# How usable are the back seats in the R35



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

For those of you who have sat in the car, how usuable are the back seats?

Is it as bad as the new Audi TT or is it more spacious? I ask because I do want to drive the car quite often and I find that a lot of the time I go out I have 2 or 3 people with me.


----------



## Fuggles (Jul 3, 2001)

If you're about 5'10" you might just get in but your head would be touching the rear screen and you might bang your head on the way in/out.


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

That should be fine, usually ladies in the back anyway. I'm only 5'7" so im assuming someone sitting behind me isn't going to be too uncomfortable then?


----------



## GTRJack (Aug 27, 2005)

Only for asian ladies at the back :chuckle:


----------



## slegros (Oct 4, 2005)

I sat in one today at a showroom in Nagoya. The car is pretty cramped compared to my R33, less headroom in both the front and rear seats, and not much rear leg room to speak of. You'll definitely be moving the front seats pretty far forward to get anyone in the back anything close to comfortable.


----------



## paul__k (Dec 8, 2007)

Doesn't look to bad to me. Most people seem to be saying its a 2 +1 for adults.

Would post some images but can't seem to do it from my computer


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

Would appreciate any pictures anyone could put up.


----------



## der_horst (Nov 13, 2007)

according to that aussie review it seems that the leg length of the people in the front are an important factor, because apart from the limited headroom in the back there has to be some space left for your ladies legs 

btw, maybe this helps:










it also gives you a pretense to acurately measure the bodies of your female passengers


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

der_horst said:


> it also gives you a pretense to acurately measure the bodies of your female passengers


LOL! Thanks.


----------



## Scott (Jun 29, 2001)

From what I say at the Nismo Festival last week, if you are coming up for 6 foot and sitting int he front, then there will be virtually no rear leg room at all. I was quite surprised.
Unless you are sub 5 foot 6 in the front, then an adult wont be very comfortable in the rear at all.

It's definitely a 2+2 unlike the Skyline.


----------



## russwestwood (Jul 11, 2007)

der_horst said:


> it also gives you a pretense to acurately measure the bodies of your female passengers


I like that idea. Damn, looks like ive got a valid reason to buy the R35 now.. :clap:

On a more serious note, I reckon the 2008 GTR was meant to be a true driver's car.. or maybe for daddy to bring mommy & the 2 kids for a bit of a joy ride once in a while, but thats about it. Never intended to be a people mover. Think of it as a 350Z, but you get better performance, handling, and you can now bring the kids along. Im sure its got to do with the gearbox & clutch in the rear, hence the raise in rear seat height.. and aerodynamics of the outer shape, so when you're in the rear and bump your head in the rear winshield, just remind yourself that its due to aerodynamics and to take the bus next time. lol!


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

I've sat in it.



If lack of rear seat usage is a deal-breaker then you're not really into sports cars, then.


----------



## MeLLoN Stu (Jun 9, 2005)

bonzelite said:


> I've sat in it.
> 
> 
> 
> If lack of rear seat usage is a deal-breaker then you're not really into sports cars, then.


LoL what utter drivel. :chuckle: Do take the GTR goggles off once in a while and come up for breath. Why is it on every thread that is posted here where something about the new GTR comes into question, where someone has a doubt or a feature which could deter them, you're sat here getting defensive? It's boring and you're fast starting to sound like a scratched record. :blahblah: 

If you care to look behind the typical glossy-brochured marketing speil, the new GTR is built and marketed as a 2+2 everyday useable supercar rival, oddly enough much the same as its predecessors. For those of us who have families to take into consideration, or folks who have more than one friend (such people do exist), it's a perfectly sensible thing to take into consideration even when buying cars of this nature, they fitted 4 seats, so they obviously expect people who may require the use of 4 seats to consider buying them, logical no?

What on earth does that have to do with *liking* sports cars?  
I love sports cars but I'm happy to say if there's something significant about one I'm interested in that I don't like, well there's probably others out there that will fit my needs better, regardless of marque. It's called being sensible and open minded, rather than a blinkered fanboy. 

My old man, much the same as me loves sports cars, but because he smashed his legs and shoulders up in an accident many years ago and still has a lot of trouble with them, he can't buy that Porsche he's always longed for, or indeed the GTR's he likes too, because getting into and out of them as well as driving for more than a few minutes in most sports seats causes him discomfort. That doesn't make him any less of a fan of these cars than you or I, just makes them unsuitable for him. 

Lots of us owners use our GTR's as daily drivers, with that often comes the usual boring stuff like transporting family around and daily driving chores. I'm one of them, doesn't mean I'm adverse to driving it as it was meant to be driven, it just means that I have other things to take into consideration and can't buy a car which doesn't suit my needs no matter how well it scratches the sports car itch. If I wanted a 2 seater sports car, or a track car I'd have bought one. I wanted a car that did it all without having to run two cars, I bought one.

I'm actually considering selling my GTR soon as I've the option of getting something else I like next year which is more special, and would undoubtedly work out less than the GTR in terms of running costs. Good God in your blinkered world I must instantly be branded a turncoat and a hater of all things GTR! 
A true sports car anti-christ because running costs came into consideration when I can easily afford to run the GTR anyway. Errm, no, despite the years I've enjoyed with mine I'm prepared to sell it when the option of something better which ticks all the right boxes presents itself. 


Get a grip! :lamer:


----------



## seksy (Jun 9, 2005)

I smell trouble in North America.  But it's another excuse to not drive anyone either


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

MeLLoN Stu said:


> LoL what utter drivel. :chuckle: Do take the GTR goggles off once in a while and come up for breath. Why is it on every thread that is posted here where something about the new GTR comes into question, where someone has a doubt or a feature which could deter them, you're sat here getting defensive? It's boring and you're fast starting to sound like a scratched record. :blahblah:


Boring is what you are considering. 

You are considering breaking the deal on the R35 to get something else with real seats. That's about the most boring kind of basis for choice you can make. You don't buy this kind of car to be practical. That is the choice of a dullard. 

So you are seriously considering the foisted 2+2 idea for the R35 as being worth looking into for practical uses?! LOL!

Look at the pictures. Go look then at pictures of a Ferrari GTC/4 or Daytona and compare. That's your rear seats. 

It's clear there's no room there. 

Then go sit in it. 

It's then even clearer --with brutal clarity-- that there are no practical uses for this car. It's an expensive toy like a Porsche or Ferrari. You buy it because it's cool and fast. You must be cool and fast to buy it. Not snoring your way to the car lot for rear seats. 



> If you care to look behind the typical glossy-brochured marketing speil, the new GTR is built and marketed as a 2+2 everyday useable supercar rival, oddly enough much the same as its predecessors. For those of us who have families to take into consideration, or folks who have more than one friend (such people do exist), it's a perfectly sensible thing to take into consideration even when buying cars of this nature, they fitted 4 seats, so they obviously expect people who may require the use of 4 seats to consider buying them, logical no?


 The 2+2 is a gimmick and false. You may get lower insurance premiums out of it, granted. 



> What on earth does that have to do with *liking* sports cars?
> I love sports cars but I'm happy to say if there's something significant about one I'm interested in that I don't like, well there's probably others out there that will fit my needs better, regardless of marque. It's called being sensible and open minded, rather than a blinkered fanboy.


Unusable rear seats even with a family in tow and with "friends" doesn't deter me one iota. The GT-R is a toy, not a family truckster to take to Disneyland. That is dull and expected and there are plenty of other cars for that purpose. The GT-R is about breaking away and being different.

I was simply struck by your seriousness of considering the GT-R to be of practical value for more than small pets or fruit in the back. 



> My old man, much the same as me loves sports cars, but because he smashed his legs and shoulders up in an accident many years ago and still has a lot of trouble with them, he can't buy that Porsche he's always longed for, or indeed the GTR's he likes too, because getting into and out of them as well as driving for more than a few minutes in most sports seats causes him discomfort. That doesn't make him any less of a fan of these cars than you or I, just makes them unsuitable for him.


Then forget any marque offering a 2+2 with the rear "2" being package trays for fruit or paper products. 



> Lots of us owners use our GTR's as daily drivers, with that often comes the usual boring stuff like transporting family around and daily driving chores. I'm one of them, doesn't mean I'm adverse to driving it as it was meant to be driven, it just means that I have other things to take into consideration and can't buy a car which doesn't suit my needs no matter how well it scratches the sports car itch. If I wanted a 2 seater sports car, or a track car I'd have bought one. I wanted a car that did it all without having to run two cars, I bought one.


Okay that's fair. Just don't buy the wrong car, then.



> I'm actually considering selling my GTR soon as I've the option of getting something else I like next year which is more special, and would undoubtedly work out less than the GTR in terms of running costs. Good God in your blinkered world I must instantly be branded a turncoat and a hater of all things GTR!
> A true sports car anti-christ because running costs came into consideration when I can easily afford to run the GTR anyway. Errm, no, despite the years I've enjoyed with mine I'm prepared to sell it when the option of something better which ticks all the right boxes presents itself.
> 
> 
> Get a grip! :lamer:



Assuming we are all here for similar reasons, we're all into sports cars in some way. 



It's not a 2+2 by any means.


Get something more boring.


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

bonzelite said:


> I've sat in it.
> 
> If lack of rear seat usage is a deal-breaker then you're not really into sports cars, then.


It ain't no deal breaker, I just wanted to get an idea. 

As for the comment about not into sports cars, well just because someone needs rear seats doesn't mean there not really into sports cars. It just might be their situation e.g kids etc.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

SAJ_1982 said:


> It ain't no deal breaker, I just wanted to get an idea.
> 
> As for the comment about not into sports cars, well just because someone needs rear seats doesn't mean there not really into sports cars. It just might be their situation e.g kids etc.


I understand. 

See my prior post to MeLLon Stu.


Use the GT-R as a toy and you're fine. Have something else to really drive every day.


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

MeLLoN Stu said:


> What on earth does that have to do with *liking* sports cars?
> I love sports cars but I'm happy to say if there's something significant about one I'm interested in that I don't like, well there's probably others out there that will fit my needs better, regardless of marque. It's called being sensible and open minded, rather than a blinkered fanboy.


You hit the nail right on the head. Good to see that there are still sensible people in the world.


----------



## doggiehowser (Oct 8, 2007)

I think the problem with designing a real "performance" sports car means you have a lot of compromises for practicality. Midship arrangements (either front or rear of the driver) will seriously compromise cabin space. 

Traditional midship designs like the Ferrari 430s and predecessors, the Audi R8 and even the Cayman/Boxster or Carrera GT means there are no rear seats.

911s give you puny rear seats (probably worse than the GTRs) by shifting the engine all the way to the rear, creating the scary pendulum effect when you try to turn hard off camber and it has taken them years if not decades to get the PSM to bear some semblance of control.

The GTRs front midship layout would give you a decent amt of space but it's not going to be cavernous by any stretch.

Heck even on a pretty stretched "luxury-class" front midship-ish platform like the Audi S5, my wife hit her pelvis on the way out of the rear seats. And she's like 5 foot and 4 at most.

And to get near 200mph, it means some form of slippery shape, that means cars that you have to crawl into rather than "slide" into.

All these point to serious compromises as a "practical" car.

Your best bet for a "practical" performance car? I'd say: BMW M3 sedan or the RS4. But these IMHO are a different grade from other cars in the GTR band.


----------



## russwestwood (Jul 11, 2007)

doggiehowser said:


> I think the problem with designing a real "performance" sports car means you have a lot of compromises for practicality. Midship arrangements (either front or rear of the driver) will seriously compromise cabin space.
> 
> Traditional midship designs like the Ferrari 430s and predecessors, the Audi R8 and even the Cayman/Boxster or Carrera GT means there are no rear seats.
> 
> ...



Agree with you completely.

Come on lads, chill. I think we're all hardcore fans for the skyline & GTR class, and we may have different reasons and opinions of wanting & owning these machines. Its easy to get misunderstood on a forum as there isnt a face-to-face type interaction going on.. so I suggest, as Daisy Duck used to advise Donald, to take a deep breath & count to 10 before we get annoyed & begin the flaming.

Have a nice day & long live the GTR!


----------



## der_horst (Nov 13, 2007)

doggiehowser said:


> 911s give you puny rear seats (probably worse than the GTRs)


but take a look at the specs, the GT-R is 20cm longer, 7cm wider and 4cm higher than the 911, so i guess the question in how far that space was used for anything else apart from sportiness is indeed valid.


----------



## NotoriousREV (Jun 11, 2003)

bonzelite said:


> I understand.
> 
> See my prior post to MeLLon Stu.
> 
> ...


What a blinkered attitude. I use my R33 GTR as an everyday car, which includes picking my 3 year old son up from nursery, who fits nicely in the back in his child seat. 

Granted, it's not as easy as it would have been if I'd bought the M5 I was also considering, but then that would have been the "boring choice". Yes it's a comprimised choice in some ways, but then I chose to accept those comprimises in favour of the less obvious choice.

For some reason, some people find the sight of a GTR with a child seat in the back amusing 

Unfortunately, the new GTR doesn't appear to allow that choice anymore with it's smaller rear seating.


----------



## Fuggles (Jul 3, 2001)

Check out this thread for some decent pictures: http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/upload/85426-exclusive-gtroc-photos-vip-session.html

and this one for some including what it's like to sit in the back seats: http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/upload/85571-new-pics-tokyo-different-colours.html


----------



## stealth (Jul 6, 2004)

I dont think anyone that is really buying an R35 cares too much about back seat room ,if you can aford the car you can aford to spend about a grand on a daily driver .


----------



## doggiehowser (Oct 8, 2007)

der_horst said:


> but take a look at the specs, the GT-R is 20cm longer, 7cm wider and 4cm higher than the 911, so i guess the question in how far that space was used for anything else apart from sportiness is indeed valid.


probably the boot 

which IMHO has better "value" or "utility" to the target market.


----------



## slegros (Oct 4, 2005)

The whole point of the GT-R in my opinion is that it was a practical everyday super car. It could be easily used as a daily driver without the need for a second 'practical' car. It had decent luggage space, carried 4 adults comfortably, was fine in any weather/road condition. In addition it was reasonably priced, could be tuned to outrageous specs, and had amazing performance. It was the go anywhere, do anything super car. I'm sorry but the practicality of the R35, has been somewhat compromised by the lack of rear seat room, and as a result in my opinion some of the practicality of the GT-R has been lost. Great, you drop 80K for a new GT-R and because Nissan couldn't add a few extra inches of headroom and legroom, it has become a weekend driver 'toy'.

Is the R35 a great car? No Doubt. Does it have the versatility that past GT-Rs had? Most certainly not, and as a result it has strayed from one of the aspects which not only attracted me to the GT-R but probably others as well. Just my opinion.


----------



## doggiehowser (Oct 8, 2007)

Guess it's different for most of the guys I know who have the weekend people mover when they need it. But the GTR is all they need during the week to get to and from work and the odd weekend getaway without the kids.

Guess demographics aren't the same everywhere.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

No one is going to have a GTR as the one sole family car. If you're wealthy enough to own one (and frankly, you can't be skint or 17 years old, but it's well within the means of many an average bloke), you're going to have two cars anyways.

I've fit four girls plus myself into my R32. Don't quite see that happening with the R35, but honestly, when will you use the car to transport four adults on a regular basis? It can be done in a pinch, like bringing your drunk mates home from the pub - something impossible with a MR layout Ferrari or Lamborghini. I haven't seen the boot of the R35 but lets hope it's as usuable as the R32.

Let's say you are married, have one or two kids about ten or under, and you can buy two regular cars or one GT-R. You *could* buy the GTR. The missus could easily drive the car and shuttle the kids around to school and back. Groceries? Easy. And when you've got the car to yourself you can raise holy hell.

So although it's clear that the pure functionality of the GT-R falls short of the R32, it can be purchased and be functional for people who cannot afford to have a two seater sitting around.

911s fall into a somewhat similar category, except the boot is really not much more than a joke.

What happened to the R32?? Rear legroom isn't like the R33, but it's decent, adults can fit in back, it's got a nice-sized boot, and above all, it weighs the least of all modern GT-Rs and it's the (relatively speaking among whales) smallest of the bunch. Popular cars always gain weight and size, they rarely go in the other direction - the Mazda FD RX-7 is the only exception that comes to mind.


----------



## russwestwood (Jul 11, 2007)

As for me it has been a little different. I seldom carry people in the back.. but when I do, I notice them bobbing up and down the rear seats as if they were riding a bull. All this thanks to the stock 34 V spec suspension. So it wasnt really practical in my eyes to even have the rear seats or the legroom, as its was way too uncomfortable anyway. Even on roads that seemed flat and smooth, the V spec suspension made lumpy especially on long distance cruising.

All this changed when I got the aftermarket shocks & EDFC, as the softer setting made it more practical for passangers in the rear. I wonder what its like in the R35 rear seats in tearms of comfort.. for space may not be the only issue at hand.


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

Wow....appreciate all the opinions, but really all I wanted to know was is the leg and head room in the back better or worse than the current TT coupe.

If it is just as bad as a TT Coupe I may have to reconsider getting the car (which is very disappointing) purely because although I have another car I can use, I do regularly have people in the back (too many friends ) for journeys lasting upto an hour and I'm not spending £60k on the car if it sits on the driveway half the time.

I understand its a sports car and they are obviously not as practicle as a saloon so I may end up going back to my S5 which is still currently on order as I haven't got round to cancelling it yet.

I'm buying the GT-R to drive it anytime, anywhere and under any conditions.


----------



## paul__k (Dec 8, 2007)

> I'm buying the GT-R to drive it anytime, anywhere and under any conditions


+1

If you hardly use it there is no point having it.


----------



## Redlineash (Jul 16, 2007)

*R35 Compromise*

To all the guys on here who are lucky enought to have the money / driveway / garage for a second car to use instead of their Skyline, Im very pleased for you.

However I think a huge number of skyline owners actually use their cars as the sole daily driver. It IS one of the appeals of the R34 for me.
I regularly have two friends in the back and they say they are as comfortable as in a friends focus. 

How can practicality NOT play a part unless you are lucky enough to afford two lots of road tax, twice the maintenance etc.


----------



## stealth (Jul 6, 2004)

slegros said:


> The whole point of the GT-R in my opinion is that it was a practical everyday super car. It could be easily used as a daily driver without the need for a second 'practical' car. It had decent luggage space, carried 4 adults comfortably, was fine in any weather/road condition. In addition it was reasonably priced, could be tuned to outrageous specs, and had amazing performance. It was the go anywhere, do anything super car. I'm sorry but the practicality of the R35, has been somewhat compromised by the lack of rear seat room, and as a result in my opinion some of the practicality of the GT-R has been lost. Great, you drop 80K for a new GT-R and because Nissan couldn't add a few extra inches of headroom and legroom, it has become a weekend driver 'toy'.
> 
> Is the R35 a great car? No Doubt. Does it have the versatility that past GT-Rs had? Most certainly not, and as a result it has strayed from one of the aspects which not only attracted me to the GT-R but probably others as well. Just my opinion.


 You have it wrong I'm afraid ,the whole point of the GTR was that it was built out of the Skyline model in those past 3 examples and loaded with all the hot bits ,engine ,4 wheel drive ,interior ,you know the rest .Nissan have dropped the Skyline name for the very reason there is not a lesser model ,just the GTR and as such is a car in it's own right .


----------



## Redlineash (Jul 16, 2007)

*All Wrong? Dont think so...*

It is an inescapable fact that past GTR's are very practical cars, in terms of sports cars they are positively cavernous (try getting four and a couple of suitcases in a 911 Carrera 4...)

Regardless of the name of the new car (we do realise that it is not based on the lesser G35 Skyline chassis), it IS the NEW R35 GTR so it is the successor to the R32/R33/R34!!

I think the observations about practicality stand up as a good point - the R35 is not as practical as the R32/3/4. Not a massive difference granted - it DOES have rear seats after all, but just enough of a difference that it probably is now a tight 2+2 rather than a full four seater.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

SAJ_1982 said:


> Wow....appreciate all the opinions, but really all I wanted to know was is the leg and head room in the back better or worse than the current TT coupe.
> 
> If it is just as bad as a TT Coupe I may have to reconsider getting the car (which is very disappointing) purely because although I have another car I can use, I do regularly have people in the back (too many friends ) for journeys lasting upto an hour and I'm not spending £60k on the car if it sits on the driveway half the time.
> 
> ...


Then your friends are going to hate riding in your car, then, anytime, anywhere, for journeys "up to an hour."

The R35 doesn't have back seats. I've sat in the car. Trust me. 

Yes, I get it. You won't believe it until you see for yourself. 

The rear seats in the back are like believing in a Leprechaun. A fantasy.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

but can you shag a girl back there, somehow? I guess she'd have to be pretty pint-sized?


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

kismetcapitan said:


> but can you shag a girl back there, somehow? I guess she'd have to be pretty pint-sized?


Sure, if you snapped off her legs like branches from a dead tree, then had your way with the wet torso... sure.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

bonzelite said:


> Sure, if you snapped off her legs like branches from a dead tree, then had your way with the wet torso... sure.


or if she were Japanese and had short legs to begin with :chuckle:


----------



## Pugwash (Mar 6, 2007)

The rear seats, no matter how small, are one of the reasons I want a GTR. It makes it easier to justify it to the Wife. We currently have two 2 seaters, She has an S2000 and I have a 350Z. The GTR having a 2+2 layout is the only way I can justify spending so much money on the car. It also makes it a direct rival for the 911.


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

Can somone lay this to rest, mainly someone in Japan and take pictures of someone in the back with someone sitting in the seat infront, just so some of us here in the UK can get a good idea about it.

ASAP please. Thanks in advance.


----------



## doggiehowser (Oct 8, 2007)

SAJ_1982 said:


> Can somone lay this to rest, mainly someone in Japan and take pictures of someone in the back with someone sitting in the seat infront, just so some of us here in the UK can get a good idea about it.
> 
> ASAP please. Thanks in advance.












Does this not give you a good enough picture?

The guy on the left is sitting in the front. Look at the room behind him? Looks like zilch to me. And the guy in the backseat looks like he needs a chiropractor on the double.

:chuckle:


----------



## ru' (Feb 18, 2007)

doggiehowser said:


> ...The guy on the left is sitting in the front....


I was about to post that that didn't look _too_ bad, until I read the above


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

Its OK. But I'd like to see a few more pics just to be sure and get a better idea. Who knows how far back the guy in front had his seat etc...

Its only a few pics so if anyone can help it would be much appreciated.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

although many of us will mourn the passing of the saloon-based GT-R, I suppose it's a good thing that the GT-R is evolving more towards a "purer" sports car.

As far as useless, well, anyone who's sat in the rear of a 911 can attest to that, yet I'll bet both my testicles that the 911 will just as soon move the engine to the front as it will delete the rear seats.

And the 80s 911s are actually not that bad. I sat in the back of a 959, and it was surprisingly passable.


----------



## doggiehowser (Oct 8, 2007)

SAJ_1982 said:


> Its OK. But I'd like to see a few more pics just to be sure and get a better idea. Who knows how far back the guy in front had his seat etc...
> 
> Its only a few pics so if anyone can help it would be much appreciated.


ps bonzelite has actually been inside one of the US spec GTRs at a special event in LA so I figure he knows what he's talking abt.

But here's some indication. See this bloke? I think he's sitting a tad too far back from the recommended "sports" driving position 










But notice where his seat is. Even if you nudged it a few more inches to the front, I doubt it would make a lot of difference to this bloke if he was sitting in the back


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

doggiehowser said:


>


This guy looks not too bad, atleast he has somesort of head room, in the TT Coupe you have none, have to squint your head. So seams feasible to me.

So my order stays. Thanks for the pics.


----------



## bonzelite (May 14, 2006)

SAJ_1982 said:


> Can somone lay this to rest, mainly someone in Japan and take pictures of someone in the back with someone sitting in the seat infront, just so some of us here in the UK can get a good idea about it.
> 
> ASAP please. Thanks in advance.


This has been laid to rest several pages ago. You can remain in disbelief all you want and it will not make the seats very usable for human beings. 


This is similar to when I said the engine would not be a VQ, but a new engine only for the GT-R, and almost everyone ignored me, as if I were from Mars.

This is even sillier as I've sat in it and you still don't believe me or even other people who have been posting pics to prove it. 


What will it take? You need to be hit over the head with a blunt object? :chairshot 


This is a 2-seater. Plain and simple. It's a coupe. Not a sedan-based chassis. It's meant for only 2 people, actually 1 person because all of the instrumentation is oriented to the driver's line of sight. 


This car is a toy like a Ferrari. It's impractical and very fast and expensive for it's "class." It will be largely out of reach for most "fans." This is an exclusive car. Very few people will own one of these cars.


----------



## alfcanada (Dec 8, 2007)

*Nothing beats a VIDEO*

Hi SAJ, 
I actually had this video since my trip last week .... 

I'm posting it up so you can see it for yourself ... here i get in and out of the back seat.

I'm about 5' 11" and 180pounds.

I would say it is SQUEEZY but not entirely unusable ... perhaps a long autoway journey would not be recommended ... but short stints to the shops would be fine ... 

so at the risk of looking like a fool to millions of vieweres .. here goes:







YouTube - Nissan 2008 GTR - How Usable are the Back Seats

enjoy dude!


----------



## Pugwash (Mar 6, 2007)

Looks like a definate 2+2 to me, very similar to an Audi TT. 

I've often wondered why they didn't put rear seats in the back of 350z as it would have appealed to more people, Nissan obviuosly thought the space didn't warrant it. So can only assume that Nissan thought the sapce warrantied it in the GTR.

Saying that I have on one occassion had another person in the back of the Z but it was for anly a mile. That was illegal and very naughty, at least it won't be in the GTR, even if it is just as uncomfortable.

Ticks the boxes for me


----------



## paulg390 (Dec 13, 2007)

Hi, be gentle, I'm a newbie... :wavey: but this is a very interesting thread for those contemplating a substantial outlay of cash on something they haven't seen yet. I'm always amazed about how strong some peoples opinions come across on these forums when someone just asks a simple question... 
I'm very interested in just how much space there is in the back for all sorts of reasons - mainly because we have a kid and so its handy to know whether he will fit (and if so how comfortably) and so whether we can expect to be able to sell two cars or have to keep one for longer journeys. 
The answer to me looks as though its fine for kids upto teens (see last video clip) as long as the front passenger compromises on space (as per most 2+2s, e.g., XK8 etc..) but not really for adults. Would that be reasonable ?
I'll still have one anyway but it would be nice to know


----------



## stealth (Jul 6, 2004)

[QUOTE=This car is a toy like a Ferrari. It's impractical and very fast and expensive for it's "class." It will be largely out of reach for most "fans." This is an exclusive car. Very few people will own one of these cars




Really ! how many are Nissan making then?


----------



## alfcanada (Dec 8, 2007)

paulg390 said:


> Hi, be gentle, I'm a newbie... :wavey: but this is a very interesting thread for those contemplating a substantial outlay of cash on something they haven't seen yet. I'm always amazed about how strong some peoples opinions come across on these forums when someone just asks a simple question...
> I'm very interested in just how much space there is in the back for all sorts of reasons - mainly because we have a kid and so its handy to know whether he will fit (and if so how comfortably) and so whether we can expect to be able to sell two cars or have to keep one for longer journeys.
> The answer to me looks as though its fine for kids upto teens (see last video clip) as long as the front passenger compromises on space (as per most 2+2s, e.g., XK8 etc..) but not really for adults. Would that be reasonable ?
> I'll still have one anyway but it would be nice to know


personally i think that would be reasonable. 

i sat in the car, and i'm no teen  .. i would say that i wouldnt' wanna be in there for more than 10 - 15mins, but then that's just me.

for a kid who's no bigger than 5', i suppose there'd be more than enough space.

cheers!


----------



## russwestwood (Jul 11, 2007)

Cheers for the video alfcanada, looks like its definately tricky, especially not getting your butt stuck for more than 2 seconds while exiting the rear seats..


----------



## SAJ_1982 (May 2, 2007)

Thanks for that alfcanada. That makes things a lot easier for me to decide now.

Thanks again, really appreciate it.


----------

