Motor Trend ACR vs. Z06 vs. GT3 RS (coming soon - not published yet)

[AW335TT]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Paying one dollar over $250k for a Gt3rs is a certain issue as Chris Harris will help explain; (Porsche puts themselves in a very stupid position with pricing)... for half you can get faster cars... for the marked up price, you can get double the car...

Compared to the ACR, ALL the cars in that video are extremely over priced. So it doesn't seem like a pricing issue for just Porsche.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by AW335TT

Compared to the ACR, ALL the cars in that video are extremely over priced. So it doesn't seem like a pricing issue for just Porsche.

I wouldn't say against the ACR... I would say against the GTR, Z06 and ACR... meaning that a performance can be built and perform at a world class level for a decent price...

Here is the problem, I understand why a 918 costs a million, I understand why a LaFerrari and P1 cost that much as well... the real issue is that they cost 10-12 times as much but can barely offer 15-20% more performance... I would be more willing to understand this at double price, even triple but 10x is sole exclusivity / far too expensive R&D costs and nothing else.

[AW335TT]

Originally Posted by ASAP

I wouldn't say against the ACR... I would say against the GTR, Z06 and ACR... meaning that a performance can be built and perform at a world class level for a decent price...

Here is the problem, I understand why a 918 costs a million, I understand why a LaFerrari and P1 cost that much as well... the real issue is that they cost 10-12 times as much but can barely offer 15-20% more performance... I would be more willing to understand this at double price, even triple but 10x is sole exclusivity / far too expensive R&D costs and nothing else.

Not sure how that is a problem since they arent meant to be track day cars.

The wing alone on the ACR is good for a couple seconds. Put that wing on a LaF with some Trofeo R tires and times will decrease significantly without putting anymore R&D or engineering into it. But it wasn't designed to be a track weapon.

[dgp]

But the gt3 rs was meant to be a track car with downforce and cup tires and yet a 220-230k 650s which isn't meant to be a track car is quicker and this is on worn out pirelli corsas-as chris harris proved in his video above.

If you put comparable tires on the 650s it would be seconds quicker as CH said...porsche fanboys don't like that and instead prefer to talk about how price of 650s is going down while gt3 rs is going up...how things change for Porsche owners from talking its track prowess to its investment prowess

[AW335TT]

Originally Posted by dgp

But the gt3 rs was meant to be a track car with downforce and cup tires and yet a 220-230k 650s which isn't meant to be a track car is quicker and this is on worn out pirelli corsas-as chris harris proved in his video above.

If you put comparable tires on the 650s it would be seconds quicker as CH said...porsche fanboys don't like that and instead prefer to talk about how price of 650s is going down while gt3 rs is going up...how things change for Porsche owners from talking its track prowess to its investment prowess

I'm far from a Porsche fan boy lol

650s starts at 265k with a 150hp power advantage..

[Jai 302]

I've driven a Viper GTS earlier this year and it was easily the most engaging car that I've ever had the pleasure of driving - it felt a lot more thrilling and exciting than a 458 or 911 GT3. Can't wait till I get my own Viper before it's discontinued in 2017.

The ACR should win this comparison test but since this is "General Motors Trend" the Chevy is naturally going to be the winner even if it's the worst of the three (which I think it is).

[auf Deutsch]

Originally Posted by Jai 302

The ACR should win this comparison test but since this is "General Motors Trend" the Chevy is naturally going to be the winner even if it's the worst of the three (which I think it is).

They really have become biased. Case in point, they pissed all over the new 340i when all other early reviews say it's a much better car than the outgoing 335i, as in "once again the segment benchmark".

[dgp]

Originally Posted by AW335TT

I'm far from a Porsche fan boy lol

650s starts at 265k with a 150hp power advantage..

Wasn't referring to you, it was for the perennial Porsche pumper of the forum.

New 650s starts at 265, but you can pick up used ones with low miles for low 200s, whereas used 991 gtr rs is low to mid 300s and the 650 will run circles around porsche at the track. And that's why the comparison-prices have gotten so ridiculous on these Porsches that they don't make sense to use them what they were intended for.

[EfEightyM3]

Originally Posted by dgp

But the gt3 rs was meant to be a track car with downforce and cup tires and yet a 220-230k 650s which isn't meant to be a track car is quicker and this is on worn out pirelli corsas-as chris harris proved in his video above.

If you put comparable tires on the 650s it would be seconds quicker as CH said...porsche fanboys don't like that and instead prefer to talk about how price of 650s is going down while gt3 rs is going up...how things change for Porsche owners from talking its track prowess to its investment prowess

I don't agree that the 650S wasn't meant to be a track weapon. That's all mclaren makes. Theyre built with monocoque chassis to be as light as possible and with all f1 race tech, not to mention the 650S also has 150 more hp and closing in on 200 ft lb more while weighing the same. Lets even out the hp and the mclarens not coming out on top. Just like how the 918 in most tests has beaten the p1 with ease.
The GT3 RS no matter how extreme is still meant to be a road car and has to be made with many compromises to do so.
As for pricing, jthat just shows the GT3 RS is far more in demand than the mclaren.

[fcman]

Originally Posted by EfEightyM3

I don't agree that the 650S wasn't meant to be a track weapon. That's all mclaren makes. Theyre built with monocoque chassis to be as light as possible and with all f1 race tech, not to mention the 650S also has 150 more hp and closing in on 200 ft lb more while weighing the same. Lets even out the hp and the mclarens not coming out on top. Just like how the 918 in most tests has beaten the p1 with ease.
The GT3 RS no matter how extreme is still meant to be a road car and has to be made with many compromises to do so.
As for pricing, jthat just shows the GT3 RS is far more in demand than the mclaren.

"I don't agree that the 650S wasn't meant to be a track weapon"
"The GT3 RS no matter how extreme is still meant to be a road car"



I'm a massive 911 fan, but the Mclaren is available for less money with more power, lower lap times (on worse tires), and is infinitely more usable every day. People compare the thing to big sedans in terms of comfort and drivability. You're getting a GT3RS-crushing track monster and a comfortable cruiser all in one, for a good price.

Also what's the point of saying "lets even out the HP?" Lets even out the HP of a 918 spyder and a Fiat 500 and the Porsche's not coming out on top

[chris82]

Originally Posted by ASAP

More like $1million because the 918 is the only Porsche that is beating the Z06 and ACR, and btw it's not an ass kicking.

I understand people that can like Porsches but 2 points must be made clear-

1) they are overpriced
2) you aren't even close to getting the best performance in the class

If those 2 are accepted, then I can understand the want for a Porsche... Although, if those 2 are accepted, what then is the point of a Porsche? And that's the conundrum that in my opinion, Porsche falls into with every one of their cars. I would argue that the Macan is the only car that doesn't fall into such a stupid position because the Macan S is very attractively priced and can directly compete with something like say an X4 or the shitty Benz offering, and I would say its overall a better package.

[chris82]

In case you don't know, the MSRP on Porsche's website for the GT3 RS is $175,800. They didn't set the MSRP to $350,000, the market did, it's basic economics. I'm not sure why everyone is arguing like it was designed to cost $350,000. It's actually just overpriced right now. If you don't want to pay that, fine, don't pay it, some other asshole will. Wait for the price to come down (if it ever does). Again, the MSRP is $175,800.

In regards to this test, it's the classic argument people; GTR vs. 911 Turbo (that was a big one!). GT3 vs Z06. Corvetter vs whatever. Why people choose to argue why one car is better than the other is beyond me. Price is another big debate here. Don't be stupid, do you really not understand why someone would buy a BMW 325i over a Honda Civic? They both get you to work right? Then surely you must understand why someone would pay more for a GT3 RS than a Z06 even if they both get you around the track.

Originally Posted by EfEightyM3

I don't agree that the 650S wasn't meant to be a track weapon. That's all mclaren makes. Theyre built with monocoque chassis to be as light as possible and with all f1 race tech, not to mention the 650S also has 150 more hp and closing in on 200 ft lb more while weighing the same. Lets even out the hp and the mclarens not coming out on top. Just like how the 918 in most tests has beaten the p1 with ease.
The GT3 RS no matter how extreme is still meant to be a road car and has to be made with many compromises to do so.
As for pricing, jthat just shows the GT3 RS is far more in demand than the mclaren.

You're the only one talking sense in this thread so far.

[FriskyDingo]

The ACR, from a pure track discussion standpoint has few, if any equals. If outright numbers are your thing, it's boss.

But the majority of these buyers aren't tracking their cars, and the lack of ease of use of the Viper puts it at a clear disadvantage compared to other cars, even those with a track-focused slant. Moving beyond that, the average owner can't come close to duplicating the times these car are capable of anyway. Based on reviews, it seems the GT3/RS is a much better tool for track use in that it is easier to exploit it's performance.

The Z06 is the odd ball here in that it is not an ideal setup for prolonged track use. The car has been proven to have issues with heatsoak and overheating time and time again, and I think that is unacceptable. I don't care how much cheaper it is, if a car can't make more than a lap or two without cutting power and potentially going into limp mode, it's not worth the money, imo.

Cars like this are about as prestige and cachet as much as anything, and driving dynamics will always be subjective. It's hard to say that a GT3 RS is overpriced based solely on the fact that cars that are as fast cost less. There's slower cars that cost more, too. Depends on how you look at it.

[EfEightyM3]

Originally Posted by FriskyDingo

The ACR, from a pure track discussion standpoint has few, if any equals. If outright numbers are your thing, it's boss.

But the majority of these buyers aren't tracking their cars, and the lack of ease of use of the Viper puts it at a clear disadvantage compared to other cars, even those with a track-focused slant. Moving beyond that, the average owner can't come close to duplicating the times these car are capable of anyway. Based on reviews, it seems the GT3/RS is a much better tool for track use in that it is easier to exploit it's performance.

The Z06 is the odd ball here in that it is not an ideal setup for prolonged track use. The car has been proven to have issues with heatsoak and overheating time and time again, and I think that is unacceptable. I don't care how much cheaper it is, if a car can't make more than a lap or two without cutting power and potentially going into limp mode, it's not worth the money, imo.

Cars like this are about as prestige and cachet as much as anything, and driving dynamics will always be subjective. It's hard to say that a GT3 RS is overpriced based solely on the fact that cars that are as fast cost less. There's slower cars that cost more, too. Depends on how you look at it.

What most people don't see is that there isn't another car in the world with the same hp that could keep up with a GT3 RS on the track. It far far far overachieves what its stand alone power or power to weight number would otherwise tell you. For instance the 2010 zr1 with 640 hp and 640 tq was only able to do the same time.
Also agreed on extracting performance. The 991 chassis is so easy to drive hard and put down blisteringly fast times. Similar to how a base 991 handily and easily can beat an m3/4 despite huge deficit in power, torque and overall power to weight.

[fcman]

Originally Posted by EfEightyM3

What most people don't see is that there isn't another car in the world with the same hp that could keep up with a GT3 RS on the track. It far far far overachieves what its stand alone power or power to weight number would otherwise tell you.

Who the fuck cares though? There isn't another car with 150hp that performs better than the Miata, but if it was $100k you wouldn't take one over a 911.

[hellrotm]

A lot of people hate on Porsche because they think they are overpriced. They hate the whole "feel" argument, even though it is quite valid one to make. But the 991 Turbo and Turbo S are actually great values. They put up some incredible times on the drag strip and road courses. Is there really any other German dual purpose car that can put down such consistent times in both disciplines. The Turbo S is really supercar performance for a fraction of the cost. The new 991.2 Carrera and Carrera S with new turbo powerplants will go the same route. They are going to be fantastic tuner cars. The 991.2 S on lesser tires is only 2sec off the M4 GTS around the Ring, for quite a bit less money.

[EfEightyM3]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

A lot of people hate on Porsche because they think they are overpriced. They hate the whole "feel" argument, even though it is quite valid one to make. But the 991 Turbo and Turbo S are actually great values. They put up some incredible times on the drag strip and road courses. Is there really any other German dual purpose car that can put down such consistent times in both disciplines. The Turbo S is really supercar performance for a fraction of the cost. The new 991.2 Carrera and Carrera S with new turbo powerplants will go the same route. They are going to be fantastic tuner cars. The 991.2 S on lesser tires is only 2sec off the M4 GTS around the Ring, for quite a bit less money.

Agree on all.

Think about this. There was just a 704 whp m4 that trapped 133 mph. A 911 turbo S on a lesser tire and with 200 less whp traps 130. Performance on the turbo and Turbo S is insane, on track or off.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

A lot of people hate on Porsche because they think they are overpriced. They hate the whole "feel" argument, even though it is quite valid one to make. But the 991 Turbo and Turbo S are actually great values. They put up some incredible times on the drag strip and road courses. Is there really any other German dual purpose car that can put down such consistent times in both disciplines. The Turbo S is really supercar performance for a fraction of the cost. The new 991.2 Carrera and Carrera S with new turbo powerplants will go the same route. They are going to be fantastic tuner cars. The 991.2 S on lesser tires is only 2sec off the M4 GTS around the Ring, for quite a bit less money.

The turbo S really is $250K with any options though. It's supercar performance for supercar price. These days, Z28, Z06, GT350R, that's supercar performance for a fraction of the price. Now, if you are talking about hypercars, then that's another category beyond. The reason why all these cheaper cars are approaching and surpassing porsche's performance IMO is the rear engined platform. At this point, they don't have many options to make the chassis perform as well as a good mid engine or front engine with the engine behind the front axle. They can make it wider, but it's already crazy wide with crazy-wide rear tires, they can try more power, but they have to balance how much power the chassis can lay down and screwing up the weight bias with a bigger engine or more hardware in the rear. They are great cars, but I think more and more they are being stretched to the limits of engineering and r&d for the chassis, while other manufacturers are soldering along with steady improvements.

[auf Deutsch]

Originally Posted by EfEightyM3

Agree on all.

Think about this. There was just a 704 whp m4 that trapped 133 mph. A 911 turbo S on a lesser tire and with 200 less whp traps 130. Performance on the turbo and Turbo S is insane, on track or off.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-tested-review

Here we have the infamous C&D "adjusted for perfect conditions" trap speed of a '14 S @126. I'd love to see any documentation from any stock 991 Turbo S hitting 130.

[EfEightyM3]

Originally Posted by auf Deutsch

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-tested-review

Here we have the infamous C&D "adjusted for perfect conditions" trap speed of a '14 S @126. I'd love to see any documentation from any stock 991 Turbo S hitting 130.

10.6@130 with only 560 crank hp. Just shows how damn potent that car is with a relatively low hp number especially when you see it crushed the c7 z06. Old 997.2 turbo S also trapped 129/130.


http://m.caranddriver.com/comparison...e-specs-page-5

Here is a stock at the drag strip trapping 128.

http://www.6speedonline.com/forums/9...ile-times.html

With stage 2, it runs 9.6@148.7 mph.

Even the PP Performance car with 662 crank hp traps 137 mph.

[auf Deutsch]

Originally Posted by EfEightyM3

10.6@130 with only 560 crank hp. Just shows how damn potent that car is with a relatively low hp number especially when you see it crushed the c7 z06. Old 997.2 turbo S also trapped 129/130.


http://m.caranddriver.com/comparison...e-specs-page-5

Here is a stock at the drag strip trapping 128.

Well, I stand corrected

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

The turbo S really is $250K with any options though. It's supercar performance for supercar price. These days, Z28, Z06, GT350R, that's supercar performance for a fraction of the price. Now, if you are talking about hypercars, then that's another category beyond. The reason why all these cheaper cars are approaching and surpassing porsche's performance IMO is the rear engined platform. At this point, they don't have many options to make the chassis perform as well as a good mid engine or front engine with the engine behind the front axle. They can make it wider, but it's already crazy wide with crazy-wide rear tires, they can try more power, but they have to balance how much power the chassis can lay down and screwing up the weight bias with a bigger engine or more hardware in the rear. They are great cars, but I think more and more they are being stretched to the limits of engineering and r&d for the chassis, while other manufacturers are soldering along with steady improvements.

250?
The highest priced msrp coupe is the Exclusive at around 233.
You can get a decently optioned S for 180 before any discount.
7-10% is easily doable too.
The S options are really interior cosmetics as the car has everything mechanical already.