neurotic

ummm. Turbo 4 with a 9K red line?

neurotic

Reference?

shaytun

First of all, worse than the 911, what a shame for the Cayman/Boxster. It's one thing to go turbo, but to lose the flat 6...what a shame. Also, are these just guesses or is there a reputable source for these exact numbers.

GreenLantern

Also, I'd call those 981.2's not 982's. The 981 is barely a couple years old (the 991 is 2 years older than it).

Vise

This article from C&D seems particularly relevant to this discussion...

The Grim Future of the Naturally Aspirated Engine, Or: The Turbos Are Winning

STG

Thanks for sharing! It's only going to get worse in the future.

To quote (for those in denial):

So What Happened?

The short answer is that modern automotive progress is driven by fuel-efficiency concerns, which are on the agendas of every major government. Witness the ever-evolving European Union legislation on economy and emissions targets. California’s Air Resources Board (and the 16 other U.S. states who copy those regulations) has certainly had its say, as well as the U.S. government’s CAFE mandates, and China’s State Environmental Protection Administration (which typically follows in the wake of the EU) and Japan’s Ministry of the Environment are in the conversation, too. It was the EU, however, that led the procession around this particular corner in the wake of 1992’s Kyoto Protocol.

The Kyoto Protocol insisted the world slice 1990-level emissions back by eight percent by 2012, which led to the birth of the first EU vehicle-emissions regulations of 1993. They covered mostly NOx and particulate emissions, so it seemed primarily like a diesel thing at the time, as did the EU 2 (1996), EU 3 (2000), and EU 4 (2005)

But we should have paid more attention because EU regulation number 443/2009 made life difficult for naturally aspirated powerplants. It demanded carmakers reduce their average CO2 figure to 130 g/km between 2012 and 2015 (the three-year period is to take into account vehicle product cycles). Yet while that one hurt, it wasn’t the end. By 2020, the EU demands that the CO2 emissions number be slashed to 95 g/km for each car company’s fleet average. (The Netherlands has gone even further, demanding 80 g/km by 2020.)

STG

"Modern automotive progress is driven by fuel-efficiency concerns, which are on the agendas of every major government."

Shouldn't automotive progress be driven by manufacturers, competition, and market demand?

Maybe governments should confiscate every car company and make them state owned entities. Oh, that was communism.

Karl_W944

Not when legislation, EU, and the EPA have their fingers firmly stuck up automakers butts...

I honestly laugh at and cry for any enthusiast who's looking forwards to the future. Because there is NOTHING to look forwards to and anyone who says otherwise is insane.

Vise

Dude, ease off the hyperbole... there will continue to be plenty of great cars for enthusiasts going forward even if they are a bit different. To me the idea of the hybrid tech of a 918 Spyder evolving into a mass market car is actually very exciting. Between the trickle down effect of the 918, P1, and LaFerrari the next few years should be interesting.

It's not even the worst development for performance cars in recent history... suggest you do some research on the death of the original muscle car in the mid-70s. At minimum the FI era is bringing even more power/torque which will certainly result in even faster cars. Engagement/experience wise remains to be seen but I haven't heard anyone call any of the next-gen hyper cars boring.

While I'm personally an NA fan I'm not losing any sleep over what the future holds. If the only thing that matters to you is a high revving NA engine there will be plenty of options available on the used market too.

997rs4.0

I just hope that we are allowed to drive these environmental monsters in the future! I'm not so sure me or my kids will be able to take the 996rs for a spin in 40 years time? With average emission down to 80-100g/km in 2020. Imagine what 2050 will be like!

Karl_W944

A bit different? Just a bit? going into the future, cars couldn't be anymore different from what they are now in the next 10 years in my opinion. And there's definitely a difference in great cars for enthusiasts and cars enthusiasts can actually afford new. Yes, some hybrid tech will be cool, but this "trickle down effect" is just going to inflate prices way out of people's budgets, but it's not like they haven't already.

And I'm well aware of the death of the original muscle car, the change from air to water cooling, from hydraulic to EPS, but this to me is worse than those.

Of course you're not loosing any sleep, you already have something that suits your NA needs. And I think prices of used cars like these will only go up now because of it.

Petevb

One thing to keep in mind when reading the C&D article above. Grams of CO2 per kilometer is a difficult number to comprehend. In realty however it's simply a measure of fuel efficiency. Stating the number in g/km eliminates diesel fuel's advantage of being a more energy-dense fuel, putting diesel and gasoline on a more level playing field. Thus the EU regulation states that fleet fuel efficiency must average:

42 mpg (gasoline) or 48 mpg (diesel) by 2015 (130 g/km).

Increasing to:

57.5 mpg (gasoline) or 66 mpg (diesel) by 2020 (95 g/km).

Netherlands is going further to 80g/km= 68/ 78 mpg.

These numbers are hard to imagine from the US, but go to European cities with zero parking and tiny city cars, some of them already electric, and it looks more plausible. And of course the 918 already scores a 70 on the test (78 mpg) so it's possibly to comply with more performance than you'll ever need... at a price.

Clearly the chase for efficiency is being pushed by regulations, though in much of Europe "green" is not a four letter word and there is customer pull. One direct result is that it becomes more difficult to increase engine power affordably. Arguably, however, many manufactures, especially Porsche, will consider that a good thing if it applies to the industry overall.

We will take a step backwards in some areas of performance in the short term, as I've said, but once electric assist, etc is properly integrated we'll be back to where we are or ahead, and at double the mpg. And that's not a bad thing overall, but it does come at a price...
In the cases above I actually think the 4 cylinders will likely end up being a good thing for the Boxster/ Cayman. I say this having a GT4 on order as one of the last of the 6s, but hear me out:

The base Boxster has an engine that I wouldn't put in a truck based on power to weight ratio. It's down around .5 hp per pound, roughly half what it should be, because it's essentially a neutered GT3 or Turbo engine with half the power but all of the weight. Translation, the Boxster/ Cayman is carrying around roughly 250 lbs it doesn't need to be if Porsche made even a half decent engine for it specifically.

I don't expect the new engine to fix that issue entirely, but a 400 lb, 365 hp engine would go a long way to improving the dynamics of the car. We'll see about response and sound, but I'm fond of good 4 cylinders. My 180 hp 912 will run rings around an equally powerful early 911 because of the huge dynamic advantage, and I owned a few 944 turbos back in the day- one of my favorite Porsches. They I'll reserve judgement, but I'm optimistic for the Boxster/ Cayman. Carrera less so...

997rs4.0

Pete,

This brings us back to some of my earlier posts. The goals set by the EU are measured during the test cycle, so on paper it looks great and Brussels can show everybody how much they have done to save the polar bears. But in reality we are no where near the grams of CO2 /km that are claimed. Like I stated before 35-50% higher! Seems like the twin turbo charged diesels are getting the best numbers in the "cycle" compared to real world consumption?

MarcusG

Even though I don't like it, I don't think it'll be the end of the world. It's not like we don't have a turbo 911 already.

I fairly certain that if the exhaust note is good enough, few 911 owners will know if they are driving a 4 cyl. or 6 cyl. turbo as long as it makes power.

I'm more concerned about the exhaust note more than anything. Is that bad? I dunno. I have brought it up before but I laugh when my buddy with a 2014 Turbo S tells me he's jealous of my exhaust note. (PSE)

I think I will drive less like an a**hole if my 911 makes more torque down low because we all know how loud the car is with PSE at high RPM's.

Chris3963

I, for one, am really looking forward to the 991.2 turbo era. While I definitely like certain characteristics of NA engines, and especially Porsche f6 engines, I am not an NA romantic. Hope this is not a blasphemous statement.

Overall, I have never really felt that my 991 4S is quick enough at the right times in context of daily driving. You really have to keep the engine stoked up with frequent gearchanges in order to make the car feel seriously fast.

Out on the motorway I am getting a little bit tired of being out grunted in the cut and thrust of normal motorway traffic by fast diesels and turbo 4s. Sure at the top end where it is a joy, not much will match it, or catch it, but I often end up feeling a little bit like a hooligan given that even in 2nd or 3rd gear you have to really get up it and get the engine between 4-6000 rpm to find any serious urge happening and by then you are way above the limit....making a lot of noise...and bringing unnecessary attention to yourself.

Now I am not necessarily looking for a big lift in HP or Torque, although I am sure there will be some, but rather where the torque is developed i.e. lower in the rev range. If they can preserve the f6 sound, while increasing low end performance, then bring the turbo's on. Otherwise Porsche risks loosing its performance edge in the modern era.