I am not going with the new 991.2
04-19-2017, 11:52 PM
#166
Nobody seemed to mention the fact that the only reason Porsche went to all Turbo motors is because of EPA continuing to crack down harder and harder. They did the best they could but I would bet, Porsche would have much rather continued with NA engines. There is a place for Turbo engines but IMO they should not all be Turbos.
If Dodge can deliver an 840 horsepower twin screw supercharged 6.2 liter V8 that meets standards Porsche can deliver an NA motor that does as well. In fact, they do in the GT3.
04-20-2017, 12:06 AM
#167
991.2 is hands down a better machine, let haters hate ! This so called "emotional" blah blah response is all there and more so than the .1 move on. Them two should do a new show called "feeling my feelings" Can't wait for the .2 lads to get upset at the 992 lol.
04-20-2017, 12:26 AM
#168
Anyway, off topic.
991.1's rule and anything Porsche turbo charges except a Turbo is a poser (except my wife's Macan S)
04-20-2017, 12:28 AM
#169
Burning Brakes
This is nothing more than a convenient excuse. Porsche went Turbo to cut costs. The 9A2 is modular and sees duty in the base 718 up to the 911 GTS. They can even stretch it to an eight cylinder and have said as much.
If Dodge can deliver an 840 horsepower twin screw supercharged 6.2 liter V8 that meets standards Porsche can deliver an NA motor that does as well. In fact, they do in the GT3.
If Dodge can deliver an 840 horsepower twin screw supercharged 6.2 liter V8 that meets standards Porsche can deliver an NA motor that does as well. In fact, they do in the GT3.
The reality is that Porsche--and all car manufacturers are under pressure to improve fuel efficiency in the years going forward--in the United States and abroad. Even in the vast VW empire, Porsche has to do its part for the corporate averages. The base 911s need to deliver good fuel economy to offset the Turbos and GT3s that don't.
The real mystery is why the 718s, despite their smaller turbo engines, DON'T get better EPA fuel economy than their six-cylinder predecessors.
04-20-2017, 12:31 AM
#170
This is nothing more than a convenient excuse. Porsche went Turbo to cut costs. The 9A2 is modular and sees duty in the base 718 up to the 911 GTS. They can even stretch it to an eight cylinder and have said as much.
If Dodge can deliver an 840 horsepower twin screw supercharged 6.2 liter V8 that meets standards Porsche can deliver an NA motor that does as well. In fact, they do in the GT3.
If Dodge can deliver an 840 horsepower twin screw supercharged 6.2 liter V8 that meets standards Porsche can deliver an NA motor that does as well. In fact, they do in the GT3.
04-20-2017, 12:56 AM
#172
Porsche can and does deliver NA motors that meet emissions standards today.
04-20-2017, 01:01 AM
#173
Sure, adding turbochargers, intercoolers, and the associated plumbing saves a fortune--NOT. The new engines are modular, but the old engines were the same. There's no cost advantage there. I suspect that a four cylinder turbo costs no less to build than a six-cylinder NA engine. And the six-cylinder turbo surely costs more.
The reality is that Porsche--and all car manufacturers are under pressure to improve fuel efficiency in the years going forward--in the United States and abroad. Even in the vast VW empire, Porsche has to do its part for the corporate averages. The base 911s need to deliver good fuel economy to offset the Turbos and GT3s that don't.
The real mystery is why the 718s, despite their smaller turbo engines, DON'T get better EPA fuel economy than their six-cylinder predecessors.
The reality is that Porsche--and all car manufacturers are under pressure to improve fuel efficiency in the years going forward--in the United States and abroad. Even in the vast VW empire, Porsche has to do its part for the corporate averages. The base 911s need to deliver good fuel economy to offset the Turbos and GT3s that don't.
The real mystery is why the 718s, despite their smaller turbo engines, DON'T get better EPA fuel economy than their six-cylinder predecessors.
It is the same cost cutting BMW and Mercedes are doing with turbo engines. Keep the parts the same and just change the software is the mantra.
As stated Dodge delivers a 6.2 liter supercharged V8 with 840 hp in today's climate. Ford has a 5.2 liter 8200 rpm cross-plane crank V8. Don't tell Me Porsche can't deliver an NA motor in the 911 when that is literally what they do.
04-20-2017, 01:28 AM
#174
Got some shocking news. Most of people that consider the 996 the worst porsche ever are the weird porsche guys. In 3 years of 996 ownership never had anyone say anything negative about it, have to go to the forums to find that stuff. An oh, by the way, most of them hate the 997's and 991's also. And as far as value, since the 996, all porsches have been mass produced. The 997's will soon be down to 20K, and a couple years after that the 991's (both the .1 and .2's will follow suit). It's a numbers thing and unless you have a special or rare edition, they will continue to depreciate.
Anyway, off topic.
991.1's rule and anything Porsche turbo charges except a Turbo is a poser (except my wife's Macan S)
Anyway, off topic.
991.1's rule and anything Porsche turbo charges except a Turbo is a poser (except my wife's Macan S)
The 996 is the worst water cooled Porsche generation. It's not a weird Porsche guy conclusion but a Porsche guy conclusion period. The design aged horribly and going away from the traditional headlight style hurt it. The interior is terrible too and let's not start on RMS leaks.
Hey, no need to take my word or your word for it. Look at the market. 996 values are a dumpster fire. The 997 will never tumble that hard because Porsche guys get what they are buying.
It isn't a numbers thing. Well, maybe it is. Look at the prices to see the esteem the 996 is held in.
04-20-2017, 01:56 AM
#175
The data is either direct from Porsche or Porsche generated telemetry through the SC system. It is taken from two of my cars with me at the wheel.
I make the time and effort to post facts/data. I do this to provide clear cut information.
"you drive the car not the graph" well I do that, one of the cars was hitting up to 225 kmh the other wasn't.
If you want telemetry based facts I can provide them including boost relative to throttle response. When I say that throttle response/boost/lag is a non issue, it is.
One of the good things that Porsche do is allow access to a full suite of data, all be it at a cycle rate of one reading per second. You can improve this by various means.
However at the end of the day the data is the data and it provides the fact base for performance - it takes away supposition.
Last edited by randr; 04-20-2017 at 04:47 AM.
04-20-2017, 06:58 AM
#176
Intermediate
Nobody seemed to mention the fact that the only reason Porsche went to all Turbo motors is because of EPA continuing to crack down harder and harder. They did the best they could but I would bet, Porsche would have much rather continued with NA engines. There is a place for Turbo engines but IMO they should not all be Turbos.
Different strokes for different folks. I am a big fan of the 991.1 NA 3.8 and I loved my 991.1 NA 3.4 prior to that. I just love the rear engine, NA driving experience. That being said, turbocharged 911s have had a formidable place in the 911 lineup since the 1970's and even moreso now with the 991.2 lineup. I agree with 2008porsche - it is a shame that the NA engine is being phased out; it has been part of the 911 DNA since its inception in the 1960's and to lose that, with the exception of the GT line, is a shame to me and to many others, but not to everyone. I, for one, am glad that I took the plunge for the 991.1 GTS. Yes, we 991.1 GTS enthusiasts get ribbed on this forum for making our version of the 911 sound like amazing sex on wheels and I hope whatever iteration of the 911 that you are driving is as good as or even better than sex on wheels.
Thumbs up!
04-20-2017, 08:39 AM
#177
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Where aspirations are natural
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 42 Likes
on
33 Posts
Nobody seemed to mention the fact that the only reason Porsche went to all Turbo motors is because of EPA continuing to crack down harder and harder. They did the best they could but I would bet, Porsche would have much rather continued with NA engines. There is a place for Turbo engines but IMO they should not all be Turbos.
04-20-2017, 08:48 AM
#178
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Where aspirations are natural
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 42 Likes
on
33 Posts
Those cars are NOT mass produced. There is a huge difference. If VAG didn't have cheap commuters then the 991.2 wouldn't pass since there are rules around company averages with regards to emissions and efficiency. This is also why several companies make EV essentially at a loss... I.e. That ugly BMW EV SUV.
04-20-2017, 08:51 AM
#179
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Where aspirations are natural
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 42 Likes
on
33 Posts
yes. If turbo was better as a blanket statement, how much easier would it have been to boost the GT3? Others have claimed cost... bringing the engine building in house for a limited number of 4.0's is the opposite of cheaper than adding more boost to the 3.0...
04-20-2017, 08:53 AM
#180
I actually think what they did was smart. They essentially used the 991.2 as an opportunity to introduce the smaller FI motors and let everyone get used to them. It also gives Porsche a chance to refine things a bit before the 992 release. Once the 992 is revealed, the FI motor won't even really be a topic of discussion since it will have been around for awhile. I have faith that Porsche will perfect this new setup in the 992.