981CS vs. 718CS
12-19-2017, 12:41 AM
#16
Three Wheelin'
Porsche's have never been about low end torque outside the 911 turbo, they're about feel and charisma..........................since the throttle response and lack of lag are also significant draws for those of us who actually drive these cars hard. ............................. For me, that's not what this is all about.
............................
Chris Harris in his 981 review said he would sell a 987 to buy a 981. But in his 718 review, even though faster, he said he'd be looking for a used 981.
Carfection loved the 981 and the reviewer (dont know his name) called it the best car Porsche made at the time. When he tested the 718 he said the 718 was better in almost every way, except when it came to the sound and soul of the car. He also said he'd be looking for a used 981.
....
..................
Chris Harris in his 981 review said he would sell a 987 to buy a 981. But in his 718 review, even though faster, he said he'd be looking for a used 981.
Carfection loved the 981 and the reviewer (dont know his name) called it the best car Porsche made at the time. When he tested the 718 he said the 718 was better in almost every way, except when it came to the sound and soul of the car. He also said he'd be looking for a used 981.
....
..................
12-19-2017, 10:09 AM
#17
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Thanks, everyone. If anyone lives in CT or near NYC with a 981CS manual and wants to let me take it for a quick spin, I'd gladly provide a nice little bottle of Bordeaux for your troubles : )
12-19-2017, 10:23 AM
#18
They also have several 781CS manuals on the lot as well. https://porscheofgreenwich.com/inven...e&model=Cayman
12-19-2017, 01:40 PM
#20
Race Car
My 981S has plenty of low end torque, and I wouldn't trade it for the "sound" of a 718. Consider me a purist, but a four cylinder engine belongs in a 912.
12-19-2017, 01:45 PM
#21
Many of you have far more experience than myself. However, I have driven the following: 73' 911T, 85' 944, 98' 986 and 11' Spyder. All of them like to be revving for best throttle response. None liked lugging at low RPM.
12-19-2017, 02:47 PM
#22
Burning Brakes
It's a great car, it would just be more fun around town with a shorter differential that wasn't geared for the autobahn. Haven't driven the 718 yet, but by all accounts the torque characteristics are more suited to the gearing so I'm looking forward to seeing how differently it drives. I'd suggest trying them both and making the call based on the driving characteristics, not just saying "more cylinders good."
Also the styling is pretty sweet: the 987.2 and 981 are no ugly cars, but looking at the 718 makes my pants feel funny.
(Heresy for the day: the 912 was a better car on the street than the 911. Slower, but lighter and better balanced. Burn me at the stake if you must.)
12-19-2017, 04:29 PM
#23
I had a 718S for the day while my 981 Spyder was in the shop. Sound, soul I know I know, but by criminy that 718 is a quick car. I confess to having had unfaithful thoughts...
Didn’t even hate the noise it made - reminded me of my old BMW 1200GS, whether that’s a good thing or not I don’t know. But it was 2 degrees C out, the thing had P Zeros on and I was flinging it around like crazy. Don’t know if I’d want one long term, but it’s a great little car. Who cares how many cylinders it has? Do people think Ducatis are bad because they have half as many as Hondas?
I would try try to drive both if at all possible.
Didn’t even hate the noise it made - reminded me of my old BMW 1200GS, whether that’s a good thing or not I don’t know. But it was 2 degrees C out, the thing had P Zeros on and I was flinging it around like crazy. Don’t know if I’d want one long term, but it’s a great little car. Who cares how many cylinders it has? Do people think Ducatis are bad because they have half as many as Hondas?
I would try try to drive both if at all possible.
12-19-2017, 04:47 PM
#24
Rennlist Member
Beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder. The styling and the turbo lag are the only two factors that are preventing me from warming up to the 718. Not the number of cylinders or the sound.
12-19-2017, 08:21 PM
#25
All of us will have to eventually make the change from NA to turbo. I already did with the family car, but don't like it on a sports car for the following reasons, in descending order of importance:
-Power delivery not linear. Not even close, as it's basically flat, with max TQ typically at less than 2K and up to 6K. And same with the HP curve from there. I like my throttle like a rheostat, not like a switch, but guess with proper throttle control (which I have from motorcycles) it can be mitigated. But it's not about having to redline the engine every time, but having the power you want relative to gear and engine speed. That's why I like the larger 3.4 engine. With a smaller engine, like the 2.7, you obviously need much more revs to have the same power on the same gear. It has plenty of torque not to need to rev it to the moon, even driven aggressively. I typically don't need to exceed 4.5K rpm, where it already sounds incredible with PSE. I have to say a turbo engine actually makes more sense than a NA one in a family car, or any other vehicle except a sports car, where you expect immediate and linear throttle response.
-Turbo lag. This is being minimized with all the new turbo technologies (variable vane, twin-scroll, etc), along with putting them closer and closer to the exhaust ports. But it's still there, especially on smallish engines, and from lower revs.
-Run hotter than a NA engine. This is pretty obvious, especially when run aggressively, as a smaller engine with the same power as a larger NA is way more stressed, plus turbos get awfully hot as well. Not good in hot climates like mine (TX), where limp mode is a constant reminder of that. This also leads to heat-related issues later in the life of the car, from cracked plastic/rubber parts, to wire damage, etc.
-More maintenance. Turbo engines need more frequent oil changes, period. Whether called or not. My turbo car calls for 5K miles max, which is what I'd do anyway. And it's not a sports car.
-Engine sound. They hardly ever sound like a NA counterpart. In the case of 981 to 718, it's an entirely different engine, and from one of the best sounding ones ever, so a huge detractor. But as 981s get older, it'll be mostly forgotten, especially for those who never owned a NA Porsche F6 with PSE before. They'll never know what they were missing. He he. Engine sound will always be an important part of the sports car experience IMO, but not a deal-breaker one, especially if you like turbo engines.
-Typically not lighter than their larger NA replacements due to heavy turbo hardware. And also not that fuel efficient in real life. In fact, the 718 is significantly lower than my 2016 GTS 22/31.
Bottom line is we'll have to get used to turbo engines whether we like it or not, even in sports cars, so there's no going back, unfortunately. Since I simply don't buy used cars (too picky
), a 981 wouldn't be an option for me, but no way I'd ever buy a 718 4-banger, but that's just me. I'd probably buy a TT RS instead. It's a more versatile car, but I probably won't be able to pull the trigger and swap my beloved CGTS for one. The only thing my car does better than a TT RS is handling, but I still value that very much. And also the 'feel', which you just don't get on a car based on a Golf hatchback. You feel special when seated in a Cayman, especially one loaded to the gills like mine, with basically no plastic in sight. It feels luxurious and sporty. Just wish it was quieter, and that it was available with SPASM. Don't regret getting X73 because PASM sucks for me, but SPASM would have most likely solved my wife's suspension stiffness issue. Oh well. Might just buy a Subaru WRX instead. Will drive the MB cars I need to drive over the holidays and decide after that. But most likely I'll keep that gem
.
-Power delivery not linear. Not even close, as it's basically flat, with max TQ typically at less than 2K and up to 6K. And same with the HP curve from there. I like my throttle like a rheostat, not like a switch, but guess with proper throttle control (which I have from motorcycles) it can be mitigated. But it's not about having to redline the engine every time, but having the power you want relative to gear and engine speed. That's why I like the larger 3.4 engine. With a smaller engine, like the 2.7, you obviously need much more revs to have the same power on the same gear. It has plenty of torque not to need to rev it to the moon, even driven aggressively. I typically don't need to exceed 4.5K rpm, where it already sounds incredible with PSE. I have to say a turbo engine actually makes more sense than a NA one in a family car, or any other vehicle except a sports car, where you expect immediate and linear throttle response.
-Turbo lag. This is being minimized with all the new turbo technologies (variable vane, twin-scroll, etc), along with putting them closer and closer to the exhaust ports. But it's still there, especially on smallish engines, and from lower revs.
-Run hotter than a NA engine. This is pretty obvious, especially when run aggressively, as a smaller engine with the same power as a larger NA is way more stressed, plus turbos get awfully hot as well. Not good in hot climates like mine (TX), where limp mode is a constant reminder of that. This also leads to heat-related issues later in the life of the car, from cracked plastic/rubber parts, to wire damage, etc.
-More maintenance. Turbo engines need more frequent oil changes, period. Whether called or not. My turbo car calls for 5K miles max, which is what I'd do anyway. And it's not a sports car.
-Engine sound. They hardly ever sound like a NA counterpart. In the case of 981 to 718, it's an entirely different engine, and from one of the best sounding ones ever, so a huge detractor. But as 981s get older, it'll be mostly forgotten, especially for those who never owned a NA Porsche F6 with PSE before. They'll never know what they were missing. He he. Engine sound will always be an important part of the sports car experience IMO, but not a deal-breaker one, especially if you like turbo engines.
-Typically not lighter than their larger NA replacements due to heavy turbo hardware. And also not that fuel efficient in real life. In fact, the 718 is significantly lower than my 2016 GTS 22/31.
Bottom line is we'll have to get used to turbo engines whether we like it or not, even in sports cars, so there's no going back, unfortunately. Since I simply don't buy used cars (too picky
), a 981 wouldn't be an option for me, but no way I'd ever buy a 718 4-banger, but that's just me. I'd probably buy a TT RS instead. It's a more versatile car, but I probably won't be able to pull the trigger and swap my beloved CGTS for one. The only thing my car does better than a TT RS is handling, but I still value that very much. And also the 'feel', which you just don't get on a car based on a Golf hatchback. You feel special when seated in a Cayman, especially one loaded to the gills like mine, with basically no plastic in sight. It feels luxurious and sporty. Just wish it was quieter, and that it was available with SPASM. Don't regret getting X73 because PASM sucks for me, but SPASM would have most likely solved my wife's suspension stiffness issue. Oh well. Might just buy a Subaru WRX instead. Will drive the MB cars I need to drive over the holidays and decide after that. But most likely I'll keep that gem.
12-19-2017, 08:24 PM
#26
Bottom line is we'll have to get used to turbo engines whether we like it or not... No we won't electric, linear, instant neck snapping, hi torque motors will be here sooner than you think. Whether you will be allowed to pilot instead of simply being a passenger is the real issue.
12-19-2017, 08:33 PM
#27
They won't replace ICE cars in our lifetime man, even if you're still young. And they're still worthless for a trip. Just a fashion statement at the moment, but yes, they'll become more and more mainstream over time.
12-19-2017, 08:39 PM
#28
They won't replace ICE cars in our lifetime man, even if you're still young. And they're still worthless on a trip. Just a fashion statement at the moment, but yes, they'll become more and more mainstream over time. Having said that, those cars are far from 'environmentally friendly' as tree huggers might believe. But probably a hair better than ICE over their life expectancy. I still think hydrogen fuel cells are the better technology, but seem stagnant at the moment. We'll see what happens.
. And they're still worthless on a trip. Just a fashion statement at the moment, but yes, they'll become more and more mainstream over time. Having said that, those cars are far from 'environmentally friendly' as tree huggers might believe. But probably a hair better than ICE over their life expectancy. I still think hydrogen fuel cells are the better technology, but seem stagnant at the moment. We'll see what happens.
