Carlos, care to place a wager?

Von Saurma vs. Rohrl in the GT3?

My prediction is that Rohrl will hit 7:50 or below.

I think you underestimate the importance of balance and linear throttle response. Manthey Racing says that even the stock suspension settings in the GT3 make it a much more agile car on the track than a GT2... food for thought. If anyone knows the Ring, it's Manthey.

 

I just noticed something, all three who think the GT3 can break the laws of physics have a '04 GT3... that explains it! Oh well, I tried reasoning ir out but you guys are blinded with passion and excitement for the new GT3

We will have to wait to see, if they actually publish factory times for the MkII GT3... they only do that went they like what they get. And the new GT3 has been around for a while now here in europe already.

I don' think so, If youn look at my sig, I drive a GSX-R1000 with 160HP and 180Kg curb weight, that will teach you about how important is throttle response coming out of a curve better than any car!

 

Yes, but a Mk. 2 GT3 laps the 'Ring faster than a GSX-R1000.

Here in the canyons, Watt and I love to chase these super sportbikers who think they are so fast around corners. They seem to get a little scared when my bumper is within a foot of their rear tire going around a turn. A few weeks ago, Watt left a pack of R1's in the dust with his GT2 going up a canyon road. I didn't know bikes corner so slowly. Oh well, must have to do with having only 2 tires.

BTW, I was mulling buying a GT2 a la Watt, but the pros keep telling me that the GT3 is better for my kind of driving.

Besides, once I mod my GT3, this will all be a moot point, and I will have a GT2 killer.

 

Oh yeah, by the way, I don't think Rohrl has done a timed lap in a Mk. 2 GT3 yet.

If he had, the Ringers would have heard something by now.

 

Not quite the problem is that its much much harder to drive a GSX-R1000 really fast than a GT3 or any car for that matter, but I can guarantee you, if "Ring King" Helmut Daehne would give it a try in the '03 gixxer it would be faster, he did a 7:49 back in pre-historic 1994 with just a RC-30 and a guy did 7:55 back in '98 in a now old GSX-750 model of the time. Imagin the freakin 1000 Gixxer

Quote:

Here in the canyons, Watt and I love to chase these super sportbikers who think they are so fast around corners. They seem to get a little scared when my bumper is within a foot of their rear tire going around a turn. A few weeks ago, Watt left a pack of R1's in the dust with his GT2 going up a canyon road. I didn't know bikes corner so slowly. Oh well, must have to do with having only 2 tires.

huh? sorry but sportbikers already know that a car is faster around corners than a bike you are not giving them a lesson . It just depends on what turf you are in, twisty roads are car territory due to the higher curve speed but open roads are bike territory. My gixxer will do 60 to 120mph in what your GT3 would need just to do 0-60mph But personally I like the twisties car or bike but there is nothing like opening the throttle on an 1000cc inline four coming out of the tight bends of a canyon road and then controlling the braking to lean the bike into the next corner again...

I wouldn't recommend sticking your bumper to a bike into a corner cause that very dangerous for the biker and you may have a fatal consecuence one day. I know if you did that to me I may have more than words for you afterwards. I have raced bikes in my 996 many times and you have to be careful with the distances and give them some space into the turn. Best place to pass a bike is not coming out of the curve but rather beating them in the braking into the corner since the bike has to carry less entry speed into the corner and the car can delay braking much more, so its easy to pass them there.

BTW the bikes wouldn't seem to corner so slowly if you were driving one, you must try it (especially a '03 GSX-R1000 which is the fastest bike out there and they are much closer to racebikes than streetcars are to racecars), there is nothing like it, not even a car, and I drive both. Its just much more wild and uncontrolable with many more sensations and things to manage and control, but like I said earlier it takes much more skill and its much harder to drive a bike fast than a car, so in the streets, bikes have to leave a "safety cushion" in their speeds otherwise a small error and you are down without any protection, but in a car you can drive it much more to the limit, with less needed skill, and its more forgiving... due to the 4 wheels

Anyway since this is not the correct thread, if you would like to find out more about the differences b/w sportbikes and sportcars check out this thread https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...threadid=23366
And these comparo's:
http://www.pro-libertate.com/gsxr100.../bike-car.html
http://solo2.abac.com/avigdor/mags/c...1996/Page.html
http://solo2.abac.com/avigdor/mags/r...2000/Page.html

 

I only get on their rear because these ******* sportbikers (aka squids) think they can just cut in front me when I am smoking down a canyon.

If you think you are hot **** and want to cut me off on a 2-lane road, you'd better know what the **** you are doing. If you can smoke me, then I'll give you the respect. If not, then keep pushing harder and hope you don't get highsided off the bike.

Don't get me wrong some of my best friends are sportbikers, but they aren't idiots like some of these morons riding the canyons.

If bikers knew they are slower around corners, why do they bother to cut right in front of me? And then you wonder why bikers get killed in accidents?

BTW, according to various bike magazines, the GSX-R750 actually laps faster than a 1000. It is a better BALANCED bike, and not substantially slower in a straight line than the 1000. The RC30 is also a true race bike, and I will bet you 100 euros that a properly ridden one will leave your GSX-R in the dust around the Ring.

In addition, a properly tuned GT3 or GT2 will beat almost any street bike around the Ring, and you know it.

Oh yeah, one last food for thought, did you know an F1 car is much faster around almost any road course than a MotoGP bike, even ridden by Valentino Rossi?

There is an inherent advantage to 4 wheels, baby!

 

BTW, the sensation of speed is greater on a bike than a car.

And though you drive both, a C4 is no GT2 or GT3.

You'd be surprised at how close a GT3 is to the Cup car.

And by the way, your GSX-R1000 is not all that similar to a race bike. Of course they will be more similar than a passenger car to an F1 car, look at the number of moving parts on a bike vs. a car!

 

SR-71 would leave all of you in the dust!

 

Uh, it's called downforce...

 

woooooo there, getting upset? there are idiots everytwhere I find them in cars and in bikes indifferently, giving everybody a bad name.

Quote:

BTW, according to various bike magazines, the GSX-R750 actually laps faster than a 1000. It is a better BALANCED bike, and not substantially slower in a straight line than the 1000. The RC30 is also a true race bike, and I will bet you 100 euros that a properly ridden one will leave your GSX-R in the dust around the Ring.

that was good for a laugh, don't want to be hard on you there but you really have no clue about sportbikes do you. You are completely wrong in both statements, believe me, I'm into those things. Wanna read the last masterbike? or better yet, the last comparo of the 03' 1000 GSX-R1000 and the GSX-750 and Busa in precisely the Nurburgring track! Guess who dominated. The 750 more balanced...
And about the RC-30, you should see what the gixxer did to the current version of the RC-30, the VTR-1000SP2, in the masterbike around the track with all 14 pilots

Quote:

In addition, a properly tuned GT3 or GT2 will beat almost any street bike around the Ring, and you know it.

And a properly tunned bike?

Quote:

Oh yeah, one last food for thought, did you know an F1 car is much faster around almost any road course than a MotoGP bike, even ridden by Valentino Rossi?

Completely true there I've read a lot about the differnces in MotoGP and F1 vehicle characteristics (aerodinamics, power delivery, average % usage of engine output, tires and available traction, engine design differences, flat-cornering vs bike cornering, software and electronics development, etc) but the problem is both are portotype vehicles that have nothing to do with street vehicles and their characteristics are not valid for comparison b/w street vehicles.

But here is a little more food for though, the GSX-R1000 is much closer to a MotoGP bike than a GT2/GT3 (or any car for that matter) is to a F1. A Gixxer 1000 with a few mods will lap similar to a '98 500cc WC bike (what was the MotoGP until 2 years ago). aND FYI a 1000cc inline-4 or V2 sportbike, not only the Gixxer, is much closer to a race bike (SBK)than a GT3 (Cup-RS). Ask around.

Quote:

There is an inherent advantage to 4 wheels, baby!

Advantage? in what? you are comparing apples to oranges really, you drive a bike for completely diffrent reasons and driving sensations than a car. Do you drive through the cayons to be faster to the diffrent vehicle in front of you or for the driving experience? Its a tottally diffenrent driving experience, like I said you should try it, but first in the rear seat of one of those biker friends through those cayons, an R1 or GSX-R1000 is not for beginners.

 

Yes , you are right about F1 cars and their aero engineering. But a car doesn't carry speed through corners just because of downforce. It also has to do with more grip from more rubber contacting the ground.

 

From Nordschliefe.no:

20,832 km 7,55 = 157 km/h GSX-R 750 -98, Felix.
20,832 km 7,55 = 157 km/h Kawasaki ZX-9R, Oliver Thierold, 2000.
20,832 km 7,58,23= 157 km/h Suzuki GSX-R 1000, Stein Rømmerud, BIKE, Norway, 2001.

Perhaps your '03 is faster. But by how much???

You are right, there are different reasons to ride a bike vs. driving a car. I prefer the latter because if another vehicle or object happens to collide into me, I have more of a chance of survival in a car than on a bike.

Different strokes for different folks!

BTW to get back on topic for a second, to address a previous point in one of your posts, your analysis of von Saurma's time vs. Rohrl's time is flawed. The difference between a BTG and a full lap is worth more than 1 second, it's more like 3 seconds or so.

How do I figure? Well even at 160mph, you are talking about 70 meters per second, 200m would then equate to about 3 seconds.

The difference is actually more like 7-10 seconds I would think, since you are accelerating into the straightaway.

 

The GSX-R1000 with BT12SS street tires of course should be a bit faster than GT2 lap times but not by too much. On hockenhein for example the Gixxer does 1:10 while the GT2 does 1:12.6 and the Mk2 GT3 does 1:13.2.

In Jerez for example, in the 20003 MASTERBIKE, the GSX-R1000 laped 2.5 secs faster per lap than the GSX-R750, if Jerez circuit was as long as the ring that would equal 11.4 secs difference per lap, so using that GSX-R750 ring lap time, the 1000 would lap the ring in 7:43.5. But the difference in the ring would even be greater than that 11.4 secs because the ring is a faster track than Jerez and the big HP advantage of the 1000 would broaden that gap even further in tracks such as the ring compared to Jerez. So using the 750's lap time of 7:55, the 1000 would be less than 7:43.

Yes , the bikes are very dangerous, I agree, I've lost many people to bikes. But I just can't make myself give it up.


You are right about the 3 secs there, I didn't bother to caculate it and used the average speeds for an aproximate, but its not 7-10 secs either since those 200ms are taken from the straight finish line at which a GT2 does about 200km/h which yield 4 secs. I guess we will really know when Rohl decides to do an official lap time with the new GT3, I for one I'm waiting for it, to shut up all that M3 CLS being faster than the GT3 stuff.


An interesting side note on the F1 vs MotoGP, to give an idea of the adavantages in acceleretion of one and the curve speed of the other: In Mugello, the Ferrari F1 comes out of the curve that leads to the 1.1 km straigh at TWICE the speed of the Ducati MotoGP bike, but by the end of the straight, the Ducati will have reached 2-3 more Km/h top speed than the Ferrari (I think it was 328km/h) before the braking. But the advantage in curve speed and braking of the F1, due especially to its aerodinamics - its drag Cd is equates to the Cd of a bus or truck due to all the downforce, is too much for the bike to make up in just acceleration, and the F1 will lap a few seconds faster per lap. But street bikes will lap much closer to MotoGp bikes than street cars to F1, so F1 is not valid for comparison b/w street cars and bikes, thats why the table turns in the street.

 

OK, couple of points:

- Difference between BTG and full lap:
The difference between BTG and a full lap is about 25 seconds. The only reason some people take BTG is because they go out during so called "tourist hours" and then you can't drive the full lap because of the entry and exit on Doettinger Hoehe.
Neither von Saurma's nor and Roehrl's times are BTG, they both drive the full lap. Why are von Saurma's laps allegedly only 20.6 km as opposed to 20.8? Don't know, it might depend on how you measure it. But believe me,
they both drive and time the same lap.
The old Ring was 22.8 km long, but that was before they built the Grand-Prix circuit. The old Start/Finish is now part of the Grand-Prix circuit, hence the 2km difference.

- Von Saurma times vs. Roehrl times:
It is not useful to compare the two. Von Saurma does his lap times by going out with an unknown car, doing one intro lap to assess the car's handling and the track condition, then a flying (timed) lap and then an exit lap. That's it. His objective is not to achieve the fastest possible time in a car, but to obtain comparable times between different cars.
When Roehrl does his timed laps, he already knows the car extremely well (having been involved in the development and testing) and also has a couple of tries. He would also try to find a day with favourable conditions.
Finally, von Saurma is the first to admit that Roehl is the faster driver.

- Car vs. motorbike:
I have explained this in detail in an earlier article. Carlos is absolutely right about the ground effect giving F1 cars the edge over MotoGp bikes.

Interesting trivia: Von Saurma's favourite car on the Ring is the 964RS.

Cheers,
Uwe

 

I've copied this from another reply I made on the General Discussion Forum and would like to share some alternative thoughts on this subject if anyone is interested in an insiders perspective.. (i.e. someone that's owned both cars)

I read this thread and another on Rennlist and laughed. It's an example of how a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing. I own an M3 CSL but I've owned performance BMWs and Porsches in parellel for more than a decade. I'm a member of Porsche Club GB and have owned 928 GT, 968 CS, 993 RS, 996 C2, 996 GT3, Boxster S and have raced a 964 RS. I know how good Porsches can be but also how good a BMW can be. I've no axe to grind since I love both brands and can see each for what it is.

A couple of points just to clear things up. Firstly the M3 CSL weighs less than both 996 GT-3 (series 1) and series 2. Porsche publicises unladed DIN weight whereas BMW publicises EU1 weights (including driver, luggage and 90% tank of petrol). When you look at the unladed dry weight (i.e. no fuel, driver or luggage) you find that the GT-3 (series2) weighs 1380kg whereas the M3 CSL weighs 1310kg. This means that the power/weight of both cars are 257.7bhp/ton (911 GT3) and 256.3bhp/ton (M3 CSL), so you can see why their lap times around a circuit might be similar. So the M3 CSL weighs just a little more than a Boxster, not a bad achievement.

On the topic of manual vs automatic gearboxes - the CSL has a sequential manual gearbox not an automatic. I have an automatic gearbox so I know the difference. Whilst there is an assisted function that you can select to change gears at a certain rev point, most people with SMG do not use this much apart from in city traffic. In the sequential mode (default) the driver is in complete control of when the gearbox selects a gear apart from two conditions; 1) it won't let you blow the engine up by overevving and 2) it won't let you drive in too high a gear at low revs to avoid labouring the engine. Both of these seem reasonable to me and do not intefere in any way with how you might drive in a manual gearbox car. So auto it is not. Also the SMG box in the M3 is twice as fast as that used in a Ferrari 360 and in turn half as fast as those used in a DTM Touring Car. So it's quick and you really wouldn't want for a quicker change.

Thirdly on the topic of tyres, the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup is far from being the best R-spec tyre on the market. In a test last week by EVO mag (to be published in December) they compared the Cup tyres against Continental ContiSport Tyres and found a difference of 2.2 seconds around a twisty 2 mile circuit, this is still 5 seconds faster than a regular M3 so the tyres are not the only factor in the improved performance. The Contis were also a lot nicer to drive on than the Cups and easier to balance near the limit of grip. At the Nurburging where a fast lap is more about confidence than outright grip I would estimate the CSL on ContiSports would lap at around the 8 minute mark.

But that brings me to the next point the GT-3 doesn't run on ordinary road tyres either. Have you seen them? They're nothing like the same tyres as fitted to the Carrera 2/4 and look semi slick for the the outer third of the tread pattern. They're also softer than a regular Pilot Sport 2 tyre. The other factor to bear in mind when considering comparing like-for-like is how do you take account for Porsche's decision to increase the tyre width to 295 on the GT-3? So let's just see, Porsche increased the tyre width and fitted softer more performance oriented tyres on the GT-3. Is that fair? Does anyone care? The point is that you can't compare like for like. Each manufacturer designed their cars around a certain specification and made appropriate compromises. With the GT3 RS and Ferraris 360 Challenge Stradale both being delivered on P Zero Corsas nobody should really be in a position to throw mud around. None of these tyres are as good as Goodyear's GS-D3 tyre in the wet, but very few of us would be commuting in our trackday cars in day-to-day conditions anyway.

The Cup tyres on the CSL are actually fine on wet roads, the problem is the lack of tread depth which is 5mm compared to the usual 8mm and tapered to 2.5 mm at the edge. Ok in wet or damp conditions but not much fun in puddles. The CSL was tested on a damp track by Top Gear magazine in the UK and was only 0.8 seconds slower than a GT-3 tested on the same track in similar conditions, so the Cup tyres are not as compromised as you might have heard.

I'm currently looking for a GT3-RS after putting my name on the list but not making the allocation. This would be in 'addition' to my CSL as both cars are quite excellent and deserve to be on the wish list of any track enthusiast.

To be a Porsche enthusiast you don't need to dislike other brands, there are a lot of nice cars out there and if you're lucky enough it's a real privellege to own more than one.