No

 

Carrera T - Is RAS a must-have?

Rennlist: YES, it handles like a truck without it
Everyone else: What's RAS? Wow can't believe how well the 911 handles
My opinion: No, it is not a must have. The CT handles amazingly well with its standard features. I see it as another computer between me and the drive, and this car has plenty of that already. I'm perfectly OK with the car challenging me to drive a little better instead of a computer aiding the steering.

 

It is more than a computer aiding the steering since the rear tires actually move - if you drove one with and one without back to back you would feel the difference, as long as you did more than drive in a straight line. There are countless threads about RAS for those that want to read about it more.

 

Curious to get @stout perspective on this one. My take is that if you're seeking the older feeling of a classic 911 with one of the most competent chassis available in recent memory, go without RAS. You can wring out the rear axle and leverage the mechanical LSD in ways that remind me of my 3.2 Carrera. If you're looking for the feel of Porsche's supercars and it's future, ya kinda gotta have RAS.

 

^ Nailed it from my perspective after a ton of seat time in both cars on great roads.

While I'd skip RAS if ordering a T due to my preferences, I wouldn't skip over an existing T with RAS if the rest of the spec was great.

 

godammit I thought I had finally reached a conclusion now its all up in the air again!

 

Yes, lots of opinions. Have you seen the Motor Trend video on a base Carrera 991.2 with no options?
If Porsche never made The T, that is how I would have ordered my 911.

In the end, it sort of comes down to feel and how you like to drive.

I found this video interesting, two 911.2 (S) models driven back to back. With PDCC/RAS and one with no PDCC/RAS.

One seems to slide more, has more driver input, and is is labeled more pure and possibly more fun. The other is extremely capable. It would be down to preference to label one better than the other, IMO.

 

Great vid. James is my hero. If only I could drive like that and talk to espousa at the same time!

SPASM cars, with a bit more grunt, so pretty good comparison. PDCC makes a difference though. As he said, a bit less 'pure'. Wonder if that is why it wasn't an option. Maybe they'd already sold enough off them? RAS was though... Interesting. Tires again... So important.

Tires and engine warm. Sport + dialed in. PSM Off. PSE on. Radio off. Windows down. Keep it above 5k... Enjoy!

 

thanks for posting this - really interesting vid

 

As hard as it is not to get caught up in this option game,c TRY to resist it. It's worse when one is ordering a car as there is then ZERO excuses for not optioning it like you want. But with all the RAS discussion here I would say the CT is fine either way. Personally, I ended up ticking the RAS box because it's kind of a sexy and I thought "why not". But good luck on your hunt! I'm sure you'll find a good one!

 

Great video and validates some of the commentary earlier in the thread.

The reason the 911 endured when the financial model seemed dire in the late 70s and early 80s was because it was perhaps the only car available that challenged the drivers senses and understanding of vehicle dynamics. Drivers then took it over far more modern and manageable designs like the 928.

It was a complicated and joyous thing to figure it all out! Outright capability was underindexed against "the process" of learning to master the inherently flawed nature of the 911. I believe many of us want to drive these cars because they teach us things an M3 can't. In that way, I see things like RAS and even PASM as brilliant tools designed to draw our attention away from the very thing that attracted generations of 911 buyers to the car in the first place.

It's complicated to satisfy everyone, which is why Porsche is miraculous in it's commercial understanding of this in the way it offers so many choices of the 911 experience.

The new reality is that you can't lose. They're all great! And the options exist for each one of us to determine the version of GREAT that feels best, and grab it!!

 

I would say 'highly recommended' rather than 'must have.'

It certainly makes the 911 feel more agile than a cayman/boxster. Without it, its more '911ish' and this isn't necessarily a good thing unless its what you want.

 

And who would want a 911 that drives like a 911 ...

 

I thought i'd post back here in case anyone else had the same question I did.

Firstly thanks for everyone who posted advice - either way. I read them all and appreciated the differing views.

I decided to go for a NON-RAS T. So far I couldn't be happier. Compared to my GT3 this thing exudes classic '911'. It's fun from the moment you switch it on and whatever speed - which was exactly what I was looking for.

OK so I haven't driven a T (or base Carrera) with RAS to compare but my GT3 has it and I've also driven GTS's with RAS on the track. I'm going to call BS on the whole RAS makes the car feel smaller and more like older 911's. So far my T absolutely feels smaller than all the other 991.2 cars I've driven - probably by virtue that it IS actually smaller (narrow body). Already I feel more connected with the back end and have pushed it out a few times and it just feels super predictable and most importantly.... MEGA FUN

My advice to anyone reading this thread is that if you are like me and are looking for the fun factor more than anything else go for the LEAST AMOUNT OF OPTIONS POSSIBLE. Underneath it all the 991 really is still a proper fun 911 and IMHO the options can sometimes take away from that (in pursuit of lap times, luxury or other goals). Maybe im the last guy in the room to realize this

 

The last guy in the room should let the rest of us decide what we think is best on our 911s....RAS is a must for many of us albeit I will not knock anyone if they prefer to not have it.