Not to turn this into a GT-R vs C63 thread but here you go:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...car-and-driver

'12 GT-R ran 11.2 @ 126mph

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...horsepower.pdf

'09-'11 GT-Rs:

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...horsepower.pdf

They tested them 5 times...I would throw out the best trap from a pre-poduction car (124 mph) and worst trap by a car that was obviously not running right (111mph???). The last two tests seem to be more accurate 11.6 @ 120mph and 11.6 @ 121mph.

And just to lend some perspective on the ease of modding a GT-R...my '09 GT-R with just a custom 93 octane tune, AAM resonated Mid-pipe and HKS drop-in filters ran 0-60: 3.14s, 0-100: 6.80s, 0-130: 11.23s and 11.1 @ 129.2mph on my vbox (with a 1 foot roll-out like the U.S. mags use)....WITHOUT using Launch Control...with the all-season Dunlops.

Tom

Tom cant agree more... and I too have tangible ownership proof.

Ok no more GTR vs C63 talk LOL because afterall its just a NIssan

I love the C63 and am buying one but this test doesn't prove the C63 is anywhere near as fast as a GT-R. C&D also tested an M3 at around 3.9s to 60 and we all know it is not as fast as a C63 with the P31 package. Testing one car in isolation ignores weather, other conditions, drivers, etc.

Don't get me wrong, the C63 is a monster but the GT-R is at true supercar performance.

$81K huh...well I guess I'll get it in 3 yrs when the price is half that.

Yes because 911s and Lambos and R8s are all gay too because its AWD

Definately prefer driving the C63 over those 3 cars, even though the C63 is slower.

And before I get bashed, I own a 911 Turbo, almost bought a R8, and spent a lot of time with a Gallardo.

Can I ask you a question?

Why did you buy a GTR over a 997T, not trying to stir dust, really curious.

At 75k used the 997T is hard to argue with. Unless you only buy new, then I understand.

On the original topic, I know C&D corrects its time for perfect D/A as well. I believe they quoted 109 for a stock CLK55. I trapped that with my headers and tune. Granted the conditions where no where near perfect, 1800 da, and 30mph wind.(Cross/head)

It is a good question. Last year I was actually looking to buy a 997TT. The thing was...I really wanted the PDK transmission. But that was only available on the (new at the time) $120K+ 997.2TTs...which was way more than what I wanted to spend. I wanted to spend less than $85K. So that left me with 997.1TTs with 6 speed manuals and tiptronics. I found a few nicely optioned CPOed '07 997.1TTs with around 20k miles for around that price. I was reading up on some old comparison test and saw that the GT-R actually had more rear leg room than the 911 Turbo (important to me because my daughter needs to sit in the back seat). I was always under the impression that the GT-R had less rear room. I started looking at GT-Rs...and low and behold there was an '09 GT-R for sale on ebay from a local Nissan dealer in the colors I wanted...with 7K miles. I went to test drive it and really liked it. The fact that it was an '09 model meant that it had as much (years) powertrain warranty as a CPOed '07 Porsche. The 7k miles were much less than any 997.1TT under $90K at the time. The GT-R had a dual clutch transmission...which I couldn't get in a 997.1TT. I was already looking up the cost of exhaust/Tune/intake mods on the 911 Turbo...and the GT-R's mods are a fraction of the cost...and the GT-R stock for stock is faster already. And the best part was that I was able to pick up the GT-R for about $20K less than the '07 997.1TT's that I was looking at. I literally have paid $2,795 for my mods on the GT-R to make it a 10 second 1/4 mile car (if I used launch control). It would take some mutiple of that to get a 997.1TT into the 10's. Admittedly, if cost were no object...I would running around in a modded 997 Turbo S. But for me the GT-R is a cheaper alternative.

Tom

Thanks for the explanation. So it was more a bang per buck reasoning than car vs car. Makes sense. I would be hard press to give up a 997T though.

When I was at the track a month back saw a ZR1 vs a GTR, the GTR ran 10.9. They scoot, no doubt. But stock vs stock I thought they were both mid 11s?

Now all I need is a winning small lotto ticket so I can make this decision as well.

Who cares about what a GT-R can or can not do. People always come on these forums trying to state how their cars compare against a C63. Which is fine but I feel like I'm reading car magazine articles. Or some kind of advertisment on whatever kind of car is the "comparo" of the day. Every other thread seems like it is C63 vs whatever. I mean who gives a s***. Yeah and at the end of the day it's still a Nissan. Something I wouldn't buy. Funny how on these forums if you love the car you bought (a C63) you are either a "fanboy" or "badge lover". Crazy... Anyways going back to a 911 soon with a Chevy truck on the side....i'm sure someone will chime in soon how Nissan makes a better truck.

And you sound like a broken record...I am glad that your Mercedes emblem does it for you.... it seems to give you great comfort...

Tom

You keep editing...it is hard to keep up with you...

You are a "badge lover" because of your inane comments...not because you prefer the C63...

Tom

Ok Tom above is my original post. My "INSANE" comment is what? That I think the car is ugly? Yes in my opinion it is. A coupe with a the bulky body of a sedan. It looks heavy to me. I don't care for the looks of it. Nor do I care for the looks of the new C63 coupe and I have posted that comment on these forums to. Sorry that I went "insane" on your comparison of the GT-R and the C63...

The word is "inane"...buy a dictionary...or use an online one...

Tom

I'm pretty sure he meant inane, not insane.

Inane
in·ane/iˈnān/
Adjective:
Silly; stupid; not significant.


But I suppose either adjective works

Ok so let's use the correct word. My bad. So base on my original post. It's "silly" "stupid" or "not significant" to state my opinion that the car is ugly? I should have just given props to the car in quesiton to make my post not "INANE".

I see you have a problem with reading comprehension....re-read my post...the inane comments relate to your "badge loving"...i.e. "it's still a Nissan". What I love is the fact that at one time a Porsche was basically a VW...does that make the Porsche 356 any lesser of car...or collectible. I judge cars by the car itself...not by what badge it wears....the same with people...I judge people by their words and deeds...not their pedigree or family name...

Tom

Whatever brother so long as your happy with what you drive. At the end of the day that's all that matters. Going to bed

It never fails to amaze me how so many of these threads simply degrade into a pissing contest.

I Invite your (not directed at anyone in particular) attention:

https://mbworld.org/forums/c-class-w...ease-read.html

actually the C63 P31 has a faster 60-130 than the 480hp GTR. Now im sure the new 530 and soon to be 555hp GTR will beat it easily.

No, but Ford does.



Funny you say that...just say a MT article. The 2013 GTR is a 10 second car.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/a...10_second_car/

Is there such a thing as being car racist? That's what you guys sound like. Look at the performance numbers and judge each car by that. Aesthetics is subjective you can call the car ugly but don't say "Oh its just a Nissan". If you have a chance please test drive a GTR it literally feels like you're in a video game. The car just follows what ever you want it to do even if it defies logic and physics. Given that, it was a bit out of my price range when I needed a new car (with the MB sales intensives) plus the lack of real back seats so I ended up with the C63.

I heard there is a lot bent frame issues on that truck?! It looks amazing though. I finally saw one on the road a few weeks ago.

http://jalopnik.com/5820104/are-ford...or-off+roading

LOL, you know any stock truck that cant take that hit at 110mph with only needing a 700 dollar frame job?

Imagine hitting a speed bump in an AMG at that speed lol.

It may be weak in that spot, but everything has a breaking point. I can put a 350 shot of N20 on my CLK55, but doesn't mean I can do it safely. Pushing the truck too hard if you ask me.

Honestly I have. Like I said in my original post it is a fast car. But unimpressed with it after that. Sorry if this doesn't agree with your view of the car. For someone looking for a fast coupe it definately fits the bill. I think my 4000 lb sedan FEELS more nimble. It's just the way I saw it. Look my C63 is nothing to brag about on the inside but the GT-R feels cheap or cheaper. The back of the GT-R looks to bulky. It looks fat and feels that way to me when I drove it. I'd rather buy a Z06 if I had the option to buy a coupe in that price range.

Last i'll say this. Look at my original post. I was not attacking anyone or getting personal. Just stating my option and giving some props on the car (GT-R) by stating it is fast (which it is) and saying that it come with a lot of options (bells and whistles). I have owned two Nissans in my life and they were both junk. I see this car no different. They are like Subarus to me. They are fast but on the lower end of the quality scale when it comes to Japanese cars. I state that and get called "inane" by someone which it looks like doesn't even own a Mercedes. I offended his car i guess. I have own four Mercedes (two AMGs) and they have been all great. That is MY opinion and experience. As far as Mercedes I happen to love the brand (along with others) because of my own experience. And like I said in my first post.....IMHO.

The Raptors are bas a$$! I have owned 3 Chevy trucks and it what I was raised on.