2009 Turbo Lag and Handling Issues
06-21-2012, 05:41 PM
#31
Thanks Pete for a detailed reply. Thanks for providing a link to the Turbo Cab. I am just confused. You think the Turbo Cab set has a lot of flaws including lag, suspension softness etc. I am just surprised that in your testing and opinion how can the same set up be better for a Cab. It obviously has the same engine with the same turbo's. Should the cab experience the same lag or greater lag because of the extra weight. A cab has 400 pounds more weight. I am not sure how the review of the Coupe and Cab can vary by such a large dimension. I think both review are polar opposites. Am I missing something. Thoughts?
Last edited by Kathuat; 06-21-2012 at 06:58 PM.
06-21-2012, 06:15 PM
#32
Rennlist Member
How long/how many miles have you been running the Eibachs with the stock PASM struts?
Was always curious about the longevity of that setup after being very impressed by a Champion-tuned 997-1 Turbo on H&R springs with stock PASM struts. We tested the car back to back with that setup and very expensive KW coil-overs and preferred the PASM struts/lowering springs. Great control and the lower ride height and higher spring rate actually seemed to help the active PASM system's body control and subsequent ride quality/ability to process lumps and bumps on back roads. Still the only case I can think of where an aftermarket spring-only change actually worked better than stock.
pete
Was always curious about the longevity of that setup after being very impressed by a Champion-tuned 997-1 Turbo on H&R springs with stock PASM struts. We tested the car back to back with that setup and very expensive KW coil-overs and preferred the PASM struts/lowering springs. Great control and the lower ride height and higher spring rate actually seemed to help the active PASM system's body control and subsequent ride quality/ability to process lumps and bumps on back roads. Still the only case I can think of where an aftermarket spring-only change actually worked better than stock.
pete
06-21-2012, 06:23 PM
#33
Drifting
And now for a little entertainment and yes another opinion...
Last edited by Bob in NY; 06-21-2012 at 08:21 PM.
06-21-2012, 06:48 PM
#34
Rennlist Member
Thanks Pete for a detailed reply. Thanks for providing a link to the Turbo Cab. I am just confused. You think the Turbo Cab set has a lot of flaws including lag, suspension etc. I am just surprised that in your testing and opinion how can the same set up be better in a Cab. A cab has 400 pounds more weight. Thoughts?
Flies in the face of accepted wisdom (a stiffer chassis is a better chassis, and makes the work of the suspension easier —* and I do not disagree), but may be a case of application. But Terry Zaccone, a very (!) accomplished autocrosser here in the Bay Area, says he thinks the early 911 Targa he's been autocrossing and time-trialing for 40 (?) years actually has an advantage in keeping its tires in touch due to the chassis flex.
To date, the 997-1 Turbo Cabrio is the only Porsche I like better from a handling standpoint than its coupe counterpart —*unless you count the Boxster Spyder and Cayman R. In 996 days, I really didn't much like the Turbo and C4S Cabs, whereas I really liked the coupes. Back then, the Cabs had noticeably more understeer. As always, you could drive around it, but you could feel the effect of the weight against the coupes. With the 997 came various electronic helpers, from PASM to PTV. Maybe these help mask some of these tendencies in the later cars?
At the end of the day, there are a lot of variables. More so now with all of the handling options. I try to address them while coming away with a "whole take," a "is it good or great, or not so good?" Of course, when we get back into the details behind the conclusions I've come to, we're digging into minutia that CandD (and, frankly, most people) would rightly skip. And, yes, I suspect that makes me a geek!
Bottom line, 997-1 Turbo is far from a bad car. But, perhaps more than any other 911 Turbo, it is one I would make some tweaks to....and then enjoy the heck out of it.
pete
06-21-2012, 07:48 PM
#36
Rennlist Member
Suppose the extra weight of the Cab might theoretically load the turbo more, but I don't recall even thinking about that back then. Of course, the extra weight would also blunt the outright performance. Not that you'd notice since the performance of either version is stupendous...
As to Clarkson...thanks for the video! Hadn't seen that one, and it's the first time I've actually agreed with him (is writers, actually) for more than three minutes (3:30, actually). Has to be a new record. The writers get into hyperbole after that, but no one does that better, or more entertainingly. Also rare for JC to praise a Porsche...
As always, Top Gear is written to be entertaining first, beautiful to look at next, and with objectivity and hard evaluation a distant third and fourth. Still love it, though. A gold standard.
pete
06-21-2012, 10:36 PM
#37
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A strong pronouncement without much basis. Credibility is always a fair question, especially when it comes to an opinion we don't like or agree with. As to the last assertion, I've been road and track testing for Excellence (as well as Sports Car International and Bimmer) for 15 years as a full-time staffer and 3 years before that as a freelance. Over that period, I've driven:
-Every new Porsche road car since the air-cooled/water-cooled transition.
-A wide variety of performance and exotic cars from different makers.
-Vintage Porsches ranging from early Pre-A 356s to 914-6 GT to 930 3.0s to Carrera RSR 3.0s to GT3 RSRs.
-More modified Porsches than I can recall, from lightweight 356s to R Gruppe 911s to super- and turbocharged 964s and 986s to heavily modified 930s, 959s, 944 Turbos, 993 Turbos, 996 Turbos, and 997 Turbos.
Our tests span 300-30,000 miles, so that's a lot of seat time. I've got no ax to grind. I've called it as I've seen it, both good and bad, for 15 years. Just ask the 997 GT3 guys. Finally, besides a variety of Porsches, I've owned four turbo cars that have ranged from "when did I push on the gas again?" to "here's your 1800-rpm powerband, enjoy it while you can" to "this thing is turbocharged? really?" For the record, I like turbo cars every bit as much as normally-aspirated cars. A good turbo car can be used to incredible effect, and can yield an accelerative rush no normally-aspirated car can match.
As to the 997-1 Turbo, I stand by my opinion that the car does, indeed, exhibit considerable lag when compared to the 415-hp 996 Turbo, this despite all the marketing about VTG. I find it better than the X50 996 Turbo in terms of lag, but not as good as the 997 GT2, the Werk K1 (thanks to cat delete), and the 997-2 Turbo. Certainly, it's no 924 Carrera GTS — which makes an early 930 feel like a Mk6 GTI — but my belief is that, when it comes to lag, the first VTG was not Porsche's best day. Nor was the chassis of the 997-1 Turbo coupe, which we panned.
I always worry when I have a strong reaction, but I found it interesting that a friend (and very knowledgeable collector) traded his 996 Turbo in on a 997-1 Turbo and went back to the dealer within two days to get his 996 back. It was not a cheap deal for him, and to his dismay, the 996 had already been sold. He didn't keep the 997. Then, a few years later at the 997-2 Carrera 4S launch I was speaking with a Porsche engineer about what the improvements to that car meant to the coming 997-2 Turbo and mentioned that I didn't think the 997-1 Turbo's chassis or AWD system were very good (too soft, unpredictable). Tthe engineer looked up from his plate, swallowed hard, and said, "We know." Even Walter Röhrl has since admitted that the 997-2 Turbo got a suspension and AWD system overhaul to correct handling issues.
Do I hate the 997-1 Turbo? No. It looks good, goes (very) fast in any weather, has a great interior, is comfortable for long hauls, is faster than a GT3 around many race tracks, and is impressive in terms of its technology. Would I buy one? Maybe — but only if I could add a few of the mods some here have already discussed. I see some great looking (!) 997-1 Turbos on this forum (the gray car on black wheels is plain stunning), and I'm sure there are some very knowledgeable drivers here. And probably also some drivers who are more than happy with the car the way it came. After all, it was developed by Weissach — so we're not talking about Chevy Cobalts here.
I know all too well that each of us only has part of the story, but stand by my statements about the 997-1 Turbo. As to the OP's original question:
-I find its lag relative to the 415-hp 996 Turbo and 997-2 Turbo to be noticeably worse.
-I find its suspension too soft, with too much brake dive, acceleration squat, and roll on the way into and through turns. Combine that with an available center diff that even Röhrl admits caused problems for owners and "unpredictability" and I know I do not stand alone on this.
I've got no problem with people — especially owners — disagreeing with my view. That's what makes the world interesting! But let's stick to our views and a healthy discourse, rather than attacking the credibility of a source you don't seem to know much about based on nothing more than one person's read of a nebulous story that isn't even quoted properly or in context.
Cheers,
pete
P.S. To the original poster: You can read my 997-1 Turbo Cabriolet review for free http://www.excellence-mag.com/issues...7-turbo-cabrio
-Every new Porsche road car since the air-cooled/water-cooled transition.
-A wide variety of performance and exotic cars from different makers.
-Vintage Porsches ranging from early Pre-A 356s to 914-6 GT to 930 3.0s to Carrera RSR 3.0s to GT3 RSRs.
-More modified Porsches than I can recall, from lightweight 356s to R Gruppe 911s to super- and turbocharged 964s and 986s to heavily modified 930s, 959s, 944 Turbos, 993 Turbos, 996 Turbos, and 997 Turbos.
Our tests span 300-30,000 miles, so that's a lot of seat time. I've got no ax to grind. I've called it as I've seen it, both good and bad, for 15 years. Just ask the 997 GT3 guys. Finally, besides a variety of Porsches, I've owned four turbo cars that have ranged from "when did I push on the gas again?" to "here's your 1800-rpm powerband, enjoy it while you can" to "this thing is turbocharged? really?" For the record, I like turbo cars every bit as much as normally-aspirated cars. A good turbo car can be used to incredible effect, and can yield an accelerative rush no normally-aspirated car can match.
As to the 997-1 Turbo, I stand by my opinion that the car does, indeed, exhibit considerable lag when compared to the 415-hp 996 Turbo, this despite all the marketing about VTG. I find it better than the X50 996 Turbo in terms of lag, but not as good as the 997 GT2, the Werk K1 (thanks to cat delete), and the 997-2 Turbo. Certainly, it's no 924 Carrera GTS — which makes an early 930 feel like a Mk6 GTI — but my belief is that, when it comes to lag, the first VTG was not Porsche's best day. Nor was the chassis of the 997-1 Turbo coupe, which we panned.
I always worry when I have a strong reaction, but I found it interesting that a friend (and very knowledgeable collector) traded his 996 Turbo in on a 997-1 Turbo and went back to the dealer within two days to get his 996 back. It was not a cheap deal for him, and to his dismay, the 996 had already been sold. He didn't keep the 997. Then, a few years later at the 997-2 Carrera 4S launch I was speaking with a Porsche engineer about what the improvements to that car meant to the coming 997-2 Turbo and mentioned that I didn't think the 997-1 Turbo's chassis or AWD system were very good (too soft, unpredictable). Tthe engineer looked up from his plate, swallowed hard, and said, "We know." Even Walter Röhrl has since admitted that the 997-2 Turbo got a suspension and AWD system overhaul to correct handling issues.
Do I hate the 997-1 Turbo? No. It looks good, goes (very) fast in any weather, has a great interior, is comfortable for long hauls, is faster than a GT3 around many race tracks, and is impressive in terms of its technology. Would I buy one? Maybe — but only if I could add a few of the mods some here have already discussed. I see some great looking (!) 997-1 Turbos on this forum (the gray car on black wheels is plain stunning), and I'm sure there are some very knowledgeable drivers here. And probably also some drivers who are more than happy with the car the way it came. After all, it was developed by Weissach — so we're not talking about Chevy Cobalts here.
I know all too well that each of us only has part of the story, but stand by my statements about the 997-1 Turbo. As to the OP's original question:
-I find its lag relative to the 415-hp 996 Turbo and 997-2 Turbo to be noticeably worse.
-I find its suspension too soft, with too much brake dive, acceleration squat, and roll on the way into and through turns. Combine that with an available center diff that even Röhrl admits caused problems for owners and "unpredictability" and I know I do not stand alone on this.
I've got no problem with people — especially owners — disagreeing with my view. That's what makes the world interesting! But let's stick to our views and a healthy discourse, rather than attacking the credibility of a source you don't seem to know much about based on nothing more than one person's read of a nebulous story that isn't even quoted properly or in context.
Cheers,
pete
P.S. To the original poster: You can read my 997-1 Turbo Cabriolet review for free http://www.excellence-mag.com/issues...7-turbo-cabrio
Have owned both 996 TT and now 997 TT and disagree 100% with you assessment on Turbo lag. The guy that went from a 996TT to a 997TT and wanted his 996TT is the anomally......just doesn't happen and now after owning the 997TT, I know why. You have your opinion and that is fine. My guess is many will disagree with you. Lastly, If you are driving this car at 1,500-1,800 rpm you belong in a Lexus.
Last edited by amerlemans; 06-22-2012 at 08:15 AM.
06-22-2012, 05:00 AM
#38
Three Wheelin'
Pete @ Excellence , happy you like my car and made a mention of it. Cool.
Or was it Nick's ? Doesn't matter as they are almost twins anyway.
Would like to react to your writings.
The Cabrio you drove was a MY08, the Coupe MY07, correct ?
It is known Porsche improved the set-up of the car in MY08. On Rennteam this has been discussed back than and it was confirmed by independent journalists. The 08 and 09 have an improved 'ring time as a result. So IMO this would be a better explanation of what you experienced. Don't think chopping of a roof would improve the dynamics of a car, it doesn't. But you know that of course. BTW, the 997 was developed as a cabrio, the chassis is very rigid.
The turbo-1 (any year) was set-up to be a comfortable cruiser. I have driven an '07 for 20.000kms, most of those km's on the German autobahn at speed. I never felt any kind of 'lacking' be it in the chassis or engine department. I regularly topped 300km/h on empty stretches and felt safe.
Take it to the track and it behaves with understeer and other less desirable features. A stock turbo was/is not build for the track and there is no shame in that. As you noticed yourself just the lowering of the car makes it 'track worthy'. The center of gravity is so extremely important in a rear motor Porsche and it only is emphasized in the turbo. Again, nothing wrong with the stock set-up as it was meant to be purely a road car.
The Porsche engineer at the table. You must know they all do that when a new model is about to be launched, right ? It is good business. All of a sudden the old car is bad and the new one is so much better. Not that the new ones aren't usually better. They are. But that reply is without value to me.
Lowering a car with stock shocks: If shocks are (fairly) new lowering a car has no influence on the life of the shocks imo. If the shocks cylinders have not worn enough to form a 'ring' (don't know the correct English word) than no prob.
It is very difficult to know when a shock is past its lowering limit, a motorway/freeway/autobahn driven car will have less shock wear than a city driven car.
And your friend wanting his 996 TT back , seriously ? Wow, that is strange. Never heard that one before. I have had a lot of Porsche's and I keep coming back to the 997 TT. It's such an addictive car.
Or was it Nick's ? Doesn't matter as they are almost twins anyway.
Would like to react to your writings.
The Cabrio you drove was a MY08, the Coupe MY07, correct ?
It is known Porsche improved the set-up of the car in MY08. On Rennteam this has been discussed back than and it was confirmed by independent journalists. The 08 and 09 have an improved 'ring time as a result. So IMO this would be a better explanation of what you experienced. Don't think chopping of a roof would improve the dynamics of a car, it doesn't. But you know that of course. BTW, the 997 was developed as a cabrio, the chassis is very rigid.
The turbo-1 (any year) was set-up to be a comfortable cruiser. I have driven an '07 for 20.000kms, most of those km's on the German autobahn at speed. I never felt any kind of 'lacking' be it in the chassis or engine department. I regularly topped 300km/h on empty stretches and felt safe.
Take it to the track and it behaves with understeer and other less desirable features. A stock turbo was/is not build for the track and there is no shame in that. As you noticed yourself just the lowering of the car makes it 'track worthy'. The center of gravity is so extremely important in a rear motor Porsche and it only is emphasized in the turbo. Again, nothing wrong with the stock set-up as it was meant to be purely a road car.
The Porsche engineer at the table. You must know they all do that when a new model is about to be launched, right ? It is good business. All of a sudden the old car is bad and the new one is so much better. Not that the new ones aren't usually better. They are. But that reply is without value to me.
Lowering a car with stock shocks: If shocks are (fairly) new lowering a car has no influence on the life of the shocks imo. If the shocks cylinders have not worn enough to form a 'ring' (don't know the correct English word) than no prob.
It is very difficult to know when a shock is past its lowering limit, a motorway/freeway/autobahn driven car will have less shock wear than a city driven car.
And your friend wanting his 996 TT back , seriously ? Wow, that is strange. Never heard that one before. I have had a lot of Porsche's and I keep coming back to the 997 TT. It's such an addictive car.
06-22-2012, 05:11 AM
#39
Three Wheelin'
The last one on Bridgestone.
One of the reasons I sold my first turbo was because my ears hurt on bad Belgian roads from tire roar. It was that bad.
The same roads with my new turbo equipped with Bridgestone and all is well. No tire drone, no deafening roar. Just normal tire noises.
But than there are posts about the Michelin being so good and quiet. My wife tells me they must be deaf from going to disco's when they were young LOL.
Last edited by TT-911; 06-22-2012 at 06:21 AM.
06-22-2012, 10:41 AM
#40
Rennlist Member
This is something that has been puzzling me. I have had 3 different 997 turbo's since 2007. 2 of them on Michelin.
The last one on Bridgestone.
One of the reasons I sold my first turbo was because my ears hurt on bad Belgian roads from tire roar. It was that bad.
The same roads with my new turbo equipped with Bridgestone and all is well. No tire drone, no deafening roar. Just normal tire noises.
But than there are posts about the Michelin being so good and quiet. My wife tells me they must be deaf from going to disco's when they were young LOL.
The last one on Bridgestone.
One of the reasons I sold my first turbo was because my ears hurt on bad Belgian roads from tire roar. It was that bad.
The same roads with my new turbo equipped with Bridgestone and all is well. No tire drone, no deafening roar. Just normal tire noises.
But than there are posts about the Michelin being so good and quiet. My wife tells me they must be deaf from going to disco's when they were young LOL.
A friend who tried all three Spyder N-spec tires on his Spyder was also blown away by the Bridgestones. Every now and then, a truly wonderful tire seems to come along. Years ago, the AVS intermediate was one. These days, the N-spec Bridgestones are another.
06-22-2012, 11:10 AM
#41
Rennlist Member
Pete @ Excellence , happy you like my car and made a mention of it. Cool.
Or was it Nick's ? Doesn't matter as they are almost twins anyway.
Would like to react to your writings.
The Cabrio you drove was a MY08, the Coupe MY07, correct ?
It is known Porsche improved the set-up of the car in MY08. On Rennteam this has been discussed back than and it was confirmed by independent journalists. The 08 and 09 have an improved 'ring time as a result. So IMO this would be a better explanation of what you experienced. Don't think chopping of a roof would improve the dynamics of a car, it doesn't. But you know that of course. BTW, the 997 was developed as a cabrio, the chassis is very rigid.
The turbo-1 (any year) was set-up to be a comfortable cruiser. I have driven an '07 for 20.000kms, most of those km's on the German autobahn at speed. I never felt any kind of 'lacking' be it in the chassis or engine department. I regularly topped 300km/h on empty stretches and felt safe.
Take it to the track and it behaves with understeer and other less desirable features. A stock turbo was/is not build for the track and there is no shame in that. As you noticed yourself just the lowering of the car makes it 'track worthy'. The center of gravity is so extremely important in a rear motor Porsche and it only is emphasized in the turbo. Again, nothing wrong with the stock set-up as it was meant to be purely a road car.
The Porsche engineer at the table. You must know they all do that when a new model is about to be launched, right ? It is good business. All of a sudden the old car is bad and the new one is so much better. Not that the new ones aren't usually better. They are. But that reply is without value to me.
Lowering a car with stock shocks: If shocks are (fairly) new lowering a car has no influence on the life of the shocks imo. If the shocks cylinders have not worn enough to form a 'ring' (don't know the correct English word) than no prob.
It is very difficult to know when a shock is past its lowering limit, a motorway/freeway/autobahn driven car will have less shock wear than a city driven car.
And your friend wanting his 996 TT back , seriously ? Wow, that is strange. Never heard that one before. I have had a lot of Porsche's and I keep coming back to the 997 TT. It's such an addictive car.
Or was it Nick's ? Doesn't matter as they are almost twins anyway.
Would like to react to your writings.
The Cabrio you drove was a MY08, the Coupe MY07, correct ?
It is known Porsche improved the set-up of the car in MY08. On Rennteam this has been discussed back than and it was confirmed by independent journalists. The 08 and 09 have an improved 'ring time as a result. So IMO this would be a better explanation of what you experienced. Don't think chopping of a roof would improve the dynamics of a car, it doesn't. But you know that of course. BTW, the 997 was developed as a cabrio, the chassis is very rigid.
The turbo-1 (any year) was set-up to be a comfortable cruiser. I have driven an '07 for 20.000kms, most of those km's on the German autobahn at speed. I never felt any kind of 'lacking' be it in the chassis or engine department. I regularly topped 300km/h on empty stretches and felt safe.
Take it to the track and it behaves with understeer and other less desirable features. A stock turbo was/is not build for the track and there is no shame in that. As you noticed yourself just the lowering of the car makes it 'track worthy'. The center of gravity is so extremely important in a rear motor Porsche and it only is emphasized in the turbo. Again, nothing wrong with the stock set-up as it was meant to be purely a road car.
The Porsche engineer at the table. You must know they all do that when a new model is about to be launched, right ? It is good business. All of a sudden the old car is bad and the new one is so much better. Not that the new ones aren't usually better. They are. But that reply is without value to me.
Lowering a car with stock shocks: If shocks are (fairly) new lowering a car has no influence on the life of the shocks imo. If the shocks cylinders have not worn enough to form a 'ring' (don't know the correct English word) than no prob.
It is very difficult to know when a shock is past its lowering limit, a motorway/freeway/autobahn driven car will have less shock wear than a city driven car.
And your friend wanting his 996 TT back , seriously ? Wow, that is strange. Never heard that one before. I have had a lot of Porsche's and I keep coming back to the 997 TT. It's such an addictive car.
All great points, and this gets into that we all have a piece of the truth, and can learn from others' experience and knowledge. That includes me!
I'd love to learn more about the MY08 changes to the 997-1 Turbo, as Porsche didn't do a re-launch (I don't blame it) on the coupe and the 2006/2007 press cars that came through were it until the 997-2 was launched. So, I knew about the changes to the Cab's suspension, but PAG made no mention of the coupe changes, and I find that pretty interesting. Reminds me a bit of the quiet structural changes to the 2002 996 Turbo. Anyway, here's what I wrote back in late 2007, upon the launch of the 997-1 Turbo Cab:
Weissach has a tradition of turning out top-drawer cabrios, but hit new highs starting with the from-scratch 996- and 997-based Cabriolets. Any lamentations over extra weight, softer suspension, and/or less structural rigidity were offset by the usual al fresco driving experience along with the realization you were giving up very little precision, performance, and pace to get it.
The 997 Turbo Cabriolet accomplishes the same feat, but adds something more. More pleasure, more feedback, and more fun. As someone who generally prefers coupes when it comes to focused driving, the idea that the open version is a better drive is nothing short of a revelation…
...this might be the best Porsche Active Suspension Management setup I’ve sampled on a 997. Softer tuning with more weight works out to more compliance and, with it, more predictability. Turn after turn, this green machine glides over bumps big and small. You can’t deny this 997’s fantastic, effortless ability to take a back road apart with surgical precision. It doesn’t give you the neck hair-raising thrills a GT3 will, but it isn’t meant to. While the Turbo Cabrio isn’t as involving or ultimately rewarding as a GT3, it’s deeply satisfying in the same way any tool that’s a cut above tends to be.
More satisfying than the Turbo coupe? Yes, and for two distinct reasons. First, the Turbo Cabriolet’s chassis feels beautifully judged in a way the coupe’s just doesn’t. Part of why might be because its chassis isn’t as stiff. Cut off the tin top and, even if you’re Porsche, you’re going to lose both longitudinal and torsional rigidity. Talk to a Weissach chassis engineer, however, and he’ll tell you that measuring what you’ve lost isn’t as easy as comparing those two parameters because there’s a third one to consider: dynamic rigidity, which takes the engine’s oscillations into account via the motor mounts and the rails they sit on.
In the Turbo Cabriolet’s case, all three parameters have obviously been managed well. Cowl shake is virtually non-existent, yet it seems like the chassis flex lets the wheels follow the road that bit better. More likely, though, that’s down to the suspension setup, which has been retuned to satisfy a “softer” buyer profile. Either way, or both ways, the result is that the Cab just plain works better on the real-world curvy roads that remind enthusiasts why they bought a sports car. The difference is subtle, but not as subtle as you’d think.
Totally agree with you re: Turbo's purpose, its performance on the autobahn (spent memorable weeks in 996 and 997 Turbos in Germany), and its traits on track, where its comfort-oriented compromises are just that. Even so, it's still wicked fast in terms of lap times around a track. And, yes, with a few mods, it's easily tuned into a far more fun track tool. Here in Northern California, I prize back-road handling far more than ultra-high speed comfort and stability. However, if I lived in Germany, or Ohio (where the roads are straight more often than not), I might have different priorities.
As to the engineer, yes, I am very familiar with that tendency, having been around these guys for 15 years and having gotten to know some of them well. This was very different, and not just "the new car is better."
Agreed on logic of shocks, if not experience. And, having just put new Bilsteins in a lowered '73 914, I hope you are right! Friend with the 996 TT isn't the only person I know with such an impression, but knows his stuff. He is certainly the most vivid example, and one I know will be very different to the experiences encountered here!!
It's always interesting for me to interact with owners, and especially in a case like this, when revisiting a car I criticized. That said, I come from a different perspective, with very little if any vested interest. That's good on one hand, but offset with limited knowledge (while one might learn to "learn" cars quickly when jumping from one to the next, there is no way to beat the knowledge a keen driver picks up about a car over the long haul). Gets back to that we all have valuable perspective, and a piece of the truth — and that's what makes forums like this one great. Hopefully, the OP comes out the winner, with more intel and a more balanced perspective.
Thanks for the feedback!
pete
Last edited by stout; 06-22-2012 at 11:34 AM.
06-22-2012, 11:23 AM
#42
Rennlist Member
Have owned both 996 TT and now 997 TT and disagree 100% with you assessment on Turbo lag. The guy that went from a 996TT to a 997TT and wanted his 996TT is the anomally......just doesn't happen and now after owning the 997TT, I know why. You have your opinion and that is fine. My guess is many will disagree with you. Lastly, If you are driving this car at 1,500-1,800 rpm you belong in a Lexus.
As to your last barb, well...it's what I don't like about forums. If you're still talking about boost and rpm, then I must question whether you understand turbocharging. Load is a key part of the equation, so boost is not necessarily linked to rpm. Same rpm, different gears, different grades, and/or different speeds = different boost. As to "1,500-1,800 rpm"
, when I'm testing on a back road or a race track, I'm really never below 2700-3000 in something like a Turbo, and generally in the 3500-8000+ range in everything else. Generally speaking, I view throttle app under 2000 rpm in gears 2-6 as lugging, and that's not just bad for acceleration but abusive of the machinery when it comes to these cars.Cheers,
pete
Last edited by stout; 06-22-2012 at 12:20 PM. Reason: Clarification
06-22-2012, 11:28 AM
#43
Rennlist Member
Nick's Turbo reminds me of a car at Laguna Seca in the paddock for the ALMS race that stopped me cold. 997-1, Atlas Gray (I think) with all-red taillights, no badging in the rear, and lowered a bit. Forget the wheels now, but they were very right and the car was just so elegant and purposeful. Reminded me how good the early 997s can look. But then, I've always been a sucker for dark gray and dark green cars...
pete
06-22-2012, 11:47 AM
#44
Three Wheelin'
Denis,
I'd love to learn more about the MY08 changes to the 997-1 Turbo, as Porsche didn't do a re-launch (I don't blame it) on the coupe and the 2006/2007 press cars that came through were it until the 997-2 was launched. So, I knew about the changes to the Cab's suspension, but PAG made no mention of the coupe changes, and I find that pretty interesting. Reminds me a bit of the quiet structural changes to the 2002 996 Turbo.
Thanks for the feedback!
pete
I'd love to learn more about the MY08 changes to the 997-1 Turbo, as Porsche didn't do a re-launch (I don't blame it) on the coupe and the 2006/2007 press cars that came through were it until the 997-2 was launched. So, I knew about the changes to the Cab's suspension, but PAG made no mention of the coupe changes, and I find that pretty interesting. Reminds me a bit of the quiet structural changes to the 2002 996 Turbo.
Thanks for the feedback!
pete
If you feel like it just have a look at the PET file of the 997 turbo and see for yourself how many parts got changed from '07 to '08. And again for '09.
The attention to detail is exemplary at Porsche. Just one example. Tire pressure monitoring system changed in '08 for no obvious reason. '08 tire sensors do not work on '07 cars. And this is only one small example.
Electronics have been even updated within model years at Porsche. Can't say for sure if this was the case with 997-1 turbo but could be.
Also note that the PET file does not show all changes by numbers, if parts can be interchanged the part number does not change even if the part itself is new and improved. I speak from personal expierence on my former 993
06-22-2012, 11:51 AM
#45
Three Wheelin'