TTRob

I heard that our local dealer has invested about $20K for GT-R service equipment and tech training. They're trying to make it back with the 'over' money on the first couple of cars.

///Mous3

... a better excuse then those "over" money on GT3's and RS'!

eclou

I don't understand the rationale of not badging it an Infiniti and thus affording the usage of the Infiniti service departments? This same curious strategy was a major downfall for the technology laden Touaregs and Phaetons. I was pretty displeased about driving a Jetta for roughly 2 months out of my Touareg ownership

Bill_C4S

....you reckon without Herr Dr. Dr. Ferdinand Karl Piech's ego...

renngt2

wow 8 pages and still goin' strong!

what is it with the continually snotty attitude? (i'll refrain from calling anyone specific out, lest they complain to the powers that be. again...)

recognizing and appreciating the provenance, performance, and driving "feel" of a porsche is one thing, but denying facts and discarding the engineering excellence of the gt-r is just plain childish.

as far as reliability, service, and dealer excellence is concerned... a bit of the pot calling the kettle black? the last time I took my GT2 to a P dealer for a $300 oil change, they complained that my car was "too low for their lift as it had been modified with H&R springs" (car was stock)

the talk about gt-r clutches and plasma coatings is at this point just rumor and conjecture. meanwhile, porsche doesn't stand behind their vaunted pccbs, transmission failures, etc. and hasn't even nipped the RMS issue in the bud.

at the end of the day, most porsche owners secure in themselves and their cars don't even care about the gtr. for the ones that are annoyed that a $130K turbo can't keep up with a gt-r that costs half as much and weighs 250 lbs more, don't get mad at nissan- get mad at porsche!

Bill_C4S

+1

ah yes now there's a memory.

PCCB Generation 1, that much vaunted technology intro/ field beta test.

amaist

I like the fact that they have the ***** to call it a Nissan.

The NSX was a Honda around the world except for North America where it was an Acura.

It's a halo car. It shows off what Nissan as a car company can make. Infiniti is just a badge. They are all Nissans. It's just that too many people when they come into some money let their inner ******* out and become badge snobs.

The fact that Lexus, Infiniti, Acura are just badges actually makes me less eager to buy them.

BTW in Japan those badges don't exist. People can understand that the same company can make tiny econoboxes with 800cc motors and V8 powered luxury cars.

The Phaeton failed because it wasn't good not because it was a VW.
And I'd be happy to buy a Touareg V10 diesel if they would sell them in Canada.

UDPride

You typically get a far different level of service at Acura, Infiniti, Lexus than you do at Honda, Nissan, or Toyota. You are paying for the customer service as much as anything. I dont see an issue with that. Ive owned an Acura, Nissan and I currently own an Infiniti. Two different ends of the buying spectrum compared to the 800-car Toyota lot out by the airport where "Crazy Larry" runs his half-hour Sunday infomercial on all the latest deals and "manager's specials".

Also, while the cars are similar, there are moderate differences you can definitely touch and feel.

You could make the argument that customer service should be "Lexus-like" everywhere, but then if it was, the $13,900 Civic would probably cost $15,500. So they make up an Acura to fill that gap.

At Nissan you get the more youthful edgier looking 350Z. At Infiniti you get the more upscale understated looking G37. Two different clienteles.

I never think its a good idea to have a $15,000 car (beetle) being sold in the showroom next to a $100,000 car (phaeton). the association of the phaeton to the others indirectly devalues the substance of the phaeton. you go shop for a phaeton and think yeah wow this is a nice car, but then look at a loaded Passat for $38,000 and think damn thats a nice car too and for 60 grand less. I think when you walk into the showroom you want the pricing to be relatively homogeneous. people invariably see a higher priced car and think "im being gouged" rather than look at a lower priced car and think "im getting a great deal." just human nature i suppose.

Im sure a decked out maxima or whatever the highest end nissan sedan is may only be $20-25K off from a new GT-R. I think thats a gap you can make work.

If Kia or Hyundai builds a $100,000 supercar, I dont see it working for the same reasons. Guilty by association -- even if the car is indeed magnificent.

amaist

Then how does GM sell Corvettes? They are sold next to Cobalts.

But there are some Chevy dealers that specialize in Vettes. The same can be done with any brand. Have a "luxury" Nissan dealer with the prerequisite free coffee and soft drinks.

But I think Nissan is pretty deliberate with selling the GT-R as a Nissan. They don't want Lexus buyers for that car. They want people who'd be buying an STI or an Evo instead but have enough money to blow on a GT-R. They want guys who spend 40k on mods to a 350z to move up. They want the car to be "cool". Lexus is not "cool".

340Elise

Yup, just like homes. You have a $500K average neighborhood ranging from $400 to $600K, the owners do not want someone to build a $100K home on some of the lots; not good for the higher priced homes; and the cheap home will automatically be worth more because it is next to higher priced ones.

TB993tt

In the UK Nissan is offering a free collection and delivery transport service to all GTR owners as well as a concierge at the end of the phone ....one hopes to never have to mingle with the masses at the Nissan dealer

USCCayman

I find it interesting that people speak as though Porsche has been blind-sided by the GT-R. Folks say things like, "Porsche has become complacent" and that they are resting on their laurels, etc., didn't see it coming and then along comes Nissan and one-ups them out of the blue. Come on, folks, you don't think Stuttgart knew what Nissan was up to when they had a 997 TT tagging along at the ring all the time? Don't count them out. There have been many interesting things happening at Porsche lately, and I doubt seriously that they have been sitting still. Thing is, they take their time in doing things and don't release products until they are up to the high Porsche standards. For example, they have had the PDK technology for twenty years, yet we have not seen it on the road cars yet. My guess is that when we do see it on the street cars, it will be the best out there. There have been reports of Cayenne Mules with wider tires in the rear than up front (meaning that it is not really a Cayenne) lapping the Ring at very high speeds and becoming air born at points on the track where the majority of other cars don't have the power to do so. Then there is the picture of what appears to be a new front-engined GT under a car cover on the grounds of Porsche-Stuttgart, which many speculate is the GT based on the Panamera. Currently, Porsche has the resources of the largest European Auto manufacturer at their disposal, the ones that created the Veyron, no less. My point is, don't count Porsche out. Porsche builds cars to meet the needs and desires of those who purchase them, not to respond to the latest media darling, whatever it may be. Porsche is very good at surprising us with some pretty neat stuff. Just look at the Carrera GT. No one saw that one coming. My suspiscion is that they have been working on the new king of the hill for some time (perhaps the 998?), not in response to the new GT-R, but because that has always been their mission, to build the best. I can't wait to see what surprises they have waiting for us next.

Kit_Chris

GT3 and GTR relevant material: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjwJl4t-DF8&NR=1

Regarding complacency, one may argue that Porsche's decision to design the Cayman so that it doesn't surpass a given performance benchmark determined by marketing considerations is a show of engineering complacency. On the other hand, the CGT proves otherwise.

I'm not sure I understand why P-car owners feel the need to downplay the GTR's objectively remarkable achievements to justify their ownership choice. Shouldn't all motoring enthusiasts appreciate different cars for their respective performance qualities? Not being an engineer, I still have tremendous respect for a car that defies the laws of physics, despite some posters' efforts at denying the GTR what pretty much all independent testers are consistently finding worldwide, it is a heavy car with less pedigree than a Porsche but it just delivers thanks to its fabulous design. As for its looks, very few of us have actually seen the car in the flesh, calling it a pig using no more than pictures is somewhat humorous.

The GT3 on the other hand doesn't need qualification, it's just an awesome machine.

Regards,
Chris

am722

I don't get the sense that Porsche drivers are trying to justify their ownership choice. As you put it, the GTR as "advertised" by many of the car mags "defies the laws of physics." Given the "stock" numbers offered by Nissan regarding the weight, bhp, etc., it's recorded times seem dubious. I don't see how it's wrong to be skeptical. Particularly when the cars provided to the testers were apparently "pre-production" models.

And the car is hideous and looks like it could hold 7 people.

UDPride

i thought the cayman was flat out butt ugly until i saw it in person. i will reserve judgment in handing out beauty pageant points on the GTR until its, likewise, in the flesh.