RE: Powerkit for Porsche Carrera S

RE: Powerkit for Porsche Carrera S

Author
Discussion

TheOrangePeril

778 posts

181 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
First 911 since the 964 that has made me go 'WOW'. Gorgeous with that aerokit, I think the red would work in the flesh too. Finally looks a bit special after years of lukewarm similarity!

Porkie

2,378 posts

242 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
Prof Prolapse said:
Tongue in cheek but not a joke.

I guess it's a can of worms but if you focus on absolute BHP per litre then fair enough but the lack of torque is rather tedious.

Kong put it better than me.
But VTEC's DONT lack torque compared with other engines of same size!!!!

Whats rather tedious, is when people on internet forums say they do!






Edited by Porkie on Thursday 21st June 13:47

corcoran

536 posts

275 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
OMG I'm so horny right now.

Prof Prolapse

16,160 posts

191 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
Porkie said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Tongue in cheek but not a joke.

I guess it's a can of worms but if you focus on absolute BHP per litre then fair enough but the lack of torque is rather tedious.

Kong put it better than me.
But VTEC's DONT lack torque compared with other engines of same size!!!!

What rather tedious when people on internet forums say they do!
I see.. I've just looked at some dyno graphs and the 197 renault and an '05 civic and they seem to agree with what I've said but admittedly the civic one looks to be written in crayon.

Why do they lack so much oomph then?


Tuvra

7,921 posts

226 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
vinnie83 said:
Iamnotkloot said:
Hmmmm, not sure. Don't think the red suits it there.
I think that red car looks stunning!
Damn right, Best looking 911 EVER IMO eek

Dusty964

6,923 posts

191 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
Great looking, but too big.

Get it back to a 993 or 964 size please.


Porkie

2,378 posts

242 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
Prof Prolapse said:
I see.. I've just looked at some dyno graphs and the 197 renault and an '05 civic and they seem to agree with what I've said but admittedly the civic one looks to be written in crayon.

Why do they lack so much oomph then?

They DON'T!

reasons people wrongly believe they do....

1. People compare 1600cc Vtecs to 2000cc engines like duratecs or Vaux XE etc etc.

2. People compare the S2000 2000cc engine to 3200cc engines in Boxsters or even worse Turbo charged 2000cc engines in Sub/Evo/Cosworth

3. The engines goes SO well up top that it can lead to a feel of them being a little lethargic down low. But look at the figures, they dont loose out on low down torque to other engines of similar size



tommy vercetti

11,489 posts

164 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
The red 911 looks great, like the rear too.

Wills2

22,894 posts

176 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
E38Ross said:
MrTickle said:
wow, 0.3 sec off 0-62 with only an extra 30bhp!
it's probably the 430bhp PDK car vs the 400bhp manual car. no way in hell would simply adding 30bhp take 0.3s of an already quick 0-62mph time. it would if some car was going from 60bhp to 90bhp but not 400 to 430.
I think the article has it wrong, a standard C2S with PDK and SC+ does 0-62 in 4.1secs so if the powerkit does it 4.0 then that's .1sec improvement (which seems more likely)

The 4.3 figure relates the PDK without SC+, the manual C2S is quoted at 4.5 to 62.

As with the 997 powerkit I reckon it's more about improved response at mid-high RPM's than out and out increases in drag times.



MrTickle

1,825 posts

240 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
E38Ross said:
MrTickle said:
wow, 0.3 sec off 0-62 with only an extra 30bhp!
it's probably the 430bhp PDK car vs the 400bhp manual car. no way in hell would simply adding 30bhp take 0.3s of an already quick 0-62mph time. it would if some car was going from 60bhp to 90bhp but not 400 to 430.
Both PDK times, but the standard is 4.1 with the sport plus engaged - so it's a 0.1 sec improvement, which is more realistic.

Fail on article writer for not comparing apples with apples.

MrTickle

1,825 posts

240 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
^^^^

Posted at same time wink

Prof Prolapse

16,160 posts

191 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
Porkie said:
They DON'T!

reasons people wrongly believe they do....

1. People compare 1600cc Vtecs to 2000cc engines like duratecs or Vaux XE etc etc.

2. People compare the S2000 2000cc engine to 3200cc engines in Boxsters or even worse Turbo charged 2000cc engines in Sub/Evo/Cosworth

3. The engines goes SO well up top that it can lead to a feel of them being a little lethargic down low. But look at the figures, they dont loose out on low down torque to other engines of similar size
I find your use of capitals intimidating.

I'm open to being wrong about this, but I'm not doing any of those things. A 200 Clio (2.0 NA) still gets 20ft/lb more of torque though for more of the rev range. Infact the 172 clio had more peak torque across the range as does the Fiesta ST185?

I think I've derailed the thread.... Drove a Porsche GT3 on a slipperly air strip earlier this year. Great fun. Only Porsche I'd own.



Robsti

12,241 posts

207 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
acer12 said:
Exactly, 911 buyers normally rock up to a dealer throw a blank cheque at the sales man and let him fill it out.

Hate that saying, it really makes no sense.
What?

Most rock up with the balloon looming and the salesman rubbing his hands! wink

taaffy

1,120 posts

240 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
pakman said:
i hate modded super cars there is absolute no point of it if u want a body kit get a nova and dress up like ali g frown
Ummmm have you looked at the car in your profile picture .....not quite standard is it .......

E38Ross

35,113 posts

213 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
Porkie said:
They DON'T!

reasons people wrongly believe they do....

1. People compare 1600cc Vtecs to 2000cc engines like duratecs or Vaux XE etc etc.

2. People compare the S2000 2000cc engine to 3200cc engines in Boxsters or even worse Turbo charged 2000cc engines in Sub/Evo/Cosworth

3. The engines goes SO well up top that it can lead to a feel of them being a little lethargic down low. But look at the figures, they dont loose out on low down torque to other engines of similar size
Finally, someone talking sense.

Big Six

37 posts

148 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
I will wait to see if the engines can last longer than 30k without needing new bearing or in most cases in the 997 range a new engine!

My next door neighbours 997 Carrera S was bought by him brand new from the dealer. It has less than 30k on it & according to PORSCHE is starting to show bad bore ware on two of the six cylinders!

I now no longer want a 911 & will stick with BMW M division.

kambites

67,593 posts

222 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
Big Six said:
I now no longer want a 911 & will stick with BMW M division.
So you can have Vanos failures instead?

Almost all manufacturers' engines have their problems, of one sort or another.

Martin 480 Turbo

602 posts

188 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
still a big boat

E38Ross

35,113 posts

213 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
kambites said:
Big Six said:
I now no longer want a 911 & will stick with BMW M division.
So you can have Vanos failures instead?

Almost all manufacturers' engines have their problems, of one sort or another.
Agree, but vanos failures are rare as rocking horse st these days, especially in cars which have regular oil changes.

Hellbound

2,500 posts

177 months

Thursday 21st June 2012
quotequote all
Wills2 said:
acer12 said:
Exactly, 911 buyers normally rock up to a dealer throw a blank cheque at the sales man and let him fill it out.
Well they must have been disappointed when I rocked up then and asked for a discount some might do what your describing but most don't.

He was being sarcastic.