997.2 GT3 has 2x downforce over 997.1?
08-06-2014, 12:03 AM
#31
GT2RS Front 14Kg, Rear 35Kg
GT2.1 Front 9Kg, Rear 29Kg
GT2.1 Front 9Kg, Rear 29Kg
08-06-2014, 02:11 AM
#32
It is hard to compare without knowing the set ride height and rake angle of the car.
A stupid shop set my front way high like a rally car and the car was undriveable at speed. No traction in the front and dose not respond to steering input at speed.
A stupid shop set my front way high like a rally car and the car was undriveable at speed. No traction in the front and dose not respond to steering input at speed.
08-06-2014, 10:40 PM
#34
Rennlist Member
Exactly. Either car produces very little downforce. The stability you're really feeling is the lack of lift, which most other cars produce.
The following users liked this post:
frederickcook87 (09-12-2022)
08-07-2014, 02:43 AM
#35
OK, I'll buy the no BS bit, IF you can explain a significant difference, "more than twice as great" between the downforce of the .1 GT3 and .2 GT3, excluding the difference created by the larger angle of the .2 GT3 rear airfoil.
In other words, I believe the angle of the rear airfoil on my .1 GT3 could be increased to create a downforce very close to that of a .2 GT3.
Anybody buy that?
In other words, I believe the angle of the rear airfoil on my .1 GT3 could be increased to create a downforce very close to that of a .2 GT3.
Anybody buy that?
08-07-2014, 09:03 AM
#38
OK, I'll buy the no BS bit, IF you can explain a significant difference, "more than twice as great" between the downforce of the .1 GT3 and .2 GT3, excluding the difference created by the larger angle of the .2 GT3 rear airfoil.
In other words, I believe the angle of the rear airfoil on my .1 GT3 could be increased to create a downforce very close to that of a .2 GT3.
Anybody buy that?
In other words, I believe the angle of the rear airfoil on my .1 GT3 could be increased to create a downforce very close to that of a .2 GT3.
Anybody buy that?
And no I do not believe there will be much if any different in drag. (see drg numbers below comparing the cars). The .1 cars (gt3 & RS) were set up to have substantially lower Drag than the .2 cars.
You can search and find an interesting wind tunnel article on the .1 gt3 car. Simple by raising the rear of the car approximately 10mm (thus increasing the car's rake) and effectively running the rear spoiler at its highest level (they used a slightly more curvy rear spoiler replacement) you increase the rear downforce greatly and you also get slight front downforce because of the rake. They then retested the same car with effectively a front cup lip and by doing so you get front downforce numbers similar to cupcar's (which somewhat surprising is quite low - last gen cars)
When you look at the numbers comparing the .2 cars below, the .2 RS comes with a higher 'standard' rear wing 'OE' rake than the gt3 in the OE position and the 4.0 comes with and even higher OE rear wing rake level again and further adds a higher rear ride height versus the 3.8RS to add to the rear DF #s (look at the .35Cd vs .33Cd drag numbers of the 4.0 vs the 3.8 RS).
If you take a .1 RS car, run the rear wing at 13-15 degrees (close to the 4.0 wing rake level), run the front cup lip spoiler and 4.0 or other canards, the cars will be 'close enough' aero-wise - the difference will be down to HP/Tq and the 3.8's better gearing.
GT3RS4.0 Front 14Kg, Rear: 58Kg on lowest setting, 0.35Cd
GT3RS.2 Front: 11Kg, Rear: 49Kg on lowest setting, 0.33Cd
GT3.2 Front: 15Kg, Rear: 19Kg on lowest setting, 0.32Cd
GT3RS.1 Front: -2Kg, Rear 10Kg, 0.3Cd
GT3.1 Front ~0, Rear ~0, 0.29Cd
08-07-2014, 09:08 AM
#39
Race Car
Additionally you can tilt the radiator, open up the top of the bumper for the center radiator to vent out the top and seal the lower bumper openings to force that air out the top of the car and it reduces lift even more. (Al La cup and RS)
The following users liked this post:
frederickcook87 (09-12-2022)
08-07-2014, 05:40 PM
#40
Yes - It is more accurate however to say that the .1RS can easily get and exceed the downforce levels for the .2GT3 and my guess is close to .2RS levels with the addition of the cup front lip. The .1gt3 airfoil doesn't quite have the size and shape to give the same numbers as the .2GT3
And no I do not believe there will be much if any different in drag. (see drg numbers below comparing the cars). The .1 cars (gt3 & RS) were set up to have substantially lower Drag than the .2 cars.
You can search and find an interesting wind tunnel article on the .1 gt3 car. Simple by raising the rear of the car approximately 10mm (thus increasing the car's rake) and effectively running the rear spoiler at its highest level (they used a slightly more curvy rear spoiler replacement) you increase the rear downforce greatly and you also get slight front downforce because of the rake. They then retested the same car with effectively a front cup lip and by doing so you get front downforce numbers similar to cupcar's (which somewhat surprising is quite low - last gen cars)
When you look at the numbers comparing the .2 cars below, the .2 RS comes with a higher 'standard' rear wing 'OE' rake than the gt3 in the OE position and the 4.0 comes with and even higher OE rear wing rake level again and further adds a higher rear ride height versus the 3.8RS to add to the rear DF #s (look at the .35Cd vs .33Cd drag numbers of the 4.0 vs the 3.8 RS).
If you take a .1 RS car, run the rear wing at 13-15 degrees (close to the 4.0 wing rake level), run the front cup lip spoiler and 4.0 or other canards, the cars will be 'close enough' aero-wise - the difference will be down to HP/Tq and the 3.8's better gearing.
GT3RS4.0 Front 14Kg, Rear: 58Kg on lowest setting, 0.35Cd
GT3RS.2 Front: 11Kg, Rear: 49Kg on lowest setting, 0.33Cd
GT3.2 Front: 15Kg, Rear: 19Kg on lowest setting, 0.32Cd
GT3RS.1 Front: -2Kg, Rear 10Kg, 0.3Cd
GT3.1 Front ~0, Rear ~0, 0.29Cd
And no I do not believe there will be much if any different in drag. (see drg numbers below comparing the cars). The .1 cars (gt3 & RS) were set up to have substantially lower Drag than the .2 cars.
You can search and find an interesting wind tunnel article on the .1 gt3 car. Simple by raising the rear of the car approximately 10mm (thus increasing the car's rake) and effectively running the rear spoiler at its highest level (they used a slightly more curvy rear spoiler replacement) you increase the rear downforce greatly and you also get slight front downforce because of the rake. They then retested the same car with effectively a front cup lip and by doing so you get front downforce numbers similar to cupcar's (which somewhat surprising is quite low - last gen cars)
When you look at the numbers comparing the .2 cars below, the .2 RS comes with a higher 'standard' rear wing 'OE' rake than the gt3 in the OE position and the 4.0 comes with and even higher OE rear wing rake level again and further adds a higher rear ride height versus the 3.8RS to add to the rear DF #s (look at the .35Cd vs .33Cd drag numbers of the 4.0 vs the 3.8 RS).
If you take a .1 RS car, run the rear wing at 13-15 degrees (close to the 4.0 wing rake level), run the front cup lip spoiler and 4.0 or other canards, the cars will be 'close enough' aero-wise - the difference will be down to HP/Tq and the 3.8's better gearing.
GT3RS4.0 Front 14Kg, Rear: 58Kg on lowest setting, 0.35Cd
GT3RS.2 Front: 11Kg, Rear: 49Kg on lowest setting, 0.33Cd
GT3.2 Front: 15Kg, Rear: 19Kg on lowest setting, 0.32Cd
GT3RS.1 Front: -2Kg, Rear 10Kg, 0.3Cd
GT3.1 Front ~0, Rear ~0, 0.29Cd
10-10-2014, 08:18 PM
#41
Pro
Thread Starter
10-11-2014, 03:03 AM
#42
at least he hasn't read about pinning vs welding.... 
10-11-2014, 12:01 PM
#43
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somewhere in a galaxy far, far away....
Posts: 17,107
Likes: 0
Received 258 Likes
on
172 Posts
the difference from the .1 and the .2 is so drastic that the .2 gets worse fuel mileage and has slower top speed due to all the drag... lol