Very interesting discussion, keep it up please. Taking notes over here

 

While I have both a 996 and 986, I have never tracked them. All my track times have been in Mini Coopers and various Lemons and Chump cars. That said, on mountain roads I think the 986 is hands down better handling. I wish I enjoyed looking at it as much as the 996 then I would be able to have just one sports car.

On a side note, I used to do a lot o PCA event with my Mini. 911 guys could not stand to give me a point by, My friends and I actually kept a tally of how many spins occurred in front of me because they pushed it too hard in the corner, lifted, I get past with out a point!

 

The consensus here is that the 986 is a better handling car than the 996. This discussion also led to some passionate opinions and claims made by some that others were poor drivers or in my case "in need of more track time". A few years ago Car and Driver did skid pad testing was done between a 2011 Cayman R and a 2010 GT3. The tests were done to measure G forces and grip as it related to the handling of both cars. The power differential between these cars would have no influence on the outcomes of these tests.
At the limits of traction the findings were conclusive, the GT3 was the superior handling car. These results are the result of a pro driver driving both cars to the limit.
Another similar review was done at the same time between a 2011 Boxster Spyder and GT3 RS written up in Excellence. Again the pro driver found the GT3 to be the superior handler while the non pro greatly enjoyed the dynamics and feedback of the Boxster.
Having driven all those cars I am inclined to agree with the results that ultimately in the right hands the rear engine car will produce a better result in a corner at the limit. For the rest of us mere mortals we can enjoy either car and have years of fun exploring those limits.

 

you can't compare a GT3 with all of its nannies and active suspension to a car that does not have that

A comparison between C2 and a Cayman S or Boxster S would be better.The reason I say S as it narrows the HP difference
Or a testing between a 991 GT3 and 981 GT4. I would bet the GT4 would outperform the GT3

 

I'm shocked that a test of the pinnacles of Porsche's track ready cars are found to out perform lesser cars! shocked I tell you!! Shocked!



Discussing that test and the results has zero bearing on the discussion at hand of Boxsters/Caymans against the matching (same performance options) 911.

If you put a normal 911 in those tests against the GT3 I'm sure you'd be shocked to find that the GT3 still comes out on top.

The Cayman R and Boxster Spyder are nothing to pan, but they are tarted up versions of the base car. The GT3 is a substantially different car than the base 911 (different motor design, different suspension, different breaks, different chassis in some cases, etc...).

 

Jay

The GT3, which I have owned and tracked does not have much in the way of Nannies. Both the Cayman R and the GT3 of the 987/997 generation were basically high performance/track based versions. What ever minimal nannies either car has would need to be defeated by the pro to achieve the best handling result. But of course you knew that as you have superior driving skills.
As far as HP differences that is a moot point, when cornering at the limit or testing on the skid pad, the higher HP engine does not provide any advantage. As a matter of fact it may be a liability.
Both cars are amazing, the 911 is king.

 

I have been avoiding this thread because I find it a little silly. The Boxster/Cayman and 911 are entirely different cars. What value is there in comparing apples to oranges? That said I feel the need to defend the 911.

The Boxster/Cayman is mid-engined as such it has very neutral handling. It is great for the inexperienced driver and pro. It is very forgiving of small mistakes and follows the line very predictably. On today's freeways that we call racetracks, they are great cars they are also great on the road. But.. they are not faster than a 911 even with equal power in the hands of a driver experienced in driving a 911. A 911 can simply do things no car other than a rear-wheel drive rear-engined car can do. There is a reason that until the advent of effective AWD systems most of the successful rally cars were rwd/re cars. Most rallies were really a series of controlled drifts punctuated with short bursts of straight line driving.

The 911 does not have snap-oversteer. It is very unforgiving if you don't learn to control the limits of adhesion but every generation is more forgiving. If you know your car you can feel when the rear tires are just beginning to break away and judiciously and smoothly adjust your inputs to regain traction. If you can't feel when the rear end loses traction, well that really isn't the car's fault is it? Once the rear end is sufficiently out of line you are going out backwards. The car tried to tell you, you just didn't listen. Here is where the 911 stands above the others, you can induce the slippage to make a line that apexes much later since are using the slippage to turn in at an angle beyond the normal limits of your steering geometry and then rapidly increase your pedal input until you feel it snap back into adhesion. You can make turns on a narrow road in a 911 that you could never take at the same speed in any lesser car. You never mash the gas, 911s expect and respond favorably to balanced inputs.

Also if you think a 911 can spin, one of the downsides of a mid-engined car is that if you really drive at eleven tenths of your ability, when it spins, it spins like a top. A central pivot point with low outboard weight is the exact same design as a child's toy top and it reacts the same way.

 

Tharbin thank you for your well worded reply. I agree with many of your points and applaud your ability to express yourself so clearly.
I do not believe this is a silly thread because it seems to be a big topic of discussion amongst Porsche folks. Whether we like it or not, the merits of the Boxster Vs 911 has been debated since the introduction of the Boxster in 1997 and the debate will probably continue long into the future.
What I have found silly is that certain individuals on this thread have resorted to personal attacks of others driving abilities, to justify their opinions. That approach is childish and unnecessary on this forum.
We all have varying degrees of skill sets and abilities when it comes to driving. We enjoy this forum because we are ultimately expressing and sharing our experiences with automobiles we all cherish. From the experience of a seasoned driver to the discovery process of a novice, all these topics have tremendous value to us all.

 

Kurt,

I did not find the thread silly either, at first. It is actually a good discussion to help a potential Porsche owner to make an informed decision. When we get into which car is faster without regards to driver ability or venue, it gets silly.

So to add fuel, which do you think would do better on a short dirt track oval?

 

I know they used to outfit older 911 's for dirt tracks and rally use. Personally no experience on dirt ovals. From other off-roading experience, dirt bikes, ATV's, etc., I would question the ground clearance of these modern cars. They seem to be built for road use exclusively.
From a hypothetical stand point, I know what it feels like to exceed traction limits and spin a Boxster on track, so on a surface like dirt I would be overly cautious. Your thoughts?

 

From a ground clearance perspective they are both horrible but theoretically, a mid-engine design is the worst possible arrangement for a dirt track oval.

It occurs to me that 5ch3ll made a very good observation earlier. If this thread is really a thread to talk about the handling characteristics then we really should separate the 996 C2 and the 996 C4. They are very different. The C2 is like a somewhat tamer late-air-cooled 911 whereas the C4 is, well it is a little hard to explain. You know it is in there, you just know it is a 911 but you have drive very stupid to get it to break free and I'm not sure what it would do. I haven't had occasion to try to kill myself with it since I got it.

 

If you are referring to my teasing of Cuda and 5ch3ll, well they are both friends of of mine and I was not being serious, then again, I do consistently Cuda at AX and the track

 

^^ I, for one, was HIGHLY insulted, defamed, disparaged, denigrated, maligned, libeled, slandered, and calumniated. This is despicable, atrocious, outrageous, contemptible, abominable, and reprehensible,

You can expect a stern letter from my attorney shortly, as soon as he sobers up.

Let's see.... 0.3 seconds faster with 58 more HP. OK, yeah, you win.

P.S., How exactly do you "Cuda" at the track? I haven't noticed you doing it. I will pay more attention next time.

 

So you west coasters were just busting, my apologies. Happy to hear you guys have that level of camaraderie.
C2 Vs. C4 another interesting discussion. My mechanic tells me that he has seen failures to the differentials of 996 C4's used on track. The newer cars with electronic AWD may be different. Your thoughts?

 

it was the new fingers that I just had attached. It was supposed to say " I do consistently beat Cuda at AX and the track.

A win is a win and besides you had those RE-71 cheater tires. I just had Direzza Star Specs