C63 vs GT-R?
#53
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 AMG / 2009 Nissan GT-R / 1988 Ferrari 328 / 1977 Maserati Bora
Excellent information and you certainly would know as you own and drive both cars (lucky you). How do they compare in other areas, ie. sound, confort, ride, cost of ownership, daily driving, etc. I've heard that GT-R's are really expensive to maintain and they require a lot of it. Also, I hear that the list of things that voids the warrantly is huge (including putting the car on a dyno or driving with the VDC off). The C63 must be easier to live with and it sounds fantastic and pulls very strongly.
COMFORT - Mixed bag. I personally find the seats in the C63 a bit too much for daily comfort. I have two settings on my seat memory (one for driving and one for getting in and out. GT-R is really a 2+2 so 4 real humans is out. Both cars are a blast and pretty easy to travel distances in.
Ride - The comfort setting on the GT-R is still harder than my C63. My C63 is an early car w/o the performance suspension (just had the LSD and the delimiter). Neither car is a Lincoln, but neither car shakes your molars loose either. On "R" the GT-R is very hard and is really just for the track.
Cost of Ownership - Neither are cheap, but the GT-R isn't as expensive as advertised. That comes from the GT-R owner that stepped up from a Z. He's blown away with $300-$500 services. That is just routine for a MB owner.
Subjective - The C63 is easier to live with as a daily driver. You really have to let the transmission on the GT-R warm up before it behaves. Visibility out of a sedan is better, will hold 4 reasonable humans, etc.
The C63 has a couple of near fatal flaws IMHO. 1st is the terrible gas mileage that translates into a ridiculously short range (under 300 miles). It should have a 22gal tank to compensate. 2nd is the seats (look cool, but the task could have been accomplished without the race-car side bolsters that are just mainly in the way and hog up rear leg room. 3rd is the manual tranny mode that "isn't really manual" (up shifts for you and will not let you downshift in certain circumstances).
For what it is for the GT-R doesn't have any fatal flaws. Some gripes:
Interior road noise (could have put in some sound deadening). They left it out to save weight, but the car is very heavy anyway and 30lbs would have meant nothing.
Fit and Finish. Panel gaps are not to MB standards and there are some very minor paint defects from the factory. Additionally, the interior carpets are just embarrassing.
Exhaust note. Probably more in comparison to the C63 that has the best stock note around.
As for the transmission warranty. R-R-R (I've gotten a 3.6 that way) will implode your eyeballs. R-R-OFF will void your warranty and gains you 0.1 - 0.2 seconds. Personally I can get 3.9sec with no launch (just stomp it from the light) as the AWD is just amazing. That'll handle everything out there as most are RWD and have traction issues.
Last edited by Ron Scarboro; 03-22-2010 at 10:54 AM.
#55
Member
The Nissan GT-R is a beast, with that being said, at the end of the day it’s still a Nissan, and I wouldn’t trade the luxury of my c63s coupe for the plastic feel of the gtr. If performance is all you care about, then gtr wins, if you want an all around performance/luxury machine, then the c63 in my eyes is the better option.
Last edited by brianc63s; 03-19-2021 at 02:46 PM.
The following users liked this post:
doncmleon (03-21-2021)
#56
Former Vendor of MBWorld
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Georgia
Posts: 658
Received 232 Likes
on
136 Posts
2013 Mercedes C63 AMG
The Nissan GT-R is a beast, with that being said, at the end of the day it’s still a Nissan, and I wouldn’t trade the luxury of my c63s coupe for the plastic feel of the gtr. If performance is all you care about, then gtr wins, if you want an all around performance/luxury machine, then the c63 in my eyes is the better option.
The following 3 users liked this post by Slow_c63:
#59