The Nissan GT-R Is One Of The Most Awesome Performance Achievements Ever. WHY Doesn't It SELL BETTER?

Since Nissan likely loses money on every one they sell at that price, there is no marketing promotion for the GTR. Production is intentionally very limited. Very few people who can afford a 100K car grew up wishing they had a Nissan - Porsches and Vettes, a different story. It doesn't look like a supercar - it looks like a large Japanese coupe - many people think its pretty ugly with a poorly designed interior. Though its performance is formidable, it is a rather boring street car, where you cannot use the performance.

Agree with pcar4evr. Looks and interior kill it and the heritage is just not enough in the US to get it moving. Maybe they should have gone and maxed out the 370Z with some of that technology (keeping the price reasonable) to get the performance close and then called it something like the 370Z-R??

It is really simple.
When one spends $100K on a car, it has to look great to the buyer.
GT-R? It looks like a $30K sports car.

I've said it before (and got deboosted to hell), but the car just doesn't look the part. It looks more like a Mustang peer than a Porsche peer. The GT-R just looks like a grown-up, steroidal G37 or 370Z. It practically completely alienates one very important demographic on styling alone: women.

To continue…Again, I've said this before. Rich people didn't grow up dreaming of someday owning a GT-R. Their dreams were filled with Corvettes, Porsches, Ferraris, etc. Can a car successfully break into an established segment? of course. The R8 and NSX both proved it in their respective peaks, but both LOOKED the part. I live in one of the wealthiest areas of the US and I, literally, have seen 2 GT-Rs in the 5 years I've lived here. And one of them was in a middle-class neighborhood, so not even in the area where I live. Seeing Corvettes, Porsches, Ferraris, Lamborghinis and R8s in my area is literally like seeing a Civic. They are so common because that's what wealthy people want.

90k with interior of Datsun....please...

Ditto all comments above... interior and exterior looks cannot justify price. In addition early stories about Nissan using GPS to invalidate warranties if car taken on track killed all karma about this car in enthusiasts minds. Also the stories about the horrendous costs to fix anything especially the gearbox scared many away. And lets not forget that you just spent $100K and have to wait behind some pimple faced kid with his hat turned sideways who leased a Nissan for $99 a month to get your GT-R serviced. Car should have been released as an Infiniti.

LOL. Pug, great point.

And I think that's where Nissan product placement and marketing failed. I do think that they were aiming right at the clientele who were now making good money but still had "blue collar tastes". And it failed.

At the same time, if Nissan badged this as an Infiniti, it wouldn't have helped. The GT-R wouldn't really fit anywhere in a luxury marque lineup. Just like the Corvette fits perfectly in the Chevy lineup and not the Cadillac lineup.

Here are two:

Because it is a Nissan
Because it is an ugly duckling


Also I know three owners of a GT-R. All report is it pretty fragile. Enough so that they fear romping on the pedal. Not a trait you want to see in a 90K sports car.

i was thinking of leasing one, went to the dealership and was quoted 1400 with 4k out of pocket, went to porsche for a 911 and was quoted 1200 with 4k out of pocket..
even though the GTR would destroy the base 911, i would rather get the porsche..
at least the first year the gtr was 75-80k msrp, now at over 90k ( even though performance has been upgraded ) its just too expensive.
most people arent car people, and those people would NEVER spend 100k on a nissan. you really have to be a car nut to appreciate what it does to spend that kind of money.

I agree with the overall sentiments in these comments but I take issue with a few things that were written.

#1 None of the cars mentioned have a 100k looking interior. The corvette probably has the worst and Audi probably has the best, but I'm not sure I would consider the R8 in this category. Anyhow, I believe Nissan was just following the trend by making it purposeful instead of eye candy.

#2 No one actually uses the performance of any of these cars on the street. The most you get to do is beat that guy in a Civic to the next traffic light.

I do agree most people are not going to pay 100k for a Nissan and the design is controversial.

I would disagree.

The R8 and 911 definitely have interiors worthy of a $100,000 product.

1. Looks ugly
2. good performance but not a macho
3. FX/G has better exhaust (one thing makes me not to buy this car)
4. poor marketing

I think this car mostly appeals to the "street,track racer/drifter" demographic. Most people who REALLY want this car are too young and don't have the money. Sport cars like Porsche, Audi, Merc and BMW offer performance and luxury. They are also more "everyday drivers". Just my opinion.

Because people who can afford a toy like that can also afford cars with lofty sounding names. I also think Nissan hasn't done a good job at getting the word out about what a performance machine the car is. Brand and advertising problems.

...All of the above are pretty much the REAL WORLD FACTS. Look, I think it should be very clear, for example, why Akio Toyoda knew he had to absolutely build his very rare and ultra exclusive Lexus LFA. He knew his company had the ability to build a car even better than the GT-R or it's rivals, but it needed to be superior in many other ways than just straight line performance. He knew as a Japanese Automaker he had to make this car super durable, super rare, extremely expensive with the use of the best exotic materials inside and out and give this Lexus Exotic a price tag, that matched it's exclusivity, making it worth every penny at the same time making history placing itself in and beyond the class of it's rivals being the Porche, Corvette, Ferrari, Lambo you name it etc. Pulled it off! Ten years plus research, 500 hand-built LFA's all sold out, gone, done deal, instant Iconic status. On top of that you had to be a wealty in the spot-light figure hand selected by Lexus to even be considered to lease for 2yrs before owning one so the car collectors could not buy them all up and hide'em away, which they'll do anyway. This my friend has not ever been done or may not ever be pulled off again by any of it's rivals. So, until one of it's rivals can really build an Exotic that's super durable, rare and as unique as the Lexus LFA, it's in a class all by itself proving that Mr. Akio Toyoda himself is a very special individual. We should all be very grateful to be living to experience this in our life time, even though most of us may never drive the LFA or even see one on the streets and THAT'S A FACT!!

I think that the LFA tried to hit a moving performance target and missed. Not enough "go", coupled with not the world's best looking exterior, and super expensive. Not a great equation for continuing sales, IMO. I don't see the LFA as an icon except to prove that the Japanese can build a car equivalent to the German and Italian supercars. In many ways the GTR did that better than the LFA.

I'm not sure how many of LFA's came to the US, but for such a rare and highly desirable car, there is ~35 cars available for sale at the moment (AOL, Auto Trader, etc.), many of these with less than 100 miles on the odometer. We all know Lexus marketing tried the "only available through lease" ploy in the US only because they were having trouble selling their allotment here. They eventually backed down on the leasing as this still was not selling cars or generating the allusion of desirability they were trying to create.

The LFA was an amazing achievement for Lexus, but it was hardly a car that placed itself above it's main rivals and THAT'S A FACT.

@Terry

The last I heard, the count for LFAs entering the U.S. was at 171.

@Terry

The whole lease thing didn't happen, not one LFA was sold that way. Yes they talked about it before the LFA went on sale but quickly retracted it shortly after because as I would imagine it was thought of as a bad idea.

I think it has to do with marketing, marketing and marketing. If I have the money I would pick up a 2014 Nissan GT-R any day of week. Each his own I guess.

And there is to much poser wannabe to that would NOT paid a $100k for a Nissan logo. And secondly, Nissan does NOT offer it in manual transmission which I think would help with the sales. But like I said if I had the money I would pick one right now.

it may be an engineering achievement. but it is a design failure. it's just plain ugly. it's a like a fat girl who's really smart and has a great personality.

It really shouldn't be hard to understand. People who buy cars at that price point don't base their decision to buy on JUST 0-60 times or 'Ring times. There is a priority list of wants and needs that have to be met before purchase and the GT-R probably only meets some of those points. People who ONLY care about certain performance metrics tend to not understand that people will hold certain values, such as brand, prestige, exclusivity, workmanship, etc when it comes to high dollar purchases. The GT-R, no matter how fast it goes, may not measure up in some instances.
I also want to add that nowadays speed is cheap. Most performance cars are nearing sensible limits as to how fast they can go. Back in the 80's, seconds use to separate high end exotics from more plebian forms of travel. Nowadays, we are passionately arguing over tenths of a second, the same tenths of a second that sometimes separate high performance family four door sedans and Ferraris. So with that said. Simply having the best track times won’t be enough when it comes time to drop the almighty dollar… most cars have to bring something extra to the table in order to capture someone’s attention.

Spot on, Need4Speed.

Do your own research Pcar4evr (pony/mustang). I always do extensive research on this kind of stuff and I'am quite aware of the pro's and con's even though I personally do have a tendacy to favor anything that has an added level of excellence to it. Do your self a favor and research the positive and negative things about the LFA and I will counter it with documented facts, opinions and knowledge from those who really know what they are talking about. By the way, there were only two performance targets the LFA engineers were instructed to Aim for: The Nurburgring and The Ferrari 599 and it did'nt miss either one.

LFA = "flash-in-the-pan" driven by ego

@lexworld is on point here...

I agree 100% with Need4Speed...to add to that the GTR has a bonejarring ride. A 911 you can drive everyday without it kicking your a$$ literally - and you have the brand cache that goes along with it. The GTR is a great performance car, but beyond that to the regular world you would have a hard time explaining to them why you spent $100K on a 911. I currently drive a R230 MB SL and I am looking at moving into a 991 - sure I like the GTR and I like the way it looks but I want to do more than dominate MSR Houston. I gave the GTR a serious look, but at the end of the day it does not feel special the way a 911 does. I applaud Nissan for keeping it a Nissan and not Infiniti...but it begs the question, would they have sold more in America if it was an Infiniti?

"$100K on a 911" error, ...spent a 100K on a GTR

@Drerx8

Bonejarring isn't the word.

Even in its most comfortable/relaxed settings, my God, what a miserable car to drive into New York City.

Nice car; I agree with Need4Speed on this. There are only so many Jay Lenos in this world.

On top of the deliberate ugliness, every review I've read leads to the conclusion that it uses its tires more like a belt sander at each edge of the car. Hacking away on the snow as opposed to gliding on skis.

Nissan does not have to defend or promote their mechanical masterpiece to anyone. The core customer knows the value and intrinsic beauty of the GTR and they purchase. Nissan sells every one they produce.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are even some who think the plastic shoe box called a Corvette is attractive to them.

for those of you who actually think this car is good looking...why doesn't it sell like CRAZY? it's half the price of ferrari and performs extremely well so it should sell FAR MORE volume than those cars cost 2-3x more. why doesn't it?

Years ago I track-raced my friend’s modified Datsun 510, along with my brother who raced his modified 240Z. I was hooked and, when I could I afford it, I bought myself a 280Z and had it restored, including painting it “Porsche Red”. After my first son arrived, I sold the treasured 280Z to a friend and bought a Pathfinder that I kept for many years. These Datsuns/Nissans were wonderful vehicles and I was excited when I heard about Nissan’s new GT-R. Although the exterior design doesn’t appeal to me the way the Z did, the performance sounded amazing. My sons think the GT-R looks “really cool”, but their generation isn’t buying cars yet. At car shows the GT-Rs were always locked tight and you were never allowed to sit in them. So I’d wander over to the Porsche area where all their different models were always open and available to sit in. Over about a two-year period I would visit various Nissan dealerships, but they rarely had a GT-R in stock. If they did have one, it always had a big “SOLD” sign displayed prominently in the front window, with the doors locked tight. When the dealership would finally find me “the GT-R Sales Associate” to speak to, I’d ask for a test drive but I always got the same response: “Sorry, we don’t give test drives with the GT-R.” Before leaving I’d ask for a brochure, but they never had any and would tell me to “just go the internet”. So, finally I decided to visit a Porsche dealership. There, the salespeople were happy to have me sit in whichever car I wanted. I test drove several different models, including the 911. I came away with several beautiful brochures that I enjoyed reading and relaxing with at home in the evenings. I bought a 911 and now I’m a Porsche guy. My sons are too.

Actually they dont all sell out. There are a bunch of '13s still sitting on lots and here we are many moons after this article with the '14s already out. As a former GTR owner (of an 09), the dealers that know me have emailed me offering *below invoice* on those '13s and *well below MSRP* on the '14s.

I liked the GTR a whole bunch, but at the end of the day the posters above are correct. People that feel that anyone interested in the intangibles is a "poser" are really just displaying their own immaturity and ignorance sorry to say.

I've been fortunate to own 911s and NSXs in the past and currently own an E92 M3 as my daily driver. All of these cars are a *lot* "slower" than the GTR, but they're actually all a lot more engaging, and provide a subjectively better overall experience, and are all *cheaper* to boot to own and run (and I bought an NSX new in 03).

The Nissan is an incomprehensible bargain when the #s are measured against a $1M Veyron, but honestly... Who cares? The real world answer is "about 1200 people a year". The sales figures absolutely *do* prove that the, admittedly massive, fan base that worships the car *cannot* afford it and the folks who *can* afford it, absolutely do not want to buy it. Even the used ones, which hold value fairly well at an absolute floor of $60k (a demographic jump down from the new MSRP), tend to change hands quite frequently and you can always find a clean one with low miles.

The vast majority of people who desperately want this car can't even afford the oldest pre-owned samples by and large. Folks who *can* swing $60-$80k for a used car tend to jump in but then, despite all of the hype and the "Veyron killer" label, jump right back out. It isn't uncommon to find 09s with only 20k miles yet 4 and 5 owners already. I guess they're all "posers".

As Nissan has continued to nudge the new MSRP ever higher the balance has just gotten thrown even farther off.