GT3.2 Nordschleife
05-04-2017, 10:42 PM
#196
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I see no reason to invoke conspiracy with this new time. I figure a 1% improvement in power to weight ratio is worth about a bit under .2% laptime reduction at the Ring, so the power bump is worth over ~3 seconds. Tires have been dropping laptime at nearly .3% per year- a further ~5 seconds. Together this leaves just a ~4 second gap to close.
Porsche has done two revs of this platform between the first GT3 and this one, the GT3 RS and the R. One assumes they learned a thing or two about setup, rear wheel steering and shift times, particularly since this was all virgin territory when the 991.1 was released. Then consider that the increased downforce came with no drag penalty (courtesy of the R's under-body development I'm sure)- more time there. Put in some reasonable time assumptions for these improvements and you're easily within a second or two- within the margin of repeat-ability or a slightly improved track.
Overall I think people are surprised largely because the 991.1 RS didn't do better, but there are two likely explanations for that time. First, I'm sure didn't fully reflect what the car was capable of, and second the RS's wide body and heavy aero isn't all that suited to the 'ring. Take that time out and the 991.2's time is right on top of where we'd expect it. Far better than previous mid-cycle updates to be sure, but that's likely reflective of the clear increase in development resources on display these days (new engine, 2 new models, new underbody aero, etc).
My rule of thumb is that 'Ring times are dropping at ~3 seconds per year, so I'm simply glad they put in the effort rather than phoning it in...
Porsche has done two revs of this platform between the first GT3 and this one, the GT3 RS and the R. One assumes they learned a thing or two about setup, rear wheel steering and shift times, particularly since this was all virgin territory when the 991.1 was released. Then consider that the increased downforce came with no drag penalty (courtesy of the R's under-body development I'm sure)- more time there. Put in some reasonable time assumptions for these improvements and you're easily within a second or two- within the margin of repeat-ability or a slightly improved track.
Overall I think people are surprised largely because the 991.1 RS didn't do better, but there are two likely explanations for that time. First, I'm sure didn't fully reflect what the car was capable of, and second the RS's wide body and heavy aero isn't all that suited to the 'ring. Take that time out and the 991.2's time is right on top of where we'd expect it. Far better than previous mid-cycle updates to be sure, but that's likely reflective of the clear increase in development resources on display these days (new engine, 2 new models, new underbody aero, etc).
My rule of thumb is that 'Ring times are dropping at ~3 seconds per year, so I'm simply glad they put in the effort rather than phoning it in...
Regardless of the car, pavement, tires, etc.
05-04-2017, 10:53 PM
#198
Rennlist Member
The 991 RS already has the new new N1 tyres fitted from launch. They have been absent in 245/305 GT3 sizes until now. Also I dont think the work on the track probably amounts to more than 1-2s in the hands of a pro driver, probably less.
My personal view is that they have found more mid-range torque (than the RS) in this "new" engine and the better N1 rubber compound is also helping along with a more aero (and very small drag penalty), which becomes very useful when you consider the average speeds of corners at the Ring. All thes ethings plus a cold dry morning and a focused driver have come together to shave a considerable time off the previous record. Whether its possible to get within even 5s of this by a mortal is unknown, but Im sure Manu will give it his best shot later this summer ;-)
My personal view is that they have found more mid-range torque (than the RS) in this "new" engine and the better N1 rubber compound is also helping along with a more aero (and very small drag penalty), which becomes very useful when you consider the average speeds of corners at the Ring. All thes ethings plus a cold dry morning and a focused driver have come together to shave a considerable time off the previous record. Whether its possible to get within even 5s of this by a mortal is unknown, but Im sure Manu will give it his best shot later this summer ;-)
05-04-2017, 11:02 PM
#199
Nordschleife Master
Torque and power curves previously posted put the .2 4.0 and .1 4.0 nearly identical. My guess is the great Ring time was due to perfect conditions which the RS did not have, less aero on the .2 so less drag (Ring is very high speed circuit) and new Cup 2's.
Evo's non Ring track times put the two cars within 2 tenths of second.
Evo's non Ring track times put the two cars within 2 tenths of second.
05-04-2017, 11:15 PM
#200
Rennlist Member
And the driver never shifted near redline.
Maybe the 9000RPM auto shifts aren't the fastest for him either.
Best laptimes aren't set in auto.
I think the redline is just right in the RS, I shift slightly short of them for the best laptime.
Once in a while I hit the rev limiter but 3-4 only, 2-3 revs high enough, I short shift a bit, 3-4 is just right 4-5 I short shift a bit.
Maybe the 9000RPM auto shifts aren't the fastest for him either.
Best laptimes aren't set in auto.
I think the redline is just right in the RS, I shift slightly short of them for the best laptime.
Once in a while I hit the rev limiter but 3-4 only, 2-3 revs high enough, I short shift a bit, 3-4 is just right 4-5 I short shift a bit.
05-04-2017, 11:16 PM
#201
Keep in mind that in the 991.2 GT3 they have an engine with all the advantages of the RS but with higher RPM potential (more power), less friction (more power and torque), a multi-stage intake (more torque), solid lifters (more power and torque due to more aggressive cam potential) and higher compression ratio (more power and torque). The only way it doesn't make significantly more power everywhere is because that's the way they want it.
Even with the same torque curve, however, the higher rpm will give the new motor more area under the curve in lower gears, so I do agree that's at least part of the advantage against the clock.
05-05-2017, 01:59 AM
#202
Rennlist Member
I do not believe they need to go "looking" for anything. Porsche has gone to great lengths to limit mid range torque in order to produce the experience they're looking for. That "top end rush" over the last 2k rpm is experienced only because of the relative lack of lower end torque. Intake manifold diameter being on the large side is likely a main contributor- in the 997 RS 4.0 it was comically larger than the 3.8 in order to prevent it pulling like a turbo-diesel truck.
Keep in mind that in the 991.2 GT3 they have an engine with all the advantages of the RS but with higher RPM potential (more power), less friction (more power and torque), a multi-stage intake (more torque), solid lifters (more power and torque due to more aggressive cam potential) and higher compression ratio (more power and torque). The only way it doesn't make significantly more power everywhere is because that's the way they want it.
Even with the same torque curve, however, the higher rpm will give the new motor more area under the curve in lower gears, so I do agree that's at least part of the advantage against the clock.
Keep in mind that in the 991.2 GT3 they have an engine with all the advantages of the RS but with higher RPM potential (more power), less friction (more power and torque), a multi-stage intake (more torque), solid lifters (more power and torque due to more aggressive cam potential) and higher compression ratio (more power and torque). The only way it doesn't make significantly more power everywhere is because that's the way they want it.
Even with the same torque curve, however, the higher rpm will give the new motor more area under the curve in lower gears, so I do agree that's at least part of the advantage against the clock.
will be interesting to see dyno outputs... once again, hard to know for sure with so many interceding variables not controlled as to what is driving lap time differentials
05-05-2017, 02:57 AM
#203
07:12 it just feels good! Thank you Porsche
Goodmorning everyone and nice friday to you all Porschelovers!
05-05-2017, 03:12 AM
#204
Rennlist Member
Porsche/Michelin do the N rating differently even within the same tire family, i.e. Cup2s.
They have different 'N rating' depending on the sizing, 918/GT3RS, regular 911 and the GT4.
The N0 in the biggest size is only reserved for the 918, as they are ECO rated. They came out with a different compound and called that N1 for the GT3RS.
The N0 rating on the middle size (for 911s) are NOT ECO rated. They are the normal sticky versions. Same tires on the .1 GT3 and the 911R. The new GT3 is wearing an improved version of these, hence the N1 rating. And these N1s are more advanced than the GT3RS N1s.
A bit confusing at first but simple after one look at them more closely.
05-05-2017, 09:25 AM
#205
Race Director
Can I ask what is so shocking that the next iteration of the GT3 is faster than the previous RS iteration.
Maybe I am wrong but is not that usually the case?
Is not the .2 RS going to be faster than the .2 GT3?
Why can not people accept this and move on
Do not worry- RS values will hold. The car is worth MSRP where prices will probably end up just as it should be. It it going to be a Collector's car??- I do not think so but i never thought they were Collector's cars but I do not follow the RS market because I never care about any Porsche being a Collector's car
Maybe I am wrong but is not that usually the case?
Is not the .2 RS going to be faster than the .2 GT3?
Why can not people accept this and move on
Do not worry- RS values will hold. The car is worth MSRP where prices will probably end up just as it should be. It it going to be a Collector's car??- I do not think so but i never thought they were Collector's cars but I do not follow the RS market because I never care about any Porsche being a Collector's car
05-05-2017, 12:46 PM
#207
Curious. Where's the time for the 991.1 GT3 RS? The best time I see is 7.27 for the 997 RS 4.0.
https://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-times-top-100/
https://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-times-top-100/
05-05-2017, 12:57 PM
#208
Burning Brakes
I call foul on this...
The .2 GT3 had a persistent tailwind at all points on the track. We all know in the RS run there was a persistent headwind. Everywhere.
The flying insect population is down 8% this spring. The reduced effect of bug splatter on aero is worth 1 second alone...
You can see at one point the driver tries to operate the headlight washers and no water comes out. We all know the RS had a full tank of washer fluid on its run
The oxygen content of the air is slightly higher this year due to denser foliage in the local area (mild winter). That's worth about half a second on an N/A around the ring
The driver had a Nature Valley bar in the glove compartment on the .2 GT3 run (original - not the chocolate one that has the weird powdery cocoa taste), but I'll point out that he had a full lunch pail on the RS run, including a juice box, carrot sticks, and a ham sandwich on marbled rye (crusts still on). Not only is this a weight penalty, but it wasn't secured in the back of the car and was rolling around. The lack of weight and moving CG on the .2 GT3 run was worth at least .4 of a second
The .2 GT3 has a magic passenger seat that disappeared, and reappeared, and then disappeared again. Also, it didn't have lumbar adjustment. Not only did the RS have lumbar adjustment, but the bag was inflated with particularly heavy springtime air
The driver had an artisanal beard for the RS run, and had a heavier Rolex. For the .2 GT3 run he barely had a moustache, was wearing a gen 1 Fitbit HR, and was also going commando.
The .2 GT3 had a persistent tailwind at all points on the track. We all know in the RS run there was a persistent headwind. Everywhere.
The flying insect population is down 8% this spring. The reduced effect of bug splatter on aero is worth 1 second alone...
You can see at one point the driver tries to operate the headlight washers and no water comes out. We all know the RS had a full tank of washer fluid on its run
The oxygen content of the air is slightly higher this year due to denser foliage in the local area (mild winter). That's worth about half a second on an N/A around the ring
The driver had a Nature Valley bar in the glove compartment on the .2 GT3 run (original - not the chocolate one that has the weird powdery cocoa taste), but I'll point out that he had a full lunch pail on the RS run, including a juice box, carrot sticks, and a ham sandwich on marbled rye (crusts still on). Not only is this a weight penalty, but it wasn't secured in the back of the car and was rolling around. The lack of weight and moving CG on the .2 GT3 run was worth at least .4 of a second
The .2 GT3 has a magic passenger seat that disappeared, and reappeared, and then disappeared again. Also, it didn't have lumbar adjustment. Not only did the RS have lumbar adjustment, but the bag was inflated with particularly heavy springtime air
The driver had an artisanal beard for the RS run, and had a heavier Rolex. For the .2 GT3 run he barely had a moustache, was wearing a gen 1 Fitbit HR, and was also going commando.
05-05-2017, 01:00 PM
#209
Drifting
^Makes complete sense!
05-05-2017, 01:02 PM
#210
Porsche/Michelin do the N rating differently even within the same tire family, i.e. Cup2s.
They have different 'N rating' depending on the sizing, 918/GT3RS, regular 911 and the GT4.
The N0 in the biggest size is only reserved for the 918, as they are ECO rated. They came out with a different compound and called that N1 for the GT3RS.
The N0 rating on the middle size (for 911s) are NOT ECO rated. They are the normal sticky versions. Same tires on the .1 GT3 and the 911R. The new GT3 is wearing an improved version of these, hence the N1 rating. And these N1s are more advanced than the GT3RS N1s.
A bit confusing at first but simple after one look at them more closely.
They have different 'N rating' depending on the sizing, 918/GT3RS, regular 911 and the GT4.
The N0 in the biggest size is only reserved for the 918, as they are ECO rated. They came out with a different compound and called that N1 for the GT3RS.
The N0 rating on the middle size (for 911s) are NOT ECO rated. They are the normal sticky versions. Same tires on the .1 GT3 and the 911R. The new GT3 is wearing an improved version of these, hence the N1 rating. And these N1s are more advanced than the GT3RS N1s.
A bit confusing at first but simple after one look at them more closely.
I don't have stats for Michelin, but I'm sure it is similar. They obviously improved the PSS enough to call it Pilot Sport 4S.