RE: Driven: Porsche 911 GT3 RS

[RobM77]

Anh said:

Davey S2 said:

Anh said:

104k for stripped down 60k car, you choose, you lose.

Where did you get the figure of £60K from??

Other than the body shape it shares virtually nothing with a £60K Carrera

A replacement engine on the Gen 1 996 GT3 was over £40K about 10 years ago so the unit in the latest car is going to easily top £50K.

You're really quite ignorant about the facts on this car arent you?

It is based on the same monocoque chassis as the 911 Carrera which retails for an inflated 60k.

The difference is they took a batch of normal 911's, installed a batch of engines with its engine mangagement fuel and ignition mapping, porting and camshafts for its torque band shifted further up the RPM range for more peak power, stripped off all the creature comforts, bolted in a roll cage and slapped an additional 90% towards the retail price to market it as some race car or "homologation" special for racing only as a marketing excerise to yet sell more 60k 911's and 30k Boxsters...

Porsche are clever as they know there are enough people who have the money to buy into that bullst, simply because Porsche simply cant afford to built a really fast car from the ground up since the Carrera GT.

Regards,

Anh

I was under the impression that the GT3 RS went further than that, with re-engineered suspension (as in pick up points etc, noto just springs and dampers). Don't forget that every element of a car isn't just knocked up in an afternoon or three in a workshop, being a mass produced car it has to be properly designed, tested in all conditions, revised if necessary, type approved etc etc. Even changing the wing mirror on a car could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds of expense for the manufacturer. Building a car is no easy feat, especially not one as good as a GT3 RS! What on earth do you think about the expense of Bristols?

Given that a Caterham R500 costs £40k (and it's easy to do the maths as to why if you have a parts catalogue), I can't see any problem with a £100k GT3 RS.

That's not saying I'd buy one if I had £100k right now to spend on cars; I'd rather upgrade my everyday car and get a Lotus 2-11 for track days, or indulge in some more racing perhaps; but purely from a financial point of view £100k seems like a fair figure for the GT3 RS.

[RDMcG]

RobM77 said:

Anh said:

Davey S2 said:

Anh said:

104k for stripped down 60k car, you choose, you lose.

Where did you get the figure of £60K from??

Other than the body shape it shares virtually nothing with a £60K Carrera

A replacement engine on the Gen 1 996 GT3 was over £40K about 10 years ago so the unit in the latest car is going to easily top £50K.

You're really quite ignorant about the facts on this car arent you?

It is based on the same monocoque chassis as the 911 Carrera which retails for an inflated 60k.

The difference is they took a batch of normal 911's, installed a batch of engines with its engine mangagement fuel and ignition mapping, porting and camshafts for its torque band shifted further up the RPM range for more peak power, stripped off all the creature comforts, bolted in a roll cage and slapped an additional 90% towards the retail price to market it as some race car or "homologation" special for racing only as a marketing excerise to yet sell more 60k 911's and 30k Boxsters...

Porsche are clever as they know there are enough people who have the money to buy into that bullst, simply because Porsche simply cant afford to built a really fast car from the ground up since the Carrera GT.

Regards,

Anh

I was under the impression that the GT3 RS went further than that, with re-engineered suspension (as in pick up points etc, noto just springs and dampers). Don't forget that every element of a car isn't just knocked up in an afternoon or three in a workshop, being a mass produced car it has to be properly designed, tested in all conditions, revised if necessary, type approved etc etc. Even changing the wing mirror on a car could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds of expense for the manufacturer. Building a car is no easy feat, especially not one as good as a GT3 RS! What on earth do you think about the expense of Bristols?

Given that a Caterham R500 costs £40k (and it's easy to do the maths as to why if you have a parts catalogue), I can't see any problem with a £100k GT3 RS.

That's not saying I'd buy one if I had £100k right now to spend on cars; I'd rather upgrade my everyday car and get a Lotus 2-11 for track days, or indulge in some more racing perhaps; but purely from a financial point of view £100k seems like a fair figure for the GT3 RS.

Your points are well taken and I am very clear that there are lots of excellent alternatives to the RS. I have some other road cars so it works for me. One point I would additionally make is that the RS engine is not a tuner version of the standard car, but a separately developed dry sump engine based on the GT1 block. I have certainly had a huge amount of fun with cars other than the RS, and the 2-11 is a brilliant track car as far as I can tell from the reviews.

[RobM77]

RDMcG said:

RobM77 said:

Anh said:

Davey S2 said:

Anh said:

104k for stripped down 60k car, you choose, you lose.

Where did you get the figure of £60K from??

Other than the body shape it shares virtually nothing with a £60K Carrera

A replacement engine on the Gen 1 996 GT3 was over £40K about 10 years ago so the unit in the latest car is going to easily top £50K.

You're really quite ignorant about the facts on this car arent you?

It is based on the same monocoque chassis as the 911 Carrera which retails for an inflated 60k.

The difference is they took a batch of normal 911's, installed a batch of engines with its engine mangagement fuel and ignition mapping, porting and camshafts for its torque band shifted further up the RPM range for more peak power, stripped off all the creature comforts, bolted in a roll cage and slapped an additional 90% towards the retail price to market it as some race car or "homologation" special for racing only as a marketing excerise to yet sell more 60k 911's and 30k Boxsters...

Porsche are clever as they know there are enough people who have the money to buy into that bullst, simply because Porsche simply cant afford to built a really fast car from the ground up since the Carrera GT.

Regards,

Anh

I was under the impression that the GT3 RS went further than that, with re-engineered suspension (as in pick up points etc, noto just springs and dampers). Don't forget that every element of a car isn't just knocked up in an afternoon or three in a workshop, being a mass produced car it has to be properly designed, tested in all conditions, revised if necessary, type approved etc etc. Even changing the wing mirror on a car could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds of expense for the manufacturer. Building a car is no easy feat, especially not one as good as a GT3 RS! What on earth do you think about the expense of Bristols?

Given that a Caterham R500 costs £40k (and it's easy to do the maths as to why if you have a parts catalogue), I can't see any problem with a £100k GT3 RS.

That's not saying I'd buy one if I had £100k right now to spend on cars; I'd rather upgrade my everyday car and get a Lotus 2-11 for track days, or indulge in some more racing perhaps; but purely from a financial point of view £100k seems like a fair figure for the GT3 RS.

Your points are well taken and I am very clear that there are lots of excellent alternatives to the RS. I have some other road cars so it works for me. One point I would additionally make is that the RS engine is not a tuner version of the standard car, but a separately developed dry sump engine based on the GT1 block. I have certainly had a huge amount of fun with cars other than the RS, and the 2-11 is a brilliant track car as far as I can tell from the reviews.

Sorry, my final comment shouldn't be mis-understood. I was meaning to say that the GT3-RS is a car for people who've got another reasonably good car, like you have. It shouldn't be put into context with someone who has only one car.

Your second point just goes to compound what I've said above - I think people like Anh don't understand a) what is involved with releasing a fully type approved production car to the standards that Porsche produce and b) what technology and engineering has gone into the GT3-RS.

I'd also like to call troll on Anh I'm afraid. When I'm discussing technical aspects of cars and driving, he frequently joins the discussion just to condescendingly say "Rob, you show a deep lack of understanding of cars on many levels and in so many ways. You really haven't got a clue what you're on about". Such comments are normally posted after I've practically written an essay on a particular aspect of driving technique or suspension design etc, using trusted textbooks and years of racing experience as sources. He won't disagree and discuss, he'll just make arrogant and condescending comments. He's a troll basically. Have a look at the 4WD vs 2WD thread in General Gassing on page 10 for an example - his post is virtually a carbon copy of another one he made recently. My statement is actually based on sound fact from respected engineering textbooks (namely "Race Car Vehicle Dynamics" by Milliken for that particular comment); his statement on the other hand just proves he's a troll.

GT3 RS: one of the best driving machines on sale, and worth every penny

[Anh]

Ferrari and Lamborghini build cars from the ground up. A 100k car is a 100k car. Not a 3 year old 59k steel bodied coupe stripped down and styled with race car pretentions with a 104k price tag.

Big difference there.

I come to understand that the more that Porsche fan boys become very defensive the more sad the whole idea of owning a Porsche is in today's world.

Perhaps porsche should publish a Porsche Owner's self-defence book, how to cover every angle of attack from "your car is actually a fast Beetle" to "You paid more money to have less on your car"

Honestly some of you would pay £10 to use a Porsche dealer's toilet and convince yourself that it is a privilege.

Edited by Anh on Friday 26th February 17:25

[petrolsniffer]

[Gridl0k]

I'll happily run you down in a Cayenne, if that'd help prove your point?

[Anh]

Gridl0k said:

I'll happily run you down in a Cayenne, if that'd help prove your point?

Was that a threat?

[Anh]

RobM77 said:

I was under the impression that the GT3 RS went further than that, with re-engineered suspension (as in pick up points etc, noto just springs and dampers). Don't forget that every element of a car isn't just knocked up in an afternoon or three in a workshop, being a mass produced car it has to be properly designed, tested in all conditions, revised if necessary, type approved etc etc. Even changing the wing mirror on a car could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds of expense for the manufacturer. Building a car is no easy feat, especially not one as good as a GT3 RS! What on earth do you think about the expense of Bristols?

Given that a Caterham R500 costs £40k (and it's easy to do the maths as to why if you have a parts catalogue), I can't see any problem with a £100k GT3 RS.

That's not saying I'd buy one if I had £100k right now to spend on cars; I'd rather upgrade my everyday car and get a Lotus 2-11 for track days, or indulge in some more racing perhaps; but purely from a financial point of view £100k seems like a fair figure for the GT3 RS.

Rob - you dont know what you are talking about - again.

Altering suspension pick up points is not a technical feat, and everything else you described has been done by other manufacturers without trying nearly double the retail of the car.

You call me a troll because you simply cant take it when someone can see right through your techno-babble.

[RobM77]

Anh said:

RobM77 said:

I was under the impression that the GT3 RS went further than that, with re-engineered suspension (as in pick up points etc, noto just springs and dampers). Don't forget that every element of a car isn't just knocked up in an afternoon or three in a workshop, being a mass produced car it has to be properly designed, tested in all conditions, revised if necessary, type approved etc etc. Even changing the wing mirror on a car could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds of expense for the manufacturer. Building a car is no easy feat, especially not one as good as a GT3 RS! What on earth do you think about the expense of Bristols?

Given that a Caterham R500 costs £40k (and it's easy to do the maths as to why if you have a parts catalogue), I can't see any problem with a £100k GT3 RS.

That's not saying I'd buy one if I had £100k right now to spend on cars; I'd rather upgrade my everyday car and get a Lotus 2-11 for track days, or indulge in some more racing perhaps; but purely from a financial point of view £100k seems like a fair figure for the GT3 RS.

Rob - you dont know what you are talking about - again.

Altering suspension pick up points is not a technical feat, and everything else you described has been done by other manufacturers without trying nearly double the retail of the car.

You call me a troll because you simply cant take it when someone can see right through your techno-babble.

Sorry, it's not like you're disagreeing with me in a discussion, you just come in and tell me I'm talking rubbish without any justification. I quote some perfectly rational arguments, and sometimes even quoting out of established and well respected textbooks (as in the 4WD vs 2WD thread), and you just say "you don't know what you're talking about". You have to learn some manners! Regarding the 4WD vs 3WD thread, you can't just tell a degree qualified Physicist who is also a racing driver that he "doesn't know what he's talking about" when he's quoting out of a textbook and leave it at that?! Extraordinary claims needs extraordinary justification. You can point out incorrect aspects of my argument, or come up with counter explanations, but just saying "nah.. you're talking rubbish" makes you a troll.. especially when you pop up out of the woodwork and say the same thing to me every few weeks.

For the GT3 RS you have to understand that this isn't just a lightening and tweaking job that you or I could do in the garage in a few weeks; it's a complete re-engineering of the entire car (have a look at Paul Frere's book on the 911 for details on the extent of the 996 GT3's modifications). A large company like Porsche can't just unbolt something, bend it a bit and bolt it back on, it has to be designed, type approved, crash tested and goodness knows what else.

Plus, regarding the cost of the car, you're exaggerating just slightly. This GT3-RS is £104,841, which you claim is "nearly double" the retail of the standard car. The standard 911 Carrera with no options added is £61,744. That makes the GT3 just under 1.7 times the cost, not double. Double would be £123,488, nearly £10k more. Your cost argument also doesn't really hold any water - are you saying that BMW are not justified in charging £50k for the M3 when the 3 series starts at £22k, or Caterham with the £40k+ R500 when they sell 7s for £18k as well? Similar differentials exist with Audi if you compare the A4 with the RS4, or Mercedes etc. As you can see, most manufacturers are charging more than double for their top of the range performance model, and so are Porsche with their GT2 compared with the base Carrera. That all seems to check out to me. Not you?

[heebeegeetee]

Why does anyone have a problem with a car company making money? The British industry has all but gone due to an inability to make money, Ferrari lost their independence decades ago, and most producers of high-end cars have also lost theirs.

Sadly Porsche has too now, but not due to an inability to make money and not because not enough people wanted their products, at whatever price they charge.

I can't see the advantages of not making enough money. Who gains? Employees, shareholders, customers, who? What's clever about not making enough money?

Why does the one sports car company that's looked after its employees, customers and shareholders so well get so much flack?

And you can't fool all of the people all of the time. The people who can buy £100k Porsches usually have the means to buy whatever they want. They're also normally fairly intelligent people, to be able to have so much disposable in the first place.

Are you saying that you know better Anh, and do you think it's better if a car company can lurch from one financial crisis to another.

And what is a sports car for? Is it about the product, or the drive? The process, or the result?

[RDMcG]

Its evident that Rob knows exactly what he is talking about ( as do the majority of the posters here),and has shown a fair amount of restraint in this trollery. Clearly the Anhtroll has some axe to grind so we are probably all better off to ignore it rather than any attempt at rational conversation. Nobody for a moment claims the RS is the perfect car, or denies the availability of numerous other options, but this continual blather does not result in any level of debate. Its like the Monty Python argument room.

[ewenm]

Anh said:

[Altering suspension pick up points is not a technical feat, and everything else you described has been done by other manufacturers without trying nearly double the retail of the car.

Maybe those other manufacturers are missing a trick then (although it would be helpful if you gave examples), after all, the purpose of a car company is to make money. By that fundamental criteria, Porsche are one of the most successful manufacturers in the world - is that a bad thing?

For someone who doesn't care, you're still surprisingly attentive on this thread...

[heebeegeetee]

Hmmm.

Who's opinion is likely to be more accurate?

Anh (et al), or Francois Delacour's?

http://www.evo.co.uk/videos/planetevovideos/249334...

[Davey S2]

heebeegeetee said:

Hmmm.

Who's opinion is likely to be more accurate?

Anh (et al), or Francois Delacour's?

http://www.evo.co.uk/videos/planetevovideos/249334...

Anh's obviously!!

Can you not see that Delacour is a middle aged man that has simply been sucked in by the Porsche marketing men?

[PiB]

Article stated:

" It's not the most relaxing car to drive in traffic, . . . ."

Can anybody (or the author) give more detail/description on this aspect - poor turning circle, rear visibility, heavy clutch etc ?

[anniesdad]

PiB said:

Article stated:

" It's not the most relaxing car to drive in traffic, . . . ."

Can anybody (or the author) give more detail/description on this aspect - poor turning circle, rear visibility, heavy clutch etc ?

I'd guess at, squealing brakes, hard(er) ride, stiff(er) gearchange, single mass flywheel, mid-weight clutch....general GT3 stuff, but for the single mass flywheel that's exclusive to the RS versions and the original Mk1 996 GT3.

[anniesdad]

contango said:

anniesdad said:

PiB said:

Article stated:

" It's not the most relaxing car to drive in traffic, . . . ."

Can anybody (or the author) give more detail/description on this aspect - poor turning circle, rear visibility, heavy clutch etc ?

I'd guess at, squealing brakes, hard(er) ride, stiff(er) gearchange, single mass flywheel, mid-weight clutch....general GT3 stuff, but for the single mass flywheel that's exclusive to the RS versions and the original Mk1 996 GT3.

If we are going specific on this, I hope you don't mind me pointing out that the 996 Gt3 mk1, it only had a single mass when ordered with the clubsport package, the regular comfort Gt3 came with the dual mass as standard equipment.

I probably read that (and promptly forgot it) somewhere once, but thanks for the info.

[zakelwe]

Anh said:

Ferrari and Lamborghini build cars from the ground up. A 100k car is a 100k car.

and in Lambo's case they call their £100k car the Audi R8 .... you be mad to pay 70k more for a bit more power etc, man that is badge marketing gone mad.

Andy

[mnk303]

I got one and it's the best car I have ever owned, it's the only car I have had eg
Here you are encouraged to be part of it.