GT3 RS 4.0

[kyoo]

Any specific reason why the flat 6 4.0L makes 500hp vs the M3's v8 4.0L?

I'm geniunely curious. Higher compression ratio, etc? Seems to run similarly spec'd otherwise, even down to the peak power, redline, etc. Just looking at the motor itself.

[kindafast]

Can't answer your question, but damn that 4.0 GT3 is expensive

[BMRLVR]

Originally Posted by kyoo

Any specific reason why the flat 6 4.0L makes 500hp vs the M3's v8 4.0L?

I'm geniunely curious. Higher compression ratio, etc? Seems to run similarly spec'd otherwise, even down to the peak power, redline, etc. Just looking at the motor itself.

The GT3 RS 4.0 is a more highly tuned engine with less compromises!

The S65 is a pretty amazing engine but their are other manufacturers who make more HP per litre NA than BMW M does with the S65. Ferrari and Porsche are the two manufacturers that come quickly to mind.

One thing to note is that BMW has engineered the S65 with a broad torque curve whereas Porsche and Ferrari Engines generally have less low end torque and are therefore not as relaxed to drive around on a day to day basis. The thing about Ferrari's and Porsche GT3's is that they are performance cars through and through and are engineered with ultimate performance in mind. The M3 was engineered to be a car that you can daily drive yet take to the track on the weekend!

[Martin_D]

Go drive a gt3, you cannot compare the two cars. No way shape or form.

[BMRLVR]

Originally Posted by shift@red

I agree with you that the GT3/RS/4.0 are more highly strung, but the GT3 models are def strong tq-wise on the lower end, more so than the M3 from my experience and def more so than the Ferrari v8 models. That said, both Porsche and Ferrari have more peaky tq bands than the m3, but up top few cars will ever come close to touching them.

As for why it makes more power, higher compression (12.6 vs 12.1) is part of it, the gt3 has more aggressive cams IIRC, higher redline (8500 vs 8300) are part of the reason. And again, this is Porsche we are talking about, they just know how to do it when it comes to high revving and motorsports better than anyone ever has.

Have a look at the torque curve of a 997 GT3...... you can see that the torque peak is over 5000RPM. You are right that the bottom end is far from soft however it is not as flat as the S65's torque curve where the peak is a 3900RPM and remains nearly flat till well above 7000RPM.


[IMG]http://www.****************/DynoGraphs/ID00058-1288748480-APEPERFORMANCE.COM.jpeg[/IMG]

Originally Posted by Martin_D

Go drive a gt3, you cannot compare the two cars. No way shape or form.

[Capt Slow]

Apparently the crankshaft used is the exact one from the 911 GT3 RSR race car. It sounds like an actual race car with registration plates, a 7:27 ring time is the claim.

If that is true, it's only 3 seconds off of the GT2 RS time and a massive 13 seconds faster than the 911 GT3 RS. The "standard" 911 GT3 is 7 seconds slower than the GT3 RS. All of these times are for Sport Auto by the same driver, Horst Von Saurma.

So, the difference between the "Super Extreme Hardcore" Porsche, and the "Super Hardcore" one is almost double the difference between the "Super Hardcore" version of the "Hardcore" one.

And breathe out...

[saeyedoc]

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

Have a look at the torque curve of a 997 GT3...... you can see that the torque peak is over 5000RPM. You are right that the bottom end is far from soft however it is not as flat as the S65's torque curve where the peak is a 3900RPM and remains nearly flat till well above 7000RPM.

S65 may be flatter, but it looks like the GT3 is close in torque to the M3 at low revs, then much higher when the variocam kicks in. Combined with the lighter weight of the GT3, not even close. I would hope so, given the GT3 is about twice the price.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by Capt Slow

Apparently the crankshaft used is the exact one from the 911 GT3 RSR race car. It sounds like an actual race car with registration plates, a 7:27 ring time is the claim.

If that is true, it's only 3 seconds off of the GT2 RS time and a massive 13 seconds faster than the 911 GT3 RS. The "standard" 911 GT3 is 7 seconds slower than the GT3 RS. All of these times are for Sport Auto by the same driver, Horst Von Saurma.

I thought the GT2 RS has a 7:18 ring time (per Wikipedia and the license plate of a local GT2 RS owner ). So it would be 9 seconds off that at 7:27. Maybe I'm wrong

[BMRLVR]

Originally Posted by shift@red

I know what you mean, Im well aware of the tq curves...but as you can see even at low rpms the GT3 is making more tq than the m3 at low revs and makes almost as much at low rpms as the m3 does at peak. Once you get into the area where the vario cam and vario cam plus kick in, the GT3s tq is killer for an NA car, thats where you see it ramp up and stay remain very strong during the point where youre going to be using it most of the time on a track. The GT3 puts down more tq at any point in the rev range and holds the tq longer as well, being that the final tip for the GT3 is ~7300 while the M3s tq takes it final dip at ~6300, so the GT3 keeps producing all that tq for another 1000 rpms. Few cars have top ends like P cars do and as good a top end the M cars have, they dont touch P cars.
And thats the power/tq curve from a 997.1 GT3, the 997.2 is only that much stronger, and the GT3 RS 4.0 is stronger again.

Agreed!

I was just trying to point out that porsche went for all out performance from the GT3 but M obviously compromised when building the S65 so they could get a nice flat torque curve at the expense of maximum output....... The S65 could have made more output with some wilder cams and a bit higher compression but I think M accomplished what they set out to do when building it.

Like was mentioned a few posts above, the M3 is not even in the same league as the GT3....... that is why my next car is going to be one!

[devo]

Originally Posted by shift@red

I know what you mean, Im well aware of the tq curves...but as you can see even at low rpms the GT3 is making more tq than the m3 at low revs and makes almost as much at low rpms as the m3 does at peak. Once you get into the area where the vario cam and vario cam plus kick in, the GT3s tq is killer for an NA car, thats where you see it ramp up and stay remain very strong during the point where youre going to be using it most of the time on a track. The GT3 puts down more tq at any point in the rev range and holds the tq longer as well, being that the final tip for the GT3 is ~7300 while the M3s tq takes it final dip at ~6300, so the GT3 keeps producing all that tq for another 1000 rpms. Few cars have top ends like P cars do and as good a top end the M cars have, they dont touch P cars.
And thats the power/tq curve from a 997.1 GT3, the 997.2 is only that much stronger, and the GT3 RS 4.0 is stronger again.

This is exactly right, the GT3 puts down more power at low rpms than the M3, combined with lighter weight it also FEELS that way if you drive the two. The GT3 feels much strong than even the numbers show.

Good points. The .2 GT3 you mention as having better torque than the .1 GT3 is absolutely true. Porsche added vario-cam to the exhaust valves (first time for this) of the .2 which dramatically improved torque across the rev range; much more than the 299 and 317 numbers (respectively) suggest. As you said it doesn't hurt when the GT3 weighs in at 450-500 lb less than the M3. My .2 GT3 feels so strong everywhere I never miss the loss of power from my previous .1 911 turbo. Sure nothing really compares to marching up a mountain side in a boosted HP German car ~especially a 911 turbo~ when you're on that mountain but the .2 GT3 never lacks for power.

I love when others say that it should because of what you pay for a GT3 or any car for that matter. You pay more you get more. When is more too much, $30k, $40k, $80k, >$100k? That's a question only the buyer can answer.

[devo]

Originally Posted by Capt Slow

Apparently the crankshaft used is the exact one from the 911 GT3 RSR race car. It sounds like an actual race car with registration plates, a 7:27 ring time is the claim.

If that is true, it's only 3 seconds off of the GT2 RS time and a massive 13 seconds faster than the 911 GT3 RS. The "standard" 911 GT3 is 7 seconds slower than the GT3 RS. All of these times are for Sport Auto by the same driver, Horst Von Saurma.

So, the difference between the "Super Extreme Hardcore" Porsche, and the "Super Hardcore" one is almost double the difference between the "Super Hardcore" version of the "Hardcore" one.

And breathe out...

Love the idea of the last of the Mezger engine going out with a bang, however, the 991 GT3/RS due in two-three years will likely eclipse the 4.0RS, with >500HP, offer optional PDK and enhanced handling for about $50k less. That is a fact, that will likely hurt buyers of the 4.0 exclusivity limited to 600 units word-wide or not. Hopefully the residual on my .2 3 will yield enough so that I can order a 991 911 GT3 RS. I at least have the first right of acceptance or refusal at two dealers.

[H Bomb]

i love the GT3 and the RS. this GT2 RS is pretty sick

http://www.autotrader.com/dealers/dd...er_id=45253959

[crackberry]

The 4.0 makes my mouth water.

[needspeed]

Originally Posted by shift@red

I def know what you mean on the price factor. A 458 italia is ~2X the price of a 'regular' GT3 but it isnt a better driving car. More often, as any of us should know, production numbers play a large part in pricing. There is no set $$ amount for a given performance figure. There are plenty of examples of this.

I would love to hear your actual impressions of both of these cars based on your behind the wheel experience. It would be very insightful......Thanks.......Steve

[gthal]

Originally Posted by shift@red

I def know what you mean on the price factor. A 458 italia is ~2X the price of a 'regular' GT3 but it isnt a better driving car.

That's a bold statement (which I'm sure many informed people may disagree with as I have not read anything but GLOWING reviews of the 458 compared to almost anything else produced)... what's the basis for this opinion?

[TheKosherStogie]

Here is my 2010 997.2 GT3 dyno (higher # is with exhaust, but lost low end trq) other # is stock. Pretty flat line. Gt3 makes 317 lb ft and 435 hp .... M3 is 295 lb ft and 414hp

Porsche did an amazing job and so did bmw. You have to consider that the porsche costs a lot more. Although you could pick up a used 997.1 GT3 which had 299 lb ft and 415 hp out of a 3.6 liter flat 6 for 70k

[kyoo]

op here - not asking about the car itself as much as the actual engine - is it better/lighter materials, higher compression ratio, etc?

[TheKosherStogie]

Originally Posted by kyoo

op here - not asking about the car itself as much as the actual engine - is it better/lighter materials, higher compression ratio, etc?

higher compression. GT3RS is 13:0 I believe. The Boxer engine is able to produce a lot of torque for a 6 cyclinder. More too it than just that thou.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by shift@red

No offense gthal, but Ive actually driven both of them, have you driven either?

None taken.

I wasn't calling you out on your comment nor was I implying I knew anything of relevance. All I was saying was that it was a very "bold" comment to make and wanted to know what supported it, I.e. Did you drive them both.

You are one of the lucky few to have experienced both... thanks for the insight. I have experienced the GT3 RS but none of the others. It was an amazing car for sure but I would not be able to make a comparison to anything else (other than it was the most insane fun of any car I have experienced).

[karussell]

not quite. Sport Auto has not conducted their own test of the GT3 RS 4.0 yet.
That time is a manufacturer time which tends to be lower than HvS laps but with porsches they are pretty close.

Sport Auto:

GT2 RS - 7:24
GT3 RS (3.8L) - 7:33

Porsche Claims

GT2 RS - 7:21
GT3 RS (4.0L) - 7:27
GT3 RS (3.8L) - 7:31

Also as another reference, the current ZR1 time is 7:19.

GM claimed the first generation ZR1 did a 7:25
Sport Auto with HvS driving did a 7:38.

all in all, the times at the ring are very hard to repeat. way too many variables on that track even on the same day with back-to-back runs.

The Mezger engine in the GT3's is a work of art. It was originally used in the GT1 and has been in every GT 911 car since. It is also the same engine used in the 911 GT3 Cup car. The porsche community is now worried about the future 911 GT3 engines as the 4.0 is the final farewell to this engine. Porsche folks don't like change much as evidenced by the 911. Its all about evolution and refining what works. On the flip side of the coin BMW tends to take a more radical approach and reinvents itself, never looking back. I actually like both approaches which is why I think I will always have both products in the garage.

Originally Posted by Capt Slow

Apparently the crankshaft used is the exact one from the 911 GT3 RSR race car. It sounds like an actual race car with registration plates, a 7:27 ring time is the claim.

If that is true, it's only 3 seconds off of the GT2 RS time and a massive 13 seconds faster than the 911 GT3 RS. The "standard" 911 GT3 is 7 seconds slower than the GT3 RS. All of these times are for Sport Auto by the same driver, Horst Von Saurma.

So, the difference between the "Super Extreme Hardcore" Porsche, and the "Super Hardcore" one is almost double the difference between the "Super Hardcore" version of the "Hardcore" one.

And breathe out...

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

I actually know someone who ordered one. Specs look amazing.

[crackberry]

I saw one at the dealership the other day. All I can say is wow, except for the stickers. Peal them off and that this is aboslutely perfect.