Unexpected things I found after all my research
#16
Nordschleife Master
Nice post.
As far as the wanting for power goes... these cars aren't about absolute power. You don't really get to see how scarily fast it is until you take it to the appropriate environment.. on track for example. It's a momentum car, much like the MX-5 you mentioned (get it on boil and use the brakes judiciously, connect the corners without losing momentum, just keep that power up and she'll look after the rest, ). Some might disagree but there are a number of similarities I've found between the two cars. But on the street, a 997.2 is not an especially quick car by todays standards (another MX-5 similarity)
One thing I feel can't be overstated, look for ways to trim weight. Starting with the wheels is a great place. You'll get gains in every department by going with lighter wheels, even fuel mileage.
Car and Driver managed to shave 3/10ths of a second off their 0-60 and 2.2mpg on a Golf just by trying a few different wheel/tire combinations. Seems like a pretty big difference and over a long enough period of time the savings in fuel mileage will pay for the wheels.
Those 3/10ths difference is greater than the difference between a 997.2 C2 and 997.2 C2S for 0-60. http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/s08dtcb1lzv6
https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...d-tires-tested
As far as the wanting for power goes... these cars aren't about absolute power. You don't really get to see how scarily fast it is until you take it to the appropriate environment.. on track for example. It's a momentum car, much like the MX-5 you mentioned (get it on boil and use the brakes judiciously, connect the corners without losing momentum, just keep that power up and she'll look after the rest, ). Some might disagree but there are a number of similarities I've found between the two cars. But on the street, a 997.2 is not an especially quick car by todays standards (another MX-5 similarity)
One thing I feel can't be overstated, look for ways to trim weight. Starting with the wheels is a great place. You'll get gains in every department by going with lighter wheels, even fuel mileage.
Car and Driver managed to shave 3/10ths of a second off their 0-60 and 2.2mpg on a Golf just by trying a few different wheel/tire combinations. Seems like a pretty big difference and over a long enough period of time the savings in fuel mileage will pay for the wheels.
Those 3/10ths difference is greater than the difference between a 997.2 C2 and 997.2 C2S for 0-60. http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/s08dtcb1lzv6
https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...d-tires-tested
#17
I also had a pretty significant change when I took my OEM wheels and spacers off to run just my lightweight forged wheels. More so than I've experienced in other cars.
#18
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I have a set of lightweight, forged, polished Champion RS171 wheels for sale in The Marketplace if anyone is looking to upgrade their wheels. I'm running the same make, model, and size of tire on my Forgelines that I was running on these Champions. I weighed the Forgelines prior to having the tires mounted and then again after mounting and balancing. Using those #s I calculated the weights of these Champion wheels in case anyone is interested in significantly reducing their unsprung weight for better acceleration (less rotational inertia), better handling, and improved gas mileage. Surprisingly, my current Forgelines are actually 1.5 lbs heavier per wheel.
Champion RS171 Front wheel weight is 20.75 lbs
Champion RS171 Rear wheel weight is 21.8 lbs.
https://rennlist.com/forums/parts-ma...l#post15076098
Champion RS171 Front wheel weight is 20.75 lbs
Champion RS171 Rear wheel weight is 21.8 lbs.
https://rennlist.com/forums/parts-ma...l#post15076098
#19
#20
I either jump in the car quickly and don't remember about plugging in the phone till I'm under way, and/or forget to unplug it and take it with me when I get out of the car. BT is much more convenient. In a Lexus or Mercedes maybe I could hear the difference but not in this car what with the cabin acoustics and road noise, let alone the somewhat unerwhelming OEM stereo.
#21
Nordschleife Master
I don't think there's all that much power difference between an S snd NonS. Maybe on paper but I can tell you that on the track it's not enough power to pull on a straight and pass. These cars are quick and handle well. Brute power has never been their forté.
I have Auto dimming mirrors but never have them enabled because my windows are tinted. It's just too much darkness.
I have Auto dimming mirrors but never have them enabled because my windows are tinted. It's just too much darkness.
#22
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ridgefield, CT
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#23
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ridgefield, CT
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I either jump in the car quickly and don't remember about plugging in the phone till I'm under way, and/or forget to unplug it and take it with me when I get out of the car. BT is much more convenient. In a Lexus or Mercedes maybe I could hear the difference but not in this car what with the cabin acoustics and road noise, let alone the somewhat unerwhelming OEM stereo.
#24
Nordschleife Master
#27
Most of my trips are of short duration so it's never been a problem. The only time it is is if I'm using the phone for GPS on a long ride, in that case I do plug the phone into 12V. My car's a .1, no aux input. I have a Tranzit-BLU HF unit, it only does BT. In my other cars I do have USB inputs but still use BT only, plug the phone in to 12V only when on a long drive. One car's a Corvette, much quieter on the road than the 997 but still noisy and with weird cabin shape; other car is an E-Class Merc, quiet as a tomb and great stereo, still can't really discern any sound difference between BT and USB. Maybe if I was an audiophile listening to classical or jazz I would, but the Stones sound fine either way.