Originally Posted by sharkster

Look at you... completely out of control

Originally Posted by excmag

Originally Posted by excmag

Personally, I think what you are feeling in the GT2 is good damping, not a setup that's too soft. Go ahead and push the car hard and then tell me similar it is to a 997 Turbo. It is not similar, at all.

GT3/RS damping has been my biggest complaint with that platform since its introduction. Mediocre or even poor damping in standard, worse in Sport, and PASM adjustments that are reactive not active. This is my opinion, but it is one that was backed up by a local suspension genius (who was blown away by how jiggly the ride was), a professional Porsche racer with a lengthy resume, and watching two good friends with back issues who can handle a sporting car's ride quality wince in pain over little bumps and ripples in the street at 25-35 mph. I know others will disagree, but I find the chassis too fidget for no appreciable gain. Remember too that the U.S. GT3 seats should be better than the new GT2 seats in terms of adding a bit of cushion.

I've driven cars with MUCH higher spring rates that ride far better than a stock 997 GT3. Heck, I've driven hoary old torsion-bar 911s with huge bars that ride better than the GT3 despite its massive advantage in terms of rear susp. design.

In contrast, GT2 damping seems very, very good to me, filtering out a lot of the ripples and bumps the GT3/RS fails to around town and on the freeway, and exhibiting absolutely superior body control on our demanding road test loop and at Infineon Raceway. And, unlike previous PASM setups, I found PASM's Sport setting useful out on our test loop. Initially, it felt too stiff, but then it seemed to dial in. Or maybe that was me. Either way, only on the roughest sections did I disengage it. Seems to me that is as it should be.

Johannes van Overbeek was stunned by the GT2's goodness around Infineon, and his lap times in the car. Never did he say it felt too soft (but he was, as I was, evaluating it as a street car....), he only noted, as I did, that the chassis was simply brilliant. As I wrote initially, I think only very few will ever understand how good the 997 GT2 really is. Few will own them, and fewer still (by a lot?) will drive them hard enough to know the brilliance. And then there will be a few who simply prefer NA power, period. I like either, so long as the rest of the car is good. In this case, the chassis of the GT2 makes it outshine the GT3/RS for me. I know others have had different experiences, and I have read these with keen interest.

But I dunno, when I read a lot of comments about how "raw" the RS is, and especially with re: to the ride/suspension, I think people are mistaking poor damper tuning for some sort of edge. Don't get me wrong: it's a fast car and I get (and love) raw. But there is a fine line between raw and rough. And, when it comes to suspension, poor damping makes you slower, not faster. The fast cars are always the ones where the wheels follow the road surface and the body stays relatively unperturbed.

I can see this on the freeway in various cars I've tested with damper tuning I didn't like. Watch an E39 5's wheels in their wells as it goes down the road, and its body. The wheels are constantly moving, the body isn't. RS4 is another interesting car to watch in this way. But, in a car with poor damping, the body moves up and down with the road, not the wheels. I used to watch a friend's early 997 GT3 bounce and jiggle all the way down Doyle by the Golden Gate Bridge on his morning commute. I could see it from across that "freeway." Surprisingly, I've seen the same in pro race cars. A White Lightning GT3 RSR that won Le Mans was super jiggly over the bumps up the hill to T1 at Infineon years ago. The fact the AJR and FLM 911s weren't seemed to indicate the Petersen car was still running Le Mans setup, or a poor one by comparison to the others. In any event, it looked like a handful -- though it may be they were sacrificing control there for stiffness elsewhere. But they were the only ones doing it.

This leads me to think that even the best can struggle with damper tuning, and that it is an art as much as it is a science. My perception is that the new GT2's damping is MILES ahead of the GT3's, and that its other suspension tweaks (which suggest Weissach saw real room for improvement, unlike in the 996 days) add up to a car you're more confident in. I usually go faster in those, feel safer in those, have more fun in those, and develop a better bond with those.

But this is just my take. As we have seen here, your results may vary!

And sorry for the long ol' post!

pete

Originally Posted by sharkster

Who drives stock cars anyways? I don't know anybody like that

PS Got a chance to check out a GT-R yesterday. I still can't believe how um... LARGE it is.

Originally Posted by OldGuy

Turbo Cab??!! Why stop there? How about a RS cab? or or a CAB CUP!!!


j/k

BTW you can buy a Lambo SL for 205K wouldnt that come into play if youre thinking about a GT2?

Originally Posted by C.J. Ichiban

correct on both accounts- so many people complain about handling characteristics that are more on the account of a bad stock setup or stuff we're going to change anyway- ride height, alignment, sway bar settings are all COMPLETELY ADJUSTABLE on the GT cars! meaning, you can do it yourself or have it done very quickly.

gtr is like a japanese benz CL amg.

Originally Posted by C.J. Ichiban

you've got to be kidding- I hated the stock 996TT but loved the 997 version...you must have either a really big *** or a long torso because at 6'2 I've got no issues with clearance in 997TT.

Originally Posted by sharkster

No no... talking about thee GTR Look how low the roof-line is...

996TT's just din't wallow around as much (even if the stock suspension was still pretty poor but it was a couple of hundred pounds lighter too. Stock suspension in the 997tt is pretty scary at the best of times;(

Originally Posted by C.J. Ichiban

my car dyno'd at 379 rwhp a few months ago- counting for driveline losses at 10% we're looking at 421 hp. (don't try and say it's 15% or 20%- this is the best street transmission P has ever sold) I've seen dyno ranges on the gt3 and RS from 371 rwhp to 379.6 which is plenty, but I've never seen a 385-390 whp.

let's not get too crazy and insist someone can get 60+ extra hp out of this car. 35, I'll believe (3.8L), but 60-70? crazy talk. that's an RSR engine with a redline @ 9200. most of the exhausts only add a few Tq or (6-8) HP in the midrange- I've yet to see one that increases peak hp. most actually screw up the backpressure needed, as sharky could tell you this is a tough car to tune for anything other than noise.

Originally Posted by C.J. Ichiban

340 said 'can be easily modified to nearly 500hp' (single quote= paraphrase) to which I guessed that a 3.8kit would be worth 35ish extra hp over stock...guess I should change that to 40-45 but either way it's not 500hp...and from the looks of your conversion- I'm guessing none of that came cheap or easy!

getting 500 hp from a gt3 engine...well that's funny just to picture on so many levels