like it is growing out of me.

 

I've always said this, looks are subjective, speed is not. If you're fast you're fast. People will not always agree with what looks good. I think both cars would be cool to own but depending on what kind of driving you do. The California might actually do very good on a small course or for SCCA auto x, the GT-R is made for big tracks. I was running similar times to a modded GT-R at an auto x event but that car would have tore me up on a big track with higher speeds.
In the end it comes down to driver preferance. Both cars are very fast but I bet there are only a handful of members on this forum that could drive these cars to their potential.