Well, here's the data from track-challenge.com, comparing bone stock 996TT vs CGT.

Speed carried through the corners is different between the cars, as shown. Notice that the average difference in corner speed between the cars is only a couple of percent. Let's assume the corners where the TT was faster were due to poor driving. Take them out, and the CGT advantage is still less than 6%.

So, add engine, braking, aero, and suspension upgrades to a TT, and the real world difference is nowhere near as great as we might believe.

With all of that, the CGT is still sex on wheels, though.

 

Having had numerous modified turbos and currently owning both a modified GT2 and Carrera GT, I can tell you that Tyson is aboslutely right on.

As great as the GT2 is, the Carrera GT is in a different league all together. An extra $250K worth? ABSOLUTELY!!!!

Before taking delivery of my Carrera GT, I couldn't help but wonder if the CGT was going to be worth more than twice the price of my GT2 and Stradale. After the first 100 miles it got me wondering whether the GT2 and CS are worth half the price of the CGT. Now, with more than 5000 miles of seat time, I still can't believe how incredible it is.

Just my 0.02 of course.

Happy New Year.

Amir

 

I'm glad you're happy with the CGT.

Having owned both, and therefore driven both on the same roads, is the CGT substantially quicker than the GT2 in terms of handling? Can you quantify how much more speed you carry through the corners?

I'm ignoring straight line speed, as that's easily adjustable in the GT2.

Is the CGT's superiority related to its speed, or other attributes?

I've never argued the CGT's desirability, or that it's not quicker than a TT/GT2 (even modified), only that it's not *sufficiently* quicker to find 1,000 more buyers like you to keep prices north of 300k for ever.

 

I think Mark Twain once said something like this:

"There are lies, and damned lies..and then there are statistics."

When you start with statistics and then have to add engine, braking..etc to a TT ( you get a GT2, no mean effort from Porsche), you're going to the hypothetical..and at that point the argument (and hypothesis) is invalid.

Remember, the same guy who had overall design responsibility for the GT2 and GT3 also designed the CGT, let's give him a little credit, even accounting for the law of diminishing returns.

Go try a GT2 and a CGT for yourself, the paper argument only flies if you make an aeroplane out of it.

A real world visceral opinion would mean a whole more, and the $ argument only applies if they are your $ willing and able to be spent.

 

I tested a C-GT at the Autobahn Country Club in Chicago....Very impressive car, very fast.... Sounds from the exhaust are amazing.....

 

Perfectly Stated.

PMac- I think you're missing the point of what I'm trying to say. If you want to strictly talk numbers then you can get a CIVIC to beat a CGT or Enzo in straight line acceleration. Or spend $70K and beat a CGT on the track with a Radical.

But for an all out street car there is simply nothing else like it. The mid engine layout, the precise steering, the well planted rear end, the instantaneous throttle response, the faster than lightening rev buildups, the perfect close ratio gearbox placed just inches away from the steering wheel and not to mention that glorious engine sound, all add up to a mind numbing experience that the GT2, CS, F430 et al wouldn't even come close to matching.

I am by no means a race car driver, but the sensation that the CGT gives you just driving down the street at normal speeds is unmatched. I've taken both to the track at the same time and I can easily tell you that the CGT was A LOT more fun to play with. Does that make the GT2 less of a car? Obviously not, otherwise I would have sold it along time ago. They are just differently set up and on different levels.

Forget about the modified 996TT vs. CGT debate. You can't even compare a modified 996TT with a GT2. The GT2 is so much more visceral than any modifed 996TT in terms of steering feel and responsiveness than a 996TT. Much less a CGT. Tyson would know.He had one of the baddest 996TTs around and yet I think if you were to ask him which car he would take, he'd obviously pick the one he has in his garage. The GT2.

I know on paper it seems extremely hard to justify a CGT over a number of fantastic cars available on the market today but until you actually get even a minute of driving time you will never appreciate what a phenomenal experience it truly is.

Amir

 

Ahh, do I envy you guys for being in a position to say that from experience

It may seem like I'm missing the point of the CGT, but I don't think I am. Certainly, I'm arguing from never having seen one, and I'm perfectly willing to accept that the car generates more hard-ons per mile than anything else on the market, but all I'm saying is that there are enough people that don't want to have to justify 400k in terms of feel or exclusivity after getting blown away at the lights by some kid in a blown Dodge Stealth that the CGT values will dwindle over time.

I'm not commenting on the car's visceral appeal, as I've never driven one (although I covet the notion of doing so one day). My original post was simply looking at market dynamics in the current world, and comparing the difference between today and 20 years ago in terms of the performance gap between supercars and everyday quick cars.

Value equations are personal, of course.

 

Just adding a little something here on the "blown away by a kid in a blown stealth" comment...and Im sure you were just joking...but I have a VR4 (same as a stealth RT)...the CGT weighs like 800lbs less and has twice the HP...I mean..i think my car is quick...but even the fastest VR4's only compare them selves to SKYLINES and such....I just said this because as a 3S owner I felt I must add my 2 cents ...I know that this thread has dealt more with numbers and such...but there is a feeling you get listning and seeing a CGT that is only matched by very few cars....I used to go at night and look at the one that they had at the dealer here in SB....not to mention I photographed the first one to california....iv been around alot of TT's and I have never had the same emotions as standing next to a CGT....anyhoo..just my opinon on the matter

 

Yes I was (mostly) joking. I know there are plenty of 11-second VR4s around, though, and a messed-up launch in the CGT would potentially hand a 0-60 or 0-80 race to a Stealth. Eventually, though you'd catch up and fly by in the CGT, but maybe not before the damage was done.

I know it's not about the straight line, and when that kid went online to brag about his CGT kill, at least 20 people would jump on him with the 'yeah, but he drove home in a CGT, and you didn't' comments.

I should probably never drive one, or I may be ruined for all other cars.

 

I've owned a 996TT in the past and now I have the GT. In practical terms (on the street) the acceleration of one is no better than the other (again, in practical, day to day terms) -- the main difference for me is that in the GT, you feel like you are piloting a jet, in the TT, it's driving a fast car. Emotionally it is very different.

On the track, however, the stock GT kicks butt! :-)

 

The Turbo is to the CGT what the bi-plane is to that yet un-named highly classified ultrasonic jet aircraft setting at hangar 51.

Sure, you could strap a rocket to a Sopwith Pup, but it would still be a dog.

 

Check out the difference at Metzgefeld...the TT is 36 kph faster than the CGT?? What's wrong with this picture?

Gary

 

and the earth is flat

 

I wondered about that too. I assumed that there were sections of the track where the driver of the CGT just wasn't taking the corner properly. Possibly, the speed was measured at a point in the curve where the rear-engined cars might have an advantage (maybe exiting under power where the TT might get the power down more easily). That was why I took out all the corners where the CGT was slower, and still only came up with a 6% speed advantage to the CGT.

We should remember, though, that in cornering F=mv^2/r, so a 6% increase in speed requires a 12% greater lateral acceleration.

I'm sensing quite a bit of hostility to the idea that a CGT is not hugely quicker than a TT. I've never questioned its specialness, or the emotive aspect of its performance, simply that in terms of outright speed, the differences between any of today's high performance cars is relatively narrow. Not narrow as in 1%, but narrow as in <10%.

I'm posting multiple data points, all of which show the CGT faster than a TT, but I'm getting the flat-earth-lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-it's-really-a-lot-quicker-than-that rebuttal. This is simply intellectually dishonest, unless anyone can provide contradicting data, or point to discrepancies in the track-challenge data (of which I saw some, but I didn't feel that they invalidated the analysis)

Cool yer jets, guys. You don't need to justify your purchases to me or anyone. If you're happy with it, that's all that matters.

But these days, the single greatest limiting factor in track performance is tire adhesion. Sure the CGT is a little lower, a little lighter, a little wider, has a better polar moment of inertia, and more downforce, and all of these make an objective difference. All I ever said with regard to this topic is that I suspect that there are enough cars close enough in performance (objective or subjective) for a lot less money than a CGT that Porsche overproduced relative to the number of price-insensitive, wealthy, car afficianados willing to shell out on a used vehicle. That's the sum total of my input. Market values in the next few years will dictate if I'm right or wrong. Personally, I hope I'm wrong, because I'd love Porsche to see the ubercar market as fiancially attractive enough to build a Veyron-killer.

 

How about Jay Leno setting the world record 198+ with a stock CGT(except Hoosiers) on a track for which the car was not made.

Also, stock GT3 is a faster track car then the TT (not GT2) and the TT cost more! Having passed TTs and being passed by CGT on the track the CGT is a great car. By the way why do you have a C4s? Using your 6% logic one would think you would have a C5 or a Supra. People buy the cars they want and