996 GT3 (mk2) vs 360 Challenge Stradale

[crayzayjay]

After seeing its 360 Modena crash and burn at the hands of the 996 GT3, Ferrari upped the stakes with its race-tuned 360 CS. To counter Ferrari, Porsche released a new and improved GT3, and an RS version is imminent. But we're getting ahead of ourselves with that one. Which of the two currently available models would you rather have and why? GT3 or 360 CS?

[crayzayjay]

A few pics

360 Challenge Stradale:



996 GT3:

[Moppie]

Ferrari no questions asked, simply because Iv never had much of a like of Porsches, and having on worked on several I like them even less.
They are simply far to over enginered, and mass produced, the sort of thing I want in a family car, or daily driver.
Ferrari's however still retain all the elements of a unique, exotic, and highly tuned sports car.

[crayzayjay]

Wow - you must have extremely high standards if you relate the GT3 to things you want in a family car! And how can there be anything wrong with being "over engineered"? Would you prefer a half-assed project? If you were to buy an exotic - which, im sorry, but the GT3 definitely falls under that category for me - wouldnt you want it to last forever? Which of these cars do you think will break down first? They're gonna be driven hard, and im much more willing to go with the GT3 knowing it will stand up to extreme punishment and in many ways offer a more rewarding drive than the CS. Besides, the fact it can almost keep up with the CS given the power deficit and additional weight shows what a great sports car it is. And if the GT3 isnt "highly-tuned", i dont know what is.

[NISSANSPDR]

I am gonna go w/the GT3...simply b/c I know it will last and I saved some money by not buying a Ferrari 360 CS...

I think it also looks better and w/Porsche's GT3 track record...they do pretty good...I dont see the 360 Modena race cars win much

[Moppie]

LOL!
Well crayzayjay yes, the Porsche is probobly the more reliable car, and for me that is bad thing in a super car of this nature, as in the case of the porsches Iv driven and worked on it makes them feel very boring and ordinary. If Im going to be traveling at insane speeds in a car that cost more than the average house then I want to know that it's something unique and hand assembled, not something that despite its performance still feels like my mothers accord.
And over enginering equals excess weight, the enemy of any sports car.
Basicly if I want a reliable everyday super car (oxymoron) then Ill buy an NSX, it will be just as reliable as the porsche, but weighing less feel lighter and more agile (I don't care that the porsche might be faster).
Given the choice of the Ferrari and the Porsche, then the Ferrari is also the lighter, and more agile, and IMO more delicate car, which is for me, what a true sports car should be, and given Ferraris huge leaps ahead in reliablity and build quality, also a reliable easy to drive car.

Porsche just has a philosophy that I dont agree with, not only is the engine still in the wrong place (i.e. pandering to comsumeristic demands, instead of putting the engine in the right place), but they have also developed a bigger is better attitude, and achieve thier high levels of performance with sheer brute power, not just engine power, but bigger heavier cars, with bigger heavier technology i.e. they need AWD to keep up with, or be faster than Ferraris 2WD etc.
The fact that the 911 series handles at all is testiment to the engiering and design skills of the company, but the fact that they keep producing a 911 model 30 years after it should have been replaced is also testiment to something being majorly wrong in company.


Im just one of these crazy people of British decent who would rather drive an Elise than a Viper

[TexasF355F1]

How could I choose?!?! I'd say I'd go with both. I love the looks of both of them. And like I've said many a times, if I could afford one of them, then I could get both.

[crayzayjay]

Originally Posted by Moppie

LOL!
Well crayzayjay yes, the Porsche is probobly the more reliable car, and for me that is bad thing in a super car of this nature, as in the case of the porsches Iv driven and worked on it makes them feel very boring and ordinary. If Im going to be traveling at insane speeds in a car that cost more than the average house then I want to know that it's something unique and hand assembled, not something that despite its performance still feels like my mothers accord.

Reliability is a bad thing in a supercar? We all know the saying, to finish first, first you must finish. The reliability of Michael Schumacher’s Ferrari went a long way in ensuring his winning of the F1 WDC in 2000, 2001, 2002, and I say it confidently 2003. Has Ferrari cursed his reliability there? You may want a car that breaks down halfway through the race, or a spirited run, but I’ll take the Porsche

If you want more “show” in the interior, that’s fine, but I look at it in the way that all the money’s been spent in the right place. A 911 interior leaves you in no doubt that this car is all business. Somehow I feel that driving at 190 mph in a GT3 is going to feel very special. Add to that the sound of a Porsche flat-six, one of the greatest sounds in the world, automotive or not, and you have yourself a very special car indeed.

Originally Posted by Moppie

And over enginering equals excess weight, the enemy of any sports car.
Basicly if I want a reliable everyday super car (oxymoron) then Ill buy an NSX, it will be just as reliable as the porsche, but weighing less feel lighter and more agile (I don't care that the porsche might be faster).
Given the choice of the Ferrari and the Porsche, then the Ferrari is also the lighter, and more agile, and IMO more delicate car, which is for me, what a true sports car should be, and given Ferraris huge leaps ahead in reliablity and build quality, also a reliable easy to drive car.

First you condemn reliability in a supercar and now you commend it ??????

Overengineering does not automatically make for excess weight. Having said that, it’s Porsche philosophy not to compromise reliability for lightness. Still, a 911 Carrera is lighter than a 360! LOL! How can you justify nearly twice the asking price for a car that isnt that much faster? I'll tell you how. Posing power!

Back to the reliability issue. Look at your beloved Lotus’s, light as a feather, but a poor record for reliability, which is thankfully beginning to improve with the Elise. What good is having a sports car that doesn’t start? Lambos are to this Audi day destroying their clutches. What good is that?
As you say, even Ferrari is going for an everyday supercar philosophy in their new cars, or the “Accord feel”, as you (imo harshly) call it. The 360 is more of an everyday car than the F355, and its descendant will be too. Weighing less doesn’t automatically mean a car feeling more agile. Chassis engineers can work a lot of magic, not in the least at Stuttgart. But I’ll come to that later.

It’s another Porsche philosophy to have some of its cars somewhat accessible to the public, and not out of range to the very high majority of the population. If a 911 cost almost twice as much as it does, ie as much as a 360, the use of more exotic materials means you’d get a lighter product. And that’s what the GT3’s about, a more extreme performer, and the forthcoming GT3RS, which FIY has been spanking 360 C’s left right and centre on the race track.

Originally Posted by Moppie

Porsche just has a philosophy that I dont agree with, not only is the engine still in the wrong place (i.e. pandering to comsumeristic demands, instead of putting the engine in the right place), but they have also developed a bigger is better attitude, and achieve thier high levels of performance with sheer brute power, not just engine power, but bigger heavier cars, with bigger heavier technology i.e. they need AWD to keep up with, or be faster than Ferraris 2WD etc.

Man I don’t know what youre talking about. Porsche going for bigger is better? Let’s look at each company’s base product. The 996 is lighter than the 360. But let’s look at the evolution. The 996 is lighter than the 993, but the Modena is heavier than the F355! A 575M is heavier (albeit slightly) than a 550. I realise the 911 Turbo has gotten heavier from 993 to 996, but let’s not put Ferrari’s philosophy on a pedestal. That’s just the way cars are going these days. But not the standard 911, Porsche’s central product.
As for sheer brute power, the 360 CS is the power freak in this comparo, and even the 360 is the power freak against a GT3. Which doesn’t help it one bit, might I add. You say Porsche needs AWD plus a Turbo to keep up with or be faster than Ferrari? The mk1 GT3 has a lower bhp to weight ratio than the 360M but is quicker around a track What did I tell you about those Porsche engineers? 911’s lacking agility? Ha! For 4 years the GT3 has received accolade after accolade for its wonderfully adjustable, chuckable handling. It may have still been heavier and less powerful than a standard 360, but on the track, it left it firmly in its wake.
So criticise the position of the engine (it didn’t seem to impede the GT3 kicking dust in the 360’s face) or the weight of the car, (again the 360’s lightness or extra power did nothing for it), all you want, but in this day and age, that argument, I feel, doesn’t always stand up. Maybe Ferrari have their engines in the wrong place . j/k. There is no doubt the advantage of a mid-mounted engine, but it doesn’t hinder Porsche anymore, it’s no longer such an issue.

To the two stars of this comparo. Delicacy isn’t something you’d criticise the GT3 for, in fact I think it’s what helps it stay in touch with the 360CS. The 360 CS has 60 extra horses per ton and the GT3 still keeps it in its sights. I am sure they will both go down in history as all-time greats, and I wouldn’t dream of reproaching anyone for choosing either, but for punching above its weight, ill take the GT3. I'm just crazy like that

[gnasha]

I'll choose the GT3, with the clubsport option if I may... waiting for the RS.