Just watched the British Car show TopGear. they had a 360 Challenge Stradale up against a GT3RS.

They did the lap of their circuit in identical times.

Pretty impressive considering the £50k price difference (£80k for Porker, £130k for Ferrari).

Vids will probably be hosted on www.sleepy-fish.com over the next few days.

 

and that the 360CS had 45HP more HP and less weight than the GT3RS and still did the same time which handles better then?

 

Carlos - I think Ferarri overstates their HP and Porsche does the opposite. The Stradale has a built in advantage since it comes on Pirelli Corsa R compound tires which have superior traction to the Michelin Pilots on the GT3. On the same tires the GT3 would have been even better.

 

http://www.sleepy-fish.com/sleepy/To...s_360CS_hi.wmv

 

I have little confidence in that show given their arbitrary test times. When thye originaly tested the GT3 it was at 1:27.x. They were ravign about it being faster than many more expensive and higher horsepower cars in the DRY. I just watched a very recent episode where tehy tested the mercedes SLR and not only did it surpass every car on their "list" but all the cars the gt3 supposedly beat somehow magically moved up as much as 4 seconds on their list. I realy don't understand their test method and can only assume its complete bull****. Honestly i don't believe that "dry vs. dry" the gt3 could have beaten half the stuff they showed it beating according to their test list but the way some of the cars just "magically" moved up the list I really don't trust anything I see from them anymore.


P.S. All the American car mags that cared to compare the GT3 vs the 360cs found that the "regular" GT3 was able to match the 360 CS in any test they could throw at it. Other than it's orgamisic sounding exhaust the 360 cs apparently offers little beyond the GT3 for the double the price tag.

It's also worth pointing out that all dynos of the GT3 seem to suggest under-rating while dynos of any 360 or 360 cs seem to suggest over-rating.

 

GT3 was wet test at 1:27 or so, the RS came in 122.3, I didn't see changed times on Top Gear, I do not understand your reasoning...

 

There's been a lot of posts on the British forums stating everyone's suspicion over the TopGear times.

Conclusion - its entertainment, not a definite answer to the petrolheads' wishes.

In the clip (link a few posts back) you see Jeremy Clarkson (an ok driver, but great journalist) overtaking the Stradale in the RS... the Stradale was driven by the Ferrari test-driver!!!

Overall... we're all a bit biased on Rennlist, but unless you're a millionaire, the RS is a much better car.

The Ferrari may offer the V8 'F1 style' sound, but its £50k more and servicing/repairs/brakes will cost a HUGE amount more.

Porsche...

 

Pity we can't get the RS here in the US! I'll just have to try to live with what you folks feel is "second best."

 

My opinion is that it would be quite easy to bring a GT3RS into the USA.

Stephen

 

Agreed.

Top Gear has become pretty bad. Most of the original people on Top Gear have moved to the competition and now appear in Fifth Gear. Fifth Gears seems to be everything that Top Gear once was.

Stephen

 

Yea but the 1:27.2 was in the WET. And the murcielago was at 129.0 dry (way too slow for that car). Check the new video and the murcielago has magicaly moved up the list to 1:23.7. I don't know what time any car should run on their crazy circuit but none of the times make sense. A GT3 beating a 911 turbo by 4 seconds IN THE WET? That doesn't make any sense. The GT3 and turbo are closer in times than that on the nurburgring let alone a tiny little track like that.

The GT3 RS turning a lap 5 seconds faster than in the dry than the GT3 isn't all that hard to believe but judging by every other comparison out there the "regular" was the same if not just a hair quicker than the CS so I would expect the RS to be slightly faster (Car and Driver and Motortrend both had it just a fraction of a second quicker than CS).

Also why don't any of the mainstream automotive media EVER mention that the GT3 appears to be underrated and the CS overrated. They always mention "the lighter more powerful" CS. Even if they're not doing dyno tests hasn't anyone caught on yet. If the Ferrari were actually lighter AND more powerful it ought to easily out accelerate the GT3!

new video:
murcielago 1:23.7
Zonda 1:23.8
Konneseg 1:23.9
Noble M12 1:25
Gallardo 1:25.8

Old:
GT3 (W) 1:27.2
911 Turbo (W) 1:31
Murcielago 1:29

Atleast they got the comaprison right the RS versus the CS.


While on the topic of this show is it true that the GT3 engine alone costs 40,000 pounds as they said in the GT3 test? 40,000.00 GBP = 71,601.24 USD. That doesn't seem right. Where do they get the money to build the rest of the car?

 

The 360CS and GT3RS test looked to be a good one. Same dry track and clearly the Stig was working hard. One thing is for sure the GT3RS handles better at speed. Watching the video you can see the 360 was very twitchy and the GT3RS was smooth and planted. Anyone who says the 911 doesn't handle as well as a mid engine doesn't have a clue. The GT3 is one of the best handling cars in the world.

 

Yes it looked to be a good one but unless all the other comparison testst that have been done were flawed this test was either flawed or it suggests that the GT3 RS is no faster than the GT3. That doesn't make sense either.

 

Don't feel bad -- all the magazine writers picked the CS over the GT3 as the car they would rather drive on a regular basis, despite the numbers (performance and money). Never having driven the RS, I can't make my own evaluation with regard to that model. On the other hand, I have driven the CS back to back with the GT3, and the CS offers a far more exciting, visceral and race car like driving experience given my mix of driving conditions and my lack of talent. Both cars are great -- I'd go for one of each.

 

At this top gear track I don't think the standard GT3 did 1:22.3. It was tested in wet. Top gear should use ONLY dry track numbers for their top speed board. It would be very hard to compare all these cars in the same way. Also this is just one track and may suit some cars more than others. Its a fun show and you do get a ruff estimate of the performance between all these cars. Could some cars do better on another day? Maybe maybe not. IMHO the Nring is the ultimate bench mark in my book.