Macca

^^^ Probably the CF as its easier to mould to a double bubble and gives a better headline tech....

JasonAndreas

GrantG

Wow - i wonder if e RS MIGHT HAVE 6 individual throttles like the RSR. Ive been wanting this since they gave it up after 1973 models.

CRex

Mike you and I know at some point it's not about the weight savings but the extra $ margin that can be squeezed out by having a CF piece right? That's +$5k MSRP right there for one panel!

Right on! That was my thought too--there may be a win-win 6-butterfly implementation for us road car users... but that may be wishful thinking coz the "vanilla" 991 Cup is still using the uni-throttle body of yore...

Mike in CA

CRex, no doubt....

G55amg

Not much

Nizer

Good stuff. Pretty safe to assume the motorsport-mandated air restrictors (15, 16) will be binned.

Alan Smithee

Anybody else think they might call this car the GT3 RSR? If they are going for a loftier price point than previous RS models relative to the standard GT3, I could see them exploiting those three hallowed letters...

Dan39

If you believe Ferrari, they don't think CF actually saves much weight in street car applications versus aluminum once finished and painted and, of course, it's much more expensive and less durable, more difficult to repair, etc. They are one of the manufacturers, along with Porsche it seems, that is not going down the CF road.

Petevb

It's complicated.

In an absolute sense there is zero question carbon composite saves weight. The real metric is dollars per pound, however. The highest end cars that can afford it will be virtually entirely composite, the lowest end will stick with steel. Pretty straightforward.

In-between is where it gets interesting. If you’re making an upper mid-range car then aluminum is attractive- it’s the medium dollar per pound option, so using high percentages probably result in the lowest blended cost in isolation. But if you’re making something like a BMW M3, for example, you’re really blending the economies of scale of a primarily low cost, high volume car with certain features of a high cost, low volume one. Re-tooling to make the entire car from aluminum would lose the economies of scale and be more expensive than blending mostly cheap steel parts you’re already tooled up for with a few expensive carbon ones. Hence for them a carbon roof, etc probably makes a strong case.

If you’re Porsche, however, and already have an aluminum roof, the dollars per pound saved math for a carbon roof gets far less advantageous: it's much harder to beat money spent instead on a lighter motor, battery or brakes. Thus Porsche and Ferrari’s stated aversion to carbon probably has more to do with them starting with a fundamentally good and light platform to begin with rather than the inherent qualities of the material itself.

Medium term the picture is changing. BMW has made a case with their i3 that the carbon tube will actually be cheaper to repair: The parts themselves are admittedly more expensive, but by making the frame modular and replacing rather than mending entire sections they'll save labor resulting in a lower repair cost overall. Or at least insurance companies seem to have bought into that theory so far. It’s a test case- if successful it may well shortly replace aluminum as the material of choice for the medium volume, medium cost optimization. This next gen lower cost/ lower performance carbon tech might be particularly suited for something like future roof structures, ie A, B and C pillars to allow for high stiffness and rollover protection while maintaining good visibility. We'll see.

consolidated

So the vents are here to stay it appears.

Larry Cable

Finally! - thanks, happy to be proved wrong!

Boxster Coupe GTS

Porsche 991 GT3 RS prototype on road in Nürburg...















Porsche 991 GT3 RS prototype on road in Nürburg -- Gallery link

Bill_C4S

the rear wheels are huge.....basically 918 metal/rubber....

it will be a weapon....but we're into (more) serious $$$ for consumables....

Jon70

Dunlop tires, wonder what size the rears are.