Originally Posted by Mike in CA

OTOH, just to play the devils advocate, maybe it was unrealistic to buy a "race car", use it like a "race car" and then expect to not have to maintain it like a "race car".

Originally Posted by MikeBat

Isn't the fact that since they started to sell Porsches, the true attraction to the brand was exactly that? You could drive your sports car to the track with your gear in the back seat, run all day long, and drive home without any over the top prep or specialized parts?

Isn't that one of the complaints people have about Corvettes, Vipers, Bmw's etc regarding taking them to the track? Stock parts and setups not being up to the task etc...

Originally Posted by MikeBat

Isn't the fact that since they started to sell Porsches, the true attraction to the brand was exactly that? You could drive your sports car to the track with your gear in the back seat, run all day long, and drive home without any over the top prep or specialized parts?

Isn't that one of the complaints people have about Corvettes, Vipers, Bmw's etc regarding taking them to the track? Stock parts and setups not being up to the task etc...

Originally Posted by Mike in CA

I think you might be overstating the historical facts. Increased track time has always meant parts replacement and additional maintenance. Sure, Porsches don't generally break down under occasional hard use, unlike other makes have stock setups that are viable at the track, don't leave you without brakes at the end of a long run, and are versatile enough to drive to and from an event. But serious, extended, hard core track use is a different animal and always involved more wear and tear, even in the old days.

Originally Posted by Manifold

True, but Porsches have historically been able to take the track beating relatively well (so far), whereas I often see cars of other makes spending extra time in the paddock because of things going wrong. As far as parts and maintenance, it's mostly a matter of doing the usual things (pads, rotors, fluids, tires, etc.) more often, not fixing things that break.

Your experience is mainly with autox, not track, correct?

Originally Posted by Mike in CA

No question that Porsches have a justified reputation for being more durable. That's not at issue. My original point was simply that the harder you use your car, Porsche or otherwise, the greater the need for increased maintenance and the greater the likelihood of failure, which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

Not sure why it's relevant, but I tracked my Lotus Europa extensively in the '70's. Once kids and other responsibilities got in the way I turned to autox as a less time consuming fix for my speed jones. Even in autox, though, I've seen my share of breakdowns and failures. Respectfully, did your question have a point?

Originally Posted by Manifold

My point is that if you do a lot of track days, with a mix of cars present, you clearly and firsthand see the superior durability of Porsches for that use. With the GT3 purportedly being Porsche's most track-oriented car, we have every right to expect that the 991 GT3 should excel in that regard.

Originally Posted by Mike in CA

Nothing I've said is at odds with anything you are saying. From all I've ever experienced, read, or heard in 30 years of ownership, Porsches are a cut above in terms of reliability and you're right, the 991 GT3 should be no exception. I'm also not defending CL's per se.

My only point was regarding people's expectation that they could buy essentially a street car (even an exceptionally durable one), use it like a race car, and not expect to have to maintain it like a race car. CL's, Porsches, or what-have-you notwithstanding, that's simply self-evident.

Originally Posted by Mike in CA

I voted for 5 lugs because they're what I'm familiar with and they require no special attention, tools, or expertise. That said, from what I've read, Porsche have improved the CL design to near Cup car levels and concerns over design shortfall should be a thing of the past.

Also from what I've read, although the failures have been well documented, they involve a very small percentage of CL wheels and these seem to be related to improper maintenance and installation proceedures rather than structural issues. I remember one thread a few months back where someone posted pics of unusual wear and described torquing problems and everyone freaked out for a while about how there was another CL disaster in the making until an experienced poster noted that the wheels had actually been installed incorrectly. Most users have said that they have experienced zero problems.

Now before y'all jump down my throat, I get that the more complicated procedures around CL's aren't well suited to a DE track environment and 5 lugs would be much more forgiving in that regard. AP himself said that Porsche underestimated the way people used the wheels and presumably that's one reason why they have made changes in the design. I also get that people are righteously upset that maintenance/replacement protocols were not spelled out for the previous gen CL's. OTOH, just to play the devils advocate, maybe it was unrealistic to buy a "race car", use it like a "race car" and then expect to not have to maintain it like a "race car".

The issue of choice is a valid one. I don't know the specific design considerations that are involved but on the surface it sure seems reasonable that 5 lug wheels could be an option for those who want them.

As to your specific question, Chris, for someone who will not be tracking their car extensively or at all, the new CL's will likely never cause them a problem. They do look good, are a bit lighter, and I can see where 10% of the voters might choose them for those reasons alone without fear of having to live "on the edge". Doesn't really rise to the level of a wtf, IMHO.

And now, to the bunker.........

Originally Posted by Manifold

For mutliple reasons, I don't expect it to be used as a race car or perform like one. But it should still be suited for use as a heavy-duty track car by experienced drivers (eg, 25+ track days a year, driven at 8.5/10ths+). I suspect that most of the people complaining about the car are experienced and active track guys, and IMO their opinion should carry extra weight given the GT3's purported use (track videos, R-comp tires, 'ring lap times, etc.). If, instead, the intended market is road guys who fantasize about tracking the car, Porsche should admit that and stop taunting the real track guys.

Originally Posted by 911rox

No need to bunker down Mike, I won't be flaming you but once you peel away the layers upon layers of spin from Porsche surrounding CLs, it boils down to the following few facts:

-they had a system that was near idiot proof and maintenance free with the exception of wear and tear etc
- they replaced it with what should have been at the very least equivalent, thus an upgrade, not a downgrade... the new system has had multiple failures through its lack of foolproofness, poor engineering and complexity.
- it was decided 3 YEARS after the car's release that their system is inadequate and requires significant maintenance... Parts that were designed to last years were now given a 4200mile life.
- being customer focused (NOT!!), rather than correct the system and fix the problem, they passed the buck and the huge burden onto customers...
- these are the facts, the rest is BS to justify an unjustifiable position.

If we'd been told 3 years ago that we were buying cars with cup car maintenance, we could have (i) sucked it up in full knowledge of what we're getting into and proceeded or (ii) walked away and bought 997.1s or earlier car...

Unlike us, at least the guys buying cup cars know what they are getting themselves into...

Originally Posted by paver

A lot of people use 997.1 gt3's like race cars and they arent officially asked to replace the 5 lug hubs every 4200 track miles. It's bs to essentially say "the cl's are fine, you guys are just using them harder than we thought". It's a way for them to wash their hands of a design that has shortcomings, a design they must've initially thought was innovative and superior and in the end was not up to the task. And they wont step up and say so.

Originally Posted by Manifold

For mutliple reasons, I don't expect it to be used as a race car or perform like one. But it should still be suited for use as a heavy-duty track car by experienced drivers (eg, 25+ track days a year, driven at 8.5/10ths+). I suspect that most of the people complaining about the car are experienced and active track guys, and IMO their opinion should carry extra weight given the GT3's purported use (track videos, R-comp tires, 'ring lap times, etc.). If, instead, the intended market is road guys who fantasize about tracking the car, Porsche should admit that and stop taunting the real track guys.