JP, here are the c/n: I want a fast, refined car that I don't have to modify in order to enjoy thoroughly.
No, my plans are that it won't be a DD. Yes, I will have another work/winter car.
Great question about substance (performance) versus style (pussy magnetism). Both definitely count, though I'd probably rank style a bit above performance. Meaning, if you asked me - would you rather have a good looking car that was slower or a less-good looking car that was faster, which would you chose? I'd chose the good looking car that was less fast.
This is where the GT-R is losing points for me. I just don't like the way it looks as much as a Vette, a Porsche, a Viper, or even the M3. Not that the GT-R isn't a nice looking car, I just don't think it's as good looking as the others.
So, I just thought of some of the things that will matter to me in terms of this next car:
Performance - 1/4 mile time, 0-60, track abilities
Looks - subjective aesthetic appeal
Price Tag - the lower the cost the better
Maintenance - expected upkeep, reputation for being costly
Insurance - amount to insure on a yearly basis, on average
Resale value - what I can expect to get out of the car in, say, four to five years
And here's how I'd rank those things in terms of importance for me with respect to the car:
Looks - most important factor to me; 10 out of 10 on scale of importance
Performance - 8 out of 10 on scale of importance
Price Tage - 7 out of 10 on importance scale
Resale - 6 out of 10 on importance scale
Insurance - 5 out of 10 on importance scale
Maintenance - 3 out of 10 on importance scale
So, for instance, while Looks is the most important factor, it's not exceedingly more important than the Price Tag, which could be the undoing of a car in my analysis. A perfect example of this would be a Murcielago - great in Looks, but waaaaay too expensive.