991 RS ON TRACK

[APOLO1]

Housey said:

I don't think anyone (unless they are an idiot) would argue it's a great car and a step forward, but some of the hyperbole on here is horse st. I don't need to drive one to know that, there is plenty of evidence out there when you start to compare lap times that it's a bit quicker, but not 918 quick or any quicker than a 997 GT2 for example (yea I know that as many more horses) and not massively quicker than a 991 GT3 or Turbo, or any quicker in some instances. It's a 911 a few percent better than the last 911 version. Same as it ever was, same bks as there ever was with the 997 and 996 before them arriving, just after they arrived, and so then the world turns.

ref the 918, not on about the speed, more from a fun interaction point, not just my view either, other 918 owner's that own an RS have same view...

Not a good example with 997GT2 either, would not know which way a RS went.......

[911Viking]

Housey said:

I don't think anyone (unless they are an idiot) would argue it's a great car and a step forward, but some of the hyperbole on here is horse st. I don't need to drive one to know that, there is plenty of evidence out there when you start to compare lap times that it's a bit quicker, but not 918 quick or any quicker than a 997 GT2 for example (yea I know that as many more horses) and not massively quicker than a 991 GT3 or Turbo, or any quicker in some instances. It's a 911 a few percent better than the last 911 version. Same as it ever was, same bks as there ever was with the 997 and 996 before them arriving, just after they arrived, and so then the world turns.

Also don't think it will get close to 918, but quite sure it will leave a 997GT2 and 991 TS/GT3 for that matter. I have a lot of Spa laps in 991GT3/TS and soon will be able to determine delta to RS. That be delta for a fairly quick ametour. Pro might be diff, time will tell.

Point to 918 vs RS was RS being the favored at current, no reference to capability. That choice to make is not relevant to most of us.

[Housey]

Sorry, GT2 RS

Look at this, click on the track to see comparisons.

http://fastestlaps.com/models/porsche-911-gt3-rs-9...

I am not surprised the RS feels good, they have always felt good, but from what I am (able) to see the cars when driven by people who can get them round a track really quickly, are not significantly quicker, if at all. I appreciate that us mere mortals might be able to go quicker, but if that is the car I don't believe downforce is the reason, certainly not in the wet.

[ttdan]

911Viking said:

Somewhat funny, not only here, with everybody having an opinion without even haven driven the car.

Trust me, it would silence every single one of you, the car is just shockingly good. There is nothing out there coming anywhere close.

I have driven it at the PEC, Its wonderful. but, its not that wonderful. Quite a mobile car on its factory geo at moderate speeds but be then so was the 997. it SEEMS to be doing a load of stuff on your behalf, but you could says that about any car, it feels so much smaller to drive than it looks, it looks huge, just depends what you want from a machine. I couldn't get over the not changing gear thing personally and how much quicker that makes it regarding lap times. This makes sense for a racing car where you need to win things but for a toy its less important for me personally.

Its all academic anyway as you can't buy one, so its not as if it a choice for people.

[LaSource]

ttdan said:

I have driven it at the PEC, Its wonderful. but, its not that wonderful. Quite a mobile car on its factory geo at moderate speeds but be then so was the 997. it SEEMS to be doing a load of stuff on your behalf, but you could says that about any car, it feels so much smaller to drive than it looks, it looks huge, just depends what you want from a machine. I couldn't get over the not changing gear thing personally and how much quicker that makes it regarding lap times. This makes sense for a racing car where you need to win things but for a toy its less important for me personally.

Its all academic anyway as you can't buy one, so its not as if it a choice for people.

Has our coffee making friend received his yet?

[ttdan]

nope, early next year apparently.

[911Viking]

I like manual cars as well and keep a few of them. Was actually a little surprised these new super GT3's excited me, but they do. I think they are awesome fun and they are fairly comfy as well. In my book that's a good thing.

[ttdan]

I just wish Porsche would make a few more of them and cool off some of the "unobtainium" hype. Then we would be discussing real options for real people rather than a rarified few, some of whom may have a resale agenda.

The car seemed easy to drive stupidly quick. For some thats a great thing for others its not such a big deal.

[fioran0]

isaldiri said:

Fiorano - many thanks for taking the time on all the above. A last question if you could say, what would the 430 challenge aero numbers look like compared to the 997 cup as I believe you have mentioned running the challenge before so am quite interested given you had posted on the differences in driving the 2 cars previously how the downforce balance would look to compare the different engine configurations.

I don't know what the DF numbers are on the 430 challenge. I didn't ever run shock pots to measure and haven't seen anyone elses numbers sadly. It would be interesting to see though.
There are some Sport Auto numbers etc out there for the 430 and Scuderia but they are problematic. These cars rely on ground effects for downforce and the lack of a moving floor reduces their effectiveness in wind tunnel situations.
There are a bunch of interesting papers produced on this topic that can be fun to skim over with a cup of tea/coffee.

Actually the 991 numbers can reasonably be expected to differ as a consequence of the lack of a moving floor (if they were tested without one too) even though they don't use ground effects like Ferrari do.
By way of example, the centre of pressure at the front can shift lower when the floor is moving and this can cause some separation on the bonnet area. The effect is a reduction in DF/increase in lift there.
There is also usually a pressure difference created in the wheel wells when the ground is moving (and therefore so are the wheels). Usually this movement causes lift here which subtracts from DF/adds to lift. The RS has vented front wheel arches at the front of course which, if applied properly should atleast have an effect up there on this factor.
How much these sorts of things will influence the real world numbers are anyones guess but it is something to be aware of when having these discussions.

Ref the rest of your question. If you look at the way the F430 GTC car adds extra aero, it is mainly through the addition of a large rear wing and a front splinter as is the convention. I wouldn't expect these to add levels of downforce in a way that matches the natural weight distribution of the car seeing how much DF a high lift type of wing adds.

[APOLO1]

ttdan said:

I have driven it at the PEC, Its wonderful. but, its not that wonderful. Quite a mobile car on its factory geo at moderate speeds but be then so was the 997. it SEEMS to be doing a load of stuff on your behalf, but you could says that about any car, it feels so much smaller to drive than it looks, it looks huge, just depends what you want from a machine. I couldn't get over the not changing gear thing personally and how much quicker that makes it regarding lap times. This makes sense for a racing car where you need to win things but for a toy its less important for me personally.

Its all academic anyway as you can't buy one, so its not as if it a choice for people.

The worlds press, owners, PCC drivers, F1 drivers disagree with you, GT3 won best drivers car on the planet 2014, This RS is big step above.

Also imv, PEC not a good place to get best out of the car, did you drive the press car, or the pre production car?

[APOLO1]

Housey said:

Sorry, GT2 RS

Look at this, click on the track to see comparisons.

http://fastestlaps.com/models/porsche-911-gt3-rs-9...

I am not surprised the RS feels good, they have always felt good, but from what I am (able) to see the cars when driven by people who can get them round a track really quickly, are not significantly quicker, if at all. I appreciate that us mere mortals might be able to go quicker, but if that is the car I don't believe downforce is the reason, certainly not in the wet.

S
It is the DF that sets this car aside from those before it...PCC drivers that have driven the car say its close to their race car.

Go and have a sit it one....

[Alpinestars]

For all it's "aero" it's hardly any quicker than a 991 gt3/TTS around a track. Why not?

[Phooey]

I wonder if it's as quick(er) as some people make out? For all it's power advantage and tech-features the 997 GT3 seems to hold onto it quite well. Might be the quicker car at the traffic lights but when they are moving the performance of both cars isn't too different. Certainly looks that way to me by this recent vid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b9ecQyn8ag

[Steve Rance]

APOLO1 said:

S
It is the DF that sets this car aside from those before it...PCC drivers that have driven the car say its close to their race car.

Go and have a sit it one....

So the race car has active anti roll bars, a torque vectoring diff and rear wheel steer?

[isaldiri]

fioran0 said:

I don't know what the DF numbers are on the 430 challenge. I didn't ever run shock pots to measure and haven't seen anyone elses numbers sadly. It would be interesting to see though.
There are some Sport Auto numbers etc out there for the 430 and Scuderia but they are problematic. These cars rely on ground effects for downforce and the lack of a moving floor reduces their effectiveness in wind tunnel situations.
There are a bunch of interesting papers produced on this topic that can be fun to skim over with a cup of tea/coffee.

Actually the 991 numbers can reasonably be expected to differ as a consequence of the lack of a moving floor (if they were tested without one too) even though they don't use ground effects like Ferrari do.
By way of example, the centre of pressure at the front can shift lower when the floor is moving and this can cause some separation on the bonnet area. The effect is a reduction in DF/increase in lift there.
There is also usually a pressure difference created in the wheel wells when the ground is moving (and therefore so are the wheels). Usually this movement causes lift here which subtracts from DF/adds to lift. The RS has vented front wheel arches at the front of course which, if applied properly should atleast have an effect up there on this factor.
How much these sorts of things will influence the real world numbers are anyones guess but it is something to be aware of when having these discussions.

Ref the rest of your question. If you look at the way the F430 GTC car adds extra aero, it is mainly through the addition of a large rear wing and a front splinter as is the convention. I wouldn't expect these to add levels of downforce in a way that matches the natural weight distribution of the car seeing how much DF a high lift type of wing adds.

Interesting stuff as usual, much appreciated for taking the time.

p.s if you wouldn't mind pointing to the odd link for said tech papers as mentioned I'd be quite keen to have a browse even if it most likely wouldn't make very much sense..

[Housey]

APOLO1 said:

Housey said:

Sorry, GT2 RS

Look at this, click on the track to see comparisons.

http://fastestlaps.com/models/porsche-911-gt3-rs-9...

I am not surprised the RS feels good, they have always felt good, but from what I am (able) to see the cars when driven by people who can get them round a track really quickly, are not significantly quicker, if at all. I appreciate that us mere mortals might be able to go quicker, but if that is the car I don't believe downforce is the reason, certainly not in the wet.

S
It is the DF that sets this car aside from those before it...PCC drivers that have driven the car say its close to their race car.

Go and have a sit it one....

Oh I have

Next time, I plan to start it and drive off though

[Housey]

Alpinestars said:

For all it's "aero" it's hardly any quicker than a 991 gt3/TTS around a track. Why not?

This is the point I was making really, the stop watch doesn't lie and feeling fast and being fast are 2 different things. Anyone who has raced a go kart knows that....or an MX5

[911Viking]

Phooey said:

I wonder if it's as quick(er) as some people make out? For all it's power advantage and tech-features the 997 GT3 seems to hold onto it quite well. Might be the quicker car at the traffic lights but when they are moving the performance of both cars isn't too different. Certainly looks that way to me by this recent vid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b9ecQyn8ag

Bad comparison, that RS is all over the place, Dijon good example of how big delta the driver can make, let them swap car and the RS is out of sight in 1/3 a lap.

We have done these type of comparisons on Spa, 991GT3 vs 997GT3, equal driver, delta is huge, 991 is gone without even trying. 991RS is a fair big step up in real life.

True the car is a lot more capable, much more than 996/997, but you still have to go out there and do it. When moving modern cars round a track in flat out mode, things happens a lot quicker than in old school manuals.

I like both and will keep both.

[911Viking]

Alpinestars said:

For all it's "aero" it's hardly any quicker than a 991 gt3/TTS around a track. Why not?

Think next season will show the delta, in real life like for like, there will be a substantial delta.

[F40GT346]

Is it just me, or do the wheels on the 991 GT3 RS actually look too big now? Particularly noticeable in the pictures taken close to the ground, the wheel size just looks a bit much, and also seems to raise the ride height of the car.