The Bad News piles up about the new Turbo
12-17-2009, 04:41 AM
#197
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sarasota, FL. Home of Florida Man.
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
what is this, the second grade? LTC, can i used the restroom please?
boo, when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you should do is stop digging. put down the shovel, man.
for my argumentum ad hominem i present that you should send VR a note to get some help on in the avatar category.
boo, when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you should do is stop digging. put down the shovel, man.
for my argumentum ad hominem i present that you should send VR a note to get some help on in the avatar category.
12-17-2009, 05:21 AM
#198
Rennlist Member
With regards to claims of reliability, thats exactly what I'll be doing... I'll believe the claims when the scores are on the board....
They're called incremental improvements... Granted a new technology (pdk) has been introduced that exagerates the measurable improvements of new to old but comparing a 997.1 manual to a 997.2 manual, the improvements in performance are marginal as always...
Some people here are comparing apples and oranges (997.1 man to 997.2 pdk) and claiming the world... Wake up and smell the coffee....
My previous two statements also address this comment... Hopefully, they'll sort out all the carbon build up issues for you that most makes of DI are suffering with for the moment or your fuel economy will improve heaps more when you're broken down and consuming none. Each to their own...
They're called incremental improvements... Granted a new technology (pdk) has been introduced that exagerates the measurable improvements of new to old but comparing a 997.1 manual to a 997.2 manual, the improvements in performance are marginal as always...
Some people here are comparing apples and oranges (997.1 man to 997.2 pdk) and claiming the world... Wake up and smell the coffee....
My previous two statements also address this comment... Hopefully, they'll sort out all the carbon build up issues for you that most makes of DI are suffering with for the moment or your fuel economy will improve heaps more when you're broken down and consuming none. Each to their own...
When the lead Porsche test driver says a 10 second improvement at the Ring is huge, why would we not believe that? When he says the previous car was unstable in long corners due to switch from oversteer to understeer, how is that better than the new car?
Reliability in year one can always be a question, but Porsche and other high end manufacturers have consistently worked that out. Therefore, the argument is more specific to waiting a few months, rather than supposing the old car is better.
The previous tt versions could not be launched without terrible drive line chatter, and the short 1-2 gearing always meant a shift in the middle of an intersection. Thats why a tip was faster on the street, but tested slower on the strip ( i know you will argue this, but the tip is quicker across an intersection, unless you want to brutalize your drivetrain).
The PDK doesn't only magnify the acceleration difference, it also eliminates any difference in track performance when left in auto mode vs. either manual paddle shifting or the standard 6 sped. That means that you as a driver are quicker. Some may say, "I want the involvement of the old gear lever", but when you are on the track, you always want what's "quicker" and less error prone. On the street, I don't see that rowing the old box is that much fun, but if you want the slower, less fuel efficient, but simpler technology, that is purely personal.
I cannot see any reasonable argument that the old car is better. AS
12-17-2009, 06:49 AM
#199
Racer
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London, UK
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To drive, I don't think anyone is disputing the new Turbo is better than the old one. It would be a pointless release by Porsche if that were not the case. The new car is certainly a little faster and a little tighter handling wise.
This is how I rated each from my experiences:
997.1 Turbo (tiptronic) = 15/20
997.1 Turbo (manual) = 16/20
997.2 Turbo (manual) = 17/20
997.2 Turbo (PDK) = 18/20
My modified 997.1 Turbo (manual) = 19/20
So the only question marks are:
1) How reliable is the new 9A1 engine and PDK box with 500bhp going through it?
2) Can the new 9A1 engine be tuned to the same levels as the old M64 engine without huge cost overheads of having to strengthen internal components (obviously irrelevant if you stay stock)?
3) If you are a 'manual' junkie then is PDK now impressive enough to warrant changing (I am actually on the fence about this - satisfaction of doing it yourself vs benefits of lightning fast changes)?
4) Are the differences between the 997.1 and 997.2 Turbo large enough to warrant the depreciation trade-in hit you would have to take if you already own a 997.1 Turbo? Also, if you are a new purchaser, given the bargain prices of 997.1 Turbos now, would this be a better investment - with the option to tune and surpass the 997.2 stock Turbo at a fraction of the cost?
I know I won't be trading 'up'
This is how I rated each from my experiences:
997.1 Turbo (tiptronic) = 15/20
997.1 Turbo (manual) = 16/20
997.2 Turbo (manual) = 17/20
997.2 Turbo (PDK) = 18/20
My modified 997.1 Turbo (manual) = 19/20
So the only question marks are:
1) How reliable is the new 9A1 engine and PDK box with 500bhp going through it?
2) Can the new 9A1 engine be tuned to the same levels as the old M64 engine without huge cost overheads of having to strengthen internal components (obviously irrelevant if you stay stock)?
3) If you are a 'manual' junkie then is PDK now impressive enough to warrant changing (I am actually on the fence about this - satisfaction of doing it yourself vs benefits of lightning fast changes)?
4) Are the differences between the 997.1 and 997.2 Turbo large enough to warrant the depreciation trade-in hit you would have to take if you already own a 997.1 Turbo? Also, if you are a new purchaser, given the bargain prices of 997.1 Turbos now, would this be a better investment - with the option to tune and surpass the 997.2 stock Turbo at a fraction of the cost?
I know I won't be trading 'up'
12-17-2009, 09:21 AM
#200
Rennlist Member
To drive, I don't think anyone is disputing the new Turbo is better than the old one. It would be a pointless release by Porsche if that were not the case. The new car is certainly a little faster and a little tighter handling wise.
So the only question marks are:
1) How reliable is the new 9A1 engine and PDK box with 500bhp going through it?
2) Can the new 9A1 engine be tuned to the same levels as the old M64 engine without huge cost overheads of having to strengthen internal components (obviously irrelevant if you stay stock)?
3) If you are a 'manual' junkie then is PDK now impressive enough to warrant changing (I am actually on the fence about this - satisfaction of doing it yourself vs benefits of lightning fast changes)?
4) Are the differences between the 997.1 and 997.2 Turbo large enough to warrant the depreciation trade-in hit you would have to take if you already own a 997.1 Turbo? Also, if you are a new purchaser, given the bargain prices of 997.1 Turbos now, would this be a better investment - with the option to tune and surpass the 997.2 stock Turbo at a fraction of the cost?
I know I won't be trading 'up'
So the only question marks are:
1) How reliable is the new 9A1 engine and PDK box with 500bhp going through it?
2) Can the new 9A1 engine be tuned to the same levels as the old M64 engine without huge cost overheads of having to strengthen internal components (obviously irrelevant if you stay stock)?
3) If you are a 'manual' junkie then is PDK now impressive enough to warrant changing (I am actually on the fence about this - satisfaction of doing it yourself vs benefits of lightning fast changes)?
4) Are the differences between the 997.1 and 997.2 Turbo large enough to warrant the depreciation trade-in hit you would have to take if you already own a 997.1 Turbo? Also, if you are a new purchaser, given the bargain prices of 997.1 Turbos now, would this be a better investment - with the option to tune and surpass the 997.2 stock Turbo at a fraction of the cost?
I know I won't be trading 'up'
12-17-2009, 09:46 AM
#201
Rennlist Member
When the model number shifts, one expects more than incremental change or just modification of the shape of a headlight. If the changes from the 996tt to the 997tt merited a designation change, then the 2010 997tt should have yet another new designation. A .9 second drop in 0-200 kph is not "incremental", it is a quantum shift.
When the lead Porsche test driver says a 10 second improvement at the Ring is huge, why would we not believe that? When he says the previous car was unstable in long corners due to switch from oversteer to understeer, how is that better than the new car?
Reliability in year one can always be a question, but Porsche and other high end manufacturers have consistently worked that out. Therefore, the argument is more specific to waiting a few months, rather than supposing the old car is better.
The previous tt versions could not be launched without terrible drive line chatter, and the short 1-2 gearing always meant a shift in the middle of an intersection. Thats why a tip was faster on the street, but tested slower on the strip ( i know you will argue this, but the tip is quicker across an intersection, unless you want to brutalize your drivetrain).
The PDK doesn't only magnify the acceleration difference, it also eliminates any difference in track performance when left in auto mode vs. either manual paddle shifting or the standard 6 sped. That means that you as a driver are quicker. Some may say, "I want the involvement of the old gear lever", but when you are on the track, you always want what's "quicker" and less error prone. On the street, I don't see that rowing the old box is that much fun, but if you want the slower, less fuel efficient, but simpler technology, that is purely personal.
I cannot see any reasonable argument that the old car is better. AS
When the lead Porsche test driver says a 10 second improvement at the Ring is huge, why would we not believe that? When he says the previous car was unstable in long corners due to switch from oversteer to understeer, how is that better than the new car?
Reliability in year one can always be a question, but Porsche and other high end manufacturers have consistently worked that out. Therefore, the argument is more specific to waiting a few months, rather than supposing the old car is better.
The previous tt versions could not be launched without terrible drive line chatter, and the short 1-2 gearing always meant a shift in the middle of an intersection. Thats why a tip was faster on the street, but tested slower on the strip ( i know you will argue this, but the tip is quicker across an intersection, unless you want to brutalize your drivetrain).
The PDK doesn't only magnify the acceleration difference, it also eliminates any difference in track performance when left in auto mode vs. either manual paddle shifting or the standard 6 sped. That means that you as a driver are quicker. Some may say, "I want the involvement of the old gear lever", but when you are on the track, you always want what's "quicker" and less error prone. On the street, I don't see that rowing the old box is that much fun, but if you want the slower, less fuel efficient, but simpler technology, that is purely personal.
I cannot see any reasonable argument that the old car is better. AS
Have you taken a moment to see what was achieved in the GT# camp with a 200cc engine capacity increase in the M64? And without the added benefits of pdk you highlight as yet... The new GT3- acceleration 0-200kph 0.7sec faster, NBR improved by 8sec... GT3 RS, acceleration 0-200kph 0.8sec faster, NBR improved by 12sec... These sorts of improvements suggest to me that a 3.8 lt M64 would have done just as well as the new engine in the TT without the reliability concerns that come with new motor which is largely unproven...
12-17-2009, 01:16 PM
#202
Better? Faster? I don't know. From my POV, driving frisky on public roads, there's zero difference. I like my "proven bulletproof" GT1 engine but..., the new TT with superfast power-saving shifts from PDK and a much better looking PCM are nice.
12-17-2009, 02:19 PM
#204
We now see that since the new car excels over the old in every metric of performance including NBR times, straight line performance etc. it is no longer necessary to argue which one is a more reliable indicator. And it does so in a very convincing manner.
As far as reliability is concerned I think that it is a bonus that the new engine achieves these results at lower boost (made possible by a higher compression ratio and higher red line) as well as the 40% decrease in overall engine parts. These changes bode well for the robustness and reliability of the design. Those who argue that the new engine is unproven from the standpoint of upgradability miss the point. The stock car will outperform many modded 997.1 turbos anyway at lower overall cost, so large horsepower improvements, even if they could not be achieved, may not even be necessary.
Moreover the improvements extend well beyond the all new more efficient engine. Upgrades to the suspension and transmission have been almost universally acclaimed by those who have driven the car. That alone should be worth the price of admission. The PDK transmission has received glowing reviews from even die-hard 6-speed enthusiasts and, as is well known, the conventional manual transmission is considered obsolete technology in F1.
In light of the above and all the other un-rebutted observations in favor of the new car previously noted, I think I may go back and change the title of this thread to "An Inconvenient Truth." LOL!
As far as reliability is concerned I think that it is a bonus that the new engine achieves these results at lower boost (made possible by a higher compression ratio and higher red line) as well as the 40% decrease in overall engine parts. These changes bode well for the robustness and reliability of the design. Those who argue that the new engine is unproven from the standpoint of upgradability miss the point. The stock car will outperform many modded 997.1 turbos anyway at lower overall cost, so large horsepower improvements, even if they could not be achieved, may not even be necessary.
Moreover the improvements extend well beyond the all new more efficient engine. Upgrades to the suspension and transmission have been almost universally acclaimed by those who have driven the car. That alone should be worth the price of admission. The PDK transmission has received glowing reviews from even die-hard 6-speed enthusiasts and, as is well known, the conventional manual transmission is considered obsolete technology in F1.
In light of the above and all the other un-rebutted observations in favor of the new car previously noted, I think I may go back and change the title of this thread to "An Inconvenient Truth." LOL!
12-17-2009, 02:53 PM
#205
Now, I admit, you do have a flair for the dramatic don't you?
Why don't you show us some pictures of war torn Germnay while you're at it?
Why don't you show us some pictures of war torn Germnay while you're at it?
Last edited by boolala; 03-27-2015 at 05:28 AM.
12-17-2009, 04:59 PM
#206
Rennlist Member
We now see that since the new car excels over the old in every metric of performance including NBR times, straight line performance etc. it is no longer necessary to argue which one is a more reliable indicator. And it does so in a very convincing manner.
As far as reliability is concerned I think that it is a bonus that the new engine achieves these results at lower boost (made possible by a higher compression ratio and higher red line) as well as the 40% decrease in overall engine parts. These changes bode well for the robustness and reliability of the design. Those who argue that the new engine is unproven from the standpoint of upgradability miss the point. The stock car will outperform many modded 997.1 turbos anyway at lower overall cost, so large horsepower improvements, even if they could not be achieved, may not even be necessary.
Moreover the improvements extend well beyond the all new more efficient engine. Upgrades to the suspension and transmission have been almost universally acclaimed by those who have driven the car. That alone should be worth the price of admission. The PDK transmission has received glowing reviews from even die-hard 6-speed enthusiasts and, as is well known, the conventional manual transmission is considered obsolete technology in F1.
In light of the above and all the other un-rebutted observations in favor of the new car previously noted, I think I may go back and change the title of this thread to "An Inconvenient Truth." LOL!
As far as reliability is concerned I think that it is a bonus that the new engine achieves these results at lower boost (made possible by a higher compression ratio and higher red line) as well as the 40% decrease in overall engine parts. These changes bode well for the robustness and reliability of the design. Those who argue that the new engine is unproven from the standpoint of upgradability miss the point. The stock car will outperform many modded 997.1 turbos anyway at lower overall cost, so large horsepower improvements, even if they could not be achieved, may not even be necessary.
Moreover the improvements extend well beyond the all new more efficient engine. Upgrades to the suspension and transmission have been almost universally acclaimed by those who have driven the car. That alone should be worth the price of admission. The PDK transmission has received glowing reviews from even die-hard 6-speed enthusiasts and, as is well known, the conventional manual transmission is considered obsolete technology in F1.
In light of the above and all the other un-rebutted observations in favor of the new car previously noted, I think I may go back and change the title of this thread to "An Inconvenient Truth." LOL!
Those who have half a clue, know the better car and I'm betting you'll beat my M64 powered GT3 into a grave. I can assure you that the same won't be the case with the TT.2...
You've spent endless hours going around in circles as if you're trying to convince yourself. So why not be man enough to crack open your check book and buy one since you've made your decision. Put your money where your mouth is poolala or take a hike! I and others have....
Last edited by 911rox; 12-18-2009 at 03:34 AM.
12-17-2009, 05:34 PM
#207
I can now see the broad outlines of the campaign against the new turbo. Based upon "desmoc's" sobering analysis above it would go something like this:
"Are you sure that you want to put your trust in the 9A1 engine? After all we all know what can happen when the Germans miscalculate:"
"Are you sure that you want to put your trust in the 9A1 engine? After all we all know what can happen when the Germans miscalculate:"
12-17-2009, 06:35 PM
#209
In the words of the indomitable brendorenn:
