rs10

I just posted the same question on the 997 forum, but I guess it's equally appropriate for 996 forum readers. (And I'm curious to see if in this forum it will get completely different responses ... )

Anyway, I’m trying to decide between buying a 3.6 liter 996 (996.2) and a 997.1. While the 997 may have many advantages, the only one I am willing to pay so much more for is PASM. And while ride quality is more important to me than speed, I now think both the standard 996.2 and the 997.1 with PASM ride well enough, so the remaining big question for me is speed on track. (And while one would generally expect newer cars to be faster, the 996 actually has a slightly better power to weight ratio … .)

So I looked for lap times, starting with the Nurburgring of course, and yes, the 997.1 is 2 seconds faster. But then the 996 was driven by a Horst von Schauma (spelling?) (who is undoubtedly good, but is still a journalist, not a professional), and the 997.1 was driven by Walter Rohl, which surely counts for some of the difference (he’s 4 seconds faster than von Schauma in the Carrera GT, if I remember correctly), and the tires were three years more modern. On the other hand, the 996 had the sport suspension (though not the X74 suspension), and did the 997.1 driven by Rohl have PASM? If not, maybe the PASM car would be much closer to the PASM (and LSD) equipped 997.1 C2S with a LSD which did 8m02 (again driven by Rohl). I’ve found a few other times for other tracks, but there is always the question of which driver, which suspension option, which tires, what weather, LSD or not, etc.

However, surely many members with one of these cars have shared time on tracks with friends with the other, or have even owned both. Can anyone share any insight into which is faster, 996.2 (3.6 liter, with standard suspension) or 997.1 (3.6 liter, with PASM), and how much?

Actually, my initial question (in the title of this thread) is 996 C2 versus 997 C4. That’s because I’m going to buy a Targa, and the 996 Targa is 2wd whereas the 997.1 is 4wd. So while what I ultimately care about is which Targa is faster, I figure that whatever is true for the 996.2 C2 and 997.1 C4 will be more or less true of the targa versions. Similarly, while I’m not going to buy a US car, I figure that in this case, what is true in the US is true ROW. And any insight related to 996.2 versus 997.1 would be greatly appreciated (but please do specify which cars and suspensions are compared)!

Thanks!

Imo000

On a dry pavement and uless you are pushing some really high HP where traction is an issue, a 2WD will always be faster than an AWD. Every time power gets transfered, you loose HP.

ccaarmerciill

Don't take the nurburgring times with a grain of salt. Difference in temperature, humidity, driver differences... On a course that long makes comparing times down to a few seconds pretty moot in my opinion. I'd take the RWD car every time, personally I like the lower weight, less power train loss, and typically under steer less compared to AWD. But if you're just comparing a 997 to a 996, I'd take a 997 if $ was no deciding factor, but personally not the C4.

ivangene

unless you are getting 10/10ths out of either car - who cars, they are both fast and not more than a few 10th of a second apart from each other

I drive an 86' stock 3.2 with no motor mods and 199 hp (dyno'd) and on any given Saturday I can be faster than either of those cars - or slower

and at the end of the day we all get together and smile - so again - who cares

buy the one you like and enjoy it - if you find your data logger says you are on 100% throttle 80% of the time and you are really concerned about getting 0:03 removed form your lap times - readdress the question

Invius

I would say they are virtually identical. And +1 to what Ed said, I would look more at dragtimes.com, or something of the like to compare the 2...not a race course that takes 7 minutes to go around..and not comparing a journalist with a professional driver. If you've ever watched a pro drive a street car, the first thing they do is disable as much of the electronics as possible, so PASM would not have played a role in his times. Also like Ed said, buy the one you enjoy the most, that you will keep the longest, if that is your intent for your car.

Cheers,

DS

rpm's S2

2002 Coupe 0-60 was 5.0 seconds
2005 C4 was 4.8

A wash in the real world. The actual answer would almost exclusively depend on conditions and who was driving.

Given a choice between a 996.2 and a 997.1 I would go with the 997 if price were not a consideration. The rule of thumb has always been to buy the nicest, newest 911 you can afford.

I love my 996, but may move to a 997.2 in the future. If nothing just to get a newer, lower-mileage car with a better interior.

kromdom

IMHO, posted times, specs, etc. are nice to know (good for bragging rights and bench racing) but are not worth crap if average Joe Citizen is unable to extract the full potential out of the car. So my 2 cents: test drive both cars then buy whichever you're faster on.

Nedster

IMO isn't speed a little strange to differentiate these cars by? They are very different in many ways, other than speed. Fastest 996 Carrera was the 2004 40th AE 4.8s with LSD and 345HP as far as i am aware.

WalterRohrl

Of all the Porsche's I drove on the Nurburgring, I found the 996.2 to be the fastest. Hence I now drive a 2002 as my daily....heh heh heh.

That aside, in general a Narrow Body car will be "faster" than a Wide Body car (due to drag), assuming identical engines and a 2WD will be "faster" than a 4WD, assuming identical engines (due to weight).

The only real comparison that you can do between the scenarios are looking for published figures from Porsche themselves. While still possibly not correct, at least the source would be consistent. It's not like EVERY engine on a 996.2 has 320hp. Some have slightly more, some slightly less, maybe Manfred does something slightly different than Klaus on the line...(although part of their testing after assembly supposedly figures this out). Everyone just uses the published Porsche figure as the reference to compare items unless actual examples are available for testing/measuring at the same time, same place.

Also, a Targa with PASM likely has all kinds of other options on it anyway. Some will make one car heavier, some will make another ride worse. Can't really compare cars that are that close in speed without having the actual two examples on hand and testing them at the same time. Hell, if one of them has the tires inflated several PSI different than the other, that will affect BOTH ride and speed around whatever course is used...or just on the way to work in the morning.

rs10

Thanks everyone for the responses. I appreciate the insight, and also see that I should clarify some things.

First, my interest is in how fast they are on track, not in a straight line.

Second, while 2 seconds around the Nurburgring might not matter, I am wondering - and trying to find out - if the difference might not be a lot bigger. If the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove did not have PASM, then maybe half the 13 second difference between it at the 997.1 C2S with PASM was PASM. (I very much doubt 9% more hp could cut even 6 seconds off.) And maybe a 996 without the sport suspension would be 5 seconds slower. That would mean a 5 + 6.5 + 2 = 13.5 second difference. On a normal race track, that would suggest a 3-4 second difference, and that's huge. For that, I would pay more for the 997.1. On the other hand, maybe the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove did have PASM, and Rohl is 4 seconds faster than von Schauma in all cars, and the tires were two seconds faster, and 4wd makes the 997 C4 four seconds slower than the 997 C2. That would mean that - thanks to lighter weight and 2wd - the 996 is 8 seconds faster than the 997.1 C4. Which would make it a huge shame to pay for the 997.

Yes, the main thing about track days is enjoying yourself and improving. But it is still more fun for me if I'm somewhere near the middle of the pack - not so fast that I'm constantly stuck behind slower cars, nor so slow that I can't pass anyone and I'm always looking over my shoulder. And any 911 I can afford will be slower than most of the cars at track days I attend (this year, much less three years from now). Also, I always want my next car to be meaningfully faster than the last one. The first time I drove my current car on track, it was thrilling. The last time, a bit dull (no, it wasn't the Nurburgring). And it's not clear the 911's I'm looking at will be that much faster. So every bit counts.

And yes, maybe it is strange to differentiate the cars based on this. But of the things that I know about the two cars, there is nothing that makes me want to pay a lot more for the 997, and of the things I don't know, the only thing that would make me pay a lot more for the 997 is if it is a lot faster on track. If it is, I'll happily pay a lot more. (Well, there is one other thing I don't know yet, but hope to learn by test driving - if the 997 is (so much) more comfortable that it's a lot more fun to drive fast on the roads I am stuck driving on, even if the 996 is as much/more fun on smooth roads.)

rs10

Invius, can you let us know what that is based on? Your experience on track, perhaps?

Thanks!

Ahmet

I would skip the C4 unless your climate really necessitates it (and probably even then)... And I imagine a 997 C2 is slightly faster than a 996 C2, there is a delta in price between the two though.

As a side note, the proliferation of electronics in the 997 would make me shy away from them, unless you're going for MK2 C2S or something, at which point you get a meaningful upgrade.

MiamiC70

996 40th Anniversary w/x51 & LSD

KrazyK

I agree with several of the above posts. My owners manual says the top speed is:
C2 177mph
C4S 174mph

Why does it matter? Either car is faster than any of use can drive it and either can be modified to be faster than the other. Like any of us is ever going to approach anywhere close to these speeds, what in the world are you looking for? I have got mine to 75mph on IH-10 a few times if that impresses you.

And,, Invius, why must Mr. Cash flip us off everytime you post?

Invius

RS, I've driven both (had a friend that had a 997 C4, that sold it and got a GTS, and test drove a MK2 C2 before I bought my Mk1), but no track experience with either. I'm basing my assessment on the fact that the 996 is lighter, but slightly less HP than the 997, however it is RWD, which is going to be faster off the line than than AWD (when comparing apples to apples) in almost every circumstance where road conditions are not a factor...so tit for tat, I think you'll end up pretty close to even.

@Krazy, Because he's the man, that's why.

Cheers,

DS