Nissan GTR, The Pricey Story

[deadlydave]

Source:  http://www.autoblog.com/2012/01/21/nissan-raises-gt-r-base-price-again-this-time-to-96-820/

Enthusiasts looking to purchase a Nissan GT-R will need to dig deeper. Nissan has announced pricing for the 2013 model, which starts at $96,820, nearly $7,000 more than the 2012 car.

You may remember that the 2008 GT-R started under $70,000, so the sticker shock of a 38.6 percent price increase in six model years is not insignificant. That said, Nissan can counter that no supercar within $100,000 can touch the GT-R when it comes to performance bang for the buck.

Like we told you back in November, the 3.8-liter, twin-turbo V6 cranks out 545 horsepower and 463 pound-feet of torque for 2013, an increase of 15 hp and 15 lb-ft. The zero to 60 sprint takes a jaw-dropping 2.7 seconds, according to the automaker.

The GT-R Black Edition also returns with a starting MSRP of $106,320. It's mainly unchanged for 2013 save for a new dry carbon fiber rear spoiler. Hit the jump to read over the Nissan press release.

I was fascinated by the ridiculous sticker price.  I always had a theory that the GTR was never a 70k supercar, but a 120k supercar that Nissan was selling at a massive loss (See Sony PS3 for that marketing idea).

[Pitcrew]

I still want one....

[madlife]

I'm sure this was the plan all along.  Going back a few years, 90% of Americans would laugh at Nissan making a supercar.  When they think 100k+ they would think High end BMW, Mercedes, Jag, Maserati, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche.  Nissan needed to prove themselves and their car.  They did, so now they can jack the price up..

The same goes for Lexus LS-F  {is that the name?}  although with Nissan doing it first, people probably accepted the Lexus more up front.

[spoolordie]

LEXUS LF-A    

[deadlydave]

The same goes for Lexus LS-F  {is that the name?}  although with Nissan doing it first, people probably accepted the Lexus more up front.

LEXUS LF-A    

Some of the Car mags that have/had fleet GTR's took them in for service and were astounded at the 'reguluar' service costs in the 3-5k range. 

The GTR, at it's core, is still a regular car made with regular materials.  It's arguably the best-performing 'regular car' in the world, but you see my point.  The engineering is fantastic, the electronic dudad programming is exemplary, and the performance and ease-of-use are unbelievable.  However, it's a steel unibody(common), with AWD(unique execution but common concept), Boosted Front-mounted V6(common).

The LFA's is almost a tech demonstrator for mass CF production and digital instrumentation. 

[hydrochloric]

The LF-A was built so Lexus could swing its technological dick around.  It's a sweet car, but they spent about a decade designing it, just to scrap that design once CF came around?  Come on.

[deadlydave]

The LF-A was built so Lexus could swing its technological dick around.  It's a sweet car, but they spent about a decade designing it, just to scrap that design once CF came around?  Come on.

That obsessive-compulsive engineering drive would've avoided the disastrous recalls they had in '09 and '10.

Back to Nissan:  By making the GTR's base sticker for 100k, they leave themselves a lot of room to be undercut by a Supra or NSX. 

[hydrochloric]

That obsessive-compulsive engineering drive would've avoided the disastrous recalls they had in '09 and '10.

Back to Nissan:  By making the GTR's base sticker for 100k, they leave themselves a lot of room to be undercut by a Supra or NSX. 

Fair on the recalls....  MAYBE  THAT'S WHY IT HAPPENED!  All the engineers were too busy with the LF-A! 

Toyota isn't going to make another Supra.  Sorry.  Nope.  Toyota is too-beige, and unless they're planning a demographic shift for Scion, it's too cheap.

Acura's NSX is really good looking (and will probably be very good), but...  SH-AWD?  Just... what... why...  NSX and AWD?  I just...  No.  Even if it is just electric assist.

[peter32892]

Fair on the recalls....  MAYBE  THAT'S WHY IT HAPPENED!  All the engineers were too busy with the LF-A! 

Toyota isn't going to make another Supra.  Sorry.  Nope.  Toyota is too-beige, and unless they're planning a demographic shift for Scion, it's too cheap.

Acura's NSX is really good looking (and will probably be very good), but...  SH-AWD?  Just... what... why...  NSX and AWD?  I just...  No.  Even if it is just electric assist.

SH-AWD is one of the best awd systems out there so I don't see how it is a bad thing. Even if honda hasn't been putting out the best cars atm I cannot see them messing up the NSX at all.
On the note of a supra successor from what I have been reading they're making a "supra" successor.

[deadlydave]

Fair on the recalls....  MAYBE  THAT'S WHY IT HAPPENED!  All the engineers were too busy with the LF-A! 
Toyota isn't going to make another Supra.  Sorry.  Nope.  Toyota is too-beige, and unless they're planning a demographic shift for Scion, it's too cheap.
Acura's NSX is really good looking (and will probably be very good), but...  SH-AWD?  Just... what... why...  NSX and AWD?  I just...  No.  Even if it is just electric assist.

Toyota took a very grade-schooler approach to being the #1 automaker in the world:  just sell the most units.  Totally bit them in the ass by focusing too much on quantity and not enough on quality. 

Previously, they might not have been able to make a business case for an FR supra against something like a 70k GTR.  For the money, it would get it's ass handed to it.  But, with the base price of the GTR so high, it gives them room to make what amounts to a JDM Corvette.

The NSX rumblings I heard were an FR drivetrain with electric assist on the front wheels.  If they switch to conventional awd, SH-AWD is a great performing system, and to give the car a sportier feel, their engineers already have the ability to give it a heavy rear-bias.

When the R35 GTR came out, I remember being disappointed.  This was not a tuner-friendly almost-affordable rocket I was expecting.  Price, engine configuration, and initial lack of tunability aside, it is still a sledgehammer, which keeps the original spirit of the car.  Even Toyota should be able to make an FR sledgehammer in the spirit of the supra.  The NSX was always about balance, and it will be tricky to keep that spirit in the front engined, awd car.

SH-AWD is one of the best awd systems out there so I don't see how it is a bad thing. Even if honda hasn't been putting out the best cars atm I cannot see them messing up the NSX at all.
On the note of a supra successor from what I have been reading they're making a "supra" successor.

That's what I heard, the supra project was only shelved because of the recalls and the Eartquake/Tsunami/Reactor Meltdown.

[Zeeeek]

As someone never in the market for one: who cares?

[deadlydave]

As someone never in the market for one: who cares?

Speak for yourself, peasant.   

[hydrochloric]

It's not the system I take offense to, it's the fact it's there.  The original NSX was RWD for a reason.  It was purpose built for track and daily use (Ayrton Senna even helped tune it), and while the 2.5WD may help on the street, I can't see it helping on the track (even though I recognize that most will only see the street anyway), so to me it departs from the original car.

As for a Supra...  Given Toyota's recent cars (and considering most of the Toyobaru was engineered by Subaru), I can't bring myself to expect anything good.  If they pull it off, I'll be pleasantly surprised.  I still don't see where they would propose putting it in their line up, since, in the words of Adam Ferrara, it would be asked to leave the normal lineup because "all the minivans are crying," and Scion's price point is too low for it.

[deadlydave]

The original NSX was RWD for a reason...so to me it departs from the original car.

You and I are on the same page.  The NSX name represents an MR car.  It was light, reliable, fun to drive, easy to live with, and quick.  Gordon Murray, creator of the McLarens loved it so much, it inspired him to create his ultimate road car.  He even wanted Honda to do the engine for him, but they declined.

As a separate note, there was an autoblog article maybe a year ago where they went to an Acura proving grounds and the engineers were able to with a laptop change the AWD bias to almost 100% RWD.  That would be baller to have optional DCCD-style control of rear bias in those cars.

As for a Supra...  Given Toyota's recent cars...I still don't see where they would propose putting it in their line up, since, in the words of Adam Ferrara, it would be asked to leave the normal lineup because "all the minivans are crying," and Scion's price point is too low for it.

I agree that there's no place for it in the lineup, it would almost have to be sold as a sub-ISF Lexus or as a Scion 'halo car'.  Like a lighter, cheaper, 2-door ISF.  Even though I'm no longer a lexus driver, I still am highly attracted to the ISF.  Maybe in a few years, they do depreciate faster than M3's.

[hydrochloric]

As a separate note, there was an autoblog article maybe a year ago where they went to an Acura proving grounds and the engineers were able to with a laptop change the AWD bias to almost 100% RWD.  That would be baller to have optional DCCD-style control of rear bias in those cars.

That would solve most of my complaint, though the fact its there is still irking.  I would fear that if they included a feature like that though, they would take the route others have, and not really turn the system off.  It stays off until it detects slip or some such and then turns on again...

I agree that there's no place for it in the lineup, it would almost have to be sold as a sub-ISF Lexus or as a Scion 'halo car'.  Like a lighter, cheaper, 2-door ISF.  Even though I'm no longer a lexus driver, I still am highly attracted to the ISF.  Maybe in a few years, they do depreciate faster than M3's.

If it were a true Supra successor, wouldn't it be above the IS-F?  I don't think that a brand marketed as a "youth brand", focusing primarily on FWD, "sporty", buzz-word styled cars can sell a GT car with enough power to remove limbs....  Mostly because mommy and daddy wouldn't pay for that one.

I like the IS-F, but the hood's lines put me off slightly, and the fake exhausts really disappoint.  Now, maybe the Lexus version of the Soarer, or LF-LC if they ever make it, those I would go for.

[deadlydave]

If it were a true Supra successor, wouldn't it be above the IS-F?  I don't think that a brand marketed as a "youth brand", focusing primarily on FWD, "sporty", buzz-word styled cars can sell a GT car with enough power to remove limbs....  Mostly because mommy and daddy wouldn't pay for that one.

The ISF is 460 horsepower (IIRC), I really don't think that toyota would go much above that.  And I think a supra replacement using that drivetrain would be cheaper than the ISF regardless of badging.

I like the IS-F, but the hood's lines put me off slightly, and the fake exhausts really disappoint.

The hood does look silly and bulbous.  They bulged the whole hood to clear the engine and plastics, I wonder if an IS250 hood could go on with small bulges just over the heads on each side, and toss the plastics?  I have heard conflicting reports on the exhaust being 1-outlet-per-side as EDM-only.  Either way, the car's too quiet.  I'd throw a catback on there, and just have the stock tips welded on to that.

My disappointments were centered around the open diff, automatic only, and conservative tire widths. 

[hydrochloric]

I'll pull a ricer, because I would get an IS300 before the IS-F.

Is that actual 460HP, or is it under-rated?  I would hope a Supra 2.0 WOULDN'T use that drivetrain, but rather a 6-spd, Torsen LSD, and something like a 3.8 or 4.0 I6, TT.  Toyota has already tried making an AE86 homage in the BRZGT-86FR-S, why wouldn't they want to make an homage for a Supra, too?

[deadlydave]

I'll pull a ricer, because I would get an IS300 before the IS-F.

Is that actual 460HP, or is it under-rated?  I would hope a Supra 2.0 WOULDN'T use that drivetrain, but rather a 6-spd, Torsen LSD, and something like a 3.8 or 4.0 I6, TT.  Toyota has already tried making an AE86 homage in the BRZGT-86FR-S, why wouldn't they want to make an homage for a Supra, too?

I looked it up and the ISF 'only' 416HP.  I-6's are the bomb, but I think the chances of an I-6 supra are nonexistent.  Why would they want to make an homage to the supra?  A fat, Steel, I6 Twin Turbo with <350HP?  Even Nissan abandoned the GTR's bread and butter steel TT I6.  I think they'd probably go a similar route to Nissan and do an advanced V6 TT or an NA V8. 

The IS300 is good in a lot of ways.  Like the ISF, the stats were NOT impressive for the money of a new vehicle.  Like the ISF, LSD was not standard.  Like the ISF, the depreciation hit was massive.  I think that you'd like an IS300 more, knowing you, and since you have tons of engine-out experience working on a car, you would probably have no problem getting a steal on a beat one and making it nice again.

Interesting factoids:
The chief engineer of the IS F, Yukihiko Yaguchi, previously worked on the Toyota Supra.
The chief engineer of the IS300,  Nobuaki Katayama, previously worked on the AE86 project.

Not to derail the conversation further, but I compared prices on a davespec ISF and davespec CTSV wagon...virtually identical.   Which leads me to ask...why isn't there an LS3-powered Sub-V CTS Sport or something?  There's a pretty big price jump to the V...seems like there's a sweet spot for an NA V8 CTS between the 2.

[hydrochloric]

I looked it up and the ISF 'only' 416HP.  I-6's are the bomb, but I think the chances of an I-6 supra are nonexistent.  Why would they want to make an homage to the supra?  A fat, Steel, I6 Twin Turbo with <350HP?  Even Nissan abandoned the GTR's bread and butter steel TT I6.  I think they'd probably go a similar route to Nissan and do an advanced V6 TT or an NA V8.

I guess "homage" might be the wrong word, more a "spiritual successor".  I just hate that stupid buzz-word phrase.  I assume, if they did/do make a Supra successor, they would do it like the GT-86, and make a car that followed all the principles of the original.  So an aluminum engine, probably that funky DI and PFI fuel system, manual, etc.  It wouldn't have to be an I6, I guess, I just like I6s.    It almost feels like V6s have a "sedan" stigma to them, like if you say your car has a V6, you'd have to hurriedly explain it also has two turbos and 400HP, so that whoever you're talking to doesn't just say "Oh, you have an Accord?".

Now, a V8 one wouldn't be so bad, but V8s are getting pretty uncommon outside of trucks and American cars these days...  I seriously doubt they would use a V8.

The IS300 is good in a lot of ways.  Like the ISF, the stats were NOT impressive for the money of a new vehicle.  Like the ISF, LSD was not standard.  Like the ISF, the depreciation hit was massive.  I think that you'd like an IS300 more, knowing you, and since you have tons of engine-out experience working on a car, you would probably have no problem getting a steal on a beat one and making it nice again.

Many cars had pretty bad stats for their price.  The original Miata had an optional LSD, and the wheeziest, most high-strung engine ever fitted to a road car (3500RPM at 65?).  1.4L is just too small for a non-city car.

Huh.  I had no idea the original IS300 had AWD as an option.  I might make it run well, but my bodywork skills are non-existent, so it would look like a LeMons car. 

Not to derail the conversation further, but I compared prices on a davespec ISF and davespec CTSV wagon...virtually identical.   Which leads me to ask...why isn't there an LS3-powered Sub-V CTS Sport or something?  There's a pretty big price jump to the V...seems like there's a sweet spot for an NA V8 CTS between the 2.

I would think that would trample the ATS market spot.  Plus, I don't think they could really justify the engine.  The reason they got away with a massive supercharged V8 in a sedan is because they put it in the V-range, which has always held exclusively insane, often stupid, cars (XLR-V, anyone?).  If they put a huge LSx in it WITHOUT giving it a V tag, I would think people would go crazy about fuel economy and the like.  Plus, the whole point of the CTS-V is that it's a sedan that's faster than a Ferrari.  A lower-power CTS-V would be like...  the 300ZX NA.  It was made for, and is better with, the TT engine.  The only reason they made it NA was to sell more.  Cadillac wouldn't want to pollute the CTS' image, I wouldn't think.

Also?  "Davespec" needs to be an SCCA class. 

[deadlydave]

...so that whoever you're talking to doesn't just say "Oh, you have an Accord?".

I also love I6's.  Hell, modern turbos, aluminum block, VVT-i, and Direct injection, even applied to the 'basic' 2jzgte engine design, would still probably produce, even with modern emissions restrictions, 400 horsepower, with better response AND economy.  But, the bean-counters don't like soulful things.

Now, a V8 one wouldn't be so bad, but V8s are getting pretty uncommon outside of trucks and American cars these days...  I seriously doubt they would use a V8.

The only way they could justify it is if it was cheap enough...and having 2 models with the ISF lump miiight do that.  Maybe.  That was my only reasoning for that.  To avoid the gas guzzler tax, they have the freakin 8-speed slushbox in the ISF...if you're driving in manual mode, how do you not get carpul tunnel from the flappypaddles? 

Many cars had pretty bad stats for their price.  The original Miata had an optional LSD, and the wheeziest, most high-strung engine ever fitted to a road car (3500RPM at 65?).  1.4L is just too small for a non-city car.

Fiat 500 Abarth!  But yea you're right.  My is300 new stickered(it came with a ratty original window sticker) for 32,500 in 02-03.   Hell, my 318is was like a 24,000 dollar car.

Huh.  I had no idea the original IS300 had AWD as an option.  I might make it run well, but my bodywork skills are non-existent, so it would look like a LeMons car. 

Read the wiki page, eh?  The IS300 technically didn't, the Altezza Gita(wagon) did, and it was a light-duty  4eat w/transfer case versus the 5eat or 5mt/6mt depending on spec.  The unicorn for those cars in the US is a 5mt wagon w/oem torsen.  Also, the wagons ran wide 7.5" rear wheels that looked identical to the 7" on the sedan...when I was running mine in Solo, I did briefly contemplate cheating with those, until I just started building the car for STX.

Cadillac wouldn't want to pollute the CTS' image, I wouldn't think.
Also?  "Davespec" needs to be an SCCA class. 

I see your point.  It wouldn't surprise me to see an ATS-V or "s" that was similar in performance to the Buick Regal GS (which I slightly like only because my brother has a Grand National).

If you want to do some auto-x this year, my friend Joe is building a ratty E30 for our 'crapcan cup', you can join as long as you don't fix any more body work.  We'll use the class paxes.  We'll probably also run in the Street Tire class so I can interchange wagonzilla to beat on Devin and the Dirty 30 to beat on Joe(who is coming to the e30 world from an LS3-swapped Z3).

[hydrochloric]

Multiple quote boxes made for a large message.

But, the bean-counters don't like soulful things.

To avoid the gas guzzler tax, they have the freakin 8-speed slushbox in the ISF...if you're driving in manual mode, how do you not get carpul tunnel from the flappypaddles? 

Fiat 500 Abarth!

Read the wiki page, eh?

I see your point.  It wouldn't surprise me to see an ATS-V or "s" that was similar in performance to the Buick Regal GS (which I slightly like only because my brother has a Grand National).

If you want to do some auto-x this year, my friend Joe is building a ratty E30 for our 'crapcan cup', you can join as long as you don't fix any more body work.  We'll use the class paxes.  We'll probably also run in the Street Tire class so I can interchange wagonzilla to beat on Devin and the Dirty 30 to beat on Joe(who is coming to the e30 world from an LS3-swapped Z3).

They mostly don't like excess.  Which an I6 would undoubtedly be.  It is a good question, though.  In theory, there's no reason an I6 is any worse than a V6, and yet everyone switched.  I can see the size argument when it comes to transverse mount, but why the switch in longitudinal cars?

I don't even understand how a transmission changes the tax bracketing, except I suppose you can get into the powerband slightly better, for slightly less emissions.  Not knowing how they operate, perhaps it skips gears?

...which is a $23,000 car.  Yes, the power-to-weight is good, but it's also turbocharged, something the Miata wasn't.

Most Toyotas never really caught me eye, so Wikipedia is a first stop. 

The new Buicks are really quite nice, to me anyway.  I know they're basically just badge-swapped Vauxhalls, but I like lots of those, too.

Because that was the worst part of the Z3, the engine...   All I have to show is the 944 (which is STILL not running), which is also my (more or less) first RWD car.  I have a feeling it would be like bringing a small pebble to an ICBM fight.  Although it would sure fit the moniker, what with its stock everything and disconnected front swaybar...

[deadlydave]

The lexus 8EAT saves fuel for 1 reason: to avoid the Federal Gas Guzzler Tax.  It does so using to methods:  100% torque converter lockup in gears 2-8, and having such a huger number of ratios lets you have a really tall final drive.  The Corvette C6 6mt avoids the gas guzzler tax by physically locking the driver out of gears 2 and 3 unless you're under hard acceleration. 

Because that was the worst part of the Z3, the engine...   All I have to show is the 944 (which is STILL not running), which is also my (more or less) first RWD car.  I have a feeling it would be like bringing a small pebble to an ICBM fight.  Although it would sure fit the moniker, what with its stock everything and disconnected front swaybar...

Hey Hey, the M44 1.9L is stout.  It's the descendant of the M42 1.8L in the dirty30.  Though the M42 is more stout because of forged crank, conrods, and pistons.  The Z3 shared a lot of similarities with the E30 from a rear-suspension standpoint too.  Further proving the E30 may have been the ultimate driving machine.   

[hydrochloric]

The Corvette C6 6mt avoids the gas guzzler tax by physically locking the driver out of gears 2 and 3 unless you're under hard acceleration.

I had no clue it did that.  That's...  somewhere between awesome and terrifying.  I assume it's quite common to disable that lockout.

Hey Hey, the M44 1.9L is stout.  It's the descendant of the M42 1.8L in the dirty30.  Though the M42 is more stout because of forged crank, conrods, and pistons.  The Z3 shared a lot of similarities with the E30 from a rear-suspension standpoint too.  Further proving the E30 may have been the ultimate driving machine.   

Hmm.  Once again, sarcasm doesn't translate well in text form.  I meant that the engine wasn't the worst part.  Kinda lost the effect...

So, by virtue of most Jags having the E-Type's rear suspension, does that further prove it's the most beautiful roadster ever?