ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

Guys, I'm an artist and thus can barely spell my own name—use of affect vs. effect was purely by chance. And don't read any of my lounge stuff too seriously, that's my agent provocateur alter ego that comes out when I want to avoid an overwhelming amount of real work I have to do.

no_more_rice

Did I ever say otherwise? It's interesting how often people on these forums invent strawman arguments, knock them over, and then try to claim some kind of superior intellectual position. Then you get some tag along "schooled" quip. *shakes head*

All I said was the GT3 is a serious track weapon. It is. It has the chassis rigdity, brakes, power and suspension to obliterate a stock FD. Two track novices here claim they can "destroy"an ostensibly stock GT3 with a 350 rwhp - in a somewhat blanket statement - with essentially no evidence to back up their claims. When I throw the bs flag on such claims I'm an FD hater (?), I thought this forum was a bit more mature and open minded than that. The FD - can - lose.

"Superior" depending on who you talk to, many will argue passionately for advantages of the GT3 engine layout. This seems to be more a matter of personal preference than anything else.

Ok, but, again, at what point do you compare a heavily modded car to a stock one and call it fair? I suppose if you dump enough coin into a RX-8 you can get there as well, possibly faster. Not sure what the point of this argument is or where it's going...it's an argument of potential, of "what if" vs. reality.

Yes. Again, x car on y track on z day vs some unknown driver doesn't prove anything. Can I find GT 3 track times that will obliterate an 350 rwhp FDs track time on multiple tracks? Absolutely (although few FDs compete these days, so it would take some digging). That's not an attack on the FD, a car I've owned for 12 years, it's just reality.

You seem to be admitting the GT3 can get around most tracks faster here. That's really all I was saying.

TRWeiss1

iTrader: (20)

^ Touche.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

As I said, your persistence in your claim of GT3 superiority despite evidence to the contrary would seem to IMPLY a notion of "magic" intrinsic capability. I didn't say you said so implicitly.

I'm much closer to a track novice than either Fritz or the Wird, and I'LL tell you that a 350hp rwhp will be potentially quicker than a stock GT3 in the hands of drivers of similar skill level. The evidence was clearly shown to you on video, and having ridden with Fritz many times on track, and done it myself, I can tell you it's true. At that power level, the FD has a power/weight advantage, and it's multiple autocross championships speak to it's pure handling advantages. That's just reality.

Well, ou will find no purpose-built racecars, i.e.: formula or prototype's that are built rear engined from a clean sheet of paper. Porsche built theirs this way as an evolution from Volkswagen, and it has become a part of their brand... even they know it's not optimal. That's why the Carrera GT, the GT1 and other clean-sheet racers aren't configured that way, and why they'll never give the Cayman any power—because they know it'll be better than the 911.

I think up to the point where you change the base design—make it tube framed, re-engineer the suspension pick-ups or shock config. "Heavily modded" for an FD in this context really just means adding the $50k worth of ancillaries that the Porsche factory added to a base 911.

That's exactly what I said.

Really? Where? STOCK GT3's with non-pro drivers vs. Fritz's VIR times? Not many. You'll see alot of great GT3 times... but I'll tell you, they've likely been modded and have $7k worth of Motons on them.

No, I'm saying it does things differently than an FD does. Better in some ways, not in others.... just like everything else.

no_more_rice

WHAT evidence?

The 'Ring vid? It's clear in that vid (as mahjik also commented), that the GT3 could out-brake and out-accelerate the FD at will. The two cars were not officially racing, it was just a track day. That video proves nothing.

So what are his times vs. a similar racing class GT3 (not just random track day times)?

What, 150 pounds?

Most seem to agree the Cayman has an advantage, but it's still a Porsche design.

Ok...so modded vs. modded, which is fair. This isn't a dollars invested question, it's a question of which car is quicker around a track with similar power levels. I'm not questioning that an FD can be significantly faster with enough money invested and enough power. A 20b FD would defintely get the job done.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

It's only "fair" if the preparation levels are similar (not who performs them). What you pay for with a "stock" GT3 is the level of pre "modding" the factory does for you over a base 911. Like I say, underneath, it's just a steel unibody with McPherson struts.

Again, when you say "enough money invested", this again seems to suggest that one would need to spend money on an FD to overcome an intrinsic disadvantage. That's just not the case. It isn't a Pinto, where you would have to spend a crap load to overcome the fact that it's handicapped by poor design.

Can you tell any of us, specifically, what the FD design handicap is, or what the GT3 design advantage is?

There isn't really any. The comparisons one way or the other fall on level of preparation, either by the owner or the factory.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Nomorerice,
You've mentioned the straw man argument a few times and yet you are the one continually using the straw man to back up the majority of your positions which is why your straw man keeps getting blown away.

It's remarkable how your straw man responses to everyones post seem to only make sense to the straw man, STRAW MAN!

He's On Toroids

iTrader: (2)

no_more_rice

Not intrinsic, more an issue of cheap components. The stock FD has many flaws. The brakes are crap, the IC is tiny, the ECU is useless, the fuel system is prone to catch on fire, the shocks are outdated (of course), and the chassis rigidity is mediocre. These issues can all be fixed, but as mahjik says, not everyone wants to bother.

no_more_rice

Example?

I honestly don't think you understand what the term means.

93rx74lyfe

iTrader: (1)

Open thread

Grab

Then continue to

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


Fits you to a tee in my book.

Biggest example I have is me supplying you with a pro driven GT3 running the exact same track as I am in my FD that runs a lower time as proven by video to back up my statement that a 350 FD will run a faster lap yada yada and you refuting it with no evidence to support your stance other than going on about cup cars, motorcycles, caymans etc..... STRAW MAN!

no_more_rice

I guess you had to look it up - not a good sign, and you still don't get it.

Your story keeps changing. First it was some type of magazne test driver, now it's a "pro". Honestly, I think you're full of ****, and I'm pretty tired of your condescending babbling nonsense. That isn't an example of a strawman, it's a disagreement, moron. You made the claim, you need to back it up with facts. Lap times would be preferred. You can't. You lose.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

As you acknowledge, none of those, except possible chassis rigidity, are are intrinsic design aspects. Cheap and outdated components indeed... on a 15 year old (relatively) budget-priced car.

That's all Fritz and I are trying to tell you.

Those things are basic upgrades on most any 350 rwhp FD. Power FC, StopTechs, new IC, and better shocks. All stuff the car could/would have come from the factory with if it had cost $100k, and similar to what Porsche does to a base 911 to make it a GT3. That's the GENIUS of these cars, once you add that stuff, you DO have something on par because it's "got it" where it counts... and whereas you can add all that stuff to an Eclipse or something, and you still don't.

The one thing is the chassis rigidity. Obviously the standard has gone up in 15 years (see: RX8), but then again one of the acknowledged best-handling cars in the world (Lotus Elise) isn't any better than an FD.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

I looked it up for your benefit because clearly I thought you were confused yourself.

I've already said several times that the mags hire pro drivers and if you had any damn sense at all you'd realize that yourself, STRAW MAN! That way folks like you can't argue that the m3 driven by Randy Pobst for Motor Trend was faster than the GT3 driven by the magazine editor of Car and Driver AGAIN the mags have PROS testing these cars or the test wouldn't make any sense. At the professional level there is very little difference in track time between any driver even the guys that finish last (like 1/2 a second a lap).

Check my video for my lap time which is why I thought you wanted the video (strawman) to begin with. That's how I know your Kawa... is not going to crush the GT3 in fact it will LOOSE to the GT3 with the pro mag driver driving the bike and some track hack like me in the GT3.

no_more_rice

The hire people to test the cars, yes, the question is how competitive they are - it varies. What I really want to see is RACING lap times vs your racing lap times - if indeed you do race (?).

Wrong. Bikes have been compared to these heavier street cars many times in the past, the bike always wins. Bikes only lose to ultralight high power cars and/or "go-kart" type track only vehicles like the Atom.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Whether I race or not has no bearing on the proof I provided STRAW MAN. So now where going to assume the test drivers are half assing it because they aren't competitive, straw man.

So you're saying that Bikes are faster on road courses than cars?

1QWIK7

iTrader: (33)

LOL this thread is getting epic.

Love to see the vets go strong in discussions like these.

This was way better than the GTR escapade a couple of pages ago. Maybe we should do that again after the GT3 discussion????

Okie-RX7

iTrader: (1)

http://www.fastestlaps.com/track3.html

The S8 times are pretty close to the Gt3, and it only has 280 hp not 415. So with an extra 50 hp I think it make sense that an rx7 could walk over a GT3. I hope you accept these times as being accurate...

Montego

iTrader: (1)

I knew that would get your attention Yet you ignored me twice when I inquired what the deal was with you….

https://www.rx7club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=340

FYI- You asking for a vid for proof given that you had just mocked someone else for asking the same thing makes you a clown. And that is why you chose to ignore me.

You have zero credibility as it is blatantly obvious that you argue just for the sake of it. Bottom line is that everyone can tell that you are one closed minded individual that refuses to even attempt to hear what the other side has to say. We can’t always be right, and many times the other side has a good point that should be taken into consideration- that is what makes a good debate unfortunately that is beyond your means. The funny thing is that in the end it actually makes your points weak, as your thought process is flawed. The only person who doesn’t see that is you as you seem to think that as long as you keep going you somehow won. Just because people get tired of arguing with you doesn’t mean you made the best point nor won.

Fritz was correct: We do shake our heads at you

^ Point proven.

no_more_rice

The GT3 (granted it's an RS) is well ahead of the RX-7 at Willow Springs

http://www.fastestlaps.com/track15.html

no_more_rice

Yes...now move along, you have nothing to add here except bs personal attacks

1QWIK7

iTrader: (33)

This x100000

Someone give this man an award.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

That's also a stock U.S.-spec FD from 1993, against the RS.

5 secs a lap at Willow. I think Fritz told me his very best time at VIR in a stock-ish FD was something like 2:14 or so. At his last time trial, his 350 rwhp car ran a 2:05.XX

I think it'll cover 5 secs at Willow over a stocker.

no_more_rice

Post the lap times and I'm a believer - I'm not asking for much here, just more than "what ifs". I agree it's impressive for a 17 year old car.