Breaking my 911 Virginity

[chriscoates81]

I thought of the 997 variety they were wide bodied if an s and that a c2/c4 looked the same?

[Magic919]

The 997 Carrera has a wide body if it's a 4, narrow if a 2 (except GTS and specials).

Gen 2 997 AWD is way ahead of the viscous system on the 996 C4S in my experience, having had both.

C4S Gen 2 PDK tend to have more options fitted and are priced above C2S. Might need to stretch the £40k budget a bit.

[StuH]

EnS said:

What a great idea - can you post any photos of the foam/canvas cover in situ ?

Sure! I'll get some shots this week..........

[StuH]

Mario149 said:

On summer tyres yes. Experience with my 996 C4S in the winter suggested any advantage on snow/ice was negligible on summer tyres and certainly not a reason to go down the C4 route (which has other good, non weather related reasons to be chosen). Either was dangerous. If you're driving on snow/ice you need winters full stop. Stick winters on a C2 and it'll run rings around a C4 on summers in those conditions.

I'd certainly agree that winter tyres are a bigger factor in snow/wet conditions than 4WD, but in combo they are fantatsic and it's pretty hard to get going in RWD car if only the front tyres have traction!

There's also a good reason why the 4WD TT is the all-weather supercar of choice, because it grips and goes in the wet better than anything else. Having come from RWD 'M's the notion that 4wd offers no advantage is ludicrous.

[LordHaveMurci]

StuH said:

Mario149 said:

On summer tyres yes. Experience with my 996 C4S in the winter suggested any advantage on snow/ice was negligible on summer tyres and certainly not a reason to go down the C4 route (which has other good, non weather related reasons to be chosen). Either was dangerous. If you're driving on snow/ice you need winters full stop. Stick winters on a C2 and it'll run rings around a C4 on summers in those conditions.

I'd certainly agree that winter tyres are a bigger factor in snow/wet conditions than 4WD, but in combo they are fantatsic and it's pretty hard to get going in RWD car if only the front tyres have traction!

There's also a good reason why the 4WD TT is the all-weather supercar of choice, because it grips and goes in the wet better than anything else. Having come from RWD 'M's the notion that 4wd offers no advantage is ludicrous.

911 has less traction issues than most RWD cars being as the engine is slung out over the back wheels.

[StuH]

LordHaveMurci said:

911 has less traction issues than most RWD cars being as the engine is slung out over the back wheels.

For sure. But 4wd versus 2wd on a greasy winters morning on fast B roads? My car is a DD and I like the fact that I can go out in all conditions and have fun. I've got no issue with the case for the purity of RWD in good conditions and on track, but then I'd be in a GT3..........

[LordHaveMurci]

StuH said:

LordHaveMurci said:

911 has less traction issues than most RWD cars being as the engine is slung out over the back wheels.

For sure. But 4wd versus 2wd on a greasy winters morning on fast B roads? My car is a DD and I like the fact that I can go out in all conditions and have fun. I've got no issue with the case for the purity of RWD in good conditions and on track, but then I'd be in a GT3..........

Not arguing with anybody but in the 6.5yrs I've had my C2 I've only triggered the PSM once & that was deliberate on an off camber, wet & greasy roundabout.
I like to think it gets driven as intended, certainly not fast on the straights, crawl through the bends kinda driver!
I guess if AWD gives you peace of mind & therefore extra confidence it can only be a good thing, nice to have the choice I guess

[Mario149]

StuH said:

Mario149 said:

On summer tyres yes. Experience with my 996 C4S in the winter suggested any advantage on snow/ice was negligible on summer tyres and certainly not a reason to go down the C4 route (which has other good, non weather related reasons to be chosen). Either was dangerous. If you're driving on snow/ice you need winters full stop. Stick winters on a C2 and it'll run rings around a C4 on summers in those conditions.

I'd certainly agree that winter tyres are a bigger factor in snow/wet conditions than 4WD, but in combo they are fantatsic and it's pretty hard to get going in RWD car if only the front tyres have traction!

There's also a good reason why the 4WD TT is the all-weather supercar of choice, because it grips and goes in the wet better than anything else. Having come from RWD 'M's the notion that 4wd offers no advantage is ludicrous.

I think you may have misunderstood....to clarify....

4wd plus winters is clearly the best way to go if it's icy/snowy/slidey - obviously better than rwd plus winters. Not disputing that. What I am saying is that if you're running your car on summers and think that buying a C4 will mean that you don't have to put winters on your car whereas if buying a C2 means you will have to, you're off your trolley. If the conditions are bad enough that you need winters on a C2 to not slide off the road in normal driving, they're also bad enough to need them on a C4.

In terms of general driving when it's just crap rainy weather, a 996/997.1 C4 will not give you any more meaningful grip than a C2. Why? Because at road speeds the system is designed, ironically, to basically be rwd until such time as the rears are spinning faster than the fronts i.e. you're already oversteering, which means unless you're doing it deliberately, you've cocked up already and the 4wd hasn't helped you prevent it. It also means you've probably been an idiot and turned off the PSM in the wet when you couldn't handle it thinking you (as in the driver, not you personally) have more talent than you do.

4wd in a 996/997.1 only helps you meaningfully after things have gone tits up on the road, not before. So if you're relying on it on a regular basis on the road, please don't drive anywhere near me

Edited by Mario149 on Monday 25th January 20:17

[BlackGT3]

richardrsc said:

jamiesim said:

Thanks...

I'm far from being tall enough and my kids are 3 & 6 so am sure they'll be ok...

I do prefer the 'look' of the 4wd cars but wholly accept that don't make it safer... Just not sure if I should get a 2wd car as there are more to choose from and perhaps budget may get me some more car...

Is chrono pack a must or just a gimmick??? Any other must haves in the spec???

I went for a manual 4s (2006 997) as mines a DD that I wanted to use all year round, and I've never regretted it. Good traction in the snow and slush in the winter. Back end looks great and you get the bose and lots of leather etc, it's a lovely package.

I'd go OPC personally, the warrantee saved my arse on an engine rebuild, with no quibbles and great service.

The OP suggested he is looking for a 997.2 which is a different engine to your car and isn't known for launching itself. Plenty of very good Specialists such as 911 Virgin who are much more selective when buying in and preparing stock than many OPC's.

[StuH]

Mario149 said:

I think you may have misunderstood....to clarify....

4wd plus winters is clearly the best way to go if it's icy/snowy/slidey - obviously better than rwd plus winters. Not disputing that. What I am saying is that if you're running your car on summers and think that buying a C4 will mean that you don't have to put winters on your car whereas if buying a C2 means you will have to, you're off your trolley. If the conditions are bad enough that you need winters on a C2 to not slide off the road in normal driving, they're also bad enough to need them on a C4.

In terms of general driving when it's just crap rainy weather, a 996/997.1 C4 will not give you any more meaningful grip than a C2. Why? Because at road speeds the system is designed, ironically, to basically be rwd until such time as the rears are spinning faster than the fronts i.e. you're already oversteering, which means unless you're doing it deliberately, you've cocked up already and the 4wd hasn't helped you prevent it. It also means you've probably been an idiot and turned off the PSM in the wet when you couldn't handle it thinking you (as in the driver, not you personally) have more talent than you do.

4wd in a 996/997.1 only helps you meaningfully after things have gone tits up on the road, not before. So if you're relying on it on a regular basis on the road, please don't drive anywhere near me

Edited by Mario149 on Monday 25th January 20:17

No misunderstaning - my TT with winters on is a riot in the wet and snow, and there is no way a 2wd car is stopping or going as well in those conditions!

[Mario149]

StuH said:

No misunderstaning - my TT with winters on is a riot in the wet and snow, and there is no way a 2wd car is stopping or going as well in those conditions!

[Magic919]

[StuH]

Magic919 said:

Lol I love my TT

[medieval]

Ha , the TT nomenclature used to confuse the hell out of me when I first started looking at 996s.

Quite like it now though...

[monthefish]

bigkeeko said:

Unless your children are in miniature format then the 997.2 rears won't exactly be roomy especially if they have plenty to take with them and I think and the Golf will feel like bus in comparison. I think the rear seats are only there in a 911 so the owner can say "I have rear seats".

Hate to break it to you, but children generally come in 'miniature format'. It's one of the attributes that qualifies them as children.

As has been said, the rear seats in a 911 are fine for children below, say, 10 years old.

[Billsnemesis]

Or those under 5'4"

As mine are

[Onetrackmind]

My five year old daughter fits easily into the back of my 996. But it is a pain compared to out suv. Chucking her and my wife's stuff in the frunk is a pain. For the school run it might get annoying. It's fine for me on weekends but most mornings when rushing out the door the practical car is much easier. You could put up with it but it's a bit of a faff compared to a golf. C63, E90 M3,

[skillimz]

[=monthefish]

Hate to break it to you, but children generally come in 'miniature format'. It's one of the attributes that qualifies them as children.

As has been said, the rear seats in a 911 are fine for children below, say, 10 years old.
[/quote]

True

[skillimz]

[=monthefish]

Hate to break it to you, but children generally come in 'miniature format'. It's one of the attributes that qualifies them as children.

As has been said, the rear seats in a 911 are fine for children below, say, 10 years old.
[/quote]

True

[c4sman]

Interestingly most contemporary mags who tested C4s found them more spikey on the limit compared with C2s (certainly in the dry).

Also I am confused as to why 4WD drivers believe their cars stop faster than 2WD cars in poor conditions. As an engineer i just don't get this. With the same tyre footprint, same brakes and more weight, surely a 4wd version of the same car will slide further than its 2wd equivalent? I have nothing against 4wd cars BTW having enjoyed my 997.1 C4S cab, 997.1 Turbo coupe and 997.1 Turbo Cab and a wonderful 3.2 Golf R32Mk5.