chuckbdc

Very interesting. How would you rate the power in the 991 compared to the GT3?

hlee1169

I think the GT3 is about 300lbs lighter than my 991 S cab, so take this into consideration when I describe my impression of the power difference between these 2 cars:

997.1 GT3 is rated 415hp, and the 991 S is rated 400hp.

On the street, the GT1 block in the GT3 definitely feels stronger, torque-wise. It seems to pull harder.

On the track, it is harder to compare because PDK is just so much faster than my clumsy manual shifting and heel and toe. Looking at video of one lap between the 2 cars, 991 hits 111mph compared to GT3's 110mph on roughly the same spot at turn 1 at Laguna Seca. This is on the front straight. However, I chickened out at the top of the hill and did not push pedal to the metal, so I don't know if GT3 will gain more speed had I kept pushing it.

Keadog

Great read!

chuckbdc

Says a lot about what Porsche has accomplished with the 991!

fxz

Gary , this is the best review on C2S C4S w. and w.o PDCC,much better than Evo Autocar etc.
they look confused,you are an Expert,well done!

Mike in CA

That a significantly heavier, less powerful 991 Cab can outpace a 997.1 GT3 and provide the driver with a more confident driving experience on track is just hugely impressive to me. It makes me really hopeful about the 991 GT3 and like you, I'm also really anxious to find out what it can do.

Dr.Bill

Seems to me it has added a bunch of electronic nannies that will mask the deficiencies of the driver. Hence, anyone can look like a 'hero' without having to work for it. Perhaps what most buyers want.

chuckbdc

Nah- just extended the 911 performance envelope with a suspension that is superior to the older models- sort of the way the 981 did for Porsche's mid-engine line.

simsgw

It doesn't really work that way, though. You can't use digital control to make a clumsy car act like a race car, and you can't make a clumsy driver look good.

Since sometime in the eighties, maybe earlier, Porsche design goals have included a lot of 'straddle' which simply means letting a competent driver do whatever is desired, while protecting a bad driver from mistakes. Previous generations, clear up to my 997S, used the necessary but annoying assumption that the driver was a novice until proven otherwise. Among other competition drivers I describe dealing with this as grabbing my 997 by the scruff of the neck and insisting "we are going to drive this fast." It is like bursting your way through a protective cocoon to get a 997 to reach its limits. It keeps wanting to protect you from yourself until you force the issue.

The increased sophistication of modern control systems has let them drop that irritating assumption. Now the car presumes that you know what you're doing until you prove you're in over your head. By being able to recognize that need for help in time to save the car's stability, they leave it performing the way we want it to the rest of the time.

A friend off-forum was trying some tests of his own and discovered that you can try hard enough to upset the 991 car that it will engage protective actions very quickly and quite firmly as well. But normally it never interferes. I've had my 991 on track in a Winter storm and driven it to the limits trying to find out where they are. Nothing. Not once did an automatic system interfere.

I grant you that a lot of learning fast driving is learning to control a natural fear of flinging oneself toward a rock wall at 150 fps. A better car helps develop that confidence, and knowing it has airbags and stability systems if you do suffer brain fade surely must help as well. If nothing else, it must help novices feel like the risk is lower. ["Okay. Worst case, I'll break both legs. But I won't get killed. Yeah!"]

Seriously, Ray. PTV and PSM and ABD and all the alphabet soup in Germany won't make you a better driver. They just keep you alive to buy a new Porsche and maybe take advanced DE training with the next one.

Gary

Mike in CA

Upgraded performance parts and an expert chassis tuning also allows a driver to extract more from the car. Maybe they should be outlawed and everyone should do track days on skinny tires with bone stock suspensions so we can find out who can really drive. PASM and PDCC aren't nannies and don't drive the car for you, they expand the envelope. The driver still has to find the limits.

rpilot

I think you need a car with a wind up starter device in front. That will show us so-called hero's who use a quick turn of our wrist to start the car without even bothering to pull the key out of our pockets.

Bob Rouleau

Nannies can be useful on the other hand my experience is that novice drivers on track feel they are a lot better than they are because said nannies are preventing them from losing control.

So what happens next, they buy a GT3 and crash. In PCA DE, 1/3rd of crashes are in GT3s. They are less than 15 percent of the population. So, Gary doesn't need nannies, neither do I but I really wish that PSM would trigger a loud warning horn so that an inept driver would know that PSM or TC or both had just prevented a loss of control. Sadly this is not the case.

Mike in CA

You may be on to something, Bob. I'd just suggest that there is a difference between electonic nannies like PSM and the performance upgrades like PASM and PDCC that we've been discussing at length in this thread. The former is there to try and save your butt if you make a mistake. The latter are modern examples of the kind of suspension tweeks we've all been using for years to help us go faster. The absolute limit of the car's performance has been raised but it still takes skill to find it.

Let's assume that everyone's car had all the Porsche alphabet upgrades. If those upgrades really made it "easy" to drive the car at the limit it would follow that almost anyone could climb into the car and achieve minimum lap times. I don't think that would be the case. The alphabet tweeks may have raised the performance bar, but just as with more traditional upgrades, not everyone will be able to reach it. Just as now, only the best drivers will be able to extract the most from the improvements. Will it be easier to achieve better times with PASM and PDCC than with "normal" tweeks? Maybe. But then it's easier to get fast times with a track oriented suspension and sticky tires than stock bits. I don't see a lot of difference. It's just another evolution in performance.

Bob Rouleau

Mike - true, but I ted to lump all the electronic gizmos together. One wonders if after driving a 991 with the alphabet of gizmos one gets into a 996 GT3 and discovers that the car does not take turn "x" at 140 MPH ...oops! If I had my druthers, all my novice students would learn to drive in something like an Ariel Atom

simsgw

I respect your position, Bob, and I know others who agree. Personally, I'd like to see anyone with promise use an open-wheel car for the rest of their training. But as a fellow CDI I can't say I find it harder to teach the skills with a 997 or even a Cayman, which many writers describe as "making it easy." It may be less inspiring for them to sit in an air-conditioned mid-engine car with ABS and all the rest, but it isn't easier to learn steering with power, two-phase braking, or reading a track. When they get good, they're good, even if the classroom wasn't as primitive as a Formula Ford.

I think our real challenge is on the other end of the scale. We're trying to develop a program in our region that might be called a "confidence course" because we have a lot of Porsche drivers and Porsche spouses who really don't believe in their car. It doesn't seem too safe to those folks.On the contrary, it seems frightening. Even the ones who love it, are sometimes afraid of its potential. If you invite them to a track to learn their car, they hear "Track! Race! Crash! Die!" If you offer to wet down a parking lot, so they can learn control at slow speeds, these potential Porsche enthusiasts hear "Wet! Spin! No control!" That's what we're working on. A curriculum that will build confidence in students who don't have enough.

Over-confident students aren't the serious problem I submit. Of course their insurance agents may not agree...

Gary