996 GT3 Mark 1 or Mark 2?

[TP321]

Whats the difference between these two and why is the Mark 1 regarded as the better drivers car? (read it in EVO somewhere). Also which variant - Comfort, Club Sport, or RS (but only in Mark 2 guise)?

[ZeroH]

Evo consenus is that the mk1 has stronger turn in and more feel but mk2 counters with more top end pace altho its stiffer front end detracts from its road use.

On balance they preferred the mk1 and didn't think the mk2 moved the game on enough.

[markcoznottz]

Mark 2 also has better brakes and less fussy wheels.

[anniesdad]

Mark 2 has more power, better brakes, better spoiler, nicer wheels...need I go on?

[drmark]

Don't get too bogged down in this debate and buy on budget, condition and history - rather than model or spec. All are great cars, all rare, and the differences smaller than made out. Here are my thoughts (bearing in mind I own a Mk2):

The Mk1 is the original and cheapest - Clubsport probably the best spec - and a fraction lighter. Downside is they look like every other 996 with a body kit, and have the same iffy build quality (material and fit and finish were much improved in the later 996s), and they are up to 6 years older so more likely to need new rads, bushes, diff etc.

The Mk2 is slightly faster and has better brakes and stronger gearbox. Spec not so important here as stronger cage only real diffference between Comfort and Clubsport - depends whether you like leather or Nomex buckets. I would avoid cars with normal seats though.

RS - a lighter Mk2 with a number of other significant mods and the one to go for if you are a serious tracker / looking for best long term investment. But you will pay for the privilege in the short term.

All great cars.

Edited by drmark on Saturday 4th September 05:32

[MrCooke]

All GT3s feel slightly different to drive, the suspension is fully adjustable so they can be set up how you fancy, but I'm yet to drive a Mk2 that feels as light and edgy as a good Mk1.

It's difficult to put into words but the 2s tend to feel more planted and the 1s more willing to dance. Which is better is a personal taste thing.

I agree that the 2s are better screwed together and have 20bhp more.

The Mk1 ought to be better news in the future since it's the original and there were far fewer UK RHD cars made.

[DanH]

ZeroH said:

Evo consenus is that the mk1 has stronger turn in and more feel but mk2 counters with more top end pace altho its stiffer front end detracts from its road use.

On balance they preferred the mk1 and didn't think the mk2 moved the game on enough.

Journos largely clueless though and none of them live with the cars so have very little idea about the realities, especially if you fettle.

[Pugley]

I bought a Mk1 because it has slightly softer spring rates and damping, making it a little more comfortable for use on the average UK bumpy country lane. It is also worth noting that a Mk1 being older and rarer is likely to cost less initially but will need all of the usual repairs that any 996 requires with age! (rads, dampers, exhaust etc etc)

I think you would need to be a driving God to push either model to its limit on the road. I understand that the MK2, having a stiffer setup is better on the track.

[rlw]

drmark said:

Downside is they look like every other 996 with a body kit, and have the same iffy build quality (material and fit and finish were much improved in the later 996s), and they are up to 6 years older so more likely to need new rads, bushes, diff etc.

They don't look like every other 996 in Zanzibar red and lowered even more............

What he said but most careful owners will by now have replaced everything that needs it whereas the later cars may just be reaching that point in time.

Mk1 wheels are a bugger to look after - mine are now all powder coated (non-original shock horror!)and will last for years. At almost 11 years old and over 50000 on the clock the interior scrubs up like new and the only thing which has fallen off is the GT3 badge in the carpet in the back. As a daily drive, in London, its hard work (so it isn't) and they don't like speed bumps and steep ramps much. Many people will say that scratches underneath are the sign of a car thats been tracked extensively, whereas I would say its a sign of a car thats been used in an urban environment and has possibly been to Tesco in Wadebridge the back way.

All Mk1 owners are keeping their fingers crossed and waiting for prices to go up but they don't seem to be going down so much any more. I am happy to sell mine when its worth what I paid for it so a couple of years yet then..........

[Harris_I]

DanH said:

ZeroH said:

Evo consenus is that the mk1 has stronger turn in and more feel but mk2 counters with more top end pace altho its stiffer front end detracts from its road use.

On balance they preferred the mk1 and didn't think the mk2 moved the game on enough.

Journos largely clueless though and none of them live with the cars so have very little idea about the realities, especially if you fettle.

Agree. Most journos are useless. However, I think the original Evo piece comparing the two (best cars of the decade feature a few years back) was comparing cars out of the box, and I suspect the journos with the views were Meaden and Barker at the time, who do know a thing or two.

That said, suspension is fully adjustable so no point in comparing handling characteristics out of the box. Buy on condition.

[MrCooke]

DanH said:

ZeroH said:

Evo consenus is that the mk1 has stronger turn in and more feel but mk2 counters with more top end pace altho its stiffer front end detracts from its road use.

On balance they preferred the mk1 and didn't think the mk2 moved the game on enough.

Journos largely clueless though and none of them live with the cars so have very little idea about the realities, especially if you fettle.

Largely maybe, but Evo have some that can drive rather well and 911&PW own a long term Mk1.

[DanH]

Harris_I said:

DanH said:

ZeroH said:

Evo consenus is that the mk1 has stronger turn in and more feel but mk2 counters with more top end pace altho its stiffer front end detracts from its road use.

On balance they preferred the mk1 and didn't think the mk2 moved the game on enough.

Journos largely clueless though and none of them live with the cars so have very little idea about the realities, especially if you fettle.

Agree. Most journos are useless. However, I think the original Evo piece comparing the two (best cars of the decade feature a few years back) was comparing cars out of the box, and I suspect the journos with the views were Meaden and Barker at the time, who do know a thing or two.

That said, suspension is fully adjustable so no point in comparing handling characteristics out of the box. Buy on condition.

Personally I'd buy on what you want. The mk2 has superior specification and is newer. The mk1 is the original so if you put value on that then go for it.

[robmug]

MrCooke said:

Largely maybe, but Evo have some that can drive rather well and 911&PW own a long term Mk1.

..and Total 911 Magazine ran a long term Mk2 (3 years and 30,000 miles).

[Steve Rance]

There has been a lot of poorly written comparisons between these cars over the years. The Mk2 car had a more idiot proof geo put on it hence the understeer. in General, give an inexperienced driver lots of front end grip in a 911 - especially a GT3 and oversteer will ultimately follow it which is not a good plan. Also, the RS was not a track only car fatally compromised on the road, just a car that gives more feedback than the other models. To a driver who is unable to understand or decipher it, this could appear intimidating. The common - too extreme for the road - response from journalists says more about thier own ability or lack of it to translate what is happening than it does about the car. it is the far more extensitve and delicate feedback of the passively sprung cars that seperate them as ultimately more satisfying and rewarding cars to drive than latter active vehicles.

Put a propper geo on any 996 GT3 and it will be a delight to drive. There is no 'bad' car in the bunch, they are all very good cars. My advice is the buy the best car thats on the market your budget allows. Whether it be a MK1 or MK2, they are very good cars indeed.

Edited by Steve Rance on Saturday 4th September 21:04

Edited by Steve Rance on Saturday 4th September 21:10

[SonnyM]

Steve Rance said:

There has been a lot of poorly written comparisons between these cars over the years. The Mk2 car had a more idiot proof geo put on it hence the understeer. in General, give an inexperienced driver lots of front end grip in a 911 - especially a GT3 and oversteer will ultimately follow it which is not a good plan. Also, the RS was not a track only car fatally compromised on the road, just a car that gives more feedback than the other models. To a driver who is unable to understand or decipher it, this could appear intimidating. The common - too extreme for the road - response from journalists says more about thier own ability or lack of it to translate what is happening than it does about the car. it is the far more extensitve and delicate feedback of the passively sprung cars that seperate them as ultimately more satisfying and rewarding cars to drive than latter active vehicles.

Put a propper geo on any 996 GT3 and it will be a delight to drive. There is no 'bad' car in the bunch, they are all very good cars. My advice is the buy the best car thats on the market your budget allows. Whether it be a MK1 or MK2, they are very good cars indeed.

Edited by Steve Rance on Saturday 4th September 21:04

Edited by Steve Rance on Saturday 4th September 21:10

Thanks. What defines a proper Geo? Should all GT3 Geos be setup the same? Would an OPC not setup the Geo on a GT3 perfectly or would you have to go to a race specialist?

Just curious... Thanks.

[Harris_I]

Don't bother with OPC. Go to a proper specialist - plenty of previous advice on these in previous threads.

Any decent specialist will ask you what your usage of the car is, and your preferences on feel/turn in/stability/comfort etc. There's no one size fits all solution, and some specialists can be quite secretive about their settings.

[drmark]

Harris_I said:

Don't bother with OPC. Go to a proper specialist - plenty of previous advice on these in previous threads.

Any decent specialist will ask you what your usage of the car is, and your preferences on feel/turn in/stability/comfort etc. There's no one size fits all solution, and some specialists can be quite secretive about their settings.

+1

[lowndes]

Harris_I said:

Don't bother with OPC. Go to a proper specialist - plenty of previous advice on these in previous threads.

Any decent specialist will ask you what your usage of the car is, and your preferences on feel/turn in/stability/comfort etc. There's no one size fits all solution, and some specialists can be quite secretive about their settings.

If new to the GT3 then it is probably worth first of all going to someone who will accurately set the car to factory theoretical settings (as distinct from those it came out of the factory on). One you have this as a bench mark you can see how you like it and then dial in revisions to suit your preference. However, getting to this point may take time as you need to start with ride height, and spring seat perches may be seized. Not all specialists are prepared to take this step by step approach so care is needed when selecting one.

[monthefish]

drmark said:

The Mk1 is the original and cheapest - Clubsport probably the best spec - and a fraction lighter.

The comfort spec GT3 was heavier than the base Carrera - was the Clubsport lighter than the Carrera?

rlw said:

drmark said:

Downside is they look like every other 996 with a body kit, and have the same iffy build quality (material and fit and finish were much improved in the later 996s), and they are up to 6 years older so more likely to need new rads, bushes, diff etc.

They don't look like every other 996 in Zanzibar red and lowered even more...............

How much lower is the GT3 than the std Carrera?

[Diamond blue]

For what its worth, the experience I had with the 2 cars were that the mk1 had, by some distance the best turn in of any 911, great sound , very fast and I think has a better , harder looking body kit. Weaknesses were a slightly agricultural gear change, quite heavy clutch and a longer front overhang meaning more grounding (Cheaper replacements though )
Mk2 was a bit softer looking but as some have said actually stiffer especially at the front end. The performance is palpably faster, it seems much more than 20bhp and the last 2,000 rpm is balistic.My mk2 felt just as fast as my 997 GT3. Was better made as well.
Never driven an RS but they are a bit noisier inside I am told although they do make good road cars.

Having had them all.

Really nice MK2 clubsport