GT3 Configurator up
03-08-2009, 05:20 PM
#61
Americans and Germans are optimizing for very different things in a car. To over simplify Americans are optimizing for enjoyment, while Germans are optimizing for efficiency. This inevitably leads to one group of enthusiasts not quite understanding the other- that's my point. Both are "serious" in very different ways, and both are right for their respective environments.
Perhaps you think I'm saying that optimizing for enjoyment, ie having fun is a bad thing? That couldn't be further from the truth- "fun" is exactly what I look for in a car (in the US). I assume that your choice of a GT3 over a 996TT means you think the same way...
Different topic: I do like the ride height adjustment on the new GT3; I'd just set it up so it was absolutely on the deck for autocrosses, then raised up to "normal" height for the street. If you're going to add weight that's not a bad place to do it.
03-08-2009, 09:34 PM
#63
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Trying to be the driver my car wants me to be
Posts: 1,249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Guys,
It says the 997.2 GT3 will have a "lightweight battery". Has this always been the case with the GT3's or is it something new? This is listed as such in the standard features section of the configuration page.
If this has been the case, how much different in size is the battery?
It says the 997.2 GT3 will have a "lightweight battery". Has this always been the case with the GT3's or is it something new? This is listed as such in the standard features section of the configuration page.
If this has been the case, how much different in size is the battery?
03-08-2009, 10:15 PM
#64
Pete -- I have read with great interest your posts here (and your articles in the mag) re your dislike of the suspension set up (PASM) on the 997.1 GT3/RS; perhaps "dislike" is too strong a word -- lack of "sweetness" on the GT3/RS, and your preference of the GT2 setup over that of the GT3/RS, certainly come to mind, though. And it sounds like JvO (of Flying Lizard fame) shares your opinion too.
I have not driven the GT2 (nor an R8 for that matter), and I am guessing your seat time in all things Porsche (at least variety-wise) may exceed that of all of us on this forum combined . . . and probably exceeds that of any other reviewer in any car magazine. Question: is difference between the GT3/RS and GT2 that huge, or are we splitting hairs here? Playing devil's advocate, it is interesting that in a recent Road & Track comparo (Sept 2008) Steve Millen commented a few times that the GT2 would be faster if it had the GT3RS set-up -- in fact, he said he was "disappointed in the [GT2] chassis" and that there was too much "suspension motion." Also, in a recent Evo Mag (May 2008) they picked the GT3RS over the GT2; also, the RS was their Car of the Year (over a Scuderia no less). I guess reasonable minds can differ, and that there is obviously a subjective factor in a review of anything, cars or otherwise . . . . This past weekend I just had the most unbelievable drive in my RS, running through some back country roads in Marin (over the hills, and along the coast), with a PCA group -- I can't imagine things getting any better/sweeter -- the car thrills me today as much as it did almost 2 years ago when I took delivery. But then again, I have not yet driven a GT2 or R8; perhaps ignorance is bliss.
Keep up the great work with the mag. It keeps getting better and better.
I have not driven the GT2 (nor an R8 for that matter), and I am guessing your seat time in all things Porsche (at least variety-wise) may exceed that of all of us on this forum combined . . . and probably exceeds that of any other reviewer in any car magazine. Question: is difference between the GT3/RS and GT2 that huge, or are we splitting hairs here? Playing devil's advocate, it is interesting that in a recent Road & Track comparo (Sept 2008) Steve Millen commented a few times that the GT2 would be faster if it had the GT3RS set-up -- in fact, he said he was "disappointed in the [GT2] chassis" and that there was too much "suspension motion." Also, in a recent Evo Mag (May 2008) they picked the GT3RS over the GT2; also, the RS was their Car of the Year (over a Scuderia no less). I guess reasonable minds can differ, and that there is obviously a subjective factor in a review of anything, cars or otherwise . . . . This past weekend I just had the most unbelievable drive in my RS, running through some back country roads in Marin (over the hills, and along the coast), with a PCA group -- I can't imagine things getting any better/sweeter -- the car thrills me today as much as it did almost 2 years ago when I took delivery. But then again, I have not yet driven a GT2 or R8; perhaps ignorance is bliss.
Keep up the great work with the mag. It keeps getting better and better.
Last edited by zellamsee; 03-09-2009 at 05:02 PM. Reason: typo
03-09-2009, 12:57 AM
#65
Hey Guys,
It says the 997.2 GT3 will have a "lightweight battery". Has this always been the case with the GT3's or is it something new? This is listed as such in the standard features section of the configuration page.
If this has been the case, how much different in size is the battery?
It says the 997.2 GT3 will have a "lightweight battery". Has this always been the case with the GT3's or is it something new? This is listed as such in the standard features section of the configuration page.
If this has been the case, how much different in size is the battery?
03-09-2009, 10:37 AM
#66
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Trying to be the driver my car wants me to be
Posts: 1,249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Careers GT, I found the info of the lightweight battery in the car configuration on one of the European locations of Porsche.com. Guess this doesn't mean we will definitely get it here on the states but one never knows.
03-09-2009, 11:14 AM
#67
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Thread Starter
The Battery is smaller
60 Ah vs 70 Ah for the std Carreras.
Has always been that way.
Physical size smaller
Smaller = Lighter
60 Ah vs 70 Ah for the std Carreras.
Has always been that way.
Physical size smaller
Smaller = Lighter
03-09-2009, 01:43 PM
#70
Rennlist Member
I completely agree. The US and Germany have very different perspectives regarding what it means to be a "serious" car enthusiast, and it took a couple years living in Germany to figure out why.
I have to say that before I lived in Germany I never really "got" the 996/ 997TT, for instance. I respected it as an efficient tool, but driving it on the road in the US it seems uninvolving compared to say a GT3 or GT2 - too cushy, too quiet, too remote. Push it to the point where it's talking to you on public roads and you're doing three times the speed limit; take it to a track and a GT3 or 2 are as fast or faster and more fun.
In Germany, however, it all makes sense, because street driving is serious business. You're doing 130-170 on the autobahn hour after hour. You're not at the limit of the car; instead you're leaving margin for the inevitable rain around the next corner or the clueless tourist pulling out into the fast lane in front of you. Pushing on can be nerve wracking, mentally and physically exhausting. Suddenly the quiet, isolated, 4wd TT lets you carry an extra 10 mph while arriving to your meeting relaxed. It makes complete sense, even with a dreaded tiptronic. For serious street driving it's a great tool.
It's also a tool that makes very little sense in the US. The ability to go much, much faster than the speed limit just makes those limits all the more annoying. Here driver involvement (manual gearboxes, etc) is far more important, and you're not often going to go for a sunday drive in the pouring rain. You will quite possibly, however, take a car autocrossing or to a race track, and you may well modify the car to be faster still for that purpose. Of course those modifications (stiffer suspension, etc) might slow the car down on the street, which must only confuse those Germans further.
In summary to Germans it's about going quickly on the street, any place any time, while in America it's more about having fun... It's not hard to see why the Germans have trouble understanding that ;-)
I have to say that before I lived in Germany I never really "got" the 996/ 997TT, for instance. I respected it as an efficient tool, but driving it on the road in the US it seems uninvolving compared to say a GT3 or GT2 - too cushy, too quiet, too remote. Push it to the point where it's talking to you on public roads and you're doing three times the speed limit; take it to a track and a GT3 or 2 are as fast or faster and more fun.
In Germany, however, it all makes sense, because street driving is serious business. You're doing 130-170 on the autobahn hour after hour. You're not at the limit of the car; instead you're leaving margin for the inevitable rain around the next corner or the clueless tourist pulling out into the fast lane in front of you. Pushing on can be nerve wracking, mentally and physically exhausting. Suddenly the quiet, isolated, 4wd TT lets you carry an extra 10 mph while arriving to your meeting relaxed. It makes complete sense, even with a dreaded tiptronic. For serious street driving it's a great tool.
It's also a tool that makes very little sense in the US. The ability to go much, much faster than the speed limit just makes those limits all the more annoying. Here driver involvement (manual gearboxes, etc) is far more important, and you're not often going to go for a sunday drive in the pouring rain. You will quite possibly, however, take a car autocrossing or to a race track, and you may well modify the car to be faster still for that purpose. Of course those modifications (stiffer suspension, etc) might slow the car down on the street, which must only confuse those Germans further.
In summary to Germans it's about going quickly on the street, any place any time, while in America it's more about having fun... It's not hard to see why the Germans have trouble understanding that ;-)
This is one of the best, most enlightening, and most interesting posts I've read in a car forum. The logical link I was looking for. It's kind of an "of course," and fits in with so many of my experiences, observations, and conversations. Also fits in perfectly with what the Turbo has become, and, at least in 996TT terms, is a strong justification for that evolution. Who wouldn't want a little more leeway at those speeds, a little more cross country ability WITH more margin that keeps you fresh and on your game?
Your post sure rings true and fills in a missing piece of a puzzle for me. I suspect it would be a light bulb for many of the German engineers I've worked with, too. I'll be sure to raise this idea next time I see one of the good guys over a beer.
Thanks for this. (not sure how to emphasize that appropriately)
Best,
pete
03-09-2009, 01:45 PM
#71
And sure enough, the one Porsche that needs ample (pun) battery reserve is the Cayenne and it never seems to have enough battery.
03-09-2009, 02:45 PM
#72
Rennlist Member
Question: is difference between the GT3/RS and GT2 that huge, or are we splitting hairs here? Playing devil's advocate, it is interesting that in a recent Road & Track comparo (Sept 2008) Steve Millen commented a few times that the GT2 would be faster if it had the GT3RS set-up -- in fact, he said he was "disappointed in the [GT2] chassis" and that there was too much "suspension motion." Also, in a recent Evo Mag (May 2008) they picked the GT3RS over the GT2; also, the RS was their Car of the Year (over a Scuderia no less). I guess reasonable minds can differ, and that there is obviously a subjective factor in a review of anything, cars or otherwise . . . . This past weekend I just had the most unbelievable drive in my RS, running through some back country roads in Marin (over the hills, and along the coast), with a PCA group -- I can't imagine things getting any better/sweeter -- the car thrills me today as much as it did almost 2 years ago when I took delivery. But then again, I have not yet driven a GT2 or R8; perhaps ignorance is bliss.
So glad to hear you had a great drive! We live in an amazing place -- such a blessing for those who love to drive.
From the PCA runs I've been on (a few long, long ago and then one in 2005 to chase the Yellow Bird), I'd say they're a lot more casual than what I do when road testing. If I'm wrong, then I wouldn't want to be in the same county, let alone on the same road, with one. When testing, I drive for safety first but my guess is that I'm running quite a bit quicker. I really don't like to run with more than two cars and am happiest on my own unless I really know the other driver's temperament. Our three-car tests have shown me that they may be one car too many, which may doom some of my more ambitious story ideas unless I could find the perfect team of caring, careful, and level-headed shoes. Who aren't dog slow.
My PCA experiences, however, are probably way too limited to draw any real conclusions from. And those runs SHOULD be more casual fun, given the wide breadth of driving talent, from a lot of people who have never "really" driven to, potentially, someone who can school us all on a race track. They also tend to use roads far more frequently traveled than the ones I use (I go to great lengths to get away from other people, and often don't see another car for 30 miles at a time). Club runs are also, by their very nature, pretty high profile -- making them a good time to enjoy the scenery, which, in our part of the world, is oh so worthy. At that pace, a lot of things that can bug me won't really be an issue. But they're still there, in shades...
You post made me smile, because I was just being given a hard time by a rather serious collector/enthusiast over the weekend. He owns a GT3 RS and a 997 GT2, and was grilling me on the Moton and PSS9 comments in the "1400-hp" story. Very funny the way he kidded me: "You're SO sensitive..." (if he only knew), followed by "C'mon, would guys like me reeeally be able to feel the difference?" I believe the truth is, yes, they would be -- if they were in the right environment and pushing hard enough (not 10/10ths) to find it. The loop does that. It separates brilliance from merely good in just 30 miles. And then you have another 170 miles or so to clarify things. Or 400, if you're feeling particularly gamey.
That said, his kidding got me to thinking about whether I've been having a damping fetish of late, if I am majoring on a minor point. I do believe that damping, like steering, is one of the most critical aspects to whether a car will be confidence-inspiring, and thus fast AND fun. But maybe I'm a little off the deep end?
Re: Millen and EVO, I have HUGE respect for Millen, but have found that racers approach road cars in a curious way. Danica's comments on the RS are one example, I think this is another. While their talent behind the wheel typically (always?) vastly exceeds that of a road tester, they are often stuck in an unfortunately limited sphere in which to evaluate the car -- thanks to the design of so many stories in car mags. Millen commented on the Yellow Bird for R&T a few years ago, but I got the sense he only drove the thing down the runway. And, given how things work in this business, he probably did. Danica probably only drove the RS around an oval at top speed. How applicable is that? How useful will the observations be? And, crucially, is that what the car was designed to do -- and how it will be used? Also, what is the knowledge base from which to draw observations? And how does that match up with the intended audience?
We use JvO for track testing because he, unlike a lot of racers, majors in Porsche and knows how to extract the most from them, whether they're track cars or road cars. It's nice that he happens be local and a stellar guy, too. Many seconds separate him and me on a race track, but that's okay with me because I'm not out there to set times, I'm out there to gather dynamic observations and convey them to you (and hopefully get them right) -- so lifting before braking in some cases suits me just fine in my line of work. Not bending cars is kinda important. Out on the road, he and I seem to run at a very similar pace, but he'll be the first to tell you that, while he's driven a stunning amount of cool street cars (probably a cooler list than mine), he's driven a tiny variety on the road. He'll also tell you that even the coolest street cars don't make very good track cars. Add 2+2+2 (talent + environment + experiences) and you start to see the sticky web that getting good intel on cars can be. Now throw in personal preferences, both the tester and the reader...
For years, EVO blew me away with how well it did at putting the reader in the driver's seat and describing nuance and sensations -- things that are frankly far more important to perceptive owners (and voyeurs) than 0-60 times and roval tests. I've driven fast cars that feel slow (Lotus Esprit V8, please stand up) and slow cars that feel fast. I've driven $100,000+ cars that weren't much fun and $20,000 trash cans that were an absolute BLAST (MR-2 Spyder, that's you). Much of what you see in my tests, at some level, is an outgrowth of years of reading EVO in its heyday. That's because, more often that not, I'd drive a car they'd tested and say, "Yup, it drives like they said it would." Occasionally, I'd disagree with their conclusions when I later drove a car they panned or praised, but it was only VERY occasionally -- against regularly driving stuff our car magazines had tested and feeling like nothing they said translated.
These days, I personally feel like EVO has lost a bit of its mojo. Something is missing. Perhaps it's the departure of a few key characters to DR, perhaps it's something more. Even so, I'm talking about a bit off at the very top of the pile. So this is not meant as a back-handed compliment. I feel similarly about another great Brit pub, but maybe "it's me, not you?" On a broader view, I think (hope?) things will get back on track industry wide and that the hybrid we have in terms of media "authority" will sort itself out. I don't see internet media doing much in-depth ROAD testing, but then I don't see that in print either and I am wondering if there is a group of enthusiasts who will be willing to pay for entities to do that -- or if the "free-radio" internet will make that kind of testing a thing of the past. It'd be a sad day if that were to happen, but we humans vote with our feet and usually get what we ask for. Right now, car media is kind of falling apart and even where there is good talent (remarkably rare, sadly) there is a lack of business foundation (and $$$) to support it.
We'll see what happens.
Sorry for the book (and any typos)! I can write long in minutes. Short takes hours!
pete
P.S. Oh yeah: don't drive an R8. Ignorance *is* bliss when it comes to that car. Among the best modern German cars I've driven on the loop, right up there in the rarefied air of 996 GT3, CGT, K1, and 997 GT2 for sheer goodness. Felt CGT thrilling without CGT baggage. Is it AS thrilling? Not sure, would have to do back to back. It's that close, or at least might be. Lacks the rear-engined interaction of the best 997s, but it's just madly, foolishly good with a stick shift, this despite its weight and unimpressive numbers. But it's not a 911, that's for sure. More like an ultimate road-going Cayman...and that ain't no bad thing in my book.
Last edited by stout; 03-09-2009 at 05:48 PM.
03-09-2009, 06:15 PM
#73
Rennlist Member
Pete
Amazingly excellent comments and discussion!
Thanks for that - I thought I was reading Excellence for a minute there! However, can you with your experiences put your finger on the specific question "zellamsee" has asked, "Is difference between the GT3/RS and GT2 that huge, or are we splitting hairs here? Also, do you have any insider info regarding the speculation of whether or not the new 2010 GT3 has any of the trick and revised GT2 suspension modifications we have been reading about?
Best Regards,
Doug Neilson
Contributing writer to European Car (and of former "Excellence" fame
)
Amazingly excellent comments and discussion!
Thanks for that - I thought I was reading Excellence for a minute there! However, can you with your experiences put your finger on the specific question "zellamsee" has asked, "Is difference between the GT3/RS and GT2 that huge, or are we splitting hairs here? Also, do you have any insider info regarding the speculation of whether or not the new 2010 GT3 has any of the trick and revised GT2 suspension modifications we have been reading about?Best Regards,
Doug Neilson
Contributing writer to European Car (and of former "Excellence" fame
)
03-09-2009, 07:00 PM
#74
Rennlist Member
Pete
Amazingly excellent comments and discussion! Thanks for that - I thought I was reading Excellence for a minute there! However, can you with your experiences put your finger on the specific question "zellamsee" has asked, "Is difference between the GT3/RS and GT2 that huge, or are we splitting hairs here? Also, do you have any insider info regarding the speculation of whether or not the new 2010 GT3 has any of the trick and revised GT2 suspension modifications we have been reading about?
Best Regards,
Doug Neilson
Contributing writer to European Car (and of former "Excellence" fame)
Amazingly excellent comments and discussion!
Thanks for that - I thought I was reading Excellence for a minute there! However, can you with your experiences put your finger on the specific question "zellamsee" has asked, "Is difference between the GT3/RS and GT2 that huge, or are we splitting hairs here? Also, do you have any insider info regarding the speculation of whether or not the new 2010 GT3 has any of the trick and revised GT2 suspension modifications we have been reading about?Best Regards,
Doug Neilson
Contributing writer to European Car (and of former "Excellence" fame
)You've been playing with some fun cars in the interim...
I see the difference between the two as very big indeed, with the leaps in damping and roll coupling being enough that I VASTLY prefer the turbo car to the normally-aspirated, an unusual situation for me.
At least one conversation made it clear to me the new 3 will have the 2's suspension improvements, so it might just be the best of both worlds. That said, I am not feeling the aesthetics...
Then again, I have an unfortunate history of falling for ugly cars that happen to be phenomenal driver's tools. Sometimes, they even start to look good to me...
pete
03-09-2009, 07:38 PM
#75
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
A no options 997 GT2 is just 20 lbs heavier than a no options GT3 RS.
My experience with the GT3 RS is that the car has problems putting the power down on turn exit and the car pushes a lot. It's quite interesting that in talking to people that have driven both the RS and regular open top 997 GT3, they much prefer the GT3 RS for its feedback and stability. The RS is very stable.
I got the understeer problem fixed with the GMG bars and my old 2004 GT3 alignment settings. However, it made the inside rear wheel lift even worse, so I set the rear bar at full soft, but the problem is still there. In my experience, the 997 GT3 RS needs less compression, more rebound on all four shocks, more springs at the rear, and much more springs at the front, and less rear sway bar. I was going to work on these issues by throwing the right parts, but oops! I sold the car.
Excellence wrote a great feedback comparing the 7GT2 and the 7GT3RS, preferring the GT2. This was enlightening.
My friend Carlos got a 7GT2 and he likes it a lot, he drove my 2004 GT3 when it was modified with the right things, and he also drove a street GT3 converted to Cup specs at the Ring, plus too many other sport cars, over many years, so I trust his experience.
Bilstein developed the PASM with Porsche. The 7GT2 being a newer car, has a newer version. This is the reason I bought the Bilstein B16 Damptronic kit for the GT3 RS. This kit is sold by Bilstein as an upgrade to the 7GT2, and it was developed with focus on the Nurburgring. For my autoX needs, this kit was ideal, something better than a 7GT2 suspension for the road, from the same makers of the 7GT2 suspension. Unfortunately, I found out that the suspension kit was not legal for my autoX class with the SCCA.
So, I have not driven a GT2, but I got to put 4,000 miles on the GT3 RS, 300 of them at different tracks and autocrosses. The GT3 RS can be improved a lot on the suspension. The brakes are great, except the once in a while ABS mind of its own. The engine is phenomenal, perfect music with the Sharkwerks bypass pipes, good power on the high RPM. The transmission needs work, a short R&P could help, but ultimately, it needs to be re-geared to match the engine power curve, Porsche could learn from Honda and Ferrari on how to properly set gear ratios. The steering feedback is the best I have experienced.
I think the GT3 RS is much better looking than the GT2. The GT3 RS is so beautiful, that it needs shinny colors such a Green or Orange. A 997 GT2 instead needs plain colors, whites/blacks, it's ugly, it needs to hide. I don't care about the looks, but about the dynamics, and performance (heck I have a Boxster, a fast one BTW).
My experience with the GT3 RS is that the car has problems putting the power down on turn exit and the car pushes a lot. It's quite interesting that in talking to people that have driven both the RS and regular open top 997 GT3, they much prefer the GT3 RS for its feedback and stability. The RS is very stable.
I got the understeer problem fixed with the GMG bars and my old 2004 GT3 alignment settings. However, it made the inside rear wheel lift even worse, so I set the rear bar at full soft, but the problem is still there. In my experience, the 997 GT3 RS needs less compression, more rebound on all four shocks, more springs at the rear, and much more springs at the front, and less rear sway bar. I was going to work on these issues by throwing the right parts, but oops! I sold the car.
Excellence wrote a great feedback comparing the 7GT2 and the 7GT3RS, preferring the GT2. This was enlightening.
My friend Carlos got a 7GT2 and he likes it a lot, he drove my 2004 GT3 when it was modified with the right things, and he also drove a street GT3 converted to Cup specs at the Ring, plus too many other sport cars, over many years, so I trust his experience.
Bilstein developed the PASM with Porsche. The 7GT2 being a newer car, has a newer version. This is the reason I bought the Bilstein B16 Damptronic kit for the GT3 RS. This kit is sold by Bilstein as an upgrade to the 7GT2, and it was developed with focus on the Nurburgring. For my autoX needs, this kit was ideal, something better than a 7GT2 suspension for the road, from the same makers of the 7GT2 suspension. Unfortunately, I found out that the suspension kit was not legal for my autoX class with the SCCA.
So, I have not driven a GT2, but I got to put 4,000 miles on the GT3 RS, 300 of them at different tracks and autocrosses. The GT3 RS can be improved a lot on the suspension. The brakes are great, except the once in a while ABS mind of its own. The engine is phenomenal, perfect music with the Sharkwerks bypass pipes, good power on the high RPM. The transmission needs work, a short R&P could help, but ultimately, it needs to be re-geared to match the engine power curve, Porsche could learn from Honda and Ferrari on how to properly set gear ratios. The steering feedback is the best I have experienced.
I think the GT3 RS is much better looking than the GT2. The GT3 RS is so beautiful, that it needs shinny colors such a Green or Orange. A 997 GT2 instead needs plain colors, whites/blacks, it's ugly, it needs to hide. I don't care about the looks, but about the dynamics, and performance (heck I have a Boxster, a fast one BTW).