Not to bad for a commute. If it's illegal to drive like Elan Musk has illuted too than the hell with cars. I'll leave the country and get a mule.

 

Yep. In the age of CAFE/whatever, the lower cars on the brand's spectrum have to be sacrificed, and only the lower volume cars like the 911R/GT3RS can be without compromise.

Those of us with limited resources will have to go to a cheaper brand where we can afford the top-of-the-range cars like the GT350R if we want a true driver's car.

 

Completely out of context for this thread.
What's your point...just bragging or trolling?

 

So back on topic…

Here is the power and torque curve for the 991.2 cars.




And here is the power and torque curve for the 991.1 cars.




At 5500 RPM the 991.2 torque starts to rapidly fall off while the 991.1 cars keep a flatter (albeit a bit hilly) profile. I wouldn't mistake higher torque for high end torque.

It's simple mechanical engineering. Low end torque needs good back pressure and high end torque cannot have back pressure.

 

not for nothing, but the 991.2 S still make more torque than the 991.1 S even @ 7,000rpm

 

Yes but it feels flat as the actual torque and power are declining, there is really no reason to rev the 991.2 past 6500 rpm while the 991.1 GTS continues to climb to power at 7500 rpm.

 

NA engines are gone with the dodo bird and steam power. That said, I would not rule out a hybrid with a a 4 cyl TT. Regardless if we like it or not, everything is moving to small displacement engines.

 

Uh huh. Just like the 918.

 

Word is there is a 700HP Panamera Hybrid on the way.

Looks like Porsche will offer small, medium and large(ish) options with electric motors too! Not for nothing the 918.

 

Right, just like the 918.

 

A. I don't believe it. Maybe at that dealership, but I bet if/when we see reported numbers, you'll see more than half of 991.2 sales are S models.

B. Why was the price differential acceptable on .1 cars but not .2 cars? The S model buys you several things, standard Pasm, bigger brakes, more powerful engine to name a few.. Why does it make a difference if the 'more power' part comes from bigger turbos and whatever other subtle improvements Porsche makes to the new .2 3 liter vs. slightly larger cylinder sleeves in the .1 engines?

C. IMHO, the real difference is that with the 991.1 generation engines, non S cars were kind of poor performers and you had to get the S to feel significant power. In the .2 generation cars, the base is 'oh my god' good and the S is 'holy ****' good... Personally I'd skip heated/cooled seats, fancy leather options, and other creature comforts and get the 'holy ****' performance if I was ordering a .2!

 

Lol, I have seen these discussions since the 996 came out and on here since the 997.1 first came out. All of the 996 owners were crapping on the 997s when the 997 first hit the market for a variety of reasons and well . . . we all ended buying them after crapping on them, me included.

Area under the torque curve is key and there is a massive difference in the above. Don't confuse nice linear acceleration and pull with drop-off. Porsche conquered lag since at least the 996tt or 993tt. Those little twins spool up early and deliver incredibly linear power and acceleration that remains consistent though the rev range up to red line. Despite what your butt-g-meter maybe telling you due to the boring linear pull versus the steadily crescendoing pull of an NA, those little twins are spooled up and delivery more power and acceleration even in the upper revs.

I get it . . . I have had the hypertweeked rodded out air-cooled NAs and various GT3s and early turbos with all but linear power curves versus my 993,6,7tt daily drivers between 90 and 2010. It is just a completely different sensation and driving experience, but like it or not . . . without a doubt turbos are the way to go and you guys will be converted soon enough. This is coming from a guy that used to spend car prices just tweaking out old air-cooled engines with everything from titanium internals, Lenz and stand alone fuel management systems to try and build NAs that could perform like FIs. Lol, juts a waste of time and money with todays FI technology.

 

I don't think anyone is crapping on the 991.2 here. Just talking torque curves.

Area under the curve? You mean horsepower. Even the horsepower curve (which traces the AUC of the torque curve) shows a better profile for the NA engines. It's just the nature of the beast. High end torque or low end torque. Can't have both. The old NA V10 F1 engines idle at 4000 RPM. Almost no torque at 4000, but at 14000 RPM…different story.

 

I don't really have anything against turbos. I like the non-turbo sound but to me the much bigger question is what is the reliability of these engines 5 years from now? Whatever comes after the 991, that's going to be very interesting as there will be some years of real world testing and we will get to see what issues come up.

I know Porsche has experience with turbos, but this is not the same engine as "the" Turbo. Anything new, even with a brilliant design, is likely to have some kinks to get worked out.

 

I don't agree - turbocharging is well understood over and over and over and especially by Porsche. I don't think you need to fear reliability in any way shape or form.