jnkirk1974

The Turbo S is an incredible car. It's perfect at what it is designed to do. Maximum power and comfort. Pretty much the Concorde of the road.
200mph while drinking your coffee type of car (if you get what I mean). It's not meant to be the ultimate 911. Some will disagree with that. I'll (safely)
say that the GT cars are meant for ultimate 911 status. Remember, the GT3 has a lower MSRP than the Turbo S. So, people don't buy a GT3, just because
they cannot afford a Turbo S.

So, no, not everyone desires the Turbo S, because it costs the most.

My previous car was the Carrera 4 GTS. When I ordered this car, the Carrera S was the only option. However, I knew with a few tweaks, I could make it
what I wanted it to be.

I don't want a Turbo or Turbo S. Too heavy on track for my purposes....and yes, the weight is felt. Especially under braking.

So, the Turbo S isn't the be-all/end-all. It's an awesome car, but it does not fill the needs of everybody out there.

Many of us can afford the Turbo S. So, income isn't the deciding factor here.

CodyBigdog

I assume that many (not all) Porsche buyers get exactly what they, and their significant other, wants….especially if I believe the data/info on the income/wealth demographics of the median Porsche buyer….ie, so, a shortage of money is not the problem for many Porsche buyers. It’s more a question of priorities. Oh, and if “image” was my thing…I would not have gotten a Porsche. Plenty of other marques with more cache in the publics eye.

Personally, since I will rarely track or even approach the limits of my 992 S on the street, anything more would NOT be appreciated by this driver (although I do plan to do a power bump, because it is a cost effective “option”, once I am convinced it will translate into the improved performance metrics I want). I would rather put my money on other bling, such as a vacation home, boat, plane, trips,,,and in my case, I also have a growing list of charities I contribute to, as well as helping out my kids with buying their first homes.

Point being - for some, there are other “things” and/ or philanthropy that we would rather allocate money towards…than buying the “top of the line” Porsche.

rk-d

If you haven’t driven a 992 TTS aggressively then try it if you get the chance. I had a 991.2 TT and didn’t like its heavy feel. The 992 TTS changed that. It’s a true sports car now.

I do agree it’s not the be all end all. Same with the GT3. Each occupies its niche and does it well.

M3Inline6

Nope! The transmission alone makes it a no-go for me. The Sport Classic I would take in a heartbeat though…..


​​​​​……probably over the GT3 (…simply due to the wider body and aesthetics). I think you’re way off in your assessments about what people can or can’t afford.

Jimmy-D

^ I would take the "Sport Classic" today and not to sit and stare at in Garage. Take my GTS and I would pay the MSRP difference

22992

Define afford..most people who buy an S could afford a turbo, especially if they keep the options to a minimum. The question on hand is if they value the turbo package, the collision of cost and features/attributes is the equation most sane people use to buy a car. Many reasons not to go TS. Hard to make the “afford” argument for the Carrera line. If you can afford a base, you can without a doubt afford an S or GTS or a gt3 for that matter. A gt3 would probably be cheaper Than a GTS/s/base to own due to better resale, so…..maybe it’s all the GT3 buyers who can’t afford a turbo S I kid.

ipse dixit

My business partner and I use our 911 C2S as a beater car for daily use and track fun. At ~150k, it fits the bill.

A TT/TTS at over 200k, is not something that fits our use case.

Has nothing to do with affordability, but the right tool for the job.

Just like you wouldn't wear a shirt, tie and suit to go swimming, you would instead wear jammers, goggles, etc.

Same here.

Drew46

Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy:

• The car someone drives is as imprecise a measure of their financial status as it is a measure of their manhood (or womanhood as the case may be).
• Many people here could afford a TTS (or several) even if they didn't get a TTS. In fact many people here have cars in their stable which are more expensive than a TTS, yet still bought an non-TTS 992.
• Many people here indeed cannot afford a TTS - who cares.
• Many people here who own another 992 actually cannot "afford" that 992 by someone else's definition of afford.
• There is zero correlation between internet posters who claim that they can afford a TTS and those that can. There may actually be somewhat of an inverse relationship.
• People tend to believe that the model/trim they bought is the "right" one. That's why they bought it. Some, but certainly not all, might have bought a more expensive model or added more options if they had more funds they wanted to allocate to the car. At the end of the day, it is human nature to defend our choices - whether those choice were driven by financial prudence or financial constraints.
• If everyone bought everything they could afford, nobody would have any money left.
• None of the above statements matter one iota in the scheme of life. Drive the car you have, appreciate it, appreciate that other cars are also awesome and may fit the bill better for other owners and, most importantly, appreciate your ability to own a car that 99.99% of the world's population will never be lucky enough to drive let alone own!

NastyHabits

Prefer a 2 car stable; 718 GT4 & 992 C2GTS to a TT/TTS

SBAD

I wanted fun. And I’m happy with the size of my *****. So CS manual is more than enough.

Potsnu

Your analogy doesn't make any sense. 6% is looking at peak horsepower, you have to compare the two power curves. The GTS is going to be more aggressively tuned through out the whole range, so the difference is going noticeable and not some placebo effect you seem to be implying.

CodyBigdog

By the way, the ~6% more HP/torque in the GTS is not a placebo. Time and speed test show there is a difference. My point was, the difference is not pronounced enough that most, maybe all, people will feel the difference.

The feeling/sensation of quickness in a car is from torque, or the force on the wheels. HP, gearing and drag become more relevant at higher speeds, and HP = torque x RPM/5252. What people feel is acceleration - that push back into your seat. That’s torque (ROTATIONAL force) at the wheels. By the way, the dyno only measures torque. HP is calculated from the torque curve.

The GTS has a peak torque of 420.4 ft-lbs, and is flat from 2300-5000 RPM, while the S has a peak torque of 391 ft-lbs, and is also flat from 2300-5000 RPM. To better quantify - The maximum acceleration FORCE from the GTS is estimated to be 0.91g, while the S estimated peak acceleration force is 0.88 g. I defy anybody to be able to differentiate a difference of only 0.03g. But another way to look at it is - that acceleration that pushes you back in the seat is related to the change in velocity/change in time. The run times (within measurement error), show the S, up until about 100kph to be slightly quicker…however, after about 100kph, the +30 extra (peak) HP of the GTS begins to work in it’s favor, with quicker times from about 130kph up through 200kph. If one were so inclined (I am not), one could do some quick calculations for the changes in velocity divided by the changes in time (and convert to the correct units) to determine acceleration. I believe (?) the stock GTS is heavier than the stock S….so adjust for weight difference.

Finally, and this may come as a surprise to some, but engine and turbo used in the GTS and S are identical. The difference in torque/HP is attained by primarily altering the turbo waste gate to obtain higher boost pressure…similar to what automobile tuners, like Dinan, do to achieve 100HP+ gains…where you can then “feel” the difference.

SBAD

Damn, that was a satisfying response!

Drew46

So the S actually is and feels quicker than the GTS up to 100kph?

CodyBigdog

Within measurement (rounding error) and testing errors, the times are shorter up to 100kph….but as to “feel”, well, I doubt anybody will “feel” a few tenths of a second difference, regardless of which model times are measured to be faster…which was sort of my point. .But according to the data on FastestLaps.com, these are the numbers:

VELOCITY,,,,, S,,,,,,,,,,,,,GTS
0-40kph ,,,,,1.2 sec ,,,,,1.3 sec
0-50kph ,,,,,1.3sec,,,,,, 1.5 sec
0-80kph ,,,,,,2.4sec,,,,,,, 2.5sec
0-100kph,,,, 3.2 sec,,,,,,, 3.3sec
0-130kph,,,, 5.1 sec ,,,,,,,4.9 sec
0-150kph,,,,, 6.7sec,,,,,,,, 6.2sec
.
.
0-200kph 11.1sec 10.4sec

Note that around V > 150kph, the time differential becomes more significant. For me, anyway, a speed that high is only relevant to me if I’m on the track…which will be rarely.

Perhaps the most relevant numbers for most of us are overtaking and merging times..ie, 30mph-70mph or 40mph-80mph.