GTR on Top Gear
Author
Discussion

BlueEyedBoy

Original Poster:

1,954 posts

225 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
I know there is another thread in the TV section, but don't want to moan about the programme.

However, that GTR was epic and I even thought it looked pretty darned good too, the tweaks have improved it in my eyes to the extent where I would say it looks better than the Jaguar XKR-S.
Interior looked better and its getting to a point now, where I can't think of anything better for the money at all. Even thinking this will be more fun than my current want of a Sagaris one day.

I know people post about driver enjoyment etc, but I suspect this car DOES offer a hell of a lot that way too.

Daston

6,149 posts

232 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
It looked fab in that shade of blue, would love one as a daily driver but I just dont think it has the drama of a weekend toy

Animala

777 posts

191 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
I didn't think it looked any different from the "older" version. Looked awesome then and still does. Think if I could have one I would be leaning towards white.

Tyngwndwn

12,549 posts

210 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
Good money for a super car though,eh?

V88Dicky

7,368 posts

212 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
I think it was a bit unfair pitching the GT-R up against the XKR-S, especially in the wet! No wonder it left it standing.

Anyway loved them both, but I think the Jag just pipped it for me, if not just for that noise.

cloud9

alcovrugbyfan

351 posts

188 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
The Jag all day for me...

The GT-R may have been quicker and cheaper but I couldn't own a car made by the same people that forced the Juke and the Cube upon us! laugh

LuS1fer

43,509 posts

274 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
I've never been a fan of the GTR's design with that "broken-back" look but that genuinely impressed me the way it demolished the Jag. Unfortunately, I'm one of the people who think the front end of the new XK is far worse than the old one which I quite liked.

Dr Doofenshmirtz

16,952 posts

229 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
What was the GTR...60k?
Seriously - if you had (upto or over) that sort of money to spend - why on earth would you buy anything else?
It looks totally awesome and is a mechanical and technological mind boggling masterpiece.
...and if it bothers you that it's Japanese, you really need to have a word with yourself*.

Of course, on the flip side of that. Because it's Japanese rolleyes it'll depreciate heavily and be an absolute stonker of a second hand car in >5 years time!!

Nedz

2,439 posts

203 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
I think the only visual differences are the lights on the front bumper and different wheels.The interior looked very similar to the previous 'black' edition models.
I have been thinking about a GTR as my next car sometime next year and seeing that only whet my appetite even more,the only downside to the car,from what i gather is that they cost a fortune to keep on the road.

blindswelledrat

25,257 posts

261 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
BlueEyedBoy said:
However, that GTR was epic and I even thought it looked pretty darned good too, the tweaks have improved it in my eyes to the extent where I would say it looks better than the Jaguar XKR-S.
Interior looked better and its getting to a point now, where I can't think of anything better for the money at all.
I think the interior is unchanged and the exterior barely any different.
I particularlly liked the colour though

rsv gone!

11,288 posts

270 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
Dr Doofenshmirtz said:
Of course, on the flip side of that. Because it's Japanese rolleyes it'll depreciate heavily and be an absolute stonker of a second hand car in >5 years time!!
I bet it doesn't depreciate any faster than any other £60K car. I bet the opposite; that it's value will be fairly copper-bottomed and it'll retain its value in the same way as RS4s, CSLs and other well-respected contemporaries. Not quite as good as CSLs, I dare say but it'll be pretty good. Look at what you'd have to spend to get into a 10+ year old R34 GTR.




Edited by rsv gone! on Monday 18th July 13:02

Roop

6,018 posts

313 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
The running cost of the GT-R are pretty eye watering IIRC. Particularly the cost of parts. Make a 911 look cheap...

S18DMW

20,008 posts

196 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
I know the GTR had a mssive advantage because the drag race was done in the wet, but realistically, would there be much more of a different outcome if it was done in the dry? I doubt it....

BlueEyedBoy

Original Poster:

1,954 posts

225 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
I also can't help thinking that in true Top Gear style, they made it look much worse that it was. The guy driving the XKR looked like he just buried the throttle. I think it would have beat it in any objective race they put together. Subjectively maybe not.

BoRED S2upid

21,050 posts

269 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
It was astonishingly quick, I knew it would be fast but not THAT fast.

One stupid question though how do you pump up the tyres if they aren't filled with air? do you get a special pump or something or have to go to a dealer everytime you need a touch of air in the tyres?

sleep envy

62,260 posts

278 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
rsv gone! said:
Dr Doofenshmirtz said:
Of course, on the flip side of that. Because it's Japanese rolleyes it'll depreciate heavily and be an absolute stonker of a second hand car in >5 years time!!
I bet it doesn't depreciate any faster than any other £60K car. I bet the opposite; that it's value will be fairly copper-bottomed and it'll retain its value in the same way as RS4s, CSLs and other well-respected contemporaries. Not quite as good as CSLs, I dare say but it'll be pretty good. Look at what you'd have to spend to get into a 10+ year old R34 GTR.




Edited by rsv gone! on Monday 18th July 13:02
2009 cars are now mid thirties

BlueEyedBoy

Original Poster:

1,954 posts

225 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
BoRED S2upid said:
It was astonishingly quick, I knew it would be fast but not THAT fast.

One stupid question though how do you pump up the tyres if they aren't filled with air? do you get a special pump or something or have to go to a dealer everytime you need a touch of air in the tyres?
Don't Quick Bodge do this (or similar), I am sure it won't cost that much.

StottyZr

6,860 posts

192 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
The 4wd definatly helped it with the launch. But yikes it absolutly fking launched, especially when taking the conditions into account. I wonder what the 0-60 in the wet is, < 4 secs maybe? scratchchin

LuS1fer

43,509 posts

274 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
BlueEyedBoy said:
I also can't help thinking that in true Top Gear style, they made it look much worse that it was. The guy driving the XKR looked like he just buried the throttle. I think it would have beat it in any objective race they put together. Subjectively maybe not.
The Jag start certainly seemed overdone as the smoke/steam testified and I don't think it moved for a minute or so. However, the fact remains that the most valid point raised was that launch control of the GTR is never going to be used without you looking like a div save at a drag track. I'm sure the piece was meant to "demolish" the Jag and show what it could do but even if I had a GTR, I can't see any real-world point where I would be using it (and I'm sure the Police would be pulling you very shortly after you did, if you did).

So the question should really have been, after doing that test, whether there was any massive difference on the road at the lights.

rsv gone!

11,288 posts

270 months

Monday 18th July 2011
quotequote all
sleep envy said:
2009 cars are now mid thirties
Quite a few for around £40K mark or just below.

But is that significantly worse than its peers; M5, RS4 etc? How much were they new? £50K? £55K? Depreciation seems pretty similar.