Like the GT-R?

 

Re Gt2 v 997.2 turbo;according to fastest laps the 997.2 is quicker at Willow Springs,Autozeitung track,Fuji Speedway and Ring Knutsdrop.I reckon the active engine mounts,lower c of g of the lighter engine,more responsive engine and the "pdk" effect and also PTV (which does help round tighter curves) combine to make the 997.2 competitive.Re 991 v 997;the standard 991 is said to rival the GT3 for lap times,despite being softer sprung,heavier and less powerful-I stil expect the new 991 turbo to get close to the GT2 RS for lap times.Re which is the "best turbo ever"-so far it is the 997.2.Unless one is very seriously modifying the engine,looking for 650bhp+,the 997.2 is the better car.I have already mentioned the handling,but the engine is better too-it is bigger,has a wider power band,reving more freely and apparently more smoothly at the top end as well as being much more responsive lower down.It also has direct injection and is more efficient.It has 7 gears instead of 6.The brakes feel much better (I think it has more pots on the front,but whatever the reason,the brakes are better).The steering feels better-more responsive.Traction is better-the ability of the car to "leap off the line" is legendary.If one did want to modify the suspension,one is stil better off starting with the 997.2 over the 997.1,because of active engine mounts,lighter engine,lower c of g etc.So,my advice is get the 997.2 over the 997.1 every time!

 

Sure. It's the same principle in cars - 2 completely different issues: chassis dynamics vs. ride/handling trade-off.

To think an "improved platform" (more forward engine) would lead to better ride and handling trade-off reflects some serious misunderstanding of the parameters involved.

 

I believe that again you are making an error by basing your argument on numbers and reasons that are not valid. We could look at the data you are using - I am going to use one example. Per Fastest Laps:
997.2 Turbo S: Autozeitung 1:37.80 http://www.fastestlaps.com/cars/pors...7_turbo_s.html
997.2 Turbo non S: Autozeitung 1:36.90 http://www.fastestlaps.com/cars/pors..._facelift.html
You use the numbers to prove that your 997.2 Turbo is faster than a GT2. Using same, the non S is *also* faster than the S Turbo, how does one explain that?

Here is the answer: you can't. The data don't make sense and are a perfect example of why one must use numbers within proper context. In comparing track times, you must assure that the test cars are driven by same driver, in same condition, using un-doctored cars. Otherwise pigs will again fly. It's simply not a good idea to use random numbers from internet, or those from the car companies themselves. The safest source is third party, and one of the better ones is Sport Auto's tests on Nurburgring, not because they have a perfect judge, but merely because of the consistency of their methodology.

Opinions on 997.1 vs. 997.2 are fair game, but what with this repeated non-sense about 991 Turbo being as fast as GT2 RS? Think of some very basic principles of motorsports: GT2 RS is nearly 450 lbs lighter, engine is nearly 100 hp more than Turbo S, use R compounds, lower, stiffer. I really should NOT have to say these more than once. I am now beginning to suspect you don't even own a Turbo, and worse, are a troll. Kidding :-).

 

I couldn't agree more!!!

Although this thread morphed into a suspension theme from the engine being the reason the .1 is the superior sled - which I would agree with if you're keeping it more than 5 to 7 years and/or more than 20,000 miles a year. Maybe even if you plan on modding it.

But anyone modding it knows the increased risks associated with such actions and it becomes a mute point.

Even when 'upgrading' the suspension of .1, I still think the .2 is the better car on the track or the street. Unless you strap the car down like a Cup Car, it's nearly impossible to compensate for the height of the centrifugal drivetrain weight when cornering against a .2.

I LOVE my .2 over the .1 - like 'most', I won't keep this sled more than 4/5 years from new (it's already 15 months old). Not to make this a debate with Cannpa as we agree that when you upgrade the suspension on the .1, it's an altogether better car - but it's only a better .1 car.

I sincerely doubt that a .1 with an upgraded suspension is going to hold increased value over a .2 without an upgraded suspension in the next 4 to 5 years regardless of the motor. Maybe in a decade or so - but then we're talking garage-queen-collectibles that have low miles and will be used by a market segment fitting an economic demographic, not the rare motor-head's 5% like us (I love you guys ) who cares about that specific anomaly.



My ".2 cents"

 

BTW, for those interested in track times, the link below is one of the best. As I have mentioned, the key is to ignore times by companies' drivers. They are known to cheat and doctor their cars so that they could out-rank competitors.

There are many worthy testers/tests, but among the most reliable are by Sport Auto, so look for that. The driver is Horst von Saurma, an outstanding professional Porsche driver. Sport Auto tests are reliable not only because he's a good & consistent driver, but also because they go out of their way to make sure the car is not "doctored." In other words, like stock.

I'll post some of the important times later. Needless to say, they will prove that pigs can't fly :-), and despite of rumors otherwise, the 997.2 Turbo is far far far from matching GT2, let alone GT2 RS, at the 'ring.
http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?fID...3&viewThread=y

 

I recently picked up a publication which detailed the Porsche Turbo. In it was a chronological description of each and every turbo model. The two that jumped out the most were the 993 (being the last air cooled, as well as a timeless design) and the 997. The 997 for the metzger engine as well as design inside and out.

For this thread, I'd like to add that when the publication described why the 997.1 was so great, it basically came down to one major point. The engineers from the body design, interior design, engine design, etc.... had gotten all the funding they requested, this allowed them to create the turbo they dreamed of. In past years (im pointing out as the article did the 996 variant) engineers were only granted 30% of their budget to create the turbo. Just food for thought and also gives a good idea behind why some years/models are just better.

 

Yes,the 997 turbo was a good car,when it came out.But it wasn't good enough to keep it "at the top" throughout the life of the 997.That is why they brought out the improved,997.2,to keep the car competitive until the 991 came out.Anyone interested in getting into 991 turbos for the first time,should be advised to get the 997.2,rather than the 997.1,as long as they can afford it.Taking up cannga's further comments re GT2RS v 991 turbo;we are not expecting the 991 to be a full 450 lbs heavier,I would think 350 lbs might be about it and the power of the 991 will surely not be a full 100bhp less.Cannga did list all the advantages that he could think of for the GT2RS,but I can list more for the 991;wider front track,wider rear track,longer wheel base,better weight distribution,engine has a lower c of g,active engine mounts,20 inch wheels,superior drag factor,7 gears rather than 6,pdk,PTV.Let's see how far these factors will offset greater weight and less power.PDK,we know already,can offset alot more power,especially on shorter,tighter tracks.On a fast track like Nurburgring,admitedly,the "pdk effect" will be reduced.I have had a lot of supercars over the past 20 years and I definitely do have a 997.2 turbo which replaced my 997.1.I am begining to think that maybe Cannga can not afford a 997.2 turbo,which is why he stil has a 997.1 with tweaked suspension,unless he is,in fact,a troll or even a dork.(Just kidding-of course.)

 

Oh, "only" 350 lbs now makes it much better than 450? The pig could now fly?
Owning several "supercars"? Sorry but ownership has obviously not led to knowledge or common sense, only misplaced arrogance towards someone you think not wealthy enough. You've made several outrageous statements such as 991 Turbo will be like GT2 RS, have some serious misunderstanding of handling/ride versus chassis dynamics, and quote random numbers off the internet without understanding necessary context.

Here are times from independent testing at Nurburgring:
997.1 Turbo: 7:54, second rumored test 7:52 (Sport Auto)
997.2 Tubo: 7:47 (Sport Auto)
997.2 Turbo S: 7:41 (Auto Bild)
GT2: 7:33 (Sport Auto)
GT2 RS: 7:24 (Sport Auto)

What is the chance of the next Turbo leap frogging 20 seconds to be like GT2 RS? Think please, or at least, use common sense. Listing "more" number of reasons (LOL!) and repeating them ad nauseum don't erase the 3 widely accepted fundamental parameters: power/weight ratio, suspension stiffness, and tires.

 

Road and Track has some interesting data,collected reliably and consistently.We have been talking about the future and the 991 turbo,but let's look at the data for the 997.2 turbo S,we can see that on many bench marks,it already matches the GT2 RS,yes,it is true!On the skid pad,the TurboS comes within 1% of the GT2 RS (the PTV effect).On acceleration,the Turbo S beats the GT2 RS by 0.5 second over the quarter mile and is within 1.4 mph trap speed (the pdk effect).See how technology overcomes substantial weight disadvantage,power disadvantage,lack of R type tires,soft springs....The new 991 turbo wouldn't have to be much better than current turbo models to actually eclipse the GT2 RS on these benchmark performance parameters!Check out Road and Track!Of course,we expect the next generation of GT2 and Gt2 RS will also be improved (they will need to be),and will almost certainly benefit from pdk-I suspect Porsche are developing a stronger pdk box now and also researching uprating the new direct injection engine with stronger rods,pistons etc to cope with 600 -650 bhp reliably.

 

1. We are now digressing further and further. Those tests are good for what they are, but it is not a good idea to use acceleration test, skid pad test individually, etc. to reflect car's true and overall road performance. The acceleration test for example has nothing to do with braking, or handling (obviously).
Track times OTOH reflect all parameters that are relevant to us as drivers. This is why so many people follow Sport Auto's supertest numbers (consistency of methodology). You quoted the track times yourself to start this non-sense about your 997.2 Turbo being faster than GT2. I agreed with using them as standard and merely pointed out the errors of your quotes.

2. No, technology helps, but cannot overcome the law of physics. Now it's another non-sense of Turbo S against GT2 RS? We have the "best available" evidence, as I have pointed out:
997.2 Turbo: 7:47 (Sport Auto)
997.2 Turbo S: 7:41 (Auto Bild)
997 GT2: 7:33 (Sport Auto)
997 GT2 RS: 7:24 (Sport Auto)
Stop reading these silly charts like the one on Fastest Laps that says your Turbo is faster than GT2, and think about these 3 simple parameters please: power/weight ratio, suspension tuning, tires.

Look we are both car enthusiasts and it's not fun for me to do this ok? There are more holes/errors in your previous posts that I have not had time to write about yet. For example your thought of the 20 inch wheel being the advantage (!) of 991 car, the lift-throttle test in 100 mph curve (your finding re. oversteer is the exact opposite of Porsche's, 997.1 Turbo *understeers*). Your reasoning is not reflective at all of someone with multiple "supercar" ownership, frankly I find it weird and lacking substance behind all the "talk."

 

Thats digging deep man whats your story? How can Can be trolling on his own thread? I hear what you are saying about the 997.2 being a better car than.1 was out of the box but there is more here than what meets the eye.

 

This answer without a doubt let me know that 997.1 will be the turbo over 997.2.

I had the same debate over mk1 & 2 and I read the forum here and the discussion. I think Tom made it very clear here then which is a better car in terms of mods and reliability. And who here drives a turbo that doesn't mod it anyways!?

 

More and more gizmo's and Nanny stuff will just make the car a glorified video game complete with comfy sofa to sit in. No doubt, that is appealing to lots of buyers. I am thinking that the RAW fun of driving a car that clearly is challenging (bucking bronco comes to mind) and requires finesse, practice and dedication is what makes us - the Porsche fanatics - different from all the others. Also, for the road, it will always be a trade-off between handling, capability, speeding tickets, cohones and safety. I am also suggesting that, even with the 996 Turbo, we are pretty close to that limit and in many cases (mine included) way over that. That is 95% or more of the driving population. The other 5% tears around on a track a few times a year and gets a certificate and a lollypop. Then there are the pros... they just drive whatever car with large decals that people with large budgets give them and they just park after the event. Tomorrow it's a red car they drive.... or perhaps a yellow one.

 

Paul my friend thanks for sparing me the ignominy, of being both a dork AND a troll in my own thread.

I hope I was clear enough: yes the 2010 *is* better than 2009 in nearly all apsects, EXCEPT for the engine. The point is that the improvement is not nearly significant enough to justify the engine sacrifice. The Mezger engine most likely will remain the "best" and most robust engine ever put in a Turbo.
I understand DFI engine could have problem with oil deposit on intake valves - I wonder if the new Turbo engine will have this issue down the line.