Porsche992

Hi, Why does everyone get so excited about the naturally aspirated engines ? My first and only 911 I ever had is my current 992 S , what will it gain by it being naturally aspirated ? I Asking because everyone is excited about a supposed GTS that will be NA. Does the acceleration feel different or is it sound ? I feel no turbo lag in this one. Thanks

VarTheVar

Pros: better throttle response, better noise, crispier downshifts when done manually, better matched with a manual
Cons: generally less under the curve power

There is certainly a bit of turbo lag on the S. If you drive a GT3 or a GT4 you'll see the difference in response. Is your S a PDK or Manual?

michelc4

Entièrement d’accord avec cette analyse, je suis aussi passé de la 991 .1 à la 992 , le 3 litre Turbo de la 992 est sans comparaison meilleur que le 3.8 de la 991 .
Pratiquement aucun turbo lag , du couple à tout les régimes et une allonge jusqu’à 7500 rpm .

991.1 Guy

I think you will have to drive one to appreciate the difference.

YWG_YYZ

Honestly, I think people are excited about NA vs Turbo because it's rare to find a NA engine these days (similar to how a MT is harder to get these days).

In theory, NA engine offers better sound (no turbo to filter through), likely higher RPM redline, more linear response to the throttle. But it produces less torque under the curve, and because of that, you have to be sure that you are in the right gear.
Turbo is just the opposite the above. Day to day, it is more usable. Just like how PDK are easier than MTs.

991.1 Guy

D'accord.

Tupper

I currently have both, and enjoy both for what they are.

I do think that for a daily driver and a car that you drive a lot on the highway, turbocharged is a somewhat more desirable set up. Torque is great for getting that butt moving forward and for overtaking on the highway.

But I prefer NA for the drama, the noise, the "unlocking the beast". I think for sports cars, NA is a somewhat better set up. But mind you, I still had a blast driving my turbocharged 992

detansinn

Why do people want NA cars?

• They’re too scared to ride motorcycles, because if you want NA, sky high revs, a manual transmission, and performance that will melt your brain, a motorcycle is the answer.
• On the basis that the GT3 is NA and therefore every NA engine must be as good as the GT3’s engine.
• They don’t like having lots of horsepower when they drive up into the mountains, instead preferring to lose horsepower with altitude.
• The idea of having usable torque low in the rev range makes them uncomfortable.
• While most of us were dreaming of owning a turbocharged Porsche someday, they dreamed of owning something slower.

​​​​…I appreciate an NA engine, but most of them don’t deserve to be canonized.

Porsche992

Manual

rk-d

I think it's a far thing to say - not all NAs are worth lauding over a top tier FI motor.

For me, it's sharpness of the throttle and noise as much as anything. A great NA motor gets stronger in the higher revs and that's a fun combination particularly matched with an MT. Working a great NA motor and really pushing it is fun to me.

It's a different vibe - massive low end torque and the thrust of that force vs a screaming NA motor being lit up at (for instance) 9k RPM. The low end torque is easily accessible and it's hard to argue against the acceleration, but a really good NA motor being taken to redline is a different kind of fun, almost scary. Pick your poison.

I've owned some great turbocharged Porsches and I just prefer NA, but all the NAs I've loved are *great* NAs. A bad NA motor is just slow and annoying.

3uros

Naturally aspirated engines bring back so many good memories like the smooth inline 6 in my E36 and E46 3ers to the screamer in my E92 M3. When I bought the F80 M3 in summer 14, I instantly regretted the move from an E92. Hence the reasons why I bought the 991.1. Better sound, linear power delivery, and torque at the top end of the revs. BMW turbo engines run out of steam in the upper revs so it wasn't all that great that the F80 had a 7500 redline. I do wish I would've kept my 991.1 after all these years but there are so many other reasons why the 992 is better, turbocharged and all IMHO.

Wilder

#1 reason people want NA over turbo is engine noise, and as far as Porsche people are concerned, what they really want is GT noises.

The base engine with PSE is the best blend of NA and turbo I've experienced to date.
Sounds NA
Near-zero lag and near-instant throttle response
Wring-out-able yet torquey

The perfect Carrera.

PSPorsche

I'm kind of opposite to you-- all of my sports cars have always been NA, manuals.
So, I'm both excited and apprehensive about my 992S, expected next month.
With the NA cars, I always knew where to shift to get the power I needed, when I needed.
The 992 will be PDK (with turbos, obviously), and I hope I don't miss the NA motor + manual, that I've become accustomed to for the reasons folks have already pointed out above.

PSPorsche

I agree with the Pros.
(And, yes the sound is nice, but sound is not my personal reason for linking NA cars, as some have suggested).

Regarding the Cons, I never found N/As to be lacking in power, especially at low RPMs, because NA motors are usually higher displacement than turbo counterparts.
I always felt with turbo cars, until the turbo spins up, you are basically stuck with a low displacement "NA motor" with lower power.

Caveat: I'm talking about the older turbo motors that took forever to spool up; I have zero experience with modern 911s with turbos (that, according to the reviews I've read have no discernible turbo lag).

mcacs1

When driving spiritly, revs tend to be higher and the low rev advantage of turbo goes away. Before my 992 C4 I had a 981 Cayman S (NA 3.4l). Verdict: the 981 engine felt more exciting sound wise and response wise. Acceleration wise, the C4 is faster, but the Cayman S 'felt' just as fast in many circumstances. I love my C4, but i certainly have not forgotten my Cayman S.