718 GT4?
Advanced
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, CA
It's easy to calculate the approximate HP increase. (4.0/3.8)*385. Ratio of displacement increase * HP. This gets you to 405.26. If you consider the Carerra motor as a 400HP motor (since it was detuned in the GT4), then you get to 421.05 with nothing more than stroking.
Pro
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 604
Likes: 5
From: Cumming, GA
lol! This!
If you look at the CG of the engine/transaxle assembly in the 911, it's been steadily moving more towards the rear axle. Along with improvements in traction/stability control, that old school canti-levered feel of a rear engine car doesn't apply as much anymore.
If you look at the CG of the engine/transaxle assembly in the 911, it's been steadily moving more towards the rear axle. Along with improvements in traction/stability control, that old school canti-levered feel of a rear engine car doesn't apply as much anymore.
Cruisin'
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
“Making sure it’s oroducts are profitable”
That's great and I share your sentiments but....the reality is that if auto manufacturers do that they end up with twice the amount of models which require specific parts for each one driving the cost up, just to satisfy a niche. As an example see how many manufacturers are consolidating platforms, engines and eliminating low volume models. You got to see the macro from the manufacturer side.....PAG first priority is making sure their products are profitable while covering the most markets/products they can.... Hell....if I could ask for something, take out the rear trunk on the Cayman and drop the GT2 engine! The mid-engine platform was develop by PAG to be the entry level, if something new comes up it wont be a Cayman trust me.
Sometime our passion for Porsche products don't allow us to see the business side, which at the end is the #1 priority.
Sometime our passion for Porsche products don't allow us to see the business side, which at the end is the #1 priority.
Instructor
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 117
Likes: 10
From: San Diego
At the same time by not having a high end mid engine platform they are missing out on my business and many others who simply do not want the inferior driving dynamics of a rear engine car. Even if the GT3 had an 18,000 RPM engine and I dont care that much about the price, I just dont want a car that suffers from lift off oversteer at the limit. I want it to do what I tell it to do, not the other way around.
This is also why am hoping they make a RSR for us, or convert all of their GT cars to mid engines. Just make sense..
Rennlist Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,078
Likes: 1,516
From: Vancouver, BC
He didn't say that Porsche told him this, only that he was told this talking to his connections within the network. I'm not saying he's right but we'll see soon enough. I've had this car promised since they ran out of 981 Spyder's. The man believes what he's saying. Just surprised mw that he offered this info in passing while I was there having service. I never brought it up. With people still debating whether the car will have a four or six cylinder.engine, I found it refreshing that he says it's a detuned GT3 NA. To me that's what was important. You put money on one hoping its a six cylinder I suspect. Anyway he didn't get this from reading a thread on RL unless he's lying, not.
He read a post from me that I posted oh 2 months back. Or heard it from someone that read my post 2 months ago.
When I first heard 4.0L I had automatically assumed it was the GT3 engine. It isn't and I had an updated post oh 3 weeks ago that he or his friend didn't read.
The GT3 engine, actually did make an appearance on another prototype at Weissach when I was there. A car that doesn't officially exists but these guys here are all over it already anyways.
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,014
Likes: 7,040
From: Denver
At the same time by not having a high end mid engine platform they are missing out on my business and many others who simply do not want the inferior driving dynamics of a rear engine car. Even if the GT3 had an 18,000 RPM engine and I dont care that much about the price, I just dont want a car that suffers from lift off oversteer at the limit. I want it to do what I tell it to do, not the other way around.
Once learned, there is no substitute as they say
BTW, the main reason that the RSR went to mid-engine is because this allowed them to make a huge under-car splitter (engine is in the way on a rear-engined car), not because the rear-engine car had a handling issue.
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,762
Likes: 1,501
i’m not convinced a limited run GT4 RS with the GT3 motor would be bad for PAG’s profitability. The car would be priced much closer to the GT3 than the “normal” GT4, so it wouldn’t be “entry level” and cannibalize GT4 sales, and the factory would make plenty of profit on each one it sold. And if the “threat” to profitability is that GT3 customers supposedly will turn away from the GT3 because a handful of hot, but less engineered, decidedly “junior” GT4 RSs are running around, I don’t buy that. It totally discounts the 911’s history and mystique (you’ve always needed some extra skills to drive a 911 fast, right? — or so the mythology goes), and it underestimates the customer loyalty that has created. And one last, admittedly tongue-in-cheek point about profitability: how much did Porsche make on each 959? I’m not saying the GT4 RS with GT3 motor will happen; I just think the apocalyptic arguments for why it won’t are not sound.
"limited run" as in 500 or 1000 of them? Ok...guess we will se the $350K Cayman. Ok so we take out limited run and do the GT3 engine....you have two cars probably $5K apart from each other or the same price. One has more options to choose (goodies) and some extra performance bits you do want at that price....or they plan to also do Multilink rear suspension and steering on a Cayman? Now that it's really a stretch for the current platform and a must if doing an RS. And believe it or not....there are a lot of P-Car owners, including GT owners specially since the introduction of PDK, that do care about those little GT4s getting too close to their GT3 performance space. The 959? That was Porsche development for their future 911s that they are still reeling in the profits...water cooled, twin turbo, all-wheel drive. It was a radical approach for racing different classes (homologation needed) that culminated in all of that technology being used on the production cars for years. Besides it was not a regular production car unlike a GT4 or a possible GT4RS. Bottom line, I'm not saying it can't happen but the chances are very, very slim. They had a better chance to do that on the 981.1 GT4....just do the X51, maybe a single mass flywheel (like in 997 GT3/RS era cars)...then on the next one go up to 4.0L...but they didn't do it and it wasn't because of profits.
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,762
Likes: 1,501
At the same time by not having a high end mid engine platform they are missing out on my business and many others who simply do not want the inferior driving dynamics of a rear engine car. Even if the GT3 had an 18,000 RPM engine and I dont care that much about the price, I just dont want a car that suffers from lift off oversteer at the limit. I want it to do what I tell it to do, not the other way around.
Hey...It just came to me...they are not missing out on your business...you just have to buy a 918 or a Carrera GT!!!!!! Just kidding......
Rennlist Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,368
Likes: 347
From: SF Bay Area, CA
I love rear-engine handling (much more than mid). Lift-off oversteer is not a bug, it's a feature. The car Does do what you tell it to do. Being able to cause rotation mid-corner is a rare and valuable asset (most cars are not this adjustable). If you don't want over-steer, then don't lift mid-corner. Yes, it does take awhile to train yourself to react properly to this handling behavior (best learned on a track).
Once learned, there is no substitute as they say
BTW, the main reason that the RSR went to mid-engine is because this allowed them to make a huge under-car splitter (engine is in the way on a rear-engined car), not because the rear-engine car had a handling issue.
Once learned, there is no substitute as they say
BTW, the main reason that the RSR went to mid-engine is because this allowed them to make a huge under-car splitter (engine is in the way on a rear-engined car), not because the rear-engine car had a handling issue.
Rennlist Member
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 591
Likes: 189
From: US
He read a post from me that I posted oh 2 months back. Or heard it from someone that read my post 2 months ago.
When I first heard 4.0L I had automatically assumed it was the GT3 engine. It isn't and I had an updated post oh 3 weeks ago that he or his friend didn't read.
The GT3 engine, actually did make an appearance on another prototype at Weissach when I was there. A car that doesn't officially exists but these guys here are all over it already anyways.
When I first heard 4.0L I had automatically assumed it was the GT3 engine. It isn't and I had an updated post oh 3 weeks ago that he or his friend didn't read.
The GT3 engine, actually did make an appearance on another prototype at Weissach when I was there. A car that doesn't officially exists but these guys here are all over it already anyways.
Pro
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
From: Sierra Madre, Ca.
"limited run" as in 500 or 1000 of them? Ok...guess we will se the $350K Cayman. Ok so we take out limited run and do the GT3 engine....you have two cars probably $5K apart from each other or the same price. One has more options to choose (goodies) and some extra performance bits you do want at that price....or they plan to also do Multilink rear suspension and steering on a Cayman? Now that it's really a stretch for the current platform and a must if doing an RS. And believe it or not....there are a lot of P-Car owners, including GT owners specially since the introduction of PDK, that do care about those little GT4s getting too close to their GT3 performance space. The 959? That was Porsche development for their future 911s that they are still reeling in the profits...water cooled, twin turbo, all-wheel drive. It was a radical approach for racing different classes (homologation needed) that culminated in all of that technology being used on the production cars for years. Besides it was not a regular production car unlike a GT4 or a possible GT4RS. Bottom line, I'm not saying it can't happen but the chances are very, very slim. They had a better chance to do that on the 981.1 GT4....just do the X51, maybe a single mass flywheel (like in 997 GT3/RS era cars)...then on the next one go up to 4.0L...but they didn't do it and it wasn't because of profits.
You, and a couple of other people on this forum are adamant that a GT4 RS is not coming, and your arguments are more emotional than factual.
Rennlist Member
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 591
Likes: 189
From: US
As far as price for a possible RS, could they price it inline with a regular GT3? If they offered a Weissach package with mag wheels as an option you could easily reach $175k and sell 5x more than they would supply. That would be about $50k lower than a similarly equipped 3RS. In my opinion with an RS designation I would expect it to be more expensive than the standard GT3.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 923
Likes: 61
From: Virginia
I love rear-engine handling (much more than mid). Lift-off oversteer is not a bug, it's a feature. The car Does do what you tell it to do. Being able to cause rotation mid-corner is a rare and valuable asset (most cars are not this adjustable). If you don't want over-steer, then don't lift mid-corner. Yes, it does take awhile to train yourself to react properly to this handling behavior (best learned on a track).
Once learned, there is no substitute as they say
BTW, the main reason that the RSR went to mid-engine is because this allowed them to make a huge under-car splitter (engine is in the way on a rear-engined car), not because the rear-engine car had a handling issue.
Once learned, there is no substitute as they say
BTW, the main reason that the RSR went to mid-engine is because this allowed them to make a huge under-car splitter (engine is in the way on a rear-engined car), not because the rear-engine car had a handling issue.
king of nurburgring times is important (to me) because i feel no other track on earth really tests the full range of a car's handling character like the nurburgring.
however, the rear engined 911 are not the end all be all, lest you remember, the top production car records of many tracks in this country are still held by the Viper ACR. a front engine RWD car.
Rennlist Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,078
Likes: 1,516
From: Vancouver, BC
Plus, the HP rating would be different simply because of different intake and exhaust configuration.
Drifting
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 2,033
Likes: 315
I don’t think that’s a fair comparison though.
Like it or not, the Ring is the only one that matters. Firstly for the reasons you mentioned. It’s just so massive and diverse that it tests all facets of a car’s capabilities.
Just as important though is the fact that the world has sort of decided it is and therefore it’s the only place that everyone goes to make their name.
I think GM just recently set a record at VIR with the new Corvette. So what? Porsche isn’t gonna send their A team there to beat it with the GT2RS. Why would they? Nobody cares.
Like it or not, the Ring is the only one that matters. Firstly for the reasons you mentioned. It’s just so massive and diverse that it tests all facets of a car’s capabilities.
Just as important though is the fact that the world has sort of decided it is and therefore it’s the only place that everyone goes to make their name.
I think GM just recently set a record at VIR with the new Corvette. So what? Porsche isn’t gonna send their A team there to beat it with the GT2RS. Why would they? Nobody cares.