By on June 2, 2016


Nissan’s hot GT-R receives new looks and equipment upgrades for 2017, but it also gets a price that pushes the performance coupe into near-supercar territory.

Getting into Nissan’s range-topper will now set you back $109,990 — a price that doesn’t include a $1,595 destination and handling charge, the automaker revealed today. Updates to the model piled on cost over the past decade, but enthusiasts continue to pull out their wallets.

The price Nissan lists is for the GT-R Premium. Four trim levels are expected, and pricing for the other three will wait for another day.

When it went on sale in the U.S. in 2008, the model carried an MSRP of $69,850, a cost that rose to $84,060 when the GT-R received a refresh in 2011.

Besides a new hood, “V-motion” grille and redesigned interior (now featuring 11 switches, instead of 27), the 2017 model gets a 20 horsepower boost. The turbocharged 3.8-liter V6 now boats 565 hp and 467 pounds-feet of torque, with a flatter torque curve to aid acceleration.

Nissan carried over the six-speed dual-clutch transmission, but made a few modifications to make it quieter and smoother. Acoustic glass and other sound dampening efforts make this GT-R the quietest to date.

A titanium exhaust system that comes standard on the Premium model explains some of the added cost for the new model. The system cancels out unwanted noise and amplifies the good stuff, giving the driver a more pleasurable motoring experience.

[Image: Nissan Motor Corporation]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

24 Comments on “Nissan Announces the 2017 GT-R’s Incredible Expanding Price...”

  • avatar
    John R

    meh. their costs go up, our costs go up.

    • 0 avatar
      John R

      A rejoinder – Guys, the 911 turbo s STARTS at $188k (

      Still a well equipped accord away from even the NISMO.

      • 0 avatar

        My friendly neighborhood Porsche dealer(ok, not so friendly), has two 2017 911 turbos. Both S models. Both in Orange. A drop top and a coupe. $222k, and $219K.
        GTR’s usually get discounted around here a bit near the end of the year…

        Not that I can afford one a

  • avatar

    It’ll make a real sweet used sports car in five years.

    • 0 avatar

      Maybe. The maintenance costs for the GT-R make it an expensive proposition even with a depreciated price tag.

      • 0 avatar

        Granted, that’s true of nearly any expensive luxury car–they were expensive for a reason, be it luxury in interior appointments or in performance engineering.

    • 0 avatar

      If you do not have deep pockets or are a tremendously skilled modern mechanic then this car can decimate your pocketbook out of warranty. These things have sensor suites that would put NASA to shame. You can’t ignore the laws of physics but the engineering of this car has some workarounds.

  • avatar

    OK I’m an old fart, but going fast and having the computers do half the work just doesn’t interest me. See my logo and for about half the price I’d be perfectly happy.

  • avatar

    At $70K, the GT-R was the middle finger salute to the Porsche turbo. Sure it was ugly but it was fast.

    Fast forward 8 years and the NISMO edition is now nearly the same price as the Porsche turbo. The problem is that the GT-R is still ugly and now feels old while the Porsche is brand new, looks great and doesn’t have a Nissan badge.

  • avatar

    This finally has an interior worthy of a $70K car. Back then it was an OK philosophical alternative to something like a Z06 or Cayman R if you were willing to put up with its idiosyncracies. For $110K now you are in mid level well equipped 911 territory (now with turbo!). A mid level trim GT-R is GT3 money and the NISMO trim is Turbo S money. Seems like a no brainer to me, especially after having driven an earlier GT-R at the track. Felt like a really fast AWD Altima, with near CUV height seating to boot. No freaking thanks Nissan. Hopefully the next one weighs less than a CR-V class CUV with AWD. Nissan lost the plot with this one

    • 0 avatar

      +1 on the ride height observation. I did like the car though. It just felt like such a jump up coming from the seat of a Carrera S.

    • 0 avatar

      This is spot on Sporty. Not only that, but with the Porsche and Corvette lineups you can chose manual or automatic transmission as well as hardtop or convertible. I think the Cayman or 911 with stick shift would be a much more fun daily driver, too.

  • avatar

    “Updates to the model piled on cost over the past decade, but enthusiasts continue to pull out their wallets.”

    Is this thing selling? I wasn’t aware it was. I never see one on the road, and I see everything from 911s to Lambo’s to Rolls-Royces.

    • 0 avatar

      According to sales stats (using Timothy Cain’s website) the GT-R has averaged 1,300 US sales/year since it’s first year (2008) which was also it’s highest take rate (1,730 in ’08).

      Over the same time period, the 911 (all versions together) has averaged 8,277/yr. This average increases to 9,390/yr if you go back to 2002 (first year of data on this site). No info available there for Lamborghini or Rolls (I’m too lazy to look them up elsewhere).

      Must depend on where you are though, as I see GT-Rs quite a bit in my area, including one in my neighborhood. As Timothy noted in a January 2015 article here on TTAC, the aging GT-R interestingly outsold the Audi R8 and Viper combined in 2014.

    • 0 avatar

      I see a bunch here in the SF Bay Area, but the population of flush-with-VC bro-grammers per capita here is higher than basically everywhere else in the world, which I feel is the perfect target market for these cars.

  • avatar
    Hoon Goon

    I liked the car when it came out, but over the years have come to believe that it’s an over-complicated fat pig with an automatic transmission.

  • avatar

    I’m be upset with Nissan, but I’m still heartbroken at the price of the Ford GT.

    • 0 avatar

      Yeah, the Ford GT price and the “write an essay about why we should sell to you” feels a bit like an “F-you”. At that price and production quantity, I’ll be lucky to ever see one on the road. And it’s not clear to me that these these are going to appreciate dramatically, as we are entering an age of improved batteries/capacitors, (relatively) affordable exotic materials, and near infinite torque from electric motors … so at least from a performance point of view, I’m not sure this vehicle is going to be a long-term standout.

  • avatar

    It’s still butt-ugly, new grill or not. Millennials seem to think that they look awesome, though.

  • avatar

    Back in 2008, when I bought my 2008 Evo X, these were a logical jump from those cars, given the msrp at the time. Now a days, not so much. Back then, the price was somewhat attainable to a lot of people. Now, the price is a condo in my area.

  • avatar

    “Nissan carried over the six-speed dual-clutch transmission, but made a few modifications to make it quieter and smoother.”

    Well then, it’s not carried over.

    • 0 avatar

      I think you’re focusing too much on detail. Even if there are minor modifications, the same transmission assembly would still be a carry over by my definition. Some of this might simply have been programming changes.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • FreedMike: “…too much throttle would’ve likely resulted in fishtailing that could’ve bent...
  • azfelix: The colorful decals on the white car certainly bridge the transition from the 80’s Miami Vice era to...
  • FreedMike: If I were the cop, I might let the kid off with a warning if he said his dad’s name was...
  • wjtinfwb: The Fiesta was the entry-level Ford when I was in College, several friends had them as I was always happy...
  • bjohnson10: It’s easy to mock a basic car like this, but I bought one new in 1990 when I finished college and...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber