Me too! Who wants faster, safer and more comfortable? Bast@&ds! And I forgot, new and better looking. Yes, I would definitely go with your strength. iMHO.

 

You seem really determined to believe that your 991 is better than the 997 in every way and is as true a 911 as any generation, and have everyone agree with you. No offense (I do like and respect you), but it's starting to sound a bit desperate. Try to understand that a lot of people are still exploring and making up their minds (like me), and some will decide differently than you.

 

I am just having some fun. You know I love you...and your ca!.. (I mean that in a totally platonic way cor both you and the car!)
But a lot of people seem very free with questioning the 911-ness of the 991, and accuse its owners of being too sensitive, but are just as defensive when the more obvious improvements are trumpeted. Turn-about is fair play.

I am glad you love what you drive and that you are trying to be objective.
I meant what I said in another thread about buying you a beer!
Michael

 

I drove a Gallardo yesterday, and it felt super planted, with essentially none of the classic 911 dynamics. Basically, a big go-kart. So continuing the physical parameters theme, I added the Gallardo to my list:

Base Cayman
Wheelbase: 95.1
Front Track: 58.7
Rear Track: 60.4

996
Wheelbase: 92.5
Front track: 57.7
Rear track: 59.1

Base 997
Wheelbase: 92.5
Front Track: 58.5
Rear Track: 60.4

Base 991
Wheelbase: 96.5
Front Track: 60.3
Rear Track: 59.8

Gallardo
Wheelbase: 100.8
Front Track: 64.3
Rear Track: 62.9

Key points are that the wheelbase is much longer than the 991, tracks are much wider than the 991, and rear track is narrower than the front track (like the 991).

I think this helps to explain why the 991 performs and feels the way it does relative to the 997. And I'll tentatively predict that the next generation of 911 will have parameters and a feel closer to the Gallardo (basically, a further step in the direction of the changes made relative to the 997).

 

Seem so strange to me to have a rear track that's narrower than the front track. Is this done on other sports cars? What's the advantage? I always picture wider set rear wheels then front wheels when I look at a sports car.

 

I don't know, and am interested in finding out. Working from basic principles, I'm guessing that the wider front track improves grip in cornering, particularly when trail braking into corners, which puts more load on the front tires. Plus, when the weight distribution is less rear-biased, that also puts more load in the front. I'm sure the engineers who design this stuff must have some pretty sophisticated software to allow them to play around with the parameters and predict the effects fairly accurately.

 

Ferrari 458:
Wheelbase 104.3in
Front 65.8
Rear 63.2

This is not the first I've heard of the front being wider than rear either... Seems as though it is becoming more common.

 

I'm sensing a pattern here.

 

One more:

McLaren MP4-12C
Wheelbase: 105.1
Front Track: 65.2
Rear Track: 62.3

I'm increasingly thinking that these supercar proportions are the direction Porsche plans to take the 911. The 991 may represent the farthest Porsche felt they could go in this generation without too many people saying that it's no longer a 911, thus eliciting a big backlash which could hurt sales. I won't be surprised if the next 911 sees another 4" increase in wheelbase.

 

Manifold, that is a very interesting take on the situation. Perhaps you could say it differently... Could Porsche plan to move the Panamera down a size? After all they have a 4 seater, luxury sports car, obviously with the interior they like as that is the new look for the complete Porsche stack in a front engine car but now with Duracells to help in the traction department. I am thinking that the flat six is on the way out and that too much space is needed for all these government mandated nannies to reduce emission etc... Time will tell.

 

One big difference is that the Panamera is front-engined, so I think the 911 is moving more in the direction of a bigger and badder Cayman, rather than a smaller and more nimble Panamera.

But ultimately I think the 911 is moving more in the direction of the supercars that already exist (458, McLaren, etc.). Porsche could have gotten there right away if they wanted, maybe even beating those guys at their own game, but I think they're under a lot of pressure to not make changes so big that everyone feels that they've abandoned their history. I sympathize with their dilemma.

 

I reject this perspective. The Carrera GT is my supporting evidence. Porsche sat on a formula of great success, and we can't help speculate that certain technology worked its way into the Boxster/Cayman. This is why people like me want Porsche to completely scrap the common themed model of the platformed 'hierarchy' (911>Cayman). Would Guam tip over if Porsche made an AWD Turbo mid-engined car with PDK?

They've got the AWD, they've got a mid-engined platform (Boxster/Cayman/Carrera), they've got turbos, they've got PDK. Just put the pieces together and watch the sales come in.

Was Audi worried about heritage of the R8 when they released it?
Was McLaren worried about heritage of the F-1 when they released the MP4?

Sorry if this is off-topic. I've been biting my lip long enough...

I believe (and I've stated this before) that heritage is a way to explain NOT doing something. Others may suggest that if it isn't broken, don't fix it. Fine, release a mid-engined coupe with the specs I've mentioned and see what will sell.

Something tells me the 911 will just go away (except for the 10% 'purists' who will take an additional 2 years to come around).

 

Can't do that, we wouldn't be able to call it a 911.

ChuckJ

 

Then call it something else. Would a 911 by any other name be less sweet?

 

Actually, rumor has it that a mid-engine 911 designed to go after the 458 is coming in 2015