New GT3 on street
03-12-2009, 11:41 AM
#16
Gents, I say this with some cheek but I think we need to harden the f#k up about the rear wing...
Unlike many other manufacturers, Porsche put it there to fulfill a purpose... increased downforce, not bling-bling... As was clearly indicated in the podcast interview on DR republic (link in other thread), downforce was increased nearly "3" fold... thats a big difference (more so than even the previous generation RS) and the only way to achieve it is through a combination of surface area and shaping... A concern with the 997.1 was downforce and high speed stability and so many guys here have upgraded splitters and wings for the track which confirms this... they've attempted to address the issue... Who here has seen a discreet wing on an F1 car or a touring car??? I think not...
Simply put, it was used to fulfill a purpose-downforce, not for show... and the size is the compromise...
Unlike many other manufacturers, Porsche put it there to fulfill a purpose... increased downforce, not bling-bling... As was clearly indicated in the podcast interview on DR republic (link in other thread), downforce was increased nearly "3" fold... thats a big difference (more so than even the previous generation RS) and the only way to achieve it is through a combination of surface area and shaping... A concern with the 997.1 was downforce and high speed stability and so many guys here have upgraded splitters and wings for the track which confirms this... they've attempted to address the issue... Who here has seen a discreet wing on an F1 car or a touring car??? I think not...
Simply put, it was used to fulfill a purpose-downforce, not for show... and the size is the compromise...
Also, from behind, the white car looks like the wing is already angled up (on wedges?) but from the side it looks like the angle of attack is pretty normal. That first photo might just be an awkward angle.
03-12-2009, 11:49 AM
#17
Don't believe this is correct.
The RS wing is 40% bigger than the mk1gt3 wing, has substantially more curvature (negative lift) and can be adjusted from 0 to 16 degrees versus 0, 4 & 8 degrees for the mk1gt3 wing
From the podcast, the "new wing" is mounted at 7 degrees in the default stock position versus the old wing - this alone is substantial and with what looks like more curvature and a slightly higher mounting point you get the 3 times effect
The RS wing versus the new mk2gt3 wing would still be able to generate more rear negative lift
The front aero is however a huge improvement
From the podcast what struck me the most was the improvement in the engine deflection from what could be 18mm (old engine mounts) to 1mm with the new magnetic fluid engine mounts (this is huge in my opinion) - imo, this should be a must option for all who plan on tracking the car - a 300# engine in the rear of the car that can potentially move back and forth 1/2 an inch is almost frightening and i now understand when i drive the car and especially when i follow another gt3 on the track why that rear-end is wiggling
paul
03-12-2009, 12:26 PM
#18
Three Wheelin'
From the podcast what struck me the most was the improvement in the engine deflection from what could be 18mm (old engine mounts) to 1mm with the new magnetic fluid engine mounts (this is huge in my opinion) - imo, this should be a must option for all who plan on tracking the car - a 300# engine in the rear of the car that can potentially move back and forth 1/2 an inch is almost frightening and i now understand when i drive the car and especially when i follow another gt3 on the track why that rear-end is wiggling
paul
paul
03-12-2009, 01:16 PM
#19
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
So I guess I need some clarification on the new engine mounts.
I am under the assumption that the new mounts are a good feature if you both track and daily drive your car. This gives you the advantage of comfort and sport when you need it.
If you will only track the car I assume you are better off just replacing the existing standard mounts to a stiffer one and call it a day. The new mounts may have three disadvantages for the track animal, cost weight and reliability.
Therefore I would assume ordering this option will depend upon just how hard core of a track junkie you are.
Am I missing anything???
I am under the assumption that the new mounts are a good feature if you both track and daily drive your car. This gives you the advantage of comfort and sport when you need it.
If you will only track the car I assume you are better off just replacing the existing standard mounts to a stiffer one and call it a day. The new mounts may have three disadvantages for the track animal, cost weight and reliability.
Therefore I would assume ordering this option will depend upon just how hard core of a track junkie you are.
Am I missing anything???
03-12-2009, 02:44 PM
#21
So I guess I need some clarification on the new engine mounts.
I am under the assumption that the new mounts are a good feature if you both track and daily drive your car. This gives you the advantage of comfort and sport when you need it.
If you will only track the car I assume you are better off just replacing the existing standard mounts to a stiffer one and call it a day. The new mounts may have three disadvantages for the track animal, cost weight and reliability.
Therefore I would assume ordering this option will depend upon just how hard core of a track junkie you are.
Am I missing anything???
I am under the assumption that the new mounts are a good feature if you both track and daily drive your car. This gives you the advantage of comfort and sport when you need it.
If you will only track the car I assume you are better off just replacing the existing standard mounts to a stiffer one and call it a day. The new mounts may have three disadvantages for the track animal, cost weight and reliability.
Therefore I would assume ordering this option will depend upon just how hard core of a track junkie you are.
Am I missing anything???
- a true track junkie would own a pure track car
- a gt3 seems to fill that whole of half track half street that is why i like this option
- i also really like that fact that they have increase to spring rates front and rear (12% in the front 45nm versus 40nm / 10% in the rear 105nm vs 95nm) - plus "new sways" guessing this is why the gt2 feels better
03-12-2009, 03:47 PM
#23
fairfield county motorsport can source them for you
come in 2 flavours of hardness - they recommend the softer ones
old pricing was appox $190
call ask for drew
03-12-2009, 04:01 PM
#24
Three Wheelin'
So I guess I need some clarification on the new engine mounts.
I am under the assumption that the new mounts are a good feature if you both track and daily drive your car. This gives you the advantage of comfort and sport when you need it.
If you will only track the car I assume you are better off just replacing the existing standard mounts to a stiffer one and call it a day. The new mounts may have three disadvantages for the track animal, cost weight and reliability.
Therefore I would assume ordering this option will depend upon just how hard core of a track junkie you are.
Am I missing anything???
I am under the assumption that the new mounts are a good feature if you both track and daily drive your car. This gives you the advantage of comfort and sport when you need it.
If you will only track the car I assume you are better off just replacing the existing standard mounts to a stiffer one and call it a day. The new mounts may have three disadvantages for the track animal, cost weight and reliability.
Therefore I would assume ordering this option will depend upon just how hard core of a track junkie you are.
Am I missing anything???
03-12-2009, 04:25 PM
#25
Drifting
If I were buying a new GT3, I'd definitely get the active mounts and the lift system.
The mounts are a brilliant idea. I hate it how everything resonates and buzzes at 3,000rpm in the interior and how the engine feels coarse until 4,000rpm. This is due to a harder than required street mount and a softer than desired race mount. My 993TT was much smoother in this regard, but the engine moved around a lot in that car on the track.
I have full poly engine mounts on my racecar and can tell you that it introduces a whole suite of problems on a car that isn't checked over every week. Everything, and I mean everything, comes loose due to the vibration.
I'd love to have a mount that transmits less NVH through on the street, and that stiffens up to produce less movement on the track. I love advances like this, you get to have your cake and eat it.
The mounts are a brilliant idea. I hate it how everything resonates and buzzes at 3,000rpm in the interior and how the engine feels coarse until 4,000rpm. This is due to a harder than required street mount and a softer than desired race mount. My 993TT was much smoother in this regard, but the engine moved around a lot in that car on the track.
I have full poly engine mounts on my racecar and can tell you that it introduces a whole suite of problems on a car that isn't checked over every week. Everything, and I mean everything, comes loose due to the vibration.
I'd love to have a mount that transmits less NVH through on the street, and that stiffens up to produce less movement on the track. I love advances like this, you get to have your cake and eat it.
03-12-2009, 05:03 PM
#26
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is that about 400lb/900lbs? substantially more than the 996 stock. i just upgraded mine to 600/900 and should be very good for track. how heavy is this car?
03-12-2009, 05:41 PM
#27
the answer is to multilpy by 5.7
45 = 256
105 = 598
except, when i look back at old posts i see that excellence reported that 997gt3 spring rates were 45/105 so someone has the wrong data - either excellence or the head dood from porsche who was the guy being interviewed on the blog
45 = 256
105 = 598
except, when i look back at old posts i see that excellence reported that 997gt3 spring rates were 45/105 so someone has the wrong data - either excellence or the head dood from porsche who was the guy being interviewed on the blog
03-12-2009, 07:28 PM
#28
Rennlist Member
Don't believe this is correct.
The RS wing is 40% bigger than the mk1 gt3 wing, has substantially more curvature (negative lift) and can be adjusted from 0 to 16 degrees versus 0, 4 & 8 degrees for the mk1gt3 wing
From the podcast, the "new wing" is mounted at 7 degrees in the default stock position versus the old wing - this alone is substantial and with what looks like more curvature and a slightly higher mounting point you get the 3 times effect
The RS wing versus the new mk2gt3 wing would still be able to generate more rear negative lift
The front aero is however a huge improvement
From the podcast what struck me the most was the improvement in the engine deflection from what could be 18mm (old engine mounts) to 1mm with the new magnetic fluid engine mounts (this is huge in my opinion) - imo, this should be a must option for all who plan on tracking the car - a 300# engine in the rear of the car that can potentially move back and forth 1/2 an inch is almost frightening and i now understand when i drive the car and especially when i follow another gt3 on the track why that rear-end is wiggling
paul
The RS wing is 40% bigger than the mk1 gt3 wing, has substantially more curvature (negative lift) and can be adjusted from 0 to 16 degrees versus 0, 4 & 8 degrees for the mk1gt3 wing
From the podcast, the "new wing" is mounted at 7 degrees in the default stock position versus the old wing - this alone is substantial and with what looks like more curvature and a slightly higher mounting point you get the 3 times effect
The RS wing versus the new mk2gt3 wing would still be able to generate more rear negative lift
The front aero is however a huge improvement
From the podcast what struck me the most was the improvement in the engine deflection from what could be 18mm (old engine mounts) to 1mm with the new magnetic fluid engine mounts (this is huge in my opinion) - imo, this should be a must option for all who plan on tracking the car - a 300# engine in the rear of the car that can potentially move back and forth 1/2 an inch is almost frightening and i now understand when i drive the car and especially when i follow another gt3 on the track why that rear-end is wiggling
paul
The wing on the mkI RS whilst larger, seems to be thinner and with less vertical curvature than the wing on the gt3.2...
The drag co-efficient on the RS.1 was 0.30 (despite being a wide body model) whereas the drag co-efficent on the new gt3.2 is 0.32 (old car 0.29) and its a narrow body. The body shape hasn't changed in a major fashion so this big increase would be due to the aero package...
In the podcast, the Porsche chap eluded to the fact that they used the displacement increase of the car to also increase the downforce without creating a reduced Vmax... Thus, whilst an increase, not a sigmificant one despite big torque gains and obviously much faster times btw gears...
Hopefully, some sort of comparison will be done at some point to give us an indication of relative difference in downforce btw the two...
Completely agree on the engine mounts, huge difference in movement... and yes reliability would be my only concern for a keeper car...
03-12-2009, 09:21 PM
#30
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the answer is to multilpy by 5.7
45 = 256
105 = 598
except, when i look back at old posts i see that excellence reported that 997gt3 spring rates were 45/105 so someone has the wrong data - either excellence or the head dood from porsche who was the guy being interviewed on the blog
45 = 256
105 = 598
except, when i look back at old posts i see that excellence reported that 997gt3 spring rates were 45/105 so someone has the wrong data - either excellence or the head dood from porsche who was the guy being interviewed on the blog