Notices

982 GT4 Spyder?

 
Old 04-19-2019, 09:06 PM
  #1456  
JSF101
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
JSF101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 625
Default

Agree with all of the below. You have to wonder when the "up the ante horsepower" with every model is going to end. And when the "amazing sound" of the NA motors will cease as well.
Much rather have lightweight and amazing sound than 525hp, 550hp, 575hp, etc Guess we'll see shortly whether GT4/Spyder still have the amazing sound and stay lightweight
seems kinda funny that I've had a Boxster (200hp, momentum car), Cayman S (295 hp, momentum car), Spyder (320hp, momentum car) and now GT4 (385 hp, momentum car)….you can never have enough horsepower!
the trend is in the opposite direction and I don't think it will be long before no more lightweight, no more amazing sound...it's called electric!

Originally Posted by n4v4nod View Post
I hope I'm wrong and that they make it ultra lightweight as possible... canyon carver... with amazing sound and feel... but I just feel like that is a pipe dream nowadays with Porsche.
JSF101 is offline  
Old 04-19-2019, 09:22 PM
  #1457  
n4v4nod
Addict
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
n4v4nod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,728
Default

Originally Posted by JSF101 View Post
Agree with all of the below. You have to wonder when the "up the ante horsepower" with every model is going to end. And when the "amazing sound" of the NA motors will cease as well.
Much rather have lightweight and amazing sound than 525hp, 550hp, 575hp, etc Guess we'll see shortly whether GT4/Spyder still have the amazing sound and stay lightweight
seems kinda funny that I've had a Boxster (200hp, momentum car), Cayman S (295 hp, momentum car), Spyder (320hp, momentum car) and now GT4 (385 hp, momentum car)….you can never have enough horsepower!
the trend is in the opposite direction and I don't think it will be long before no more lightweight, no more amazing sound...it's called electric!
watch the press conference... he states three defined areas where Porsche will focus:
n4v4nod is offline  
Old 04-19-2019, 09:23 PM
  #1458  
hf1
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
hf1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 4,738
Default

I just don't get it. Isn't going lightweight one of the best ways to go "green" and "planet-friendly" which seems to be all the rage with current trends and regulations? What better way to "save the planet" than to have LESS mass to move around? Isn't it counterproductive (nay, retarded?) to make ever heavier cars with ever more HP which then have to be choked with particulate filters and make them sound like vacuum cleaners to make them "planet-friendly"? What am I missing?
hf1 is offline  
Old 04-19-2019, 11:47 PM
  #1459  
Suitcase
User
 
Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 303
Default The Greenest Car in the World

Originally Posted by hf1 View Post
I just don't get it. Isn't going lightweight one of the best ways to go "green" and "planet-friendly" which seems to be all the rage with current trends and regulations? What better way to "save the planet" than to have LESS mass to move around? Isn't it counterproductive (nay, retarded?) to make ever heavier cars with ever more HP which then have to be choked with particulate filters and make them sound like vacuum cleaners to make them "planet-friendly"? What am I missing?
I'm in total agreement. Many years ago I was an auto emissions engineer. I always believed the environmental move forward was lighter vehicles combined with smaller more efficient internal combustion motors. Manufacturers have been trying to make electric cars work for a hundred plus years. So far it hasn't.

Fast forward the last decade. In response to global warming the public and politicians have legislated, especially in Europe, for automobile companies to become electric car companies. Many executives at Porsche have said to me, "we have no choice." Meanwhile, Porsche has "bet the farm" on the success of what is still an unproven technology in the real world. Are people really going to wait around at a communal table drinking coffee for a half hour while their car charges? And what about the charging station 150 miles west of Des Moines? Who pays for it? And the cost and environmental impact of the electricity to charge the car? And the toxic production of batteries? And the disposal of the batteries? And the value of your 5 year old car when the battery costs more than the car is worth? Meanwhile, lightweight composite materials keep stronger stronger and cheaper.

Over the years I've been asked "what is the greenest car in the world? Prius? Tesla?" I would tell them there is only one answer. A Porsche 911. No one ever throws one away. No one ever throws a part away, not even a broken part. It's far "greener" to drive your 12 year old 996 than to junk your 7 year old Tesla for a new one. The cost to the environment (and your wallet) of manufacturing and then re-manufacturing any product with a shorter life cycle is far more detrimental to the environment than a more sustainable product. But this is not the way it's going. Think of the battery degradation in your phone over two years. Last August I decided late on a Saturday to drive my 25 year old 964 Speedster across the US for a PCNA Cocktail party the following Thursday in Pebble Beach, California.. No special prep. 1/2 qt. of oil, check the tires, RainX on the wind screen and I'm ready. Early Monday I'm in the car in West Palm Beach and I'm at the party on Thursday. Two 1350 mile days. 137 mph as indicated on my radar detector. To me, this is green. Think of the true environmental cost of all the cars I didn't need to buy over 25 years. I hope that my 981 Spyder is still going strong and is serviceable in 25 years. I suggest that we consider that Quality = Sustainability = Green.
Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-20-2019, 03:01 AM
  #1460  
Marine Blue
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Marine Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Temecula, CA
Posts: 13,990
Default

Originally Posted by hf1 View Post
I just don't get it. Isn't going lightweight one of the best ways to go "green" and "planet-friendly" which seems to be all the rage with current trends and regulations? What better way to "save the planet" than to have LESS mass to move around? Isn't it counterproductive (nay, retarded?) to make ever heavier cars with ever more HP which then have to be choked with particulate filters and make them sound like vacuum cleaners to make them "planet-friendly"? What am I missing?
You’ve hit the nail square on the head. This has been my biggest issue with modern sports cars since the mid 2000’s. Why can’t manufacturers focus on reducing weight rather than adding electronic wizardry. If we only care about the numbers then the manufacturers are definitely headed in the right direction, If however we focus on the experience, the current generation of cars leaves lots to be desired.
Marine Blue is offline  
Old 04-20-2019, 07:10 AM
  #1461  
ekam
User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 738
Default

Originally Posted by hf1 View Post
I just don't get it. Isn't going lightweight one of the best ways to go "green" and "planet-friendly" which seems to be all the rage with current trends and regulations? What better way to "save the planet" than to have LESS mass to move around? Isn't it counterproductive (nay, retarded?) to make ever heavier cars with ever more HP which then have to be choked with particulate filters and make them sound like vacuum cleaners to make them "planet-friendly"? What am I missing?
Because of ever increasing crash safety as well as emission standards that cause vehicles to gain weight.

More airbags, more particulate filters, etc etc...

https://newsroom.porsche.com/fallbac...388-16349.html

Same reason why nobody can drive with their arm resting on the driver's door in their 981 anymore because the door height keeps getting higher because of crash safety.
ekam is offline  
Old 04-21-2019, 11:39 AM
  #1462  
unclemat
User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 27
Default

Hasn't seen this posted.

Here's Our Best Look Yet at the Porsche 718 Cayman GT4

The new 718 Cayman GT4 is one of the most hotly anticipated cars expected from Porsche this year. The company revealed the racing version, the Clubsport, back in January, but we have yet to hear anything official on the road car. Thanks to these spy videos from the Nurburgring, though, we get to lay our eyes on a GT4 test car.

Though Porsche has yet to confirm any specs, the 718 Cayman GT4 is expected to retain the same flat-six engine layout as its predecessor. Coinciding with the Clubsport's announcement, we learned the GT4 road car will not be getting the race car's old 3.8-liter 911 Carrera S engine, but rather a different naturally aspirated six; most likely the 4.0-liter unit found in the current 911 GT3.

Judging by the time between shifts in this video, it seems this test car is sporting a manual transmission. It's expected a PDK will also be offered, just like in the GT3.

Porsche previously confirmed to us we'll see the final version of the car sometime in 2019. It's only a matter of time now.

https://youtu.be/6lZCXwj7wbc
unclemat is offline  
Old 04-21-2019, 06:27 PM
  #1463  
fast1
Super User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,484
Default

Originally Posted by hf1 View Post
I just don't get it. Isn't going lightweight one of the best ways to go "green" and "planet-friendly" which seems to be all the rage with current trends and regulations? What better way to "save the planet" than to have LESS mass to move around? Isn't it counterproductive (nay, retarded?) to make ever heavier cars with ever more HP which then have to be choked with particulate filters and make them sound like vacuum cleaners to make them "planet-friendly"? What am I missing?
Classic example of cognitive dissonance. The majority of "soccer moms" are ardent proponents of "green" policies, yet their vehicle of choice is a 5K+ lb SUV. One of my neighbors is an ardent supporter of AOC, yet she sees no contradiction in driving a 6700 lb Silverado.
fast1 is offline  
Old 04-21-2019, 06:43 PM
  #1464  
fast1
Super User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,484
Default

Originally Posted by Suitcase View Post
I'm in total agreement. Many years ago I was an auto emissions engineer. I always believed the environmental move forward was lighter vehicles combined with smaller more efficient internal combustion motors. Manufacturers have been trying to make electric cars work for a hundred plus years. So far it hasn't.

Fast forward the last decade. In response to global warming the public and politicians have legislated, especially in Europe, for automobile companies to become electric car companies. Many executives at Porsche have said to me, "we have no choice." Meanwhile, Porsche has "bet the farm" on the success of what is still an unproven technology in the real world. Are people really going to wait around at a communal table drinking coffee for a half hour while their car charges? And what about the charging station 150 miles west of Des Moines? Who pays for it? And the cost and environmental impact of the electricity to charge the car? And the toxic production of batteries? And the disposal of the batteries? And the value of your 5 year old car when the battery costs more than the car is worth? Meanwhile, lightweight composite materials keep stronger stronger and cheaper.

Over the years I've been asked "what is the greenest car in the world? Prius? Tesla?" I would tell them there is only one answer. A Porsche 911. No one ever throws one away. No one ever throws a part away, not even a broken part. It's far "greener" to drive your 12 year old 996 than to junk your 7 year old Tesla for a new one. The cost to the environment (and your wallet) of manufacturing and then re-manufacturing any product with a shorter life cycle is far more detrimental to the environment than a more sustainable product. But this is not the way it's going. Think of the battery degradation in your phone over two years. Last August I decided late on a Saturday to drive my 25 year old 964 Speedster across the US for a PCNA Cocktail party the following Thursday in Pebble Beach, California.. No special prep. 1/2 qt. of oil, check the tires, RainX on the wind screen and I'm ready. Early Monday I'm in the car in West Palm Beach and I'm at the party on Thursday. Two 1350 mile days. 137 mph as indicated on my radar detector. To me, this is green. Think of the true environmental cost of all the cars I didn't need to buy over 25 years. I hope that my 981 Spyder is still going strong and is serviceable in 25 years. I suggest that we consider that Quality = Sustainability = Green.
Although 8 year warranties on electric car batteries is the standard, the replacement cost is substantial. The current list price of a Chevy Bolt EV HV battery pack is $15,734.29 and the part number is 24285978, and then there's the installation cost. That's nearly 50% of its MSRP. So how much will buyers be willing to pay for an electric car when it's near its warranty expiration?
fast1 is offline  
Old 04-22-2019, 06:52 AM
  #1465  
hf1
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
hf1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 4,738
Default

Originally Posted by Suitcase View Post
I'm in total agreement. Many years ago I was an auto emissions engineer. I always believed the environmental move forward was lighter vehicles combined with smaller more efficient internal combustion motors. Manufacturers have been trying to make electric cars work for a hundred plus years. So far it hasn't.

Fast forward the last decade. In response to global warming the public and politicians have legislated, especially in Europe, for automobile companies to become electric car companies. Many executives at Porsche have said to me, "we have no choice." Meanwhile, Porsche has "bet the farm" on the success of what is still an unproven technology in the real world. Are people really going to wait around at a communal table drinking coffee for a half hour while their car charges? And what about the charging station 150 miles west of Des Moines? Who pays for it? And the cost and environmental impact of the electricity to charge the car? And the toxic production of batteries? And the disposal of the batteries? And the value of your 5 year old car when the battery costs more than the car is worth? Meanwhile, lightweight composite materials keep stronger stronger and cheaper.

Over the years I've been asked "what is the greenest car in the world? Prius? Tesla?" I would tell them there is only one answer. A Porsche 911. No one ever throws one away. No one ever throws a part away, not even a broken part. It's far "greener" to drive your 12 year old 996 than to junk your 7 year old Tesla for a new one. The cost to the environment (and your wallet) of manufacturing and then re-manufacturing any product with a shorter life cycle is far more detrimental to the environment than a more sustainable product. But this is not the way it's going. Think of the battery degradation in your phone over two years. Last August I decided late on a Saturday to drive my 25 year old 964 Speedster across the US for a PCNA Cocktail party the following Thursday in Pebble Beach, California.. No special prep. 1/2 qt. of oil, check the tires, RainX on the wind screen and I'm ready. Early Monday I'm in the car in West Palm Beach and I'm at the party on Thursday. Two 1350 mile days. 137 mph as indicated on my radar detector. To me, this is green. Think of the true environmental cost of all the cars I didn't need to buy over 25 years. I hope that my 981 Spyder is still going strong and is serviceable in 25 years. I suggest that we consider that Quality = Sustainability = Green.
Originally Posted by fast1 View Post
Although 8 year warranties on electric car batteries is the standard, the replacement cost is substantial. The current list price of a Chevy Bolt EV HV battery pack is $15,734.29 and the part number is 24285978, and then there's the installation cost. That's nearly 50% of its MSRP. So how much will buyers be willing to pay for an electric car when it's near its warranty expiration?
Yep, as suspected all along...

Electric Car-Owners Shocked: New Study Confirms EVs Considerably Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...te-diesel-cars

hf1 is offline  
Old 04-22-2019, 08:33 AM
  #1466  
Closertotruth
User
 
Closertotruth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: RI/SC
Posts: 183
Default

This really shouldn’t surprise anyone. Nuclear is actually the most “green” energy but most folks find that hard to believe.
https://quillette.com/2019/02/27/why...ve-the-planet/
Closertotruth is offline  
Old 04-22-2019, 09:09 AM
  #1467  
Gravs
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Gravs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,304
Default

Originally Posted by hf1
Yep, as suspected all along...

Electric Car-Owners Shocked: New Study Confirms EVs Considerably Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...te-diesel-cars

It's quite hard to know who to believe. This may be biased in some way. I have to say that it doesn't 'feel' right that batteries as the way to go. They're so heavy and are so expensive to make (although they could be 95% profit for all I know). I prefer the idea of methane or some sort of fuel that burns without significant emissions. Seems to make more sense. If every car was suddenly battery powered tomorrow think of all the batteries, all the chargers, all the power stations etc etc etc we'd need.

Nuclear reactor cars yes.
Gravs is offline  
Old 04-22-2019, 09:14 AM
  #1468  
Marine Blue
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Marine Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Temecula, CA
Posts: 13,990
Default

The manufacturing process to make batteries is highly energy intensive which is the biggest issue. Recycling these batteries is also energy intensive. By the time you take all this into consideration gas engines are still more efficient although it took nearly 100 years to get there. So perhaps with time battery technology will improve assuming we continue down that path.

Hydrogen would be a great alternative for the environment but that process is also heavily underdeveloped.
Marine Blue is offline  
Old 04-22-2019, 12:08 PM
  #1469  
MidEngineRules
User
 
MidEngineRules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 427
Default

Originally Posted by Marine Blue View Post
Hydrogen would be a great alternative for the environment but that process is also heavily underdeveloped.
BMW was leading the way in hydrogen ICE development, but EV took a stronger foot hold and I can only imagine they've abandoned their efforts at this point. The problem with hydrogen is that you need a nuclear reactor to produce the fuel. Don't think the US and other nuclear states want to see nuclear reactors producing hydrogen fuel all over the world.

I agree with going lighter with cars as important, but we would need to increase public safety first. Speed limiting big rigs to 62 mph (like in Germany) would be a good start.
MidEngineRules is offline  
Old 04-23-2019, 08:47 AM
  #1470  
Zeus993
Super User
 
Zeus993's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 4,561
Default

Zeus993 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 982 GT4 Spyder?


Contact Us - About Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: