Coupe VS Cabrio (Long)
02-21-2003, 03:36 PM
#16
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Eric
what is the code for the special option cab motor?
Don't forget the track car has 100 less hp than your Ca(b)rrera.
Mike J and Tim
Maybe there is something to that break-in thing. The cab is my garage queen. It must be that pampering makes these cars faster.
what is the code for the special option cab motor?
Don't forget the track car has 100 less hp than your Ca(b)rrera.
Mike J and Tim
Maybe there is something to that break-in thing. The cab is my garage queen. It must be that pampering makes these cars faster.
02-21-2003, 04:03 PM
#17
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Not sure about that Mike. My garage queen seems to perform better when I drive it everyday, at least that's the feeling I got. One time my other car was in the shop for 2 weeks and I had to take my 95 cab to work everyday in short distant with stop and go traffic. I noticed the car became more responsive starting on the second day. I tried to keep the rpm above 3000 during those short trips though.
02-21-2003, 04:37 PM
#18
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
hn
I probably should have put a smilie thing after that.
I do try to get it good and hot for at least a half-hour to hour very regularly. It's just not a daily driver.
It does feel strong than the coupe, which has frequently been on the track.
(Btw, I broke the cab in according to the manual)
I probably should have put a smilie thing after that.
I do try to get it good and hot for at least a half-hour to hour very regularly. It's just not a daily driver.
It does feel strong than the coupe, which has frequently been on the track.
(Btw, I broke the cab in according to the manual)
02-21-2003, 04:50 PM
#19
Three Wheelin'
"what is the code for the special option cab motor?"
Sorry Mike, that is classified...
As for your track car, 100hp<, no big deal. It's all about momentum!!!
Sorry Mike, that is classified...
As for your track car, 100hp<, no big deal. It's all about momentum!!!
02-21-2003, 05:57 PM
#20
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by Mike in Chi:
<strong>hn
I probably should have put a smilie thing after that.
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Sorry, I should have known <img border="0" alt="[ouch]" title="" src="graemlins/c.gif" />
It was one of those quick replies when the boss was coming.
<strong>hn
I probably should have put a smilie thing after that.
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Sorry, I should have known <img border="0" alt="[ouch]" title="" src="graemlins/c.gif" />
It was one of those quick replies when the boss was coming.
02-22-2003, 02:27 AM
#21
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
You know, I was going to buy a 97 Twin Turbo, but once I found out I had the "double-secret probation, confidential cabriolet motor option" I said to hell with it!! <img border="0" alt="[hiha]" title="" src="graemlins/roflmao.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[hiha]" title="" src="graemlins/roflmao.gif" />
With all this power, who needs a bunch of little teeny-weeny turbos taking up engine room?!? <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" /> (I think I'll have another beer, HA HA HA HA) Ya'll excuse me while I go feel the horsepower!!
Robert
With all this power, who needs a bunch of little teeny-weeny turbos taking up engine room?!? <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" /> (I think I'll have another beer, HA HA HA HA) Ya'll excuse me while I go feel the horsepower!!
Robert
02-22-2003, 11:43 AM
#23
Pro
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe I was just being fed the company line, but when at the Porsche factory a few years ago, I pretty closely questioned them about their engines.
I was told that all of the 911 engines are bench dynoed, and that engines that are out of a particular spec range, low OR high, are sent back for a tear down and rebuild. They said there was a time when higher output engines were passed along, but they wouldn't say when that policy changed. Believable? I don't know.
What is not really believable is that cabriolets as a class received stonger engines. Or that even if they got the 'stronger' engines off the production lines, there would be enough difference to actually 'feel' notably stonger than an engine that barely passed the bench dyno.
I don't know how the production figures for the 993 break down, but it seems like more than half of them in the USA are cabriolets. Thats a pretty big subset to be getting 'special' engines for free!
When I was in high school, I flipped the top of the air cleaner on my dad's piece of Detroit iron, a Buick Riviera with a 455 CID engine. That gave it a nice loud wail under wide open throttle, and it felt a lot faster. A few months later, I flipped it back to normal position. Now I was impressed with all that smooth, quiet power and it felt stonger than before! The point is that there are many inputs to subjective sense of engine power, and it is a way unreliable method of detecting small differences.
Off the soapbox now!
Chip
I was told that all of the 911 engines are bench dynoed, and that engines that are out of a particular spec range, low OR high, are sent back for a tear down and rebuild. They said there was a time when higher output engines were passed along, but they wouldn't say when that policy changed. Believable? I don't know.
What is not really believable is that cabriolets as a class received stonger engines. Or that even if they got the 'stronger' engines off the production lines, there would be enough difference to actually 'feel' notably stonger than an engine that barely passed the bench dyno.
I don't know how the production figures for the 993 break down, but it seems like more than half of them in the USA are cabriolets. Thats a pretty big subset to be getting 'special' engines for free!
When I was in high school, I flipped the top of the air cleaner on my dad's piece of Detroit iron, a Buick Riviera with a 455 CID engine. That gave it a nice loud wail under wide open throttle, and it felt a lot faster. A few months later, I flipped it back to normal position. Now I was impressed with all that smooth, quiet power and it felt stonger than before! The point is that there are many inputs to subjective sense of engine power, and it is a way unreliable method of detecting small differences.
Off the soapbox now!
Chip
02-22-2003, 12:39 PM
#24
This is a really funny thread! I doubt the Cabriolets received better or stronger engines and think Chip may have nailed it. Louder=Faster from a sensory input perspective.
My Cab with open airbox and MaxFlo's sounds pretty damn fast but I doubt it's faster BECAUSE it's a Cab.
In fact, the opposite is true. I've driven a dozen or so 97-98 Cabs and some felt much quicker than mine. I purchased mine with 5800 miles on the clocks. Now it has 24k of which nearly 1000 were on various racetracks. It is actually feeling a bit quicker now than it used to. It's getting that "eager" feeling I've felt in other peoples cars. YOu know what I mean. You're cruising along at 3k RPM or so and the thing feels like it wants to take off on its own. Sorta like a 2-stroke engine when it begins to reach the powerband.
The real reason for the difference is:
1. Cam timing - 993's used friction fit cam gears that vary up to a few degrees from engine to engine. Steve W. has pointed this out numerous times and retro-fits the "old-style" pin-fit gears whenever he can.
2. Break-in. These engines & drivetrains probably don't begin to really loosen up until they reach 20-40k miles. A 100k engine with good compression probably RIPS!
3. Oil viscosity in the engine & transaxle. Thicker=slower.
4. Wheel/tire size. Cars with 17" wheels will accelerate/brake more quickly because they weigh 5+ lbs. LESS than 18" on each corner.
5. Mike said factory accepts up to 5% variation. That = 14.1 HP on a 282 HP Varioram motor. So, a car making 267.9 would be "acceptable". My car dynoed at 239 HP with MaxFlo's, open airbox, and ~96 octane fuel. That's not especially impressive.
6. Cabs only weigh 50lbs or so more than a sunroof coupe if I remember the factory specs correctly.
So many variables can make a difference. For what it's worth, my Cab is among the weakest I've driven but also has the lowest mileage. It seems to be getting better with age!
MC
My Cab with open airbox and MaxFlo's sounds pretty damn fast but I doubt it's faster BECAUSE it's a Cab.
In fact, the opposite is true. I've driven a dozen or so 97-98 Cabs and some felt much quicker than mine. I purchased mine with 5800 miles on the clocks. Now it has 24k of which nearly 1000 were on various racetracks. It is actually feeling a bit quicker now than it used to. It's getting that "eager" feeling I've felt in other peoples cars. YOu know what I mean. You're cruising along at 3k RPM or so and the thing feels like it wants to take off on its own. Sorta like a 2-stroke engine when it begins to reach the powerband.
The real reason for the difference is:
1. Cam timing - 993's used friction fit cam gears that vary up to a few degrees from engine to engine. Steve W. has pointed this out numerous times and retro-fits the "old-style" pin-fit gears whenever he can.
2. Break-in. These engines & drivetrains probably don't begin to really loosen up until they reach 20-40k miles. A 100k engine with good compression probably RIPS!
3. Oil viscosity in the engine & transaxle. Thicker=slower.
4. Wheel/tire size. Cars with 17" wheels will accelerate/brake more quickly because they weigh 5+ lbs. LESS than 18" on each corner.
5. Mike said factory accepts up to 5% variation. That = 14.1 HP on a 282 HP Varioram motor. So, a car making 267.9 would be "acceptable". My car dynoed at 239 HP with MaxFlo's, open airbox, and ~96 octane fuel. That's not especially impressive.
6. Cabs only weigh 50lbs or so more than a sunroof coupe if I remember the factory specs correctly.
So many variables can make a difference. For what it's worth, my Cab is among the weakest I've driven but also has the lowest mileage. It seems to be getting better with age!
MC
02-22-2003, 01:07 PM
#25
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> think Chip may have nailed it. Louder=Faster from a sensory input perspective. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">But I always drive the cab with the top up!!!!
Seriously, I don't think the factory gives cabs stronger engines, either. (that fact would have leaked out somehow long ago) But I do believe the motor in my cab is stronger than the coupe.
I also believe Eric's cab's motor is stronger than mine. I've seen his mod receipts.
Seriously, I don't think the factory gives cabs stronger engines, either. (that fact would have leaked out somehow long ago) But I do believe the motor in my cab is stronger than the coupe.
I also believe Eric's cab's motor is stronger than mine. I've seen his mod receipts.
02-22-2003, 01:25 PM
#26
Rennlist Member
Apples to oranges comparing my present coupe to the prior Cab, but I do agree with the subjective sensory input. I heard the same 5% variation when I toured the factory. I switched from Cab to Coupe because I was spending too much time stuck in freeway traffic breathing others' fumes on hot days with the top down, and not enough on back roads.