umfan866

3.2 G-50 Driving impressions.

I have now driven 2 3.2s, an 88 cab, and an 87
coupe, both with a G-50. Here are my impressions,
as a longtime BMW driver, and someone who has also
test-driven a 74 911, a few beater SCs, and riden
in an early 912.

Both cars shifted fine. Its not that you notice
how smooth a G-50 is, its just that it shifts
"normally" like any other (modern) car. Its the
*absence* of a G-50 that you notice when driving
an SC--like trying to find 2nd gear. A g50 is
something my wife could drive without 2nd thought.
A 915 both I and anybody who drives it including
my wife would have to carefully learn how to shift.
Smooth 915s aren't real bad either--its the rough
(unmaintained ones) where they are popping out of
2nd all the time that are particularly challenging.
So to summarize the G50-well it's what I would expect
and its absence is what makes you notice it.

Power. BOth cars had a nice rumble and seemed to have
adequate power. The cab had a Weltmeister chip in it,
but hey I couldn't tell the difference either from
sound or engine pull.

Handling. BOth cars had no power steering and man you
had to work. I thought my BMW with power-assisted
(but not full power steering) was a lot of work, these
911s are a workout. THe cab must have had some old shocks
or needed control arm work, because the front end felt a
little mushy. The coupe I drove was accurate and tight,
reasonably crisp, but neither car handled too incredibly,
my e30 bimmer is a really fun handling car, not as nice,
but a tricked out e30 with ground-control suspension
(coilovers) and all lowered (also an 1989/1990 car) handles
maybe equal or better. BTW I was driving on regular streets
and the highway in both cases, didn't make any sudden turns
because he I'm driving with the ownwers of these cars to
my right in the passenger seat. BTW both of these cars had
modern low-profile tires.

Heaviness. Now I get to what I want to talk about. I like
the fact that these 911s are solid, heavy cars, but I am
a little disappointed at the power to weight ratio. The one
cab owner said well "you aren't going to win any races"
and the coupe owner talked more about the handling than the
power on his car (he also has a WRX and compared to that,
he said his 911 has a nice low end, no wait for power at least).
Its not just 3.2s because I have also had this impression in
some SCs. Now maybe I am just not revving the engine enough,
or stepping on it (I keep the revs about 3.5, and that little
upshift light keeps coming on ..annyoing)...I don't know, I
just don't understand. This is suposed to be a Porsche, a
fast car, but they both felt more like a heavily reinforced
dune buggy that had a lot of engine but the whole car was just
weighing itself down! I mean my Honda Odyssey van (2006) has
this 240 HP engine, and when I floor it, you feel the push
back in your seat a bit. Now maybe I just wasn't driving
aggressive enough, or maybe both of these cars were just not
tuned right (the coupe at least was stock and had impressive
maintenance records)....what gives?

I mean hey I LOVE the body style of the 911s, I love the status
and the looks you get, I love the solid tank-like feel and the
way it hugs and sits on the road, and the sound of the nice 6
rumbling (I do NOT like the VW sound of the 912 and the gutless
motor).. I just don't get why the car feels so heavy / laden down.

Can anyone tell me what the deal is, and why I am having these
impressions. What model of older 911 should I drive next, that
woudn't have this heaviness - is there one? I am told the early
cars (up to 73) had more of a lighter feel. I drove a 74 that felt
perhaps a tiny bit lighter, not sure. If I wanted to get more
performance and more of press-back-into your seat feel, which 911
do I drive? (The next car that I am going to look at is a 78 SC
that has A/C removed, rear seats removed, SSI headers/ no exhaust,
and Carrera 4 wheels - it will be interesting to see how that feels
in comparison.)

ked

why I am having these impressions?
> perhaps you are not operating the engine in its hi-perf envelope, which is 4500 - 6000+ rpm.

What model of older 911 should I drive next?
> a '69-'73 911S in good shape has a great feel of lightness, tossability & snap (@ high rpm). or a early Euro 3.0. or any one (except perhaps the US 2.7 in poor shape) where the owner allows you to wind it out. perhaps you should go to a PCA DE event (w/ a helmet) & bum a ride w/ a dialed-in old model, for a reference point.

If I wanted to get more performance and more of press-back-into your seat feel, which 911 do I drive?
> a turbo.

what it seems you are seeking is high power / weight ratio. so, find 210+ hp in a 2200 lb car (like the RS). remember, the 911s we are talking about are 20-35 yrs old. what was supercar perf is now standard "hi perf" (ala WRX). the 911 comprises a combination of perf features that are unique & somewhat unusual - a matter of taste as much as #s (imo, of course). you can tune / modify any 911 to achieve practically any perf level you wish - just takes $. happy hunting!

KC911

Respectfully, you aren't 'driving right' ! Most of us disconnect (or ignore) the shift light...it's an EPA induced "idiot light". Since you're test driving someone else's car, you're being respectful and driving as you probably should, but once my car warms up to temperature, I rarely drop BELOW 3500 rpms. If you've been keeping it in that range, as KED stated, you're not even reaching the sweet spot of the power band. These are not high hp/weight cars (many of us put the 'Carrera pigs' on a diet), but driven properly, they're plenty quick enough, and they're all about the handling. I've totally upgraded/refreshed my suspension (they are approaching 20 years old), and love the way my car handles. Try to hook up with someone with a well sorted car and let them take you for a spirited ride in the passenger seat....good luck!

Keith
'88 CE coupe

LaughaC

I have a '77 911 that accelerates smoothly to 150 MPH, but it makes a lot of (beautiful) noise if I drag race it. The powerband is between 4000 and 6500 RPM so don't expect any low-end grunt. I have a low gear ratio but 0-60 still takes over 6 seconds and 1/4 mile is only in the 14's.

My brother's 2000 996 C4 cabriolet runs about the same in a straight line, but is a much heavier car so I could walk away in tight curves. His variocams kick in about 4500 and do feel stronger from there to 6000 RPMs.

If you like the lighter cars, like I do, I recommend a '76 or '77 with an updated engine. Earlier cars weren't galvanized, so they have rust problems. In '78 the body gained 300 lbs to accomodate bigger rear wheels, so this can be a plus if the look is more important than weight. My car has been lowered using factory parts, so it handles like nothing I've ever driven, but wider rear tires would look better.

I'm also adding a turbo to see if that is something I want. So far almost most people says the extra power will ruin the handling of the car and that the heat will exponentially increase maintenance. However, the people who have actually added turbos to light-bodied 911s seem very happy with it.

Just don't let off the throttle in the middle of a curve or you'll spin! Gentle throttle control is essential in these lighter cars, especially when you make them powerful. Adding weight to the newer models reduced the risk by increasing understeer.

Jay Laifman

To be quite blunt, at 3,500 shifts, you've wasted time. You need to charge forward with it. Get to those higher rpms and push on it. Once you really get on the car, your whole being will understand what it's all about. And even then, there is so much more car there than you will ever pull out of it on the streets. I drove my car for years with lots of gusto on the streets and loved it and figured I knew what a Porsche was all about. But, then when I got it on a race track and pushed the car to its very limits (and beyond), I quickly learned that all that "gusto" I enjoyed on the street was merely a fraction of what the car still had lurking under its haunches, merely a fraction. "Every Porsche ever built is a race car" is an absolutely true statement, and one you will never understand until you get the chance to treat it as the race car it really is. The amazing thing about the cars, which you've proved, is that this wolf in sheeps clothing can in fact fool people into thinking it's merely a sheep that can be driven without issue as a commuter car.

H2NO

I purchased my 89 3.2 Cab about five weeks ago. My first test drive was in traffic and/or pothole ridden roads with the seller sitting right next to me. I had ridden in this vintage car in the late eighties when I was twenty and never forgot the feeling of how it sounded and pulled. But when I test drove this particular car I had to ask the seller if these cars lose power as they age. That is how unimpressed I was.

After a few days to think about it, I called the seller back for a second test drive. I found some clear roads and gave it more gas. This time I could feel that the car could go. I played a little bit and decided that I wanted it.

After a successful PPI and price negotiations, I picked up the car. The drive home was an epiphany. Now that the car was mine, and I was alone, I drove it harder. True, the car isn't a rocket. But, it is plenty fast and when you get in the twisties it really shines. I realized then that during my test drives I never put the pedal all the way down and didn't let it rev into the 5,000 range where the car is happiest. Like you said, one definitely drives differently with a PO in the passenger seat.

Another thing I noticed is that the car feels slower than it is. I am always shocked at how fast I'm going when I glance at the speedometer. 80 mph feels like 50.

Finally, these cars require preventative maintenance, not just trouble shooting problems as they arise. My mechanic just installed a shock tower brace, flushed the clutch lines, and adjusted the valves. Big difference. A car will feel very different if it has 20 year old fluid, shocks, etc.

mborkow

hmmm, interesting thread. i have a newer (though not new) 911 (1996 993 with nearly 300 hp, but an even heavier chassis) and i can tell you that off the line i can easily get beaten by a honda. these cars aren't really made for a quick launch. for me the fun of this car is from going from 30 to 90 mph, which i can do in an instant and with incredible control or in rounding a highway clover leaf while accelerating the whole time (try that in a honda mini van) and then punching it when i hit the straight section of the highway. try taking your next test drive on a twisty hilly road; that is where these cars love to be driven.

RacingBeat

i'm sure some of you more experienced drivers can add to this, but when driving these cars it's about momentum, even in a street setting. it's not a torquey, low-end push you in the seat kind of car....more of a high-winded runner. when you are taching about 4k and then smoothly kicking it to 6k....the car will lunge forward....pure race cars

umfan866

Thanks guys..that helps put some perspective on things. I thought I wasn't driving it "right" perhaps, my own bimmer is rev limited to 5,500 and thats with a chip (used to be 4,700) so that, combined with a driver, and the stupid upshift light (I thought well this must be Porsche's recommendation---we used to have this light in my VW rabbit)... ok next time/place I am going to drive a little differently. And the one person who commented on an 76 or 77 makes me want to see out one of those even though a lot of others trash them for all the EPA equipment and motor issues (but probably any car that has survived from that era to this day has many of the issues sorted out).
THks Marvin.

LaughaC

Yes, a '76 or '77 is the lightest galvanized 911 you'll find. You'll want an updated engine in it; either a 3.0 or a (rare) 77R aluminum-cased 2.7 with time serts in the cylinder and head studs. Either of these engines need the turbo chain tensioners and updated exhaust.

Knowing what I know now, and if I had the time, I'd look for a good car with a bad engine and build a carbureted 3.2 for it. They also offer a 3.4 oversized cylinder kit that fits the 3.0 crankcase, and I've heard good things about that.

My car was babied by the previous owner, and he had such weak tires on it that it could hardly take a turn when I test-drove it. This limited my test-drive experience, but I saw this as a plus and ended up with a rust-free car with a newly rebuilt engine.

To really get the feel of a 911 you may want to test drive one at a dealer, warm it up over 180 degrees, and then spank it in some clover-leaf exit ramps. Nothing beats that combination of g-forces and adrenalyn.

Steve Weiner-Rennsport Systems

Marvin:

You've gotten some really excellent feedback here that ought to help you,....

I'd simply add that there are several things that make one 911 "feel" heavier than others and these factors REALLY make a difference. Some of these are:

1) Tires: pressures, brand, type, size

2) Aligment: caster & camber

3) Wheel diameters, widths, and offsets

Changing any of these transforms how these cars feel so it can be challenging to compare one car to another without knowing everything.

Dr. Dynamics

GREAT POST! I also think the same way...

Right know I have an 87 951 and pretty frequently drive an 87 Carrera and an 81 SC which i do pretty much work on. I love driving them hard. The 911s don't make me feel any pull when at WOT, but when you look at the speedo, you could be impressed. And maybe I'm used to my 951's turbo kickin in. And yes you may be easily beaten by little hi revin hondas...

Getting back to it, I kind of felt a little dissapointed with all the ones i drive, since I used to daily drive and Solo Cross an 2003 Celica GTS. VERY light handling car and i felt very confident twisting it to go wherever i wanted it to go by just using a little throttle control (On and Off again). but the 951 I still don't feel very confident with it at the limit. I've gone completely sideways a couple of times. Maybe i just need to drive it more aily wise and I havent had a chance to Solo drive it yet.

Porshe cars have a lot of inertia to make them enter the curves. Maybe taking some weight off the ends might help...

KC911

Welcome back Steve, hope you're feeling better....We've missed ya!

ked

Steve - thanks for getting well! Even w/ Pete doing everything he could (which is considerable), we were getting stupider by the day without your input... Now, take the rest of the day off.

Mike Murphy

If you look at the horsepower and torque curves of the 3.2, you notice that the only way to get maximum horsepower from the engine is to shift at 6500 RPM. This gives you maximum "area under the curve" for maximum power. A Honda is the same as a Porsche or any other car until you start pushing the limits. The Porsche is a car that is meant to be pushed to the limit. The car doesn't even sound like a Porsche until the engine is up beyond 4500 RPMs.

P-cars are like long-legged marathon runners. They need more space to run faster and longer.

Consider taking a P-car to a local PCA.ORG racing event. One that teaches you high-speed driving dynamics. I think you'll find that you can push the P-car harder and it performs well at the limit, thus creating greater speed than a regular car with more power.