Audi R8 or Nissan GTR?

I'm debating a new car, possibly to sit alongside the M5 but most likely to replace it. I'll have about 45k to spend, and the only two cars I'm interested in after extensive research would be an Audi R8 V8 (the V10 is out of my budget), or an 09/10 Nissan GTR (I'd be looking for one with the 2012 gearbox updates, and ideally Litchfield Stage 1 or 2 done, but it's not that expensive so worst case scenario I'd just have that done myself if need be).

The problem is I really can't decide between the two. In my eyes the R8 is the best looking and has the biggest wow factor, but the GTR wins hands down on performance (not to mention, I also love the looks of that, too). I've never been a badge snob so I don't care about that, I'm just trying to weigh up whether I go for the best looker (and settle for the fact the R8 will be no quicker than my M5) or do I take this rare opportunity to own a performance monster in the GTR?

Running costs not really an issue so that isn't coming into my thinking, and I have a Juke for doddering about so practicality not an issue either. It's purely down to "which car"... What would people here do and why?

I'd probably go for the GTR as it sounds better then the R8 and is faster too.
The R8 looks better in my opinion but I would probably always be thinking I should have saved for the V10.

Thing is, there's a bit of me that would also be thinking I'd got the "lesser" model by getting the V8, which is part of the problem. Not such an issue with the GTR as the performance upgrades they made on later models can (mostly) be done pretty cheaply. I'm starting to be swayed lol.

R8 for me everytime, that 4.2 V8 sounds delicious and its looks and junior supercar feel special. The manual will probably prove to be a pretty good investment too fwiw.

Agreed, much more closer to a super car feel with the r8 regardless v8 or v10. Still a peach of an engine. Hardly a slouch at 415bhp out the box.

I love the gtr. Best car I've driven by far but would feel it's wasted except on track?

I've driven both an r8 gives that sense of occasion that no other Audi gives for me. Like driving a Ferrari or lambo.

The gtr is different and gives the ultimate thrill and adrenalin.

Personally, I don't believe there's any way you can use the performance of the GTR on public roads so I wouldn't even consider it - in the same way that I entirely discounted the AMG A45. The R8 isn't my taste of car but it's certainly the way I'd go given that choice.

Cheers for the input folks, some very good points. I've only ever driven the (semi) auto Audi R8 so I would need to give the manual a go to see how that feels, but I've heard it's very good, and noted the point about it being the investment potential. The GTR I drove was a stock 09, and if I'm being brutally honest didn't really feel that much quicker than my M5 in a straight line. The biggest difference was that it shifted gears so much quicker than the M5, and it was considerably more planted in the corners.. but then again, so was the Audi. I was lucky enough to drive them both back-to-back on a track, but I'll need to get some test drives done out on the road to get a better 'real world feel' for them.

I'm still very undecided!

A V8 R8 (2007 model) is nowhere near as fast as an E60 M5! Looking at the road test numbers, I can say that a 2009 GTR will pull 11 metres on the M5 in 10 seconds from a 50mph roll. The R8 would be 19.4 metres behind the M5 at this point or 30 metres behind the GTR. That's around 30 metres gap in 400 metres travelled. This is known as a bloody good hiding!!!

This puts the remapped GTR in approximately a different galaxy in terms of performance. I think the GTR is more exclusive than the R8 too so it's an easy winner for me. It even looks better to me but, as has been said, it might be a little too competent on the road to be real fun. Probably more fun than being smashed by modified 18 year old Fiat Coupes though as in the R8's case

For me given the choice I'd have the R8.
I'm all for the aesthetics and the Audi looks more exotic in my eyes. I know the performance etc. with the GTR but...
One of my neighbours has an R8 GT

It makes me feel like an unsophisticated barbarian, but I'd have the GTR all day long. Mind you, for me it's as realistic as choosing a Hirst over a Hockney.

On the subject, came across this.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5dOpXqJ6Cg

Couldn't find one for the Audi R8 V8........

This is my other fav, if you're into that kind of thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlCBxpEdOHM

I'd take the R8 if it was going to be used as a daily and the GTR if it was going to be used as a weekend toy.

I've seen quite a few videos to back this up (relating the R8 V8 to the M5 V10). When you're driving the two of them they kinda feel about the same, but that's because of the low driving position in the R8 compared with the hefty bulk of the BMW. I'm pretty sure out on the road the M5 would pull away from the R8 as you're saying.

How does the R8 V10 compare with the same test?

I’ve very little knowledge on either car but my gut feeling is that the servicing costs on a GTR could be significantly higher than on an R8. Is that a consideration?

They're significantly higher if you use the Nissan service centres, not so much if you use a specialist like Litchfield, though I daresay still a little higher than the R8. I'm not overly concerned about running costs though provided serious/major issues don't crop up every 5 mins, and one of the things I like about both of these cars is they have a reasonably good reputation for reliability (compared to similar other stuff )

The 518bhp (2010) R8 V10 would be 3.3 metres behind the M5 while the 552bhp (2013) V10 would be 24.5 metres in front of the M5.

And where would a 450bhp Coupe be against either of the above?

50mph roll for 10 seconds

R8 V10 2010 409.5m
E60 M5 412.7m
Nissan GTR (2009) 423.8m
450bhp Coupé 430.5m
R8 V10 2013 437.2m

Im assuming you are going by Nigels specific figure's

But that is mighty impressive!!

Just goes to show how cool the Fiat Coupe is!

What colour would you get either car in?

Even though I love Audi's I'd still get the GTR. Bang for buck its one of the most capable cars you could possibly buy - its just a matter of whether you like them or not. They are pretty big cars.

Mind you I'd also pick a V10 over the GTR instead. I've driven a couple (not a V8 though).

Ive done red Letter days in both and i must say i prefered the Audi it just felt like a supercar and looks stunning. The GTR is a beast but the cabin is very cheap feeling compared and the engine noise isnt as good.Speaking to people that have owned the GTR they are have expensive to maintain because they eat tyres and brakes pads/discs.

The V8 was part of the reason i went out and bought the B7 RS4 (same engine used) it just sounds perfect all the way to 8200 rpm.

I think the Audi will always hold its money better than the GTR's and the fact theres a few problems with GTR gearboxs showing up in the older models now which isnt cheap to fix it would put me off.

How was the Jaguar F-Type V8s struck off your shortlist? This is the only car I'd replace my Coupe with. Noise, sound and pace

I was going to suggest that, but out of the OPs price range. They've not been out long.

£50k is about £45k

I've read these are 560bhp with a remap. That's V10 R8 performance so getting on for remapped GTR pace (when rolling).

Bracing myself to go away and hide... but they just never really grabbed me. Yes they sound great and I'm sure they're extremely capable cars, but I just prefer the R8 and the GTR

^ I don't really like them either

Depends who you believe.... My Coupe has been dyno'd at 488bhp, but Trappy and I generally use 450bhp as an indicative figure. I believe Trappy's own Coupe is in the same ballpark, so its a valid comparison.

Yes, the Coupe is ballistic in a straight line, but all of the cars in Trappy's list will beat a Cope round the corners (although with some concerted effort, sorted suspension, a Quaife diff and good tyres, the Coupe will hang on enough not to be totally embarrassed)

EDIT - a good Coupe might be able to hang onto an M5 round a track - I drove the race-kitted M4 at PalmerSport and wasn't particularly impressed with the way it went round corners

I'd drop the Coupe in a heartbeat for an R8 V10 Plus though - one of my lottery-win cars

In case of any confusion, with the exception of the Coupe numbers, the rest aren’t calculated by the performance calculator. They’re the results of simple distance over time formulae that I’ve run over real road test data. Where road testers use timing equipment that measures acceleration AND distance, I always check against the distance data to make sure it’s all correct. The distances listed are (give or take a few feet) exactly what happened when that car was tested by whichever magazine tested the car.

I’ve added actual data for the McLaren P1 and Porsche 918. I can’t find a full data set for the Ferrari LaFerrari…

Off topic Trappy - but what does your calculator do for the 918, La Ferrari and P1?

The GTR and R8 are cars from different leagues. The GTR is a 2+2 GT so from the Audi stable it should surely be up against the RS5. The RS5 in my eyes is far better looking if not quite as capable.

The R8 is a two seat sports car. It's main competitors would be Porsche, Aston, Jaguar, Lotus and Maserati. Sadly it is also given a run for its money by its little sister - the TTRS

But as you asked R8 or GTR I would have to say the R8. The GTR is a very capable car but it just looks too, oh how do I say this? I can imagine the GTR attracting plenty of attention from the young boy racers.

I'd say these points are all true. To me the practicality isn't really a concern. The fact the GT-R has a backseat (of sorts) is a bonus, if it had been a pure 2-seater it would still be in contention. I've no doubt the types of admirers the two cars would attract would be very different (albeit with some overlap), but as I only ever buy cars for my own enjoyment (as opposed to being for the attention you get) then it doesn't bother me too much

Those GTR's look very muscular and large on the road. Very deceptive from what you see in the pics. I like their road presence.

Sort of the ultimate Jap car.

I always see the R8 as a bit of a car of someone that couldn't afford a ferrari or Lanbo personally. Not taking anything away from it, especially the new V10, but just my thoughts

Look at the issues with the Audi 4.2 unit first, there are some mental bills you can get for silly things like an oil seal (3k) etc etc.

I'd lean towards the gtr, I couldn't cope with thinking but the V10 (I know you already have one, but still)...

They are both great cars and I'd say it's down to weather you want ultimate performance with room for 5 or something that seats 2 that looks more exotic.

I appear to have edited a previous post in answer to this rather than quote it...

See above

I've found a data set for the Ferrari LaFerrari today!!

Bloody hell those hybrid hypercars really are mental. Also worth noting just how capable my M5 actually is according to these numbers. I wasn't expecting it to be quicker than the first gen V10 R8.

I saw an R8 the other day. Or was it a TT? I can't really remember.

There's no mistaking the GT-R with anything else though.

Can I be bold and suggest a Tesla model S? They are in budget and very quick.....

And something completely different...

Interesting call!

How about an Aston...they can only go up in value in the long term...http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201608267166979?search-target=usedcars&make=aston_martin&price-to=45000&radius=1500&postcode=s104fl&searchcontext=default&page=1&sort=pricedesc&onesearchad=new%2Cnearlynew%2Cused&logcode=p&adPos=8

Out of those 2, the Audi seems a bit more special and would be my choice. Not that I have driven either though, or would be in the position to buy one.

After all, the GT-R is just a Datsun.

The P85D (fast one with 690bhp) isn't in budget. Under £50k is only the 362bhp version as far as I can see.

50mph roll for 10 seconds

Aston Martin V8 Vantage (2008 model) 391.1m
Audi R8 V8 393.4m
Jaguar F-Type V8s 404.6m
Trappy 408.3m
R8 V10 2010 409.5m
E60 M5 412.7m
Nissan GTR (2009) 423.8m
Nigel 430.5m
R8 V10 2013 437.2m

I guess the next question is: Does anyone know of an airfield we can use to put these to a practical test?!

Test it yourself! Send me a data set for a car from any road test. 0-30mph all the way through to the highest speed in the test (e.g. 0-150mph). Don't post up the distance times and speeds though. I'll then run the acceleration data through the calculator and post up the distance results. If they match, you know the above is FACT

I've got a simple stop watch macro and a bar chart that allows me to race cars tested in 1950 with anything tested since

Plenty of road test data sets found here

I didn't mean from the point of view of verifying the numbers, I meant from the point of view of an excuse to set up a few drag races

sorry mate both are not a driver's cars .... put your foot down and the comp takes control ... naa ... both dogshit as far as i am conserned .... for the money you are spending buy a old Quattro ... or a celica GT4 ... mate i am building a 1990 gt4 with a reliable 400hp ..the engine specs are good for 800bhp no electronics to go wrong permanent 4wd ... the monster sleeper comes with aircon elec windows mirrors abs ... think about it ... Tart hair dresser or Driver

Quoted for prosperity....

So - an R8 or GTR aren't driver's cars, they are both sh!t and a Celica with 400bhp and no traction control is better because it has aircon and electric mirrors... Wake up and smell the roses hairspray....

I'd dump my Coupe in a heartbeat for either the GTR or the R8

mate you drive the car not the computer .. i love my coupe because its feather the right foot ... not foot to the floor while i look on FB

i want a car i drive not the computer that's why i am saying ... buy a car you can drive ... modify it so it more fun than a computer

The problem I still have with any of these cars is that I can already punt my 2007 E320 CDI around country lanes at speeds that are both illegal and dangerous and fun. I've been tempted by an AMG V8 but I think I'd just find it deeply frustrating except for a race track and, even then, my old Alfa gives a far more visceral experience.

I would actually disagree that the computers do all the work in the GTR and the R8, having driven both pretty hard on track. They do a good job of flattering the driver and they are easier to drive than, say, a Ferrari 360 (which I've also driven hard on track), but imo it's a complete misconception that the GTR and R8 "do the work for you". Personally, by the time I'd finished my time with the Ferrari 360 I felt like I'd been wrestling a bear, and whilst that might appeal to the absolute purists, I preferred the GTR and the R8 by quite a considerable distance.

With a forum name that sounds like a can of hairspray, I think we know which category you fall into

Ah, fair play I'd be more than up for a drag race day. Maybe from a roll though considering the opposition!!

The offer is still there though. Anyone, click that link to the C&D road tests and send me the acceleration data set so I can show you it accurately calculates the distances

Ask someone who really understands cars I say....

Chris Harris GTR V M5

But that AMG GT/GTS is a beautifully made machine. Would be a lovely thing to own.

Problem with these types of cars is that they are hardly ticking over at 60-70 mph and they can reach these speeds almost anywhere. The performance available is almost completely pointless but it is possible to make and sell, therefore available. Something smaller, lighter, (and slower) is usually more fun on public roads where one has to be responsible.

I'm not a fan of the R8 at all.

But to have it described as...



and






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhckuhUxcgA

Absolutely. That's why I chose the 350 version of the SL - I can actually drive it and push it a little bit (still not that much)