cloud9blue

Thanks for posting this. The turbo dimension seems to be decently large for the power output, suggest there is plenty of headroom to make more power using the stock turbo and engine internals. In compassion, last generation of BMW 3.0l twin turbo engine (n54) uses 42mm compressor and 45mm turbine, while the car can safely make 380hp at the wheels with just a tune. Also, for those who didn't bother to read the whole article. The total increase in engine weight is just over 40lbs despite the turbo add ons. So please tell me again, how this engine is built by accountants and a step back from 9A1.

As for the naysayer, all I have to say is enjoy your 991.1 and don't be so bitter over the fact that your toy is no longer the greatest and the latest. I have full confidence the new engine will be just as track able as the old one, given their history with Turbo and GT2s.

At lol at those who complain about turbo lags, if you are trying to get full power out of the car at 2000 rpms, perhaps you should learn how to drive or just leave PDK in auto...

coxswain

If this Car&Driver article is right, this new 991.2 will have a Janus-like dual character. It is a little torque monster and also a high-revving demon:

But who really knows at this stage? I'll wait and keep thrashing 991.1 until the real-life reports about 991.2 appear.


By the way, Graphite Blue looks nice:

ADias

From C&D article:

1 - "... One key change is the relocation of the direct fuel injector from the side of the cylinder head, spraying across the combustion chamber, to the top, adjacent to the spark plug, where the fuel is sprayed straight down. Coupled with 3625 psi of injection pressure—more than twice the previous maximum—the new injector location results in finer atomization, better mixing of fuel and air, and less wall wetting." - an advantage of the 9A1 side injector was a cleaner intake valve,

2 - On turbo lag - ".... Under intense questioning, one of the Porsche engineers admitted that at 1800 rpm, the engine needs three full seconds to produce full torque from a closed throttle. Though he was quick to add that the turbo lag dropped to two seconds at 2000 rpm and only one second at 2300. "

STG

What's the word been with the 981 crowd? Don't follow that board. Can't be positive with going to 4cy engines. I know this isn't "new" news as this has been out for a while. Obviously part of the overall marketing and positioning plan of the whole street car line. Two cars with such potential getting neutered.

There was even talk that the base Carrera 991.2 was getting the 4cl and Porsche seriously considered it. They even said so themselves. Changed their mind after the obvious backlash. Kind of shows they'll cut back as much as they can get away with among its ever changing customer base.


http://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-g...er-spied/32661

Quadcammer

This was about 3 pieces of factual information combined with a bunch of very questionable opinion, combined with flat out nonsense.

The posts after were much of the same.

Tor Atle Lunde

In a recent poll over at planet9, only 15% would buy a 4-cyl turbo. 39% maybies and 45% NOs. We're not too happy.

STG

Thanks. No surprise. You don't matter anymore. Probably not the "target market" anymore. You're dinosaurs.

A great platform that will never live up to it's full potential being neutered because of big brother 911. Marketing at it's best. Poor V8 Audi R8 as well.

It's bad enough big brother is getting a little flakey as well with his metrosexual makeover.

All about "positioning". Marketing basics ... Blah .. and this coming from a marketing major. Too bad anyone with a borrowed tuition payment can graduate these days.



Porsche's Marketing Team. You'll love the new color palette, environmentally friendly motors, and cute exhaust bark. Modeled after a NYC 5th. Ave. dog and American Apparel's fall line.

cloud9blue

Cayman and Boxster has always been a low cost alternative comparing to 911, despite the fact they are very capable car on their own. I am sure with a drastic decrease in displacement in those cars, they will sell well in Asian and European market when there is a hefty tax on high displacement engines.

Personally, those cars never interest me. They are neither fast enough nor practical enough to be considered in my garage. For the same price, BMWs are much vehicles for my particular uses.

GSIRM3

Just curious, what kind of 911 do you have?

cloud9blue

Why is that relevant again? It seems like every time I offer some factual information on the new car that doesn't sing along with the all turbo sucks non sense posted here, someone has to raise this question. You enjoy you current car, I get it. But we are all adults here, so owning one doesn't mean you guys have to bash on the newer cars without any technical understanding to base your arguments on, no?

But for your info, I don't own an 911 at the moment (might picking up a new .2 C2S or just a used .1 Turbo down the line). Just a Macan Turbo and 6 year old BMW 335i at the moment, which I enjoy modifying and tracking on a monthly basis.

GSIRM3

Now I understand. I don't recall bashing the new 991.2. I have said that I don't think it sounds good based on the videos I have seen/heard. I have also said I would have to wait to drive it and listen to it once it is available. Is that bashing it? And, you are correct, I do like my 3.8 liter, 430 HP, NA engine in my GTS, and do not have any desires to rush out and get the 991.2. Is that OK with you? Why is it that you think that because someone is completely happy with their current car, that they are "bitter because their toy is not the latest and greatest"?

STG

I know. Those haven't been fast enough, either has the 991.1 for you.

I hope your dream of a fast car is realized with the 991.2

Once you wake up from your chipping dreams, you'll realize, it's still not the fastest. Your search will then continue elsewhere.

Michael_s

Petevb

Some curious comments. Some might be mistaking this as a critique of the 991.2- it's not. It's an analysis of the engine performance technically, isolated from the chassis. For example: the Boxster is an outstanding car. This is despite the fact that the engine less than mediocre: close to .5 hp per pound, due to the fact that is shares most dimensions and components with the 991 Turbo or GT3- power plants than make over 2x the output. Yet the Boxster is still great- I can criticize its engine while enjoying the car for what it is.

I'm sure the 991.2 as a car will also be "better" than the 991.1 for most people. Not my cup of tea due to the turbo lag, but most will enjoy more mid range punch and power. The fuel efficiency benefit is also undeniable and required. This doesn't change the fact that the engine has objectively taken a step backwards in a number of areas. I'm somewhat surprised that Porsche didn't design a truly new engine for the turbo era, because we know that technically the game has moved on in the last 10 years, and they can do better.

The greatest cars are often, but not always, built around the greatest engines. McLaren F1, E30 M3, CGT, etc- all built around engines that were standouts for power to weight ratio for their time. But this doesn't make or break the car, and great cars (GT3 RS 4.0, etc) can certainly be built around engines that are less than state of the art.
Engines used as the basis for homologation recently have been the Mezgers:

3.60, 964- 997 GT3 (100 x 76.4) homologating 993 GT2 through GT3R race cars
3.80, 997 GT3 RS (102.7 x 76.4)- GT3 RS, RSR
4.00, 997 GT3 RS 4.0 (102 x 80.4)- current

These numbers all correspond exactly to GT rules class breaks, above which car weight or restrictor plate sizes change.

The 991 3.8L 9A1s including the GT3 are also a round numbers- (102 x 77.5), and may have been considered for racing depending on what looked best for the class (these dimensions were decided a decade ago, remember). The Current GT3 RS is, at 4.0, the basis for future homologation and engines that are beginning to race now.

Just because a Porsche engine has a round number doesn't mean it will be raced. Not having a round number virtually guarantees it won't. Interesting as one could imagine that in the Turbo era Porsche would look at switching to a forced induction race platform.

Certainly there will be more area under the curve. There will also be significant turbo lag to offset this. Neither changes my overall conclusion.

As for comments on tune-ability and headroom, there will certainly be headroom, as there is in the 9A1 for the GTS (430 hp, so far), GT3, GT3 RS, etc. I'm sure the GTS will make do with a simple boost change. But a) this is a comparison of the engines as they leave the factory, and b) it's not clear if the Siemens ECU will be cracked to give customers potential access to that headroom.
Could well be. Possibly also for weight. The turbos muffle the noise quite a bit themselves, so you need less total muffler volume. This setup, closer to a GT3 style, might be a lighter configuration as well given the new needs.
The Mezgers were very heavy, one of their main drawbacks. Even with the turbos, the 9A2 is significantly ahead in terms of power to weight, nearly 25% up on the 997.2 GT3, for example, and better than even the GT3 RS 4.0. These engines were based on a 50 year old design when they came out, however.

cloud9blue

I don't see how are you able to tell what car works or not works with me just based on very little information you have of me. Nor do I see why you need to judge on how other people buy or use their cars. So what if I like to mildy modify the performance of the stock cars according to my own liking, it is not like these things are 30 year old classic slant nose that you want to preserve in stock condition in hope of flipping it at an auction... I enjoy these car by driving them to their limit at the track and improve their stock performance if I see them lacking, rather than spending the time polishing it and drooling over its "deviant stitching and natural leather" and showing it off at your local car and coffee.

In all seriousness, I refrain from judging you base on the countless posts that you seems to make everyday, perhaps you should get off from your NA high horse, if that's indeed a thing for you, and stop judging others as well.

FYI, I am not some power junkie that "lives my life 1/4 mile at the time". I am very satisfied with old 335i at around 420whp, even on track, along with my trusty old 07 BMW R1200S, with just 123hp, which is nothing comparing to the current literbikes, which output close to 200hp. What I believe is a balance of chassis and power, which I think 911.2 is step toward the right direction, given the chassis is fully capable of handling another 100hp or so from the 991.1 power output.

NA has its merit (particularly on smaller and lighter vehicles, think sub 2700lbs curb weight and, of course, motorcycles), but so do forced induction. As I said many times, be happy with what you have, but please save the comments like "accountant built engines", "laggy response", and "a step back from 9A1" for the Youtube comment section. Hell, none of which is true if you really bother to understand the technical difference of these engines.