I don't really get that.

When I drove a PDK in auto normal it shifted at very low rpm. On sport it shifted at a little higher rpm but only if I hit the throttle harder. In sport plus it would only shift at red-line. I didn't like any of those. I could control the shift point in manual mode but certainly not any better than I can with my 7MT.

 

Yep, I think that's why I tend to use the wheel shifters so much. I enjoy the control of being in the gear I think it should be in and the ease of getting it there.

ChuckJ

 

While not as prone to hyperbole as some others, I too have been a bit less than impressed by the performance of the 3.4 911. Mine is a PDK with SC, but due to the incredibly low shift points in both normal and sport mode, I tend to drive in manual with the paddle shifters most of the time.

The car is by no means slow, and I can run away from just about anything I like with a couple of clicks of the left hand paddle. My main qualm with the car's performance is that it simply isn't quick in the middle RPMs as the Boxster Spyder I had before it. That car's combination of midrange torque and topend pull was "magic everyday" for a daily driver. I completely agree with every comment here about how fantastic the 991 3.4 motor is above 5500rpm, however there is more that needed to be done to keep the midrange performance consistent with other recent DFI engines.

 

I would think the complaint should come from PDK owners instead of MT during normal driving. I owned a 09 M3 DCT trans and I was actually very disappointed initially with the car because of the lack of power. But then I stopped driving it completely in the auto mode and used the main shifter as if the car was manual. I noticed that during normal driving, the auto mode would shift to the highest gear too quickly, I was at times in 7ths by the time I was doing 50 and therefore the RPMS were so low that slight push on the accelerator didn't move the car much compared to say I was driving in manual, I would only be in 4th or 5th gear and still would have some low end torque.

I can't quiet comment on the 991 as I'm still waiting to take delivery. If PDK owners are not complaining about the lack of power, Porsche has done a great job with the transmission compared to BMW, consider yourselves lucky.

 

Interesting. I am far from educated on the topic so enlighten me. Are the boxster spyder and 991 c2 not similar in terms of engine, power/weight etc? Both 3.4L...C2 obviously heavier but with more power. Was the engine in the spyder putting out more torque or a broader curve? Or did the raw nature of that car just feel faster.

 

+1.

It makes little difference in performance if PDK or manual (because that is just the way to get from gear to gear - but if paddles are selected this process of going to the top gear quickly wouldn't be a topic at all).

For those who drive a dual clutch in auto-mode, then complain that the car is in too high of a gear, I've got nothing for ya, except drive in manual mode. Problem solved.

The issue that was raised is the lack of torque where most people spend most of their time, regardless of transmission.

 

That's a good question. I've done a bit of acoustic analysis to some trackday vids I have (hardly scientific, but the best data I have), and it shows that the Spyder is actually quicker in the 20-50mph range. This is consistent with in-gear performance data Autocar has gathered from the 991 and the 981s.

I've been flamed for saying this before on over at Rennlist, but I think it's an issue of gearing. The 991's 2nd gear is really quite tall for it's torque curve. I like to think of a good metric for the perceived performance of an everyday sports car to be wheel torque to weight ratio at 25mph, in 2nd gear. This metric is what is going to be what determines how fast a car pulls out of 2nd gear corners and how prone it will be to power oversteer on mountain roads (if you like that kind of thing). This ignores tire size and weight distribution, but hey, we choose FR, MR, or RR because we like what the weight distribution does to the nominal behavior of a given power to weight class of car.

A combination of boredom while watching F1 qualifying this morning, and a handy copy of Carroll Smith's Tune to Win results in the following:

 

Interesting.

 

 

80% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

 

That is the beauty of statistics! Anyone can paint a picture and fools will invariably give that person more credit than with no statistics included!

 

991 3.4 faster than a 997.2S around the track and hardly slower in a straight line.



'nough said...

PS: where are all the 997.2S owners complaining abut their 'slow cars'

 

ChuckJ

 

I'm in about the same position: 2011 M3 DCT but also .... 'vert! Which adds about 300 lbs. I did euro delivery sight-unseen (had never driven one or even any BMW). I got the M3 after a 2005 S4.

Getting on to the Autobahn I was thinking, "this is legendary m3???" Wasn't even close to my S4 in terms of butt dyno. But I did have a 'vert and the M3 is still sweet so I was ok.

Cut to post break-in in the US ... holy shiz! The M3's acceleration has scared the crap out of me more than once but you have to be ready to rev to full freeway (or more) speed.

As a DD ... especially the 'vert, yeah it's a little doggy but then I wouldn't trade it for much of anything.

I'm thinking a 991 3.4 cab has to be equal or better to the M3 vert ... in any event I doubt I'll saying, "aw man, I coulda had a mini-van!"

 

Oh yeah. It's a plodding disappointment. Frankly I don't get what all the fuss is about. The base is an awesome car as I had and have no plans to race the 3.4 is more than enough for DD and long trips. It is a pleasure to drive.

I suspect those complaining really want a Mopar powered 440 GTX ....vroom vroom.