One reason why the 2017 S might beat the turbo-turbo and GT3 is aero. The is no way to prevent the turbo-turbo from deploying both front and rear spoiler, and the GT3 is fixed wing. If you are doing a timed anything where you don't actually need the downforce you just suffer the additional drag.

According to base data the 2017 S pdk is also 300 pounds lighter than the 2016 TT. Some of that is eaten up by rear wheel steering and the like, but some of the difference will remain, again for the active aero to start, and AWD. cw coefficient is given as 0.31 versus 0.30, and the winder TT body will add more drag. So even before any of the active aero does anything the TT is heavier and has more wind resistance.

PDK might also have been upgraded. The software they mess with all the time.

 

Viper ACR "suffers" from Aero. The problem here is comparing track times for street cars. As in Viper's case, 0-60 and top speed are handicapped since it has aero that is designed to keep the car glued to the track. That much aero is worthless on the street for any driver.

 

There is big power in the ECU software. We can see the factory software limiting boost pressure and keeping things reasonable....for now. COBB is coming out with an Accessport soon that we will be able to protune these cars with. That is where the real horsepower is going to be.

Big gray area, really depends on your dealership and your relationship with them. Some won't let you use an aftermarket valve stem, others will have a full performance shop selling and installing aftermarket components. Luck of the draw I guess.

Well we had both the base and the PSE come in for product development. I have to say the PSE likely sounds the best of the two. In Sport Mode, the wastegates open and it near sounds naturally aspirated. Sport Plus they are closed for quicker/stronger turbo spool. Here are both with our full packages on them for reference.

PSE


Non-PSE

 

Of the two, I actually think the non-PSE sounds better, more natural and less whizzy. But neither sounds good IMO. I just think people have to accept that the .2 cars aren't going to sound very good relative to the Porsches of the past. Not the end of the world.

 

Instead of piping randomly picked input sound, or playing on the stereo something pre-recorded, somebody should smarten up and place a quality microphone into a good sounding place (I suppose in practice that means multiple mics for user choice) and play that over the stereo, after making sure some speakers are in the right place for the illusion.

I don't think the 991.2 can ever satisfy those who like lots of farts and burbles. I bet there is great potential somewhere around the intake manifold for those who like the mechanical hammering blending into a scream.

This probably isn't as terrible for warranty issues as it sounds. Robust microphones are a long-developed art, think air and space travel. There is plenty of bandwidth on existing computer busses around the upper side of the engine. You don't need high end microphones or A/D converters since the sound doesn't touch particularly high or low frequencies. As long as proportional accuracy is there it would sound great.

Natural sound? Well looking at what Porsche did with the bad sounding and obnoxiously loud 718 I'd rather have choices.

 

In situations where you don't want max torque but want linear control of how much you're putting down, it's hard to beat a NA motor.

 

I don't mean to be argumentative, but I think WSIR would be at the absolute bottom of the list for California tracks in terms of how much a quick lap depends on horsepower. It is a fast track, yes. But it has no 2nd gear corners at all, so you are never need horsepower to dig yourself out of a hole.

To the extent that any track can be summed up by a single quality, WSIR is a momentum track -- just a very fast one. My 2400-lb car hits redline in 5th at 134 mph, and only has 272 (crank) hp to get me there. But I'm quicker (on real street tires) than the 991.2's posted lap time. And the 991 GT3. And a lot of other high-horsepower 911 variants. My low weight means I don't need to slow down as much and can carry more speed through the sweepers.

For what it's worth, I think the 991 GT3 would be quicker around Willow than the 991.2 Carrera S, most of the time. Different laps on different days can vary a lot. Ambient temps make a huge difference at Willow Springs for my car.

Now, at a certain point straight-line speed and horsepower will make a difference. I match a pro driver (Pobst again) running a record lap in the 918 for the technical half of the track (turns 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) -- but he destroys me on the back and front straights.

Check out my red speed line in the data comparison:



(Even in 8, I'm a tiny bit quicker than the 918.)

My car is a 1972 911 tub with a 272-hp 993 engine in it. I know the track very well.

 

Nice driving! Low weight pays huge dividends going, stopping, cornering, especially in what I imagine must be very well set up car like yours.

 

I recognize your name. You are not argumentative. You are the authority. Love your garage too.

 

Ha! That's me.

But (thanks to Porsche) I have gotten a little bit of experience with the 991.

 

Thanks for posting those numbers. Love seeing stuff like that! Bottom line: The 911 is fantastic! Nice driving too!

 

"One car to do it all" that's the way!

 

[QUOTE=JackOlsen;13695589]Ha! That's me.

But (thanks to Porsche) I have gotten a little bit of experience with the 991.

QUOTE]

Great postings!

Now for a question.

If you could own just one fun Porsche, would it be the 991 911 R or your 72 S?

 

Thanks. Mine's not an S. It was a 911T, originally. Now it's a Frankenstein.

But I wouldn't trade what I've got, honestly. It's like a long and successful marriage.

 

Took our 991.2 C2s on a trip down to northern California last summer and saw this nice white 911 parked next to me in the hotel parking lot in Eureka. Not sure what it is but it had the racing cage inside the car.