991.2 vs 992
04-04-2017, 05:35 PM
#61
For crying out loud, the people on this forum will take any opportunity to start a 991.1 vs 991.2 p1ssing contest.
991.1 is more endowed, but 991.2 has more girth. Case. Closed.
991.1 is more endowed, but 991.2 has more girth. Case. Closed.
04-04-2017, 06:07 PM
#62
Drifting
I have driven both cars and I understand what you are saying, but you don't seem to comprehend what turbo lag means. It is the delay between when you floor the throttle at a given rpm and when the engine actually develops maximum output at that SAME rpm. The magnitude of that maximum output is irrelevant.
Clearly, the 991.2 has virtually no turbo lag at 4000 rpm+ and considerable turbo lag below 2000 rpm. And while you might consider flooring the throttle below 2000 rpm in top gear to be absurd, I again point out that Porsche publishes a full-power output curve for the engine starting at 1250 rpm.
Moreover, since the turbo wastegates on the 991.2 are computer controlled, if Porsche felt that producing full power at low rpm was harmful to the engine, it would be an easy matter to limit boost until whatever rpm was determined to be safe for full boost. You might ponder the fact that Porsche has not done this at all.
Perhaps I'm an outlier here, but when I'm driving in my 991.2 in town, with low speed limits, traffic, and no opportunity to go quickly, I don't spin my engine at 5000 rpm just to make noise and wear it out more quickly. And I have been known to floor the throttle at considerably less than 1500 rpm if I need a little acceleration and will downshift if I want a lot of acceleration.
My previous car, BMW 335i with manual transmission, was subjected to full throttle at as little as 1000 rpm in sixth gear for some 50,000 miles and showed no ill effects.
Of course, the beauty of a manual transmission is that you can drive your car your way and I can do the same with mine.
Clearly, the 991.2 has virtually no turbo lag at 4000 rpm+ and considerable turbo lag below 2000 rpm. And while you might consider flooring the throttle below 2000 rpm in top gear to be absurd, I again point out that Porsche publishes a full-power output curve for the engine starting at 1250 rpm.
Moreover, since the turbo wastegates on the 991.2 are computer controlled, if Porsche felt that producing full power at low rpm was harmful to the engine, it would be an easy matter to limit boost until whatever rpm was determined to be safe for full boost. You might ponder the fact that Porsche has not done this at all.
Perhaps I'm an outlier here, but when I'm driving in my 991.2 in town, with low speed limits, traffic, and no opportunity to go quickly, I don't spin my engine at 5000 rpm just to make noise and wear it out more quickly. And I have been known to floor the throttle at considerably less than 1500 rpm if I need a little acceleration and will downshift if I want a lot of acceleration.
My previous car, BMW 335i with manual transmission, was subjected to full throttle at as little as 1000 rpm in sixth gear for some 50,000 miles and showed no ill effects.
Of course, the beauty of a manual transmission is that you can drive your car your way and I can do the same with mine.
Turbo lag (perceptible or not) or a delay with a NA engine getting into the engine's power band to provide acceleration from one speed to another all amounts to the same thing - a wait for acceleration. In one case you have "lag" (as you claim), in the other case, you have to wait until the engine winds itself up from 1,000RPM to 4,500RPM. So both drivers are waiting for something.
When I step on the gas at a low engine and road speed or a higher engine and road speed, what is the time duration between when my brain says I want to go from 20 - 60 and the car doing that? That is what I care about.
So, while the 991.2 might have some "lag", in the end, that car just gets there faster, and the taller the gear selected, the greater the delay between going from 20 - 60 mph with a NA 991.1.
I'm not saying one car is better than the other. They are both great cars and both are great performers.
As to turbo lag, I've read almost every auto journalist review out there and they all have to speak to turbo lag because that is the elephant in the enthusiaists room. And they have all said the same thing - "turbo lag is all but imperceptible".
The new Carrera goes zero to 60 1 full second quicker than the last car. Lag or not, the new 991.2 has enough in a base model to outperform the 2016 991.1 S model. Porsche, you saved me $18,000. Thank you!!
04-05-2017, 01:28 AM
#63
Burning Brakes
From my perspective, its all about drivability and performance.
Turbo lag (perceptible or not) or a delay with a NA engine getting into the engine's power band to provide acceleration from one speed to another all amounts to the same thing - a wait for acceleration. In one case you have "lag" (as you claim), in the other case, you have to wait until the engine winds itself up from 1,000RPM to 4,500RPM. So both drivers are waiting for something.
When I step on the gas at a low engine and road speed or a higher engine and road speed, what is the time duration between when my brain says I want to go from 20 - 60 and the car doing that? That is what I care about.
So, while the 991.2 might have some "lag", in the end, that car just gets there faster, and the taller the gear selected, the greater the delay between going from 20 - 60 mph with a NA 991.1.
I'm not saying one car is better than the other. They are both great cars and both are great performers.
As to turbo lag, I've read almost every auto journalist review out there and they all have to speak to turbo lag because that is the elephant in the enthusiaists room. And they have all said the same thing - "turbo lag is all but imperceptible".
The new Carrera goes zero to 60 1 full second quicker than the last car. Lag or not, the new 991.2 has enough in a base model to outperform the 2016 991.1 S model. Porsche, you saved me $18,000. Thank you!!
Turbo lag (perceptible or not) or a delay with a NA engine getting into the engine's power band to provide acceleration from one speed to another all amounts to the same thing - a wait for acceleration. In one case you have "lag" (as you claim), in the other case, you have to wait until the engine winds itself up from 1,000RPM to 4,500RPM. So both drivers are waiting for something.
When I step on the gas at a low engine and road speed or a higher engine and road speed, what is the time duration between when my brain says I want to go from 20 - 60 and the car doing that? That is what I care about.
So, while the 991.2 might have some "lag", in the end, that car just gets there faster, and the taller the gear selected, the greater the delay between going from 20 - 60 mph with a NA 991.1.
I'm not saying one car is better than the other. They are both great cars and both are great performers.
As to turbo lag, I've read almost every auto journalist review out there and they all have to speak to turbo lag because that is the elephant in the enthusiaists room. And they have all said the same thing - "turbo lag is all but imperceptible".
The new Carrera goes zero to 60 1 full second quicker than the last car. Lag or not, the new 991.2 has enough in a base model to outperform the 2016 991.1 S model. Porsche, you saved me $18,000. Thank you!!
And only someone who doesn't understand the term, or refuses to say anything negative about Porsche would say that turbo lag is "all but imperceptible."
In a Car and Driver story a year and half ago, "one of the Porsche engineers admitted that at 1800 rpm, the engine needs three full seconds to produce full torque from a closed throttle. Though he was quick to add that the turbo lag dropped to two seconds at 2000 rpm and only one second at 2300. If a bit of turbo lag at very low revs is the price for a 7500-rpm redline charge, I think most of us will happily pay it."
The lag is real. That doesn't make the car bad in any way. In fact, I rather love mine. But that doesn't mean I should deny the obvious.
04-05-2017, 07:30 AM
#64
Drifting
You are, of course, free to define your own perception of throttle response, but what you describe is is simply not the definition of turbo lag.
And only someone who doesn't understand the term, or refuses to say anything negative about Porsche would say that turbo lag is "all but imperceptible."
In a Car and Driver story a year and half ago, "one of the Porsche engineers admitted that at 1800 rpm, the engine needs three full seconds to produce full torque from a closed throttle. Though he was quick to add that the turbo lag dropped to two seconds at 2000 rpm and only one second at 2300. If a bit of turbo lag at very low revs is the price for a 7500-rpm redline charge, I think most of us will happily pay it."
The lag is real. That doesn't make the car bad in any way. In fact, I rather love mine. But that doesn't mean I should deny the obvious.
And only someone who doesn't understand the term, or refuses to say anything negative about Porsche would say that turbo lag is "all but imperceptible."
In a Car and Driver story a year and half ago, "one of the Porsche engineers admitted that at 1800 rpm, the engine needs three full seconds to produce full torque from a closed throttle. Though he was quick to add that the turbo lag dropped to two seconds at 2000 rpm and only one second at 2300. If a bit of turbo lag at very low revs is the price for a 7500-rpm redline charge, I think most of us will happily pay it."
The lag is real. That doesn't make the car bad in any way. In fact, I rather love mine. But that doesn't mean I should deny the obvious.
04-05-2017, 09:12 AM
#66
So, while the 991.2 might have some "lag", in the end, that car just gets there faster, and the taller the gear selected, the greater the delay between going from 20 - 60 mph with a NA 991.1.
I'm not saying one car is better than the other. They are both great cars and both are great performers.
As to turbo lag, I've read almost every auto journalist review out there and they all have to speak to turbo lag because that is the elephant in the enthusiaists room. And they have all said the same thing - "turbo lag is all but imperceptible".
The new Carrera goes zero to 60 1 full second quicker than the last car. Lag or not, the new 991.2 has enough in a base model to outperform the 2016 991.1 S model. Porsche, you saved me $18,000. Thank you!!
I'm not saying one car is better than the other. They are both great cars and both are great performers.
As to turbo lag, I've read almost every auto journalist review out there and they all have to speak to turbo lag because that is the elephant in the enthusiaists room. And they have all said the same thing - "turbo lag is all but imperceptible".
The new Carrera goes zero to 60 1 full second quicker than the last car. Lag or not, the new 991.2 has enough in a base model to outperform the 2016 991.1 S model. Porsche, you saved me $18,000. Thank you!!
Personally, coming from one of the fastest production FI cars (R35 GTR) the NA 911 has been a personal joy. I find it far more enjoyable to have a slightly slower yet extremely responsive experience. That is my personal opinion and there are plenty that would argue that they would want the faster option even if there is a slight lag in the responsiveness.
The reason this has become such a topic of discussion in the 911 community specifically is that NA responsiveness has been a defining characteristic of the 911 for quite some time (I expect the 992 will solve many of these complaints). Obviously times are changing and Porsche needs to look to the future and I'm sure they will perfect the new FI platform with time. But let's also not lie to ourselves and say the current iteration is without flaws, especially when coming from the hyper responsive NA platform that Porsche has been known for.
Last edited by phow; 04-05-2017 at 10:02 AM.
04-05-2017, 11:12 AM
#67
Race Director
I have driven both cars and I understand what you are saying, but you don't seem to comprehend what turbo lag means. It is the delay between when you floor the throttle at a given rpm and when the engine actually develops maximum output at that SAME rpm. The magnitude of that maximum output is irrelevant.
Clearly, the 991.2 has virtually no turbo lag at 4000 rpm+ and considerable turbo lag below 2000 rpm. And while you might consider flooring the throttle below 2000 rpm in top gear to be absurd, I again point out that Porsche publishes a full-power output curve for the engine starting at 1250 rpm.
Moreover, since the turbo wastegates on the 991.2 are computer controlled, if Porsche felt that producing full power at low rpm was harmful to the engine, it would be an easy matter to limit boost until whatever rpm was determined to be safe for full boost. You might ponder the fact that Porsche has not done this at all.
Perhaps I'm an outlier here, but when I'm driving in my 991.2 in town, with low speed limits, traffic, and no opportunity to go quickly, I don't spin my engine at 5000 rpm just to make noise and wear it out more quickly. And I have been known to floor the throttle at considerably less than 1500 rpm if I need a little acceleration and will downshift if I want a lot of acceleration.
My previous car, BMW 335i with manual transmission, was subjected to full throttle at as little as 1000 rpm in sixth gear for some 50,000 miles and showed no ill effects.
Of course, the beauty of a manual transmission is that you can drive your car your way and I can do the same with mine.
Clearly, the 991.2 has virtually no turbo lag at 4000 rpm+ and considerable turbo lag below 2000 rpm. And while you might consider flooring the throttle below 2000 rpm in top gear to be absurd, I again point out that Porsche publishes a full-power output curve for the engine starting at 1250 rpm.
Moreover, since the turbo wastegates on the 991.2 are computer controlled, if Porsche felt that producing full power at low rpm was harmful to the engine, it would be an easy matter to limit boost until whatever rpm was determined to be safe for full boost. You might ponder the fact that Porsche has not done this at all.
Perhaps I'm an outlier here, but when I'm driving in my 991.2 in town, with low speed limits, traffic, and no opportunity to go quickly, I don't spin my engine at 5000 rpm just to make noise and wear it out more quickly. And I have been known to floor the throttle at considerably less than 1500 rpm if I need a little acceleration and will downshift if I want a lot of acceleration.
My previous car, BMW 335i with manual transmission, was subjected to full throttle at as little as 1000 rpm in sixth gear for some 50,000 miles and showed no ill effects.
Of course, the beauty of a manual transmission is that you can drive your car your way and I can do the same with mine.
