Whoopsy:All cars are compromises, there is no one perfect car. Everyone's priorities are different, it is impossible for a car manufacturer to make one perfect car without compromises.
Even the mighty 918 is a compromised car.
ohhh sure it is highly compromised, it is a two seater::::)))
peter
The 918 is a different story. A GT3 RS is basically a 911 with a different engine and chassis, not really an issue for Porsche to easily add (without any developing cost) two rear seats.
Back to topic, 911 R: Today I received a very confusing information. It seems that the Porsche Board hasn't approved the 911 R for production yet and will decide on it's fate after the Geneva(?) presentation. This is the weirdest information I heard about the 911 R lately.
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
Boyko23:So, it will be presented there, or...?
Good question but the missing green light could explain where there is so little information available (yet).
Maybe they switch back to PDK and rear seats...
--
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
pmarkow:Whoopsy:All cars are compromises, there is no one perfect car. Everyone's priorities are different, it is impossible for a car manufacturer to make one perfect car without compromises.
Even the mighty 918 is a compromised car.
ohhh sure it is highly compromised, it is a two seater::::)))
peter
Well Dr. Walliser trade-off top end acceleration for un-matched low-mid end acceleration for one.
RC:The 918 is a different story. A GT3 RS is basically a 911 with a different engine and chassis, not really an issue for Porsche to easily add (without any developing cost) two rear seats.
Back to topic, 911 R: Today I received a very confusing information. It seems that the Porsche Board hasn't approved the 911 R for production yet and will decide on it's fate after the Geneva(?) presentation. This is the weirdest information I heard about the 911 R lately.
In view of some of the information we have read so far on the 911R, I'm not completely surprised.
In particular, the suggestion that a car with GT3-like performance should be released without a rear wing or the other measures seen in the latest 911RS (air outlets on tops of front and rear wheel wells) which are required to reduce aerodynamic lift would contradict all the claims made in the past relating to such measures.
fritz
fritz:RC:The 918 is a different story. A GT3 RS is basically a 911 with a different engine and chassis, not really an issue for Porsche to easily add (without any developing cost) two rear seats.
Back to topic, 911 R: Today I received a very confusing information. It seems that the Porsche Board hasn't approved the 911 R for production yet and will decide on it's fate after the Geneva(?) presentation. This is the weirdest information I heard about the 911 R lately.
In view of some of the information we have read so far on the 911R, I'm not completely surprised.
In particular, the suggestion that a car with GT3-like performance should be released without a rear wing or the other measures seen in the latest 911RS (air outlets on tops of front and rear wheel wells) which are required to reduce aerodynamic lift would contradict all the claims made in the past relating to such measures.
Always the same story: When I want a car, it suddenly won't be made anymore.
You are right, the 911 R would be some sort of breaking a taboo but Porsche could justify this by offering it in a very limited number only and at a very high cost. However, this could of course raise some new desires from customers who didn't get one and Porsche could come under huge pressure to offer a wingless GT3 with rear seats in the future.
Brand dilution, I get that but I still think that a limited edition 911 R would have been a great idea.
Let's see what happens in Geneva...
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
Maybe they will revise their strategie about that car. After the success of GT3 RS and GT4/Spyder they may thinking about increasing production of that car. The other thing can be they are thinking about making it a 991.2 car (still with N/A engine from the GT3 RS)
Offering PDK and manual, rear seats (with option to remove them) I imagine they can sell easily 2000 to 3000 cars. With that production numbers they can reduce the price to something only little bit above the GT3 RS and have more profit at the end.
--
daily: BMW 430d
for fun: Porsche Boxster GTS
m4ever:Last week the Porsche Board decided the R production numbers, any insider info on this?
How could they decide the production numbers if the car is rumored not to have the green light for production yet?
The last number I heard was something between 600 and 700 cars but again, this was before the new rumored with the Porsche Board approval appeared.
--
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
sfo:very bizarre for Board "approval" after Geneva presentation
The car shown in Geneva, if there will be one, is supposed to be a concept study.
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
Actually I think the issue for the board may be not whether to produce the car, but whether the initial high price low production concept was the correct path. I would sign up for a wingless, rear seated, GT3 powered, PDK equipped 911 in a heart beat. I would also be willing to pay a premium (GT3RS money) but not be gouged by US dealers w/ a market premium as w/ the RS made possible by Porsche's allocation nonsense.
"Don't worry about avoiding temptation, as you grow older it will avoid you" Churchill
DaveC:Actually I think the issue for the board may be not whether to produce the car, but whether the initial high price low production concept was the correct path. I would sign up for a wingless, rear seated, GT3 powered, PDK equipped 911 in a heart beat. I would also be willing to pay a premium (GT3RS money) but not be gouged by US dealers w/ a market premium as w/ the RS made possible by Porsche's allocation nonsense.
This would sound logical to me and you but I'm afraid the points "fritz" made are a bit more valid (and more likely).
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
RC:Back to topic, 911 R: Today I received a very confusing information. It seems that the Porsche Board hasn't approved the 911 R for production yet and will decide on it's fate after the Geneva(?) presentation. This is the weirdest information I heard about the 911 R lately.
They are probably awaiting the legal department drafting a customer contract that implicity states the buyer must agree to put the car straight into storage and agree not to start the engine or drive the car until after the warranty period has expired. They've already had to take those engines back at least once already and after coming up with this cunning plan to re-use them do not wish to see the recouped profit wasted on yet more warranty swap outs
The marketing campaign will focus on the beauty of a true collectors car and the desirability of zero kms/miles untouched/undriven examples for future value appreciation
@Fritz "I see no problems with breaking taboos, but opening a barn door to the lawyers of the first litigious owner who wrecks a 911R would not be a good move."
Why would they fear lawsuits?
Other marques are able to match downforce without huge static wings for years now, Porsche engineers can surely design a proper wingless active aero car, no?
spudgun:@Fritz "I see no problems with breaking taboos, but opening a barn door to the lawyers of the first litigious owner who wrecks a 911R would not be a good move."
Why would they fear lawsuits?
Other marques are able to match downforce without huge static wings for years now, Porsche engineers can surely design a proper wingless active aero car, no?
There were a few legal "incidences" which require a certain attention and carefulness.
Not sure if this is the reason but fritz certainly made a very good point.
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
Kobalt:It has a diffuser, ... No need for wing I suppose.
This is not about what it "needs" I'm afraid. Legal stuff...
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
spudgun:@Fritz "I see no problems with breaking taboos, but opening a barn door to the lawyers of the first litigious owner who wrecks a 911R would not be a good move."
Why would they fear lawsuits?
Other marques are able to match downforce without huge static wings for years now, Porsche engineers can surely design a proper wingless active aero car, no?
1. I would question the statement that other marques can match downforce on road cars without wings or other adequate aerodynamic measures.
2. I haven't read any rumours to the effect that the 911R would incorporate adequate "proper wingless active aero" measures to allow GT3-like performance without a wing.
3. In the Paul Walker case, his daughter's lawyers based their claims partly on the fact that the Carrera GT did not have an ESP system, whereas some other car models of the same era were introducing such systems. Similar arguments could be used in the event of an owner crashing a wingless 911R, hence the reference to a "barn door".
fritz
I remember there were similar (legal) concerns regarding throttle response and ESP setups in the past. Where using a different setup (and much more dynamic approach) vs. the competition and the standard models of the same model range, was a apparently a (legal) issue.
--
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Carrera 4 GTS Cabriolet, Porsche Macan Turbo, Ford Mustang GT500 Shelby SVT (2014), Mini JCW (2015), Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT (2014)
fritz:spudgun:... Other marques are able to match downforce without huge static wings for years now, Porsche engineers can surely design a proper wingless active aero car, no?
1. I would question the statement that other marques can match downforce on road cars without wings or other adequate aerodynamic measures.
2. I haven't read any rumours to the effect that the 911R would incorporate adequate "proper wingless active aero" measures to allow GT3-like performance without a wing. ...
I think it's worth pointing out, in addition, that even if "other marques" (which I guess is supposed to be code for Ferrari?), "are able to match downforce without huge static wings," they aren't working with a basic car that is not designed in that way, but rather, designing the car to that end. I'm confident that Porsche engineers could design a car that produced a lot of downforce without a wing... if they started with a clean slate. But, it wouldn't be a 911R if they didn't start with a 911, so they're working with a design that wasn't intended to produce such downforce, and the only practical way to generate it and keep the overall design intact is to attach a wing.
RC:spudgun:@Fritz "I see no problems with breaking taboos, but opening a barn door to the lawyers of the first litigious owner who wrecks a 911R would not be a good move."
Why would they fear lawsuits?
Other marques are able to match downforce without huge static wings for years now, Porsche engineers can surely design a proper wingless active aero car, no?
There were a few legal "incidences" which require a certain attention and carefulness.
Not sure if this is the reason but fritz certainly made a very good point.
because of the rear engine there is an issue with space for the diffuser. no problem in a mid engined car.
peter
pmarkow:RC:spudgun:@Fritz "I see no problems with breaking taboos, but opening a barn door to the lawyers of the first litigious owner who wrecks a 911R would not be a good move."
Why would they fear lawsuits?
Other marques are able to match downforce without huge static wings for years now, Porsche engineers can surely design a proper wingless active aero car, no?
There were a few legal "incidences" which require a certain attention and carefulness.
Not sure if this is the reason but fritz certainly made a very good point.
because of the rear engine there is an issue with space for the diffuser. no problem in a mid engined car.
peter
Thanks to the much greater ground clearance of road cars compared to racing cars the capability of just a diffuser to create downforce in this kind of application are generally overrated anyway.
fritz
fritz:Thanks to the much greater ground clearance of road cars compared to racing cars the capability of just a diffuser to create downforce in this kind of application are generally overrated anyway.
Good point. A car using just a diffuser would benefit from an adjustable air suspension that could be lowered on a smooth track (McLaren P1 does this, and also has a wing)...
--
16 Cayman GT4, 73 Carrera RS 2.7 Carbon Fiber replica (1,890 lbs), 06 EVO9 with track mods. Former: 73 911S, Two 951S's, 996 C2, 993 C2, 98 Ferrari 550, 79 635CSi
RC:m4ever:Last week the Porsche Board decided the R production numbers, any insider info on this?
How could they decide the production numbers if the car is rumored not to have the green light for production yet?
The last number I heard was something between 600 and 700 cars but again, this was before the new rumored with the Porsche Board approval appeared.
We have contrasting information then . The information that I have is that the car is real and deliveries will start in Sept-Oct 16' . The greatest surprise of all will be the power output and weight . The source of this info is a friend who is a major Porsche collector (for what is worth).
Grant:fritz:Thanks to the much greater ground clearance of road cars compared to racing cars the capability of just a diffuser to create downforce in this kind of application are generally overrated anyway.
Good point. A car using just a diffuser would benefit from an adjustable air suspension that could be lowered on a smooth track (McLaren P1 does this, and also has a wing)...
True, but the adoption of a hitherto unavailable variable-height suspension for a limited number of a series-runout model variant can be safely ruled out.
fritz
fritz:Grant:fritz:Thanks to the much greater ground clearance of road cars compared to racing cars the capability of just a diffuser to create downforce in this kind of application are generally overrated anyway.
Good point. A car using just a diffuser would benefit from an adjustable air suspension that could be lowered on a smooth track (McLaren P1 does this, and also has a wing)...
True, but the adoption of a hitherto unavailable variable-height suspension for a limited number of a series-runout model variant can be safely ruled out.
Absolutely - was just thinking hypothetically (or for future series developments)
--
16 Cayman GT4, 73 Carrera RS 2.7 Carbon Fiber replica (1,890 lbs), 06 EVO9 with track mods. Former: 73 911S, Two 951S's, 996 C2, 993 C2, 98 Ferrari 550, 79 635CSi