Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

[TripleM]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

In the hands of good drivers, fast shifter like DSG system vs manual stick isnt an issue.

I tell you why and it doesnt take a genius to understand this but purely from observation from the many track days I have seen and attended.

GTR has got DSG, 475bhp, 580Nm torque, twin turbo ( v little lag I'd expect )
vs
Evo9, modified n tuned to similar specs, manual stick tranny...
or shud I say, done to similar power to weight ratio to be fairer

Put equaly good drivers on each car, who will win?

I hv seen the time sheets of those souped up Evos/STis with power ard 430 to 500bhp and clocked timings of low to mid 2.30s

I wouldnt say the GTR will certainly lose but I will argue it will be a good fight and I tend to pick the modifed ones as the winner.

 

[Shaun]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

MT, to me it's all about progress and speed. If I knew I would never have to drive a car that had zero electronic aids, nothing more than a standard manual trans, etc. then I'd just get the quickest car regardless of how it felt. The only reason I'd get a raw, basic car is because of possible future requirement of having to get into like car and go fast.

the other thing is that feel, which in some circles is perceived as unquantifiable, is actually quantifiable in a myriad of ways, and where analog feel and speed conflict, the real performance seekers go after speed. So as mentioned in other posts some time ago, it is probably more a conscious choice that manufacturers make rather than an inability to make a car feel a certain way.

What the average driver believes he feels is also heavily influenced by what he reads and hears. A lot of it is just from press releases parroted by journalists. If you took a bunch of different cars of roughly similar performance and layout, put a completely generic interior (everything.. unitless tach, standard 6 speed manual and all) in all of them and blacked out the side and rear windows so vehicle ID would be just about impossible, muffle them to hell, and have people drive them round the track and write down that they felt about the car ride and handling alone, most wouldn't be able to tell what they were driving and might even get the basic layout of the car wrong. Of course the few outliers with mass distribution far forward or rearward will be more obvious. AFAIK, a test like that has never been done before because the whole industry thrives on differentiation, so isn't in their interest. IMO, based on observations so far.

 

[centurion]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

I agree with Shaun - strip away the mystique from the 911 and all you are left with is a 40 year old design that other right-minded car makers have not even bothered to emulate. It is the purity of form, the Porsche heritage and the stubborn loyalty of a band of 911 enthusiasts that has kept this antiquated layout going for far longer than it has had any right to.

That heresy ... them's fighting words!

Not to mention that Porsche still wins sometimes when 997 RSR vs F430 new boy.

And that's why I not really a Porsche fan.

 

[Shaun]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

Apparently, one of the very first things the designer of the 911 (forgot his name) matter of factly said to certain race engineers when they first took delivery of the 911s in preparation to campaign them, was in effect.. 'most importantly, you have to realize the engine is in the wrong place, and work around that' but that was probably in reference to mid-engined cars and of course RR is still superior to some FR and all FF. And there are many ways to deal with a fixed parameter such that the overall vehicle is still extremely effective.. so whatever. Just is a funny and interesting story IMO.

 

[centurion]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

they have to UP the development effort of the 997 RSR man ... in this month's excellence just got exposed that Porsche bochup the 997 RSR dev coz all brains went to RS Spyder ....

damn embarassing ...

 

[Crufty Dusty]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

In the hands of good drivers, fast shifter like DSG system vs manual stick isnt an issue.

I tell you why and it doesnt take a genius to understand this but purely from observation from the many track days I have seen and attended.

GTR has got DSG, 475bhp, 580Nm torque, twin turbo ( v little lag I'd expect )
vs
Evo9, modified n tuned to similar specs, manual stick tranny...
or shud I say, done to similar power to weight ratio to be fairer

Put equaly good drivers on each car, who will win?

I hv seen the time sheets of those souped up Evos/STis with power ard 430 to 500bhp and clocked timings of low to mid 2.30s

I wouldnt say the GTR will certainly lose but I will argue it will be a good fight and I tend to pick the modifed ones as the winner.

The simple answer is that those cars rumored to have 430 to 500 bhp, simply do not have that kind of power or are not set up for track use. And the drivers need more laps on the track. In early 2003 up till about 2005, a good target to aim for was to go under 2'40" in an Evo with the standard turbo still in it. Most guys who've seen more than 3 track days under their belt will be able to do it easily in a mildly modded Evo 9 which is a much better car than the Evo 8.

Sepang is a high speed track, so for time attack a GTR is expected to dominate. Endurance races are a whole different thing altogether.

 

[fasterthanferrari]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

the other thing is that feel, which in some circles is perceived as unquantifiable, is actually quantifiable in a myriad of ways, and where analog feel and speed conflict, the real performance seekers go after speed. So as mentioned in other posts some time ago, it is probably more a conscious choice that manufacturers make rather than an inability to make a car feel a certain way.

What the average driver believes he feels is also heavily influenced by what he reads and hears. A lot of it is just from press releases parroted by journalists. If you took a bunch of different cars of roughly similar performance and layout, put a completely generic interior (everything.. unitless tach, standard 6 speed manual and all) in all of them and blacked out the side and rear windows so vehicle ID would be just about impossible, muffle them to hell, and have people drive them round the track and write down that they felt about the car ride and handling alone, most wouldn't be able to tell what they were driving and might even get the basic layout of the car wrong. Of course the few outliers with mass distribution far forward or rearward will be more obvious. AFAIK, a test like that has never been done before because the whole industry thrives on differentiation, so isn't in their interest. IMO, based on observations so far.

Some average driver will also be heavily influence by the cars in his GT4 and Forza Motorsports garage, hehe.

To do a test as suggested can be like playing TV game of sorts minus the feel. While children who have no driving experience tend to do better than even some adults with tracking experience. Experience does play a role in what average driver perceived as fast.

Unit-less tach and speedo are ok, but to drive deaf would be really hard. Muffling out exhaust & tire screech will seriously impede the drivers capabilities and point of balance. Surely you cannot expect the tester to make a round on the track on these conditions. Another similarity of the test might be of driving different go-karts. I think this might be closest to what is to be expected, but to a seasoned go-karter, he can be just as good at picking out the faster ride by looking at the setup, tires, engine and listening to the sound of the exhaust.

So what we are left with is a muffled and blind folded passenger sitting in the same seat but a different car driven the by a same tester. The blind and deaf passenger/tester will have to go through the list of cars before being let to see the light of day again, then we might have a fair test finally.

 

[centurion]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

a 997 with fatty 310 rear - will be difficult to discern that it's an RR car. Many will think it MR. But never will it be mistaken for a FR or FF.

But shaun, it's a philosophical issue within myself. I don't want a car to feel a certain way IN SPITE of a problem, I want it to feel a certain way BECAUSE of a rational engineering solution to it.

 

[Shaun]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

Hi Faster,

Driving a production car with earplugs on, you still feel a whole lot more than playing any sort of video game. To drive a car with minimal engine noise and inaudible tire noise is entirely possible.. it's done all the time. For example, in everyday driving where some blast music and drown everything else out, or in racing where open cockpit in a quiet car is aurally dominated by airflow, or where competitor engines drown out your own to where driver can only rely only on feel and shift light visuals.

If you had an average-good trackday enthusiast running 2:40s in a car, then you took another enthusiast of equal experience and threw him in it with earplugs on, tach blanked off to where there's only shift indication, and let him mess around with it for 3 laps and then run a hotlap, I'd bet he could get close to 2:40. Maybe within 3-4% of it easy.. not great but enough to get a feel for how the car handles.

What I was trying to describe in earlier post, is a test where the driver really doesn't know what make and model of car he's driving, and then rates it purely by how it handles, no marque and journalistic bias in his head.

==

MT, I see.. yah that makes sense.

 

[totoseow]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

You need to get a new punchline now - this has been repeated way too often now...

so more than one person feel this way. oh i forgot..u bot one.

well dun get defensive...i din say its a bad car. its a blardy fantastic car for the average joe to excel in. its just not the car for me. not all average joes wanna excel using a GTR.

 

[TripleM]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

From the vid
Clearly the Porsche Turbo driver is the slowest in taking corners..
That car has similar power specs to GTR, lighter in fact and how can it be the first car to start and yet finish last?

From what I can see, if he were to drive the GTR and be placed on starting grid..he would be overtaken too in lap 2 I would think.

 

[louis]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

From the vid
Clearly the Porsche Turbo driver is the slowest in taking corners..
That car has similar power specs to GTR, lighter in fact and how can it be the first car to start and yet finish last?

From what I can see, if he were to drive the GTR and be placed on starting grid..he would be overtaken too in lap 2 I would think.

maybe because it had tiptronic? you can see his revs drop down below 3000rpm in some corners, hardly the ideal rev range to be in i'd imagine.

 

[timechaser]

Re: Tsukuba Battle: GTR vs GT3 vs 997Turbo vs Superleggera vs NSX-R

so more than one person feel this way. oh i forgot..u bot one.

well dun get defensive...i din say its a bad car. its a blardy fantastic car for the average joe to excel in. its just not the car for me. not all average joes wanna excel using a GTR.

Sorry if it came out to be defensive. I fully meant it to be offensive :nehnehhh:

Did say that seriously - your opinion and you can say that. But you have repeated this sentence several times so find a new way of saying it. There... maybe that's clearer and more offensive? :nehnehhh:

As for your comment about average joe - well I am one, and I dont know much about driving cars but would like to have a fast one please...