When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The AMG GTR is faster than the 991.2 GT3 so why is it less popular?
I am trying to decide between buying a GT3 and an AMG GTR and I am leaning towards the GTR based on current prices which are ~20% lower for the GTR on comparable cars. Plan is to use the car mainly at the track. I have had 911s for many years (current DD is a 991.2 TTS) but frankly I am kind of sick of the dealer allocations/prices on the GT3s which is why I am considering the GTR. The GT3 is amazing BUT I have a hard time paying full MSRP for a 5 year old car. Has anyone had both cars? Any insights on why the GTR depreciates like a normal car is performance is great? I test drove a GTR (on the street, not the track) and was pretty impressed with the steering, power, brakes.
Personally I find the GTR awkward looking but that is subjective.
Objectively, they'd be a pain for a track car. With that much weight and power, it's a car that will do well on numbers at the track to get one or two fast laps but would suck to live with as a real track car. You'd be replacing tires and pads all the time, fighting brake cooling issues, uneven tire wear, random mechanical issues, etc... As someone who did a lot of tracking with BMW M3s, they can be dialed in but you have to change a lot of the things the engineers set up for a particular tradeoff that is much more street biased. You add cooling ducts to the front brakes which restricts your turning angle and don't last very long before needing replacement. You add negative camber to even out the tire wear but screw up your street wear and hurt your braking, you try to take weight out and then you compromise on all the luxury that Mercedes built in.
The beauty of a GT3 is that it is really well dialed in from the factory to do both street and occasional HPDE. You basically don't need to do anything to it. I drove up to Thunderhill this weekend, lowered the tire pressures and ran 8 sessions at near track record pace, then I added some tire pressure back in, packed my stuff in and drove 180 miles home. I can do that 10+ times a year and I'll go through 1-2 sets of tires a year, brake pads every other year (PCCBs in my case) and brake fluid changes. You will not be able to do that in a GTR.
Three reasons: naturally aspirated, manual, rear-engine RWD.
The GT R is a great car, but the configuration in comparison is a lot more common: forced induction, front-engine RWD, automatic. Everything from a C7 ZR1 to a GT500 is in that category and might be nearly as fast and deliver a similar experience.
I had an AMG GTR and only put about 2K miles on it in 18 months. It was a fun German muscle car with wonderful amenities... heated seats, Burmeister, easy to get in & out of, etc.
But eventually I found it to be fairly boring to drive unless I was driving it like I just robbed a liquor store. It feels like a luxurious GT, while the GT3 feels like a sports car. I don't view the GTR as an alternative to a GT3, but rather as an alternative to an F12.
Thanks for the replies. I guess why surprises me is that it is equal or faster than the GT3 per its Nurburgring time. As such it is not a slouch on the track. I come from having a couple 911 Turbos so I like the power from the turbos even if driving technique is different from a gt3. Have any of you seen GTRs at your local tracks and does it keep up well with the GT3s?
There are several cars that are faster than the GT3 but less popular. The Viper ACR will crush a GT3, even a .2 RS, at the track, yet they couldn’t give them away when new (I bought my Viper way under MSRP when the GT3s were selling for 50k ADM or more).
Because if speed was the main criterium then everyone would buy *insert car here*
It's like judging food by calorie content.
GT3s are expensive not just because they are awesome but because everyone thinks they are awesome which is unusal. As such they are oversubscribed and they never build enough to satisfy demand. Hence, high price.
Personally I find the GTR awkward looking but that is subjective.
Objectively, they'd be a pain for a track car. With that much weight and power, it's a car that will do well on numbers at the track to get one or two fast laps but would suck to live with as a real track car. You'd be replacing tires and pads all the time, fighting brake cooling issues, uneven tire wear, random mechanical issues, etc... As someone who did a lot of tracking with BMW M3s, they can be dialed in but you have to change a lot of the things the engineers set up for a particular tradeoff that is much more street biased. You add cooling ducts to the front brakes which restricts your turning angle and don't last very long before needing replacement. You add negative camber to even out the tire wear but screw up your street wear and hurt your braking, you try to take weight out and then you compromise on all the luxury that Mercedes built in.
The beauty of a GT3 is that it is really well dialed in from the factory to do both street and occasional HPDE. You basically don't need to do anything to it. I drove up to Thunderhill this weekend, lowered the tire pressures and ran 8 sessions at near track record pace, then I added some tire pressure back in, packed my stuff in and drove 180 miles home. I can do that 10+ times a year and I'll go through 1-2 sets of tires a year, brake pads every other year (PCCBs in my case) and brake fluid changes. You will not be able to do that in a GTR.
Thanks for the replies. I guess why surprises me is that it is equal or faster than the GT3 per its Nurburgring time. As such it is not a slouch on the track. I come from having a couple 911 Turbos so I like the power from the turbos even if driving technique is different from a gt3. Have any of you seen GTRs at your local tracks and does it keep up well with the GT3s?
Yes a few on track, and no, they're not a pace match so far as I've seen. Almost certainly not over the course of a session. Merc power advantage is offset by lesser GT3 weight and (especially) corner exit traction.
3,600-3,700 lbs. isn't disqualifying for track purposes, but that extra 500 lbs. matters in every sense in the real world.
RudyP's commentary above is spot on. The more you use a GT3 exactly as he detailed, the more you realize it's one of a kind.
Fan of AMG V8's. I'd happily own one, but would not attempt to use like GT3 and expect equal pace and component durability.
on that note, don't know about Merc's carbon ceramic longevity either. Probably nothing like PCCB. Only GM specs a similarly track capable carbon ceramic from Brembo, in my experience.
Thanks for all the perspective. Very helpful. I am really torn. I have been driving 911s for the past 15 years and want a GT3 but despise the dealers and the GT cars allocation process which is why I’m looking for an alternative that can keep up with the GT3 but I know the GT3 is one of a kind. Maybe I just have to buy the bullet and pay msrp for a 5 year old car and enjoy it. By the way, the car would be mostly dedicated to the track since I have a 991.2 TTS as a daily driver.
Race cars are different from the road cars. Why do they cost more?
1. Brand prestige.
2. 60+ years of history of Porsche sports cars
3. 60 years of people saying “one day I will own a 911” and those with the inclination and means, a GT3 is the example to get
4. The balance between street car and track car as someone else mentioned
5. Enthusiast community support
6. Enthusiast community street cred
7. People who like cars and think a GT3 is a good place to “park” your money in a fun car - they do suffer less depreciation than most others
And lastly I know it’s stupid but I don’t like getting CLA loaners when I drop off my S class, a GTR at the end of the day is still a Mercedes. At Porsche even a base Macan is a pleasure to drive.
03-05-2023, 05:16 PM
The AMG GTR is faster than the 991.2 GT3 so why is it less popular?
