leedav

TD,

You are mistaken. It's not in the equipment codes, I don't have a switch, I've never seen an indicator.. I've had it sideways at the track... If I have PSM, it certainly is discreet...

TD in DC

Well Lee, it is not the first time I have been mistaken, so I may have been wrong. Nonetheless, before posting, I checked out the order guides for the '04, and I did not see it. Also, pages 58-59 of the manual state that PSM automatically comes on automatically when you start the motor, which confused me. Upon a second review, I see that it was mandatory only with the technics and advanced technics packages, both of which were very popular. so, you could get a car without PSM if you did not get certain packages.

I wonder why people talk about the option to not have PSM as being an advantage for the early cars. If you always had the option to not buy PSM, what is the advantage for the '99? Oh well, you learn something every day.

leedav

Maybe the person who ordered it (I bought it off the lot) had it deleted...

TD in DC

Yours has the technics or advanced technics package?

Here is what the ordering guide says:

P82 Technic Package
Includes options: 342 Heated Seats, 446 P83 $6,085
Wheels Caps w/Color Crest, 476 PSM, 680
Bose Sound Package, P15 Power Seats, P74 Bi-
Xenon w/Washers

P83 Advanced Technic Package
Includes options: 342 Heated Seats, 446 P82 $10,185
Wheels Caps w/Color Crest, 476 PSM, 680
Bose Sound Package, 692 Remote CD
Changer, P11 Rain Sensor/Dimming Mirror P15
Power Seats, P16 PCM, P74 Bi-Xenon
w/Washers

My car has the advanced technic package so it was included . . .

leedav

I don't think so. I have US M030, Bose, Thick Steering Wheel, leather seats, 18' alloys, Wheel Caps (I sold them to ekename after upgrading to Boothe).

No mention of PSM in the standard equipment column. I'm sure it would be there, and there would be a switch to turn it off. They even list stuff like OBDII and power steering.

TD in DC

Well, that makes more sense. I was trying to say in a confused manner that PSM is mandatory only as part of the technics or advanced technics packages. since you do not have either of those packages, you could order, or not order, PSM as you choose.

If you had the choice whether to order PSM or not, why do so many people bitch about PSM on the 996? If you don't want it, don't order it.

leedav

QED. You can't NOT have PSM and PASM in a 997.

snaproll

It goes away in a hurry once I get in................

Rob in WA

LSD interferes w/PSM ( like on the CGT ), it was an option for MY99 C2s, that combined with direct throttle linkage ( no e-gas ) makes those MY99s very desirable - IMHO.

10 GT3

First, I like how I'm being fought by supporting my points. If you can afford and choose to buy a 2-3 year old 3.6l, you could obviously afford to buy a 3.4l, but don't. There is a big difference between saying both are equal and saying that the price difference doesn't justify the cost difference. Pointing out that the more expensive 3.6l Turbo and GT3 also have better performance and costs more also supports the same points I made.

Weight is only a single factor. Having less unsprung weight matters more than less chassis weight. Power to weight taking into account the "area under the curve" along aerodynamics (coefficient of drag and frontal area) determine acceleration. Aerodynamic forces increase at a cubed rate with speed meaning weight matters less the faster you go. A reduction in weight can't counteract aerdynamic forces, but an increase in HP can. Chassis improvements and braking can also make significant improvements in track times. The C6 Z06 weighs almost 200 lbs less, has almost 50 more hp, a wider wheel/tire combination and bigger brakes than an 02' GT2; yet only matches track times at the Nurburgring. On paper it is better in every area, in execution it is only equal. It is the same reason why a 300 lb lighter 3.4l Carrera Coupe is only able to match a 3.6l Targa at the Nurburgring. Porsche didn't add weight just to add weight; they did it to improve chassis and steering response. Why would you ever add a strut tower brace, roll bar or subframe connectors if they just added weight?

I went through the same decision myself as being asked here. Rather than read or ask opinions, I drove at over a dozen cars to make up my mind. I never put a post on a board for input. I recommend anyone else trying to make the decision, do the same. I drove a couple 3.4l's. I almost bought a low mileage 00' Coupe. I drove a 3.6l just to see the comparison and the difference is extremely noticeable, substantually more than I would have expected. If I had kept my limit at 35K, I would have bought the 3.4l and been very happy with it. I also drive a very low mileage 01' Turbo that was about $15K more than the range of an 02' Carrera (almost twice the price of the 00' Carrera). To be honest, I noticed less of a difference between the Turbo and NA 3.6l than I did between the 3.4l and the 3.6l, but the Turbo is a very different car. My compromise was to get a 3.6l Carrera, that does not mean it is better or equal to a Turbo in performance. If I had gone the Turbo route, it would have quickly gone Stage 4 within the first couple of months. I don't regret not buying the turbo, but I am currently considering moving up to a GT3 in the fall.

If you believe the performance is the same for a 3.4l and a 3.6l, I have a simple challenge. Keep in mind that Porsche always under rates their performance figures. Porsche rates the 0-60 as 4.9 for the 3.6l C4S and 4.8 for the 276lb lighter 3.6l Carrera and the new 997 Carrera. I am going to spot this challenge 276 lbs to start with by only using the C4S numbers. Both Car & Driver and Motor Trend both did long term tests of production US 3.6l Carrera 4S models. For 0-60, Car & Driver got a 4.5 and Motor Trend got a 4.6. At the 1/4 mile Car & Driver passed the traps in 13.0 @ 108 while Motor Trend was able to do a 12.9 @ 108.7. Porsche quotes the acceleration figures for the new 997 Carrera the same as the 996 due to an increase of 5 hp offset by 55 lbs of increased mass, so for reference Car & Driver was able to achieve a 0-60 of 4.3 and a 1/4 mile of 12.8 @ 109 for a non-S 997 Carrera. My challenge is for you to prove the performance is the same by simply finding a single independent article of a production US 3.4l Carrera from ANY source were it shows it was able match the numbers the either of these C4S cars. Good luck.

himself

I don't want to get into the mix here. But I saw a challenge, and it just so happens I saved a link to this information when I was shopping for my 2000 C2. I actually haven't confirmed the veracity of this, but it at least points north. Specs are for 3.4L 996's (1998-2000). Shows 0-60 at 4.6 (Road and Track + Car and Driver); QM at 13.2 (R&T + C&D).

Autobahn Site

Or click here to select from different models and specs. Comparisons match your previously posted numbers.

I know this isn't definitive, but does this count as "ANY source"? Is there a prize for meeting the Challenge? I'll take a RUF Turbo Upgrade

Oh, while I'm at it, here is another source with *slightly* different numbers: 4.9 and 13.4 for a 99 911. And don't forget MSN autos: . (anything Microsoft puts its seal on MUST be true!) -> 4.73 and 13.28 and that's TWO decimal places of accuracy - sweet.

And, this is clearly bootstrapping, but it has numbers:

"And that's all I have to say about that" (Gumpism)

-td

Tbred911

A reduction in weight by 10% is equivalent to increasing HP by 10%


The wheels on the 3.6 cars (5-spoke lightweights) are MUCH ligher than the fat twisities used on the 3.4 car... there is definitely some torque loss by using the 3.4 turbo twisties as they are very heavy and one can extract more noticeable performance by going to lighweight rims like a Champion RG5.

stock vs. stock your completely right; especially in terms of engine flexibility - this is where the extra tq of the 3.6 shines*** but if you slap on a ROW 030 kit/PSS9 with the $$ you have saved they will feel similar/better based on suspension option...

less of a difference? in what sense? the turbo is *blazingly* fast and a 3.6 car doesn't have a chance in hell in keeping up with a turbo....

Motortrend tested an early 996 (stock 99) @ 4.6 and 13.1 ; my own roll on tests with a C4S revealed to me that I slowly pulled on that C4S (not by much but I was slowly getting by him); also my friend has a well broken in 997 with Champion lightweight wheels and he could not get by me all day... (this is through strait line racing from roll ons betweeen 40-120) and we did this run many times... at the end of the day he commented on how my 996 was the first 996 he couldn't get by... all I've done is a GIAC flash, PSE and K&N;

stuart_w

I have a 1998 3.4 model and love it, but I have no basis for comparison with an 02 but I really doubt you will notice the difference. The real plus is that you can spend all the money you saved on mods like sports exhaust, SSK, improved audio (a must on earlier models), improved suspension and control arms etc. etc etc. Each little mod makes you like it even more and so my recommendation is find a really good car (one thats been cared for) and dont worry too much about the year. A good 99 beats a crappy 02 IMO.

Rob in WA

This statement makes you lose all credibility.

stuart_w

Great thread. A little ironic that Adrian from Switzerland doesn't want to talk about watches but please lets not start the thread about underwear. I worry we may get photos.