The 718 Spyder RS Discussion Thread
#226
You’re missing his very valid point. The use of the RS designation means something very specific in the Porsche product line. It either is or it isn’t an RS. It’s unlikely that Porsche would build a true RS spec Spyder and then call it something different like a Special Edition.
Besides the whole logical argument is backwards. Certain things have to be done to consider a car an rs; whatever, but okay. But nothing says rs-like things can’t be done to a car, and call it something other than rs. (Fourth attempt to gain traction with the gt spyder not called gt example)
The se could be a paint and plaque special. Booooo! Or it could be more; much more. The fact an rs was rumored and semi verified by someone people on the forums trust would seem to indicate the car should be more than a paint and plaque special.
#227
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 6,086
Likes: 3,939
From: Texas Hill Country
You’re missing his very valid point. The use of the RS designation means something very specific in the Porsche product line. It either is or it isn’t an RS. It’s unlikely that Porsche would build a true RS spec Spyder and then call it something different like a Special Edition.
Why are we getting so spun up on what a “RS” is?
The following users liked this post:
AlexCeres (08-30-2021)
#228
Thread topics ranked from most factual to least factual:
- Track time reductions produced by ceramic coatings
- Tire longevity advantages from using nitrogen rather than air
- Oil preferences
- Break-in procedures
- This one.
The following users liked this post:
dichael (08-30-2021)
#229
The following users liked this post:
josephr25 (08-30-2021)
#230
My speculative prediction and rationale: *IF* this thing exists at all, given the gt4/spyder paradigm, it will be all the gt4 rs upgrades they can easily reuse, and maybe some unique convertible variants, while leaving off anything which involves major redesign or is ONLY of utility on a track.
This conversation got me into thinking about why the sales-generating GT label wasn’t used on the very gt spyder. Besides just looking awkward (spyder gt?), could it be liability issues, with the GT label implying “built for the track,” and Porsche being worried putting that on a roofless/cageless car like the spyder might lead to deaths and or liability they would be seen to be encouraging?
It makes sense Porsche would reuse any reasonable improvements they make to an RS gt4 on a spyder, to sell to a different line of clients, especially given the similarity in the base platforms. Motor, suspension, light weighting, brakes, external aero (where reasonable)…check check and check. It’s consistent with the philosophy of harmonizing the gt4 and the spyder in the first place.
Or it’s paint and plaque. Some marketing weenie is possibly deciding right now. lol
This conversation got me into thinking about why the sales-generating GT label wasn’t used on the very gt spyder. Besides just looking awkward (spyder gt?), could it be liability issues, with the GT label implying “built for the track,” and Porsche being worried putting that on a roofless/cageless car like the spyder might lead to deaths and or liability they would be seen to be encouraging?
It makes sense Porsche would reuse any reasonable improvements they make to an RS gt4 on a spyder, to sell to a different line of clients, especially given the similarity in the base platforms. Motor, suspension, light weighting, brakes, external aero (where reasonable)…check check and check. It’s consistent with the philosophy of harmonizing the gt4 and the spyder in the first place.
Or it’s paint and plaque. Some marketing weenie is possibly deciding right now. lol
#234
lol You’re consistent, I’ll give you that.
+5 points for pointing out the corollary to the speedster
-10 points for withholding the actual information you claim to know
Based on a cursory google search, my theorizing would appear to represent the situation, more or less, ie the ultimate suitability of designating a cageless convertible as a “track car”.
+5 points for pointing out the corollary to the speedster
-10 points for withholding the actual information you claim to know
Based on a cursory google search, my theorizing would appear to represent the situation, more or less, ie the ultimate suitability of designating a cageless convertible as a “track car”.
Last edited by Adrift; 08-30-2021 at 02:26 PM.
The following 4 users liked this post by GooDy151:
#237
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 9,292
Likes: 4,801
From: Victoria, BC, Canada
The following users liked this post:
Valeyard (09-11-2021)
#240