captainkirk

Sure 991 is a fat pig, but what a pig, it sure can fly fast!!!!

PS - I am glad that I have not seen a 991 in pink, I will throw up if such a color exists for this model generation

chuck911

These stats are even more impressive in light of the number of cars that have come along over the last 50+ years that have seemed to hold a lot of potential only to squander it away in just a few years of mostly trying to make up for bloat with horsepower. The poster child (or at least the one I remember best, because I had one- no make that two!) was the 240-Z. "I coulda been a contender!" Instead: bloat, bloat, and more bloat.

In fact the more you think about it the less sense it makes to complain about size and weight at all. For one thing, a huge amount of the weight is down to regulations. Back in the day, before air bags and all the rest, a 911R was so featherweight light that according to R&T you could lift the fronts in 1st, and the hood was so thin you could see it dent in at 150. Today's R is so hyper-regulated that even with all their tricks its all they can do to shave a few pounds. A lot of this is down to regulations. What's left is down to the fact the basic platform they started with is already so damn lean by modern standards there really is very little left to remove. Pretty much have to literally remove- seats.... insulation...

As for size it seems a lot of guys are missing the point the 911 is (and has been for a while now) basically a 200 mph supercar. Just because we can hardly do that here in the land of the unfree doesn't free Porsche from the laws of physics. Which is another thing a lot of guys are totally missing. Because the physics of a car that fast is and has to be inherently different than one much slower. Those early 911's could be small with a short wheelbase because they were nowhere near 991 performance. The air-cooleds for the most part, while they had top speeds of about 150, it took them a good long ways winding out that last 20 to 30 mph. The 991 hits 150 faster than you can count the days that will land you in jail. And then it just keeps on pulling. Speeds like that, you not only want, you NEED a longer wheelbase!

But then, extra credit, Porsche does it one better. They go and give the car rear axle steering that allows the car to emulate a car with an even longer wheelbase at high speeds, AND a car with a much shorter wheelbase at low speeds.

Looks can be deceiving. So much so, scroll up, its even possible to have two cars in your garage and think the BIGGER one is SMALLER!!! (News flash- according to the interweb the C7 is bigger- not smaller- in length, width and weight.) What Porsche has pulled off in the 911 is a seemingly impossible feat of massive technological revolution married to conservative preservation of original concept. Borderline magic.

justabout

Porsche_nuts

96redLT4

Big isn't necessarily bad as long as you can keep the weight down. The thing I found most impressive about Ferrari's new Pista is a CLAIMED 2800lb weight

Jim

Hurricane

Ski Porsche

One of the nicknames for our brand is, "Porker". In light of that, the pig appellation seems like a synonym, not an insult.

Andial

Everything after the 964 is a "fat pig" by 911 standards. However, compared to its competitors, the 911 is one taut car.

.2PDK

The seemingly impossible trick Porsche has pulled off is getting us to pay massive amounts of money for every aspect of their little technological revolution. Borderline insanity.

Needsdecaf

TexasRider

Tell us more. The C7 is smaller- wow. While I haven't looked it up, I am surprised. On the other hand I find myself liking the C7.

A Grand Sport is in the 3400 lb range. My guess is that is a couple of hundred more than a Carreras actual weight. Of course , you can get the C7 with 650 hp too.

I am not sure I want a 991 to replace my 981S. I know for sure I don't want a 718. And I'm not going to spend Turbo money.

Valvefloat991

Car and Driver weighs cars with full fuel tanks and normal equipment, such as spare tires, tools, etc. Drivers are not in the cars, but the cars usually have some option content.

Porsche is reasonably honest with its quoted weights, though those weights tend to be for cars with no options. As a result most purchased, or tested cars are a bit heavier. However, some manufacturers are less accurate. Ferraris have been know to weigh 500 pounds more than their claimed weights--perhaps their interiors, crankcases and fuel tanks were filled with hydrogen?

P.S. I drove my first 911 in 1973.

MaxLTV

Great to see someone with more street cred making this argument. Whenever I bring it up, the response is usually that I'm too young to understand what a light car is (I look younger than I am and love new tech, so most would not guess I passed my first driving exam on a car with non-synchronized manual). But yes, older cars were not much lighter, some actually heavier, and their quoted weights are usually much more optimistic than the weights quoted now because standards of how the weight is advertised got much stricter.

MaxLTV

My 991.2 Turbo S with sunroof delete is just near the bottom of the advertized weight range. I imagine if it did not have front lift, aerokit and burmester, it could have been even below the advertised weight. I think they quote the base config weight (with sunroof). They definitely stopped quoting the lightest possible configuration because Turbo is heavier than Turbo S now, and the only way it's possible is comparing iron brakes Turbo with PCCB Turbo S

85Gold