It's not every weekend I have access to both a Ford GT
and a Nissan GT-R
. In fact, I'd say it only happens about once a month.
But it did happen this past weekend, and I spent enough time in both vehicles to get a sense of their unique character traits. Thus, what follows is my completely unbiased appraisal of how these two supercars stack up.
First let's call out the obvious areas where these cars don't compare. The Ford GT is out of production, as it was only made for the 2005 and 2006 model years, while the Nissan GT-R recently went on sale as a 2009 model. Our site puts the current value of a 2005 Ford GT at $115,000 and the Nissan GT-R at $77,000 to $80,000. Reports of GT-Rs going for $20,000 over MSRP persist, while few Ford GTs (not including salvage title cars) change hands for less than $150,000, but let's just go with the prices on Edmunds to keep things simple.
In terms of acceleration, the best accleration numbers we've established for a Nissan GT-R are zero-to-60 in 3.53 seconds and the 1/4-mile in 11.77 @ 118 mph, but that's with launch control. Without LC (it goes away for the 2010 model year) the car pulled zero-to-60 in 4.0 second and 1/4-mile in 12.3 @ 118 mph. If you've been reading this blog you know the, um...questions surrounding launch control, so take those figures as you will.
The Ford GT initially pulled zero-to-60 in 3.7 seconds and the 1/4-mile in 11.8 seconds @ 124 mph. But after a supercharger pulley swap and ECU reflash the GT managed zero-to-60 in 3.5 seconds and the 1/4-mile in 11.6 seconds at 126.3. No launch control for the GT, but you do have to know the proper technique to get these times without overheating the clutch. And at 17,000 miles, the GT's transmission has never left it's place in the drivetrain.
Further testing of our long-term GT-R had braking performance from 60-to-zero mph in 108 feet. We never tested the long-term Ford GT for braking, but in our American Exotics Comparison Test that GT stopped from 60 mph in 115 feet. Slalom speeds? GT-R 73.6, GT 69.5. Skidpad? The GT-R pulled .91 Gs while the Ford GT in that comparison pulled .92 Gs.
I think it's safe to conclude that performance is pretty much a wash between these two cars. But if the GT-R offers that performance for $40,000 less it's gotta be the better car, right?
That's certainly what the spreadsheet suggests. And plenty of people "shop by spreadsheet" so those folks could buy a GT-R and call it a day. But for those interested in going beyond the numbers I'm happy to supply additional feedback.
First, if you're going to argue looks...well, good luck. That's like arguing over the best color for a bathroom. Too personal and too many factors at play. The photo above shows both vehicles. You make the call.
Steering feel? That goes to the GT by a wide margin. Just having AWD puts the GT-R at a distinct disadvantage, as the additional hardware -- though great for grip -- is usually terrible for transmitting road data to your fingertips. Audi and Porsche do an amazing job overcoming this in cars like the R8 and C4S/Turbo, but Nissan isn't there yet.
A similar story exists with braking feedback. The GT-R never feels like it won't stop. Actually it feels like you hit a brick wall when you stomp on the brake pedal. But if you want something less than "brick wall" deceleration it's not as easy to modulate with the GT-R as it is in the Ford GT.
If you've been reading about the GT-R you already know who wins the ride quality contest. This is ironic considering the amount of technology going on under the GT-R. The fact that you can put the Nissan in "comfort" mode and it still rides worse than the non-adjustable Ford GT makes no sense to me. Maybe it would if the GT-R was clearly superior in terms of handling than the Ford GT. It's not, so it doesn't.
Exhaust note advantage goes to the Ford GT, even in stock form (this GT has the Ford Racing exhaust, which thoroughly trumps the GT-R's truck-like groan).
Let's talk transmissions. The GT-R doesn't have a clutch pedal, so it's more traffic friendly and the "not-into-manuals" wife can drive it (in fact, she did for these photos). But as pointed out in a previous blog, the execution of this dual-clutch tranny is worse than in our $40,000 Mitsubishi Evo. Beyond it's shifting idiosyncracies, the GT-R's transmission results in some throttle-response lag as the computer registers throttle position and compares it to rpm, current speed and current gear. Basically, when you roll into the throttle you're often not sure exactly what you'll get back, especially if you're already moving (it's not as bad when you pull away from a dead stop).
Obviously the old-fashioned transmission in the Ford GT suffers no computing errors -- it just does what it's told (plus it allows you to heel-and-toe).
The GT-R has a few other obvious advantages. The seats are more adjustable and comfortable. The rear seats technically allow for more passenger capacity, though my 8-year-old daughter can't sit behind me unless she sits, as she says, "criss-cross." The GT-R's audio/nav system is far more advanced than the Ford GT's factory head unit, though this Ford GT has an aftermarket JVC head unit that basically matches the GT-R's (nav, Bluetooth, satellite radio, DVD player, etc.).
The Nissan GT-R is easier to get into and out of thanks to its traditional doors and taller seat height. Entry/exit is probably the biggest strike against the Ford GT's daily functionality.
So performance is a wash. GT-R wins on cost and daily functionality. The Ford GT wins on pretty much every driving characteristic (steering feel, brake feel, throttle response, transmission interface, exhaust note) and -- in my totally biased opinion -- looks.
I guess it comes down to what matters to you most. If you want exotic-car performance on-the-cheap there's no denying the GT-R. And if you drive in city traffic or park in narrow spaces the GT-R is clearly the winner. If you want the complete exotic-car experience (not just the spreadsheet numbers) and enjoy interacting with your sports car the GT has it all over the GT-R. One thing is certain however, if you drive them around together looking for a photo location, you'll get plenty of attention.
Karl Brauer, Edmunds.com Editor in Chief @ 15,910 miles
dougtheeng says:
07:57 AM, 01/20/09
Interesting write up. Having not driven either car, I really don't know which I'd choose. I love how rare/exotic the GT is! For either car, I don't think 'every day driveability' would really be a concern for me because it would definitely be a weekend vehicle for me. The manual in the GT is a huge bonus, as I don't buy into the new transmission technology hype.
omfg says:
07:58 AM, 01/20/09
Looks? No contest, the Ford GT is worlds better.
1487 says:
07:58 AM, 01/20/09
The GTR has supercar performance but its no supercar. There is nothing exotic about its styling or price tag. Logically speaking it would make no sense to get the GT over the GTR. If you are into exclusivity, exotic styling (although I find the car to be ugly) and have money to burn the GT is going to win. The GT may be more engaging to drive hard but in normal street driving it really isnt going to make much of a difference.
chavis10 says:
08:25 AM, 01/20/09
"Steering feel? That goes to the GT by a wide margin. Just having AWD puts the GT-R at a distinct disadvantage, as the additional hardware -- though great for grip -- is usually terrible for transmitting road data to your fingertips. Audi and Porsche do an amazing job overcoming this in cars like the R8 and C4S/Turbo, but Nissan isn't there yet."
This is because of the weight distribution. Mid/rear engine cars have light front ends and this is the major factor fot their sensitive steering feel.
farvy says:
08:42 AM, 01/20/09
I really wouldn't use either of these cars as daily drivers because of the wear & tear it puts on them. If you can afford either of these, you can afford something else to drive to the grocery store & dry cleaners.
So it comes down to which one is more special. You put both sets of keys in front of me, & I would grab the Ford GT 90% of the time.
e10rice says:
08:44 AM, 01/20/09
Sounds like a GTR bashing write up. Sure you threw in some points but over all sounds like another "the GTR is no Supercar".
rayainsw says:
09:24 AM, 01/20/09
Karl -
Good to see a post here.
Since the move to "Tweets"
I rarely stop in there...
- Ray
pat1usmc says:
09:43 AM, 01/20/09
"It's not every weekend I have access to both a Ford GT and a Nissan GT-R. In fact, I'd say it only happens about once a month."
Now THAT is some funny stuff. I was laughing like crazy until I realized that it might not have been meant as a joke!
canadaphant says:
10:16 AM, 01/20/09
It's okay to hate you a little bit, right?
arm51 says:
10:50 AM, 01/20/09
Great writeup, nice to see the comparison going as deep as it did.
stingray454 says:
11:08 AM, 01/20/09
Interesting comparison. Not to knock your driving skills, but it should be known that many other automotive sites/magazines have gotten much better slalom, skidpad, and braking distances out of stock Ford GT's than the numbers you listed, and also beat the GT-R's numbers.
I'm also surprised that you didn't mention that the Ford GT is simply a faster car than the GT-R, with or without it's launch control. One look at the 1/4 mile trap speeds shows that - An 8 MPH difference in trap speed is HUGE. In a race 0-150, the GT-R would be WAY behind the Ford GT. The Ford GT just needs more room to stretch it's legs than the GT-R needs, due to its traction disadvntage.
csxtrader says:
11:35 AM, 01/20/09
I've been fortunate enough to drive a Ford GT. The car is simply stunning to drive even at sedate speeds on "ordinary" roads, and every time I see one around town I crane my neck to look at it. I often see one on Saturday nights at a local car hangout, and it excites me every time.
I also worked at a Nissan dealership where I saw two of these. We first delivered a red one to a young guy who lived in a neighboring state, and then we got in a dark gray one for a guy who was coming from Los Angeles to Indianapolis to pick his up. He ended up backing out of the deal for stated financial reasons; however, I suspect he realized they were going to be a little more commonplace in L.A. than he thought. After about two days of looking at that gray one that we got in all of my excitement for it was gone. The car just didn't do anything for me any more. It just seemed like a very expensive Nissan. I'd take a 370Z and then keep the rest of my money for something else. The only thing I can say about it is that it in my opinion it looked better in gray because the color closely matched the wheel color. Ford GTs will be special for along time, but I just don't see the same long-lasting appeal for a car like the GT-R.
MS3lvr92 says:
04:05 PM, 01/20/09
How did you get a Ford GT? Or did I miss that somewhere in the post. Given the choice between the two I'd have to go with the GT purely based on styling.
billt9 says:
06:02 PM, 01/20/09
What a wash.
The Ford GT certainly has a much older American styling.
GT-R techno robo big eyed pikachu cool it is then.
brn says:
06:52 PM, 01/20/09
The GT never stops amazing me in how good it looks. The GT-R, not so much.
csxtrader says:
09:47 AM, 01/23/09
"How did you get a Ford GT? Or did I miss that somewhere in the post. Given the choice between the two I'd have to go with the GT purely based on styling."
I was able to drive a Ford GT that was red with white stripes. It had all of the few options that were available at that time. I worked for a Chevrolet dealer, but our owner also had a nearby Ford dealership and he brought the car to our Chevy store one day. If memory serves me right the car stickered for about $156K. I believe he sold it for $175Kish. Both cars have styling that could be argued for days, and both cars have undeniable performance. At the end of the day though, I just think the GT will hold a special place for a long time, and the GT-R will fade away. I'd buy a Z06 or 911 for similar money.
thehardcard says:
05:35 PM, 01/23/09
The GT-R won't fade away. It is the latest link in an already firmly established legendary line. Showing it up with cars that cost much more isn't the way to tarnish its image.
MN_Car_Enthus says:
07:38 AM, 01/28/09
Slow day in MN so here are my random (and I think unbiased) thoughts after driving the GT-R for little over a month:
- In the end, it is about what you should expect from a $75k car in (styling, performance, trim, etc..). If it were a $120 - $150k car, it'd be a disappointment (maybe just a slight one at that).
- Paddle shifters, dual clutches and VDC suck. Technology for technology's sake I think. Though I will say manual down-shifting from 2nd to 1rst produces one of the best sounds I've heard in a car.
- It is big. I ran over the top of a 911 and didn't even notice.
- Suspension: it rides rough. They could have done better, and all reports are true. Let's face it, most driving will be on roadways and not the track.
- It isn't a svelte car, but it isn't ugly. I don't think the car photographs well. Go see one in person. That being said, it certainly isn't GT or 911 iconic styling. Relativism is a lie and beauty in the eye of the beholder is total bullshit. The GT-R...is sort of in between. Not beautiful and not ugly.
- Maybe someone here said it, but you never know what you are going to get from the car performance wise. Mash the gas and you'll either have your neck snapped-back into the headrest, or disappointing pause. There is something inconsistent about the throttle response at low rpm.
- It is fast enough. And for a measly couple thousand $ extra(and a potentially voided warranty) it CAN be supercar, supersick fast. I'll drive it hard but with common sense (no or few launches) to vette-out any production issues before tuning it. To be on the safe side. I suspect Nissan wants the car to be tuned and left a little performance on the table for tuners to extract...
- It has a ton of character. Just depends on what character you want. It is a geeky car and there is a lot to like if that's your character disposition.
- It drives well in the snow. It starts in -20 degree weather. Below freezing, it is sluggish but operates just fine after warming-up.
ace47 says:
04:19 PM, 02/22/09
Juat because a bunch of 10 year old boys or some 50 year old men design something like the GT abomination and gives it limited runs hardly makes it supercar worthwhile. The bullshit interior and the supercharged crap of an engine doesn't make it a supercar. You can't polish a turd and thats what the GT is.
carswapper says:
11:56 AM, 02/25/09
Sounds like ace prefers rice
fuhteng says:
09:13 AM, 08/ 5/09
Hush ace, adults are speaking.