JRRSA

I just returned home from having driven the new Cayman S.

Here are my thoughts: Having just sold an 911 RS America, 2 minutes into the drive I found myself immediately missing that car from a visceral feel standpoint. The Cayman would make a fantastic daily daily driver, I'm not sure it's what I would consider for a weekend enthusiast's car. It does everything for you so well it almost takes away what I considered "fun" with the RS America.

It's very refined and insulated, i.e. quiet. It has a decent exhaust note underload with very little road noise at speed. The steering response is very quick, the handling is outstanding - watch out for these guys on the autocross course, driven correctly they will be the king of every event and likely to be as competitive at the D.E. events.

Having said all of this, it reminded why I really like the early cars for a weekend driver, however, not for a daily driver. It's difficult to replicate the "driver's" feel offered by the early 911's.

Jim Michaels

Having just sold my own RSA in anticipation of taking delivery of a Cayman, I read both good and bad news in your post. The trade-off seems to be some driving fun lost in exchange for higher performance on the autocross course and the track. Maybe I can live with that.

JRRSA

Jim,

It will most definitely be quicker through the cones and quicker on the track, however, straight line speed I'm not so sure.

As you have probably seen on Keith V's site the RSA that Car and Driver tested did zero to sixty in 4.6. My RSA had the full B&B exhaust with headers no cat etc, which really woke it up especially in third gear. The Cayman did not feel as quick to me however, that could be because it was so well insulated, quiet and smooth. One of the attributes I enjoyed most about the RSA was that it was loud and raw, you never forgot that you were in a performance car regardless of whether you were running it through the gears or cruising down the highway.

I do think you will enjoy the Cayman, however for different reasons especially if you drive it daily. I can tell you this, the handling was amazing, so amazing that I think you will find that you don't have to be ready to throttle steer or correct. The car just does everything so well for you. Some may say that takes the fun away, others may say...awesome!

STLPCA

How was the Cayman you drove configured re: performance options?
PASM
Sport Chrono
PCCB
18" or 19" wheels

JRRSA

It had the 19 inch 5 spoke wheels, not the Carrera S wheel. It had Sport Chrono and PASM, no PCCB.

JRRSA

The wheels on car in this recent post Black/Black w/Classics 30 Pics were the wheels on the car I drove. 19 inch 265-35-19 rear.

Jim Michaels

JRoss: I find it hard to believe that anyone (even C&D) got a 0-60 time of 4.6 from a stock RSA. I had all the mag tests and I'm pretty sure 0-60 times were all over 5 seconds. A good time for a stock RSA would be about 5.3 as I recall. Mine also had breathing improvements (including cat & 1st muffler by-passes), a re-mapped chip, and weighed 2920#, but I doubt that it would break 5 seconds. In short, the Cayman S should be quicker to 60; Porsche says 5.1, but R&T reported a 4.8; the quickest I've read. The Cayman you drove probably wasn't fully broken in, so it should loosen up a bit with more break-in time. I fully believe your handling description, however, and am looking foward to experiencing that myself in less than a week.

JRRSA

Jim,

Check out the Road Test articles on RSA.net. Here is the link. It's Car and Driver and it's #7 on the list.

http://www.rsamerica.net/articles/roadtest/index.htm


I'm sure they probably abused the car to get those results, however, it's there in print.

JRoss

CP

JRoss,

This is good news for me. I am looking at the Cayman as my daily driver. Truth be told, I had a 1996 super-charged Miata before I bought my RUF. My wife deemed the Miata unsafe for daily use (too light, single air-bag, etc.). However, I sorely missed the nimbleness and precise handling of the Miata for daily driving.

I know the Cayman weights 2950 lbs compared to the Miata at 2,300 lbs, but I am hoping that the mid-engine layout (low polar moment of inertia) would help mask the weight at corners. I don't need a lot of power for the street as the Bay Area traffic is pretty jammed anyways. Also, on drives where I need power I'll take the RUF. So your report is really encouraging for me.

Thanks for the good news.

CP

JRRSA

CP,

What you described above is what I see after today as the perfect buyer for the Cayman. It will be a phenomenal daily driver. Having the RUF as well is a perfect set-up...

JRoss

Jim Michaels

JRoss: Now I remember the C&D report, but still consider their 4.6 as a deviant time among the many other tested times. C&D said the RSA was quicker to 60 than the ZR-1, Lotus Esprit Turbo ES, and Acura NSX. A 4.6 would also make the RSA quicker than a 993, a 996, and even a 997. Not very likely with only 250 hp. Most of those 7 magazines probably just reported Porsche's figures, as 5 of them reported 5.4 for 0-60. Strange that the R&T report is missing from that group. My responses to the 4.6 figure keep interrupting the real thread. Sorry about that folks.

forklift

I like that review as a RSA owner! I think the C&D test is optimistic. They usually have lower times for some reasons.

ChuckG

I have a copy of an R & T test of the RS America-they tested a 0-60 of 5.3 sec.

C & D tested the 0-60 of the 1990 Porsche 911 C2 at 4.8 sec. They tested the 993 at something like 4.6 or 4.7 sec.

Most other tests I've seen have 964s in the 5.0-5.4 second range.

STLPCA

Excerpt from C&D's long term '95 993 test published in July 1996:

Performance: . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . new . . . . . . . . . . 40,000 miles
Zero to 60 mph .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6 sec . . . . . ... . . . 4.9 sec
Zero to 100 mph . . . . . . . . .. . . 12.2 sec . . . . . . . . . 12.5 sec
Zero to 130 mph . .. . . . . . . . . . . 24.1 sec . . . . . . . . . 24.3 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph . . . . . . . . . 5.5 sec . . . . . . .. . . . 5.5 sec
Standing 1/4-mile . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3 sec . . . . . . . . . . 13.5 sec
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 104 mph . . . . . . . . . . 104 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph . . . . . . . . . .. . 164 ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad . . . 0.92 g . . . . . . . . . . 0.94 g
Top speed (drag limited) . . . . . . . 161 mph . . . . . . . 161 mph

CP

Dan,

The 0-60 times are amazingly quick for a 280+ HP car. That is considering that an E39 M5 with 400 HP does 4.8 seconds 0-60.

I have always thought the 993 is in the 5+ seconds range.

CP