Cayman R
11-10-2010, 02:02 PM
#31
Rennlist Member
11-10-2010, 02:16 PM
#32
GT3 player par excellence
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
yeah there is an interesting articile in the new Evo about the Lambo Sesto Elemento ... they claim that they have developed a "scanner" with Boeing that allows them to detect "invisible" flaws in the biffed CF which they can then cut out and glue in a new piece ... good as new!!!
tongue in cheek of course, CF will improve and may well be the next thing..... until then, enjoy the blue beast.
11-10-2010, 02:25 PM
#33
Rennlist Member
11-10-2010, 03:43 PM
#34
Rennlist Member
Yep, meant Ruf, as in the new V8 that fits in the back of a 997. In a 987, it would be pretty interesting, too. Maybe more interesting.
Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension. Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court.
Naming aside, I too am all for more driver-focused Porsches. Funny how we're pining for those, eh?
pete
Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension. Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court.
Naming aside, I too am all for more driver-focused Porsches. Funny how we're pining for those, eh?
pete
11-10-2010, 03:45 PM
#35
Rennlist Member
Yep, meant Ruf, as in the new V8 that fits in the back of a 997. In a 987, it would be pretty interesting, too. Maybe more interesting.
Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension.
Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court.
pete
Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension.
Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court.
pete
11-10-2010, 06:12 PM
#37
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Francisco & parts north
Posts: 1,010
Received 188 Likes
on
84 Posts
Strategically I can't see why Porsche would want to offer a flat-8 or V8 in its mass-produced sports cars. The flat 6's are already powerful enough, have a strong historical significance, and theoretically could be kept more efficient that any 8 cylinder (if you assume equal component weights, then fewer cylinders = less reciprocating mass). With ever-increasing environmental/mileage concerns on the horizon, I suspect the prudent way for Porsche to move performance to the next level is via weight reduction.
At least that my hope. If I wanted a 400+hp 3,800+lb 8 cylinder car, well there are already plenty of those on the market.
As a former Cayman S owner, I hope this Cayman R follows the trajectory of the Boxster Spyder and takes is two (or three!) steps farther. Less weight, less electronics in the suspension, less weight, and less weight.
At least that my hope. If I wanted a 400+hp 3,800+lb 8 cylinder car, well there are already plenty of those on the market.
As a former Cayman S owner, I hope this Cayman R follows the trajectory of the Boxster Spyder and takes is two (or three!) steps farther. Less weight, less electronics in the suspension, less weight, and less weight.
11-10-2010, 06:24 PM
#38
Rennlist Member
Strategically I can't see why Porsche would want to offer a flat-8 or V8 in its mass-produced sports cars. The flat 6's are already powerful enough, have a strong historical significance, and theoretically could be kept more efficient that any 8 cylinder (if you assume equal component weights, then fewer cylinders = less reciprocating mass). With ever-increasing environmental/mileage concerns on the horizon, I suspect the prudent way for Porsche to move performance to the next level is via weight reduction.
At least that my hope. If I wanted a 400+hp 3,800+lb 8 cylinder car, well there are already plenty of those on the market.
At least that my hope. If I wanted a 400+hp 3,800+lb 8 cylinder car, well there are already plenty of those on the market.
So that begs the question, whats in the 991? RUF have somewhat intriguingly demonstrated that you can build a l/w V8 for the 997 platform ... what will
Porsche do, extend the 9A1 engine or drop something else instead into the back of the 911?
Some have indicated that the 9A1 engine design is designed to be extended ... hence the flat-8 extrapolation ...
unless they have a l/w V8 in the wings (maybe the same one in the 918?)
11-10-2010, 06:40 PM
#39
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Francisco & parts north
Posts: 1,010
Received 188 Likes
on
84 Posts
I suspect the next 911 will continue with the current 9A1 engine. Porsche has a history of milking engine designs for many years (which makes a lot of sense) and the 9A1 is only a couple years old now. Everything I've seen indicates the "new" parts of the 991 to be limited to body, interior and chassis. Maybe they'll throw in some nominal power increases for essentially unchanged 3.6L and 3.8L driveline choices. If they can do this while reducing total vehicle weight by >100lbs, then all the on-paper performance metrics should improve relative to the current car. Job done. And much cheaper than developing & producing a F-8 that will only cannibalize existing F-6 sales.
But what do I know? Nada.
But what do I know? Nada.
11-10-2010, 06:43 PM
#40
Rennlist Member
[QUOTE=quickxotica;8046814]I suspect the next 911 will continue with the current 9A1 engine. Porsche has a history of milking engine designs for many years (which makes a lot of sense) and the 9A1 is only a couple years old now. I expect the "new" parts of the next 911 to be limited to body, interior and chassis. Maybe they'll throw in some nominal power increases for essentially unchanged 3.6L and 3.8L driveline choices. If they can do this while reducing total vehicle weight by >100lbs, then all the on-paper performance metrics should improve relative to the current car. Job done. And much cheaper than developing & producing a F-8 that will only cannablize existing F-6 sales.
But what do I know? Nada.[/QUOTE]
me neither ... I personally dont buy into the flat 8 that others have mentioned
But what do I know? Nada.[/QUOTE]
me neither ... I personally dont buy into the flat 8 that others have mentioned
11-10-2010, 07:02 PM
#41
Intermediate
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting discussion. There are now more than ever many competing objectives for Porsche engineers, from CAFE standards to the limits of the current racing engine technology. I would bet that the 9A1 engine will find a home in many future models, and I would not expect the large HP/displacement gains we have seen in the past. The "mainstream" models will need to balance fleet fuel economy, safety, and also complement the rest of the VW product family.
The real question for enthusiasts is: what will they race? How much of their racing technology will also shift to green technologies (918 and GT3R-H), and how will that trickle down to the next generation of GT-level cars. I think it is inevitable.
The HP orgy is about to end, IMHO.
Mike
The real question for enthusiasts is: what will they race? How much of their racing technology will also shift to green technologies (918 and GT3R-H), and how will that trickle down to the next generation of GT-level cars. I think it is inevitable.
The HP orgy is about to end, IMHO.
Mike
11-10-2010, 07:09 PM
#42
Rennlist Member
Interesting discussion. There are now more than ever many competing objectives for Porsche engineers, from CAFE standards to the limits of the current racing engine technology. I would bet that the 9A1 engine will find a home in many future models, and I would not expect the large HP/displacement gains we have seen in the past. The "mainstream" models will need to balance fleet fuel economy, safety, and also complement the rest of the VW product family.
The real question for enthusiasts is: what will they race? How much of their racing technology will also shift to green technologies (918 and GT3R-H), and how will that trickle down to the next generation of GT-level cars. I think it is inevitable.
The HP orgy is about to end, IMHO.
Mike
The real question for enthusiasts is: what will they race? How much of their racing technology will also shift to green technologies (918 and GT3R-H), and how will that trickle down to the next generation of GT-level cars. I think it is inevitable.
The HP orgy is about to end, IMHO.
Mike
11-10-2010, 07:20 PM
#43
Rennlist Member
Perhaps the modular 9A1 will continue as a flat-6 for the Carrera/Boxster/Cayman, and spawn a flat-8 for the N/A GT cars to more directly compete with Ferrari? What if the $250k Sport Classic and Speedster are purely marketing exercises to test the demand for a less focused 911-based car at those price levels? Or maybe this was the plan before the VW takeover, as they have Lamborghini in that price range...
11-10-2010, 08:39 PM
#45
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension. Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court.
pete
A Cayman with extra power cannot challenge a GT3, not remotely close.
One just has to get underneath the Cayman/Boxster and the GT3/GT2 (any generation), to appreciate how far better the GT cars are. By the way, this handicap or lack of real performance parts is not unique to the Cayman/Boxster, it is shared by all the Carrera versions, and just recently the Turbo joined them. The GT3/GT2 are too far apart from the rest of the lineup.
I ended with a Cayman S because I could not enjoy the lack of power on a SpecBoxster I had, and the cost to upgrade the SpecBoxster to a 3.4 was higher than buying a newer car (1999 2.5 Boxster vs. 2007 Cayman S), add safety equipment and have it as track ready as the Spec Boxster.
Unfortunately, I realized that adding safety equipment to the Cayman was not going to fit my needs, the car is just not designed to be tracked. So, I planned to upgrade the car, but the cost of the upgrade ( over $150,000) was just too much for a Cayman. Curiously enough, a Cayman S + $150k buys a Scuderia these days, a car that has a better engine/transmission/suspension/brakes than all the GT3 parts you could put in a Cayman.
So here is the list of parts that need to be replaced to make a Cayman as good as a GT3.
- Engine
- Brakes
- Transmission
- Wheel carriers
- axles
- springs/shocks/bushings
- Aero
- starter motor
- power steering pump
- water pump
- alternator
- AC compressor
IMHO, this is pretty much building a GT3 out of a Cayman. All the previously mentioned parts are much stronger in the GT3/GT2.
One of the areas where custom work is required is on the rear Boxster/Cayman wheel carriers, the pickup points are way too high. The little units that come stock cannot be compared with the 2007 GT3 bulky units, and even bigger and bulkier 2010 GT3 units, with the added benefit of lower pickup points for the the rear links. The rear suspension of the Boxster/Cayman is a compromise, there are no upper a-arms or upper control arms, just a single lower control arm, a toe link and a trailing arm, once you put good power and level of grips on these stock pieces, be ready for flexing and unwanted toe/camber dynamic changes.
No idea who can do the work on the rear Boxster/Cayman wheel carriers, but it would require plenty of re-engineering, probably swapping rear GT3 wheel carriers left-to-right and vice versa, plus custom links could work. Not of my interest anyway, as the level of crappy mass production parts in the Cayman/Boxster is just blasphemous for a Porsche.
Years ago I read an european article where a 2007 GT3 was compared against a Cayman with the RUF 410Hp kit+suspension+other goodies. The GT3 beat the Cayman in every performance test, despite of the Cayman being lighter and more powerful.
There is not a single thing a Cayman can do better than a GT3, even if we can detune the GT3 to Cayman power levels (295 HP, 303 HP, 320 HP).
The GT3/GT2 are the perfect examples of "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts".