Cayman R Vs GT3
Discussion
Please can we stop hijacking threads about the GT3 by banging on about the Cayman R and vice versa. It's getting very boring to start reading an interesting thread a la GT3 RS one from a few days ago to find that yet again, there's some nonsense spouted about the Cayman R.
For anybody who truly wants to know which is "better", please could we channel that here, so that at least anybody who is interested in the debate can harp on about it as long as they like and the rest of us can read threads that stay on topic!
For the record, the pre-991 GT3 is a far superior car to the Cayman R for anybody who actually likes to drive. (I haven't driven a 991 GT3 yet, so can't comment on what that is like to drive).
The GT3 sounds a lot better, has way more feel, is a lot quicker in pretty much every guise and feels way more special. Chasing down the redline in a GT3 is simply a wonderful experience.
This doesn't mean that the CR is an utter piece of crap either - it's a perfectly good road car, handles well enough and is fun in its own right and makes a better noise than a 997 generation Carrera but it is not as good as a GT3 in any sense.
You've probably read some utter drivel about gear ratios etc and how the R is so much better as a road car because it has better gear ratios than a GT3 - this is desperate clap trap to me.
I own an R and to be honest I really like it, it's a nice car but it is not the best thing since sliced bread and if you wish to remain legal on any b road, you'll not escape 2nd gear and you'll certainly get nowhere near top of third unless you're happy to flirt with going to jail.
In my mind an R needs a higher revving engine, with better noise, more power and in general needs more feel, from the steering and chassis to be able to begin to approach a GT3.
In summary, an R feels like what it is. A half hearted effort from an exceptional car manufacturer, which means that it is in actual fact a very good car but one that has been deliberately restrained and you feel that when you drive it. Whereas every GT3, I have driven feels like it's the absolute best effort from an exceptional car manufacturer and you feel that difference when you drive it too.
For anybody who truly wants to know which is "better", please could we channel that here, so that at least anybody who is interested in the debate can harp on about it as long as they like and the rest of us can read threads that stay on topic!
For the record, the pre-991 GT3 is a far superior car to the Cayman R for anybody who actually likes to drive. (I haven't driven a 991 GT3 yet, so can't comment on what that is like to drive).
The GT3 sounds a lot better, has way more feel, is a lot quicker in pretty much every guise and feels way more special. Chasing down the redline in a GT3 is simply a wonderful experience.
This doesn't mean that the CR is an utter piece of crap either - it's a perfectly good road car, handles well enough and is fun in its own right and makes a better noise than a 997 generation Carrera but it is not as good as a GT3 in any sense.
You've probably read some utter drivel about gear ratios etc and how the R is so much better as a road car because it has better gear ratios than a GT3 - this is desperate clap trap to me.
I own an R and to be honest I really like it, it's a nice car but it is not the best thing since sliced bread and if you wish to remain legal on any b road, you'll not escape 2nd gear and you'll certainly get nowhere near top of third unless you're happy to flirt with going to jail.
In my mind an R needs a higher revving engine, with better noise, more power and in general needs more feel, from the steering and chassis to be able to begin to approach a GT3.
In summary, an R feels like what it is. A half hearted effort from an exceptional car manufacturer, which means that it is in actual fact a very good car but one that has been deliberately restrained and you feel that when you drive it. Whereas every GT3, I have driven feels like it's the absolute best effort from an exceptional car manufacturer and you feel that difference when you drive it too.
N
it could never be considered as having a sybiotic relationship with its chassis. The Gen 1 6 shuttle is a far sweeter drive. I frequently drive my Shuttle flat out, in fact many is the time I've left home at 100% throttle for the first 3 minutes despite the manual saying that I should throttle back to 65% to ensure the vehicle doesn't break up as I leave the earth's atmosphere.
Added to which production of the shuttle in all its iterations has only recently ceased, and whilst getting parts out of NASA for them can prove troublesome, it's nothing like trying to get parts for a vehicle that NASA stopped producing nearly 40 years ago. I'm sorry, but buying stuff off ebay or the PH classifieds for a 40 year old highly specialised vehicle like the Saturn 5 GT2 isn't an option for me.
I tried the Saturn 5 6 GT2 , it's good, but all that landing in the sea nonsense was a complete PITA. At least with the Shuttle I can land on the M5 late at night and be home within ten minutes.
I like the Gen 2 7 shuttle a lot, but find the PASM (Powered Ascent Shock Management) overly intrusive. If someone would design a passive system that enabled me to play with orbital exit speeds, I'd probably trade my Gen 1 in.
The Shuttle R is a very well resolved vehicle, but for me the mid engine design makes it far too stable, put bluntly I don't drive at 17,800 mph and expect the vehicle to be stable. The very nature of the Gen 1 6 Shuttle with it's rear engine design makes it a far edgier drive at the limit (and below it).
Sure all the Shuttle 6 versions have front ends that "understeer", but that's a very intrinsic part of their appeal. You can either speak to the various independent specialist NASA service agents and get them to alter the front vector geometry, OR you can learn to drive the vehicle in such a way as to nullify the understeer. Or as I've done in the past, you can have modifications carried out to the vehicle to make it more composed irrespective of atmospheric conditions (the fitment of Ohlins) Overt Handling Linear Improvement Nicely Sorted)
Leaving the earth's atmosphere in a Saturn 5 is a piece of piss, it's a sledgehammer. Leaving the earth's atmosphere in the Shuttle R with its stable platform is equally easy (despite it's wheezy characterless engines)
In a Shuttle 6, with it's lesser power (compared to the Saturn 5 GT2 type 6) and inherently unbalanced platform, you have to work at the process, and that for me (and many others I suspect) is the attraction of the Shuttle 6.
Here's the launch of my Shuttle 6 a few weeks ago : (probably best to get a glass or can of something and make yourself comfortable)
I spent a fortune on GoPros to get this footage, I hope you enjoy and appreciate it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFwqZ4qAUkE
Slippydiff said:
AndrewD said:
Not as good as a Saturn V though. Lacks feel and not as resolved
Nonsense, the Gen 2 Saturn 5 6 GT2 experience is dominated by the massive thrust of the engine,it could never be considered as having a sybiotic relationship with its chassis. The Gen 1 6 shuttle is a far sweeter drive. I frequently drive my Shuttle flat out, in fact many is the time I've left home at 100% throttle for the first 3 minutes despite the manual saying that I should throttle back to 65% to ensure the vehicle doesn't break up as I leave the earth's atmosphere.
Added to which production of the shuttle in all its iterations has only recently ceased, and whilst getting parts out of NASA for them can prove troublesome, it's nothing like trying to get parts for a vehicle that NASA stopped producing nearly 40 years ago. I'm sorry, but buying stuff off ebay or the PH classifieds for a 40 year old highly specialised vehicle like the Saturn 5 GT2 isn't an option for me.
I tried the Saturn 5 6 GT2 , it's good, but all that landing in the sea nonsense was a complete PITA. At least with the Shuttle I can land on the M5 late at night and be home within ten minutes.
I like the Gen 2 7 shuttle a lot, but find the PASM (Powered Ascent Shock Management) overly intrusive. If someone would design a passive system that enabled me to play with orbital exit speeds, I'd probably trade my Gen 1 in.
The Shuttle R is a very well resolved vehicle, but for me the mid engine design makes it far too stable, put bluntly I don't drive at 17,800 mph and expect the vehicle to be stable. The very nature of the Gen 1 6 Shuttle with it's rear engine design makes it a far edgier drive at the limit (and below it).
Sure all the Shuttle 6 versions have front ends that "understeer", but that's a very intrinsic part of their appeal. You can either speak to the various independent specialist NASA service agents and get them to alter the front vector geometry, OR you can learn to drive the vehicle in such a way as to nullify the understeer. Or as I've done in the past, you can have modifications carried out to the vehicle to make it more composed irrespective of atmospheric conditions (the fitment of Ohlins) Overt Handling Linear Improvement Nicely Sorted)
Leaving the earth's atmosphere in a Saturn 5 is a piece of piss, it's a sledgehammer. Leaving the earth's atmosphere in the Shuttle R with its stable platform is equally easy (despite it's wheezy characterless engines)
In a Shuttle 6, with it's lesser power (compared to the Saturn 5 GT2 type 6) and inherently unbalanced platform, you have to work at the process, and that for me (and many others I suspect) is the attraction of the Shuttle 6.
Here's the launch of my Shuttle 6 a few weeks ago : (probably best to get a glass or can of something and make yourself comfortable)
I spent a fortune on GoPros to get this footage, I hope you enjoy and appreciate it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFwqZ4qAUkE
Mr D. I didn't say that I thought that the CR was too fast. I merely pointed out that the top end of 3rd gear was way to over the legal speed limit. These are 2 different things!
The reason I don't have a GT3 are somewhat more complicated. But here goes:
1. I like owning cars from new and you can't get a new GT3
2. I suspect that the cost of running one is far higher than the CR
3. My mrs won't get why I bought a car with 2 seats that looks like the family friendly car we used to have that has 4 seats
4. I've driven a 997 GT3RS 4.0 - this is the car that I really want but I don't have the spare £350k to buy one
5. The cost to swap to a GT3 is very high and as I said the CR is a very good car, just no GT3
6. I do like the CR, it feels light and has a great spec. It's also quite a small car, which is good for the roads around here.
You seem to suggest that the CR needs to be modded to get the best from it. I don't diasagree, if I was to keep it, then I'd get quite a lot more stuff done to it but out of the box, a GT3 is the better car IMHO.
I'm on the list for a GT4. I'm hoping Porsche allow that car to realise the full potential of the chassis. The signs are good as the GTS cayman is a great car (no GT3) but very similar to the R in terms of drive with better engine noise and it can be spec'd to be like an R (other than lightweight doors obviously).
Also I have had the geo done on my car. It still wasn't that great, it's actually better now that it went into a tyre fitters, who just did a std geo on it (not OEM). The main issue for me is that the CR needs to be ragged senseless to feel fun., so it is great on track days (although still not as good as a GT3). Whereas a GT3 feels great even at 5mph.
The reason I don't have a GT3 are somewhat more complicated. But here goes:
1. I like owning cars from new and you can't get a new GT3
2. I suspect that the cost of running one is far higher than the CR
3. My mrs won't get why I bought a car with 2 seats that looks like the family friendly car we used to have that has 4 seats
4. I've driven a 997 GT3RS 4.0 - this is the car that I really want but I don't have the spare £350k to buy one
5. The cost to swap to a GT3 is very high and as I said the CR is a very good car, just no GT3
6. I do like the CR, it feels light and has a great spec. It's also quite a small car, which is good for the roads around here.
You seem to suggest that the CR needs to be modded to get the best from it. I don't diasagree, if I was to keep it, then I'd get quite a lot more stuff done to it but out of the box, a GT3 is the better car IMHO.
I'm on the list for a GT4. I'm hoping Porsche allow that car to realise the full potential of the chassis. The signs are good as the GTS cayman is a great car (no GT3) but very similar to the R in terms of drive with better engine noise and it can be spec'd to be like an R (other than lightweight doors obviously).
Also I have had the geo done on my car. It still wasn't that great, it's actually better now that it went into a tyre fitters, who just did a std geo on it (not OEM). The main issue for me is that the CR needs to be ragged senseless to feel fun., so it is great on track days (although still not as good as a GT3). Whereas a GT3 feels great even at 5mph.
Edited by J-P on Saturday 22 November 17:38
Edited by J-P on Saturday 22 November 17:53
mrdemon said:
" I merely pointed out that the top end of 3rd gear was way to over the legal speed limit"
"The main issue for me is that the CR needs to be ragged senseless to feel fun"
I don't get it, the GT3 is even faster in 3rd and needs to be ragged even more !
All I'm saying is the GT3 has more feel at low speed than the CR, hell the GTS has more feel than the CR at low speed. You need to be going much faster in the CR to get the same level of feel. It's not specifically about going fast."The main issue for me is that the CR needs to be ragged senseless to feel fun"
I don't get it, the GT3 is even faster in 3rd and needs to be ragged even more !
Edited by mrdemon on Saturday 22 November 18:07
Edited by J-P on Saturday 22 November 23:16
Alpinestars said:
hondansx said:
I think you could make an argument that the a Cayman R is better than a GT3. But you could make the same argument that a two grand MX5 is better than both.
The limitation with the GT3 is that it is so capable that it is too fast for the road. Even on balls-out blasts, you are scratching the surface of the what the car is capable of and - frankly - kidding yourself if you think you are really pushing. As a result, can't wait to get the GT3 on track where i know it will come into it's own!
Oh, and away from the driving the experience, the GT3 looks frigging awesome and the Cayman R looks like a bar of soap...
Except you don't need to drive the GT3 at ten tenths to feel how special it is. It engages right from the off. The limitation with the GT3 is that it is so capable that it is too fast for the road. Even on balls-out blasts, you are scratching the surface of the what the car is capable of and - frankly - kidding yourself if you think you are really pushing. As a result, can't wait to get the GT3 on track where i know it will come into it's own!
Oh, and away from the driving the experience, the GT3 looks frigging awesome and the Cayman R looks like a bar of soap...
Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff