997.1 GT3 buying guide
Discussion
Slippydiff said:
Trev450 said:
One point to consider with an RS is that you cannot get normal road tyres in the correct size for the rears so are stuck using Cups or similar.
Where did you get this gem of information from ? Michelin Pilot Supersports, Michelin Pilot Sport 2s or Pirelli P Zero Rossos (not that I'd fit Rossos on a shopping trolley let alone a GT3/RS) are all "normal road tyres" and available in the correct size for the rear of the GT3 RS (which incidentally is EXACTLY the same size as the vanilla GT3)
Edited by Slippydiff on Monday 27th February 19:37
Brizzle said:
Thanks for all the replies.
I completely accept a 997.1 RS is realistically no more capable than a 997.1 GT3, and there's not a huge amount of logic in paying £10k more for one, or not buying a technically superior 997.2 GT3 for the same price. But...having been in both, the RS feels more special, there's no doubt about it. Amazing what a fancy paint job and carbon wing can do
Head is still fighting with heart though, have another round of viewings this weekend crossing a wide spectrum of prices. Is anyone familar with this car?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3665208.htm
Have also seen this which looks great but is perhaps priced too high considering its spec?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3631468.htm
Going back to my question on the RS's rear screen crazing, would be interested to find out if this is normal.
Thanks again for all the info and advice
In the medium term the RS will at least retain its premium.I completely accept a 997.1 RS is realistically no more capable than a 997.1 GT3, and there's not a huge amount of logic in paying £10k more for one, or not buying a technically superior 997.2 GT3 for the same price. But...having been in both, the RS feels more special, there's no doubt about it. Amazing what a fancy paint job and carbon wing can do
Head is still fighting with heart though, have another round of viewings this weekend crossing a wide spectrum of prices. Is anyone familar with this car?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3665208.htm
Have also seen this which looks great but is perhaps priced too high considering its spec?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3631468.htm
Going back to my question on the RS's rear screen crazing, would be interested to find out if this is normal.
Thanks again for all the info and advice
And I'm pretty sure they will be worth more than gen 2 GT3s in a years time. You have to buy a car like this with your heart I think.
Viper Green RS .1 I reckon.
Slippydiff said:
I think that might be over-egging the mix slightly, Have you driven Bens Mk1 996 GT3 yet ? or indeed a 964 RS, they are truly engaging machines. The Gen 1 997 GT3 is an epic car, but engaging, when compared with the earlier cars ? they're not in the same league.
Hey, yeah I must concede; you're quite right. The 996 GT3 I drove a few months back (thanks Ben) is/was closer to the action than any 997. Personally I prefer the road manners on the 997 but yes; the 996 was ostensibly better in that regard agtlaw said:
Diamond blue said:
No difference in engines on paper but the 996 cars were the same on paper too and the RS's seemed to be the pick of the bunch dyno wise.
6RS has a different engine to the standard mk2 GT3. Ported heads and a different engine map on the 6RS.I'm pretty sure they were both quoted at 381PS but at the time RS motors all had consistently more on the dyno.
But in my experience a "good" GT3 engine was a match for an average RS one. But that's entirely my subjective impression from drives several years apart.
I never felt my 97 GT3 was any faster than the very quick MK2 96 GT3 I had.
Diamond blue said:
Really?
I'm pretty sure they were both quoted at 381PS but at the time RS motors all had consistently more on the dyno.
But in my experience a "good" GT3 engine was a match for an average RS one. But that's entirely my subjective impression from drives several years apart.
I never felt my 97 GT3 was any faster than the very quick MK2 96 GT3 I had.
The press reports did indeed say that they produced the same 381hp as the standard car and that they used the same internals, the alleged horsepower increase was supposedly only achieved at 180 + mph when the ram air collectors came into effect.I'm pretty sure they were both quoted at 381PS but at the time RS motors all had consistently more on the dyno.
But in my experience a "good" GT3 engine was a match for an average RS one. But that's entirely my subjective impression from drives several years apart.
I never felt my 97 GT3 was any faster than the very quick MK2 96 GT3 I had.
996 GT3 RS used the later small plug heads. Ostensibly they're the early 997 items. As AGTlaw said, the engine runs a different map (seemingly less well fuelled as the RS apparently gets through cats quicker than a "vanilla" mk 2 GT3)
Personally I thought the '6 RS engine was quite "top endy" without the barrel-chested low and middle range that the 997 GT3 benefits from. A Manthey K400 Mk1 GT3 is a more engaging engine (and as quick if not quicker than a '6 RS IMO)
I suspect you must have driven a below parr 997 GT3 and a Mk2 996 GT3 that was in very fine fettle indeed.
Slippydiff said:
Diamond blue said:
Really?
I'm pretty sure they were both quoted at 381PS but at the time RS motors all had consistently more on the dyno.
But in my experience a "good" GT3 engine was a match for an average RS one. But that's entirely my subjective impression from drives several years apart.
I never felt my 97 GT3 was any faster than the very quick MK2 96 GT3 I had.
The press reports did indeed say that they produced the same 381hp as the standard car and that they used the same internals, the alleged horsepower increase was supposedly only achieved at 180 + mph when the ram air collectors came into effect.I'm pretty sure they were both quoted at 381PS but at the time RS motors all had consistently more on the dyno.
But in my experience a "good" GT3 engine was a match for an average RS one. But that's entirely my subjective impression from drives several years apart.
I never felt my 97 GT3 was any faster than the very quick MK2 96 GT3 I had.
996 GT3 RS used the later small plug heads. Ostensibly they're the early 997 items. As AGTlaw said, the engine runs a different map (seemingly less well fuelled as the RS apparently gets through cats quicker than a "vanilla" mk 2 GT3)
Personally I thought the '6 RS engine was quite "top endy" without the barrel-chested low and middle range that the 997 GT3 benefits from. A Manthey K400 Mk1 GT3 is a more engaging engine (and as quick if not quicker than a '6 RS IMO)
I suspect you must have driven a below parr 997 GT3 and a Mk2 996 GT3 that was in very fine fettle indeed.
The 97 is more torquey though and in general is a much better day to day car, especially in comfort spec.
The "head" decision is find a well looked after comfort spec 97 GT3.1 around the £53-55k mark.
Heart says Viper Green, Akrapovic equipped RS
yes, really. mk2 GT3 has a M96/76 engine and the 996 RS has a M79/80 engine.
Total911 said:
Andreas Preuninger, project leader for the [996] RS programme. “We worked our way through the whole powertrain to see where we could save further weight, help gases flow more efficiently in and out of the engine, and finish up any tasks that were in the pipeline when the last two GT3 versions went to production.”
“The next item to be sorted was the cylinder-heads,” he continues. “These also have reshaped intake and exhaust ports for race homologation, although the exhaust system remains unchanged. Tappets remain hydraulic like the normal GT3s.”
Critical to the whole mix is the ECU remapping. “Most people in the chip tuning business do not realise it, but a lighter flywheel means that the fuelling and ignition can be much more aggressive on full throttle to take advantage of the dynamics of an engine that can now rev up faster," he explains. "The counterpoint is that we have to be very careful with the fuel and ignition settings at small throttle openings, so that the car is not a pig to drive when you are parking or moving slowly in town. This is partly an issue of being able to get the airflow working properly at low speeds with small throttle openings.”
Being able to rev higher helps as well, and the rev limit is raised to 8300rpm. Not many owners have complained about the power output, and on paper, Porsche still claims the same 381bhp at 7300rpm as the standard GT3. In reality, however, Andreas freely admits that the gains from all this work, as measured on Porsche’s control dyno, showed a jump to nearly 400bhp, possibly a shade more once the engine is properly run in.
“The next item to be sorted was the cylinder-heads,” he continues. “These also have reshaped intake and exhaust ports for race homologation, although the exhaust system remains unchanged. Tappets remain hydraulic like the normal GT3s.”
Critical to the whole mix is the ECU remapping. “Most people in the chip tuning business do not realise it, but a lighter flywheel means that the fuelling and ignition can be much more aggressive on full throttle to take advantage of the dynamics of an engine that can now rev up faster," he explains. "The counterpoint is that we have to be very careful with the fuel and ignition settings at small throttle openings, so that the car is not a pig to drive when you are parking or moving slowly in town. This is partly an issue of being able to get the airflow working properly at low speeds with small throttle openings.”
Being able to rev higher helps as well, and the rev limit is raised to 8300rpm. Not many owners have complained about the power output, and on paper, Porsche still claims the same 381bhp at 7300rpm as the standard GT3. In reality, however, Andreas freely admits that the gains from all this work, as measured on Porsche’s control dyno, showed a jump to nearly 400bhp, possibly a shade more once the engine is properly run in.
Slippydiff said:
The press reports did indeed say that they produced the same 381hp as the standard car and that they used the same internals, the alleged horsepower increase was supposedly only achieved at 180 + mph when the ram air collectors came into effect.
porsche press release: heredon't agree increased power is _only_ at high speed. see my earlier post and here's Herr Preuninger again:
Total911 said:
If you look under the front of the rear wing, you will notice ram air ducts for the engine bay. According to Andreas, these force cooling air into the intake with 15-18Mb of pressure at 300km/h (187mph), and this is enough to create an additional 15bhp. That extra 15bhp cannot be homologated, though, since the official engine output figures are certified on a dyno!
agtlaw said:
yes, really. mk2 GT3 has a M96/76 engine and the 996 RS has a M79/80 engine.
So that would explain why RS engines consistently dyno'd at higher outputs. All GT motors were hand assembled at Zuffenhausen and individually dyno tested on the bench to ensure they provided "at least" the claimed output. When I collected mine I saw them being built and tested. Total911 said:
Andreas Preuninger, project leader for the [996] RS programme. “We worked our way through the whole powertrain to see where we could save further weight, help gases flow more efficiently in and out of the engine, and finish up any tasks that were in the pipeline when the last two GT3 versions went to production.”
“The next item to be sorted was the cylinder-heads,” he continues. “These also have reshaped intake and exhaust ports for race homologation, although the exhaust system remains unchanged. Tappets remain hydraulic like the normal GT3s.”
Critical to the whole mix is the ECU remapping. “Most people in the chip tuning business do not realise it, but a lighter flywheel means that the fuelling and ignition can be much more aggressive on full throttle to take advantage of the dynamics of an engine that can now rev up faster," he explains. "The counterpoint is that we have to be very careful with the fuel and ignition settings at small throttle openings, so that the car is not a pig to drive when you are parking or moving slowly in town. This is partly an issue of being able to get the airflow working properly at low speeds with small throttle openings.”
Being able to rev higher helps as well, and the rev limit is raised to 8300rpm. Not many owners have complained about the power output, and on paper, Porsche still claims the same 381bhp at 7300rpm as the standard GT3. In reality, however, Andreas freely admits that the gains from all this work, as measured on Porsche’s control dyno, showed a jump to nearly 400bhp, possibly a shade more once the engine is properly run in.
“The next item to be sorted was the cylinder-heads,” he continues. “These also have reshaped intake and exhaust ports for race homologation, although the exhaust system remains unchanged. Tappets remain hydraulic like the normal GT3s.”
Critical to the whole mix is the ECU remapping. “Most people in the chip tuning business do not realise it, but a lighter flywheel means that the fuelling and ignition can be much more aggressive on full throttle to take advantage of the dynamics of an engine that can now rev up faster," he explains. "The counterpoint is that we have to be very careful with the fuel and ignition settings at small throttle openings, so that the car is not a pig to drive when you are parking or moving slowly in town. This is partly an issue of being able to get the airflow working properly at low speeds with small throttle openings.”
Being able to rev higher helps as well, and the rev limit is raised to 8300rpm. Not many owners have complained about the power output, and on paper, Porsche still claims the same 381bhp at 7300rpm as the standard GT3. In reality, however, Andreas freely admits that the gains from all this work, as measured on Porsche’s control dyno, showed a jump to nearly 400bhp, possibly a shade more once the engine is properly run in.
Nevertheless the claim was still the same for Mk2 and RS and 20bhp is a modest difference to feel through the seat of your pants. Variations between individual motors could easily negate most of that but in fairness it could also end up being nearer to 40PS difference too.
My original point was more to do with any differences between 97 GT3 and 97RS motors. I don't believe there were. If GT3 and RS were being built at the same time was there any selection process to ensure RS's received the "better" engines?
Lots of good advice here. Not sure if mentioned but as I recall the RS has a single mass flywheel unlike the GT3.
I have had my 2007 RS.1 from new (11000 miles). Generally reliable except for a clutch at 10k, by far the earliest I ever had a clutch problem. The clutch got progressively heavier (no slippage). Back to dealer several times and eventually replaced. NOT under warranty.
I am not hard on clutches but the dealer said they had done several. I understand there was a fix on the 4.0 that they are using now.
I fitted grilles on the open intakes in front right away to protect the oil rads which worked well.
After I had run a few sets of PS Cups I switched to SuperSports which wear better and have much better wet handling. The Cups are nasty in heavy rain.
RS.1 has no stability control which was available on the GT3 and is alos very low in front. I am on my third splitter from ramps in parking lots.
Car (viper green) is otherwise great. I had venturshield wrap on front as well as rear arches which proptected from stone chips. Alcantera steering wheel is now rough to the touch. Not sure how or if to clean it.
As has been said above RS offers no performane advantages on regular GT3 but it just feels a bit more special.
I have had my 2007 RS.1 from new (11000 miles). Generally reliable except for a clutch at 10k, by far the earliest I ever had a clutch problem. The clutch got progressively heavier (no slippage). Back to dealer several times and eventually replaced. NOT under warranty.
I am not hard on clutches but the dealer said they had done several. I understand there was a fix on the 4.0 that they are using now.
I fitted grilles on the open intakes in front right away to protect the oil rads which worked well.
After I had run a few sets of PS Cups I switched to SuperSports which wear better and have much better wet handling. The Cups are nasty in heavy rain.
RS.1 has no stability control which was available on the GT3 and is alos very low in front. I am on my third splitter from ramps in parking lots.
Car (viper green) is otherwise great. I had venturshield wrap on front as well as rear arches which proptected from stone chips. Alcantera steering wheel is now rough to the touch. Not sure how or if to clean it.
As has been said above RS offers no performane advantages on regular GT3 but it just feels a bit more special.
agtlaw said:
Slippydiff said:
The press reports did indeed say that they produced the same 381hp as the standard car and that they used the same internals, the alleged horsepower increase was supposedly only achieved at 180 + mph when the ram air collectors came into effect.
porsche press release: heredon't agree increased power is _only_ at high speed. see my earlier post and here's Herr Preuninger again:
Total911 said:
If you look under the front of the rear wing, you will notice ram air ducts for the engine bay. According to Andreas, these force cooling air into the intake with 15-18Mb of pressure at 300km/h (187mph), and this is enough to create an additional 15bhp. That extra 15bhp cannot be homologated, though, since the official engine output figures are certified on a dyno!
Evo June '04 said:
The flat-six engine has always had an epic delivery: meaningful low-and mid range torque spliced with howling top-end power. Now, with revised mapping and and more effective air intakes, the motor sings with even more vigour, although the official outputs remain the same as the GT3
Car April '04 said:
The powertrain is as per the 911 GT3, except for a lighter single mass flywheel: vibrates more but jumps faster to the throttle
Andrew Frankel '10 said:
The value was there though (and not just because two GT3 were built for every RS) you just needed to know where to look. We'll start with that apparently identical engine. Porsche claimed it to give the same 381hp as the standard model, but thanks to what Porsche termed as an "air collector" under the rear wing, the Rs engine reached its maximum power output "even more easily2, which, even at the time, was held to be a euphemism for "has more power". But how much ? Numbers around the 400hp mark have been mooted
One is left wondering whether the press pack wasn't given to the journalists ? or did they just not bother to read it perhaps ?and March 2012...
GT Porsche said:
Mechanically the [996] GT3 RS was identical to the Gen-2 GT3, but benefited from a 20kg weight saving.
lazy journalism. there are various mechanical differences (engine/suspension etc) and it's actually 50kg (DIN) lighter than a LHD 996 GT3 Clubsport. agtlaw said:
and March 2012...
The suspension is very different I thought, different pick up points etc.GT Porsche said:
Mechanically the [996] GT3 RS was identical to the Gen-2 GT3, but benefited from a 20kg weight saving.
lazy journalism. there are various mechanical differences (engine/suspension etc) and it's actually 50kg (DIN) lighter than a LHD 996 GT3 Clubsport. Brizzle said:
Thanks for all the replies.
I completely accept a 997.1 RS is realistically no more capable than a 997.1 GT3, and there's not a huge amount of logic in paying £10k more for one, or not buying a technically superior 997.2 GT3 for the same price. But...having been in both, the RS feels more special, there's no doubt about it. Amazing what a fancy paint job and carbon wing can do
Head is still fighting with heart though, have another round of viewings this weekend crossing a wide spectrum of prices. Is anyone familar with this car?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3665208.htm
Have also seen this which looks great but is perhaps priced too high considering its spec?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3631468.htm
Going back to my question on the RS's rear screen crazing, would be interested to find out if this is normal.
Thanks again for all the info and advice
I went for a 997.1 GT3 Comfort so I could chuck my kids in the back. If I hadn't got that constraint I would probably have gone for a 997.1 RS as I think they look more special. Colours are interesting, but there is a silver one at Specialist Cars of Malton which I think looks really good - a change from the regular green and orange.I completely accept a 997.1 RS is realistically no more capable than a 997.1 GT3, and there's not a huge amount of logic in paying £10k more for one, or not buying a technically superior 997.2 GT3 for the same price. But...having been in both, the RS feels more special, there's no doubt about it. Amazing what a fancy paint job and carbon wing can do
Head is still fighting with heart though, have another round of viewings this weekend crossing a wide spectrum of prices. Is anyone familar with this car?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3665208.htm
Have also seen this which looks great but is perhaps priced too high considering its spec?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3631468.htm
Going back to my question on the RS's rear screen crazing, would be interested to find out if this is normal.
Thanks again for all the info and advice
My mates 996RS rear screen as not crazed - sounds like its been treated with something that could have affected it.
nsm3 said:
RDMcG said:
RS.1 has no stability control which was available on the GT3
If you want PSM you have to move to the 7.2 versions.
Diamond blue said:
Heart says Viper Green, Akrapovic equipped RS
+1 to this!!! love it already...where is it now?Regarding Akrapovic, they are quite some money!
I just received my Fabspeed center bypass last week from the US, and got it fitted friday afternoon => couldn't stop driving it over the wkend eheheheh! Sounds amazing, plug or unplugged!
Overall was only £850 GBP (shipping, VAT, fitting). Jeff at Fabspeed was super responsive and quick and getting both bypasses built /shipped for Neil Kidhaa and i
Edited by 911Thrasher on Tuesday 28th February 14:30
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff