996 Turbo?
08-14-2014, 02:48 AM
#47
Rennlist Member
Not for me...
See one in your rear view mirror, you may ask yourself, check out those head lamps, is it a fat Boxster, or? If you want rocket ship performance, the 400 HP will turn your head…
On the track, they eat brakes. Dem cars is heavy! My pal's 996 Turbo suffers from a severe lack of cooling air to the brakes in the stock configuration, no serious ducting to speak of. He has pretty much fried his front calipers. They eat tires too, an added expense as Turbo tires tend to cost more than 993 tires.
The all wheel drive also tends to mask driver error. It is probably a little tougher to drive a N/A 993 well. Some say, just remove the front wheel drive, easily done and lose 150 Lbs. in the process. Then you have a GT2 configuration…GT2 cars can be a handful, the genuine GT2 cars are often referred to as the "widow makers".
Is this "sour grapes"? Not really…I have had quite a few opportunities to buy a lower mileage 996 Turbo…just could not part with Baby, after all these years…from December 1999 to now….14 years and 65,000 miles together…and the car has been extremely reliable.
On the track, they eat brakes. Dem cars is heavy! My pal's 996 Turbo suffers from a severe lack of cooling air to the brakes in the stock configuration, no serious ducting to speak of. He has pretty much fried his front calipers. They eat tires too, an added expense as Turbo tires tend to cost more than 993 tires.
The all wheel drive also tends to mask driver error. It is probably a little tougher to drive a N/A 993 well. Some say, just remove the front wheel drive, easily done and lose 150 Lbs. in the process. Then you have a GT2 configuration…GT2 cars can be a handful, the genuine GT2 cars are often referred to as the "widow makers".
Is this "sour grapes"? Not really…I have had quite a few opportunities to buy a lower mileage 996 Turbo…just could not part with Baby, after all these years…from December 1999 to now….14 years and 65,000 miles together…and the car has been extremely reliable.
08-14-2014, 04:16 AM
#48
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I laugh when I read these threads (and they repeat every few weeks...) because the comparisons are always between a naturally aspirated car vs a turbocharged car - and often the much less powered car is the preferred choice.
Ok, if this was a non-turbo 996 vs a non-turbo 993 comparison, then I think the discussion goes quite different. The downsides of grenading engines, slab side styling and ugly headlights more than offset any of the positive features of the non-turbo 996. There are virtually NO discussions about trading a 993 for a 996, its always trading a 993 for 996TT.
So really the differential is strictly around power and reliability. There are very few discussion to move just because of looks, or handling, ergometrics - it always seems to come down to the power being the key enablers. If the other factors were important, the 996 non-turbo would not be valued cheaper than used Honda.
From a power spectrum, we have:
- Stock 993 - adequate power but have to work the engine to get speed
- Upgraded 993 -very expensive for medium increases in power
- 993TT - quite a bit of power, but priced out of reach of many 993 owners
- 996 - more power than the stock 993, but negatives outweigh any advances in design or technology
- 996TT - more power than a 993TT for almost the same money as a 993, reliable power outweighs the looks
- 997 - more power than the 996 with more 993 styling cues - which means the jump from a 993 to 997's is much more likely than to a 996, and may in fact match the jumps to the 996TT.
- 997TT - again, out of reach of most 993 owners due to cost
Now that was a bit long-winded ..
Cheers,
Mike
Ok, if this was a non-turbo 996 vs a non-turbo 993 comparison, then I think the discussion goes quite different. The downsides of grenading engines, slab side styling and ugly headlights more than offset any of the positive features of the non-turbo 996. There are virtually NO discussions about trading a 993 for a 996, its always trading a 993 for 996TT.
So really the differential is strictly around power and reliability. There are very few discussion to move just because of looks, or handling, ergometrics - it always seems to come down to the power being the key enablers. If the other factors were important, the 996 non-turbo would not be valued cheaper than used Honda.
From a power spectrum, we have:
- Stock 993 - adequate power but have to work the engine to get speed
- Upgraded 993 -very expensive for medium increases in power
- 993TT - quite a bit of power, but priced out of reach of many 993 owners
- 996 - more power than the stock 993, but negatives outweigh any advances in design or technology
- 996TT - more power than a 993TT for almost the same money as a 993, reliable power outweighs the looks
- 997 - more power than the 996 with more 993 styling cues - which means the jump from a 993 to 997's is much more likely than to a 996, and may in fact match the jumps to the 996TT.
- 997TT - again, out of reach of most 993 owners due to cost
Now that was a bit long-winded ..
Cheers,
Mike
08-14-2014, 11:34 AM
#49
They were. Care to join me in an analysis of a torsion bar chassis v. a 964? Or a 993 v. 996? Not much overlap. 964 --> 993? Refinement, and that's all.
Getting a bit tired of the secret handshakeness of the whole 993 thing. Or the air cooled thing if we're going to go all in. Where was everyone in '92, when the company was about ready to go down the tubes? Or even a decade before that when the 911 was due to be killed off.
Getting a bit tired of the secret handshakeness of the whole 993 thing. Or the air cooled thing if we're going to go all in. Where was everyone in '92, when the company was about ready to go down the tubes? Or even a decade before that when the 911 was due to be killed off.
On paper, no arguments there, but history has relegated the 993 as the pinnacle of aircooled 911 development; whether richly deserved or not.
I was graduating high school in 92' so I obviously couldn't "join the party" then. Nostalgia is a powerful sales tool; it tends to gloss over shortcomings with a delicious glaze of warm adolescent memories.
08-14-2014, 12:10 PM
#50
Instructor
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I laugh when I read these threads (and they repeat every few weeks...) because the comparisons are always between a naturally aspirated car vs a turbocharged car - and often the much less powered car is the preferred choice. Ok, if this was a non-turbo 996 vs a non-turbo 993 comparison, then I think the discussion goes quite different.
08-14-2014, 01:03 PM
#51
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
That is why they are compared - the argument "look, I can get 200 more HP for virtually the same money" is why this comparison keeps coming up and up. Even when the 996 was depreciated to the same price as the 993's, there were not a lot of people jumping - and I was there at that time - because of the styling and IMS issues which were then starting to, pardon the pun, explode, without that quantum leap in power to offset the pain.
IMHO, the temptation to jump is, again primarily but not exclusively, driven by the relatively cheap in porsche terms increase in performance.
I think we are talking the same thing from different angles, but I also think we do not agree on the primary driver. The prices being close to equal is the enabler, but the driver for the decision to move is power.
Cheers,
Mike
08-14-2014, 01:23 PM
#52
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Mike, I think that the decision is based on power if it's not a daily driver. If it is, the decision could very well be based on a more modern car's merits - interior, A/C, possibly safety. Or it could be based on the old adage "buy the newest Porsche you can afford", than the primary consideration shifts back to the price (though in this case it should be a normally aspirated 997).
I daily drive a 993 and am not interested in power at all, quite honestly. Nor am I interested in a 996s. But than again, I'm a fossil. Wait, wait. Most of us here are fossils
BTW, the value discussion might also constitute itself as: "Should I buy a 993 or a 996.1 plus a $20K daily driver?" or "Should I buy a 993 plus a daily 996.1 and a race Miata?". So i would not throw the pricing/value out of the equation.
I daily drive a 993 and am not interested in power at all, quite honestly. Nor am I interested in a 996s. But than again, I'm a fossil. Wait, wait. Most of us here are fossils
BTW, the value discussion might also constitute itself as: "Should I buy a 993 or a 996.1 plus a $20K daily driver?" or "Should I buy a 993 plus a daily 996.1 and a race Miata?". So i would not throw the pricing/value out of the equation.
08-14-2014, 01:30 PM
#53
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I agree there are other factors for sure, but I think it's primarily about the increase in performance - otherwise it would be a non-brainer to switch to a stock 996's - its got all more modern conveniences and it's 1/2 the price! Why does not never happen? - it does not have the performance increase to override why we do not migrate to the $15,000 996.
There may be a factor around reliability given the only car in the 996 lineup with a bullet proof engine is the 996TT.
And yes, I am a fossil too - although that 2010 GT3 that I can move to without too much pain from my Turbo is sure tempting ....
Cheers,
Mike
There may be a factor around reliability given the only car in the 996 lineup with a bullet proof engine is the 996TT.
And yes, I am a fossil too - although that 2010 GT3 that I can move to without too much pain from my Turbo is sure tempting ....
Cheers,
Mike
08-14-2014, 01:54 PM
#54
I laugh when I read these threads (and they repeat every few weeks...) because the comparisons are always between a naturally aspirated car vs a turbocharged car - and often the much less powered car is the preferred choice.
Ok, if this was a non-turbo 996 vs a non-turbo 993 comparison, then I think the discussion goes quite different. The downsides of grenading engines, slab side styling and ugly headlights more than offset any of the positive features of the non-turbo 996. There are virtually NO discussions about trading a 993 for a 996, its always trading a 993 for 996TT.
So really the differential is strictly around power and reliability. There are very few discussion to move just because of looks, or handling, ergometrics - it always seems to come down to the power being the key enablers. If the other factors were important, the 996 non-turbo would not be valued cheaper than used Honda.
From a power spectrum, we have:
- Stock 993 - adequate power but have to work the engine to get speed
- Upgraded 993 -very expensive for medium increases in power
- 993TT - quite a bit of power, but priced out of reach of many 993 owners
- 996 - more power than the stock 993, but negatives outweigh any advances in design or technology
- 996TT - more power than a 993TT for almost the same money as a 993, reliable power outweighs the looks
- 997 - more power than the 996 with more 993 styling cues - which means the jump from a 993 to 997's is much more likely than to a 996, and may in fact match the jumps to the 996TT.
- 997TT - again, out of reach of most 993 owners due to cost
Now that was a bit long-winded ..
Cheers,
Mike
Ok, if this was a non-turbo 996 vs a non-turbo 993 comparison, then I think the discussion goes quite different. The downsides of grenading engines, slab side styling and ugly headlights more than offset any of the positive features of the non-turbo 996. There are virtually NO discussions about trading a 993 for a 996, its always trading a 993 for 996TT.
So really the differential is strictly around power and reliability. There are very few discussion to move just because of looks, or handling, ergometrics - it always seems to come down to the power being the key enablers. If the other factors were important, the 996 non-turbo would not be valued cheaper than used Honda.
From a power spectrum, we have:
- Stock 993 - adequate power but have to work the engine to get speed
- Upgraded 993 -very expensive for medium increases in power
- 993TT - quite a bit of power, but priced out of reach of many 993 owners
- 996 - more power than the stock 993, but negatives outweigh any advances in design or technology
- 996TT - more power than a 993TT for almost the same money as a 993, reliable power outweighs the looks
- 997 - more power than the 996 with more 993 styling cues - which means the jump from a 993 to 997's is much more likely than to a 996, and may in fact match the jumps to the 996TT.
- 997TT - again, out of reach of most 993 owners due to cost
Now that was a bit long-winded ..
Cheers,
Mike
My apologies to all 996 and 996TT owners.
08-14-2014, 01:57 PM
#55
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I know of two recent 996tt that sold with less than 25k miles and completely stock for under $40k. And I have seen many 60k mile 996tt's for sale for well under $35k. It would be very hard to find a comparable, stock NB 993 with the same miles for the same price in the current market. I would guess a clean NB 993 with under 25k miles would easily be priced in the upper $50k's.
08-14-2014, 02:07 PM
#56
Rennlist Member
Just awoke from a nice little AM nap...
I know, you are slaving away, and I am napping. Just "pay your dues", slave away for 35 years and you can nap too!
Here is the solution to your dilemma. Have your transmission rebuilt to a close ratio box. I did it, spent somewhere between $8,500 and $9,000…worth every dollar.
The first time I went through the gears, especially 2nd to 3rd….awesome, feels like a turbo.
Here is the solution to your dilemma. Have your transmission rebuilt to a close ratio box. I did it, spent somewhere between $8,500 and $9,000…worth every dollar.
The first time I went through the gears, especially 2nd to 3rd….awesome, feels like a turbo.
08-14-2014, 09:00 PM
#57
Drifting
I agree there are other factors for sure, but I think it's primarily about the increase in performance - otherwise it would be a non-brainer to switch to a stock 996's - its got all more modern conveniences and it's 1/2 the price! Why does not never happen? - it does not have the performance increase to override why we do not migrate to the $15,000 996.
08-15-2014, 12:59 PM
#58
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know, you are slaving away, and I am napping. Just "pay your dues", slave away for 35 years and you can nap too!
Here is the solution to your dilemma. Have your transmission rebuilt to a close ratio box. I did it, spent somewhere between $8,500 and $9,000…worth every dollar.
The first time I went through the gears, especially 2nd to 3rd….awesome, feels like a turbo.
Here is the solution to your dilemma. Have your transmission rebuilt to a close ratio box. I did it, spent somewhere between $8,500 and $9,000…worth every dollar.
The first time I went through the gears, especially 2nd to 3rd….awesome, feels like a turbo.
08-15-2014, 01:14 PM
#59
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
You get a bonus with the 993TT - the gearbox ratios are closer to eurospec than the NA 993's, and with 400+HP and lots of bottom end, I find it pretty well perfect. When I bought mine at the astronomical price of $64K CDN, i rationalized $8K away because I did not need to regear the box.
I have driven regeared 993's, they are better but I found it was not a quantum jump in performance that seems to be always mentioned. Perhaps it was the specific gearing on those cars, but I came away thinking that it was nice, but not worth the large outlay of money (and at the time I had a NA 993).
Maybe I need to sample a few more regeared cars ...
Cheers,
Mike
