I'm sorry you think I'm a *****, but you appear to be quite ignorant about what a GT3 really is and its intended purpose.

A GT3 is not some ricer M3. You don't just add a hair dryer to engines with racing pedigree in them. Only the idiots at Mercedes-AMG do that, but as you can see, in real cars like the Pagani Zonda, they leave them naturally aspirated, not supercharged.

If you want to build a GT3, do it right... either make a racing turbo setup or increase displacement a la Koro...

 

'course not

 

Whatever. Why am I arguing with you when you don't even own a GT3?

 

i think even if the compression ratio was dropped to a suitable one for boost like 9:1...to what end is this for? i guess it would be possible, but what i'm saying is that i doubt we will see this ever happen. those smart enough to buy, keep, and appreciate a GT3 for its visceral pure motorsport character wouldn't even try to supercharge it, because of the ensuing change in motor characteristics. i think by doing things to reduce the compression ratio to an appropriate level, one would affectively lose the intended character of a GT3. the high-revving pure n/a in my opinion is one of the defining characters of the GT3, and those who will buy the GT3 over a Turbo and appreciate it for what it is, will not even attempt to create a boost-safe environemnt in the GT3 because of what it requires will lose the inherent qualities of the GT3. GT3's not a car with which the owners will experiment with all different types of setups...i believe that the GT3 owners are well-deserving, very lucky, enthusiasts who are a focused group and share the same ideals. it takes a certain type of person to buy one and keep it. i don't think those people mess with FI on the GT3 for the sake of bragging rights or straightline HP. bottom line: GT3 owners won't even try this, so i doubt we will ever see it happen, even if it is well within financial means or mechanical feasibility.

that said, i don't have a gt3, so i'm just kinda speaking out of my ***. it may sound hypocritical. i don't think i really deserve a GT3 in all honesty even if i could afford it and i like it so much i would feel guilty in robbing the true enthusiasts...rather i have a truly poser sports car which is really a crappy-class sedan made in mexico, but it's just for temporary use till i can get my Porsche

 

my gt3 seems just fine stock. It's way more car than I am or will probably ever be a driver....


Unlike like many people here who mods thier cars to the hilt cause they can or think it will make them a better driver...
I understand that a great driver in a POS will whoop my *** in a 600 hp TT when we aint in a staight line.... I know this cause I've watched it happen...


twice

 

'cos you were a little snotty-pants when I asked a legitimate question.

The objections fall into two categories, taste, and mechanical feasibility. If Stephen tells me it's mechanically problematic, then I'll happily defer to his expertise, but when someone bashes the idea as equivalent to a riced out M3, that's just plain rude (there's a topic on OT dealing with the characteristics of gentlemanly conduct. You might care to check it out)

As to the taste question, I understand that the GT3 draws the more hardcore track drivers, and if they feel there's adequate horsepower, great. The GT3 is also used as a street car, where extra horsepower is potentially more useful than on the track. The GT3 has handling characteristics that are intrinsically better than a Turbo, so juicing it up might be a nice blend of raw horsepower and handling finesse. This is not an intrinsically stupid idea.

If the cumulative wisdom of GT3 owners is "drive one and you'll understand", that's fine. My problem with you was your supercilious response.

 

OK, I'll bite. Let's take a look at your so-called brilliant idea.

By the time you have spent the time and money to rebuild the motor with lower compression pistons, fitted the supercharger and tuned the ECU, you will probably be out something like $40,000-50,000 with R&D costs and get what, maybe 500-550hp?

So you have taken one of Porsche's best motors, ripped it apart, lowered the compression ratio, strengthened the internals, added a blower, and now you have many many hours of ECU tuning ahead of you. You have effectively rebuilt the motor to get another what, 100hp or 150hp?

Now, how do you know this thing will be reliable? There will be lots of trial and error. How do we know how reliable the supercharger will be on the racetrack with constant 6000-8000 revs? Only time will tell.

For this cost, why not get a real race engine builder like Koro to bore the motor out to 4.6L and 500hp+? You would be hard pressed to find many cars that will beat this car around the racetrack, and it will run the quarter mile in less than 11 seconds. And I can guarantee you that this motor will be more reliable and the car will be faster than some custom supercharged GT3.

Or better yet, you can turbocharge the motor instead, and get 850hp like certain race teams that have fitted twin turbos to their GT3 Cup and GT3-R race cars for ****s and giggles. Which do you think will be faster? A 550hp supercharged car or a 850hp turbocharged one?

So let's say you are cheap and you try to bolt on a low-pressure supercharger... I'd really like to see you be bold enough to run a blower with stock compression. I guarantee you that under hard sustained use, you will have a blown motor within 5000 miles.

I have seen a few E39 M5 owners attempt to supercharge their motors, and after something like 2 years and probably over $50,000 in development costs, they are able to get 600hp and change from a stock engine that produces 400hp from a 5L V8 and high compression. Not very efficient. Let's see how long their engines will last before they require another rebuild.

The moral of the story is, it's pretty hard to outsmart the factory and Germany's top tuners.

Doing a cost benefit analysis, price/hp on supercharging a GT3 motor is just plain retarded. See my point?

Oh, and by the way, if it makes you feel better to think that all the cars in my sig belong to various members of the family, go ahead. Yes, my dog owns the GT3, my bird owns the GT2, and my 15 year old sister owns the BMW, and my neighbor's cat owns the Jag. Mom drives the Cayenne, but the goldfish owns that one.

 

do you really expect to confide in what you have to say after calling the M3 a ricer w/ no racing pedigree and the engineers at M-B idiots?

the S54 motor in that "ricer" M3 has a CR of 11.5:1. now maybe the combination of the motor and chassis that is the e46 M3 isn't as "race" as a GT3, but horsepower per litre is approximately the same in both cars, and BMW did it with less displacement and a lower CR. rice? think again...

not only has Active Autowerke has successfully S/Ced the e46 M3, but they did it without lowering compression. is it reliable? well i'm sure they would have lowered compression and raised boost if the current situation wasn't working for them. will it increase engine ware and decrease the life of the engine? for sure. the point is it can be done, and so it can for the GT3 as well. maybe the money spent isn't justification for doing so, but maybe somone would do it to be unique or different. that being said, i would never S/C a GT3 if i had one. i wouldn't even do that to an M3 unless i had ungodly amounts of money at my disposal to replace it when it dies young.

back on topic, $1,600 seems like quite an affordable kit for someone who can afford the GT3 in the first place. and for a car that's been tweaked almost to the limit by the factory, the HP and torque you've extracted is quite respectable.

 

Yeah, I would really put Active Autowerke on the same plane as Ruf, Manthey, and Koro.

Ever seen the average age and profile of the typical M3 owner? Especially the ones who tune them? If M3 isn't rice, then why are all the body kits so ricey looking? Maybe because that's the type of customer who buys M3's???

You actually respect the engineers at MB AMG after the pieces of **** that they are producing? If they are such great engine builders why can't they perform in F1? Why is it that MB dealers refuse to put the Starmark extended warranty on the 5.5 kompressor engines? What, they can't stand behind their products? Supercharging is lazy way out. Even BMW builds real engines at least.

As for your What's the point of being unique or different when other approaches are clearly superior? That sounds like the mentality of an owner who cares more for Import Show-Off and NOPI shows than performance.

With your logic, maybe I should put two engines in my GT3, front and rear, and make it a bimoto, similar to the Audi TT Bimoto. Perhaps the engine in the front would make it have better weight distribution. Or better yet, maybe I should just add a supercharger, turbocharger and Nitrous to make 1000 smooth horsepower. If I spent maybe $1 million in development I can make it possible.

Perhaps you don't know that until about 2 weeks ago, I had a modified M5. I know quite a bit about BMW, as I used to be a big fan. That was until I realized that Porsche clearly makes superior sports cars to BMW M. Even the CSL (BMW's only real sports car) is no match for the GT3-RS, period. BMW unfortunately is so ubiquitous now that it has become an alternative to VW or Toyota. Boys in M3's (unless it is a second car as a toy) trade in for Porsches or Ferraris should they be lucky enough to have the extra cash. You know that and I know that.

 

Geez, Tyson, what a traitor.
You can buy 2 M3's and "rice" them out for less than 1 Gt3. I know because, well, uhhhh... I did. The M3 is not in the same class as the GT3, the CSL is, (and does quite well in comparison)the GT3-RS is matched perhaps by the M3 GTR?

 

Hi Paul... as you may know, BMW really pissed me off in their attitude towards customer service. I have found that BMW NA really ties up the dealer's hands in what type of work can be warrantied, even when it is 100% legitimate. Look at the whole M5 clutch cluster****. They claim free maintanence, warranty, etc. and they won't replace a god damn clutch accusing most EVERY owner of abuse? What is that?

Then there is their styling, or lack thereof. The new Bangle stuff is so nasty.

As for the M3, I can honestly say that I would rather have 1 GT3 than 2 M3's.

The CSL is fitted with the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup tires, which are even stickier than the Corsa System as fitted on the GT3-RS. The standard GT3 and CSL are quite comparable indeed.

A GT3-RS is not a comparison with the M3 GTR because the former is street legal in all markets except for North America, and is basically a GT3 with less weight and different suspension geometry. It is what the CSL is to the standard M3, only the bar is higher of course.

The M3 GTR should be compared to the GT3-RSR. Of course, it's a moot point since BMW decided ***** out on racing in ALMS and FIA GT due to homologation rules. The way I see it, if BMW was allowed to continue racing its dominant V8 into the M3, Porsche should have been able to use a turbocharged motor in the same class without restrictors. But rules and rules, and I think BMW realized that its S54 Inline-6 is no GT1 block.

 

Since I got my GT3, my M3 only collects dust (granted it's a convertible). The funny thing is that everyone likes to **** on M3's, but I've always been very happy with mine. However, the driving experience with the GT3 is so superior that the only mileage the M3 gets now is when I move it around in the garage. When the weather turns nice, I'll probably let it go...

 

What's your cat's name?

 

QUOTE: (Hamann7):"Or better yet, you can turbocharge the motor instead, and get 850hp like certain race teams that have fitted twin turbos to their GT3 Cup and GT3-R race cars for ****s and giggles. Which do you think will be faster? A 550hp supercharged car or a 850hp turbocharged one?":


tyson, i'd love to see some information on this.....do you have anything published or on the web that you gave you this info, or just word of mouth. any info would be great....

 

In order...

If you're saying it's not a good idea technically, no problem. I get it. I accept your logic. If you'd laid that out first time, instead of the playground invective, that would have been A-OK. Of course, if you'd done that, you'd be Stephen, and more people would listen to you.

As for the last part, which part of your underdeveloped little noggin concocted the notion that I a) question who owns which of your cars, and b) give a ****?