2008 widebody M3 GTR

[JClark]

That car isnt modified, its a BMW Motorsport factory race car. I havent seen pricing yet but the competition costs $450k up to $635k for the F430GT.

Originally Posted by Cavi Mike

Porsche makes a mid-engine car, it's called the Boxster. The 911 is a real car that you can use everyday, not just some sunday driver, that backseat is very important. Without the back seat you have...wait for it...a boxster. People do use that backseat and if you take it away, what's the point of buying it now? It can no longer be your daily driver so what's the point? And if people don't buy your car, what's the point of winning races with it?

All of that aside, what I don't understand is if BMW can have 4.0litre's and a V8, why can't Porsche have their 10% smaller, 2 piston shy engine with a turbo?

And I do still think the new M3 is retarded, no matter how good it looks. It's a fucking boat with a V8 like everything else.


*edit* and I ruined my lucky 777 post count with this too, FYI

Ok my head hurts.

We're talking race cars, specifically BMW vs Porsche. Race cars have very little in common with street cars, especially rear seat leg room. Why would Porsche race the RS Spyder, a prototype car that looks nothing like a street Porsche and is barely branded as such? Because the name Porsche winning races sells cars, not the actual street car racing.

And have you seen the backseat in the 911?! It looks like a bleacher for midgets! It's only there so your insurance company cant call it a 2 seater.

The purists would flip but they need to get everything they can out of the Cayman. Cayman Turbo, Cayman GT, Cayman GT RS, etc. It's a better platform, but if it usurped the 911, 25,000 geriatrics worldwide would throw a fit and storm Stuttgart in their 1982 911 SCs.

The reason Porsche cant have a turbo is because within the rules of modification they would be making ridiculously more power than the NA competition. On the other hand, they wouldnt want to since a race version of the flat 6 turbo motor from the production cars wouldnt last a race in that kind of stress. A forced inducted engine in FIA GT class would have a huge displacement penalty (we're talking less than 2.0L) making it much harder to drive than an NA motor with the same power.

The street M3 being a pig is how sports cars are going these days. This has nothing to do with it. Its a stripped 700lb chassis shell littered with carbon and aluminum race parts. That's pretty much the only similarity.

[Cavi Mike]

Originally Posted by JClark

We're talking race cars, specifically BMW vs Porsche. Race cars have very little in common with street cars, especially rear seat leg room....Its a stripped 700lb chassis shell littered with carbon and aluminum race parts. That's pretty much the only similarity.

Everything other than that is just amenities for street going cars but the car is still the same. If Porsche changes the race car drivetrain lay-out(by swapping the engine to midship and adding 2 cylinders), the street car has to follow suit. This isn't NASCAR. And I don't see how the rear-seat is a non-issue either, just because you can't fit adults in the back doesn't mean you can't fit your two kids in the back, your wife in the passenger seat and some picnic goodies in the very decent sized trunk. Try that in ANY super car, and this IS a super car. I think you're paying to much attention to the (non-existent) American market and forgetting that this is still an everyday car in Europe that you can drop the kids off at school and drive to work.

[BoxerSix]

Originally Posted by Cavi Mike

Porsche makes a mid-engine car, it's called the Boxster. The 911 is a real car that you can use everyday, not just some sunday driver, that backseat is very important. Without the back seat you have...wait for it...a boxster. People do use that backseat and if you take it away, what's the point of buying it now? It can no longer be your daily driver so what's the point? And if people don't buy your car, what's the point of winning races with it?

What does the 986 have anything to do with the 911???? Two completely separate chassis and driver/buyer markets.........I never said anything about flipping the engine/transaxle around and making the 911 mid engine..Up until just recently the Boxster is a rag top piece of junk. The 986 was the worst mechanical flop Porsche has ever released and they lost an assload with the engine R&R issues related to that chassis, and the 996 for that matter... Most people who drive a Boxster wouldn't know a 911 from a 928 if it drove over their ass. I know because I run into those people all the time, whether it's at the local mall or at a PCA track event. Guarantee J Clark has had his run ins well...

Your statement is spoken exactly as any non 911 owner / mechanic / tuner / driver / racer would...... nothing wrong with it aside the fact that you're way out in left field on the entire topic...... Next time I bring the 3.6 up to the dyno you can ride in the "backseat" and tell me how functional it really is. My 1 yr old daughter in a car seat would be uncomfortable back there. And what does removing a couple rear seats have anything to do with a performance sports car being or not being a daily driver? Go do a poll and find out how many 911's drivers actually use their backseats for anything even remotely close to waht they were designed for. I'd bet my private salary that you'd find 95% of them hardly even look behind the front seats, let alone turn around to put something(or someone) back there. My old 944 had more backseat room than a 911. Doesn't hinder them from racking up 20K+ mileage every year as daily drivers......

Porsche has released 911's without rear seats and you know what, they sell just fine. If someone is looking for a Porsche with more than two seats for family/recreational use...they buy a Cayenne. It's why those things sell.. People who buy a 911 buy it because they want a 911. There's cheaper alternative out there with more creature comforts than a 911 for those looking for a four seat car with "family options". And in this day an age those who buy new 911's already have one or two other 4+ seats daily drivers in the stable anyway. I'd say a good third of my regular 911 customers are female drivers with kids and they never use the back seats and I'm not talking 1989 Targa owners but the 996/997 tub cars. RSA anyone, which sold like hotcakes and still claim a very high price/demand. Just did a PPI on one two weeks ago for a friend and that car had a cash-in-hand waiting list fifteen strong down at HD LLc. Sold for $42K used. If Porsche released a similar model again it would be pre-ordered and sold out before they even hit the shores here. GT3RS's ring a bell....... which were in such high demand that they were calling for in some areas 50K+ over MRSP. Even most of your typical GT3 and 996 turbo owners have long since ditched the rear seats in favor of "RS" delete kits now available. Still sold and driven as your typical base 911 daily driver though and was stated across the globe that Porsche should have released a base 911 as such from the start..... Across the PCA community and net-based community, the single largest customer base Porsche has, we are calling for a typical 911 without rear seats. They'll sell faster than you can imagine.

People who drive and buy 911's don't bitch about missing things like cupholders, storage compartments, and missing back seats. They're absolutely useless in these cars anyway, even with the pig-size chassis they're built on now. I know they'd sell, without question. The Porsche public majority is out crying for such a car now. Porsche is just too high on their ass trying to keep up with the "plushiness" of other car manufacturers(**cough** BMW Ferrari). Porsche has the big ass Panamera coming out for that shit...........

The point I was making was in conjunction with what Jesse was saying is that Porsche complains that they get "out-classed" by the competition halfway through the season because they are "displacement handicapped" from the start by the rest of the grid in homoglation series. We're not talking prep 2 here(although we should be ) They can fit a larger motor than the current largest 3.8L under the bonnet if they ditch that waste of an ass space behind the two front seats and homoglate a few cars. Ever see a 917K 4.5 flat 12, or a 908 flat 8....not much bigger than your typical 3.6 you currently find in your commonplace 911 and that's the old aircooled technology from the late 60's. What it boils down to is Porsche still wants to race like a factory backed team in FIA GT classes, but doesn't want to develop/pursue it like every other car manufacturer that does race these days and bitches when shit hit s the fan and BMW starts walking all over they race itinerary. Porsche got smart with the GT3Rs release here stateside, just not smart enough. They have WAY more flex room with the current chassis than they're lending it to be.

[Cavi Mike]

God I hate this wicked small font. Anyways, here's my argument:

Originally Posted by BoxerSix

What does the 986 have anything to do with the 911????

First of all I never compared the two but just to make a point, almost half of the Boxster is made from 911 parts(or vice-versa). I brought up the Boxster because both of you are bitching about removing the rear seat to make room for the engine. The engine in the 911 currently sits behind the transmission(and rear axle) and to make good use of a large boxer 8, it must be placed midship. That's where the rear seat is. Or should I say, that's where the engine in a Boxster is. Oh shit, I brought up the Boxster again, and for good reason. The Boxster was a test and it flew over well...in the American market. Front-engined and mid-engine Porsche's have never gone over well but the rear-engined 4 seater has since it's inception.

The 911 has never fundamentally changed in 40+ years and with that, Porsche has achieved something no manufacturer has ever done. I just can't believe you guys are really arguing this point. I think you guys would only believe in Porsche if they withdrew altogether and went back to their family car roots. Maybe that's what they need to do but I wish they didn't have to go to that extreme for people to see.

[JClark]

THE BOXSTER/CAYMAN LAYOUT IS BETTER THAN THE 911!!!!!!!!!! THAT IS WHY IT EXISTS!!!! That was my point. Porsche hangs on to the 911 for the purist, but the design is flawed. It was swell back in the late 60s but with the invention of basic physics it was proven STUPID around 1975. They've done some pretty cool stuff to offset a crappy layout (the new 997 race models are head and shoulders above the 996 re: weight distribution and suspension balance). If Porsche would man up and replace the 911 with a high performance Cayman, Porsche would dominate BMW (better layout for overall race performance) and Ferrari (same layout, but dramatically more extensive driver/team network to test with).

BMW, Porsche, Ferrari are NOT prep 2 because the only place it would be useful (or legal) is in GAC Rolex. While better, prob not worth the development time. Even then, prep 1 European cars absolutely ROCK the prep 2 purpose-built racers from America and Japan once the obvious advantages are dealt with by the GAC rules nazis. God Bless European engineering.

[Moai]

If Porsche would just drop the price on a factory competition variant of the Carrera GT, throw on a hardtop and make those available to race teams, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[JClark]

There is no factory CGT race car because of the hardtop thing. Kinda hard to make a race chassis when the production version has a whole in the roof.

And then you'd need some suspension guru to get it to stop handling like a bipolar twitchy gokart.

[BoxerSix]

Originally Posted by Cavi Mike

God I hate this wicked small font. Anyways, here's my argument:

First of all I never compared the two but just to make a point, almost half of the Boxster is made from 911 parts(or vice-versa). I brought up the Boxster because both of you are bitching about removing the rear seat to make room for the engine. The engine in the 911 currently sits behind the transmission(and rear axle) and to make good use of a large boxer 8, it must be placed midship. That's where the rear seat is. Or should I say, that's where the engine in a Boxster is. Oh shit, I brought up the Boxster again, and for good reason. The Boxster was a test and it flew over well...in the American market. Front-engined and mid-engine Porsche's have never gone over well but the rear-engined 4 seater has since it's inception.

The 911 has never fundamentally changed in 40+ years and with that, Porsche has achieved something no manufacturer has ever done. I just can't believe you guys are really arguing this point. I think you guys would only believe in Porsche if they withdrew altogether and went back to their family car roots. Maybe that's what they need to do but I wish they didn't have to go to that extreme for people to see.

Now my head hurts. You should really stop making statements when it's apparent you don't deal with the Porsche field and don't have your facts straight. First off the 986 was not a test car. It was a fully developed and tested chassis that Porsche released in high hopes to pull them out of an inevitable chapter 11. It was not a test car that they released on a whim just to put it out there. It was a sporatic yet smart move by Porsche to save their ass from going under.

Second Porsche has developed a 4.2L flat 10 and mating G96 transaxle that can fit in the 996/997 based 911 tubs without the need for running a mid engine setup. Many 911 gurus have done swaps that make the basic 3.6L engine look small and feeble. Flat fan 906, 908, even 917 engines in 911's and they still run rear engine configuration in the smaller, older 930/964/965 tubs let alone a 993 or even larger 996/997 car. There's be no reason for Porsche to change the drivetrain layout to disrupt the 911 feel, aside from re-utilizing the wasted space behind the rear seats. Put a small storage compartment back there for all I care........it'll still be a rear engine 911 that will sell faster then the current lineup ever could....the whole reason Porsche has not done this is because of the basis around the 911 fundamentals, your correct. 8/10 cylinder in a 911? Blasphemy!!!! Not in my books and according to well over 80% of Porsche customer base....not in theirs either.....

And the boxster/996 share about 20% of their parts, not close to half. Some engine stuff and some interior stuff. That's it. Compare the 986/996 base models to the likes of the same chassis GT2/3 and Turbo and that percentage drops even farther as NOTHING from the entire wiring/drivetrain is compatible between the two cars....

Originally Posted by JClark

THE BOXSTER/CAYMAN LAYOUT IS BETTER THAN THE 911!!!!!!!!!! THAT IS WHY IT EXISTS!!!! That was my point. Porsche hangs on to the 911 for the purist, but the design is flawed. It was swell back in the late 60s but with the invention of basic physics it was proven STUPID around 1975. They've done some pretty cool stuff to offset a crappy layout (the new 997 race models are head and shoulders above the 996 re: weight distribution and suspension balance). If Porsche would man up and replace the 911 with a high performance Cayman, Porsche would dominate BMW (better layout for overall race performance) and Ferrari (same layout, but dramatically more extensive driver/team network to test with).

BMW, Porsche, Ferrari are NOT prep 2 because the only place it would be useful (or legal) is in GAC Rolex. While better, prob not worth the development time. Even then, prep 1 European cars absolutely ROCK the prep 2 purpose-built racers from America and Japan once the obvious advantages are dealt with by the GAC rules nazis. God Bless European engineering.

Clark hit this point home. Unfortunately you will not see this from the factory. Reason being Porsche will never allow a lower base lineup(aka cayman) out gun their high end 911's(read GT3RS) out on the tracks. Porsche looks at this as a bad marketing standpoint. How can they sell a $110K 911 when the $75K Cayman is whooping their ass all day long. Porsche won't have anything to do with that. They had a hard enough time marketing the coupe 986(Cayman) at a haigher base price than your rag top boxster. Soft tops/targa's have ALWAYS pulled more weight in Porsche income than the coupes and still do pound for pound. Porsche will eventually ride the tide in and see what they should have done at the commencement of the 997 chassis. Release a better balanced 2 seat 911 with a bigger motor. It's the only way the 911 can and will survive over the next couple decades. Porsche has managed to keep the 911 line running strong because of cars like the RS, RSA, 3.8RS, GT3RS, etc. All which BTW, have no backseats and sold better than any other 911 per equal volume...even though limited.

Clark look forward to the 986/cayman spec classes that are slowly evolving. They're the new 944/968 of this day and age and will be tearing ass in stripped format very soon. RUF has a very nice Cayman based supercar.

There's only a handful of privateer CGT-"GTR's" in the world and their all chassis modified way beyond a factory CGT. Porsche never put racing into the CGT's bag of tricks from the start and has managed to keep it that way for good reason. It's just not cost effective for Porsche to do so. They back any private team looking to do so with technical support and drop shipped parts but will never fund a factory back team for a CGT. Problem with the CGT's isn't so much that the car is twitchy, it's just 95% of them were gobbled up by rich pops who are used to driving a 450hp Turbo with all the fancy wuss features like PASM and traction control......not a 610hp mid engine rocket which can put most of that to the ground at the blip of the throttle.

[crazybrew609]

Longest Post Eva!!!!!!

[Moai]

Originally Posted by BoxerSix

Problem with the CGT's isn't so much that the car is twitchy, it's just 95% of them were gobbled up by rich pops who are used to driving a 450hp Turbo with all the fancy wuss features like PASM and traction control......not a 610hp mid engine rocket which can put most of that to the ground at the blip of the throttle.

Exactly. That's the fundamental issue I see here. They went through the incredible expense to design, test and market a supercar that won't do what some of the most notable supercars can: Race Successfully. They have all the elements for a successful platform, yet it seems they let it go just at the final steps.

Yes, it needs to have some form of hardtop variant. Yes, it needs suspension revised with the intent of competition involvement. It has a decent engine, it has the aerodynamics, the overall chassis layout and pedigree of a car that could make a serious mark, but without any of the final detailing and engineering to make it work in such. It's sad. It was made to be a 600hp golf caddy and bragging toy. I can't imagine how successful it could be with a little further development in the direction of a competetive race platform. It has the basic elements intact.

Porsche needs to unmarry itself from the 996 platform. It's a great competition tool, but it has many limits in its current state, where the carrera gt is virgin territory with so many possibilities. It's a shame they're so rare, so expensive and designed with completely different intentions in mind. It could have been a contender.

[JClark]

The CGT wasnt made with racing in mind. It's an open roof roadster made for ripping through Beverly Hills, and it made Ferrari mad.

The best example of a production supercar built along side its race version at the same time to optimize both is the Saleen S7, currently still beating up on the Maserati MC12, Aston Martin DB9R, etc in FIA GT1. Not what the Carrera GT was, and they cant go back and start over to make it that.

Porsche only races the 911 and P2 prototypes. Everything else they sell is to generate revenue and operate a business selling high performance street cars and unnecessarily fast SUVs.