gengar

Well, I can only give my opinion. To me, the Cayman and Corvette aren't just "pretty different", they are night and day different. To me, track days aren't about "capable" - a track day is not going to the Nürburgring to set lap times for the magazines and the legions of spec time fanboy trolls on the Internets. Rather, it's about engaging the car and engaging the track and bettering myself as a driver by improving my understanding of the car and the track. Naturally it follows that a track day will be more enjoyable with a car that is more rewarding to understand (this is true for the track too, but it's a lot easier to get into a great car than onto a great track).

"Easy to drive" is a meaningless concept in a vacuum. The important question is why a car is easy to drive. Is it "easy to drive" because the chassis, suspension, and steering are incredibly communicative and predictable due to good design and extensive engineering (the LFA and Cayman come to mind)? Is it challenging because the engine layout is fundamentally flawed, but nevertheless is very well engineered not least because there are decades of racing experience built into it (perhaps the 911)? Or is it challenging because, despite plenty of racing pedigree, it's just not that well engineering and/or executed so is incredibly unpredictable at the limit (think Corvette)? It's only after understanding the reasoning that it's possible to determine if a car will offer you a rewarding experience.

The way you talk about these cars, I think that you better track them or at least similarly-designed/engineered cars before making such a big purchase decision. I don't think it will be difficult to resell either of these cars (heck, the GT4 might well appreciate) but you don't want the hassle of having a car you don't like.

Porsche's Sport Chrono Plus was already logging telemetry data last decade, just FYI.

RocketGuy3

iTrader: (1)

"Capable" was just one of element of the point I was making, but it's not irrelevant. It's nice when a car is capable of going faster than another car. When all else is equal: faster = more fun.

Anyways, you make fair points, but again, I think you're greatly exaggerating the difficulty in driving a Corvette, at least based on my 2nd-hand knowledge (and my experience in a relatively similarly setup car -- the Mustang GT).

I think the Corvette is pretty well engineered as they've been tuning that engine and many components of that chassis for generations, and by most accounts, it's not that unpredictable at the limits even if it's a little more oversteer-happy. Plus, many would argue that being a little "harder" to drive and to tame can make a car more fun to an extent.

Also, one thing to consider with the GT4 is that it's pretty different from a standard Cayman. It's basically a track car that they put together from the parts bin. They started with the body/chassis of the Cayman, then shoehorned in the engine from the 911 S, de-tuned it, took the brakes and some suspension components from the GT3, and then made everything work together. Oversimplification, but it's not like this was a car specially designed from the ground up. That's part of why it's so cheap... by Porsche standards.

Honest question -- have you tracked both of these cars (or at least some trim of the Cayman) hard?


Yes, but it's not remotely as feature rich without the support of auxiliary devices, and it's just plain stupidly overpriced. Even Porsche owners recommend just using Harry's Lap Timer.

gengar

The fact that you keep trying to downplay the difference between the cars makes me skeptical that you understand how different they are. Really, go track them or at least similar cars and figure it out for yourself. You aren't going to figure out what you need to figure out from words on an Internet forum.


I disagree, and you'll find plenty of car and track day enthusiasts who feel the same way. Not to mention that "all else" is never equal.


Both the 987 and C6 (specifically the Z06). Based on the plethora of reviews on the 981 (and even the GT4 specifically) and the C7, I don't think anything has changed nearly significantly enough that my opinion would change after driving the newer generations.

RocketGuy3

iTrader: (1)

The whole point of almost every sports car advancement for the past century has been to go faster, stop harder, and turn quicker (and do it all more safely and efficiently). You're telling me none of that has anything to do with people enjoying going fast?

I'm a track day enthusiast myself, and I know I certainly enjoy going faster... although I do like to learn my car and my limits, too, of course.

Again, I'm not saying speed is EVERYthing (or else I really would be more interested in a Z06), but you seem to be downlplaying it's importance too much IMO.

I agree that all else is never equal, but I'm just speaking generally. The capability to go faster is a very worthwhile consideration when buying a performance/sports car. Otherwise we'd all be driving Mini Coopers or BRZs.

But I'll see if I can find a way to track one of these cars... I know a friend of mine has a Boxter S that he might be willing to let me track.

Also, I'd say the C7 is very different from the C6. Just sitting inside them is pretty good proof of that, let alone basic metrics like power, weight distribution, tires...

rominl

iTrader: (4)

i know gt3 is not on your list but in terms of maintenance, that car is actually quite well on maintenance due to its nature

gengar

I guess I'm confused by what you're saying, then. In your last post you repeat what you said earlier in this thread - that the Z06 represents too much power and/or speed. That earlier post gave me the impression that you were emphasizing other qualities of the track experience. Nevertheless in the very same last post, you imply that capability/speed/lap times are still very important to you.

Even in terms of speed/lap times, the GT4 and Z51 are very different. Just look at the lap times the Z51 is pulling off - it's right with the C6 Z06, sometimes even the Z07 package. Didn't it even best top speeds on the straight in a comparo with the GT-R? The GT4 isn't going to compete at all with the Z51 in that way.

From many of your statements in this thread, I've found it unclear what you want or what you're really looking for. Hence my strong recommendation to test the cars to make sure you don't make a poor decision. No amount of back-and-forth here is going to achieve what that will.

RocketGuy3

iTrader: (1)

Speed is important to me... up to the point where the compromises are too significant, which I personally think they are in the new Z06 for the reasons already stated. I was never trying to argue that faster is ALWAYS better.

But anyways, we're going in circles now.


Due to it's nature? How do you mean?

primecut

iTrader: (1)

Not sure if this is already mentioned, but if overall cost is an issue, then long term (3-4+ years) you are much better off in a GT4. Whereas the Vette (Z06 or otherwise) will lose a huge chunk of resale value over time, the GT4 (Assuming toy = low miles), will likely to only depreciate slightly, with a chance to appreciate in value. I'm not so certain about the insurance rate delta between the two cars, but you'll make it back and more if you re-sell the GT4, almost guaranteed. That's why it's already sold out and people will look to flip the car, just like the GT3. In fact it might appreciate at a faster rate than the 991 GT3 due to the coveted manual option.

I also agree with Gengar... other than lap times, the driving experience is going to be totally different between the 2 cars.

You mentioned luxury/features as an advantage on the Vette. Sure, it might have more checkmarks for amenities per price, but build quality is worlds apart, and once you sit in the cabin you'll know where the extra $$$ has gone in the Porsche.

rominl

iTrader: (4)

gt3 is pretty much like a track car. i have talked to a few gt3 owners. they say that the gt3 is pretty easy to work on and even if you have to drop the engine, it's not a very tough job (because ppl literally drop the engine at the track to fix things). and it's NA so it makes things easier as well.

and fwiw i will also echo to gengar and primecut. pure speed is one thing but it's only small part of the whole driving. as a complete package car? my money is on the gt4

rominl

iTrader: (4)

actually i think the 997 gt3 have appreciated quite a bit faster after the 997 gt3 was announced (pdk). in some way i regret getting the nsx over the gt3 back then!

92 SC400

If your budget is $70k, get a Vette, if you are OK with spending $100k, get the GT4. When/if you get tired of the GT4, you may even be able to sell it and buy a new Vette...

RocketGuy3

iTrader: (1)

Again, I never said that pure speed is all I wanted, and I don't know when that came into question. If all I wanted was the fastest possible car for my money, this would be a much easier decision. I don't think anything in the OP even really hinted at the importance of speed or lap times.

All I said in some of my last few posts was that speed is a consideration, and I don't see how any car guy could deny that. (Although I think if we're going by published lap times, the GT4 is probably just about as fast as the C7 Z51, anyways)

Anyways, thanks for the input. The GT3 is pretty appealing, but I think I like the dynamics of a mid engined car better, and I hear great things about the Cayman. In fact I think Porsche themselves knows it's a superior platform, so they intentionally gimp the Cayman to keep the 911 as their halo.

Plus, by many accounts, the GT4 is actually at least as good of an overall track car compared to the 997 GT3. And obviously I wouldn't be able to find a 991 in this price range (plus, lack of a manual in that car is a deal breaker for me).

bagwell

yep, all true.................and holding back the Cayman is BS strategy by Porsche, IMO.

427Monster

Out of those 2 choices...Cayman...

If I were buying, I'd get a Viper GTS.

427Monster

Depends on the crowd and location. Here I see more P cars.

I buy what I like...don't care about others...