US RS weight savings
11-29-2006, 11:57 PM
#16
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by NJ-GT
- Rollbar Weight on the 996 GT3 RS: 37 lbs (just the rollbar, not the full cage). The 997 RS version has extra bars. I would expect it to be at 40-42 lbs.
- US cars have extra weight due to bumper hardware reinforcement. On the 996, that was 18 lbs more compared to the ROW 996. This is necessary to pass the 5 mph DOT crash test.
- I don't have the exact weight for the CGT style CF seats for the 997 GT3. However, the Carbon 996 Recaro seats weighs 25 lbs, and the popular fiberglass one weighs 28 lbs. I would not expect the 997 GT3 CF seats to be lighter than 22 lbs. These weights include the rails, brackets, shells and cushions.
- The 996 Carrera sunroof weighs 23 lbs. It's actually one of the lightest sunroof available on a street car. The 997 sunroof looks identical to the 996 one.
- PCCB save 37 lbs on the 997 GT3 and 42 lbs on the 996 GT3.
- A/C delete saves 45 lbs
The only problem I see so far, is that every European magazine has published weights not closed to the 3075/3031 lbs for the 997 GT3/GT3 RS. The increase on real weight (and not published/marketing weight) is what makes the 997 with an extra 35Hp, shorter gears, and r-comp tires not to be able to accelerate as strong as it should compared to the 996 GT3 Mk2.
Indeed, the 20Hp increase on the Mk2 GT3 from the Mk1 GT3, made the car around 0.6-0.8 secs faster on the 1/4 mile. There was a noticeable increase on acceleration.
- US cars have extra weight due to bumper hardware reinforcement. On the 996, that was 18 lbs more compared to the ROW 996. This is necessary to pass the 5 mph DOT crash test.
- I don't have the exact weight for the CGT style CF seats for the 997 GT3. However, the Carbon 996 Recaro seats weighs 25 lbs, and the popular fiberglass one weighs 28 lbs. I would not expect the 997 GT3 CF seats to be lighter than 22 lbs. These weights include the rails, brackets, shells and cushions.
- The 996 Carrera sunroof weighs 23 lbs. It's actually one of the lightest sunroof available on a street car. The 997 sunroof looks identical to the 996 one.
- PCCB save 37 lbs on the 997 GT3 and 42 lbs on the 996 GT3.
- A/C delete saves 45 lbs
The only problem I see so far, is that every European magazine has published weights not closed to the 3075/3031 lbs for the 997 GT3/GT3 RS. The increase on real weight (and not published/marketing weight) is what makes the 997 with an extra 35Hp, shorter gears, and r-comp tires not to be able to accelerate as strong as it should compared to the 996 GT3 Mk2.
Indeed, the 20Hp increase on the Mk2 GT3 from the Mk1 GT3, made the car around 0.6-0.8 secs faster on the 1/4 mile. There was a noticeable increase on acceleration.
I do believe the 997 GT3 is a much better street/track car than the 996 GT3.
However, for someone like you that replaces almost all the OEM parts with Motorsports and aftermarket stuff, then your logic applies as you are only using the "canvas" and getting rid of the "painting".
Therefore, the 997 GT3"RAD" would not be very different than the 996GT3"RAD" as most likely you will use similar aftermarket components and modifications.
11-30-2006, 01:30 AM
#17
I have a Porsche Techequipe rollbar and when we weighed it for shipping, it was 27lbs. The skid that was made to attach it to weighed as much as the rollbar weighed.
If you are whining about weight, the only way to order one is with PCCBs and A/C delete. Does it really matter that much, no.
One major factor people aren't talking about is aerdynamics of the GT3 versus the GT3 RS. I don't know if people are aware of this, but both cars have the same drivetrains (engines and transmissions). The RS does have a single mass flywheel, but no increase in power. For a very small weight difference Porsche claims the RS is .1 sec faster from 0 to 100 kph, 160 kph and a full KM. Keep in mind that Porsche is always conservative in their posted figures.
It is physically impossible for an RS to be as fast accelerating at higher speeds as a regular GT3. Why? 2 reasons: the RS has a high coefficient of drag and the RS has a larger frontal area. The RS has a Cd of .30 versus the regular GT3's .29 or roughly 3.5% worse. The is due to the wider rear fenders and bigger wing. The frontal area of an RS is 2.04 M-squared versus the regular GT3's 2.00 M-squared or 2% larger. Again due to the wider rear fenders and larger wing. This results in the RS have a total aerodynamic efficiency (Cd x A) of .61 versus the regular GT3's .58 or over 5% worse. Considing that weight stays linear with acceleration, but aerodynamic forces increase at a cubed rate; it is pretty obvious that a 50 lb difference is irrelevent compared to the increase in drag above 150 mph.
Although Porsche quotes 21.0 secs for a regular GT3 and 20.9 secs for an RS to run a KM, I am sure both will do far better in real road tests. It is unquestionable that due to the aerdynamic forces between the 2 that the regular GT3 will be faster at the end of that KM. Did anybody else figure this out?
If you are whining about weight, the only way to order one is with PCCBs and A/C delete. Does it really matter that much, no.
One major factor people aren't talking about is aerdynamics of the GT3 versus the GT3 RS. I don't know if people are aware of this, but both cars have the same drivetrains (engines and transmissions). The RS does have a single mass flywheel, but no increase in power. For a very small weight difference Porsche claims the RS is .1 sec faster from 0 to 100 kph, 160 kph and a full KM. Keep in mind that Porsche is always conservative in their posted figures.
It is physically impossible for an RS to be as fast accelerating at higher speeds as a regular GT3. Why? 2 reasons: the RS has a high coefficient of drag and the RS has a larger frontal area. The RS has a Cd of .30 versus the regular GT3's .29 or roughly 3.5% worse. The is due to the wider rear fenders and bigger wing. The frontal area of an RS is 2.04 M-squared versus the regular GT3's 2.00 M-squared or 2% larger. Again due to the wider rear fenders and larger wing. This results in the RS have a total aerodynamic efficiency (Cd x A) of .61 versus the regular GT3's .58 or over 5% worse. Considing that weight stays linear with acceleration, but aerodynamic forces increase at a cubed rate; it is pretty obvious that a 50 lb difference is irrelevent compared to the increase in drag above 150 mph.
Although Porsche quotes 21.0 secs for a regular GT3 and 20.9 secs for an RS to run a KM, I am sure both will do far better in real road tests. It is unquestionable that due to the aerdynamic forces between the 2 that the regular GT3 will be faster at the end of that KM. Did anybody else figure this out?
11-30-2006, 02:39 AM
#18
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by 02 Carrera
I have a Porsche Techequipe rollbar and when we weighed it for shipping, it was 27lbs. The skid that was made to attach it to weighed as much as the rollbar weighed.
If you are whining about weight, the only way to order one is with PCCBs and A/C delete. Does it really matter that much, no.
One major factor people aren't talking about is aerdynamics of the GT3 versus the GT3 RS. I don't know if people are aware of this, but both cars have the same drivetrains (engines and transmissions). The RS does have a single mass flywheel, but no increase in power. For a very small weight difference Porsche claims the RS is .1 sec faster from 0 to 100 kph, 160 kph and a full KM. Keep in mind that Porsche is always conservative in their posted figures.
It is physically impossible for an RS to be as fast accelerating at higher speeds as a regular GT3. Why? 2 reasons: the RS has a high coefficient of drag and the RS has a larger frontal area. The RS has a Cd of .30 versus the regular GT3's .29 or roughly 3.5% worse. The is due to the wider rear fenders and bigger wing. The frontal area of an RS is 2.04 M-squared versus the regular GT3's 2.00 M-squared or 2% larger. Again due to the wider rear fenders and larger wing. This results in the RS have a total aerodynamic efficiency (Cd x A) of .61 versus the regular GT3's .58 or over 5% worse. Considing that weight stays linear with acceleration, but aerodynamic forces increase at a cubed rate; it is pretty obvious that a 50 lb difference is irrelevent compared to the increase in drag above 150 mph.
Although Porsche quotes 21.0 secs for a regular GT3 and 20.9 secs for an RS to run a KM, I am sure both will do far better in real road tests. It is unquestionable that due to the aerdynamic forces between the 2 that the regular GT3 will be faster at the end of that KM. Did anybody else figure this out?
If you are whining about weight, the only way to order one is with PCCBs and A/C delete. Does it really matter that much, no.
One major factor people aren't talking about is aerdynamics of the GT3 versus the GT3 RS. I don't know if people are aware of this, but both cars have the same drivetrains (engines and transmissions). The RS does have a single mass flywheel, but no increase in power. For a very small weight difference Porsche claims the RS is .1 sec faster from 0 to 100 kph, 160 kph and a full KM. Keep in mind that Porsche is always conservative in their posted figures.
It is physically impossible for an RS to be as fast accelerating at higher speeds as a regular GT3. Why? 2 reasons: the RS has a high coefficient of drag and the RS has a larger frontal area. The RS has a Cd of .30 versus the regular GT3's .29 or roughly 3.5% worse. The is due to the wider rear fenders and bigger wing. The frontal area of an RS is 2.04 M-squared versus the regular GT3's 2.00 M-squared or 2% larger. Again due to the wider rear fenders and larger wing. This results in the RS have a total aerodynamic efficiency (Cd x A) of .61 versus the regular GT3's .58 or over 5% worse. Considing that weight stays linear with acceleration, but aerodynamic forces increase at a cubed rate; it is pretty obvious that a 50 lb difference is irrelevent compared to the increase in drag above 150 mph.
Although Porsche quotes 21.0 secs for a regular GT3 and 20.9 secs for an RS to run a KM, I am sure both will do far better in real road tests. It is unquestionable that due to the aerdynamic forces between the 2 that the regular GT3 will be faster at the end of that KM. Did anybody else figure this out?
However, the RS should go through turns faster.
11-30-2006, 02:45 AM
#19
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by cgomez
Number specs don't really matter that much at the marginal differences being discussed. Other things, like setup, geometry, NVH, etc. are more important in this case. You could say the same thing of 996 vs 997 (regular Carrrera) in which the 997 is slightly heavier but the real outcome is that is a much better car.
I do believe the 997 GT3 is a much better street/track car than the 996 GT3.
However, for someone like you that replaces almost all the OEM parts with Motorsports and aftermarket stuff, then your logic applies as you are only using the "canvas" and getting rid of the "painting".
Therefore, the 997 GT3"RAD" would not be very different than the 996GT3"RAD" as most likely you will use similar aftermarket components and modifications.
I do believe the 997 GT3 is a much better street/track car than the 996 GT3.
However, for someone like you that replaces almost all the OEM parts with Motorsports and aftermarket stuff, then your logic applies as you are only using the "canvas" and getting rid of the "painting".
Therefore, the 997 GT3"RAD" would not be very different than the 996GT3"RAD" as most likely you will use similar aftermarket components and modifications.
By the way, Santa has not confirmed but I've been a good kid this year. Traqmate and ChaseCam for next season.
Ask Santa for a 997 GT3 and get rid off that poseur 997S.
