I test drove an Audi R8 V10 (2010 with R-tronic), followed within the day by a 991 C4S PDK(no powerkit).

The Audi is sexier. The torque difference is significant. The sound is wonderful.

I still chose to order the 991 C4S with $70,000 in options (including powerkit and aerokit). Why? I just feel like the Porsche is a better car. I would not have to drive the Porsche every day, but I would want to. If your all about short drives on a weekly basis, buy the Audi R8. If you want a car that you are going to be pleased to drive on any (and possibly every) given day of the year, the Porsche may make more sense to you. It did to me.

I am not as much about impressing the neighbors and teenagers, as I am about impressing myself. Even still, the Porsche was not the easiest choice. For me, I am glad I chose it.

 

One other thing, for those of you that live at higher elevations, the revised air intake and engine modifications allow the engine to breath a lot easier. This is especially appreciated.

 

This is of interest to me too, as I also live in Colorado. I'm just not so sure that the less restrictive air intake and breathing when at sea level translates to a disproportionate (or even proportionate) benefit with the low-density air at high elevations. Not so sure the full benefit would be realized here. Of course we lose 15% at best in Denver and not sure we'd be seeing more than 20hp more from the X51. If anyone has compared up at altitdue, I'd be interested. Thanks!

 

• The power kit includes revised cams, heads, air intake and ecu. The non power kit 991S runs out of steam in the upper rpms. This is not the case with the power kit version as it screams to redline. I'm not sure to what degree the revised air intake is responsible, but if the ecu is performing its job it should be able to adjust to varying parameters.

 

It's ironic that you take umbrage at possibly the finest-written car magazine in the world but your post is a jumbling, incoherent mess.

As has already been shown to you, the power figures quoted by EVO are what are provided by the manufacturer, verbatim. If you read the magazine, you'll know that numbers are not a primary concern of theirs; they focus more on the emotion of driving so they're not likely to research the hell out of a number they're given and validate it with dyno-testing. If you're interested in only numbers, may I direct you towards any number of US car magazines?

I don't even want to deal with your assertions of him saying 'PCCB isn't worth every penny' as being 'unprofessional' and 'misleading'. These are what you call OPINIONS; the fact that PCCB's stop sooner/resist fade better are not in question by the author. What is in question is how much they offer as a value proposition - there is no obligation for car owners to fit the best available OEM brake package possible on a car and there is no obligation for a magazine to endorse said option, especially when it costs so much.

Secondly, I defy you to show me data showing that the dual-clutch in the Audi, a gearbox that has been described as very good, is significantly slower than the Porsche PDK. Even if it is 50 milliseconds slower ( whopping 30% or so slower), you realize that two different manual gearboxes will also have different shift speeds, and because they are slower to begin with, their deltas are likely to be even wider? What next, we shouldn't test cars because they don't have identical gear ratios?

Finally, the magazine was honest enough to preface the article by saying they were in a dilemma regarding which spec of car to choose with the Audi. I'm sure you're extremely anxious to justify your purchase of the x51 package and you don't really need to be, you have a great car and I'm sure it's enhanced by the package.

 

How about adding only the powerkit headers to a 2016 GTS with TPC/Cobb ECU tune. What would I expect there?

Also some news: Cobb has their PDK tune ready to market.