GT3 production delays.... again!
09-12-2013, 08:12 AM
#31
I don't like it, although it is much more integrated than the last gen.
As you likely already know, SC on a gt3 doesn't provide the performance benefit like other 911s. So, personal choice of course.
09-12-2013, 08:25 AM
#32
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I Just got the same email Tom,
"Your car is now due to be completed week 39 (between 22nd – 28th September 2013). Its estimated arrival timescale is now week 47 (between 17th -23rd November 2013 )"
Seems like the first batch( 3 cars) are being put in with the second batch now(7cars) and will all be delivered around week 47.
Hopefully no more delays.
Arth
"Your car is now due to be completed week 39 (between 22nd – 28th September 2013). Its estimated arrival timescale is now week 47 (between 17th -23rd November 2013 )"
Seems like the first batch( 3 cars) are being put in with the second batch now(7cars) and will all be delivered around week 47.
Hopefully no more delays.
Arth
09-12-2013, 11:12 AM
#33
Rennlist Member
Regarding PCCB's EVO drove both the 991TT and 991TTS which had ceramics as standard and found the Porsche steel brakes on the TT superb and opined they would order the TT with standard brakes over the TTS which has PCCB's.
I posted their conclusion in another thread.
I posted their conclusion in another thread.
09-12-2013, 11:56 AM
#34
Does anyone know exactly what is included with the wart? Looks like it's the digital stopwatch and the G-meter display if PCM is selected and only the stopwatch with the standard system. I don't think either 'function' is worth the cosmetic blemish, but if something important is included, it would be nice to know.
09-12-2013, 12:36 PM
#35
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know exactly what is included with the wart? Looks like it's the digital stopwatch and the G-meter display if PCM is selected and only the stopwatch with the standard system. I don't think either 'function' is worth the cosmetic blemish, but if something important is included, it would be nice to know.
09-12-2013, 01:21 PM
#36
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dam it Nick. you just messed me up again.
09-12-2013, 02:42 PM
#38
Race Director
We also sampled a relatively basic standard 911 Turbo with steel brakes. To be perfectly honest, it felt pretty much exactly like a Turbo S - same runaway acceleration, same astonishing grip and traction, same terrific balance on the circuit and similar glimmers of outright brilliance on the road. The steel brakes were also superb and stood up to six laps of Bilster Berg (the launch’s circuit venue) at full speed with no issues at all. Our hunch is that a standard Turbo without PDCC could be the one to have.
What they reference specifically in that quote is PDCC (Porsche Dynamic Chassis Control), not PCCB, although of course the TTS does have PCCB's and the standard brakes on the TT are no doubt excellent. Given that the price delta between the TT and TTS is $33K, and the performance is similar, I can understand where they're coming from.
I don't think we can turn this into a rational argument for one thing or the other. Once you've decided to buy a $150K winged sports car, rationality in the decision process probably slides down the list a bit. But we can probably all come up with ways to rationalize what we want. I decided I want, no need, those giant, lightweight, relatively dust-free, freaking stoppers, so there you have it.
If you're going to track it extensively, I'm sure you're right.
09-12-2013, 03:14 PM
#39
For me, the PCCB's don't make sense in either application.
For track use, they are lighter and more fade resistant. (never had a problem with standard iron brakes though) However, they are more easily damaged and expensive to replace. So, the cost-benefit just isn't there. For occasional track use they would be fine. However, the occasional track driver would not likely notice the benefit.
For the street, they are massive overkill. Anyone ever had an issue with stock brakes on the street?? OK, you get less brake dust. Again, for me the cost is not justified.
If I was made of money or had a sponsor buying new parts, sure. Otherwise, I cannot justify it. YMMV and all that.
Please - I'm not saying either decision is wrong. Just my opinion!
For track use, they are lighter and more fade resistant. (never had a problem with standard iron brakes though) However, they are more easily damaged and expensive to replace. So, the cost-benefit just isn't there. For occasional track use they would be fine. However, the occasional track driver would not likely notice the benefit.
For the street, they are massive overkill. Anyone ever had an issue with stock brakes on the street?? OK, you get less brake dust. Again, for me the cost is not justified.
If I was made of money or had a sponsor buying new parts, sure. Otherwise, I cannot justify it. YMMV and all that.
Please - I'm not saying either decision is wrong. Just my opinion!
09-12-2013, 03:14 PM
#40
Rennlist Member
09-12-2013, 04:37 PM
#41
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for more confusion. LOL. I guess I will revert back to standard, put the red stitches back on and donate 10k to a worthy college fundraiser at a local bar that has mysterious poles to support the roof.
09-12-2013, 04:42 PM
#43
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Wishing I Was At The Track
Posts: 13,512
Received 1,721 Likes
on
913 Posts
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...cb-rotors.html
09-12-2013, 05:33 PM
#44
For me, the PCCB's don't make sense in either application.
For track use, they are lighter and more fade resistant. (never had a problem with standard iron brakes though) However, they are more easily damaged and expensive to replace. So, the cost-benefit just isn't there. For occasional track use they would be fine. However, the occasional track driver would not likely notice the benefit.
For the street, they are massive overkill. Anyone ever had an issue with stock brakes on the street?? OK, you get less brake dust. Again, for me the cost is not justified.
If I was made of money or had a sponsor buying new parts, sure. Otherwise, I cannot justify it. YMMV and all that.
Please - I'm not saying either decision is wrong. Just my opinion!
For track use, they are lighter and more fade resistant. (never had a problem with standard iron brakes though) However, they are more easily damaged and expensive to replace. So, the cost-benefit just isn't there. For occasional track use they would be fine. However, the occasional track driver would not likely notice the benefit.
For the street, they are massive overkill. Anyone ever had an issue with stock brakes on the street?? OK, you get less brake dust. Again, for me the cost is not justified.
If I was made of money or had a sponsor buying new parts, sure. Otherwise, I cannot justify it. YMMV and all that.
Please - I'm not saying either decision is wrong. Just my opinion!
That said, the car is overkill.
09-12-2013, 06:37 PM
#45
Rennlist Member
If you're ordering ceramic brakes for anything BUT cosmetic reasons, you will be seriously disappointed. A lot of money for a bling option, but it does add a LOT of bling.