odwa

Are these possibly the wings discussed, canards? Posted on Ferrari chat.http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/att...t3-rs-fvp2.jpg

Macca

Peter. My understanding is you can in ROW order the folding buckets, fixed buckets, standard seats or 18 way seats.

As I stated before the slide was "released" standard cage colour black cost options colour keyed. Cage is remove able and doesn't affect safety or performance of the car on the road.

The slide indicated no difference in engine architecture or gearbox ratios but the brochure to follow will englighten us further on these matters.

The CF front wings are the same material used in GT3 rear wing. It isn't CF like some folks thing that can be exposed. It looks like rough plastic when raw and must be finished and painted to look presentable. It's there only to save weight. I'm told it will be expensive to replace and paint but will be more durable than the steel ones.

The car will not be noticeably quicker on the road than the GT3. The place where this car will shine is at the track. On the road it's additional width, track, tire width and much firmer suspension will create road noise, skipping, tracking and be very very firm. Lack of rear heated window in ROW will make winter use a little more challenging.

Aero dynamics, footprint, weight savings etc is where this is at.

markow

thanks a lot macca. whenever i get my 'i-like-the RS' attack, your email takes me back to reality. i always concur more and more with your opinion that the GT3 non-RS is the sweet spot of racy road cars, just as the 458 speciale.
so i shall stick with the vacuum cleaner hp monster from fiat::)). a bad driver needs electronic nannies and the 458 made even me look good at times.
peter

GoHardGT3RS

Yes, but as we see on this pic, in this early stage of testing, the fenders did not have the vents. For me, the vents have somehow replaced the canard option as they have probably been measured as more effective in downforce contribution.

odwa

In this photo you may see that the fender vents are camo covered as well.http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/att...t3-rs-fvp1.jpg

GoHardGT3RS

Thanks, true indeed. So new logic: The canards were on the mule in order not to disclose the vent solution and therefore canards = vents in terms of downforce contribution. P just wanted to have/show something new on the new RS

Macca

The canards were never for production only to simulate the reduced lift from the fender vents which were covered over with camo at the time.

They will save the canards for the limited edition 991.2 manual version with 520 bhp in 2017 lol!

I agree with previous comment the black grill insets being plastic is a bit disappointing. Would have been nice if they were in CF weave or anodised alloy. Not a big deal tho. The plastic windows are a PITA for regular use - here I think the U.S will get the best option (glass) as the plastic windows on the 996gt3RS were very easy to scratch and get a bit cloudy with age. Glad can be heated too and doesn't make noise.

Peter. As much as you want this car as a DD for Europe summer and winter with zero track use I have to say again it's not for you IMO. Have you still got 458 or is it gone already? If gone why don't you buy a used LHD 991 GT3 and drive that for 12 months till 488 production is well underway and better future model visibility is available? I think you will love the GT3...

Selvatico

last robust rumors about weights:
1450 kg with carboceramic, some options (not better described), not roll cage, but full fuel tank 90 lt..

markow

macca,
we spend little time in austria, so two cars there would really be an overkill. the 458 italia has to go in may otherwise residuals will get worrisome. the ferrari dealer is going to give me an excellent deal on the 488 part exchange. so that will be it.
if we spend more time in the UK next year, then i shall get a cayman GT4 there and keep the ferrari in austria. will need your GT4 experience to decide then.
btw, the GT4 looks really low ..... no lift....hmmmmmm....
peter

Macca

Pete. I think the GT4 will be ok. Ive done the math and its higher at the front splitter than my GT3 by around 25-30mm. Its higher at the axle by 18mm. The break over angle is way less than GT3 and the published figures show the front and rear approach and departure angles are better than the GT3. I have no lift on my GT3 and like others without the lift U have experienced no real issues in 14 months of ownership. Looking at the numbers the GT4 will be at least as easy to manoeuvre as a GT3 with lift activated. Its certainly not a reason for me to consider the purchase. It is a firmly sprung low car again better suited to road than track and probably fitting between 991 GT3 & GT3RS in terms of "use ability, comfort, NVH" etc. It will keep us heel and toe types happy anyway!

Your two car strategy sounds great. The 488 will be a great car. I like the styling though reserve judgement till the car breaks cover in the flesh.

Nice problems to have!

Marco. 1450kg sounds right for a loaded car. Many dont realise the 7.2 RS 4.0L came in for most testers well above published infact around 1435kg was the average and when put against 991 GT3 in early EVO tests (the 4.0RS was the UK riviera one) the 991 GT3 was the same weight more or less!

Given all the exotic materials, more basic door cards and the plastic windows on the ROW model I should think if the cage is included the weight will be around 1400kg DIN standard. The 4-50kg savings from the above will be offset by the cage, larger rear bodywork, bigger wing, larger wheels and tyres. I should say 1400KG would be most likely achievable with smaller tank and radio + a/c delete , PCCB etc. So with 90L tank to DIN standards and the a/c + radio added back and steel brakes I should say 1440KG approx is right...

NateOZ

Thanks - I assume that is an EC weight? So 1450kg vs 1530 kg (EC + fuel tank adjustment) on the 991 GT3.

NateOZ

I think I'm coming to a similar landing, but different than Pete. I'll probably end up with GT4 + McLaren 675LT. I'll pick up an RS (trade my 991 GT3 against it) while waiting for the McLaren, but I think it's the best combination.

Nice stick DD (with replaced box to fix the ratios) and very light, very focused track monster.

I've got my 3.8L 981 PDK track car, but plan to replace it with a factory Cup car in 24 months when I've hopefully improved my driving skills further.

Macca

Nate. I cant be EC as the cars base weight is only 20-30kg off in teh first instance and what you are suggesting is 80kg (190+ LB) difference...its just DIN standard weight as per Porsche norm I suggest.

Nizer

Yes, do more with less. Always the Porsche way all the back to 550 RS. One of the things I really like about Porsche.

In what way?

What we have so far suggests White and GT Silver standard no cost, Lava Orange and Mystery Purple an upcharge, and all else falls to PTS bucket. A little surprising that Black's excluded but let's wait for final specs as we could see a third cost layer as on other 911's.



Yup, sum of the parts...

Road cars from mass manufacturers start out with massively conflicting design requirements, most obvious being costs, regulatory, and marketability. With a nod to this my critique would be the following.

1) Weight:
Swap to 991 platform and 9A1 engine architecture yielded an inherent 130lb weight saving over 997/Mezger. It would've been nice to see more of this retained in the new RS.

PDK added the most weight to the new platform. How about a lightened case of titanium or magnesium as we see Ducati do? Cost obviously and to a lesser extent maybe safety in the case of magnesium.

This RS is more extreme than the last continuing the trend of each successive RS, but again Porsche checked up with the interior. In this regard, I like Ferrari's Scuderia/Speciale interior treatment. How about simple carbon door cards, bin the Panamera console in place of a simple switch panel on dash, gut the carpet/padding? But cost, marketability, comfort all get hit.

2). No mention of lightened flywheel. Again, waiting on final specs and performance claims.

3). Brakes:
No PFC brake option. The PFC brakes on the 991 Cup are a significant step up over the prior road-based brakes and really moved the game on. For real track work you really don't want PCCBs. It would've been nice to see these brakes offered as standard or upgrade.

4). Motorsport application:
Waiting on the 2016 FIA/ACO reg changes is what the whispers say. It'll be a disappointment if they don't follow through with a direct link with the new engine, but I also know this matters more for some than others.

End of the day it'll be a great car and still likely the best track value out there that also carries a high cache.

GoHardGT3RS

RS widened track vs. GT3:

> 991: front (and rear?) +36 mm
> 997: front +12 mm, rear +30 mm

RS wider body vs. regular GT3:

> 991: front +50 mm, rear +30 mm
> 997: front +26 mm, rear +44 mm

Conclusion: RS should offer much less understeer than GT3 on the 991 compared to what we have/had on the 997