I have not seen convincing evidence of the underrating you mention above. In the dynos I’ve seen the main difference that suggests a bigger delta appears to be PDK (.1) vs manual (.2) and the reduced associated driveline loses. PDK vs PDK I don’t expect nearly as big a difference.

There was a time when Porsche would lie through their teeth about power ratings (ie 996 GT3 RS). Recently the deltas appear to have shrunk.

TIRES! Porsche had no choice. You can all spend lots of time with all else but you would wasting time. Yes, suspension mods and small HP difference made some difference. Porsche didn’t get result they wanted and the only remaining solution was to have Michelin develop new tires. Put R spec cups on GT3 and you will find same drop in times on PDK-S .2 GT3 vs .1. Funny though....you won’t find them anytime soon until after next gen is released and that’s not accidental, it’s by legal means. You will see significance when someone takes .1 RS and shows what’s possible with new tires. Buckle up for safety!

Ha ha, well I think you’d say that with most that have pulled off a lap under 7:20, tire development adding lots of cajones!!!!!!

10 seconds is perhaps a bit much, but if you see the spread of 2 seconds between the (top) drivers set on the same day and consider the 7:20 was done by Timo Kluck (not Glock, the ex F1 driver), who is very good but nowhere near the same level as Estre, I would guess in the region of 5 to 6 seconds. Also, that attempt was never documented, but don’t think Porsche out as much effort into it with the gen1.

I reckon the tyres are easily 10 seconds compared to the N0. So the gap does get much more narrow. Can only be proven of course once someone does a back to back comparison, which should not be too difficult to arrange. Also expect the effect of the suspension improvement to be more on GP style tracks that are more technical and less bumpy.

The dark horse in the room is imv the gen2 GT3. If you compare the videos it’s evident that the driver was less committed at places like SX, unlikely because the car could not do it. So on same rubber I think it will be very close to the RS, though probably with less composure.

You'd have thought so but it's in neither the mags nor the manufacturer's interest to do so unfortunately so I doubt it'll ever happen with the likes of SportAuto. I still don't think after taking into account the track/tyre and driver changes (as you say Kluck is quick but with all due respect Estre is going to be a lot faster) the actual chassis/mechanical changes are as much as it is made out to be sometimes. It used to be dropping 5 seconds was a pretty big deal and now people seem to be throwing out multiple seconds on individual changes.

But when we head to Spa with drivers of similar ability the differences will be clear. For example the serious drivers all do around 2:40 on N0/1 tyres. The N2 knocks off 1s. The changes to the gen2 will make a significant difference at Spa for a good driver (whilst most likely slowing lesser drivers), so I reckon they will do high 2:36, I.e. about 1s per km faster.

Pure speculation on my part, so curious to start seeing some actual onboards.

ah didn't realise you and the others had run the N2 at Spa. Ok if it's only 1s there for the N2 then it's a bit less than expected I guess. I'd agree the gen2 will be more difficult to get a good time for most as well. Should be interresting to see anyway when they do come out.

S9/Spa 14/15 May/Caravan Bloke ;-)

Looking at the GT2RS vs 3RS laps in detail you can find a couple places where Estre clearly carried more speed. The total effect was quite limited, however maybe 1 second total. Porsche has their simulations and sector times; they know with great accuracy what the car should run before they take it out. They bring multiple drivers and my bet is that they plan to run until one of them gets close enough to their target number (given the day’s conditions) and re-schueduke if the day’s bad (either weather or drivers). Given that format I can’t see them leaving more that 2 seconds on the table- the number is of such importance for PR reasons, etc- why would they?

I’m now running .2RS spring rates, I could throw a set of N2 on and see what those two factors add up to.

Issue is that the car is setup for 19” now so the car needs to go up quite a bit to fit 20-21” under, ruining the center of gravity again.
Plus rake and camber need to be adjusted again as well.

Its never that easy...

N1 (was N0 on .1) and is similar in compound and performance to the N2 on the .2 RS - quite confusing as the N number refers to different compound depending on the size/application...