jweslowski

I just read R&T's comparison of the GT-R, Z06 and TT. I know the GT-R is a computer controlled marvel and the 911 rewards a skilled driver, but they described the 911 TT's handling as disappointing. We have seen this as well in C&D's lightning lap against the R8.

I am a 996 GT3 owner, and had a 996 X50 Turbo before that. I expect to purchase a 997TT as a daily driver in the next few months.

So my question, 997TT owners, is:
What is the 997TT handling like and what are these reviews finding on the track? Is the 997TT that hard to drive? Is it that unpredictable?

Finally, I noticed all the reviews are of 997TTs without the rear limited slip differential. I bet this addition would help the handling of the TT dramatically as it does with a GT3. I have heard that a GT3 with a worn out LSD is nearly un-drivable. Is the LSD a must have option for the 997TT if track use is planned?

Chris from Cali

Good question... I am going to buy a 997 TT too and I read the same article. I plan on ordering the LSD and Sport Chrono.

Terry Adams

Porsche should quit worrying about making a car for journalists some of whom do not know how to drive a 911. It is either "no fun anymore" or "unpredictable".

If your street driving includes aggressive canyon carving, I found LSD on my 993 to be very beneficial. A small price to pay even if you never track it. The next owner might.

eclou

jweslowski,

lots of info on the board regarding the handling of the 997tt. On the street it is fine. Coming from a 996Gt3 you may find it understeers in sharp, slow corners on the track. The prodigious torque can lead to snap oversteer as you try to throttle thru the corner. The car also is spec'd with a measly -0.4 camber in the front. Running true R compounds will rectify some of the push, but I found that going to -1.2 camber in the front has made the car very neutral and confidence inspiring.

Papa

Just out of curiosity, what is the effect of increasing the negative camber on tire wear? Historically, I always wear out the outside of the front tires regardless of the car.

Papa

eclou

Papa,

neg camber causes earlier inside tire tread wear. In your case, adding neg camber would give better tire longevity

jmitias

A lot of what R&T complained about is legitimate. The 997TT understeers into a corner and as you apply power it has significant oversteer, which in of itself is not "bad" but coupled with the soft suspension settings it gets out of sorts and the transitions are disconcerting. The 997 GT3 is easier to drive to me on the track because its tendencies are better telegraphed to the driver and there is less of the dive, squat, and that squirrely transition from understeer to oversteer with the added complication of turbo boost in the mix.

Anyway, the 997TT is the greatest road car in the world because it absolutely can do everything extremely well,in any weather, on any road surface, with any driver. You can even fit a couple kids in the back.

SciFrog

What is troubling is the poor NBR lap time, NBR is more road like than other tracks...

Also the current stock 997TT doesn't inspire confidence at the limit, unlike the R8, thus some semi pro driver have a hard time finding the limit.

The 996TT was better in that aspect.

dustinr

In regards to tire wear and negative camber, some R compound tires require negative camber, Toyo RA1 require a minimum of -1 or it might be more, I can't remember, but they're designed to be run with negative camber. As far as driving dynamics are concerned the general design of a 911 requires a different driving technique, a technique which doesn't come easy due to the fine line between driving the envelope and driving over the envelope. A 911 will bite you quickly if driven wrong, they are less forgiving than a lot of cars. So unless you are skilled at ringing out a 911, a car like the GT-R is going to be easier to drive and more confidence inspiring and less apt at eating your lunch if you make a mistake and therefore probably quicker around any road or track with mere mortals driving. On the R8 note; there's a newer Top Gear episode where they pit the Stig in a GT3 against Sabine (can't remember her last name, but she's a German racer) in a R8 at what looks like the Ascari track. The R8 looks easier to drive but the Stig knows how to ring out a 911 and ends up beating the R8 by a second or 2, worth the watch.

cannga

For street driving, if you follow the dictum of "slow in fast out" (which one should anyway IMHO for all cars in general, and 911 in particular), for me the car is utterly stable and NOT unpredictable *at all*. It takes corners at speed that is way beyond my previous car, a 997 C2, and feel VASTLY more planted. Just take a look at the forums and see if there are unusual number of complaints of "widow maker" type comment. (The answer is no.)

The Turbo is designed to be a daily driver, more GT than track, a job that it currently still has no competition. At the track, I would think your GT3 is "better," saved for the lack of torque and power-300 lb ft is on the low side for the lighter than Turbo but still heavy GT3. If you take the Turbo to the track it would have to be modified (stiffer, lower), as this is something that it is NOT designed for in OEM form. Some people on the forum do this suspension mod, for example "eclou" who posted above, and have taken the car's handling towards track status. The advantage here with the Turbo is that the power, modded or un modded, is something that I think you will be VERY VERY VERY pleased with. The shove in the back when you step on the gas, and not let go, with this Turbo is a can't-miss once in a lifetime experience.

The ring times of 7:48 (2008 model car-"forum rumored") to 7:55 seconds (2007 car). Even using the low end of 7:55, it is slighter faster than Ferrari F430, and a LIFETIME faster than street legal Aston Martin Vantage. So "poor" is relative indeed.

IMO, magazine comments for the Turbo in general re. the "disappointing" handling is also a result of the "fortune" of having the engine hanging out back there, which is what makes a 911 a 911 in the first place anyway.

SciFrog

FYI a stock Vantage V8 N400 does the NBR in 7.57...

FYI a 996TTS was faster than early editions of 997TT...

You are absolutely right when you say the 997TT was tuned for street driving under 8/10th...

cannga

>>>>>FYI a stock Vantage V8 N400 does the NBR in 7.57...

1. Still slower than a Turbo 2007, no? Let alone 2008 Turbo with suspension change.
2. Who tested the Aston Martin? Was it a directly comparable source such as Sport Auto?
3. And why would one want to be buying a car associated with this kind of news? http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/07/k...play-for-sale/

Which brings us back to the point, for a daily driver, the Turbo has no competition, all things considered.

>>>>>FYI a 996TTS was faster than early editions of 997TT...

1. And is the original poster asking about early editions of 997TT?

2. Please provide URL with direct comparison, not "what if" scenarios. If we are speculating, I could also telll you the 2008 Turbo is rumored to go at 7:48 to 7:52. Which would make it a LIFTTIME faster than Aston Martin.

Even if the 996 TT is faster (never proven directly with 2008 Turbo), the 997 TT has to deal with more safety equipment, more stringent regulations.
http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?vie...ID=0&tID=10073
And I have yet to see a 996TT (a great car) owner who has moved to 997TT wanting to move back.

>>>>>You are absolutely right when you say the 997TT was tuned for street driving under 8/10th...
Please don't misquote me. If I were to make such silly statement, it would be the Turbo is tuned for 9/10 TRACK driving (remember 7:48), and 10/10 street driving.

I would be first to admit the Turbo is not perfect (weight, etc.); I have A LIST OF NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS. But, what kind of long term test drive have you had with the Turbo? Have you driven a Turbo long enough to be giving advices?

You own an Aston Martin, no? Why frequenting forums making ONLY negative statements of questionable validity about the Turbo, unless you have had enough experience with it to give valid opinions?

SciFrog

N400 not tested by SA yet, but AM has not been lying in the past, but the regular one did 8.03...
Anyway the AMV8 is the competitor of the 997S, not the TT.
Ferrari is also partly owned by Abu Dhabi...

996TT did 7.56 in 2000.
Somehow I would not be surprised if the 996TTS with modern tires can come really really close to the 2008TT.

I did misquote you, but the car is not tuned 10/10 for street driving with such poor NBR lap (for that kind of hp and vs expected times, after all fastest NBR lap time were even done with suspension NOT in sports mode).

Don't get me wrong, the 997TT is a great all around car, especially with four sits. But it just fell so short of expectations vs the 996TT, performance and technology wise. Two years ago, the 997TT was my dream car and the only one I considered. But when out, so many details became dissapointing that I had to look somewhere else, and many people did the same...

I have tried the TT, but not that extensively. I don't make only negative statements about the TT and Porsches overall as you know... But IMHO Porsche has not been listening to customers lately and is being driven solely by marketing, something they are great at.

cannga

>>>>>Somehow I would not be surprised if the 996TTS with modern tires can come really really close to the 2008TT.

Speculation.

>>>>>I did misquote you, but the car is not tuned 10/10 for street driving with such poor NBR lap (for that kind of hp and vs expected times, after all fastest NBR lap time were even done with suspension NOT in sports mode).

Just a question, outside of the very debatable practice of calling a 7:55 ring time "poor" (7:48 if one is into speculation), is the implication here that the 997 Turbo cannot be a good car because it did not achieve x:xx time at the ring?! Again, the Turbo is not perfect, but I feel sorry for anyone making decision based on magazine reviews and ring time. This is where the mistake started.

>>>>>But when out, so many details became dissapointing that I had to look somewhere else, and many people did the same...

More speculation. And a BIG mistake btw.

>>>>>I have tried the TT, but not that extensively.

I think I would end this discussion on this note. My suspicion all along. Many questions for readers, but not for me; I really am too "afraid" to find out. How fast did you take the car to in that test drive? How long was the test drive? Did the dealer allow you to take the car past 4200 rpm?

You haven't even tested the car extensively, let alone own one, and here giving opinions?

SciFrog

I agree a longer test drive might help. I have seen this with the Sportshift on the Aston, which takes more than a test drive to master and appreciate...

Problem is long test drives are not really possible, dealers are not that nice... Especially when the car just came out last year.