Former RS owner's first 991.2 GTS Track Day
10-12-2019, 02:39 AM
#31
Rennlist Member
Do you all really need that much braking ability or more seat time? In my years of racing, the brakes work in conjunction with the tires. So if you have very sticky tires you will overpower your brakes and vice versa. It's better to get more seat time rather than spend loads of money on parts that might not work well together. On my c5 z06 i cooked my upgraded brakes because I had hoosier A6 slicks. On my f80 m3, my pagid pads warped my rotors lol.
10-12-2019, 02:50 AM
#32
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
The car at a minimum needs fluid, pads and likely cooling; larger brakes probably even better. Car has a lot of power and is not light. The stock MPS4S's are decent for street tires so add stickier tires and the brakes are even more taxed.
My opinion is the car is under braked for an advanced driver. That is not based on lack of seat time. I've owned and tracked several GT cars and by comparison, they are adequately braked with just pads/fluids on R compounds. They use larger diameter rotors and larger calipers and weigh less. Seems logical to me.
My opinion is the car is under braked for an advanced driver. That is not based on lack of seat time. I've owned and tracked several GT cars and by comparison, they are adequately braked with just pads/fluids on R compounds. They use larger diameter rotors and larger calipers and weigh less. Seems logical to me.
10-12-2019, 02:59 AM
#33
Do you all really need that much braking ability or more seat time? In my years of racing, the brakes work in conjunction with the tires. So if you have very sticky tires you will overpower your brakes and vice versa. It's better to get more seat time rather than spend loads of money on parts that might not work well together. On my c5 z06 i cooked my upgraded brakes because I had hoosier A6 slicks. On my f80 m3, my pagid pads warped my rotors lol.
I boiled the stock fluid in the first week I had the car on the street lol.
The GTS has huge torque and is a very heavy car. My car has over 600Hp, it needs something to pull it up. GT3 has less power than my car and way less torque. And they have 380 front and rear. So yea it is necessary, if you want to track seriously.
I have 410 Brembo GT on my F82. It has original rear pads (from the Brembo GT kit) the FM1000. The F82 does not use any rear brakes. I run the ME20 up front and it stops on a dime.
The car at a minimum needs fluid, pads and likely cooling; larger brakes probably even better. Car has a lot of power and is not light. The stock MPS4S's are decent for street tires so add stickier tires and the brakes are even more taxed.
My opinion is the car is under braked for an advanced driver. That is not based on lack of seat time. I've owned and tracked several GT cars and by comparison, they are adequately braked with just pads/fluids on R compounds. They use larger diameter rotors and larger calipers and weigh less. Seems logical to me.
My opinion is the car is under braked for an advanced driver. That is not based on lack of seat time. I've owned and tracked several GT cars and by comparison, they are adequately braked with just pads/fluids on R compounds. They use larger diameter rotors and larger calipers and weigh less. Seems logical to me.
The front ME20 do have a slight squeal occasionally after track transference wears off, but it is less than it did stock and no where near as loud as stock were. But Pagid Yellow were shocking.
Even my new 380 Brembo GTS type 3 front rotors have surface cracks in them. The rear's are fine though. So the stock GTS is seriously under braked for tracking.
It was fine on the street.....for most people : )
10-12-2019, 11:18 AM
#34
Rennlist Member
I put brand new OEM pads in rear and after 3 x 20 min sessions they were on bare metal. So Yes, I like to finish a track day. My front stock calipers went brown. Brownbo's.
I boiled the stock fluid in the first week I had the car on the street lol.
The GTS has huge torque and is a very heavy car. My car has over 600Hp, it needs something to pull it up. GT3 has less power than my car and way less torque. And they have 380 front and rear. So yea it is necessary, if you want to track seriously.
I have 410 Brembo GT on my F82. It has original rear pads (from the Brembo GT kit) the FM1000. The F82 does not use any rear brakes. I run the ME20 up front and it stops on a dime.
I found ME 20's up front have done the trick. Having 380mm in the rear solved the rear brake issue as well. I no longer wear rear brake even with just MX72+ in rear, and they are silent on the street as well.
The front ME20 do have a slight squeal occasionally after track transference wears off, but it is less than it did stock and no where near as loud as stock were. But Pagid Yellow were shocking.
Even my new 380 Brembo GTS type 3 front rotors have surface cracks in them. The rear's are fine though. So the stock GTS is seriously under braked for tracking.
It was fine on the street.....for most people : )
I boiled the stock fluid in the first week I had the car on the street lol.
The GTS has huge torque and is a very heavy car. My car has over 600Hp, it needs something to pull it up. GT3 has less power than my car and way less torque. And they have 380 front and rear. So yea it is necessary, if you want to track seriously.
I have 410 Brembo GT on my F82. It has original rear pads (from the Brembo GT kit) the FM1000. The F82 does not use any rear brakes. I run the ME20 up front and it stops on a dime.
I found ME 20's up front have done the trick. Having 380mm in the rear solved the rear brake issue as well. I no longer wear rear brake even with just MX72+ in rear, and they are silent on the street as well.
The front ME20 do have a slight squeal occasionally after track transference wears off, but it is less than it did stock and no where near as loud as stock were. But Pagid Yellow were shocking.
Even my new 380 Brembo GTS type 3 front rotors have surface cracks in them. The rear's are fine though. So the stock GTS is seriously under braked for tracking.
It was fine on the street.....for most people : )
Do you cool down after each session? This will reduce surface cracks. I used to go through 10 events before cracking would occur on any rotor. You also have to choose the right rotor and pad setup. Some pad materials are way too aggressive.
It all comes down to drivers foot and how you modulate the brake pedal. Try trail braking, you'll save your brakes.
10-12-2019, 07:07 PM
#35
Changing fluid is necessary, but going through pads on 1 track day is over braking in braking zone for sure.
Do you cool down after each session? This will reduce surface cracks. I used to go through 10 events before cracking would occur on any rotor. You also have to choose the right rotor and pad setup. Some pad materials are way too aggressive.
It all comes down to drivers foot and how you modulate the brake pedal. Try trail braking, you'll save your brakes.
Do you cool down after each session? This will reduce surface cracks. I used to go through 10 events before cracking would occur on any rotor. You also have to choose the right rotor and pad setup. Some pad materials are way too aggressive.
It all comes down to drivers foot and how you modulate the brake pedal. Try trail braking, you'll save your brakes.
Is there any other way to drive a 911? Yes we have a cool down lap every time. M3/M4 guys buckle rotors from not having a good enough cool down lap. I have tested quite a few rotor and pad setups. What I am saying is, the OEM setup is no good for heavy tracking. It was OEM rear pad and OEM setup that disintegrated on 3 x 20 min sessions. The guys following me said everytime I hit the brakes, there was a cloud of grey dusk pluming from the rear of the car.
(They could have told me earlier )I believe I am on a great setup now. Pedal feel is the best of any car i have ever driven. The ME20 upfront should last about 5-6 track days and the rears just with the lessor MX72+ should last a full year. I am fine with 3 sets of fronts in a year and one set of rear. If I can get a year from front rotors I am happy. 2 Years would be perfect. I'll easily get that in the rear now.
The thing I love most about the 911 is when trail braking you can control the rotation of the rear by increasing or decreasing pedal pressure. Once the rear is rotated, you can get off the brake pedal and onto the throttle so early.
I get why they kept going with rear mounted. I don't want any other car. (Maybe a McLaren 600LT and a SInger) But nothing else interests me.
10-13-2019, 01:01 AM
#36
Rennlist Member
Try trail braking Is there any other way to drive a 911? Yes we have a cool down lap every time. M3/M4 guys buckle rotors from not having a good enough cool down lap.
I have tested quite a few rotor and pad setups. What I am saying is, the OEM setup is no good for heavy tracking. It was OEM rear pad and OEM setup that disintegrated on 3 x 20 min sessions. The guys following me said everytime I hit the brakes, there was a cloud of grey dusk pluming from the rear of the car. (They could have told me earlier )
I believe I am on a great setup now. Pedal feel is the best of any car i have ever driven. The ME20 upfront should last about 5-6 track days and the rears just with the lessor MX72+ should last a full year. I am fine with 3 sets of fronts in a year and one set of rear. If I can get a year from front rotors I am happy. 2 Years would be perfect. I'll easily get that in the rear now.
The thing I love most about the 911 is when trail braking you can control the rotation of the rear by increasing or decreasing pedal pressure. Once the rear is rotated, you can get off the brake pedal and onto the throttle so early.
I get why they kept going with rear mounted. I don't want any other car. (Maybe a McLaren 600LT and a SInger) But nothing else interests me.
Is there any other way to drive a 911? Yes we have a cool down lap every time. M3/M4 guys buckle rotors from not having a good enough cool down lap.I have tested quite a few rotor and pad setups. What I am saying is, the OEM setup is no good for heavy tracking. It was OEM rear pad and OEM setup that disintegrated on 3 x 20 min sessions. The guys following me said everytime I hit the brakes, there was a cloud of grey dusk pluming from the rear of the car.
(They could have told me earlier )I believe I am on a great setup now. Pedal feel is the best of any car i have ever driven. The ME20 upfront should last about 5-6 track days and the rears just with the lessor MX72+ should last a full year. I am fine with 3 sets of fronts in a year and one set of rear. If I can get a year from front rotors I am happy. 2 Years would be perfect. I'll easily get that in the rear now.
The thing I love most about the 911 is when trail braking you can control the rotation of the rear by increasing or decreasing pedal pressure. Once the rear is rotated, you can get off the brake pedal and onto the throttle so early.
I get why they kept going with rear mounted. I don't want any other car. (Maybe a McLaren 600LT and a SInger) But nothing else interests me.
10-16-2019, 12:59 AM
#37
Great write up. I have gone from Cup2's to TrofeoR to now AR-1 semi slicks, and shortly full slicks on track wheels.
The TrofeoR is the best all round tyre if you track. The Cup2 is a considerable improvement, however it does not have enough stiffness in the sidewall for heavy tracking. I split one. The TrofeoR was much better.
The AR-1's are great on the track, but suck on the street from dreadful road noise. Sounds like a 4 x 4 hum. So I need track wheels next.
I have Tractive suspension. It is epic. It delivers as promised. Even with my serious spring rates, it is still street compliant at the push of a button. very pleased with tractive.
The TrofeoR is the best all round tyre if you track. The Cup2 is a considerable improvement, however it does not have enough stiffness in the sidewall for heavy tracking. I split one. The TrofeoR was much better.
The AR-1's are great on the track, but suck on the street from dreadful road noise. Sounds like a 4 x 4 hum. So I need track wheels next.
I have Tractive suspension. It is epic. It delivers as promised. Even with my serious spring rates, it is still street compliant at the push of a button. very pleased with tractive.
I currently have DSC and love it. Would love to hear more about your experience with it.
Thanks for all the informative posts
10-16-2019, 11:30 AM
#38
Rennlist Member
^ 4 PT 0, has the Tractive system with your big springs reduced lap times? My tuner was adamant that a traditional coilover like KW would be faster. His take was the big advantage of Tractive was it's ability to control the engine mounts on the track.
I do like my DSC for the street ride. And the new calibration file settled the rear end down in high speed braking at the track.
I do like my DSC for the street ride. And the new calibration file settled the rear end down in high speed braking at the track.
10-16-2019, 06:51 PM
#39
Premium Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
I have driven a lot of cars on street and track, including cars with DSC controlling OEM PASM shocks and DSC controlling Tractive coilovers. My experience has been DSC controlling OEM PASM shocks with a good alignment is generally as fast on track as entry-level (say around the $3K range) mechanical coilovers with the mechanical dials adjusted well to suit the driving conditions. Some of the performance advantage on track is from stiffer spring rates that came on the coilover kits, which DSC makes up for by increasing damping force during moments of peak loading. This makes DSC a great value considering its price and ease of installation. And having DSC actively controlling the damping force of OEM shocks and dynamic engine mounts for varying driving situations including launch mode makes for a pretty awesome driving experience that many DSC users can attest to.
With DSC controlling Tractive coilovers paired with more track focused spring rates(such as 70/130, 100/150,120/180nm or something alongs these rates) it is as good as the upper tier consumer-level (in the $7K+ range) mechanical coilovers with the mechanical dials adjusted well to suit the driving conditions. In this level of comparaison, with the spring rates being comparable between active electronic damping and passive mechanical damping it then comes down to the damping force strategy itself. To be completely transparent, I worked as a race team manager in pro racing, I have witnessed both technologies run with 0.05 second of each other with equally prepared race cars running the same tire compound, tire size, ride height, alignment driven by comparable skill pro drivers in competition. The peak performance potential is near identical, that is when the passive mechanical dampers are adjusted well for conditions. Ina pro race event, it is common for each team car to have its own race engineer to interpret data and driver feedback and keep making changes up until qualifying time. The advantage of DSC in this environment or any environment is that the built-in active algorithm makes it plug & play since all the engineering is already written in. Bottomline is, on any passive mechanical adjustable damper the peak performance is only as good as the adjustment itself for the current driving conditions. Having active electronic adjustment with a wide range range eliminates the need for making changes for ever changing conditions. A perfect example is my 997 GT3 with DSC and Tractive on 120/180 springs, the car is as fast and composed as a Cup car on track, and the ride on street is better than a new Honda Accord.
Circling back to the first paragraph, regarding spring rates, in 2020, we plan on offering linear-rate stiffer spring kits for OEM shocks with matching DSC mapping to bridge the performance gap between OEM shocks and coilovers.
With DSC controlling Tractive coilovers paired with more track focused spring rates(such as 70/130, 100/150,120/180nm or something alongs these rates) it is as good as the upper tier consumer-level (in the $7K+ range) mechanical coilovers with the mechanical dials adjusted well to suit the driving conditions. In this level of comparaison, with the spring rates being comparable between active electronic damping and passive mechanical damping it then comes down to the damping force strategy itself. To be completely transparent, I worked as a race team manager in pro racing, I have witnessed both technologies run with 0.05 second of each other with equally prepared race cars running the same tire compound, tire size, ride height, alignment driven by comparable skill pro drivers in competition. The peak performance potential is near identical, that is when the passive mechanical dampers are adjusted well for conditions. Ina pro race event, it is common for each team car to have its own race engineer to interpret data and driver feedback and keep making changes up until qualifying time. The advantage of DSC in this environment or any environment is that the built-in active algorithm makes it plug & play since all the engineering is already written in. Bottomline is, on any passive mechanical adjustable damper the peak performance is only as good as the adjustment itself for the current driving conditions. Having active electronic adjustment with a wide range range eliminates the need for making changes for ever changing conditions. A perfect example is my 997 GT3 with DSC and Tractive on 120/180 springs, the car is as fast and composed as a Cup car on track, and the ride on street is better than a new Honda Accord.
Circling back to the first paragraph, regarding spring rates, in 2020, we plan on offering linear-rate stiffer spring kits for OEM shocks with matching DSC mapping to bridge the performance gap between OEM shocks and coilovers.
__________________
PCA National Instructor
TPC Racing stats:
2023 Porsche Sprint Challenge 992 Cup Am Champion
2023 Porsche Sprint Challenge GT4 Pro-Am Team Champion
2022 Porsche Sprint Challenge 992 Cup & 991 Cup Champion
2020 IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge 2nd Championship
2018 IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge 2nd Championship
2016 IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge Champion
2013 IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge Champion
2006 Rolex-24 @ Daytona GT Champion
2004 Grand-Am SGS Class Champion
PCA National Instructor
TPC Racing stats:
2023 Porsche Sprint Challenge 992 Cup Am Champion
2023 Porsche Sprint Challenge GT4 Pro-Am Team Champion
2022 Porsche Sprint Challenge 992 Cup & 991 Cup Champion
2020 IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge 2nd Championship
2018 IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge 2nd Championship
2016 IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge Champion
2013 IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge Champion
2006 Rolex-24 @ Daytona GT Champion
2004 Grand-Am SGS Class Champion
10-16-2019, 07:03 PM
#40
I have driven a lot of cars on street and track, including cars with DSC controlling OEM PASM shocks and DSC controlling Tractive coilovers. My experience has been DSC controlling OEM PASM shocks with a good alignment is generally as fast on track as entry-level (say around the $3K range) mechanical coilovers with the mechanical dials adjusted well to suit the driving conditions. Some of the performance advantage on track is from stiffer spring rates that came on the coilover kits, which DSC makes up for by increasing damping force during moments of peak loading. This makes DSC a great value considering its price and ease of installation. And having DSC actively controlling the damping force of OEM shocks and dynamic engine mounts for varying driving situations including launch mode makes for a pretty awesome driving experience that many DSC users can attest to.
With DSC controlling Tractive coilovers paired with more track focused spring rates(such as 70/130, 100/150,120/180nm or something alongs these rates) it is as good as the upper tier consumer-level (in the $7K+ range) mechanical coilovers with the mechanical dials adjusted well to suit the driving conditions. In this level of comparaison, with the spring rates being comparable between active electronic damping and passive mechanical damping it then comes down to the damping force strategy itself. To be completely transparent, I worked as a race team manager in pro racing, I have witnessed both technologies run with 0.05 second of each other with equally prepared race cars running the same tire compound, tire size, ride height, alignment driven by comparable skill pro drivers in competition. The peak performance potential is near identical, that is when the passive mechanical dampers are adjusted well for conditions. Ina pro race event, it is common for each team car to have its own race engineer to interpret data and driver feedback and keep making changes up until qualifying time. The advantage of DSC in this environment or any environment is that the built-in active algorithm makes it plug & play since all the engineering is already written in. Bottomline is, on any passive mechanical adjustable damper the peak performance is only as good as the adjustment itself for the current driving conditions. Having active electronic adjustment with a wide range range eliminates the need for making changes for ever changing conditions. A perfect example is my 997 GT3 with DSC and Tractive on 120/180 springs, the car is as fast and composed as a Cup car on track, and the ride on street is better than a new Honda Accord.
Circling back to the first paragraph, regarding spring rates, in 2020, we plan on offering linear-rate stiffer spring kits for OEM shocks with matching DSC mapping to bridge the performance gap between OEM shocks and coilovers.
With DSC controlling Tractive coilovers paired with more track focused spring rates(such as 70/130, 100/150,120/180nm or something alongs these rates) it is as good as the upper tier consumer-level (in the $7K+ range) mechanical coilovers with the mechanical dials adjusted well to suit the driving conditions. In this level of comparaison, with the spring rates being comparable between active electronic damping and passive mechanical damping it then comes down to the damping force strategy itself. To be completely transparent, I worked as a race team manager in pro racing, I have witnessed both technologies run with 0.05 second of each other with equally prepared race cars running the same tire compound, tire size, ride height, alignment driven by comparable skill pro drivers in competition. The peak performance potential is near identical, that is when the passive mechanical dampers are adjusted well for conditions. Ina pro race event, it is common for each team car to have its own race engineer to interpret data and driver feedback and keep making changes up until qualifying time. The advantage of DSC in this environment or any environment is that the built-in active algorithm makes it plug & play since all the engineering is already written in. Bottomline is, on any passive mechanical adjustable damper the peak performance is only as good as the adjustment itself for the current driving conditions. Having active electronic adjustment with a wide range range eliminates the need for making changes for ever changing conditions. A perfect example is my 997 GT3 with DSC and Tractive on 120/180 springs, the car is as fast and composed as a Cup car on track, and the ride on street is better than a new Honda Accord.
Circling back to the first paragraph, regarding spring rates, in 2020, we plan on offering linear-rate stiffer spring kits for OEM shocks with matching DSC mapping to bridge the performance gap between OEM shocks and coilovers.
Your DSC was truly the best mod I did on my GTS. I am tracking my car more than I am driving it and I am hoping that the Tractive coilovers will even make the experience even better. It sounds like it will definitely take my car to the next level. Dealing with your company on the DSC was a real pleasure. Thank you
The following users liked this post:
Tom@TPC Racing (10-17-2019)
10-16-2019, 07:44 PM
#41
Rennlist Member
Awesome! I'll be very interested in this setup when it becomes available, especially if the springs also have a slight drop to match GT3 ride height.
10-16-2019, 07:52 PM
#42
10-16-2019, 08:14 PM
#43
Premium Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Hi Lockie, Yes the ride height can be lowered. For the suspension geometry to be in the sweet spot on a GTS we recommend factory GT3 ride height, which is approximately 20mm lower. The Tractive coilover can go lower but the suspension geometry will not be happy.
10-16-2019, 08:22 PM
#44
Rennlist Member
Tom-TPC, "To be completely transparent, I worked as a race team manager in pro racing, I have witnessed both technologies run with 0.05 second of each other with equally prepared race cars running the same tire compound, tire size, ride height, alignment driven by comparable skill pro drivers in competition. The peak performance potential is near identical, that is when the passive mechanical dampers are adjusted well for conditions."
This is exactly what my tuner observed (also preps pro race cars), and probably why he likes mechanical coilovers - he gets to tune and not just "install".
I'm not convinced at my level (DE red )I would see any performance gain worth $10k installed and aligned. Would love to hear amateur track feedback! That said, Tractives would be my first option when the stock dampers fail.
This is exactly what my tuner observed (also preps pro race cars), and probably why he likes mechanical coilovers - he gets to tune and not just "install".
I'm not convinced at my level (DE red )I would see any performance gain worth $10k installed and aligned. Would love to hear amateur track feedback! That said, Tractives would be my first option when the stock dampers fail.
10-17-2019, 01:53 AM
#45
