Car comparison

Nissan GT-R (R35) · Facelift 2010 3.8 V6vsFerrari California T 3.9 V8

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

Nissan GT-R (R35) · Facelift 2010

3.8 V6

550 hp3799 ccGasolineAWDDual-clutchTwin-turboCoupe2012-2016
VS

Ferrari California T

3.9 V8

560 hp3855 ccGasolineRWDDual-clutchTwin-turboCoupe2014-2017

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

Ferrari California T 3.9 V8

  • Most powerful
    560 hp
    418 kW
  • Highest torque
    755 Nm
    557 lb-ft
  • Lightest
    1,625 kg
    3,583 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    345 hp/t
    257 kW/t
    2.9 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    10.5 L/100 km
    22.4 mpg US
    26.9 mpg UK
  • Best estimated range
    743 km
    462 mi
  • Best performance score
    93/100
  • Best economy score
    79/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelNissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
Power
550hp410kW
560hp418kW
Torque
632Nm466lb-ft
755Nm557lb-ft
Curb weight
1,740kg3,836lb
1,625kg3,583lb
Gross weight
2,200kg4,850lb
-
Top speed
315 km/h
196 mph
315 km/h
196 mph
To 99% top speed
40.3s99% target: 312 km/h / 194 mph
Calculated
66.3s99% target: 312 km/h / 194 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
2.8s
3.6s
0-200 km/h
7.9s
Calculated
11.2s
0-60 mph
2.7s
Calculated
3.4s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
11.8L/100 km19.9mpg US23.9mpg UK
10.5L/100 km22.4mpg US26.9mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
17L/100 km13.8mpg US16.6mpg UK
-
Fuel consumption highway
8.8L/100 km26.7mpg US32.1mpg UK
-
Quarter mile
10.2s
Calculated
11.5s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
316hp/t236kW/t143hp/1000 lb
Calculated
345hp/t257kW/t156hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
363Nm/t243lb-ft/ton
Calculated
465Nm/t311lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
627km390mi
Calculated
743km462mi
Calculated
Displacement
3,799cc232cu in
3,855cc235cu in
Length
4,670mm184in
4,570mm180in
Width
1,895mm75in
1,910mm75in
Height
1,370mm54in
1,322mm52in
Wheelbase
2,780mm109in
2,670mm105in
Front track
1,590mm63in
1,631mm64in
Rear track
1,600mm63in
1,605mm63in
Ground clearance
105mm4in
-
Trunk volume
315L
241L
Max trunk volume-
340L
Doors
2
2
Seats
4
4
Fuel tank
74L
78L
CO2 emissions-
250g/km

Performance charts

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Dyno simulation

Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.

Nissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6Ferrari California T 3.9 V8PowerTorque
  • Nissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6: Power / Torque
  • Ferrari California T 3.9 V8: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V66,400 rpm3,200-5,800 rpm6,650 rpm
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V87,500 rpm4,750 rpm7,750 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricNissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
2.7 s
3.4 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
2.8 s
3.6 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
7.9 s
11.2 s
Top speed
315 km/h
196 mph
315 km/h
196 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
1.8 s
1.9 s
330 ft
101 m
4.5 s
5.0 s
1/8 mile
201 m
6.7 s
7.5 s
1000 ft
305 m
8.6 s
9.7 s
1/4 mile
402 m
10.2 s
11.5 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
228 km/h
141 mph
202 km/h
126 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
550 hp
410 kW
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
560 hp
418 kW

Ferrari California T 3.9 V8 has 10 hp more than Nissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6.

The biggest power difference is between Nissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6 and Ferrari California T 3.9 V8: 10 hp (7 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
632 Nm
466 lb-ft
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
755 Nm
557 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
1,740 kg
3,836 lb
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
1,625 kg
3,583 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
315 km/h
196 mph
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
315 km/h
196 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V62.8 s
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V83.6 s

Although Ferrari California T 3.9 V8 has more power, Nissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Nissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6 and Ferrari California T 3.9 V8: 0.8 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
11.8 L/100 km
19.9 mpg US
23.9 mpg UK
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
10.5 L/100 km
22.4 mpg US
26.9 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Ferrari California T 3.9 V8 and Nissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6: 1.3 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
316 hp/t
236 kW/t
3.2 kg/hp
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
345 hp/t
257 kW/t
2.9 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
627 km
390 mi
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
743 km
462 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
550 hp
410 kW
2.8 s
315 km/h
196 mph
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
560 hp
418 kW
3.6 s
315 km/h
196 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
Power
550 hp
410 kW
0-100 km/h2.8 s
Top speed
315 km/h
196 mph
Doors/seats
2 doors
4 seats
Trunk
315 L
11.1 cu ft
Length
4,670 mm
183.9 in
Height
1,370 mm
53.9 in
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
Power
560 hp
418 kW
0-100 km/h3.6 s
Top speed
315 km/h
196 mph
Doors/seats
2 doors
4 seats
Trunk
241 L
8.5 cu ft
Length
4,570 mm
179.9 in
Height
1,322 mm
52.0 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
Power
550 hp
410 kW
0-100 km/h2.8 s
Top speed
315 km/h
196 mph
11.8 L/100 km
19.9 mpg US
23.9 mpg UK
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
Power
560 hp
418 kW
0-100 km/h3.6 s
Top speed
315 km/h
196 mph
10.5 L/100 km
22.4 mpg US
26.9 mpg UK

Ferrari California T 3.9 V8 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption

Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
11.8 L/100 km
19.9 mpg US
23.9 mpg UK
2.8 s
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
10.5 L/100 km
22.4 mpg US
26.9 mpg UK
3.6 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6
316 hp/t
236 kW/t
3.2 kg/hp
11.8 L/100 km
19.9 mpg US
23.9 mpg UK
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
345 hp/t
257 kW/t
2.9 kg/hp
10.5 L/100 km
22.4 mpg US
26.9 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleNissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8
Power
550 hp
410 kW
560 hp
418 kW
Torque
632 Nm
466 lb-ft
755 Nm
557 lb-ft
Acceleration
2.8 s
3.6 s
Top speed
315 km/h
196 mph
315 km/h
196 mph
Lightness
1,740 kg
3,836 lb
1,625 kg
3,583 lb
Fuel consumption
11.8 L/100 km
19.9 mpg US
23.9 mpg UK
10.5 L/100 km
22.4 mpg US
26.9 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
2 doors
4 seats
Trunk
315 L
11.1 cu ft
Length
4,670 mm
183.9 in
Height
1,370 mm
53.9 in
Doors/seats
2 doors
4 seats
Trunk
241 L
8.5 cu ft
Length
4,570 mm
179.9 in
Height
1,322 mm
52.0 in
Range score
627 km
390 mi
743 km
462 mi
CO2 score
-
250 g/km
Trunk score
315 L
11.1 cu ft
241 L
8.5 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
316 hp/t
236 kW/t
3.2 kg/hp
345 hp/t
257 kW/t
2.9 kg/hp
Overall
Fixed score
Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.

Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.

LC = Local Currency

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleNissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6Ferrari California T 3.9 V8
Consumption11.8 L/100 km19.9 mpg US23.9 mpg UK10.5 L/100 km22.4 mpg US26.9 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km20.65 LC100 km18.38 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi33.23 LC100 mi29.57 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,770 L468 US gal389 UK gal1,575 L416 US gal346 UK gal
Annual fuel cost3,098 LC/year2,756 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Nissan GT-R (R35) Facelift 2010 3.8 V6

  • Is 0.8 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 74 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Lowest power
  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Heaviest

Ferrari California T 3.9 V8

  • Has 10 hp more
  • Has 123 Nm more
  • Is 115 kg lighter
  • Uses 1.3 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 29 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 116 km (72 mi) more estimated range

Pros

  • Most powerful
  • Highest torque
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Best estimated range

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Smallest trunk

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Nissan GT-R (R35) 3.8 V6
Ferrari California T 3.9 V8
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

3.8 V6
Track Edition 3.8 V6
VS
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6vsNissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 2016Track Edition 3.8 V6
3.9 V8
30 4.3 V8
VS
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8vsFerrariCalifornia30 4.3 V8
3.8 V6
3.8 V6
VS
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6vsNissanGT-R (R35)3.8 V6
3.9 V8
3.9 V8
VS
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8vsFerrariGTC4Lusso T3.9 V8
3.8 V6
5.2 FSI V10 plus
VS
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6vsAUDIR8 Coupe (42)Facelift 20125.2 FSI V10 plus
3.9 V8
4.5 V8
VS
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8vsFerrari458 Spider4.5 V8
3.8 V6
Turbo S 3.8
VS
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6vsPorsche911 (991)Turbo S 3.8
3.9 V8
4.5 V8
VS
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8vsFerrari458 Speciale4.5 V8
3.8 V6
5.2 FSI V10
VS
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6vsAUDIR8 Spyder (42)Facelift 20125.2 FSI V10
3.9 V8
4.5 V8
VS
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8vsFerrari458 Italia4.5 V8
3.8 V6
R 5.0 V8
VS
NissanGT-R (R35)Facelift 20103.8 V6vsJaguarF-type CoupeR 5.0 V8
3.9 V8
6.3 V12
VS
FerrariCalifornia T3.9 V8vsFerrariFF6.3 V12
Nissan GT-R (R35) · Facelift 2010 3.8 V6 vs Ferrari California T 3.9 V8 - car comparison - FastVsFaster