Which is faster, 996.2 (C2) or 997.1 (C4)?
01-08-2013, 11:21 AM
#16
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It really depends on who is behind the wheel. As for the video it's cool but I doubt that you'll be in a rally race with your 911 anytime soon. Perhaps the C4 would provide an advantage in AutoX.
01-08-2013, 07:41 PM
#19
Thanks everyone for the helpful input. I’ve also been looking up laptimes online, and while I haven’t quite answered my question, I have reached some helpful conclusions, which I thought I’d share:
1. For every water cooled Porsche, it seems pretty clear that 4wd cars are faster than their 2wd equivalents on short tracks, and a lot slower on the Nurburgring, though the Nurburgring gap seems to be decreasing (at least from 996.1 to 996.2). I’d guess that the 2wd cars are generally faster on tracks where their lap time is above ~1m40s, which is actually not that short. (Though what matters is probably not just the total length of the track, but also the number of curves (or similarly, the average distance between curves) and the width.)
2. PASM is worth about 5 seconds at the Ring on the 997.1 (according to Porsche). I’m guessing the difference is proportionally smaller on smoother tracks – except maybe where you use rough curbing at every entry, exit, and apex.
3. And yes, Walter Rohl is also good for a few seconds :- ) . Apparently 6 seconds versus von Saurma in the 997.1 C2S with sport suspension and LSD.
4. And here’s an intriguing one. The 997.1 (C2S) is faster with the sport suspension (20mm lower, with LSD) than with PASM. By 3 seconds at the Ring.
So where does this leave me? Let’s see. I’m now pretty sure the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove at the Ring didn’t have PASM. Add PASM, and it could do ~8m10. Add 4wd and it can do 8m16, at best. Take out Walter Rohl, then 8m20 – 8m22, at best. Versus 8m17 for the 996.2. Problem solved then? Not quite. Remove the sport suspension from the 996.2 and ... . Well, how bad could it be? The sport suspension is probably worth less than 4 seconds (seems to me the difference in ride quality is no bigger than between PASM normal and sport settings, which make a 3 second difference, and 4 seconds is a lot for a suspension change that doesn’t have too much impact on comfort or height). So we have 996.2 with 8m21 or better, and 997.1 C4 with 8m20 – 8m22 or worse. Advantage 996. Probably.
But on most tracks, the numbers improve for the C4, and on short tracks, the C4 is probably a lot faster ...
1. For every water cooled Porsche, it seems pretty clear that 4wd cars are faster than their 2wd equivalents on short tracks, and a lot slower on the Nurburgring, though the Nurburgring gap seems to be decreasing (at least from 996.1 to 996.2). I’d guess that the 2wd cars are generally faster on tracks where their lap time is above ~1m40s, which is actually not that short. (Though what matters is probably not just the total length of the track, but also the number of curves (or similarly, the average distance between curves) and the width.)
2. PASM is worth about 5 seconds at the Ring on the 997.1 (according to Porsche). I’m guessing the difference is proportionally smaller on smoother tracks – except maybe where you use rough curbing at every entry, exit, and apex.
3. And yes, Walter Rohl is also good for a few seconds :- ) . Apparently 6 seconds versus von Saurma in the 997.1 C2S with sport suspension and LSD.
4. And here’s an intriguing one. The 997.1 (C2S) is faster with the sport suspension (20mm lower, with LSD) than with PASM. By 3 seconds at the Ring.
So where does this leave me? Let’s see. I’m now pretty sure the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove at the Ring didn’t have PASM. Add PASM, and it could do ~8m10. Add 4wd and it can do 8m16, at best. Take out Walter Rohl, then 8m20 – 8m22, at best. Versus 8m17 for the 996.2. Problem solved then? Not quite. Remove the sport suspension from the 996.2 and ... . Well, how bad could it be? The sport suspension is probably worth less than 4 seconds (seems to me the difference in ride quality is no bigger than between PASM normal and sport settings, which make a 3 second difference, and 4 seconds is a lot for a suspension change that doesn’t have too much impact on comfort or height). So we have 996.2 with 8m21 or better, and 997.1 C4 with 8m20 – 8m22 or worse. Advantage 996. Probably.
But on most tracks, the numbers improve for the C4, and on short tracks, the C4 is probably a lot faster ...
01-08-2013, 10:03 PM
#20
Rennlist Member
Thanks everyone for the helpful input. I’ve also been looking up laptimes online, and while I haven’t quite answered my question, I have reached some helpful conclusions, which I thought I’d share:
1. For every water cooled Porsche, it seems pretty clear that 4wd cars are faster than their 2wd equivalents on short tracks, and a lot slower on the Nurburgring, though the Nurburgring gap seems to be decreasing (at least from 996.1 to 996.2). I’d guess that the 2wd cars are generally faster on tracks where their lap time is above ~1m40s, which is actually not that short. (Though what matters is probably not just the total length of the track, but also the number of curves (or similarly, the average distance between curves) and the width.)
2. PASM is worth about 5 seconds at the Ring on the 997.1 (according to Porsche). I’m guessing the difference is proportionally smaller on smoother tracks – except maybe where you use rough curbing at every entry, exit, and apex.
3. And yes, Walter Rohl is also good for a few seconds :- ) . Apparently 6 seconds versus von Saurma in the 997.1 C2S with sport suspension and LSD.
4. And here’s an intriguing one. The 997.1 (C2S) is faster with the sport suspension (20mm lower, with LSD) than with PASM. By 3 seconds at the Ring.
So where does this leave me? Let’s see. I’m now pretty sure the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove at the Ring didn’t have PASM. Add PASM, and it could do ~8m10. Add 4wd and it can do 8m16, at best. Take out Walter Rohl, then 8m20 – 8m22, at best. Versus 8m17 for the 996.2. Problem solved then? Not quite. Remove the sport suspension from the 996.2 and ... . Well, how bad could it be? The sport suspension is probably worth less than 4 seconds (seems to me the difference in ride quality is no bigger than between PASM normal and sport settings, which make a 3 second difference, and 4 seconds is a lot for a suspension change that doesn’t have too much impact on comfort or height). So we have 996.2 with 8m21 or better, and 997.1 C4 with 8m20 – 8m22 or worse. Advantage 996. Probably.
But on most tracks, the numbers improve for the C4, and on short tracks, the C4 is probably a lot faster ...
1. For every water cooled Porsche, it seems pretty clear that 4wd cars are faster than their 2wd equivalents on short tracks, and a lot slower on the Nurburgring, though the Nurburgring gap seems to be decreasing (at least from 996.1 to 996.2). I’d guess that the 2wd cars are generally faster on tracks where their lap time is above ~1m40s, which is actually not that short. (Though what matters is probably not just the total length of the track, but also the number of curves (or similarly, the average distance between curves) and the width.)
2. PASM is worth about 5 seconds at the Ring on the 997.1 (according to Porsche). I’m guessing the difference is proportionally smaller on smoother tracks – except maybe where you use rough curbing at every entry, exit, and apex.
3. And yes, Walter Rohl is also good for a few seconds :- ) . Apparently 6 seconds versus von Saurma in the 997.1 C2S with sport suspension and LSD.
4. And here’s an intriguing one. The 997.1 (C2S) is faster with the sport suspension (20mm lower, with LSD) than with PASM. By 3 seconds at the Ring.
So where does this leave me? Let’s see. I’m now pretty sure the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove at the Ring didn’t have PASM. Add PASM, and it could do ~8m10. Add 4wd and it can do 8m16, at best. Take out Walter Rohl, then 8m20 – 8m22, at best. Versus 8m17 for the 996.2. Problem solved then? Not quite. Remove the sport suspension from the 996.2 and ... . Well, how bad could it be? The sport suspension is probably worth less than 4 seconds (seems to me the difference in ride quality is no bigger than between PASM normal and sport settings, which make a 3 second difference, and 4 seconds is a lot for a suspension change that doesn’t have too much impact on comfort or height). So we have 996.2 with 8m21 or better, and 997.1 C4 with 8m20 – 8m22 or worse. Advantage 996. Probably.
But on most tracks, the numbers improve for the C4, and on short tracks, the C4 is probably a lot faster ...
7:59 - Porsche 911 Carrera S - Walter Röhrl - 'Wheels' magazine (06/2004), PASM setting "Performance
8:03 - Porsche 911 GT3 - Horst von Saurma - Sport Auto (08/1999)
When 997 Carrera S goes around faster than 996 GT3, that's proof enough for me.
If you think you can get either of those cars around Nurburgring at same lap times as Walter Rohrl, you're mistaken. Get the 997 already and enjoy it.
Last edited by alexb76; 01-08-2013 at 10:26 PM.
03-19-2013, 01:48 AM
#21
Bumping this old thread to see if the OP found a car yet, or did he wind up with a lowered civic and cut the roof off? Because this thread felt like a whole bunch of chain yanking.
03-19-2013, 08:52 AM
#22
Intermediate
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bucks County, PA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Waaaay too much bench racing going on here. Lap times have much more to do with your driving ability than with the car's potential. At a track event it won't matter what your car could possibly do a the Ring when you get passed by a Miata.
Buy the car you enjoy driving.
Buy the car you enjoy driving.
