[buildbright]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Maybe, but the Z28 was also pulling numbers in places that were only equaled by the 918, which goes to show that the americans have learned a thing or two about how to make a car handle AND go fast in a straight line. As these cars get progressively better, we see things like this. It also gets progressively harder for porsche to make a better car on their rear engined chassis, if you throw enough money and development at it, you an eventually do it, at least to a point, but the manufacturers with a superior chassis layout can do it for much cheaper with less extreme engineering challenges.

I'm not a "mustang" guy or one that has a certain allegiance to a certain brand, I go with what I like at the time, but you have to give serious props to cars like the 350, and yes, it may end up being a far better performing car than ones that cost more, or even as good as ones costing many times more.

The 918 is a on a whole nother level then the z28 and at that price it should be.

[drewnel22]

Originally Posted by EfEightyM3

That is my hypothesis. When we see them compared we will know, but just going by what is known, they facts don't compute to me.

GT350R, 3700 lbs, 526 hp rating, and likely only puts down 440-450 to the wheels.

GT3, 3300 lbs, 475 hp rating and likely also putting down 450 to the wheels

Not only that, the GT3 also has the best dual clutch transmission available in any car on the market today.

Does that add up to you?

Again, we will certainly see in testing, and I don't see myself being proven wrong. I do not by any means want what I am saying to be construed in any way other than that I am highly skeptical.

Tracking a car is a lot more about the power and weight ratings. How about the 305 width tires in the front and 315 in the rear? Also the carbon wheels help a lot. Power and weight can estimate straight line numbers better but around a track there is way too much going on. I bet the numbers are similar between the two cars with a slight edge to the GT3. Is that small advantage worth 60-70k?

[gthal]

Originally Posted by drewnel22

Tracking a car is a lot more about the power and weight ratings. How about the 305 width tires in the front and 315 in the rear? Also the carbon wheels help a lot. Power and weight can estimate straight line numbers better but around a track there is way too much going on. I bet the numbers are similar between the two cars with a slight edge to the GT3. Is that small advantage worth 60-70k?

For many the answer is yes... assuming money is doable. There is more to a car experience than pure lap times. The GT350R may be as fast (or close) but may not provide a similar experience. No one knows yet but if I'm a betting man, it will be fast but someone with the $$ would still choose a GT3 because the overall experience will be different and better.

[David70]

Originally Posted by gthal

For many the answer is yes... assuming money is doable. There is more to a car experience than pure lap times. The GT350R may be as fast (or close) but may not provide a similar experience. No one knows yet but if I'm a betting man, it will be fast but someone with the $$ would still choose a GT3 because the overall experience will be different and better.

So you're betting that even with the GT350R on the market some will still buy the GT3?

I absolutely expect the overall experience will be different and better for many in the GT3. It would be crazy to expect otherwise. I am willing to bet that the overall experience for many is better in the Ferrari 488 than both of them.

[fcman]

Originally Posted by chris82

True, but car for car, the GT3, or any 911 is going to be the better track car, and more preferred. The GT350 R looks incredible, but so do a lot of cars, and the ones you see at the track the most are BMWs and Porches.

Again, the GT3 is more than twice the price, if it wasn't the better car I would be worried. The question is whether the GT3 is twice the car that the GT350R is, and I dont see it.

[M3 Esq]

Originally Posted by TRZ06

Pricing will be above MSRP, especially for the GT350R. Real world, I say between $10-20k over MSRP.

Regular GT350 in a year will be at MSRP, but I bet the R's stay above MSRP

There's a local dealer here that's getting one and said they're going to ask $30k over MSRP. It's total BS and gouging IMO. Ford ought to step in and prohibit this kind of thing. It ridiculous.

[EfEightyM3]

Originally Posted by David70

So you're betting that even with the GT350R on the market some will still buy the GT3?

I absolutely expect the overall experience will be different and better for many in the GT3. It would be crazy to expect otherwise. I am willing to bet that the overall experience for many is better in the Ferrari 488 than both of them.

Historically, Ferrari's have been right there with the GT3 and RS but seemed most of the edge has gone to the GT3.

Not sure Ferrari is going to be able to deliver against a still NA GT3 with its turbo 488. Ought to be faster, but not sure the experience will quite align. Similar to how a 911 Turbo S is a phenomenal car yet wont deliver the way a GT3 can. The new GT2 and RS will be something too...

[UMich_335i]

There are a few around here in Dearborn that the execs drive around and they sound unreal. The flat plane crank just makes some amazing music, its loud, obnoxious, mean, and so perfect!

[TSM330i]

Originally Posted by M3 Esq

There's a local dealer here that's getting one and said they're going to ask $30k over MSRP. It's total BS and gouging IMO. Ford ought to step in and prohibit this kind of thing. It ridiculous.

If it's a 2015, they'll get it. Ford is only make just over 100 2015 GT350s.

If it's a 2016, they're nuts.

[TSM330i]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Maybe, but the Z28 was also pulling numbers in places that were only equaled by the 918, which goes to show that the americans have learned a thing or two about how to make a car handle AND go fast in a straight line. As these cars get progressively better, we see things like this. It also gets progressively harder for porsche to make a better car on their rear engined chassis, if you throw enough money and development at it, you an eventually do it, at least to a point, but the manufacturers with a superior chassis layout can do it for much cheaper with less extreme engineering challenges.

I'm not a "mustang" guy or one that has a certain allegiance to a certain brand, I go with what I like at the time, but you have to give serious props to cars like the 350, and yes, it may end up being a far better performing car than ones that cost more, or even as good as ones costing many times more.

That wasn't really my point. Again, you're comparing non-pro drivers when you're looking at the Z/28 vs. 918. I'm not taking ANYTHING away from the American cars. I SERIOUSLY considered buying a Z/28, but in the end, my 3 year old needed a bit more room than the Z/28 afforded in the back.

Here is my point when the same driver drives the car on the same track (albeit, not on the same day):
http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna_seca.html
918 is eight seconds quicker than the Z/28. That is an eternity!
For me, the most impressive car on this list is number 7. That's the C6 Z06.

[TRZ06]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Maybe, but the Z28 was also pulling numbers in places that were only equaled by the 918, which goes to show that the americans have learned a thing or two about how to make a car handle AND go fast in a straight line. As these cars get progressively better, we see things like this. It also gets progressively harder for porsche to make a better car on their rear engined chassis, if you throw enough money and development at it, you an eventually do it, at least to a point, but the manufacturers with a superior chassis layout can do it for much cheaper with less extreme engineering challenges.

I'm not a "mustang" guy or one that has a certain allegiance to a certain brand, I go with what I like at the time, but you have to give serious props to cars like the 350, and yes, it may end up being a far better performing car than ones that cost more, or even as good as ones costing many times more.

Yes, I agree. Every once in a while a car is made that is ahead of its time for it's price point. Back in the day, it was the C5 Z06, it was way ahead of its time and compared to cars costly double or more than double. Even 10 years later, albeit a dated interior, it can still hold its own wiry most performance cars.

I believe the GT350 is one of those cars.

It puts the car world on notice and ups the anti for the next generation

[basscadet]

The Porsche will be faster, will be more fun to drive (probably), and is a comfortable car you can daily drive. And I still wouldn't buy it.

Why?

Because every year cars get better and better. And the $140k you spend on a GT3 in 2016 is going to look like a really bad decision in 2020 when the model year '20 Camaro Z28 (or whatever) is even faster and packed with newer technology for $65,000. Meanwhile, you're stuck with the keys to a 4 year old, $72,000 Porsche that pales in comparison to the latest stuff out of Porsche.

When cars STOP getting exponentially better, and I think 2009-today is the absolute golden age of performance (blame the GT-R), and progress slows down a little, then I'd be willing to throw some cash at a 911. Two years ago I came really close to pulling the trigger on a low-mileage 997.1 Turbo and GOD am I glad I didn't - I'd be holding the title to a $80k 911 with no bluetooth, soft suspension that I'd have to fix aftermarket, and no PDK.

For you guys who sit in a 997.1 Turbo and compare it to a 991 CS, it's just shocking how much progress has been made since 2007. That rocket-speed of progress is not slowing down.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by basscadet

Because every year cars get better and better. And the $140k you spend on a GT3 in 2016 is going to look like a really bad decision in 2020 when the model year '20 Camaro Z28 (or whatever) is even faster and packed with newer technology for $65,000. Meanwhile, you're stuck with the keys to a 4 year old, $72,000 Porsche that pales in comparison to the latest stuff out of Porsche.

You can't buy a 4-5 year old GT3 for less than $115,000 (997.2 msrp was $113k). Porsche GT cars extremely hard to get for msrp new and they hold there value like no other cars.

Please show me a 4 year GT3 worth $72k, I will buy 5 of them.

Just look at first year 991 GT3's, the cheapest used 2015 is $151k. Don't confuse the sh*tty Turbo models depreciation with any GT models. They don't compare.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

You can't buy a 4-5 year old GT3 for less than $115,000 (997.2 msrp was $113k). Porsche GT cars extremely hard to get for msrp new and they hold there value like no other cars.

Please show me a 4 year GT3 worth $72k, I will buy 5 of them.

Just look at first year 991 GT3's, the cheapest used 2015 is $151k. Don't confuse the sh*tty Turbo models depreciation with any GT models. They don't compare.

You missed the point of his post, and made it look even better at the same time. Bravo

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by csu87

You missed the point of his post, and made it look even better at the same time. Bravo

How so? He stated GT3 will be worth $72k in 4 years. Far from the truth. Both used 997.2 GT3's (msrp $113k new) and used 991 GT3's (msrp $130k new) sell more than msrp.

I didn't even address his claim being stuck with a 4 year old GT3 that supposedly pales in comparison to a 991. Many don't want anything to do with pdk 991 GT3. The 997.2 GT3 is looked at the last true analog 911. All 997.2 GT3/RS/4.0 will continue to climb in value.

His argument would make more sense if he left GT models out of it. Base models and Turbo models depreciate like rocks.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

How so? He stated GT3 will be worth $72k in 4 years. Far from the truth. Both used 997.2 GT3's (msrp $113k new) and used 991 GT3's (msrp $130k new) sell more than msrp.

I didn't even address his claim being stuck with a 4 year old GT3 that supposedly pales in comparison to a 991. Many don't want anything to do with pdk 991 GT3. The 997.2 GT3 is looked at the last true analog 911. All 997.2 GT3/RS/4.0 will continue to climb in value.

His argument would make more sense if he left GT models out of it. Base models and Turbo models depreciate like rocks.

His argument was you spend 150k+ for a new Porsche that in 4 yrs would still cost more than the newest performance American car that will outperform the porsche.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by csu87

His argument was you spend 150k+ for a new Porsche that in 4 yrs would still cost more than the newest performance American car that will outperform the porsche.

But in 4 years it will still be worth twice as much as a next gen Z28 for example. That is all you pulled out of his statement? Why even bring up the incorrect values of GT3's? His argument revolved around a GT3 depreciating 50% in 4 years, which it doesn't do. What is stopping GT3 owner from selling his 991 GT3, which will have little to no depreciation and picking up a next gen 992 GT3. That will smoke a Z28 even more than 991 already does. I mean I like American cars, especially the new GT350. But his argument was flawed from the get go. Like I said, it would make more sense if he referred to Turbo or base models only.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by TSM330i

That wasn't really my point. Again, you're comparing non-pro drivers when you're looking at the Z/28 vs. 918. I'm not taking ANYTHING away from the American cars. I SERIOUSLY considered buying a Z/28, but in the end, my 3 year old needed a bit more room than the Z/28 afforded in the back.

Here is my point when the same driver drives the car on the same track (albeit, not on the same day):
http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna_seca.html
918 is eight seconds quicker than the Z/28. That is an eternity!
For me, the most impressive car on this list is number 7. That's the C6 Z06.

Well, if you read my original post, the point was the Z/28 made numbers (lateral Gs, etc.) only seen by the 918. They decided to make a track-focused road car and pretty much nailed it. Is it as fast as a 918? No, but it is faster than a plethora of cars costing many times as much, because GM is a large company and can build on the right chassis the right way and use the right parts. A telling story about this is how the 918 isn't a rear-engine, because porsche knows the rear engine layout is inferior, but the 911 is so "classic" and they've invested so much time and culture into the layout and car, which also means money . GM and Ford also don't have to make the car as efficient as porsche, who is curtailed for efficiency standards since all of their cars are sports cars. GM and Ford have little more leeway here.

I know you know this, so it's mainly for the people that went a little crazy when I said "Z/28", but it's an excellent example of what a large car company can do. The Ford is going to be good. I'm so glad we got out of the 80s, 90s and 2000s where the American vehicles were just not designed seriously or competitively. The idea that a car made by Ford or Cadillac could or would handle well was just a pipe dream. Now in many cases they are setting the standards/fastest lap time. Inconceivable before.

[BMW269]

For some, Tesla rules all.

[basscadet]

If you spend $150k on a GT3 in 2016 you're not going to get $100k for it in 2020. But I don't want to get lost in a debate about resale value. The point I was trying to make is that, year-by-year, these cars are just much better. The difference in 911 performance from just 5 years ago is staggering. For such a large financial investment (for ME) I don't want something that is yesterday's old news after 24 months.

This was a different story 5 years ago when GT/Turbos were only incrementally improved.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

But in 4 years it will still be worth twice as much as a next gen Z28 for example. That is all you pulled out of his statement? Why even bring up the incorrect values of GT3's? His argument revolved around a GT3 depreciating 50% in 4 years, which it doesn't do. What is stopping GT3 owner from selling his 991 GT3, which will have little to no depreciation and picking up a next gen 992 GT3. That will smoke a Z28 even more than 991 already does. I mean I like American cars, especially the new GT350. But his argument was flawed from the get go. Like I said, it would make more sense if he referred to Turbo or base models only.

see above. No one cares that you feel he had a wrong value for a GT3. The point is, in 4 years, a 60k car will have better performance than your GT3, even if the GT3 costs $1million. The value in 4yrs is irrelevant.

[gthal]

All of these "value" arguments only matter if the $$ is a big deal. For some people (not me ), spending $150,000 is not very different than $75,000. On this forum, many people (not all) will be buy an M as it closer to the upper end of their affordability threshold... this makes the "value" issue relative to a GT3 more important. For many buying a GT3, the economics are no different than me buying an M4. Obviously exceptions to this on both sides.

My point is that arguing "value proposition" when it comes to expensive toys is somewhat academic IMO. If I can easily afford a GT3, I maybe don't care much if a GT350R is a better performance "value" or if the M4 is a better performance "value". I'm just going to get the car I like the most regardless of resale, depreciation, etc, etc. For those people where it is a bigger financial stretch, then it becomes more relevant. If I made $1M a year, I could care less how much a GT3 is or depreciates. If I made $250K, well, then it's important It's all relative to our economic situation.