Le Chef

"Sure it is fun to throw your tail out on the track, but it isn't so fun to throw it out on a twisty mountain road with trees or cliffs at the edge of the road."

You obviously don't ski! Most of the fun of skiiing is the thrill of being at the edge. AWD is skiing a green run, RWD is skiing a black run. How fast and how close to the edge can you go, dare you go?

BiggerTwin

If you are implying you drive at the edge on public roads, the litigator in me smells tragedy and big $$$ for the poor souls you maim and kill. As ronmart said, this stuff belongs on a track.

Alan

Le Chef

You misread my point by a very long way! I was writing about skiing, not about driving on the road. If I want to drive at the limit and get the kind of thrills I get skiing, then I take it to the track where that kind of driving belongs.

Bullet

I'm amazed to not hear more about understeer as an issue on the C4S. There are 2 reasons the C4S MUST understeer compared to the C2S, which, as a 911, is a car that already has a tendancy towards understeer (compared to a Cayman, which should be and has been described as quite neutral):

1) The rear tires are SO FAT

2) Sending torque to the front wheels reduces steering traction - that is, it reduces the component of their traction that goes to changing the direction of the car. This is not intuitive, and I am unable to provide the scientific explanation for it, though I read it once (perhaps on this forum), and it did then make sense. The proof is in the pudding though: if you've ever driven a front wheel drive car, then you know that putting traction on the front wheels leads to understeer. This is an issue as long as traction is good. On slippery surfaces, that tendancy to understeer counteracts the tendancy of rear wheel drive to oversteer, and the AWD car will have the more neutral characteristics.

The 996 C4S was well known for exhibiting understeer that many found intolerable, unless they drove in winter climates. It was a big enough problem that PAG tried to reduce understeer in the 997 C4S specifically. Having said that, the initial pereptions was that they had failed. Perhaps this thread suggests otherwise.

They way I see it, if you don't plan to drive the car in the winter, and using judicious caution when driving in the rain is something you're not capable of or interested in, the C2S already has HUGE amounts of traction, and AWD is not needed.

fuenfer

Which car, then, is preferable on a dry track? I know that AWD has been banned for quite awhile from a number of road racing series, including F1, but my recollection is that most F1 teams were not running AWD before the ban.

Personally, I went with the 997 C2S because I had the pleasure of driving a buddy's 996 C4 extensively, and did not like the steering feel. When I test drove the C2S, I liked the steering feel and perceived added agility so much I decided not to wait for the C4S. YMMV.

dealmaker

Guys,

Lot of talk here about advantages of C2S in dry and on track over the C4S - just to point out that ALL Porsche test drivers (including the great Walter Rorhl) are consistently quicker around tracks, and particularly the Nurburgring!, in the C4S.

I think the C4S is 8 or so seconds quicker around the (dry) 'ring than the C2S on average - in the wet of course the difference is greater. Having one of each at the moment (until I sell my C2S) - I prefer the the C4S for everyday use - for track dyas I've got a 997GT3 coming !!!

Terry L

The designer can set up the car to do whatever he wants, within limits, and is not constrained by the drive system. Of course, everything is a compromise, but there is no reason why a C4 can't be set up to oversteer, or for less understeer than before.

Le Chef

I've just done some more extended testing of the C2S Cab vs C4S Cab and the one thing I find hard to give up is the much greater feeling of agility that you get from the C2S and the increased feel you get from the steering. It's much more "chuckable" than the C4S - you have more control over what the car does compared to the C4S which seems to do most of the driving for you.

In the big snowstorm we had a couple of weeks ago my C2S Coupe with snow tires did just fine while other cars slithered around, falling off the crown in the road and fishtailing wildly.

In the end it's a personal choice - if you like the agile feel of the C2S you don't really need anything more than a good set of winter tires to drive it all year round. If you prefer the feeling of rock steady stability then buy the C4/S. And if either was wrong Porsche why would they offer both models?

Bullet

Where do you get this information? I am skeptical because the opposite was true of the 996, and I haven't seen this info anywhere for the 997 . . .

-B

ronmart

RE #2 - By default you only get 5% power to the front wheels on the C4s, so additional power is only sent to the front wheels when it is needed. This is why you shouldn't notice the difference in all but the extreme cases.

You are sadly misinformed if you think the understeer problem wasn't addressed in the C4s. Significant changes to the suspension took place to address it in the 997.

The 911 has a decent amount of oversteer by default due to the rear engine, so getting one with AWD gives you that neutral balance you just described as being something you desire.

Does the C4s understeer more than a C2s? Yes, it must, and you know what, a Cayman or Boxster will understeer more than a 911, because as you reduce oversteer, you get understeer. However, people like Boxsters, Caymans, and C4's for the same reason - they prefer to trade some of that oversteer for a more controlled feel, and others prefer the 911 C2's because they enjoy point and squirt driving and the advantages that oversteer can offer when you know how to handle it properly.

Personally, I'd like something like a mid-engine 997 C2s, but that doesn't exist so in my mind the C4s is the next best thing.

Bullet

I completely disagree. The 911 does not have a tendancy to oversteer but rather a tendancy to understeer. The reason is that there is a great deal of grip on the rear wheels because thay are fat and have the engine right above them. Once the rear does lose grip though, look out.

Understeer is LESS pronounced on Boxster (I speak from experience), and MORE pronounced on AWD 911 for reasons I described (granted, not very well).

I know that PAG tried to address the huge understeer problems on the 996 C4S, but I remain very curious to hear more about the results achieved on the 997 C4S. There was a great deal of irony in the 996 series as the only 996 to get the S badge (until the Turbo S in its final year) was the C4S, which really was a much less Sporty car to drive because of the issues with weight and understeer. Anyways, that's a different thread.

By the way, a mid-engined 997 C2S does now "exist". A modification for the Cayman S that uses a tuned version of the 997S's 3.8L engine (370hp) is already available. IMO, that car, especially with a LSD (which is needed even more with a mid-engine than rear engine set up IMO) is likely to be absolutely remarkable. Now close your eyes and imagine a 3.8 L engine with X51, now a twin turbo 3.6 L engine . . .

ronmart

The Cayman is a 2 seater, and the 911 is a 2+2 (and those +2 are important for people who like me who need to haul the kids to daycare in the morning <g>).

I also disagree with your 911 assessment. While the big tires and negative camber are implemented to reduce the oversteer characteristics of a rear weight biased vehicle, it is a car with an oversteer bias by design. Tires and suspension have improved enough to delay the effort required to break into oversteer.

Coochas

I think the whole 2 vs 4 thing can be summed up as follows:

Get a 4/4S if...
1) You live where it snows or rains alot
2) You like the phat *** of the 4's
3) You want to be different.

Also keep in mind that the performance on dry surface is about the same: Porsche cites nearly identical 0-60 and 0-99 mph times for the 2S vs 4S and Walter Rohrl recorded identical Nuburgring lap times on comparably equipped 2S and 4S (for nay-sayers that say Walter is a p-car employee so this doesn't count, keep in mind that he recorded the time for the 4S long after the 2S).

The 911 turbo has had AWD forever and you don't hear owners whining (sorry for the turbo pun) about it.

Bullet

The other reason I'm skeptical is that 8 seconds on the 'ring is a HUGE difference - way more than I'd expect if there was one (not to mention in the wrong direction!).

Show me the money!

-B

ronmart

I agree the 8 second claim probably can't be substantiated, but 8 seconds difference on a huge track like the ring (assuming we are talking about Nordschleife) isn't a huge difference. Given its enormous size (14+ miles), you could get an 8 second difference between runs with a worn or oveheated set of tires on the 2nd lap. The fact that someone can get the same exact time in two different cars is what I find to be rather amazing. Few people are talented enough that consistent.

Now if we were talking about a more nomal length track like Road Atlanta or Silverstone, then I'd agree with you. Even a couple seconds is a huge difference there.