Would you buy a Cayman if it had the GT3 running gear?
12-13-2007, 03:06 AM
#32
GT3 player par excellence
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I am a fan of mid-engine cars, and have a question for this forum.
If Porsche produced a Cayman with engine and gearbox derived from the GT3, would you have bought that instead of the 911 GT3?
Let's say they cost the same and have the same horsepower to weight ratio.
If so, why?
If not, why?
If Porsche produced a Cayman with engine and gearbox derived from the GT3, would you have bought that instead of the 911 GT3?
Let's say they cost the same and have the same horsepower to weight ratio.
If so, why?
If not, why?
i be first in line. cayman is a far better chassis than any 911.
willing to pay up to 150k USD for one with no options.
but in addition to the engine/gearbox, i would like to see a REAL rear suspension and LSD on the chassis.
12-13-2007, 03:08 AM
#33
GT3 player par excellence
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
If you said, a Cayman S with the GT3 drivetrain *and* all the full suite of chassis improvements, which came to the GT3 through a few decades of racing that chassis, then hell yes.
If a Cayman S with a GT3 tranny and motor, then no.
The key is the engineering of the whole package, which goes beyond drivetrain (ask Mooty). If PAG threw its heart into the Cayman as the 911 replacement and put the car into Cup and RSR forms and fed that back into the street car. . .
If a Cayman S with a GT3 tranny and motor, then no.
The key is the engineering of the whole package, which goes beyond drivetrain (ask Mooty). If PAG threw its heart into the Cayman as the 911 replacement and put the car into Cup and RSR forms and fed that back into the street car. . .
12-13-2007, 10:50 AM
#34
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The engine was put in the rear of the 356 because Ferdinand Porsche wanted usable rear seats. It was always about interior space as mid-engine layout is obviously superior but eliminates all space behind the driver. Front engine layout makes the whole car heavier as there are more parts needed to feed power to the other end of the car.
12-13-2007, 11:15 AM
#35
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey John,
If you'd be willing to pay that much for a GT3-engined Cayman why don't you order one to spec from Ruf? You could have a lightweight version for that price.
But all of this talk is nonsense anyway. Tell Gary to find you a CGT and be done with it
LOL!!
Josh
2005 CGT
2007 E63 Wagon
If you'd be willing to pay that much for a GT3-engined Cayman why don't you order one to spec from Ruf? You could have a lightweight version for that price.
But all of this talk is nonsense anyway. Tell Gary to find you a CGT and be done with it
LOL!!Josh
2005 CGT
2007 E63 Wagon
12-13-2007, 01:08 PM
#36
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Actually if "he" is Dr.Porsche, he wanted a mid-engine car and the first 356 prototype built in 1948 thus was a mid-engined roadster.
A rear engine was chosen for the final design because, quoting Karl Ludvigsen in Excellence was Expected:"...the roadsters engine placement had been seen, quite early on, to impose sharp limitations on the amount of useful space that could be enclosed inside the body. To get the extra luggage space that would make the car more a appealing as a versatile touring machine the engine was put in the normal VW location behind the rear axle."
So, space and convenience and VW heritage is the reason for the rear engine and as soon as Porsche could start building mid-engine racing cars they did, starting with 1953's 550 RS moving on to today's RS Spyder.
Isn't it amazing that even though a mid-engine would be better for pure performance, as proven by that choice for their pure racing cars, Porsche still continue to market the rear engine in their highest performance street cars?
A rear engine was chosen for the final design because, quoting Karl Ludvigsen in Excellence was Expected:"...the roadsters engine placement had been seen, quite early on, to impose sharp limitations on the amount of useful space that could be enclosed inside the body. To get the extra luggage space that would make the car more a appealing as a versatile touring machine the engine was put in the normal VW location behind the rear axle."
So, space and convenience and VW heritage is the reason for the rear engine and as soon as Porsche could start building mid-engine racing cars they did, starting with 1953's 550 RS moving on to today's RS Spyder.
Isn't it amazing that even though a mid-engine would be better for pure performance, as proven by that choice for their pure racing cars, Porsche still continue to market the rear engine in their highest performance street cars?
12-13-2007, 01:12 PM
#37
Yep, a CRS would be a killer track car. IMHO if Porsche wants to be competitive in pro racing they are going to have to go mid engine one of these days.
Funny, I'm always lurking over here on the 996 & 997 GT3 boards..........
Funny, I'm always lurking over here on the 996 & 997 GT3 boards..........
12-13-2007, 01:18 PM
#38
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Hey John,
If you'd be willing to pay that much for a GT3-engined Cayman why don't you order one to spec from Ruf? You could have a lightweight version for that price.
But all of this talk is nonsense anyway. Tell Gary to find you a CGT and be done with it LOL!!
Josh
2005 CGT
2007 E63 Wagon
If you'd be willing to pay that much for a GT3-engined Cayman why don't you order one to spec from Ruf? You could have a lightweight version for that price.
But all of this talk is nonsense anyway. Tell Gary to find you a CGT and be done with it
LOL!!Josh
2005 CGT
2007 E63 Wagon
The CGT is a whole 'nother deal expense wise, but does prove where Porsche would put the engine in a car built from the ground up with performance as the only consideration.
My point is marketing is the reason for the rear engine, starting from the beginning at Porsche and it would be very easy for Porsche to make the gearbox necessary for putting a dry sump GT3 engine in the Cayman, but they are afraid it will upset their sales apple cart. I heard that some rogue engineers built an X-51 engined Cayman and Weideking went nuts and had the car dismantled because he didn't want a Porsche built Cayman like that anywhere around the Porsche campus.
Only some real demand will change that.
12-13-2007, 01:23 PM
#39
Race Director
Hey John,
If you'd be willing to pay that much for a GT3-engined Cayman why don't you order one to spec from Ruf? You could have a lightweight version for that price.
But all of this talk is nonsense anyway. Tell Gary to find you a CGT and be done with it LOL!!
Josh
2005 CGT
2007 E63 Wagon
If you'd be willing to pay that much for a GT3-engined Cayman why don't you order one to spec from Ruf? You could have a lightweight version for that price.
But all of this talk is nonsense anyway. Tell Gary to find you a CGT and be done with it
LOL!!Josh
2005 CGT
2007 E63 Wagon
Good points.
If it was me, I'd take a special Ruf over the CGT. Just a little more exclusive.
Thing is, Mooty does not keep his cars long. ANY car, so even if he has the FINEST track car, he'd be itchy to switch in a few months, 6 months max.
Hmmmm... May be Mooty should take your advice and get that special Ruf. When he dumps it, I'll call first dibs.
CP
12-13-2007, 01:36 PM
#40
Platinum Dealership
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
the real solution would be to keep the 911 rear engined for all those who've got kids or golf clubs or whatever they want to store, and to have a new model for the gt3 that's more like a lightweight hardcore R8- a viewing window mid-engine bastard son who screams and roars around tracks across the world. for increased storage space they could use little portals on the sides like the mclaren f1.
base price would probably be 160-210k. call it the gt1.
of course then this car wouldn't be a 911 or maybe even porsche anymore.
base price would probably be 160-210k. call it the gt1.
of course then this car wouldn't be a 911 or maybe even porsche anymore.
12-13-2007, 02:45 PM
#41
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...
R8, as in Audi? That R8 exists because of Lambo.
Never will happen... if you are going to ask for something, ask for sunroof delete "option" first and see what happens!
12-13-2007, 03:27 PM
#42
Advanced
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Treasure Island Fl
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Non enthusiasts buy it for the performance image. As more RSRs get whipped by Fcars and Vetts, Porsche AG will have to go to 911 mid platform. Can't wait!!
12-13-2007, 03:45 PM
#43
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...
Whoooa... do the RSR's get "whipped" by the others in it's class?
