Kevin H. in Atl..

I've heard others make these exact same comments, and on an engineer's drawing board there is physical basis for them, but in my ownership and driving of both a Boxster and 996, I find my experiences to be quite different.

In my 30k mi of Boxstering, I found the the transition from understeer to oversteer very predictable and easy to catch and control. The car could then be balanced, and sort of drifted through the rest of the corner. This, while tons of fun, is obviously not the quickest way through a corner.

I find my 996 to have FAR MORE rear grip than my Boxster had. Front grip is comparable, but my 996 has larger front wheels and tires which may explain the slight additional front grip of the 996.

The advantage of the 996 over the Boxster is on throttle post apex, where the substantially greater rear grip in the 996 is readily evident and usable. The 996 simply hunkers down (rear weight bias transfered to driven axle) allowing the driver to accelerate much more strongly out of the corner.

I should note that my car has standard suspension, which of course understeers. Row 030 or X74 may allow a driver to get the 996 rear out moreso than standard suspension, but this will occur after attaining much greater corner speeds.

I would describe the Boxster as "nimble, light, quick in transition" as it's slalom speeds indicate. I would describe the 996 as less so, but more planted and stable, and faster through corners.

An interesting site is http://www.track-challenge.com/main_e.asp, which actually has corner speeds and lateral acceleration in g's for a variety of cars on both the N'ring and Hockenheim short ring.

For example, on the Hockenheim short ring, of the four turns that were measured, the Boxster S equaled the 3.4 996's lateral acceleration on one turn. The 996 produced higher g-forces on the other three measured turns, and higher speeds in all turns.

On the N'ring, of the five turns measured, the Boxster S exceeded the 996 in g-force in one turn and equaled it in another. The 996 produced higher g-forces in the other three turns. As for speed, the Boxster S equalled the 996 in one turn. The 996 had higher speeds in the other four measured turns.

So, I would say that if a driver prefers light, nimble, precise, quick handling, he may enjoy the Boxster more than a 996. However, if ultimate speed is the desired outcome, the 996 will be the faster car. Even through corners.

TD in DC

In stock form, there is no question that my '02 996 is faster than was my '02 Boxster S. That said, I hated, and I really mean hated, my 996 when I first bought it with the stock suspension. In stock form, the 996 floated around like my father's oldsmobile. The front end lifted on acceleration, dove on braking and the back end drifted out through long, sweeping high-speed corners in a way that did not inspire confidence. That all changed when I installed PSS9s and adjustable GT3 swaybars on the 996. Now, I love my 996, and my only complaint is that it is not as light as was my Boxster S. The more I drive cars on the track (and I am no expert by any means), the more I grow to appreciate the detrimental effects of weight, and the more I have the urge to rip everything out of my car that is not necessary. Of course, my wife would kill me if she saw me destroying my 996 with its integrated dry sump, so I bought a 944 that has everything already stripped out of it. But, back to the subject at hand, I think that if a mid-engined Boxster and a rear-engined 996 had exactly the same (1) engine (say you were to drop a 3.6 in the back of the Boxster ala RUF) (2) brakees, and (3) suspension, the mid-engined Boxster would leave the 996 behind whether driven by novice drivers or very good drivers. If you did not have PSM on either vehicle, drivers who were neither novices nor experts might be a little better off in the 996 due to fact that it is easier to control slip angle (e.g., the back end kicks out more smoothly and predictably) and a lot more difficult to catch the Boxster when it does slip out.

Just my .02, and a very interesting discussion, I think.

Moral of the story? IMHO, if you get a 996, the first thing you should do is modify your suspension. My preference is with PSS9s and adjustable GT3 swaybars, but that is just me.

Kevin H. in Atl..

I agree the 996 stock suspension leaves a lot to be desired, but I wouldn't compare it to an Oldsmobile. I may install row 030. I only plan to keep my car for 1 more year, so putting more than $1k into suspension is not gonna happen. Also, I don't drive my cab on the track, so row 030 should be fine for me. As for the track, I find driving street cars on the track frustrating and a waste of time.

As for a modded Boxster outrunning a 911:
I would like to point out that simply because the Boxster is a mid-engine design does not mean a 3.6 Boxster will go around a track faster than a 3.6 911.

The 911's front/rear weight distribution is ~ 40/60. The Boxster's is ~47/53.
You'll find high performance mid-engined cars to have weight distribution MUCH MORE SIMILAR TO 911 than Boxster. A few examples (from memory, and someone please correct them if needed):

Lambo Murcielago: ~42/58
Lambo Gallardo: ~42/58
Ferrari Enzo: ~42/58
Carrera GT: ~42/58

F360 and 430, and Ford GT probably yield similar ratios.

So, the 911's weight distribution is 250% closer to that of these high performance mid-engined cars than that of the Boxster. The Boxster is most likely TOO NEUTRAL and traction limited for high horsepower applications.

But you're right, it IS an interesting discussion.

Sanjeevan

In stock form, the 996 floated around like my father's oldsmobile. Well, when you say 996, it probably mean all varaiants of it, the C4S may be AWD, but it's stock suspension is far superior...yeah, as you can guess I read the previous comments on awd

Re-animator

Basically, it is RoW M030 springs over aftermarket Bilstein Sport dampers with rear RoW M030 snubbers and rear M030 rear anti sway bar only. It has been confirmed by Bilstein technical that the aftermarket Bilstein Sports are have the same specifics in valving and rod sizing as the Bilsteins used in the X74. Not to mention that RoW M030s are linear springs vs. the progressive rears on X74.

porch

Interesting. I get using the more predictable linear springs, but beyond that, other than cost, is there any further advantage beyond a full x74 setup? You will be at ROW M030 ride height so I would think that you lose some of the advantages of the lower x74 height.

Re-animator

I see the 10mm increase in front ride height as an advantage for a road car. I scrap on nothing. By doing only the rear sway bar, the 10mm increase in altitude of the nose is negligible, IMHO. Linear rates are the biggest advantage with paying only 1/3 the cost of an X74, though.

autobahnNY

996 Carrera C2 weight distribution is 38/62

autobahnNY

Boxster/S weight distribution is 46/54 (986).

Kevin H. in Atl..

One of our local PCA members weighed his Boxster on racing scales producing the 47/53 I quoted. (remained consistent with and without driver, btw)

As for the 911 at ~40/60, I've seen this figure frequently. The current Panorama has an excellent tech article on braking systems in which they also reference the static weight distribution of the 911 as 40/60.

FWIW.

porch

I took a look at the track test data and it appears that the Boxster detailed data is for the older 986. My original comments were on the new 987 which has a faster Hockenheim lap time than the 997 and just a tick slower thatn the 997S. I think the 987 is a significant step up from the older cars.

autobahnNY

40/60 is closer to the turbo weight disrtubtion. I dont know about your local PCA friend, but Porsche's spec for the 986 and 987 is 46/54 and the Cayman is 45/55.

porch

I also may have found a partial answer to my original question: Can a suspension modded 996 match the handling of a 987? I found a post over on renntech that quotes the following Hockenheim times for a 996 C2:

1:16.9 min stock
1:16.2 min 030
1:15.7 min X74

The 1:15.7 matches the 987 time, but the 996 has a power advantage. My conclusion would be that the x74 gets you close handling wise, but still a little short. The combined packages are about the same.

Kevin H. in Atl..

Which is faster, 996 GT3 or 987?

porch

The GT3 lapped in 1:14.9 so yes, it's faster as I would have guessed. But then again, a GT3 is more than a suspension modded 996 right?