how much better is a mk2 gt3 than the mk1 gt3...?

[kleonard]

how much better is a mk2 gt3 than the mk1 gt3...?.. anyone able to compare that have owned both......?????

[flemke]

Mk II's engine revs much more freely and the rear of the chassis is less prone to moving about.

[gfreeman]

Your question makes a large assumption......

regards
Biased of Hampshire

[flemke]

gfreeman said:

Your question makes a large assumption...... regards Biased of Hampshire

But a correct one.

[gfreeman]

flemke said:

gfreeman said: Your question makes a large assumption...... regards Biased of Hampshire But a correct one.

Gasp!!

[DanH]

Dangerous topic as its bound to offend someone!

If you believe journoman, the mk2s steering is less tactile with inferior turn in. Of course the relevancy of such an observation is negligable as you can fully adjust the setup on either car. I've had JZM give my car a more trackday biased setup, although nothing too extreme. Tyre choice also has an impact on directness of steering, presumably due to squirm in the tread.

As well as the benefits flemke outlines, the synchros are stronger in the mk2, it has gearbox cooling, more power & larger brakes (the mk1s can fade more easily, although some claim its solely down to crap drivers on the brakes too long).

Personally I think mk2 are better value at the moment. Especially if you factor in the additional cost the extra power & brake upgrade would cost on a mk1.

In the mk1s favour, there are less of them, and if you believe that infers greater value on a model, then they may hold their value better.

[Stirlings]

The mark 1's engine comes on cam at 3200 revs, and sounds better than the Mk2
mk2 has bigger brakes & dearer ( recently spent £1500 on rnewing front discs and pads,

having had 2 side by side most people reckoned the mk1 looks better

[ChrisW.]

The Mk1 is three years older and only £10k ? less expensive than the MkII.

And still a beautiful if slightly less robust and less powerful car.

Synchros, brakes ...