991.1 vs 991.2 Fight Club Thread
04-27-2018 | 05:36 PM
#391
Racer
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 475
Likes: 5
04-27-2018 | 05:36 PM
#392
Racer
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 475
Likes: 5
Nope. Design aesthetic is 100% personal/subjective. But we know what looks bad (Pontiac Aztek anyone?), typically. Neither looks bad - just one's preference.
04-27-2018 | 05:41 PM
#393
Banned
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 642
Likes: 10
I suspect I'll be hanging on to my 991.2 for a while. They're getting rid of the 5-dials and I think I want to revel in that for some time; as well, I am reading comments about how the new 992 has a lot of Panamera about it. Judgement reserved. I'm sure it will be a killer drive. But getting OT on 991.1 vs .2
The 5 dials with that fat tach is legendary. Love the font and precision of the needles. Even the chrono clock is superb at what it does.
04-27-2018 | 06:24 PM
#396
Instructor
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 181
Likes: 49
Some .2 owners are so blindsided by beauty of their new Carrera they even love hideous grill LOL. I drove .2 many times (base and S) and I prefer my .1 GTS by miles probably except slightly worse ride quality. That doesn't mean .2 is not a great car it's just a preference.
04-27-2018 | 06:43 PM
#397
Drifting
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 3,096
Likes: 44
Ah, perhaps I didn't convey my point well, but it was this: Thanks to its light-pressure turbochargers, the 3.0 has a linear, NA-like powerband with far more accessible torque when driven in the same way you would drive a 3.4 or 3.8 in a 991.1—which is how I drive the 991.2 80-90% of the time. But the 3.0 also offers the option of dipping into useful torque without a downshift, something the 3.4 and 3.8 don't. Yes, there's some lag on big throttle openings at low rpm in a higher gear, but the surge that follows brings in-gear acceleration the NA engines simply can't muster. It's nice to have that option while sipping coffee on a long haul down to Los Angeles. Or, you can drop a gear or three as you might in a .1 and you're gone. It's the added dimension—two kinds of engine in one—that I dig, and that's absolutely objective. That added dimension is there in the .2, and it isn't in the .1.
Last edited by Dewinator; 04-27-2018 at 11:02 PM.
04-27-2018 | 06:48 PM
#398
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 822
Likes: 21
Some .2 owners are so blindsided by beauty of their new Carrera they even love hideous grill LOL. I drove .2 many times (base and S) and I prefer my .1 GTS by miles probably except slightly worse ride quality. That doesn't mean .2 is not a great car it's just a preference.
04-27-2018 | 06:52 PM
#399
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 822
Likes: 21
I think that’s a really great explanation... and where the different way of doing it appeals to different preferences. My first car was a little Civic with a tiny 1.6L VTEC engine that produced like 6hp down low and I’ve always loved engines with the Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde personality where it’s a totally different engine at low revs and you get that character shift as it builds. The 360 is even more that way than the 9A1... produces about 12.6 torques so if you don’t rev it, it does nothing but if you go to 8500 it’s a whole different animal. But it’s totally understandable that some people are not like me and are think ugh you HAVE to rev the snot out of it to go anywhere? Why should I have to?
04-27-2018 | 06:53 PM
#400
Rennlist Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,919
Likes: 1,332
From: ^ The Bay Bridge
I think that’s a really great explanation... and where the different way of doing it appeals to different preferences. My first car was a little Civic with a tiny 1.6L VTEC engine that produced like 6hp down low and I’ve always loved engines with the Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde personality where it’s a totally different engine at low revs and you get that character shift as it builds. The 360 is even more that way than the 9A1... produces about 12.6 torques so if you don’t rev it, it does nothing but if you go to 8500 it’s a whole different animal. But it’s totally understandable that some people are not like me and are think ugh you HAVE to rev the snot out of it to go anywhere? Why should I have to?
Basically, I just like good engines. Fun engines. As with cars, they don't have to take any particular form. If it's good, I am in. And I think the 991.2 3.0 is vastly underrated, mainly by those who haven't spent enough time with it. I appreciated the 991.2's chassis/steering/shifter before I really started to appreciate its engine. It's a real achievement not just in power but in character. It, too, is Jekell & Hyde, just in a different way. Mellow and luxurious when you just need to get around town, and seeeeeriously quick and fun to rev out when the opportunity presents itself. Its excellence, however, is subtler—and far subtler than the 3.8 in my GT4, which almost felt crude and sophomoric when I got on it after a month in the 991.2. Not that sophomoric is a bad thing...
04-27-2018 | 06:58 PM
#401
Instructor
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 181
Likes: 49
Yeah, the new grill is clearly a functional change disguised as a "nod to the past" retro design change. I'm not a fan no matter how hard I try, which is one of the reasons I got my car in agate grey so the grill blends in a little more than a more contrasting color. Every time I see a 991.1 I think "that's an elegant car". I just prefer the performance and everything else of the 991.2, lol.
04-27-2018 | 07:04 PM
#402
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 822
Likes: 21
Yep, but I actually like both approaches. Loved my 2.5-liter 986 years ago...so worth the mid-range to upper-end payoff—that intake howl at 4500~ rpm at WOT was better than anything Porsche has produced since (other than the CGT)—and the little 2.5 didn't even rev to 7000 rpm. Ditto for the 996 GT3 (the last lunge to 8300~ was addictive) and there are countless other examples, some of them even with VTEC. There's also something to be said for a really good V8, whether it's American or...Italiano! Or a V12.
Basically, I just like good engines. Fun engines. As with cars, they don't have to take any particular form. If it's good, I am in. And I think the 991.2 3.0 is vastly underrated, mainly by those who haven't spent enough time with it. I appreciated the 991.2's chassis/steering/shifter before I really started to appreciate its engine. It's a real achievement not just in power but in character. It, too, is Jekell & Hyde, just in a different way. Mellow and luxurious when you just need to get around town, and seeeeeriously quick and fun to rev out when the opportunity presents itself. Its excellence, however, is subtler—and far subtler than the 3.8 in my GT4, which almost felt crude and sophomoric when I got on it after a month in the 991.2. Not that sophomoric is a bad thing...
Basically, I just like good engines. Fun engines. As with cars, they don't have to take any particular form. If it's good, I am in. And I think the 991.2 3.0 is vastly underrated, mainly by those who haven't spent enough time with it. I appreciated the 991.2's chassis/steering/shifter before I really started to appreciate its engine. It's a real achievement not just in power but in character. It, too, is Jekell & Hyde, just in a different way. Mellow and luxurious when you just need to get around town, and seeeeeriously quick and fun to rev out when the opportunity presents itself. Its excellence, however, is subtler—and far subtler than the 3.8 in my GT4, which almost felt crude and sophomoric when I got on it after a month in the 991.2. Not that sophomoric is a bad thing...
04-27-2018 | 08:22 PM
#403
Racer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 414
Likes: 39
BTW - in the holy 4.0 in the 991.2 GT3 even, the power delivery is turbo-like IMO. Surges at 3800-4k RPM with another around 7k, it was not as linear as I expected based on the NA reputation. Also still have to downshift to find *rapid* power in even the GT3's engine when at freeway speeds, whereas in the 3.0 I just hit throttle harder and boost comes instantly with no lag
04-28-2018 | 09:13 AM
#404
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,128
Likes: 906
From: Destin, Nashville, In a 458 Challenge
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.
While nothing is precise, Pobst's Lagua Seca times are about as good and accurate comparisons as we are going to get. To me, the Ring times are bit suspect . . . Heck, even Alfa Romeo was able to post a 7:39 back in 2015 in with the QV sedan. The Ring became all about marketing and $$$s so who knows here . . .