Power:Weight by the numbers
10-16-2014, 02:51 PM
#1
Power:Weight by the numbers
So just looking at the numbers:
GT3: 3,150 lbs / 475 hp = 6.63 lbs/hp
Turbo: 3,500 lbs / 520 hp = 6.73 lbs/hp
Turbo S: 3,550 lbs / 560 hp = 6.34 lbs/hp
The GT3 has a slightly better power to weight ratio than the regular Turbo, assuming these numbers are reasonably accurate.
But yet the regular Turbo seems to have slightly better acceleration numbers than the GT3.
I'm guessing that this has a lot to do with the higher amount of torque produced by the Turbo's engine?
I've mentioned this before in this forum, and I know that many will disagree, but I STILL find myself wishing that the GT3 had more horsepower. After driving a Turbo and enjoying such a wonderful delivery of power and torque at pretty modest engine revs, I find myself wondering if I will miss the more brutal acceleration of the Turbo, if/when I get my GT3...
Am I missing something here?
Has there been any head-to-head review of the GT3 vs the Turbo? The only reason I ask is that I have a GT3 set to arrive in December, yet seem to be finding it difficult to step away from my Turbo, and I really need to figure this out today... Not an easy decision.
Someone please make this decision easier for me! :-)
GT3: 3,150 lbs / 475 hp = 6.63 lbs/hp
Turbo: 3,500 lbs / 520 hp = 6.73 lbs/hp
Turbo S: 3,550 lbs / 560 hp = 6.34 lbs/hp
The GT3 has a slightly better power to weight ratio than the regular Turbo, assuming these numbers are reasonably accurate.
But yet the regular Turbo seems to have slightly better acceleration numbers than the GT3.
I'm guessing that this has a lot to do with the higher amount of torque produced by the Turbo's engine?
I've mentioned this before in this forum, and I know that many will disagree, but I STILL find myself wishing that the GT3 had more horsepower. After driving a Turbo and enjoying such a wonderful delivery of power and torque at pretty modest engine revs, I find myself wondering if I will miss the more brutal acceleration of the Turbo, if/when I get my GT3...
Am I missing something here?
Has there been any head-to-head review of the GT3 vs the Turbo? The only reason I ask is that I have a GT3 set to arrive in December, yet seem to be finding it difficult to step away from my Turbo, and I really need to figure this out today... Not an easy decision.
Someone please make this decision easier for me! :-)
10-16-2014, 03:30 PM
#3
Three Wheelin'
You are comparing 2 totally different power deliveries. Apples and Oranges. Maybe it is more of a reflection of how you will use the car, and what you like and desire as a driver.
A high compression N/A engine like the GT3's is meant to rev and rev and rev. Lightweight internals with a high compression ratio. It will have smooth power delivery, that peaks near the top end, especially useful on the track, when modulating power to a chassis at it's limits of adhesion, is very important to the driver. The lower levels of torque down low is a driver benefit, as a torque rush when applying throttle will simply break the rear end loose when coming out of a corner. This engine type allows the driver to control the physics of the car in cornering.
A lower compression F/I engine (turbo) is a method to produce Big Block V8 torque from a small displacement engine that can produce better mpg when not using all it's muscle.. The low compression will produce a turbo lag before boost kicks in, and then the power delivery is much more vertical at that point. Turbo engines run out of steam at the top end, and don't typically rev to crazy high limits. When driving a turbo car on the racetrack, it becomes a "point and shoot" car. The uneven power delivery and untimely delivery(lag) takes a lot of the control of the car's physics away from the driver.
A high compression N/A engine like the GT3's is meant to rev and rev and rev. Lightweight internals with a high compression ratio. It will have smooth power delivery, that peaks near the top end, especially useful on the track, when modulating power to a chassis at it's limits of adhesion, is very important to the driver. The lower levels of torque down low is a driver benefit, as a torque rush when applying throttle will simply break the rear end loose when coming out of a corner. This engine type allows the driver to control the physics of the car in cornering.
A lower compression F/I engine (turbo) is a method to produce Big Block V8 torque from a small displacement engine that can produce better mpg when not using all it's muscle.. The low compression will produce a turbo lag before boost kicks in, and then the power delivery is much more vertical at that point. Turbo engines run out of steam at the top end, and don't typically rev to crazy high limits. When driving a turbo car on the racetrack, it becomes a "point and shoot" car. The uneven power delivery and untimely delivery(lag) takes a lot of the control of the car's physics away from the driver.
10-16-2014, 03:37 PM
#4
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Don't forget that the TT/TTS both have a lower Coefficient of Drag (0.31) than the GT3 (0.33).
Which may contribute to some of the time differential.
Which may contribute to some of the time differential.
10-16-2014, 03:47 PM
#5
Rennlist Member
OP,
I understand your concern 100%. I have some fear as well, coming from a ZR1, multiple Z06s and numerous Vipers.
I had to laugh b/c I initially ordered a non-S Turbo, but switched to the GT3 over the weekend.
The GT3 has always intrigued me b/c of the raw edge and high strung flat six. I just love the aggressive looks!
As a motorcycle nut, I can understand the differences. Most metric motorcycles rely on similar engines as the GT3, high revving, lower displacement engines, offering little torque down low... Completely contrary to Harley Davidson motorcycles (w/the exception of the VRod), which generally have higher displacement, gobs of torque, but run out of breath above 6500 rpms...
Both are fun but offer different/unique driving experiences/pleasure. What's your poison/You get to pick...
You have to drive the GT3 and metric motorcycles with a little aggression to get the most enjoyment out of them..
I had a similar experience with a 2008 Honda S2000. Low torque, low displacement, but once the VTEC kicked in at about 6500 rpms, look out...
At the end of the day, I derive more enjoyment out of driving a slower car fast, than a faster car slow. This is why I chose the GT3 over the Turbo. The American torque monsters I owned above, were fun, but the novelty wore off quickly, because putting down that massive power/torque was extremely difficult. I felt like it was a complete waste...
Knowing this, I can accept the lower torque figure of the GT3.
Best/Cheers/GL
BB
I understand your concern 100%. I have some fear as well, coming from a ZR1, multiple Z06s and numerous Vipers.
I had to laugh b/c I initially ordered a non-S Turbo, but switched to the GT3 over the weekend.
The GT3 has always intrigued me b/c of the raw edge and high strung flat six. I just love the aggressive looks!
As a motorcycle nut, I can understand the differences. Most metric motorcycles rely on similar engines as the GT3, high revving, lower displacement engines, offering little torque down low... Completely contrary to Harley Davidson motorcycles (w/the exception of the VRod), which generally have higher displacement, gobs of torque, but run out of breath above 6500 rpms...
Both are fun but offer different/unique driving experiences/pleasure. What's your poison/You get to pick...
You have to drive the GT3 and metric motorcycles with a little aggression to get the most enjoyment out of them..
I had a similar experience with a 2008 Honda S2000. Low torque, low displacement, but once the VTEC kicked in at about 6500 rpms, look out...
At the end of the day, I derive more enjoyment out of driving a slower car fast, than a faster car slow. This is why I chose the GT3 over the Turbo. The American torque monsters I owned above, were fun, but the novelty wore off quickly, because putting down that massive power/torque was extremely difficult. I felt like it was a complete waste...
Knowing this, I can accept the lower torque figure of the GT3.
Best/Cheers/GL
BB
10-16-2014, 04:05 PM
#6
Rennlist Member
Has neone weighed their 991 gt3 with all fluids and full tank of gas? I presume those weight numbers are offered by PAG. 3150 seems on the lite side given the PDK tranny is heavier than a mt. Mike
10-16-2014, 04:23 PM
#7
Race Director
MileHigh911 - Thanks for those descriptions. I think that was very well said.
Now - I will put my money on that the 991 GT3 will beat the 991 Turbo to 100 mph. I do not care what they have published but I would bet on the GT3. I say that because the numbers are so close, on paper, but the NA engine will have (0) hesitation/lag and if you have not noticed it may be rear wheel drive but it still takes off like a rocket with minimal wheel spin.
The 991 Turbo S would clearly win - way too much HP and torque
Now - I will put my money on that the 991 GT3 will beat the 991 Turbo to 100 mph. I do not care what they have published but I would bet on the GT3. I say that because the numbers are so close, on paper, but the NA engine will have (0) hesitation/lag and if you have not noticed it may be rear wheel drive but it still takes off like a rocket with minimal wheel spin.
The 991 Turbo S would clearly win - way too much HP and torque
Trending Topics
10-16-2014, 04:26 PM
#8
Rennlist Member
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...he-911-gt3.pdf
For sake of reference my 997.1 GT3RS weights 3080 with 2/3 tank fuel.
10-16-2014, 04:36 PM
#9
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Its probably a bit light, Car and Driver tested theirs at 3197. Unclear of fuel level.
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...he-911-gt3.pdf
For sake of reference my 997.1 GT3RS weights 3080 with 2/3 tank fuel.
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...he-911-gt3.pdf
For sake of reference my 997.1 GT3RS weights 3080 with 2/3 tank fuel.
(And, yes, I know they were using 93 octane and had Pilot Sport Cups ...)
10-16-2014, 04:47 PM
#10
Three Wheelin'
OP,
I understand your concern 100%. I have some fear as well, coming from a ZR1, multiple Z06s and numerous Vipers.
I had to laugh b/c I initially ordered a non-S Turbo, but switched to the GT3 over the weekend.
The GT3 has always intrigued me b/c of the raw edge and high strung flat six. I just love the aggressive looks!
As a motorcycle nut, I can understand the differences. Most metric motorcycles rely on similar engines as the GT3, high revving, lower displacement engines, offering little torque down low... Completely contrary to Harley Davidson motorcycles (w/the exception of the VRod), which generally have higher displacement, gobs of torque, but run out of breath above 6500 rpms...
Both are fun but offer different/unique driving experiences/pleasure. What's your poison/You get to pick...
You have to drive the GT3 and metric motorcycles with a little aggression to get the most enjoyment out of them..
I had a similar experience with a 2008 Honda S2000. Low torque, low displacement, but once the VTEC kicked in at about 6500 rpms, look out...
At the end of the day, I derive more enjoyment out of driving a slower car fast, than a faster car slow. This is why I chose the GT3 over the Turbo. The American torque monsters I owned above, were fun, but the novelty wore off quickly, because putting down that massive power/torque was extremely difficult. I felt like it was a complete waste...
Knowing this, I can accept the lower torque figure of the GT3.
Best/Cheers/GL
BB
I understand your concern 100%. I have some fear as well, coming from a ZR1, multiple Z06s and numerous Vipers.
I had to laugh b/c I initially ordered a non-S Turbo, but switched to the GT3 over the weekend.
The GT3 has always intrigued me b/c of the raw edge and high strung flat six. I just love the aggressive looks!
As a motorcycle nut, I can understand the differences. Most metric motorcycles rely on similar engines as the GT3, high revving, lower displacement engines, offering little torque down low... Completely contrary to Harley Davidson motorcycles (w/the exception of the VRod), which generally have higher displacement, gobs of torque, but run out of breath above 6500 rpms...
Both are fun but offer different/unique driving experiences/pleasure. What's your poison/You get to pick...
You have to drive the GT3 and metric motorcycles with a little aggression to get the most enjoyment out of them..
I had a similar experience with a 2008 Honda S2000. Low torque, low displacement, but once the VTEC kicked in at about 6500 rpms, look out...
At the end of the day, I derive more enjoyment out of driving a slower car fast, than a faster car slow. This is why I chose the GT3 over the Turbo. The American torque monsters I owned above, were fun, but the novelty wore off quickly, because putting down that massive power/torque was extremely difficult. I felt like it was a complete waste...
Knowing this, I can accept the lower torque figure of the GT3.
Best/Cheers/GL
BB
I think my new GT3 should be so much easier to drive fast around a track than our cars. It is loads of fun on the street and on the straights and handles well on entry/apex, but is a handful on exit, especially on a wet track.
10-16-2014, 06:34 PM
#12
Rennlist Member
BB, I am the same situation...coming from a 640 rwhp/rwtq ZR1.
I think my new GT3 should be so much easier to drive fast around a track than our cars. It is loads of fun on the street and on the straights and handles well on entry/apex, but is a handful on exit, especially on a wet track.
I think my new GT3 should be so much easier to drive fast around a track than our cars. It is loads of fun on the street and on the straights and handles well on entry/apex, but is a handful on exit, especially on a wet track.
I'm looking forward to the GT3 even more, though. Another gripe I have with the Vette is that it is just a bit too wide, and it is a bit challenging to place the long nose where you want to go. It's difficult to see the very front edge of the ZR1..
PCars offer exceptional frontal view. I loved that about my 996s from the day...
Best/Cheers & GL,
BB
10-16-2014, 06:55 PM
#13
I can tell u that any one that has driven any 911 will probably feel that they need some more hp. But in reality porsche is very clever at putting power to the ground vs just advertising raw muscle figures. So generally a 475 hp 911 will keep up with most other sports cars with an add'l 100 hp.
I suspect your gt3 will keep up with any 911 turbo (currently available) and do it in a more emotional and interesting manner (at least on challenging twisty roads/tracks). Straight line who cares. There will always be a bend soon enough where u will catch up. I have driven the 991 turbo S a few times and surprisingly felt it could also use more power. Just the way 911s are made. Keep u thirsting for more. Plus the turbos are boooring, sound very ordinary, more comfort/luxury oriented. If that's what u prefer, reconsider why u want a gt3.
I suspect your gt3 will keep up with any 911 turbo (currently available) and do it in a more emotional and interesting manner (at least on challenging twisty roads/tracks). Straight line who cares. There will always be a bend soon enough where u will catch up. I have driven the 991 turbo S a few times and surprisingly felt it could also use more power. Just the way 911s are made. Keep u thirsting for more. Plus the turbos are boooring, sound very ordinary, more comfort/luxury oriented. If that's what u prefer, reconsider why u want a gt3.
10-17-2014, 08:59 AM
#15
Nordschleife Master
putting all the technical stuff aside, here is what I think it comes down to...
do you want a point and squirt, torque everywhere driving experience, but with very little noise/sound and not a razor sharp throttle, handling, etc.
OR -
do you want a noisy, high revving, razor sharp, experience, albeit anemic at lower RPMs, lower speeds
Having owned/driven both turbos and NA high rev cars, I really think it comes down to that question. Maybe captain of the obvious. My AMG black series with almost 500lbs from normally aspirated engine was sort of the best of both worlds, but even that was more like a turbo experience than a gt3 experience. Kind of sloppy compared to the sharpness of the GT3.
For me, I like the sound the engine makes at high revs, the broken necks of bystanders trying to figure out the exotic engine noise, the ZING of the engine and throttle response, etc.
do you want a point and squirt, torque everywhere driving experience, but with very little noise/sound and not a razor sharp throttle, handling, etc.
OR -
do you want a noisy, high revving, razor sharp, experience, albeit anemic at lower RPMs, lower speeds
Having owned/driven both turbos and NA high rev cars, I really think it comes down to that question. Maybe captain of the obvious. My AMG black series with almost 500lbs from normally aspirated engine was sort of the best of both worlds, but even that was more like a turbo experience than a gt3 experience. Kind of sloppy compared to the sharpness of the GT3.
For me, I like the sound the engine makes at high revs, the broken necks of bystanders trying to figure out the exotic engine noise, the ZING of the engine and throttle response, etc.