Originally Posted by "02996ttx50

like i said, some of our cars are stiffer than others

thanks for undercutting much of this argument with the note of one simple yet unavoidable "fact"! that the 996gt2 only became available in MY '02.

mcbit? i have this admittedly vague theory ( wholly unsupported by "evidence", other than "anecdotal which i do readily admit, hence it is indeed just a "theory" ) that as the porsche 996 turbo became "more affordable" over these many ensuing years,.. ( along with the lower prices and accompanying lower barrier to entry of "ownership" ) a phenomenon has occurred marked by a certain class of buyer decidedly identified simply by their distinct absence of critical thinking skills, which are expressed daily in the 996 turbo forums. compare the current contributions to say, ones from 02 and up to maybe 08 when i began reading them as an owner, and the difference in content is markedly different, if not the topics themselves.

i could well be "wrong", but i don't think so, and ironically if someone doesn't "think" they "could" be wrong? they won't be, and not much can change that. it's like the inherent difficulty in "implying" something to a moron. it is by definition difficult best, at worst pointless, and most assuredly, ain't gonna happen lol

fortunately, it appears that carlo carrera is seemingly not among this aforementioned class of folks, as i believe he sees the error of his "position".

not that any of it ( facts ) really matter one bit. by way of example, has anyone spent much time in 991 turbo or gt2rs forums ( or their equivalent ) and happened to even accidentally compare the general level of discourse!?

the difference(s) are at times astonishing to me, and i'm one of the "dumb" ones lol. ...but...

unbelievable, really.

last thought, carlo. it's not as if you are/were "wrong", but the vehemence with which you denied the mounting evidence that supports the idea that indeed has been mounting, regardless of "our" lousy choice(s) of internet articles that chassis stiffness was in point of fact, increased from year to year 01/02 was what i took most exception to, and disagreement with.

we're all wrong about stuff from time to time. this was just your turn, i say... NEXT! lets argue about, i dunno.. oiled filters or something serious!

ADD: this had/has no point. i am here to learn and practice my typing skills, as although i have a stiffer than most, chassis? it's use it or lose it when it comes to thinking/typing. ha so this is just a rant.. /off.

Originally Posted by jumper5836

another one
http://porscheclub.blogspot.ca/2011/...urbo-2001.html

above was probably taken from this one
http://press.porsche.com/archive/pro...o_In_Depth.pdf

Body Structure
Like a house, a car is only as strong as the foundation on which it is built. Commonly called a "chassis," the foundation really encompasses the car's body structure, front and rear suspension and brake systems. Just as a solid foundation provides the basic integrity and strength in a house, a car's foundation largely defines its handling responsiveness, passive safety capability, ride comfort, and long-term durability. "The stronger the better" applies equally to the foundations of houses and cars.

Porsche has achieved significant gains in body stiffness over the previous-generation Porsche 911 Turbo, increasing torsional stiffness in the 2001 model by 49 percent and bending stiffness by 82 percent.

GT3 Chassis Parts
The 2001 Porsche 911 Turbo offers a combination of handling response and everyday ride comfort not usually associated with cars of its performance level. The Porsche 911 Turbo is equally adept at commuting as it is at shining at high-performance racetrack driving events. Compared to the previous Porsche 911 Turbo, the new model features a 3.2-inch longer wheelbase to accommodate new crash structures and to improve stability and ride comfort. Although the suspension layout is the same as in the 911 Carrera, the 911 Turbo adopts several parts from the 911 GT3 (a normally aspirated, limited-production model not imported to North America), including mounting points for the car's main systems and the longer rear track control arms.

Originally Posted by Carlo_Carrera

I honestly did not think there was "vehemence" in my defense of my opinion.

And now that jumper has posted what he has posted I am back believing in my original opinion that 2001 Turbo has a stiffened chassis. Those quotes there are from Porsche themselves.

I am still going to check for the reinforcement in the rear seat area next time my car is on a lift and will document it with photos.

Originally Posted by rmc1148

A lot of truth but a little mean spirited= that I have come to expect and accept .

Originally Posted by mcbit

The previous generation turbo was the 993 and yes all 996s were substantially stiffer than than the 993s.

The 2001 turbo bodyshell is a c4 body shell.

Originally Posted by "02996ttx50

you're entitled to your beliefs, as am i. doesn't make either of us right, in any definitive way, but that's just a general point i am making.

as to the chassis being stiffened from MY 01 to 02, i would again suggest your denial of what has pretty much been established as fact "was" ( i say "was" because i sense a reasonable backpedalling which i think is wise given what has been presented to you here ) without merit and i would still describe as "vehement", but who cares!? it's a word..

but you get into some slippery semantical territory with this notion of the 01 turbo chassis being "stiffened". well, it was "stiffened" relative to previous iterations! but that has absolutely zero impact on the OP's original question with which you have argued against with, well. vehemence lol.

so if you're really?! going to look under your car next time it's on a lift in an effort to locate this mythical stiffening of your MY 01 chassis? my only advice at this point would be:

don't be that rob lowe.

Originally Posted by jumper5836

All this leads me to believe the 2001 was the basis of the 2002 body shells going forward with the only exception that post #10 piece added.

Originally Posted by jumper5836

Right and it wasn't using the 996.1 C4 shell. I believe the 25% stated in the marketing is compared to the 996.1 and also it could be some form % flectional and torsional strength to equal 25% and not 25% is each area. for example 10 flex and 15 torisional.

Originally Posted by jumper5836

Also
This same press release marketing was done in 2002 to promote the 996.2 changes. Something missing from the first aritical was piece about the "Body 911 Carrera/911 Carrera 4" that the 2002 C2/C4 body shell also has exactly the same info when it comes to the reinforcement measures.

Originally Posted by mcbit

Here is part of the body shell statement from 2001; note that it uses the 993 as a comparison and not an earlier 996 body shell. (Because there wasn't on)






That's because exactly the same mods were made to all of the coupe body shells.

The "Technical Service Information" is a very structured document which goes through each section of every model and states the changes made for that model year:

like this



or this



If no changes were made:

it presents this statement




apart from the reinforcement tube shown in post #10, if you can be bothered to check PET for both the 996 and the 996T you will find that the part number for the seat well assembly until MY01 is the same in both models, whilst from MY2002 onwards, for the same part, both the 996 and 996T have the same, but different, part number. I would find that a bit odd if no changes were made.