Thinking of going from F80 M3 to the GTR or M6

[Leaveit2bevo]

Originally Posted by Arko528

Maybe... But they would not walk past my M6

Maybe its because of your location but in Los Angeles M6's are a dime a dozen and nobody would even bat an eye at your car, again GTR gets way more attention.

[Jojipoji]

Bro since you're an expert on GTRs explain why the fastest stock 2013 is over a half second faster than any stock 15+

It's called weight.

http://www.gtrlife.com/forums/topic/35199-gtrlife-14-mile-rankings/

Originally Posted by TahoeM3

Ok first of all, I'm going to fight the urge to escalate this despite your very rude and aggressive post.

Where to begin...I commented that I didn't know the current status of the exhaust is, yes. But that is irrelevant. Because you said that the '17s can't be tuned and that was the point I was refuting. Whether the exhaust can be swapped out is meaningless in that regard. The car can be tuned. So you shouldn't tell people it can't. As a bonus, the stock exhaust is Titanium, saving people from having to buy a $4000 aftermarket exhaust to get one made out of Titanium.

Rather than Googling 13 vs 17 weight, which will give different non-standardized sources, I'd prefer to use official numbers. According to Nissan, and I'd bet they are a pretty good source, the '17 GT-R gained 11 lbs. Weight went up from more sound insulation and down from the lighter Titanium exhaust. Net increase is 11 lbs, not 100.

You can "guarantee" it is multiple seconds slower around the ring, but there's nothing to support this. As I said, actual data shows it is just as fast stock for stock. And have you ever seen a stock GTR? They are very rare.

If you actually read the Australian article you cherry-picked to show it being slower, you will see they 3.3 second 0-100 time they used was measured vs the Nissan official measured time. Nissan uses a very specific testing protocol to get those times which was probably not followed by he Australian rag. Nissan posts their best number. It doesn't mean you'll get it every time. And because they got 3.3 seconds on testing under who-knows-what cicrcumstances does not mean the '17 model is 0.6 seconds slower. That's just ridiculous.

Again, where is the proof that the older years had "better" suspension? My point there is that if you're going to change you're suspension, then it doesn't matter which year you get. Bro.

Yes, if you don't care about having the newer version, definitely it makes sense to save money by getting the older version. But you said the '17s can't be modded and are seconds slower, etc. You may have had 3. I've had one for 5 years. But having or not having one doesn't matter if your facts aren't accurate.

[TahoeM3]

Originally Posted by Jojipoji

Bro since you're an expert on GTRs explain why the fastest stock 2013 is over a half second faster than any stock 15+

It's called weight.

http://www.gtrlife.com/forums/topic/35199-gtrlife-14-mile-rankings/

Bro. Bro bro bro, bro bro bro bro-buh-bro.

Seriously, I'm going to go easy on you here. I don't think you're malicious, I just think you have a lot to learn. Basically, there are a lot of factors involved in how a car performs at any given time...temperature, humidity, altitude, driver, tire pressures, state of tune, gas quality, engine condition, weight (including how full the gas tank is), condition of the track, etc, etc. None of those times are standardized, and it's hardly a comprehensive list. Because there's not a stock '17 on there doesn't mean that one has never run a 1/4 mile. And a "stock" 13 running in better conditions will get a better time than a "stock" 13 in bad conditions on worn tires. The point is that the difference in weight and other factors is pretty negligible across the years as far as straight line performance. And on a track it will also be similar assuming comparing comparable models...track model vs track model, etc. But that's why Nissan standardized testing to show how the cars perform under similar conditions.