You are correct. I will also further add that absolutely nothing has been confirmed with regards to what Nissan is planning for future GT-R development.

The best we have about the LF-A's performance is an unofficial 'Ring time of 7:24, recorded unofficially by spotters on the 'Ring in 2007. We also have the best lap time of the LF-A prototypes from this year's 24 Hours of Nurgburgring (ADAC race), which on the North Loop section of the track was a 7:13.

Both of these times, while definitely not official production car times, indicate performance exceeds the Nissan GT-R.

Several journalists and magazines that have driven the race LF-As have commented on it's performance. The C&D journalist the drove one of the race LF-As commented the handling was more direct and responsive than the GT-R.

We don't know what Nissan will do in the future with the GT-R, just as we don't know what Toyota will do in the future with the LF A, or actually how fast a production LF A will be.

Based on what we do know, right here and right now, it is fairly safe to assume the LF A is faster than the GT-R

 

Any sports coupe that can track as fast as the GT-R is competing with it at some level.

 

How can that be when we know NOTHING about the LF-A's performance? We DO know what the current GT-R can do. So there are no safe assumptions at this point.

 

I think the only safe assumption is that this thread has gone way off topic. One mention of the LF-A and this becomes an LF-A vs GT-R debate.

I agree with the people who have said that dealer mark-ups are hurting the sales of this car. Mark up of up to about 2/3 the car's MSRP is a bit over the top IMO... 5-10k is some what reasonable but I think anything more than that NNA needs to intervene a little bit.

The GT-R is also more of an enthusiast car more than it is any sort of exotic, so once those enthusiast have it where's your market now? If the GT-R ceases to be sold in the US in the future I really don't think it would matter all that much. What it could do is open up a spot for a GT-R derived vehicle in the Infiniti lineup which, I think, would be sort of a big deal...

 

Who said the LF A tracks "as fast" as the GT-R? More speculation, contradicting unofficial info we DO know about the LF A.

The GT-R runs the 'Ring almost as fast as a Carrera GT, does that mean the GT-R competes with the Carrera GT? Of course not. It means the GT-R performance-wise comes close to a Carrera GT, and nothing more.

Enthusiasts need to stop acting as if the GT-R is the end-all and be-all of performance, that it competes with any and every supercar in the world. There are still quite a few supercars out there that simply eat a GT-R performance-wise. There are also a lot sports cars and supercars that humiliate the GT-R with equal performance yet vastly better driving comfort and better ride. That's not even considering other supercar factors like high price, exotic value, radical styling or build materials or unique buying/owning experience.

Fact is, the GT-R was meant to compete mainly with the 911 Turbo. Nissan benchmarked the 911 Turbo performance. This is direct from Nissan themselves. Nissan accomplished it's goal with the GT-R by beating the performance of the 911 Turbo, but at a cost. The drive and ride comfort is inferior to a 911T, and so is the overall interior quality as well as interior refinement.

That's not true. We do know SOMETHING, and that is what I posted above. This is not speculation, but cold hard fact; the race LF-A this year at the 'Ring achieved a best lap of 7:13 at the North Loop section of the track, which is the part of the track where automakers test cars and set 'Ring times. The race LF-A is basically a near-production LF A modified to race regulations, so it gives some indication as to what an actual production LF-A could do.

Then there is the unofficial time of an LF-A prototype achieving 7:24 at the 'Ring in 2007. Since then Toyota has most definitely improved the car.

We know NOTHING directly official regarding the production car's true performance at a track.

Like I said, it is a fair assumption that the production LF A will be faster than a GT-R.

I would agree with this as well. Dealer mark-ups are never good, especially for cars in this price range. Mark-ups are not such a big deal if it is a super-limited, super-exclusive machine.

I also agree with you that outside of hardcore enthusiasts, there really is no market for the GT-R. Even looking at different aspects of the car, it was designed like that. Ride comfort is quite mediocre compared to the competition, the interior is very basic-looking, and lacks the refinement of some of the competition. The car looks unique, but most people would agree it is not beautiful or exotic. It is a great example of almost pure function over form.

 

Whatever "CLASS" you wish to place the LF-A in... I for one will be quite surprised if it can match GODZILLAS performance stats. Say what you will of the Mightiest Nissan ever... It shook up the Auto Industry and put Porsche in check.

 

I won't be surprised if it can match or exceed Godzilla, I expect it to. It bloody well better for the development time and price it will command.

 

I hear ya bro...

Just sayin... don't be too disappointed if it doesn't.

Hell.... If R&D and Time were the yardstick for the stats the LF-A should produce... The Veyron should be in it's sights.

 

I would be surprised if the LF A doesn't exceed the GT-R's performance, because for the LF A cars above the 911 Turbo in class and performance were used as benchmarks.

 

i dont doubt the LF-A can outclass the gt-r in performance, but definitely not in pricing....
well one would hope anyway

bang for your buck these days is a dime-a-dozen C6 in Z06 trim or GTR...
(ZR1 markup is the same as a GT-R)

 

LF A pricing will be stratospheric compared to a GT-R, but that's because the LF A will be a much more exclusive car competing in a more exotic class of supercars, and will offer a different experience to that of a GT-R. Despite it's performance, the GT-R was built for a price, and it shows.

The LF A, from what we know and have seen so far, was not built for a cost. The LF A, from what is known so far, was built with no time and no budget limitations. The Chief Engineer Haruhiko Tanahashi himself has been quoted as saying they wanted to build an "uncompromising" car.

 

Funny but I started a thread years about about the "Ring" and educating about it. Now its b/c some fanboi stomping ground, a place where only some damn numbers matter to people. Another e-***** measuring contest.

The LF-A is about BALANCE and FEEL, something the chief engineer stated recently. I mean the LF-A wouldn't be the only supercar behind the GT-R, the GT-R's time is simply incredibe.

THe "ring" has been *****d out where we now get spy pics of Chevy Aveo's and Kia Rios being "Tuned" at the ring...

Sigh......

 

I personaly don't care if the LFA is slower than the GTR. Even at 4 times the price it will be a much better car than the GTR could ever dream of and worth ever penny IMO. Performance is not everything.

 

Not following that logic but, ok.

 

errrrm ... well this thread certainly took a turn.....