Just being snarky...C2 is my 911. The T4 is the VW Tiguan (Consumer Reports hates it) I just picked up for the crap days and recycling center duty. I get the attraction of an AWD 911, would love to have one. Except I kind of get a little queasy thinking about driving the 911 on really bad weather days. We live in a hilly area, and AWD is a must on snowy days, so I keep an eye on the weather in the winter and use the little SUV or the Cayenne when snow is coming. Turns out the two together cost about the same as a C4. As much as I love the 911, it's a stretch to have as your only car.

 

Since you imagine that you know all of the answers and believe that only what you say matters, I'll leave you to it.

But the original question in this thread was "Is the 911 C2 safe to drive in the rain?" And the obvious answer is YES.

 

AWD is going to be safer in conditions with less traction. No, it won't help you stop better, but it will help with grip in many other situations where having only two drive wheels might fall short. Is that substantial? Probably not.

But it will also help with track speed and control, and twisty road control, since you accelerate out of corners and, as you correctly note, "AWD helps mostly/only with acceleration".

 

I generally agree with you in that AWD doesn't help you stop more quickly, or corner harder in either dry or slippery conditions. Though if you are clumsy with the throttle when the road is slick, you can be clumsier with AWD before you kick the tail out. Of course, if you're driving that hard in everyday conditions, you're probably not too bright.

And, of course, we should remember that the 911 is equipped with an excellent stability control system (PSM), which would step in to arrest clumsy-throttle-induced oversteer with both RWD and AWD.

And under dry conditions at the track, I doubt that it provides any more beneficial effect than placing a couple of 50-pound sacks of manure in your luggage compartment. After all, I'm not aware that Porsche posts faster Nurburgring times with AWD Carreras.

Certainly, If you drive your 911 in the winter and face many steep grades, AWD will make your life easier. Same goes for track days int he pouring rain. And if you simply like the extra traction that it provides, be my guest.

But the notion that it is necessary in everyday driving for most 911 drivers--even in rain and snow--is ludicrous.

 

I wonder why Porsche doesn't make a RWD Turbo/Turbo S?

 

It has and will probably do so again. It's called the GT2 and is at the top of the 911 Turbo lineup.

 

I drive a 4wd 911. My last 911 was RWD. I prefer the feel and lighter weight of RWD (playfulness?) and the traction advantages of AWD. The traction performance improvement is much more pronounced in adverse weather and I like to drive my 911 on the nice days of winter. The newer car is safer (991 vs 997) but in terms of adverse weather safety, the condition and compound of the tires plays a *much* larger role than anything else.

To to say AWD or RWD is unequivocally better is brash. That implies a lot of value judgments that are personal rather than universal.

 

Again, its all about acceleration. If nothing else putting 500 hp through 4 wheels leads to faster 0 to 60 times.

And more sales?

 

They want to keep their customer base alive and well and not make the "Fail" video montage from owners leaving a C&C.

 

If AWD was so magically better in every condition then the Porsche RSR and other race cars would use AWD. It does obviously have some advantages in inclement weather for accelerating... The rear diffs are so good in cars nowadays though that there is not the traction gap there used to be.

 

I guess that would be a good explanation why the 450+HP Mustangs and BMWs seem to dominate in those videos. If you are going to have crazy power in a light street car it seems fairly responsible to do everything you reasonably can to make it stick... for the super high-torque Turbos at least. Even the GT-R got that right from the start.

Professional race car drivers on tracks are clearly playing a different game at a different skill level so I don't really see a meaningful comparison there. For my mere 400HP C4S, sure, that is a different story here in Texas. That was just my aesthetic choice.

 

The 919 and R18 use awd to name a couple. Also, some orgs don't permit it, like F1.

 

Most of the hyper cars do.

If I was into the 991.2 game then I'd be more inclined to consider it due to the torque.

Another car that experienced huge performance gains makes an even better case study. the Jaguar F Type. Had the same engine in my XKR. Wonderful engine and way ahead of it's time. a TON of torque - enough to put the 991.2 to shame in terms if instant torque. The 991.2 isn't at that power level (or torque level) but the jag's power was far more useful in putting it to the ground with AWD vs RWD.

Another iteration that is another technology leap is the torque vectoring capabilities that brands like Lexus are beginning to release. For big power, it's more of a necessity. For the high revving NA/3.4 & 3.8 lovers its not as big of a deal.

Different strokes and we're lucky to be living in such a time although I'm more inclined to gravitate to lighter, less horsepower and more primitive cars...

 

you have a fair point. He revving cars need a little time to put power to the ground. Turbo charged cars have more instantaneous torque and therefore traction at all four wheels I more useful.

 

It is my understanding that the RSR runs in the LM-GTE racing category where 4WD is not allowed... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LM_GTE).

If it had been alowed my prediction is all the cars in the series would have 4WD....