jreifler

This is a particularly interesting observation. I’d wager there’s a decent correlation between 7.1RS lovers and those whose first / favorite Porsche experiences included air-cooled 911 ownership. And agree that broadly speaking, you won’t find those folks much outside of late Gen X. That’s where I fall and my childhood poster car was an 80s 911, so it’s intuitive for my own tastes that the newer fat cars don’t do it for me.

Steven_H

I have both and I love them for different reasons. I agree that the .1 is better looking - the 3/4 view of the underside of the front bumper is better resolved on the .1 and the .1 has more chassis than power - it is therefore better for daily drives. But the .2 is a superior car for track work and for really twisty, technical work. The 4.0 is marginally better than either, but for me the 3.8 is the real sweet spot. The 4.0 has become so valuable, one is reluctant to drive it with enthusiasm.

bweSteve

Hmm,... well Ok jreifler,.. I guess I don't exactly fit into that stereotype then either. I'm a very late Baby Boomer generation,.. I grew up in my teens lusting after widebody 911's, 928's and even owning 914 & 912.
And now after almost 20 yrs of 964 Turbo ownership, I wanted something that was juuuuust slightly far enough away from that 964 experience (997.2 fits nicely in that slot), but certainly VERY far away from 991 & newer.
so for me, it was that air-cooled experience for 35+ yrs, that brought me to the 997.2 non-RS. But again, I am strictly a tour driving street guy (no track).

jreifler

I think that does still fit the “profile” to an extent. At least insofar as the air-cooled experience cements that desire for a more analog, compact, tactile 911 preference that seems to have peaked with the 997.

Jason Zhang

I've asked the owner of a well respected local Porsche shop. He's got lots of seat time in both .1 and .2 GT3 and RS. He said .1 has a better engine and .2 is better in everything else.

bweSteve

I certainly agree with THAT!! ... but this conversation seems to be very specifically pitting the .1RS against the .2 non-RS ... in which case whether a person is late baby-boomer, early gen X,... air-cooled aficionado or other, causing them to lean .1RS verses .2 non. hmmm, that may just be a little to difficult to pin down.

jreifler

I’ve heard this sentiment too re: the 3.6, which again makes me think there’s something to that tie-in with the older cars where you really have to “work” in the higher rev ranges to extract the most from the car. Probably a heightened experience with RS clutch, LWFW, and ratios as well. 3.8 has a good bit more torque on hand, albeit slightly higher into the rev range than the 3.6. I dunno if the 3.6 is “better” in that regard (certainly not mechanically / objectively speaking), but could have something to do with driving preferences …

Wonderdan

Lol i do feel like posting that question in here baited us… funny since we all know there is no wrong answer

jreifler

Agreed. Didn’t mean to make it a .1RS v .2 non debate. My OP thread title probably confused that a bit. Apologies.

My only thought re: generational preferences was sparked by @Wonderdan’s post. Which got me thinking that I’ve never met a 30-something who leaned into 996-7 over a 991GT car given the choice. And that, I randomly speculate, may have something to do with whether they spent much time wrestling air-cooled cars …

bweSteve

... hmmm, maybe that shop owner could narrow it down further. That seems to be a high level statement (with 4 different cars in that mix). Was he making the blanket statement that the .1 engine (performance & characteristics alone) is better than the .2 engine, regardless of whether one of those was a LWFW or dual mass? Was he only specifically comparing LWFW to LWFW (in the RS's),.... as well as comparing only the DMFW to DMFW (.1 -vs- .2 non-RS)?

In this thread, we are comparing a LWFW .1RS, to a DMFW .2 non-RS. To me the differential lays squarely in the centrifugal forces of the clutch / flywheel. I think almost every one of us will agree that the liteweight makes all the difference in the world w/r/t rev's.

Plus, so many of our cars have exhaust mods that even the simplest of center bypass on a 3.6 &/or a 3.8 can make all the difference in the world (sound) when driving them back-2-back (emotionally). When was the last time any of us (Porsche Shop owner or otherwise) have compared JUST the engine when both have been completely STOCK.

Wonderdan

Im 42 and only have a handful of friends in their 30s with a GT car but one has a GT4 and three have a 991.1 or .2 GT3 RS w/pdk and could care less about manual heal toe. They also all have $25k simulators and spend more time driving those than their own cars. They have very little time/emotional attachment to their cars. Now my 30 something friends with E46s and WRX Sti’s etc that’s a different story. A few weeks ago one of them told me “I’m not a straight line kinda guy… I drift if I can”… fun to watch things evolve.

Another difference is I don’t think a single one would consider doing their own wrenching… they think I’m crazy.

jreifler

Right. I’ve played with those combos (LWFW, clutch, gearing) in both old 911 motors and with M9x motors, and it makes a massive difference regardless of platform. Add exhaust and tunes and yes - the variables become too convoluted for easy comparisons. I think you’d have to baseline with stock engines to get meaningful input there.

jreifler

LOL. Yes. We’re roughly the same age, and I get the same confused look from my younger buddies when I propose wrenching on these cars. Did coils, plugs, oil, and trans on my 3 last week and got a “what’s wrong with you?” look from a buddy.

RapidGT

.1 vs .2 RS I have a preference for the .2. More power/torque, shorter gearing (fake torque and get to use the awesome shifter more frequently w/gearing 13% shorter), better suspension w/more sophisticated PASM, and bucket seats for the US market. Styling for these two rank about the same, but the shorter gearing and buckets really settle it for me. I attached a Total 911 article below on this comparison.

As far as .1 RS vs .2 GT3 it would be a little tougher choice for me. The .2 has better suspension w/improved PASM and the 3.8 has more power/torque. However, the .1 RS has a more lively engine as the 3.6 has lighter pistons than the 3.8. That in combination with the lightweight single-mass flywheel means the .1 RS engine revs more freely. Despite this a .2 GT3 would probably be faster than a .1 RS on track, but this really doesn’t matter so much as these cars have gotten older. I like the styling of the .1 RS over the .2 GT3, but the .2 can be optioned with buckets in the US which is a big bonus. If adding to a collection probably the .1 RS would be better. But collectibility aside, I would give the edge to the .2 GT3. Besides the rev happy engine and better styling, the .2 GT3 wins in most category’s for me.

Wonderdan

Only thing I haven't figured out is making a few videos and getting some over exposed instagram pics and writing the whole thing off including the insurance… that’s some tricky stuff.

The last skip barber racing school I went to one of the guys brought his film guy with him to ride shotgun and said the whole thing was a work event for his brand.