What do you guys think of his conclusions?
09-18-2014, 11:35 AM
#16
Rennlist Member
I believe his sort of has his facts - but was recording a video and likely mixed them up.
I'm nearly certain, as I know it is true for the 997mk1 and mk2, and thus the 996 .1 and .2s, is that the frame is a hybrid of the wider, stiffer front section (found in 4wdr cars that are traditionally 'wide-body') and the rear section which is either narrow body for GT3s or wide for GT3RS (991 generation not included) - so the wide-body reference is sort of correct but how he used it - incorrect.
The 997mk1s had TC not SC - and I like 'his' explanation about corner entry versus corner exit which is mostly true but not entirely true.
I'm nearly certain, as I know it is true for the 997mk1 and mk2, and thus the 996 .1 and .2s, is that the frame is a hybrid of the wider, stiffer front section (found in 4wdr cars that are traditionally 'wide-body') and the rear section which is either narrow body for GT3s or wide for GT3RS (991 generation not included) - so the wide-body reference is sort of correct but how he used it - incorrect.
The 997mk1s had TC not SC - and I like 'his' explanation about corner entry versus corner exit which is mostly true but not entirely true.
09-18-2014, 12:15 PM
#17
I'm pretty sure that something about what I'm saying is correct as at launch on the 997GT3.mk1 car this was spoken about. It may have to do with the fact that in the transition years is it not true that not all S's or 4S's were wide bodies as I think there were a few years were they were actually narrow bodies - and thus the literature at the time spoke about the front section of a 4S being put together with a narrow body rear section - I can probably find the literature stating such but there was definitely something.
09-18-2014, 12:50 PM
#18
Rennlist Member
I'm pretty sure that something about what I'm saying is correct as at launch on the 997GT3.mk1 car this was spoken about. It may have to do with the fact that in the transition years is it not true that not all S's or 4S's were wide bodies as I think there were a few years were they were actually narrow bodies - and thus the literature at the time spoke about the front section of a 4S being put together with a narrow body rear section - I can probably find the literature stating such but there was definitely something.
09-18-2014, 01:04 PM
#19
I'm pretty sure that something about what I'm saying is correct as at launch on the 997GT3.mk1 car this was spoken about. It may have to do with the fact that in the transition years is it not true that not all S's or 4S's were wide bodies as I think there were a few years were they were actually narrow bodies - and thus the literature at the time spoke about the front section of a 4S being put together with a narrow body rear section - I can probably find the literature stating such but there was definitely something.
The C4s was launched much later in the models life, this had the wide rear haunches from the turbo, amongst other changes.
09-18-2014, 01:37 PM
#20
GT3 player par excellence
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
like bob, i owned, track and streeted all three, though 996.2 was not RS.
on track on street, i take 7.2 over all of them, unless 996 is stripped.
talking about soft, hard, turn in, this or that in isolation is like saying you want the face of this girl, the head lights of that woman, the waist if this waif and the rear of that actor. well , it aint happening. drive all and buy the whole package.
journalists opinion is just that, an opinion. fun to read but not all that useful.
on track on street, i take 7.2 over all of them, unless 996 is stripped.
talking about soft, hard, turn in, this or that in isolation is like saying you want the face of this girl, the head lights of that woman, the waist if this waif and the rear of that actor. well , it aint happening. drive all and buy the whole package.
journalists opinion is just that, an opinion. fun to read but not all that useful.
09-20-2014, 05:42 AM
#22
Drifting
like bob, i owned, track and streeted all three, though 996.2 was not RS.
on track on street, i take 7.2 over all of them, unless 996 is stripped.
talking about soft, hard, turn in, this or that in isolation is like saying you want the face of this girl, the head lights of that woman, the waist if this waif and the rear of that actor. well , it aint happening. drive all and buy the whole package.
journalists opinion is just that, an opinion. fun to read but not all that useful.
on track on street, i take 7.2 over all of them, unless 996 is stripped.
talking about soft, hard, turn in, this or that in isolation is like saying you want the face of this girl, the head lights of that woman, the waist if this waif and the rear of that actor. well , it aint happening. drive all and buy the whole package.
journalists opinion is just that, an opinion. fun to read but not all that useful.
09-21-2014, 08:53 PM
#23
Advanced
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
+1 with Mooty. I've had all three also and 7.2 trumps the other two for street and track unless you are modding and stripping the 6.2. The 7's much more supple on the road - you'll save the cost difference in dental and chiropractic bills avoided