I for one wholeheartedly agree, and have been thinking the same thing for quite some time now... What Porsche folks like, and especially the 911 crowd is a fast car that handles great. It doesn't have to be the fastest, just really great at what it does... Steering, suspension, solid structure, and a host of other things that make the 911 a 911.


Really, who wants all that horsepower in a rickety, brash, unsophisticated platform? Not me!


I applaud Porsche for being in-tune with what professional car enthusiast's really love...




From WIRED:


Porsche’s 2015 911 GT3 is a pared-down, track-derived homage to what the German brand does best. It makes 475 hp and enough grip to liquefy your kidneys. It redlines at a monster 9,000 rpm. It’s faster than any GT3 before it.



And it’s … fine. Very good, even. But not great. An astonishing piece of engineering, yes, but in the pantheon of hot Porsches, kind of a dead fish. Steering feel that isn’t a patch on a 10-year-old 911’s. A huge, uninviting cockpit. No manual transmission.
As a rule, new cars get faster, but not always better. This is partly because the automotive industry is a game of metrics. Cars are built by engineers, and engineering runs on numbers. Couple this with the needs of marketing, where bigger is always better, and you have a business driven to continually top itself. Each new car must be safer, quieter, more comfortable, and more capable than those before it.



When it comes to performance, the measuring stick traditionally has been horsepower. It’s an easy thing for the public to process, a number that almost directly relates to potential velocity. Problem is, more power means more weight. And while the industry is working on ways to lighten the load (largely through the extensive use of carbon-fiber instead of steel), the scales aren’t tipping lighter. Which in turn requires more engine output, to carry the same speed in a straight line.
This may be about to change. In an interview with England’s Car magazine, Andreas Preuninger, Porsche’s GT-car chief, said the marque’s future range-toppers won’t chase numbers.
“I’m not a believer in this horsepower monster, up, up, up, more, more, more,” he said. “For my personal tastes, around 500 hp is enough, because 700-800 hp calls for bigger brakes, sturdier suspension. It gets heavier and heavier logically.” Performance and improved driver feedback, he says, will come from lighter weight and increased engineering focus.



Porsche always has been known for this stuff, it’s just strayed a little of late. It’s one of the most profitable and respected brands on the planet, a place the industry looks to for groundbreaking, trendsetting engineering. It has pursued stratospheric engine outputs like everyone else. But this is the first time in memory a company bigwig has gone on record endorsing moderation. (Although you’ll note that he qualifies his statement with the “personal taste” bit of corporate politesse.)





We live in remarkable times. Any forum fanboy will tell you that 500 hp—five mother-loving hundred horsepower!—is snoozeworthy. The last Ford Mustang GT500 made 662 hp, brah. The current Dodge Viper is good for 640. BMW will sell you a family sedan with 575, and Dodge has two with 707. (A number, it should be noted, I can’t say without collapsing into giggles, because the last time I drove a 707-hp Dodge Hellcat, while assisting with this, I broke three laws in four counties and damn near got arrested twice while eating 90-mph Midwestern beef jerky and cackling like a lunatic.)
But those cars are unsustainable peaks. They’re so capable, they only come alive with sanity in the rear-view. First gear in the Hellcat is good for more than 60 mph. To keep average people from burning the tires off a BMW M5—or ending up in a ditch—the car’s electronic stability control is a restrictive fun-killer. (You could turn it off, but in everyday driving, why should you have to?)



And while each car is undoubtedly defined by its engine output, it’s a case of diminishing returns. Only so much of an M5 or Hellcat’s grunt is usable in the real world. As weird as it sounds, those cars aren’t made noticeably better or more involving through the application of absurd speed. Great cars tell you what they’re doing, painting a picture with feedback. It’s what helps make you comfortable, getting the most out of the machine, but it’s also fun. And many engineers don’t put a priority on it.
Ask a motorcyclist or any hot-rodder: Nutso power is nice to have, but you get used to it quickly. If raw power is a car’s main talent, it feels the same on any road, which means you get bored. The rest of the experience—steering feedback, driveline noises, chassis response, the feeling of control—has to be satisfying.
If Porsche is considering a sea change, the rest of the business shouldn’t be far behind. Preuninger is a bright light within Porsche, a company full of bright lights. His job focuses on sports cars, not SUVs or sedans. He has long advocated the prioritization of driving feedback over complication—a rare thing in this industry—boosting things like available manual transmissions, lighter weight, and a focus on driving feel.
Parse out the rest of Car’s interview, which includes a dissection of the upcoming 2016 GT3 RS—the track-focused, low-production upgrade of a low-production, track-focused car—and it becomes clear that Preuninger is advocating a return to sanity.



A brief note about that 2016 GT3 RS: “RS” stands for the German word rennsport, or motorsport. With Porsches, the letters represent the hardest of hard-core. The ’16 RS will feature a number of technical advances, including a magnesium roof (a first for production cars), claimed aerodynamic downforce matching Porsche’s astonishing 918 Spyder, rear tires borrowed from that same supercar, and enormous front fender slats designed to aid downforce. (And presumably be difficult to clean and capable of inhaling small children, but that’s nitpicking.)



The RS’s 500-hp, 4.0-liter flat-six uses a crankshaft that shares its alloy with the crank in the 919 race car. Due to the constraints of a longer piston stroke, that shaft revs to 8,800 rpm—200 below the base GT3’s 9,000-rpm redline.
And so this is the trap, the contradiction, of loving cars. You know what’s right and practical, but your primal-monkey brain wants to simultaneously have its numbers cake and eat it. The first time I read about the RS’s engine, all I thought was, “What, they couldn’t make it work at 9,000?”

 

I wonder what that statement will actually translate into, especially with the new FI engines coming for the 911 Carreras.

I made my purchase based on these exact principles; low weight, manual transmission, drivability, and sufficient power. Sure, $114,000 could have also given me quite the horsepower surge if I really wanted to go in that direction, but I didn't. I don't care how intoxicating a 600+hp car feels in a straight line highway burst... once you're in corners, on a track, or doing anything that involves actual turns and agility, it's clear that a 4,000lb car won't ever feel the same as a 3,000lb 911.

Low weight is the key to winning over an enthusiast's heart. The sad truth is that the majority of the car-buying population don't qualify as "enthusiasts."

 

 

Interesting statement.
I think it's only aimed at the GT cars.
With GT cars staying NA, they won't be competitive on HP numbers (they already aren't).

Soon FI will provide non-GT cars with power increases, to levels above the GT cars.
Does not mean one is better than the other, just different priorities.

Porsche wants everybodys money, not just the purists, so I'm betting they will take advantage of the easy power gains.

 

{ I don't care how intoxicating a 600+hp car feels in a straight line highway burst... once you're in corners, on a track, or doing anything that involves actual turns and agility, it's clear that a 4,000lb car won't ever feel the same as a 3,000lb 911.}

ABSOLUTLY CORRECT. I road raced motorcycles and we used to say all the time, anybody can go fast in the straights, but hit an s curve or a decreasing radius and you better have a bike that handles and sticks. HP and torque are great to have but I'll take something that I can throw into a corner that stays planted all the way through.

 

I disagree with the OP as to what "Porsche folks like". I have owned every variant of 911 going back to the 80s and while I have enjoyed them, they are indeed underpowered. I am so tired of hearing that Porsche is about track, handling blah blah. Who says one must sacrifice that in order to have power? Why can't we have both? Engineering allows for it. For some reason beyond my comprehension Porsche just doesn't want to increase HP in any significant way. My 991 3.4 is a slug and I have disliked it nearly since the day I drove it off the lot. I cannot wait to be rid of it once and for all. I will consider the new turbo motors as a finally viable solution but there are tons of options out there at this price point and if Porsche doesn't offer what I want then I will shop elsewhere after 25 years of brand loyalty. simple.

 

Most people on this board are enthusiasts. See my comment above about the majority of Porsche buyers being non-enthusiasts. Then, do realize that us enthusiasts on 6SO are also separated into many categories: the individuals who are happy with change, the individuals who are not, and the individuals who can go either way based on the "feel" of a car. You're never going to appease every single person with a comment, a decision, or a choice. That's why I try to cover all of the bases when discussions like this come up.

Now, about your comments. Porsche doesn't "want" to increase horsepower for the exact reasons stated in the article above. Did you read it? It's more of a pain than a pleasure to the driving experience when you're adding turbos, adding weight, adding heat, and in turn, adding cooling equipment when your models already outperform dozens of more expensive exotic cars in performance runs (drag, track, etc.). You state that you don't care about Porsches reputation as a track car, but you are well aware that this reputation is the reason a good amount of buyers, like myself, bought a Porsche to begin with. Porsche's target audience with the 911 Carrera is not the car buyer interested in absolute speed or horsepower. They know that, and we know that.

Modern technology is (thankfully) allowing Porsche and other manufacturers to reach horsepower targets without *too* much added weight and heat, but it's still a problem. The BMW M6 is a beast of a car, but it also weights ~4,200lbs and is a handful on a track. [EU requirements will force Porsche, as we all know, to take the FI route, but they will undoubtedly find a way to make it work. Do I like it? Not at all. Will I accept it and either 1) grow into it, or 2) purchase another car? Absolutely.]

Which would you opt for? The bragging rights of a 560HP straight-line tank, or a 400HP lightweight rocket that can spank the M6 on the Ring? Note: your answer indicates the type of car you should be driving. If you really think 350-400HP is "underpowered" for a car of this nature, then you're grouped into the former.

With all due respect, you're criticizing a car based on a misinformed and incorrect purchase that was your own doing. I appreciate that you've driven countless Porsches since the 1980s. But, the fact that you "disliked" your base 911 from the day you drove it off the lot says more about your erroneous purchase than it does about the 911.

 

Slug? Huh? While it is not a fire breathing drag racin nitrous burning tire smoking parachute needin hot rod, it can be scary fast.

You may want to look at a Viper or any 70s Mopar car.

 

A 560 hp car does not have to weigh 4,000+ lb. A 991 Turbo S weighs 3538 lb. This includes some comfort/luxury items not standard on the 3,120 lb 991 S PDK.

 

One advantage of going to FI on the 911 range is TORQUE, while keeping weight about the same. It will also be a bit old school in that you can have a RWD turbo 911 again.

 

Well, why can't we have it all? Vettes/Jags/GT-R all lower priced cars seem to have both components. Yeah I like to go fast once in a while, yes I like the car to go quicker in the curves better. But for this kind of money we should have both. You wonder if Porsche is just running out of hp in the 6 cylinders motors. With the turbos obviously you get more power. Look at the turbo S, less hp than some cars ,but still almost the king in 0-60 and 1/4 times, and can handle as well. Can be done maybe just not in a NA motor.
You wonder if Porsche is looking at V8 again.

 

I literally couldn't stop laughing. The 991 3.4 is a slug ? Well, I had mine bone stock for a full trackday on the Spa Francorchamps F1 track. It is NO SLUG ! Plenty of power. Take you car to the track, and I mean track, not dragstrip. You will soon change your mind. If not, sell the car and move on.

 

Tromero, my mom told me not to say anything if you have nothing nice to say, but I'm going to make an exception in your case.


You have contradicted yourself when you say, "Porsche just doesn't want to increase HP in any significant way." Yet, they in fact have, and you can correct your slug issue easily with a trip to your dealer. See pics below that will give you both...


My friend says you need "BEEG Moooney"

 

The air cooled flat six was running out of power, then they went water cooled. They reached limits again and they went to direct injection. The turbo introduction in the lower models is kinda like this. You are correct; they beefed up the GT3 engine and they get 475 hp out of that. They are reaching their limits without FI.

 

I have been a Porsche guy since in my teens.

IMO, if Porsche can deliver it all, they will.

Porsche was forced to water cooling since they had reached the limit of air-cooled engine in the attempt to increase more HP and emissions.

Sometimes, we just can't beat physics and to pursue more horses. Porsche needs to again increase the size of the engine to get more HP. And where's the problem here: REAR ENGINE LOCATION.

A physically bigger engine may require a much more bigger rear... Or possibly a mid-mount Porsche. And guess what? You'll have a mob crying over a mid-engined 911 for a 911 will always be rear-engined model.

A mid-engined 911 will be called a Cayman... Oh,'wait, there's a Cayman already.