Motor Trend COTY is....
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
...It's been proven to have a glass powertrain.
It gets mediocre MPG
and breaks no new ground in performance/economy. It's got quirky styling. It's not breaking any new ground in value/$.
Sure, it performs well. But overall it's not got much of a case as a 'world-beating design', when you stand back and look at it objectively...
Registered User
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 511
From: Mill Creek, WA
You could say the same about the GTR, but performance wise! It runs with cars costing much more, just like the Z06 was hailed for doing when it first came out.
Here's a question for the GTR haters in the thread. Say Nissan disables launch control on next years model. Now the car goes 0-60 in 3.9 seconds, and probably does the quarter in the high 11's. Transmission issues are now gone from the car. It still out laps a lot of exotics and even the "all mighty" Z06 on many a road course. Are you going to say that this car isn't impressive considering the content for the price?
If you ask me, when a '09 Z06 starts at $73,925, that this car is a failure when for another $4000 you get one of the best AWD systems in the world, a TT DOHC V6, a dual clutch transmission, 15" front and rear brakes, better tires, performance computer and a back seat? Its a livable super car that you could potentially drive year round. And the fact that it performs as well as it does despite its 3800lbs curb weight?
I'm sorry but if the only way you can bash the car is the transmission issue... It definitely runs with the best out there.
I know these cars don't sell for MSRP, but what limited sports car does when it first comes out? I remember seeing Z06's for sale with $20,000 mark ups when they first dropped.
Here's a question for the GTR haters in the thread. Say Nissan disables launch control on next years model. Now the car goes 0-60 in 3.9 seconds, and probably does the quarter in the high 11's. Transmission issues are now gone from the car. It still out laps a lot of exotics and even the "all mighty" Z06 on many a road course. Are you going to say that this car isn't impressive considering the content for the price?
If you ask me, when a '09 Z06 starts at $73,925, that this car is a failure when for another $4000 you get one of the best AWD systems in the world, a TT DOHC V6, a dual clutch transmission, 15" front and rear brakes, better tires, performance computer and a back seat? Its a livable super car that you could potentially drive year round. And the fact that it performs as well as it does despite its 3800lbs curb weight?
I'm sorry but if the only way you can bash the car is the transmission issue... It definitely runs with the best out there.
I know these cars don't sell for MSRP, but what limited sports car does when it first comes out? I remember seeing Z06's for sale with $20,000 mark ups when they first dropped.
The GT-R is certainly quick, even for the money....but it's fragile, looks like a styling exercise conducted by a first grade class, is about as far away from the intent of a true sports/ track car as you can get, and the when you factor in the cost of ownership loses even more shine when compared to the Z06.
It's a nice try on Nissan's part and certainly satisfies every BOY racer's fantasy of a performance car but they have a lot to learn still.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,402
From: Toronto, ON Canada
That's an internet myth.
For one, the "after racing" inspection is recommended; not required (although anyone who takes his car to a track day and/or races it without doing major preventative maintenance/inspection is not very bright in my opinion).
Second, if the inspection is done, the cost is likely to be much closer to $250-$300; not $1K.
For one, the "after racing" inspection is recommended; not required (although anyone who takes his car to a track day and/or races it without doing major preventative maintenance/inspection is not very bright in my opinion).
Second, if the inspection is done, the cost is likely to be much closer to $250-$300; not $1K.
I don't see someone shelling $70K (or $100K with markups) for a car and not be willing to do the "recommended" service. Owners of cars like Porsche treat them as they deserve. I wouldn't expect anything less from owners of the GT-R.
On the subject of racing and inspection after... All cars outside of GTR don't have complex computer complaining that you raced now take your car to the dealer for check up and be reset. I can do my own check up of the driveshaft, examine the engine for leaks, check suspension components. But I cannot reset the computer on my own.
If I am not mistaken, that was published in one of the magazines, not just an internet rumour.
I wasn't referring to wear...obviously tires will wear based on how the owner drives his/her car...what I was referring to is that you should always replace all four on the GT-R when one needs to be replaced.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
It's not splitting hairs; it's just simple math.
I guess if you judge based on a cursory look at what I've posted over the years you could make that assumption about my motivation; those who bother to actually look at a majority of my posts would know you are wrong.
I don't really care where your support comes from; in fact I've been scolded for asking that of another member (even though FbodFather seemed it necessary to ask it of me directly 
).
Not much of a difference, except for one thing. I'm here posting as a GM fan, on a Camaro fan site - mostly to express my admiration and appreciation for GM cars I love. However for you, it's clearly the opposite.
BTW. I don't get a penny of support from GM - in any way, shape or form.
).
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,173
I was going to go with production numbers. Although I haven't been able to find any hard numbers for 2008 CTS production numbers I guarantee it is far, far in excess of the ~1500 GTRs.
Perhapse it is you who needs to put down th fan boy hat and look at things in perspective?
Perhapse it is you who needs to put down th fan boy hat and look at things in perspective?
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,402
From: Toronto, ON Canada
Just look at my cars and what I drive: Audi, Mazda. I also owned 90's Acura Integra (one of the best driver's cars, short of BMW IMO), Beretta GTZ.
Not sure where the bias toward domestic cars is... Can you spot it? Or bias against Japanese cars...
My whole point is that the GTR is a great car, a great achievement. But it is not what it is advertised to be, and there are hidden costs with that vehicle. That is all I am trying to point out. I don't think it's a trashy piece of **** as some here mindlessly repeat.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,402
From: Toronto, ON Canada
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
On the subject of racing and inspection after... All cars outside of GTR don't have complex computer complaining that you raced now take your car to the dealer for check up and be reset.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
I was going to go with production numbers. Although I haven't been able to find any hard numbers for 2008 CTS production numbers I guarantee it is far, far in excess of the ~1500 GTRs.
Perhapse it is you who needs to put down th fan boy hat and look at things in perspective?
Perhapse it is you who needs to put down th fan boy hat and look at things in perspective?
And in support of your claim that the Cadillac is “main stream” you cited the following…
I believe this comment sums it up best:
oparan (11/17/08 10:14 PM)
Shame on you, Motor Trend, for choosing this car. For 99% of the people in this country, this car is out of reach.
I read the article, and I appreciate your arguments, but $77,000 (which is not the $120,000 that the average Nissan dealer charges, which is the only number that matters), is still more than virtually anyone can afford, let alone gas and insurance.
No matter how you cut it, a vehicle that 99% of the people in the marketplace cannot afford is not significant. It's at most a curiosity.
I'm not going to say which one of the other vehicles in the field that was tested this year deserved to win, but at least choose a product that is within reach of the middle class.
Furthermore, with all this talk of saving gas and "going green," I'm confused regarding your magazine's message. You praised the Forester for its affordability and frugality, but now you chose a vehicle that is the opposite.
Shame on you, Motor Trend, for choosing this car. For 99% of the people in this country, this car is out of reach.
I read the article, and I appreciate your arguments, but $77,000 (which is not the $120,000 that the average Nissan dealer charges, which is the only number that matters), is still more than virtually anyone can afford, let alone gas and insurance.
No matter how you cut it, a vehicle that 99% of the people in the marketplace cannot afford is not significant. It's at most a curiosity.
I'm not going to say which one of the other vehicles in the field that was tested this year deserved to win, but at least choose a product that is within reach of the middle class.
Furthermore, with all this talk of saving gas and "going green," I'm confused regarding your magazine's message. You praised the Forester for its affordability and frugality, but now you chose a vehicle that is the opposite.
Now you say main stream is not about pricing but about production numbers???
Tell you what, when you make up your "non fan-boy" mind about what you really want to say; let me know.
Last edited by Robert_Nashville; Dec 3, 2008 at 10:13 AM.
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 167
From: USA
Is $70-$80K a lot for a car? Yes.
But when you adjust for average family incomes during the past 10 years, you would find that at least 6 of those 10 would (or at least should) be out of the price range of the vast majority of people in this country.
If MT's main criteria was affordability for the "average" family, most of the vehicles it considers each year would be disqualified.
But when you adjust for average family incomes during the past 10 years, you would find that at least 6 of those 10 would (or at least should) be out of the price range of the vast majority of people in this country.
If MT's main criteria was affordability for the "average" family, most of the vehicles it considers each year would be disqualified.
Uh what?Every single one of those cars could be had well equipped for mid-30s. Not $70k, but half of that. Hell, why stop there then . . . I think they should have made the Ferarri California the COTY then.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,173
Do I really have to remind you of YOUR OWN POST in which you said…
And in support of your claim that the Cadillac is “main stream” you cited the following…
No where in your earlier post and especially not in the comments you quoted as “summing it up best” was there the slightest mention of “production numbers” as being a determinant for "main stream"; it was all pricing that the poster was claiming was the reason why the GT-R shouldn't have been chosen and which you claimed "summed it up best".
Now you say main stream is not about pricing but about production numbers???
Tell you what, when you make up your "non fan-boy" mind about what you really want to say; let me know.
And in support of your claim that the Cadillac is “main stream” you cited the following…
No where in your earlier post and especially not in the comments you quoted as “summing it up best” was there the slightest mention of “production numbers” as being a determinant for "main stream"; it was all pricing that the poster was claiming was the reason why the GT-R shouldn't have been chosen and which you claimed "summed it up best".
Now you say main stream is not about pricing but about production numbers???
Tell you what, when you make up your "non fan-boy" mind about what you really want to say; let me know.
Now do you have any point to make as to why a very limited production with fairly steep price tag like the GTR should be the COTY?
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
2007 medium household income was $44,389/year.
Anyone buying a brand new car with an MSRP of nearly 79% of their annual household income is a financial disaster looking for a place to happen. Now, I well know that people justify buying far more expensive vehicles than they can afford all the time but that's all it is...justification of a bad financial decision.
My point was that if true affordability/cost is supposed to be a major determinant in whether a particular vehicle is chosen by MT as COTY, then most vehicles would have to be disqualified.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Price and quantity, GTR is on the wrong end of both. I picked that quote as it used being out of reach to most as its main point, with price being his main point, add to that it also has very low production numbers, and you have my exact thoughts. So, yes, that quote did sum it up best of all the comments on that page.
Now do you have any point to make as to why a very limited production with fairly steep price tag like the GTR should be the COTY?
Now do you have any point to make as to why a very limited production with fairly steep price tag like the GTR should be the COTY?
I don't have to justify the Motor Trend's pick for their Car Of The Year award...it isn't my magazine nor was it my decision...if you really want to complain to somebody; why don't you write to Motor Trend; they might be as impressed with your reasoning as I am.
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 167
From: USA
Uh well...
2007 medium household income was $44,389/year.
Anyone buying a brand new car with an MSRP of nearly 79% of their annual household income is a financial disaster looking for a place to happen. Now, I well know that people justify buying far more expensive vehicles than they can afford all the time but that's all it is...justification of a bad financial decision.
My point was that if true affordability/cost is supposed to be a major determinant in whether a particular vehicle is chosen by MT as COTY, then most vehicles would have to be disqualified.
2007 medium household income was $44,389/year.
Anyone buying a brand new car with an MSRP of nearly 79% of their annual household income is a financial disaster looking for a place to happen. Now, I well know that people justify buying far more expensive vehicles than they can afford all the time but that's all it is...justification of a bad financial decision.
My point was that if true affordability/cost is supposed to be a major determinant in whether a particular vehicle is chosen by MT as COTY, then most vehicles would have to be disqualified.