jvanbrecht

Odd thread for my first post.. but it would have been awesome if there were used ones for less then 40k.. I paid 49980 for mine, it had 14k on the clock, an 09. My wife certainly would have been happier with the cheaper price (then again.. she things $20k is the absolute limit for 4 wheels and an engine.. but she is of course not a car person).

That said, I did manage to find a used GT-R with 40k miles on the clock for around $55k..

I thought about it, honestly, I do like the GT-R's, but a couple of things, first you look at it wrong and Nissan voids the warranty, the operating costs are ridiculously high ($2k for a freaking transmission fluid change+labour, atleast in my area), repair costs are through the roof, and a minor point, its not a 4 door car.

While repair costs on the C63 are not exactly cheap, they are within the realm of normal people who work for a living on an avg salary (for the DC Metro area anyways).

sflgator

Interesting, but I would be willing to bet that a GT-R w/ 40k mi. on it for $55k has been beat up and/or in an accident....those cars are typically driven quite hard; 40k mi. in just ~ 2 years is a lot of beating. Personally, I wouldn't want a GT-R w/ 40k mi. to start off with.

Boost Gomez

We have a Nissan GT-R in our stable and although on the highway it doesn't "feel" much faster than my C63 AMG, it pulls easily starting from any speed. The GTR's shifts are also so much more responsive and I think the transmission in the C63 hampers its straight-line speed by quite a bit. I'll report back how the two compare if and when I get a tune, headers, and proper LSD.

jwoods986

Of course AWD and the quick-shifting trans help make it fast, but wasn't it the (now discontinued if this article was correct) launch control that put these into the 11s stock and wowed everyone? According to this - http://www.insideline.com/nissan/gt-...h-control.html - without launch control the GT-R is a 4.5 0-60, 12.2 second 1/4 mile car. Times a C63 is certainly capable of.

sflgator

LOL...either very bad information or the guys @ Edmunds Inside Line don't know how to drive. Naw, a stock 2010 GT-R and now the 2011 GT-R still has the 'launch control' (LC) although it's updated via a change in the software and yes, it still runs ~ 11.4-11.6 sec. @ 120+mph...stock!!!!!!

My brother's 2010 GT-R is completely stock...it kills my tuned C63 AMG.

jwoods986

Oh. Well that's cool that Nissan kept it. What would not be cool is if they are still voiding warranties of people that use the LC. That's what I had read they were doing initially, some people had blown their tranny and Nissan discovered they had used LC and didn't cover it. Cost? $20K!!!!

I guess my question is, how strong are these cars w/o using LC from a dig? Or better yet, when you are already rolling and the launch advantage is moot? Does your brother's GT-R still kill you?

Jons95c36amg

$55K for a used GTR? Most likely the tranny is on the way out. With no warranty to cover your ***. $20k tranny worth

sflgator

LC isn't really necessary. My bro doesn't need to use it; it's very strong (with little wheel/tire slippage) just with the AWD from a dig. And, AFAIK, Nissan's software fix for the LC changed it so that they cannot disengage the traction control when using LC...that was the culprit which was killing some of the '09 GT-R trannies.

Sincity

Wouldn't the aerodynamics of the GT-R take over at higher speeds?

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

I think it's more geared for downforce than coefficient of drag. I was in a modded GTR a week ago. John from Broadway Auto here in North NJ had just worked on it to the tune of 550awhp and it was a SCREAMER. I've never seen anything hook up and go so damn hard. The sound was amazing. The car was absolutely solid too, but I think it's more a testament to John's work. He's built Ferrari's, Lambo's, Vettes, M5's and lots of AMG's. Anyone in the North NJ and NY area should check John out.

www.broadway-performance.com

retardedmunk

Nissan honored 99% of the blown trannies....and using Launch control is useless....it is a difference of .1 sec.....

I KNOW the GTR with 40k miles ...It was a test car..mag car I believe and it was in damn good condition when sold I heard....

U can get an extended warranty on a GTR as any Nissan Dealership for $3500 to 100k miles and 7 years.....this is cool since this can not be done on a second owned AMG


I have owned a lot of AMG's....probably more then some members...I am a diehard fan.....To this day the CL65 is my favorite car PERIOD.....I am not a fan of the C63 for what it costs and that the same body style is at Hertz for rent...and saying a SRT8 is a overpriced rental car with a big motor is not comparable....

The C63 is a $73k car optioned and a SRT8 is a $45k car....
And for the interior of the car being superior and so on...it is the least expensive AMG in the lineup....and the interior is nice but not well-crafted...

Like I said I dont hate the car....how could I? but for anything over $25-30k I dont see the car being worth it....I would prefer a E55 or E63 or S65(king) over the C63....these cars are equally as quick if not quicker,look better and have a more classy interior by far

The C63 falls into a category "best used car bargain" when they get under $30k....but as for new....it is insane to spend $40k more for a nice set of brakes and a big v8 over a C350......I would buy a 2007 S65 used for $75k or a GTR...these cars are rarer and are engineered freaks




Of course AWD and the quick-shifting trans help make it fast, but wasn't it the (now discontinued if this article was correct) launch control that put these into the 11s stock and wowed everyone? According to this - http://www.insideline.com/nissan/gt-...h-control.html - without launch control the GT-R is a 4.5 0-60, 12.2 second 1/4 mile car. Times a C63 is certainly capable of.

FUNNY....LOL....without launch control and a broken in car...my GTR ran stock 0-60 in 3.2 sec

mthis

The fastest stock Nissan GTR is 11.510 at 120.90 mph with use of LC.

retardedmunk

I am running a 11.1@128 in 80 degrees with a crap 1.85 60'
with a tune and pipe...$1700 in mods before labor...

my 0-60 calculates to 2.4 sec

LC2 not used.....I WILL not use it...it is not necessary

sflgator

There really is something wrong with you. I'm sorry your highness that we all cannot afford to drive a CL65 AMG, "other more expensive AMG's" or GT-R, etc. Although the C63 AMG shares the same platform as a C350 and C300, it's not exactly fair to say it's a "glorified rental car." I have never rented a Mercedes-Benz from any car rental company, even if the C-class is the bottom of the barrel in MB cars. In fact, did you not know that the C63 AMG was designed to compete (and beat) the BMW M3 and Audi RS4? Are you going to call these cars POS as well?

In addition, your preference for an E55 or E63 would cost an extra $20k-$30k+ above the cost of what most of us spent on our C63's...that's A LOT more $$ for most ppl (oh except you of course being in the same company as Bill Gates and Warren Buffet)...the next level up in luxury and status, which has a BIG price.

My wife also drives a MB GL450...are you going to say that the $73k GL450 is a glorified rental car station wagon? Personally, we shopped many large, 3-row SUVs, and we think the GL450/550 is the best large SUV on the road today. You really come across like a douche and its people like you that give MB drivers a bad name.

btw -- I agree with most or all of your thoughts and info on the GT-R. But, the only thing I can somewhat agree with you is how the C63 AMG is a great 'bang for your buck'...I got $13k off my '09 MB C63 AMG and bought mine for $55k brand new!

FormulaZR

I didn't read all the posts...so if it's already been covered then my apologies, but a lot of the reason a GTR will "whoop" a C63 is because of the gear ratios. GTRs from the factory are geared quite deep.

benyl

Stop feeding the troll. LOL

Funny thing is, a GT500 is really a rental car with a big engine. I have rented plenty of Mustang V6s during my travels... lol So I guess it is ok to spend $30K more for a GT500 than a Mustang V6!

SebringSilver

What I don't get is why they didn't use the GT-R as one of the Transformers.

FormulaZR

I think ANY Muffstain purchase is an exercise in how to spend a lot of money to get nowhere in a big hurry. Regardless of whatever aluminum 5.4L they are going to put in it this (next?) year to make the car not have 84/16 balance (yes, it's an exaggeration).

The ONLY respectable Cobra is the 03/04 Cobra - assuming you really don't care about sticking the launch AND keeping your rear end in good shape. Sure...you could always swap to an SRA, but in the end...you've still got a Rustang.

FormulaZR

Transformers aren't supposed to look alien until AFTER they transform...damn GTR and their "inspired by Hoover" front fascia...


Separated at birth?

emericr

Funny to read all the threads.
As many said stock for stock and anything under 100mph, the C63 will get killed by a nice margin.
C63 simple tune versus stock GTR in the mile run ran identical times or slight edge to the C63. I was there.
modded C63 versus modded GTR, forget about it. Nothing can compete with GTR, check the GTR P800. Insane.
Regarding costs, I think the MB will cost more in repair, some people have stated 5K for rotors and pads. I would assume Nissan would be much cheaper overall.
Regarding the stupid comments from the munk regarding the C63, I will just add that the C63 was the first AMG car designed from scratch by AMG. It holds its own very well compared to its real competition (CTS-V, RS4, RS6, M5, M6, M3)

AZBENZ-CTSV

The GT-R in my opinion is flat out ugly. I do give it props on performance.

bezita

Actually, there are a few, just not in any of the movies.. Check them out:

http://www.seibertron.com/transforme...-magnus/18099/

This is just one of them, there are others in various colors as well.

MikeS54

gtr isn't exactly a looker, however its got presence just because its wide

retardedmunk

After finding out the gtr was built 3.5 years in wind tunnels and has a cd ratio of a Reventon the look of the car grew on me----
Regardless it gets positive attention EVERYWHERE and
that just says it is unique in style and heritage

A Cl65 is $40k. Lol. Good one.

I base my opinion on used cars primarily 65's that r a bargain beyond
any c63 etc

As far as a RS4 and M3. They r great but then again I would buy a used
M6 before a M3.

Troll? Please. I just like expressing my car opinions
For those who like the C63 cool. Nothing wrong with the car

And next year when they r under $30k I will own one as well

The comparison of a E55-E63-S65 are on used values compared to a used
C63. The C63 is the same price but not the same quality

LZH

One could say the same about Jenna Jamison but shes petty hot to boot