Tim Burns

I've owned a boxster for four years now and have loved the handling of the car. Last week I took delivery of my new 2003 X50 TT. I absolutely love the car. But, for some reason the Turbo feels "loose" to me when compaired to the Boxster. I don't know if that's the best way to describe it and I am by no means an experienced sports car driver. But do any of you understand what I mean, or am I just crazy.

In any case, I love the Turbo and haven't gotten the Boxster out of the garage since the 911 came in. I can't wait to get 2,000 miles on it!

KPV

The 966TT suspension is a compromise to say the least. Many members have gone the route of suspension upgrades. These vary from simple spring replacements (not generally recommended) to full coilovers from Bilstein, H&R and others. You are going through the learning curve that we have all experienced. I would recommend you do some searching on the board and you will find that coilovers are the answer to your perceived "looseness". I know it may seem odd to have to upgrade the suspension of a car that costs over one hundred thousand dollars, but it simply has to do with Porsche's decision to try and appeal to more users in the US market by providing a suspension that is not as stiff or harsh as the European counterpart.

ypshan

Tim,

You may also want to spend some time to get used to the stock setting and feel.

I let an instructor drive my stock TT during an autocross and he turned in a time that's only 3 seconds away from the best time in all stock Porsches (lots of Boxter S) in just one try. Since I don't have competition tires (2 seconds difference) and he believes he can push another couple of seconds out of the car, it's possible that one can turn in the best time with just tire change and more skill/tries.

I am not an experienced sports car driver and almost all my instructors (some have very heavily modified cars that are not street legal) told me that the stock settings are just fine and I should only consider changing them when I have more time with the car and becomes more experienced.

racer63

My previous car, a Corvette Z06, actually handled far better than my 996TT on autocross courses yet the suspension was far more compliant/much softer in feel. On the other hand, I beleive that the 996TT would be slightly preferable on higher speed courses (less roll, better brakes, etc.).

But, honestly, I don't think low speed competition (autocross) is what Porsche had in mind when they designed the 996TT suspension. And while it may not be the ultimate high speed driving suspension, it's a pretty decent compromise between commuter speed driveability and high speed handling.

Personally, the only way I'd make a change to the stock suspension is if I could:

1. Improve low speed cornering (i.e., autocross like performance) and

2. Not adversely impact high speed handling and

3. Make the ride no harsher than it already is as most of my 996TT driving is commuting. (I take to the track 15-20 times a year, which really trashes a street car. I also prefer wheel-to-wheel vs. other forms of high speed. So, that pretty much rules out using my street car for dual purposes).

(For a track car, all of the above goes out the window and the suggestions made by CJV, KPV and others are the approach I would take.)

Lastly, the original poster commented that the 996TT feels "loose". As a long time racer, loose to me means oversteer. I'm assuming that this is not what the original poster meant. But, if so, the thread's gotten a little off track (although still interesting/informative).

Yours in speed.

racer63

That's one heck of a list CJV!

If I could add one more:

15b. Increase negative rear camber

And also, ask a question:

Re: #7 rear track width. Wouldn't you want to widen the rear track to decrease oversteer?

Or am I not thinking this through correctly?

KPV

With all due respect guys (cjv & racer63), I think Tim meant something else in his description. I would agree with both of you that the term loose in the car afficionado world means oversteer. In that case, cjv's recipe, with racer63's addendum makes perfect sense. You will recall that Tim professed "I am by no means an experienced sports car driver". Considering that it takes quite a bit to get one of these TT's loose in the rearend, sans wet pavement, I would interpret his comment as meaning sloppy. In that case, I would give him the advice I mentioned.
Sloppiness can be felt at all speeds in corners. He wouldn't have to be "experienced" to detect it.
That is just my take on it.
Hey Tim, how about a clarification?

ben in lj

"Sloppiness can be felt at all speeds in corners."

yep, stock tt's are indeed sloppy. C2 996s are to a certain extent sloppy as well on stock suspensions but it isn't as bad. maybe it's because c2s are lighter. it's likely the extra weight which makes the stock suspensioned tt feel even sloppier than a C2 when the weight is transfered.

racer63

Thanks for posting the link (and the list) CJV. Very interesting.

Sorry for venturing a little off topic. But, I wonder why it is that the front end and back end work differently with respect to changes in track width? Specifically, why would you increase track width at the front to cure understeer (lack of grip at the front), but reduce track width at the rear to cure oversteer (lack of grip at the rear)?

It seems counterintuitive. But, admittedly, I've never raced in a class where we could appreciably change the track width. In the classes I've run, we've only changed track width by means of spacers and/or wheel offset so that we could fit wider rubber under a stock (or slightly modified) wheel well.

Anyone know why you would reduce rear track width to reduce oversteer?

TIA.

ben in lj

.

x-50speeder

Tim,

I think I understand where you are coming from.
The boxster does have a very nice "precise" feel to it. Especially compared to the X50. Obviously the members were giving you suggestions that will in fact greatly improve the handling of your X50, which, by the way, out handles the Boxster anyway.
In my opinion, the feeling you experience in the Boxster is due to the weight and more importantly the mid-engine configuration of the Boxster. These factors greatly contribute to the scalpel like precision of the Boxster that so many journalists love. The 911 is very capable in stock form. It is soft, and being soft tends to feel "sloppy" going into turns (mostly if jerked), but I have found that once the car settles into the turn, the grip and suspension are excellent.

I guess the bottom line is: You are right, that little Boxster has a wonderful precise feel to it. The TT, with its added weight and increased polar moment does not react, nor is it expected to, as the Boxster. It will however, all but annihilate the Boxster in almost any condition.

I have driven the entire line up of Porsches, save the GT2, GT3, and Cayanne, on a 3 mile road course. The Boxster S ranks up there in the fun factor for me.

I hope you enjoy your X50.


Steve

Tim Burns

Well, I certainly gained a lot of information through this post. Just to clarify, I probably used the word "loose" inappropriately. Like I said, I'm not an experienced driver. I think as someone else used, "sloppy" may better describe what I meant. It's hard to describe, but it just seems like the boxster is a bit more responsive? Or maybe it seems like you can feel the road a bit more. Not sure - but I love both cars nonetheless. Thanks for all the good info.

Tim

TT X50

Tim,
Like you, I’m a new X50 owner and owned Boxsters ( not the “S) and a coupla 4RE spiders in recent years. They were precise and gave good driver feedback. I wonder if their mid-engine gave the feeling that the car turned or rotated around the driver. X50speeder’s post sets it out nicely.

I had the same impression as you about the TT X50.( my first 911) I wonder if its because because the TT is softly sprung. In a previous thead Jared and others commented on the TT’s “soft” suspension – and they were right. But the TT has real tangible redeeming qualities.

The stock TT seemed to pitch fore and aft. Under acceleration it was like a power boat with the bow coming up. Under braking from the outside you can see a lot of dive. But this is also part of the reward of Real accelleration.

I got the X50 just to get a car with raw accelleration - It does have that!! The thing I really like about the TT is that the gas pedal now becomes a very active driving tool, even from mid-revs.

As much as I loved the normal Boxsters, the gas pedal was just a right foot rest. The 360 felt more precise in handling and feedback but you had to flog it in the 6,000 to 8500 rpm range to get it to go ( about <95% as fast the the TT. Torque wise the TT’s 450+ ft lbs just beats the 360’s 280 ft lbs and translates to effortless acceleration.

Cornering wise, the TT at first seems soft. During break in, I did some quick
" moose avoidance" lane changes at 70mph and It seemed to wallow.

Tried my first track lapping session with the X50 a couple of weeks ago, the TT would take a set on a corner and seemed happy to take what ever you fed to it.( As per the prev. thread tried the P-Zeros at 30 front and 38 rear). Saw .9 Bar and glimpsed 1.0 bar a coupla times) I suspect the better drivers on this list can really extract some wild track times with their TT’s So what I want to do is learn how to pour it on exiting corners on the track.

Last week I tried our club’s mid-speed AX on military airbase taxiways ( 20 to 110 mph). It didn't seem as settled in quick 60 mph transitions. But a TT Tip by another Renlister ( Zigzagin) has best time of day. So I have a lot to learn to keep it settled while pouring on the coals.

That’s why I’ll be asking dumb newbie questions here to hear from more experience list experts.

Next winter I’ll think about Porsche X73 European sport suspension or Ruf suspension, and the right tires.

Tim, You comment that you’re still finishing break in...

If you think the TT is great now , wait till you can tromp it to red line -- you are yet to be rewarded! Good luck.