991.1 vs 991.2 Fight Club Thread
#316
I loved the sound of the 964, I called the uneven idle sound a "warble". Some flat plane crank engines sound good, others not so much. The gt350 not so much, the F430 yeah thats pretty much the best sound a machine has ever made. To me the 911 is the best because of driver position in relation to the road. It just "sits" better.
#317
My argument would be that there’s something more satisfying about a car that achieves raw performance via natural means (lightness, NA power, manual) than one that achieves greater performance with trickery (computers, autos, turbos, batteries, rws, etc). Which is why everyone who’s driven both seems to prefer the CGT over the 918.
I love the TDF blue! Must have been a great CS.
Seriously though, those things are hardly trickery. I suppose disc brakes and fuel injection are also some form of wizardry that also spoil the rawness for you? :P
Embrace the voodoo!!
#318
The .2 GTS to me feels totally different than the .2 S. I didn't care for the S at all when I drove it and immediately dismissed it. The GTS, however, I fell in love with immediately. It's funny how small differences on paper makes a big difference in real life.
After having had my GTS for 4-5 months now, and especially after getting it tuned, I think it's the most fun car I've ever owned. I love it, and really have no complaints. With a tune it's really quick, too. And count me in among the guys that have no problem with the sound.
I also have a .2 GT3 on order, so I'll get the best of both worlds. I'm really curious what I'll think of it after driving the GTS.
After having had my GTS for 4-5 months now, and especially after getting it tuned, I think it's the most fun car I've ever owned. I love it, and really have no complaints. With a tune it's really quick, too. And count me in among the guys that have no problem with the sound.
I also have a .2 GT3 on order, so I'll get the best of both worlds. I'm really curious what I'll think of it after driving the GTS.
I've owned 993 too not the Turbo though. One thing I notice when I drove .2 (base and S) it actually felt less powerful than .1 X51 and power delivery felt more similar to new V6 Panamera than NA Carreras of the past. I haven't driven new gts yet, I'm sure it's a fantastic car but as I said everybody has different taste and that's why we own different cars.
My argument would be that there’s something more satisfying about a car that achieves raw performance via natural means (lightness, NA power, manual) than one that achieves greater performance with trickery (computers, autos, turbos, batteries, rws, etc). Which is why everyone who’s driven both seems to prefer the CGT over the 918.
#319
That is the beauty of a 911, near supercar performance with comfort, reliability and cheap maintenance . . ., but now Ferrari has their incredible maintenance plan . . .
This article seems to suggest that the 991.2 C2S ran a 7:30 and that the 991.1 GTS ran the 7:38.
https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...ps-ring-in-726
This article seems to suggest that the 991.2 C2S ran a 7:30 and that the 991.1 GTS ran the 7:38.
https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...ps-ring-in-726
The all-out track performances between the 3.0 turbo cars and 9A1 cars aren't massive. Even trap speeds are within a few or so MPH. I think Porsche did a tremendous job engineering both their turbo and N/A motors. But since I'm an N/A enthusiast, I think it's remarkable what numbers they turn with N/A engines, verses much newer developed, twin turbo engines.
#320
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,128
Likes: 906
From: Destin, Nashville, In a 458 Challenge
Their numbers are off, and they're using the wrong cars to cite times of which they rounded (on some) to the nearest "10" (while not doing so on others). The fastest official Ring times on these cars are well documented. The .1 "GTS" time they cite is actually the 2012.5 Carrera S (7.37.9) which has a video of said run. The fastest .2 911 S was a 7:34. The same driver who drove that .2 S, also drove a Cayman GT4 to a 7:41. The .1 911 S with PDK is faster around every track I've seen tested than the Cayman GT4 (those long manual gears and detuned engined ensured Porsche's Cayman didn't encroach on their 911), and the Cayman is using a de-tuned 9A1, AND a long-geared 6 speed manual, versus the .2 S using PDK and S/C, with 2 turbos and gobs more torque. And the difference in Ring time is "only" 7 seconds. Again, that's the SAME driver in a Cayman GT4 and a .2 911 S PDK. The . 1 911 S was 4 seconds faster than the GT4 Cayman. And the .2 911 S was nearly 4 seconds faster than the .1 911 S. This is no coincidence. Porsche are extremely exact and clinical when it comes to their cars capabilities and times vs each other.
The all-out track performances between the 3.0 turbo cars and 9A1 cars aren't massive. Even trap speeds are within a few or so MPH. I think Porsche did a tremendous job engineering both their turbo and N/A motors. But since I'm an N/A enthusiast, I think it's remarkable what numbers they turn with N/A engines, verses much newer developed, twin turbo engines.
The all-out track performances between the 3.0 turbo cars and 9A1 cars aren't massive. Even trap speeds are within a few or so MPH. I think Porsche did a tremendous job engineering both their turbo and N/A motors. But since I'm an N/A enthusiast, I think it's remarkable what numbers they turn with N/A engines, verses much newer developed, twin turbo engines.
991.2 S: 136.44
991.1 S: 139:30
Incidentally, the Alfa QV, ATS and M4 all ran 139.X. Used to race and instruct for Barber at LS. 3 seconds a substantial difference on that track.
http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna-seca-post-1988
#321
Originally Posted by K-A
Their numbers are off, and they're using the wrong cars to cite times of which they rounded (on some) to the nearest "10" (while not doing so on others). The fastest official Ring times on these cars are well documented. The .1 "GTS" time they cite is actually the 2012.5 Carrera S (7.37.9) which has a video of said run. The fastest .2 911 S was a 7:34. The same driver who drove that .2 S, also drove a Cayman GT4 to a 7:41. The .1 911 S with PDK is faster around every track I've seen tested than the Cayman GT4 (those long manual gears and detuned engined ensured Porsche's Cayman didn't encroach on their 911), and the Cayman is using a de-tuned 9A1, AND a long-geared 6 speed manual, versus the .2 S using PDK and S/C, with 2 turbos and gobs more torque. And the difference in Ring time is "only" 7 seconds. Again, that's the SAME driver in a Cayman GT4 and a .2 911 S PDK. The . 1 911 S was 4 seconds faster than the GT4 Cayman. And the .2 911 S was nearly 4 seconds faster than the .1 911 S. This is no coincidence. Porsche are extremely exact and clinical when it comes to their cars capabilities and times vs each other.
The all-out track performances between the 3.0 turbo cars and 9A1 cars aren't massive. Even trap speeds are within a few or so MPH. I think Porsche did a tremendous job engineering both their turbo and N/A motors. But since I'm an N/A enthusiast, I think it's remarkable what numbers they turn with N/A engines, verses much newer developed, twin turbo engines.
The all-out track performances between the 3.0 turbo cars and 9A1 cars aren't massive. Even trap speeds are within a few or so MPH. I think Porsche did a tremendous job engineering both their turbo and N/A motors. But since I'm an N/A enthusiast, I think it's remarkable what numbers they turn with N/A engines, verses much newer developed, twin turbo engines.
I don't track nor a capable driver to extract those kinds of capabilities from the car.
Prefer the NA sound for everyday enjoyment. Turbos win the performance categories through and through, no arguments or heartache there.
#322
Gotta love the bench racing here. Different days, different tracks, different years (and thus different groups of cars vying for the qualitative "win" from MotorTrend). If a Lotus Evora 400 showed up at one year's M/T test, I would pick it over the GT4 and a 991.2 Carrera to boot, for instance.
Only thing I will say is the numbers listed by Doug H are more indicative of what I've seen with the 991.2 vs the 991.1 after driving all versions of each: The 991.2s feel considerably quicker point to point (it's a big gap because the 3.0 cars gain speed out of the hole sooner and carry that speed to the next braking zone); a 370-hp 991.2 Carrera MT I was driving had no problem keeping up with a 500-hp 991.1 GT3 RS (driven by a better driver) up a closed rally stage (he knew well and I didn't); the same 991.2's brakes got smelly on the way down the hill after one run up and one run down a 3~minute (?) course; RLer mdrums is running out of brakes at Sebring in his 991.2 Carrera GTS (I cannot remember another generation of modern 911 that overheats its brakes on decel with stock engines); and mdrums (and GT3 drivers) report that GT3s have to be driven very hard to keep up with or ahead of his .2 GTS at Sebring. Mark my words: A whole new group of .2 fans are gonna come along as the .2s filter into the CPO market and are "discovered" by enthusiasts. I can hear them now: "These aren't like any turbo 911s I've driven..."
But Bemo has it exactly right: It's what you enjoy that matters most, not what wins the performance race. These are street cars. Fun cars.
To his point, I enjoy the 991.2 Carrera/S more than the 991.1 Carrera/S. Probably for the chassis tuning more than anything else, but also for the twin-turbo 3.0—which to me is one of Porsche's best engines currently on sale and one of its best in the last 20 years, both for performance and character. The shifter is noticeably improved, as well. I almost canceled my GT4 order after driving the base 991.2 MT on good roads around Tenerife. No 991.1 that I've tested would have made me do that except for one: the 911R. Two years later, I swapped the GT4 for a base 991.2 Carrera MT—and do not miss the GT4 at all. The .2 Carrera is not only better around town, it has a MUCH more satisfying engine (the 3.8 in the GT4 isn't as good as it is in the 991.1s), is far more enjoyable on long trips, and more interesting on a back road. It is, to me anyway, more fun to drive than both a 991.1 Carrera/S/GTS and my old 981 GT4. I even like the way it sounds. Subtler, and you do have to listen for it where the GT4 beat you over the head with great noises, but it still sounds like a flat six to me—and thus really good.
As always, YMMV, and that's why it's great that there are so many choices when it comes to Porsche.
Only thing I will say is the numbers listed by Doug H are more indicative of what I've seen with the 991.2 vs the 991.1 after driving all versions of each: The 991.2s feel considerably quicker point to point (it's a big gap because the 3.0 cars gain speed out of the hole sooner and carry that speed to the next braking zone); a 370-hp 991.2 Carrera MT I was driving had no problem keeping up with a 500-hp 991.1 GT3 RS (driven by a better driver) up a closed rally stage (he knew well and I didn't); the same 991.2's brakes got smelly on the way down the hill after one run up and one run down a 3~minute (?) course; RLer mdrums is running out of brakes at Sebring in his 991.2 Carrera GTS (I cannot remember another generation of modern 911 that overheats its brakes on decel with stock engines); and mdrums (and GT3 drivers) report that GT3s have to be driven very hard to keep up with or ahead of his .2 GTS at Sebring. Mark my words: A whole new group of .2 fans are gonna come along as the .2s filter into the CPO market and are "discovered" by enthusiasts. I can hear them now: "These aren't like any turbo 911s I've driven..."
But Bemo has it exactly right: It's what you enjoy that matters most, not what wins the performance race. These are street cars. Fun cars.
To his point, I enjoy the 991.2 Carrera/S more than the 991.1 Carrera/S. Probably for the chassis tuning more than anything else, but also for the twin-turbo 3.0—which to me is one of Porsche's best engines currently on sale and one of its best in the last 20 years, both for performance and character. The shifter is noticeably improved, as well. I almost canceled my GT4 order after driving the base 991.2 MT on good roads around Tenerife. No 991.1 that I've tested would have made me do that except for one: the 911R. Two years later, I swapped the GT4 for a base 991.2 Carrera MT—and do not miss the GT4 at all. The .2 Carrera is not only better around town, it has a MUCH more satisfying engine (the 3.8 in the GT4 isn't as good as it is in the 991.1s), is far more enjoyable on long trips, and more interesting on a back road. It is, to me anyway, more fun to drive than both a 991.1 Carrera/S/GTS and my old 981 GT4. I even like the way it sounds. Subtler, and you do have to listen for it where the GT4 beat you over the head with great noises, but it still sounds like a flat six to me—and thus really good.
As always, YMMV, and that's why it's great that there are so many choices when it comes to Porsche.
#324
#326
#330
So, the twin-turbo 3.0 has really closed up the gap between the Carrera line and the GT3 line, something that couldn't be said in the .1 era. It will be interesting to see how the in-house rivalry develops from here.
Good luck in your search—you really can't go wrong with .1 or .2!