which is faster California or GT-R

My Ferrari will avearge 60-70km/h for its whole 5000-10,000 km of lifetime of my ownership... my Porsche averaged 50 km/h... call me an armchair bloke who just likes to blab... anyway, the GTR will run circles around my Ferrari and I know so... it doesn't make me feel bad... rather, it makes me all the more respect Nissan as a company and the Japanese. If these engeineers can come up with such impressive track times be it regular or special slick, they keep making Porschephiles and engineers scratching their heads in believe. Welcome to the new pecking order of the new world of Fast Cars, which the King and throne are no longer exclusively for the Europeans. Chinese, far from it. The Japanese, can rub a little shoulder pitted against a Lexus LFA and even a BUGATTI so there ya go...

 

Cal, I have to agree also. I also respect the merit of others cars and brands. I personally tend to move from car to car quickly as a result as I can't resist sampling them all. I traded my California last month for a brand Panamera Turbo. Love the car so far. Unbelievable quick for the size and weight and carries the whole family in comfort to boot. Gallardo and GTR are both on my lists of must own cars. Probably both with the next year as I cant seem to stick with any car for more that 4-5 months before I get the itch for the next one.

All said and done though, there is nothing like a Ferrari. Period. If I ever I do settle down with a car for a long period of time, it will be a Ferrari.

612scag

 

Keep in mind that those vaunted GT-R N-Ring times were apparently accomplished with some creative programming from Nissan regarding the suspension, tranny, TC/SC/etc. and have not come close to being replicated by independent tests. That is not to say that it isn't a very fast car, but I can rattle off a list of current production cars that will be quicker on most tracks assuming the driver is skilled enough to overcome their comparative lack of safety nets.

 

who cares


what do you drive? a nissan
big woop

what do you drive? a ferrari
FFFFFFFFerrari me

 

To take the above sentiment further....just wondering what would a Bugatti Veyron owner think when he/she sees a Ferrari?? Same type of reaction?? I hope not.

So, what's wrong with having/driving a Nissan?

It's a darn good sports car and is head and shoulders (performance wise) with current offerings from F, L & P-cars alike and yet cost much less $$.

Would you shy away from a excellent product just because it's not a premium brand??

I know I wouldn't.

In fact, part of the excitement that this GT-R brings is that IT'S A FREAKING NISSAN!!!

I see it as a plus not a minus.

 

oh sorry brother
i like the gtr as well
its just hard to compare the gtr to a ferrari
even thought the gtr would probably blow the doors off a ferrari

 

faster to what... if its rust I would say the GTR.

 

GTR is faster on both stright line and track. But who cares? Ferrari is Ferrari IMHO

 

Forget the IMHO ... Ferrari is Ferrari and no other can come close to the experience. Those of us that own them and more important DRIVE THEM figure that out quickly. We are very fortunate. Whether it is a 308 or a 599 it is still a Ferrari and no Chevy or Nissan can come close.

Rick

 

After putting 5,000 miles on my 09 GTR I traded it for an 08 F430. The 430 wasn't around too long and was traded for a new 2010 California, which after putting Tubi's on, I love it and still have it. (I also added a Scud which got moved for a 16m).

At least from my experience, the GTR was the fastest car I have ever driven up to this point, period. (The Scud being close to it...)The problem with the GTR is that it has no soul and the sound was underwhelming. In addition, it was actually too stiff where I find all of the Ferraris I have owned much more pleasent to drive. I suppose its all relative when it comes to ride quality anyway...

I would get another GTR for track use only, but that is about it. The Cali is certainly faster than most of us need and of course I am thrilled to have been fortunate enough to own both.

 

Yes and no.

It comes down to the engine design. The early Porsche 911s, air cooled and with no emissions concerns, sound like the 190 Horsemen of the Apocalypse. The new 997s are faster, but you can easily have a phone call or quiet conversation.

Ditto the old carburetted Ferrari V12s, which have what some people call a "ripping canvas" sound.

Modern cars tend to use exhaust flaps to get more exciting sounds. Not sure about the California or GT-R, but I suspect the sound is user-adjustable.

Bottom line is that performance used to be all about huge engines, and you had to go to Ferrari or Jaguar to get that. Now it's mostly about technology, and I don't see Italy taking the lead there.

If you buy a new Ferrari now, it isn't for investment or performance bragging rights. You have to like how it looks and like the cachet of an automotive luxury brand.

 

Rick, I seriously doubt there will be a facelift in 2012, the Cali's platform being a tech platform or as a lab rat is still too young to undergo a change... I'd tend to think that if sales slow, they will just kill it and won't facelift it. If you notice, all the technology firsts are placed on the Cali first and it is used as beta tester than trickled down to 458 (like the getrag box) and the 458 and 612 and 599 to come will all have HELE. Yes I bought the lab rat but c'est la vie.

 

Agree. It reminds me of a scene in the first FAST AND THE FURIOUS when the Vin Diesel's SUPRA was at a red light with a Ferrari 355 or was it a testarossa... the dude in the Ferrari said "FFFFFerrari... more than you can afford" (in reply to Paul's question, how much does that cost)... then they smoked him... that wouldn't go down well for me... FFFFFFFFFerrari sure... but then the guy in the GTR would smile and ask, is it FAST? then I better remain silent... he will smoke me.

 

I had a grad school classmate who now works at McLaren... he said I shouldn't get the 2012 GTR... because after driving one, everything else would seem slow... damn... he was like after the GTR 200K... I'd have to buy another faster car... and would not even drive the California... I see his point somehow... he said when you had had a MAC 27" LED CINEMA DISPLAY, everything else seems blurry like I have myopia...after HD/bluray, who can live with DVDs? I can't even get myself to go to the cinema anymore as they still use projector.

Now you have confirmed me. I am actually thinking about getting the 2012 GTR now that it is being rolled out in the fall by NISSAN for the first time... no more grey imports! Hurray!

 

Does not matter.

You buy a GTR to be faster than everybody else. You certainly don't buy it to be prettier or more sophisticated.

You buy a California to cruise around in a classic sophisticated good looking Italian GT car. That it can go faster than most other sports cars is just a side effect you can acknowledge when you need to. It is like my Bentley in that regard. I like to curise in it, but yes, every now and then its 552 horses come in handy.

People don't buy California's for the performance, nowithstanding that it performs quite well.

 

AWD always has the advantage, that's why F1 banned it, as well as bigger tires, the GT-R uses truck sized tires. At the end of the day it's a soulless appliance that is best compared to an FQ400 or Cosworth STi, but not a ferrari.

 

agree to most points but soulless soulful, a sports car is all about speed... otherwise, go drive a tinky prius which is all about being green.

Sports car is about 0-100, track times, handling so soulless soulful, Ferrari needs to excel in that front FWIW and for what it is charging customers.

Ferrari maybe prettier (debatable too when it comes to Cali as evident from most on this forum... less so the case for 458 which had gotten mostly positive reviews on looks) but in general, sure, the car may look better when in standstill but there really isn't any reason why the JAPs when set out to create a sports car with the purpose of being speedy, could create a car that outruns a legend like Ferrari, which, regardless of souls, was meant to mean speed.

Now back to the question (i am a cali owner to be so I know it will be thrown at me), so "IS IT FAST? it's a FERRARI right?"... I wouldn't wanna say "SURE, it WAS fast in the old days but it ISN'T FAST by modern standards because the JAPs made faster cars now..."

soulful soulless, I see the JAPs breathing down everyone's neck which is not necessarily a bad thing because they will only up the ANTE. Wake up Porsche, blaming it on the slick of the GTR ain't gonna make the turbo King of the RING... rather, do something to put your mouth to where the money is. Instead of defaming others, show me the money.

 

Porsche's accusation indeed made a fool out of themselves.

But they did roll out the Turbo S that apparently can do 0-60 in 2.7secs!

 

If a sports car is all about speed then why not compare the King of the Ring Radical SR8 or even a 350hp Donkervoort street legal lap king. http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/nordschleife.html

The reason is the total experience. Soulless soulful sounds like an oxymoron. Even from the GT-R's window the Ferrari emits a sound nothing less than scintillating over the GT-R. The race starts at 2:30 after the warm up and the GT-R can never pass http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt5i9RVzZmc

 

very different cars >>> i wouldnt even compare them .. but definetly the GTR

 

i really dont care about which is faster , the california is definetly my choice in a heart beat ...

 

Here is reversed roll.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Craig- Needs to pop the engine cover like the ricers and the roles will reverse again.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

I think its a humorous picture, though. Older white guy standing alone by (presumably) his F-car and younger Asian/Hispanic (tuner?) crowd around the GT-R!

 

Actually those GTR's are Skylines and rare here in the states.