If you look at the scoring carefully, the 911 lost because of Rear Seat Space and Rear Seat Comfort. Haha. So, if I didn't care about the rear seat the base 911 is better than the M4? Also, why didn't the 911 have the PDK. It should have been even quicker. And again, not an S.

 

Agreed. If the 911 had pdk AND sport chrono it would have been closer....much closer. That would have pushed the price up too high for this comparison.

 

For what Porsche charges, they do need to do better.
At least we dont see ourselves comming and going, like every other 4 series owner.

 

That's why I think these comparisons are dumb. I mean, let's take out the sunroof option, PSE and the price would be closer. But like I said, take away those rear seat numbers, and the 911 (non-S) wins. Not that I'm trying to defend the Porsche. It's really these dumb car magazines and how they compare the cars. I'm not saying that the M4 is a bad car. It's just in Southern California, I see a late edition M3 every other block. It gets old :-). Probably start seeing the M4 every other block soon.

 

The M4 is 10 seconds quicker around Nurburgring than a 991 base. No available option is going to close that gap. The 991 is still the car to own and operate though for many reasons. Does anyone know why Porsche chose to abandon the 3.6 liter motor for the base 911 in favor of the 3.4? I'm assuming they just didn't want to keep making 3 motors so close in displacement, which would make economic sense. Clearly the base needs the extra horses, although one would think it would outperform the lesser powered 981 Boxster S/Cayman S which share the same motor, which it doesn't. I'm very surprised Porsche didn't ensure the base 991 would outperform at least the 997.1 S. Negative there too. With a 3.6 I bet Porsche could have easily met the 997.2 S performance level, which is good enough to lap the ring quicker than a M4.

 

I don't know about everyone else, but I understood you perfectly, first time around...

 

Meh...Just an overstyled and overboosted 3 series.

 

Yes, it was perfectly .
Made funnier by the people who took it serioisly.

 

Gotcha!

I wasn't in a joking mood when I read it! : )

 

+1...again apples to oranges...I understand they were doing their best to keep price as close as possible, but these are completely different cars. I agree the M "feels" faster and the torque curve peaks lower throwing you back in your seat like an AMG, but take both out to mountains or track and it doesn't handle or corner anything like a 911.

 

Sorry...also missed the sarcasm...

 

Seriously? I don't have any interest in the M4 but it's buckets more agile and quicker than the 991 base. The fact the 981 Boxster S/Cayman S slaughter the 991 base around Nurburgring with detuned versions of the same motor show just how weak the 991 chassis is. 911s are capable only due to power, not cornering.

 

More agile? What 991 are you driving, mine is light on its feet. It is always composed and ready for the next hairpin..

 

Are there really legitimate ring times posted on the base 991 as well as 981s, with comparable drivers?

Its no secret the 981 is a good chasis.
991 is not exactly flawed, its very competitive with more powerfull cars.

 

ohh....He drives a 981s