996 C4S vs. 997 C2
11-10-2013, 05:38 PM
#17
M97's definitely seem to be better in that regard than the M96's; safe to assume due to the larger IMS bearing. Only suggested 2009+ MA1 cars as OP seemed to be concerned about IMS and it has been eliminated in those cars.
Really can't go wrong with any of the 911 offerings....
Really can't go wrong with any of the 911 offerings....
11-10-2013, 11:36 PM
#18
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Niagara
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-11-2013, 10:22 AM
#19
Another vote for the 996C4S.
I know I'm in the minority, but I like the headlights on the 996. It feels like it was an attempt by Porsche to modernize the looks. But purists outnumbered those who liked it and Porsche moved back to the round headlights, forever and ever now I think.
The C4S has the turbo rear and it looks great! I think all C4S should have the Turbo rear. It just looks mean! However, Porsche decided no more turbo hips on the following gen and the 997 and 991 have lost the lower side vents. They have larger rumps, not just the Turbo ones.
Interior looks better in the 997, but the 996 interior is not bad. I mean it looks like and early '00s car (it is), but the ergonomics are not "wrong".
Best advice is to drive them both back to back. I did just that a couple years back. Drove a 997C2s and a 996TT X50 back to back, it was easily decided within a km. The 996tt is a beast, the 997C2s... well it looks good.
I know I'm in the minority, but I like the headlights on the 996. It feels like it was an attempt by Porsche to modernize the looks. But purists outnumbered those who liked it and Porsche moved back to the round headlights, forever and ever now I think.
The C4S has the turbo rear and it looks great! I think all C4S should have the Turbo rear. It just looks mean! However, Porsche decided no more turbo hips on the following gen and the 997 and 991 have lost the lower side vents. They have larger rumps, not just the Turbo ones.
Interior looks better in the 997, but the 996 interior is not bad. I mean it looks like and early '00s car (it is), but the ergonomics are not "wrong".
Best advice is to drive them both back to back. I did just that a couple years back. Drove a 997C2s and a 996TT X50 back to back, it was easily decided within a km. The 996tt is a beast, the 997C2s... well it looks good.
11-11-2013, 11:36 AM
#20
Rennlist Member
I'm a bit biased and most of the points have been made before but:
996 C4S: basically a 996 Turbo without the turbo engine - full leather std, big red turbo brakes, sport suspension and that wide body with the rear reflector. You're getting the top of the non-gt based 911's of the era.
A base 997: great car, but if it wasn't loaded with options by the original owner, it's pretty spartan. THe entry point of the 911's of that era.
996 C4S: basically a 996 Turbo without the turbo engine - full leather std, big red turbo brakes, sport suspension and that wide body with the rear reflector. You're getting the top of the non-gt based 911's of the era.
A base 997: great car, but if it wasn't loaded with options by the original owner, it's pretty spartan. THe entry point of the 911's of that era.
11-12-2013, 05:07 PM
#22
Intermediate
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a rule of thumb, I stay away from early model years of any generation just to give the manufacturer some time to work the kinks out of their major revisions.
I'd get a late 997 over a late 996 of the same spec but I would certainly not get an early base spec 997 over a late higher spec 996. My 2 cents.
Good luck.
I'd get a late 997 over a late 996 of the same spec but I would certainly not get an early base spec 997 over a late higher spec 996. My 2 cents.
Good luck.
