the car and the photos look fantastic... photos look professionally done.
any more pics of the rest of the car? side shot and rear also?
Great looking PCCB's on the Red.

 

I got bigger ideas .

 

prefer the stock part, but your car really looks amazing

 

Hi yrralis,

Thanks!



The Techart side and rear are great looking but I actually don't like them that much (just personal pref). The side somehow looks more "added-on" perhaps because of the "thickness" and larger height -- see pic above. The thickness also makes the car looks heavy to me. The rear also looks thicker not necessarily better, and I don't like the step off from the thick part to the thin part -- hope I make some sense here LOL. Again, I must emphasize it's strictly personal preference & I don't mean to be critical of any forum friends who have them on; I mean I wouldn't remove them if someone puts them on my car free .

The front spoiler hangs much closer to the ground and looks much bigger than side and rear lips, as readily seen in my car. But this doesn't bother me at all because this is how all the race cars look (& GT3/GT2). At least that's my rationalization.

 

Thanks. I am about as nutty about photography as I am about car. Here is the rear, pretty much stock:

 

looks excellent... get some skirts eventually (techart or the gt2 painted).

 

I don't have good side shot (only because car doesn't look good from the side), but here's one with more side view:

 

Can -
The photograph shown is not a full techart spec and with car dropped that low it does look odd . Beyond the aesthetics is the performance value of improved aerokit .There really is a driving difference aerokit vs non aerokit. Even the basic scoops and spoliers on the stock car are hints of the larger versions used on the track. The sideskirts may look heavy but are in fact light . So is the rear diffuser .

As you say --everyones taste differs but if performance is the goal of modding I do feel that complete aerokit has to be a component of attaining it. A Type 1 may not be "the one" but there are others too.

Someone mentioned gt2 side skirts . I have issues mixing and matching mainly because it has to detract from the original design . I even went so far as to get the Techart springs and now taht I have switched to damptronics it is dialed in as close to Techart ride height as possible . This change was a large enough emotional decision that I am keeping my Techart springs just in case I change my mind.

 

Car looks fantastic. I've always been a fan of the TA front lip. Simple and classy.

 

You're really going off the deep end, Can. I still remember when you said you'd leave your car stock. That didn't seem so long ago....

Now you've got me considering the Techart front lip now. I also do agree with GotBoost, that the GT2 sides would be a much better addition than the one from Techart.

 

agree! like Alpine's TT, TA front with GT2 skirt look just right!

 

I will first begin by saying it looks beautiful so if all one cares about is creating an appearance I have no reason to argue it at all.

1) I don't understand why not do the full Gt2 aerokit ? But that brings up the question why Porsche designed a completely different OEM aerokit for the 997tt than they did for the Gt2 .

2) Are those wheels 20 in ? If so not only is the aerokit unmatched to a design purpose but on top of that the wheels are not synchonized to the suspension design for that car.

At 30MPH -no big deal . Go faster and the effect of those slight deviations might become more significant.

3) The Gt2 Aerokit =Tested at Porsche
The Techart Aerokit = Tested at Techart
The combination aerokit = Tested where ???? The Los Angeles Freeway ?

Please show me some sort of justification behind wheels larger than a suspension design and non uniformity in an aerokit doesn't pose a potential safety hazard .

Sometimes change is good . Sometimes change can look good but act bad . I am open to hear the other side but I do feel that those points need to be addressed.

 

Larry brings up a very good point. This is actually the reason why I haven't gone ahead with actually getting the Techart front diffuser yet. I was concerned about the aerodynamic change. I also considered going with the GT2 front bumper too but was concerned about not having the rear diffuser, rear wing, etc. Where does it all end, really. So, I'm satisifed with just the GT2 side skirts which from my observations thus so far has actually "stablized" the car at higher speeds.

 

Hi Larry, I am half playing devil's advocate here since I am not too keen on the GT2 side skirt, or aero kit, or 20 inch wheel (I think my forum friend Alpine's beautiful Turbo uses 19 btw.). First let me start by saying I love your enthusiasm and your repeat critical questionings -- but probably a little less than your enthusiasm . Kidding!

1. eclou took his car to 186 mph, with half of the TechArt kit, missing the side skirt and the rear wing. eclou is not just a speed freak, he spends more time at the track than 99% of people here. I hope this is some proof that maybe stability is not such an issue, granted as long as you don't touch that rear wing (to me the key)?

2. So far how do I feel with 1/3 of the TechArt kit? (And remember I am the type of person who would go through a curve 10 times and tries to notice max speed each time!) On a scale of 1 to 100 of what I could actually feel, with an alignment change being say 90, a 1 psi in tire pressure change a 40 (yes I measure mine to 0.5 or so with a reference tire gauge), I would rank the difference I feel for changing the front spoiler less than .00005. Basically I feel nothing and I would be EXTREMELY shocked if any amateur hand could pass a blind test between stock and TechArt spoiler only.

3. My speculation: I would agree with you only on the rear wing. Rear wing matters -- where lift and downforce occurs. And then only at speed. Front spoiler and side skirt and rear lip: Pure look. (And yes I am guilty of being a poseur here. LOL) That front spoiler doesn't even come remotely close to the GT2, let alone a race car with ground effect. The TechArt lip is a joke aerodynamically, basically (Well, it does something, but look at the lip of the cup cars and you see what I mean.). But I would admit, I have no proof. On the other hand, do you? For example, do you have proof that a car with those changes are demonstrably slower or faster at any track? The question of performance gain has been brought up. Has there ever been proof that a full TechArt car is faster than a stock with JUST aerodynamic add-ons? (I don't think so.)

4. We worry about the partial aero kit. But yet... Let me bring up one example, the Bilstein that we use. We each lower the car a certain amount. Me 10mm, my friend Alex 20mm, eclou 10, half of other people didn't even measure, numbers all over the place. This is a significant change to the dynamics of the car & its balance. A significant change from what the Porsche engineers have designed the car to be. And yet we worry about the dynamic effects of the rear and side skirt?
Second example: The car suspension design is for a 480 hp car. Bringing it up to 700 hp creates significant change to the car's dynamics, its behavior at low AND high speed. I am not sure even the Bilstein is designed for this much power. Who tested that? Stuttgart or the streets of Los Angeles? How significant is this in relation to a sideskirt? Or rear lip?

What I am trying to say is, there are theoretical concerns that are real, and there are theoretical concerns that may be real to some but not others. Until we have repeatable and reliable proof by multiple users, or by professionals with well controlled parameters, that the changes create something we could feel and more importantly, something significant enough to be relevant (20 inch versus 19 inch wheel is a good example -- do you have any proof close to that for side skirt or rear lip?), I would say we have to drink to our differences!

 

1) Just because Eclou made 186 (straight line texas mile ? isolated reference.driver history noted and not applicable) on half a kit means that one example is a benchmark.
Porsche and Techart test with numerous samples , often times in varied conditions, in and out of laboratories , to revise if necessary and release a product to mass consumption .
Big difference .

2)The average consumer may or may not detect the difference. Perception varies by each individual. Do you feel it's worth the risk to place the test of whether that slight deviation might effect the car on a public road ? Or even on the track? The track won't allow 20 in wheels . In short there are rules .
Do you also think that insurance companies would not hesitate to deny a claim arising from an owner choice to frankenmod systems which are so clearly lacking uniform structure .

3) Nothing wrong with admitting being a "poseur" . I just feel safety first.

4) Bilstein is certainly a well known high HP racing suspension yet is that that enough? I'll say this since the strut is wired to the PASM even if one interraction sends a fault code the sport mode light will go off and the "PASM failure" light will come on . A spring with stock wiring setup will not do this . Bilstein placed a lot of work into the electronics of the Damptronics so a slow down warning more only will come in advance but the throttle response will be cut as well . IMO -It's a step in a direction aimed at safety which a spring does not have.