911rox

tmg57, with the greatest of respect, have you heard anyone complain about a more compliant chassis that handles the real world better? The journos aren't complaining about it, we aren't complaining about it either... Ideally a more compliant chassis that can also be made substantially stiffer via button for track is ideal.

In this respect the 997.1 probably went too soft after the 996 and it was corrected in the 997.2 (for track). For street, each successive predecessor has gotten softer but more compliant and usable- a positive...

The 14 year statement relates to what was traditionally a track focused, race car inspired, manual vehicle... People were won over by and sort these cars because they were the closest street legal vehicle to a production race car... Effectively cup cars with an interior and sufficient suspension mods to make them streetable...

We can all dream but put the 4.0RS gearbox and hydraulic steering into this new chassis and I challenge you to find a sole that would have a complaint to make... Just my opinion...

frayed

Good posts macca, thanks for the updates.

The real world review from a 4.0 owner, to me, is very telling. Reading it, and reading other reviews, I get the sense that the steering is still a bit of a weak point in terms of organic feel. It doesn't replicate the 997 GT3/RS benchmark, though more precise and accurate. I suspect that development will continue to refine the steering.

No comment on PDK. That horse has been obliterated beyond recognition.

All reviews point to a car that equals or betters a 4.0 on track, and ruins every other car on the street that is w/i its performance envelope. I was surprised to read that it was faster in the real world than the AWD GTR due to grip, composure and braking. The GTR has ample brakes for street use and has two buckloads of grip.

I'm really psyched about the promise of otherworldly front end grip. The extra effort to get a 911 to turn in is perhaps charming to many, but I've always found it a buzz kill and sometimes just adrenaline-inducing (not in a good way) on track when you get a little greedy with entry speed.

tmg57

Sorry, for the sake of brevity I didn't elaborate enough. I don't disagree with your comments concerning the GT3 as a race car inspired machine. I simply used your quote in a general way to represent all of the laments about the passing of an era. Not just the GT3, but, as I mentioned, the Carrera, as well. Further, the chassis is just one of aspect of the new cars that could have been used as an example of technological progress. As your comments suggest, perhaps not the best example.

I do disagree about the motor. At some point we need to move on. If this version of the 9a1 turns out not be the answer (although I think it likely is), there will need to be something else. We can't hang on to old tech forever. As for the transmission, if we can only have one it needs to be PDK. I won't argue that in an ideal world, there would be a choice. I think most people would agree with you about the steering, but it is what it is. I have been driving the electric steering for a year and a half in a 991S (after 4 years in a 997) and really wouldn't have paid any attention if not for all of the expert criticism that I've read. Then again, I'm no expert

TomTom77

Thanks macca, thanks gives me even more hope indeed! Yet makes the wait even more painful!

I think it all comes down to the challenging balance that Porsche needed to find between fun vs. speed, having to respond to the route that most of their competition has been taking for a while. Some people translated the fun vs. speed debate into an analogue vs. digital one, which I don't agree with. That would imply that fun and speed are mutually exclusive (which is plain wrong and for some, speed in itself is fun) and that digital cars can never be fun, which isn't right either.

In my layman-view of the GT3-world, Porsche was basically left with 2 options: either create a 991 GT3 as a '997.3' with a new, lighter, body and some basic changes or redefine the GT3 using electronics smartly, increasing the performance almost exponentially, knowing they would always sacrificing some purity and thus fun for some.

The first option would have made the car just as hot for the 'purists' as its predecessors yet a lot less interesting for the younger, more tech-savy, generation, the 'softer markets' as well as those who would want a car that's more than competitive in its niche. Hence, Porsche understandably opted for the latter, since that group, whether we like it or not, is a lot larger. As a business man, I cannot blame them. As a petrolhead, I do (a little). Yet I am convinced, fully supported by the tests to date, that the car will be great (fun) to drive nonetheless!

1198r

All the above posts are completely right for the GT3 - which is why I still think it gives huge opportunity for the RS to be the EXTREME version it SHOULD BE. Can anyone hear my beating drum.......

aussie jimmy

rs will be pdk.
when is the gt3 hybrid coming out?

0Q991

Ever since the EVO interview with AP a few months back, AP has said that giving the new GT3 "greater bandwidth" allows his team to make the RS version just that much more focused and extreme. Seems like these comments and the EVO article posted on another thread are in line with this.

ajag

Very well said.

Boxster Coupe GTS

Macca -- would you prefer to own a GT3 with PDK or Manual transmission? Presumably you'd like to drive both to make an educated decision? Given the option, it would seem a bit unusual not to have a natural preference one way or the other...

Regarding the 991 GT3 articles in Evo magazine, it may be partly that the writers were reflecting the potential loss of the GT3's reputation as a benchmark analogue sports car, per the previous issue...



...how do you like them apples?

Macca

Hi BoxsterCoupe GTS. If I had have been asked at the beginning I would have said MT only as that's all Ive ever driven, low risk decision, and Ive never driven a PDK car. Id rather not have had a choice - apart from the fact it would be unlikely in my country to ever try the two next to each other (first GT3 shipment = 4 cars and total run will be 14!) some decisions Id rather have taken out of my hands frankly. Like asking the wife to decide for me what we have planned for the weekend!

I think you are right re EVO. They have been building up to this for 3-4 issues with various articles on analogue vs "digital" driving experiences. Its a big concern for them (and us) ultimately that the left leg may become redundant and those who play PS2 or Xbox may end up being faster drivers in these cars than those of us who can heel & toe and left foot brake!

Bill_C4S

Ensuing to shed further light on the analogue vs digital comparison...as with the first quote by Macca...these are from a thread on Pistonheads: (cf. http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/t...nmt=#seperator)

"stefan1 said:
I offered my 4.0 to Evo for their group test - and so had a chance to drive the new car on that day. It was great fun, and great to meet a lot of the Evo team.

isaldiri said:
Interesting to read your opinion of the car earlier. No doubt the new gt3 is exceedingly quick and capable but if I could ask, how did you think it compared to the 997 gt3 in terms of driver involvement/enjoyment?

stefan1:
The short answer is that I am someone who prefers the type of engagement offered by a manual gearbox car. The older car (my 4.0) is harder to drive quickly, demands more of the driver in terms of judging throttle applications, and offers the fun and involvement of heel & toe changes. It is also far stiffer, and so you need to plan your line more carefully to get the car straight over the larger bumps and yumps on a typical B-road.

But I also appreciate the upsides that come with the enhancements in the new GT3. By way of anaology, I am fortunate enough to own a CGT (bought in 2006). It is an intensely engaging car, and is entirely passive (bar a very basic traction control system). Driving it fast is all down to the driver - screw it up, and it will tell you! It is endlessly engaging, and it will take me a lifetime to master it (i.e. I never will - but I will love trying!).

But I have recently also bought a McLaren 12C. It has the same power and torque as the CGT, but is the polar opposite insofar as it is car with multiple systems to help the driver (active suspension, paddles, brake steer etc.). It is orders of magnitude easier to drive as fast as the CGT. In the 12C I appreciate different things - the ability to focus entirely on precision of line and turn in point - because I don't have to worry about when to slot in a manual downchange. I also love double clutch gearboxes for the way it allows a virtually continuous surge of acceleration - that in itself has its own thrills. I also marvel at the seamless integration of the technology into the driving experience. It is an amazing machine.

So with that context, I also really enjoyed the new GT3. It is very different to the older, more analogue cars - and feels like the biggest evolution yet. I admired its enormous ability to cross the ground, and it has bags of character (that engine!).

But ultimately given a choice of just one car for a Sunday blast, I would take the 4.0 - I'd make less progress, but I'd enjoy myself just that bit more along the way. "

neanicu

VW knew is going to play out this way and the 4.0 will be preferred as a driver's car...but that's irrelevant to them as long as the new one sells like hot bread. And I keep reading ad nauseam here that it's because the younger generation prefers a digital and automatic car...I even read something mentioned below 42 yrs old...this is hilarious! You've got to give more credit to the younger generation! You don't have to be " ripe " to prefer analogue.

Petevb

So being part of that "younger generation", count me as someone who prefers analog. Not necessarily 4.0 analog, though I do consider that great. But if I'm going out for a Sunday morning blast 97% of the time I'll walk past a 4.0, past my 1M or 69 GT3 and grab the keys to my little 180 hp, <2000 lbs, 4 cylinder, 185 wide tires '69 912. I can drive the crap out of that on a public road, get it sliding around, huge grin on my face and a) not endanger every bicyclist in the county, and b) not do "directly to jail" speeds, everywhere.

Any knock you can make on the new 991 you can make against the 997 GT3, or 996 GT3 or 993, for that matter, vs and good early car. They are all less involving at sane speeds. Any yet they are all great cars.

I see the 997 GT3 RS 4.0 as the most involving car of its generation. Where the base GT3 would have felt downright slow and relatively blunt in comparison, the 4.0 sharpens the car and adds the power needed to really get the dialog with the chassis going. Now we have a base 991 GT3, and the knock is that it's not quite as involving as the 4.0 at sane speeds. Which is exactly as I'd expect- the base GT3 isn't supposed to be the pinnacle of involvement, it's supposed to be a balance. That it's even close to the RS 4.0 bodes very well, I think, for the upcoming RS models that are supposed to compete in terms of involvement. Sharpen this car and turn the wick up and it sounds pretty epic.

Would I still prefer a manual for the street? Yes, I think so. But then I'm also sure I'd still walk past it and grab the keys to my '69 for a sunday morning blast. Would I grab the 991 GT3 RS keys on the way to the track or the autocross? Yes. Unless I'm feeling really feisty, in which case the 69 GT3 will turn everything up to 11, or maybe 12. But there is such a thing as too much involvement too, so the question is how much you're looking for on any particular day.

GrantG

Well said, Pete.

neanicu

Good points!


For those of us of the younger generation that either can't afford,don't have enough time or the storage space to have 4 iterations of the 911-----(A pretty well priced,plenty of power,high revving engine,great looking and sounding,loaded with all the alphabet soup of nannies,that occasionally(rarely) go to the track and drive 90% of the time on the street....and all BACKED BY A SOLID FACTORY WARRANTY...with a manual transmission would've worked just fine!)----a choice should have been offered!

P.S. Please note that I want a " choice " ,not one or the other like some suggested...