Notices
993 Forum 1995-1998

QUestion about 996 vs 993 production

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-06-2007, 10:39 AM
  #61  
Ray S
Ironman 140.6
Rennlist Member
 
Ray S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 13,794
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
True, except that as a result weight went up by 80 kgs (200 lbs). And, notwithstanding the longer wheelbase
Check your "facts". The overall weight of the 996 is actually less than a 993.

Porsche lists the official weight of these cars as;

993 C2 1,370kg
996 C2 Mk I 1,320kg
996 C2 Mk II 1,345kg

So, weight went down (not up) by 55-110 lbs
Old 11-06-2007, 10:48 AM
  #62  
jimbo3
Rennlist Member
 
jimbo3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,280
Likes: 0
Received 684 Likes on 409 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jdistefa
Wow, I'm surprised it took four pages until an argument broke out about 993 vs 996.
In case y'all haven't figured this out yet, the original post is likely a troll. Look at his other threads. Now he started the same $hit on the 996 forum yesterday. He clearly knows a lot more (or should know more by now) than he lets on, but admonishes this forum to keep the discussion going, despite acknowledging that the subject has been hashed to DEATH a million times.

I seriously doubt that he even has a pot to **** in, much less pull the trigger on EITHER model, so let's move on.
Old 11-06-2007, 10:52 AM
  #63  
Ray S
Ironman 140.6
Rennlist Member
 
Ray S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 13,794
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jimbo3
In case y'all haven't figured this out yet, the original post is likely a troll. Look at his other threads. Now he started the same $hit on the 996 forum yesterday. He clearly knows a lot more (or should know more by now) than he lets on, but admonishes this forum to keep the discussion going, despite acknowledging that the subject has been hashed to DEATH a million times.

I seriously doubt that he even has a pot to **** in, much less pull the trigger on EITHER model, so let's move on.

Good call
Old 11-06-2007, 10:53 AM
  #64  
jimq
Burgled
Rennlist Member
 
jimq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Altamonte Springs, Fl/Gwynns Island, Va.
Posts: 22,384
Received 14 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by max911
Nicely written post VGM911 .... but ...



You forgot to mention the real reason why a lot of the 996 rear main seals leaked - The end of the crankshaft was no longer centered in the block !!
Do you really think Porsche put replacement engines in thousands of 996s and Boxsters because they didn't feel like doing the repair that you state costs $1k??
WoW !! First time i saw a actual number. Where did this fact come from?
Old 11-06-2007, 10:55 AM
  #65  
jdistefa
Rennlist Member
 
jdistefa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Onterrible
Posts: 7,920
Received 483 Likes on 256 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jimbo3
In case y'all haven't figured this out yet, the original post is likely a troll. Look at his other threads. Now he started the same $hit on the 996 forum yesterday. He clearly knows a lot more (or should know more by now) than he lets on, but admonishes this forum to keep the discussion going, despite acknowledging that the subject has been hashed to DEATH a million times.

I seriously doubt that he even has a pot to **** in, much less pull the trigger on EITHER model, so let's move on.
Nice catch Jim.
Old 11-06-2007, 10:56 AM
  #66  
chris walrod
Guru
Lifetime Rennlist
Member


Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor

 
chris walrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: yorba linda, ca
Posts: 15,738
Received 100 Likes on 51 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TD in DC
Stock-to-stock, a 996 will kill a 993 with the same driver. No question whatsoever. The 996s are faster, they handle better, and they stop better. Just as the 997s are faster, handle better, and stop better than the 996s.

Would the result be the same over the course of a long race, much like an endurance type of race distance?
Old 11-06-2007, 11:03 AM
  #67  
TD in DC
Race Director
 
TD in DC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,350
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by chris walrod
Would the result be the same over the course of a long race, much like an endurance type of race distance?
Yeah, let's ask Jim B., or better yet, let's find out ourselves! Oh wait, I do not own a 996.

Hell, the 996 is so fast, the replacement motors are so cheap, and the 996s are so much easier to work on that I could build up enough of a lead in the early part of the race that if I blew a motor, I could pit in, replace the motor, get back out there and still win the enduro!



For the humor impaired among us, I am not taking this that seriously and am just joking around with Chris.
Old 11-06-2007, 12:20 PM
  #68  
JimB
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
JimB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: MN
Posts: 2,569
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by chris walrod
Would the result be the same over the course of a long race, much like an endurance type of race distance?

Chris,
I have no interest in joining another 993 vs 996 pissing match but I will point out that the Grand Am Cup guys ran many 6 hour enduros in both 3.4L and 3.6L 996s. They blew a few but overall the cars performed very very well. I think it would be safe to say that 996s have many more racing miles on them then 993 do.

Once sorted, my 996 race car performed flawlessly over the 4 years I raced it. After 3 years of racing, my 3.6L has leakdown numbers in the 4-5% range. BTW, I was racing againt 993TTs and 993RSCSs. A regurlar 993 had no chance in that fight.
Jim
Old 11-06-2007, 12:49 PM
  #69  
DC from Cape Cod
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
DC from Cape Cod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 3,727
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JimB
Chris,
I have no interest in joining another 993 vs 996 pissing match...
Jim

Your quote on the 996 forum indicates otherwise...

"In general the 993 forum is pretty much full of **** when it comes to this topic. The funny part is I think some of them actually believe what they are writing."

https://rennlist.com/forums/showpost...2&postcount=21

Why do all the 996 guys come here to join these threads? Why can't everyone accept that different people like different things about cars and call it a day?
Old 11-06-2007, 01:04 PM
  #70  
AVoyvoda
Racer
 
AVoyvoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

"So, weight went down (not up) by 55-110 lbs"

Not entirely correct Ray S. The tested curb weights (that's real life weight) are:
964 RS 1,249 kgs
964 turbo 1992 1,471 kgs
993 C2 non vario 1994 1,368 kgs
993 C2 vario 1,398 kgs
996 C2 2003 1,467 kgs
996 GT3 series II 1,420 kgs
996 GT3 RS 1,373 kgs
997 C2 3.6 1,476 kgs

Weight went UP with the 996 and the 997.
Old 11-06-2007, 01:27 PM
  #71  
TD in DC
Race Director
 
TD in DC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,350
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
"So, weight went down (not up) by 55-110 lbs"

Not entirely correct Ray S. The tested curb weights (that's real life weight) are:
964 RS 1,249 kgs
964 turbo 1992 1,471 kgs
993 C2 non vario 1994 1,368 kgs
993 C2 vario 1,398 kgs
996 C2 2003 1,467 kgs
996 GT3 series II 1,420 kgs
996 GT3 RS 1,373 kgs
997 C2 3.6 1,476 kgs

Weight went UP with the 996 and the 997.
You skipped the Gen I 996s altogether. The weight for the Gen I 996 was less than the 993. The Gen II 996 did increase in weight.

Nobody wants increased weight. Nobody. That said, the more important measure, arguably, is HP to weight. 993 really doesn't look very good in comparison to the 964, the 996 or the 997 using that criteria. Again, just talking stock for stock.
Old 11-06-2007, 01:37 PM
  #72  
Ray S
Ironman 140.6
Rennlist Member
 
Ray S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 13,794
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
Weight went UP with the 996 and the 997.
I am publishing Porsche's quoted weights, you are using magazine test weights. It's very easy to play your game (just look for a low optioned car and quote that weight vs a 996 with plenty of options). After all no two magazine test weights are ever the same (even when you compare the same model).

If you examine Porsche's numbers the 996 is lighter. However, it doesn't seem like honesty is what you are looking for. Why else would you ignore Porsche's published weights and try to confuse the issue by doing the following;

- Bringing up 964 and 997 weights
- Ignoring Porsche's published figures (After all, why would they know what the cars weigh?)
- Ignoring the Mk 1 996 C2 (it magically disapeared from your list)
- Bringing up GT3's and Turbo's, where did that come from?

Care to spin some more? Maybe next post you can bring up C4's, C4S's, Cabs, and Targa's.
Old 11-06-2007, 01:40 PM
  #73  
TD in DC
Race Director
 
TD in DC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,350
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by DC from Cape Cod
Why do all the 996 guys come here to join these threads? Why can't everyone accept that different people like different things about cars and call it a day?
Why do some of the 993 guys feel the need to twist the facts rather than just rest with the fact that they personally like the 993 better? Nothing wrong with that. Also, it is not as if the 993 guys never participate in these threads when they are on the 996 forum.

In any event, I agree 100% with Max:

Originally Posted by max911
Whatever 911you drive, have fun and be safe.



max
Old 11-06-2007, 01:41 PM
  #74  
chris322
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
chris322's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Who cares. Go back to the 996 forum and do the same thing that everyone does in their own car forum, i.e. talk about how great their car is and how smart they were for buying the best Porsche ever made.
Old 11-06-2007, 01:44 PM
  #75  
jimq
Burgled
Rennlist Member
 
jimq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Altamonte Springs, Fl/Gwynns Island, Va.
Posts: 22,384
Received 14 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
"So, weight went down (not up) by 55-110 lbs"

Not entirely correct Ray S. The tested curb weights (that's real life weight) are:
964 RS 1,249 kgs
993 C2 non vario 1994 1,368 kgs
993 C2 vario 1,398 kgs
.
Gee that means the 993 is a pig compared to the 964


Quick Reply: QUestion about 996 vs 993 production



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 09:45 AM.