newport996

I can get a OEM Porsche top, frame and motor for under 3K......Aftermarket top only, like $1700....

snaproll

I don't know where Sid came up with 2002+ cars weighing 250 pounds more than the '99s, because this is the correct info. The 2002 car gained 25kg. over the earlier cars, got a bigger engine and better fuel economy.

Sid is wrong on the power to weight ratio also. Assuming a 300 HP pre 2002 car weighs 2900 pounds (they're actually about 2920) that's 9.67 pounds per HP. Assuming a 320 HP 2002 car weighs 3000 (mine is 2977 with full fuel), that's 9.375 pounds per HP. Better power to weight ratio and more torque at a lower RPM equates to a slightly faster car, both in acceleration and top speed.

The pre 2002 cars are fine machines, but as is Porsche's typical practice, the 2002 and later MY cars are improved over the earlier versions. The folks trying to tell you a stock '99 3.4 is faster than a stock '02 3.6 are the folks with the 3.4.....................

Sids911

Actually thanks for correcting me. I checked up my excel sheet and was reading the wrong columns !
The weight/power ratio is 4.6 Kg / PS for 2002+ and 4.7 Kg / PS for 1999 - not the other way around. For the non-metric, 1 PS is = 1 bhp. So that gives the 2002+ a slight advantage on paper.

What I'm not getting is the differences in what we're thinking is the real weight of the cars. I have it as 1467 Kg (2002+) vs 1399 Kg (1999). That's almost 150 lbs heavier !! Its less that my prior post of 250 lbs that I heard at 6speedonline.com but more than what you say. The run-of-the-mill edmunds mentions that they weigh the same ... what gives ?

I'm quite curious to find out the real weights of these cars. (And I've never weighed the car myself!). Anyone with more accurate numbers ?

Finally about the track times ....
The average track time for both these cars on the Nuerburgring is same (8.17 min). And on Hockenheim the 1999 is actually (noticeably) faster, 1.17.1 min vs 1.15.9 min (1.1 seconds faster).

Anyway, like I said the the performance differences are very marginal.

Finally, I'm not trying to sell anyone a 3.4L car ... I think all the 996s are awesome cars ... just wanted to present the facts (and also learn something new in the process!). People can then make a more informed decision. Every car has its pros and cons.

cheers !!!

rcg412

It is my understanding, that the MY01 bumpers are identical to MY02+.... so a MY01 does in fact have the increased airflow/cooling characteristics... (I could be wrong).

Riad

I had my 2001 for 4 years, loved it, but the 2004 seems much more refined inside and out.

mjet

Check out the post titled.... White smoke not at start-up (99)...... IMO.... I would/did buy a less optioned but newer 996, than a better optioned 99-01.....

Ray S

Porsche publishes the "real" weights (do you think they are lying?)

- 996 C2 Mk 1 ('99-'01) 1,320 kg (2,910 lbs)
- 996 C2 Mk 2 ('02-'04) 1,345 kg (2,965 lbs)
- 996 C4 Mk 1 1,375 kg (3,031 lbs)
- 996 C4 Mk 2 1,405 kg (3,097 lbs)
- 996 C4S ('02-'05) 1,495 kg (3,296 lbs)
- 996 GT3 Mk 1 1,350 kg (2,976 lbs)
- 996 GT3 Mk 2 1,380 kg (3,042 lbs)

Obviously, the list above will vary with optional equipment. The only way to find the weight for your car is to weigh it yourself.

Next you claim the new car is slower around a track than the old car??? Let's use some logic on this one........

Porsche decides to upgrade the car. They give it more hp, more torque (earlier in the curve), a stiffer chassis, better aero (reduce lift), a little more weight (55 lbs) and after all that they come up with a slower car (according to you)?????

Let's be honest. The "ring" times you are quoting are on different days, with different drivers, different tires (possibly), different track temperatures, different atmosheric conditions, etc, etc.....

In the end I believe the later cars are faster (I drove them before I bought mine and I could feel a difference).
Is it a HUGE difference???? Not in my opinion.
Does it change the entire character of the car??? Once again no.
Can a good driver make up the difference?? Absolutely!!

The early cars are great cars!!!! The late cars are great cars!!!

But, come on Sid do you really believe the stuff you are posting??
I'm not trying to flame you I promise

I'm just asking....

Tbred911

my owners manual for my 99 states 2907 lbs (1321 kg) if the 2002 is 1467kg (3227 lbs) then we are talking a diff of 320 lbs!!! thats significant; I think the 2000,2001 MY cars were heavier than the 99 by quite a bit (200+ lbs) and it could be the data you are looking at has the 2002 cars gaining 25KG over the 2000-2001 cars... as for speeds and track times check out www.track-challenge.com and you can compare a 99 3.4 to a 2002 3.6 side by side and you'll see acceleration and round times around the ring and hockenheim are very similar. Unfortunately that site doesn't have times for a 2000-2001 c2 carrera but does list times for a 2001 c4.... and I wouldn't say the 99 3.4 is faster but on par with a 02 3.6 with the nod going to the 3.6 for the "extras" that came with the new model year additions...

hope this clears things up.

Tbred911

Ray, where di u get info from above... I've never seen a 2002 c2 weighing in @ 2,965!!!

nick49

I went thru a simular delema and searched for the "perfect" car for me for 15 months. I studied all the changes, upgrades, etc from year to year and decided that the year wasn't that important. Most of the parts were designed years earlier and used on the Boxster so a '99 was actually the third production year.

I ended with a '99 three years ago and have been very happy with the car in all areas. Most of the improvements over the years have been mainly statistical and undetectable in the real world of driving. Things like more HP but more weight also, less lift at speed (how often do you drive over 150 mph?), 20%(?) more rigid chassis (maybe to deal with the excess weight?)

Anyway, I much perfer the mechanical throttle of the '99 and most owners will concur that have driven both. The lighter weight factor is a huge plus also. My '99 has the full leather interior with lots of interior options and sports seats that make the car absolutely stunning. The dealer said lots of '99s were very heavily optioned due to the Dot Com spike in frivolus income. The plastic window in my Cab has never been an issue. The hard top is a bonus and works very well too. My car has a factory replacement motor which is a big bonus as it has the later larger intermediate shaft and other late improvements.

Finally, if you look a many cars over the decades, it is apparent the first models are the most desireable in many areas. It's like the factory spent the most time and energy trying to get it right. Subsequent years tend to loose some of the essence of the original concept and have a lot of stuff added or changed solely to increase sales. I would buy another '99 and it may well be the best buy out there.

Adrian

There are two initial factors which one should consider when purchasing a Porsche.
1/. What you can afford which means using your head first.
2/. What your heart says is the car for you. This also requires part of the head because it's the size of the grin across your face that counts.

Then you have a PPI carried out by a reliable, reputable and knowledgeable person. If he passes the car then you can drive away happy, but understanding a USED car is NEVER perfect no matter what.

Oh yes always get a second opinion. Your spouse mainly especially if they have to foot some of the bills. Porsche ownership can get expensive.

I purchased the 99 C4 because it was the best of the models around at the time and it had and did everything I wanted it to do at a good price. I admit I got it at wholesale not retail.


Ciao,
Adrian.

Ray S

Unbelievable.....where are you getting your info??? My info is from Porsche....period! I got this info from four sources 1) off of the Porsche web site (before they changed models), 2) off of Porsche Model Brochures (I pick one up at the Chicago Auto Show every year), 3) My owners manual for my '02 996, 4) Model listings in Total 911 magazine (they list the specs for every 911 ever produced).

Porsche's lists all of their weights empty (the '99 C2 included) and without optional equipment. I am looking at my '02 manual right now and it lists the "Empty Weight" as 2,965 lbs. Where are you getting your data for an '02 C2 weight of 3,227?!?!

Furthermore Track challenge lists data from multiple different references all with different drivers, on different days, with different conditions, on different tires, etc. This is fine for making very broad comparisons, but it leaves a lot to be desired when trying to draw the conclusions that your are trying to make.

In my opinion the '99 is not on "par" with the later cars. It is significantly down on power and has virtually no weight advantage. The difference can easily be felt "seat of the pants" on a test drive (I drove Mk 1's and Mk 2's back to back before I purchased my car).

Finally, I stated my sources. What is your "source" for your '02 weight of 3,227?

Ahsai

Not try to complicate the matter further. Just wanna add one more data point.
My MY03 manual says "empty weight 3020lb to 3262lb depending on equipment" (coupe with manual transmission).

- Ahsai

Adrian

Guys,
Before too many people get their knickers in a knot Porsche provide a number of different empty weight figures.
Specifically US and EU Homologation. The EU figure which includes the driver adds 75kg or 165lbs over the US weight.
Then you have the Manual, Tiptronic, Coupe, Targa, Cabriolet C2 and then the C4 model individual weights. It would be very easy to end up with some of these large splits by mistake say comparing an American C2 Coupe with a EU C4 Tiptronic if you know what I mean.
Ciao,
Adrian.

Sids911

Well, I don't believe in any conspiracy theory that its Porsche who is "lying". And I don't believe in posting garbage, so what I posted was "good" - to the best to my knowledge.

What I was getting at was with ALL the various modifications done (bhp, weight etc), the absolute final end result is
- identical 0-60 times (4.8 seconds)
- almost identical lap times
- almost identical handling metrics (lateral grip, slalom speeds)

And I'm not talking about a vague 'seat of the pants' or an intermediate metric (like weight or bhp) - we're talking FINAL, END performance for similarly optioned cars.

I'm not that surprised or shocked - we're talking of a car which is even sold as the same model number - 996 !

In the end, I'm not trying to glorify a car model (there are a ton of better cars there) nor sell someone a 3.4L car nor spread anything propaganda !! Propaganda generally needs a motive ...

Peace !!

To the original poster - I guess you pretty much got all the information you wanted about the car models !! You should be able to make a well informed decision. And either way you go - enjoy the ride !!

cheers !!!