There is a decent list of historical results from the Hill Climb at Goodwood, plenty of cars and drivers. The times are meaningful given the vast amount of data. They even have splits by sector, with Sector 1 showing the acceleration capabilities from a standing start.

The 54.xxx secs time for the 991 GT3 is beyond impressive. Race car territory.

Here is the record lap. V10, 800Hp, F1, on pre-heated tires, MP4/13, 14 years old record still stands. Last weekend the fastest times were close to 46 secs, by the Pikes Peak Hill Climb record holder from Peugeot and a LMP1 car.

54.xxx secs looks too fast indeed, but video shows it. I guess this impressive time will show up in some marketing material soon.

 

This to me makes it even more meaningful given that it was not a 10/10ths run and having a passenger in the car...Having done Hill climbs, I'd say there's another 2 seconds to be gained with no passenger and proper R compound tires...

 

My correction. the fastest ever lap at Goodwood Hillclimb was the previously said F1 car at 41.6s (not 46s as i previously stated)

 

Not really fair to compare it to the P1 I would suggest - Jenson specifically said that he was not trying to set a time with the P1, just putting on a show, where clearly AP was much more serious.

 

@Dan39 -- Agreed. At the same time, comparing the GT3 to something 10x the cost (P1) is also unfair.

 

Changing Pikes Peak was madness.

 

I just wouldn't call that a hillclimb, I'd call it a sales event for manufacturers to showcase their shiniest of the shiny, the concept cars and the historic cars you just don't get to see unless the corporations put the big bucks in these marketing events. Symbiosis of motorsport and car sales.

To try to make my point again, perhaps a little more clearly. If you take an F1 car out of its element, put it on those sorts of roads, minimal practice and setup, safety issues and a car that can hit 200 mph anywhere the driver wants, the F1 car and driver have to dial back a lot. And the car just isn't suited to the course.

I imagine F1 teams have software that would let them segment that course at Goodwood, extract identical segments from real F1 tracks, piece together a simulated inch by inch analysis of what their car has really done from data acquisition of real driving on those segments, piece each segment together with adapted transitions and come up with very reliable time that would happen if the course were driven under ideal qualifying conditions. I'd expect that "real" time to be a lot quicker. It's like when a hot shoe sets an impossibly quick lap at Laguna Seca in a F1 car -- the team doesn't put a lot of effort in, they don't prep the car for the event, they pick a gearbox, the pick some damper, diff and brake settings, they pick some aero settings and the driver goes out with the intent of absolutely, positively not getting hurt and jeopardizing his fitness for next season.

If you take a pro driver like Button and put him on marketing duty, he's not there to prove himself or find this to be his only outlet to drive a P1, he's 100% professional, focused on stated objectives, delivering a performance. He's there to enthuse VIP buyers that their million is better spent with Macca than just getting another bloody Lambo or mid tier F car.

In my half baked pseudo-analytical take on the GT3, it was a competent amateur, assuming it was Andreas Preuninger, and his goal was to hoon around, smoke 'em, slide it, pop the clutch, bang it off the rev-limiter, bang the rocks together and make some noise. The GT3 surely has a lot more up its sleeve than that time suggests. In the handful of videos I saw, not one apex was clipped, not one bobble was bobbled, no deep and late braking ... none of the telltales of a driver working on hundredths of seconds.

When the P1 goes around the ring and it's a half an hour quicker than a GT3, we'll have a meaningful number. When a few real owners get the GT3 to known US tracks, we'll have that jaw-dropping experience of a car that can enable a mediocre driver to keep up with a well driven RS 3.8 or 4.0, then we'll all adjust to the new way of things and eventually we'll all grow accustomed to hearing whirring and whining electric motors as AWD hypercars claw their way out of turns with all four wheels steering at different angles, some driven by electrics, some by fossils. Most of 'em with fossil-aged owners who'll just park the things alongside all the other "stuff."

 

Brilliant!

 

If a P1 goes around the Ring half an hour quicker than a GT3 that will definitely be meaningful. (A typo...I know....couldn't resist).

No doubt MG drivers in the '50's had the same lament when 356's began to blow them away, as did 356 drivers when the 911 came out, and on to the present day when much better sorted and electronically augmented 3.8 and 4.0 RS's allowed a new generation of "mediocre drivers" to start blowing away earlier "well driven" air cooled cars. Each generation thinks they have the corner on driving skill and excellence, often without bothering to place themselves and their equipment in the context of the generations that came before.

To blame manufacturers for building ever more capable cars because they are supposedly playing to a dumbed down audience, and therefore allegedly making driving less challenging and rewarding, is a rather cynical take on automotive development, IMHO. But then I'm just another fossil-aged auto enthusiast....what do I know?

 

i blame apple.
they started it all

 

This one posted by Porsche:

 

I'm sure one of us wouldn't mind that!

 

car is definitely a beast, once people get over the pdk saga. im sure they will realize its a special car

 

I agree 100%.