RS 4.0 vs 991 R

Author
Discussion

GarageQueen

2,295 posts

246 months

Saturday 5th November 2016
quotequote all
footsoldier said:
The engine, I'd agree, is the biggest surprise, and the noise is in another league to the 991RS.
the engine is exactly the same as in the 991RS no?

turbofreeFLAT6

Original Poster:

318 posts

110 months

Sunday 6th November 2016
quotequote all
stefan1 said:
I think the R is a better road car the the 4.0RS. I adored the latter, but on B-roads I found the rear suspension just a tad too stiff. I ran lower pressures which helped, but I always felt the 3.8RS was more finely resolved for road driving. On track of the course the 4.0RS was just sensational; but most of my driving is done on the public road.

The R doesn't quite have the steering feel of the 4.0RS, but it has a level of agility and damping control that's in another league. The gearbox is better too - when you get a double de-clutch just right the feeling of gears meshing like a life through hot butter is delicious in your palm. And, heaven forfend, I actually think the new R motor is more characterful (with the single mass flywheel) than the old Mezger 4.0. (Time will tell if it is as robust...)

My 4.0RS (the Mexico blue one) was sold to fund the 918, so I can't do a back to back now, but if I was able to, I really do think I'd vote for the R. And as a Mezger fanatic, I didn't expect that. The R really is that good.
Maybe it depends what sort of roads you drive on. I can imagine that if you have to travel regularly on rough B roads with slow traffic or low speed limits the greater compliance of the 991 would be preferable. I don't have to and I like the sense of connection to the road that stiff suspension gives. I enjoy the 4.0 the most when driving hard on bumpy roads where you feel the suspension working and marvel at how the car follows the surface so closely without losing contact. I've read reviews saying the change of some of the rear suspension bushes to ball joints made it crashy compared to the 3.8 but to me it feels that the whole structure is amazingly rigid and that sharp bumps are rounded off beautifully.

I can also understand the appeal of the extra agility. It is probably similar to what I experienced in my GT4, which had no pendulous mass in the rear, and with the rear ARB set to stiff had extraordinary front end grip. However I find that in the 4.0 the traditional 911 light front end and greater need to manage weight transfer provide more enduring interest.

It sounds like the R's engine is brilliant. Can you describe the differences to the 4.0's?

Magic919

14,126 posts

201 months

Sunday 6th November 2016
quotequote all
GarageQueen said:
footsoldier said:
The engine, I'd agree, is the biggest surprise, and the noise is in another league to the 991RS.
the engine is exactly the same as in the 991RS no?
It's more about the change in sound deadening I expect.

isaldiri

18,578 posts

168 months

Sunday 6th November 2016
quotequote all
Magic919 said:
It's more about the change in sound deadening I expect.
Single mass flywheel I'd expect perhaps.

Magic919

14,126 posts

201 months

Sunday 6th November 2016
quotequote all
This is what Stefan had to say.

stefan1 said:
I've now done about 2,000 miles in the 911R (in 2 weeks!), and it's a really, really special thing. The lack of sound deadening brings the engine to life - you can even hear the fuel injectors operating! It's amazing how different the installation sounds to the GT3 RS - the RS is super smooth, and has a fairly consistent tone through the rev range (until that last banzai 800 rpm). In contrast the R's engine changes character, from smooth and quiet at low revs, to grumbly and purposeful in the mid range, to a fantastic metallic zing at 6,500 rpm, charging to a final howl at the top end. It is enthralling to listen to and for me at least it now betters the Mezger, both in performance and character.

GarageQueen

2,295 posts

246 months

Sunday 6th November 2016
quotequote all
Magic919 said:
This is what Stefan had to say.

stefan1 said:
I've now done about 2,000 miles in the 911R (in 2 weeks!), and it's a really, really special thing. The lack of sound deadening brings the engine to life - you can even hear the fuel injectors operating! It's amazing how different the installation sounds to the GT3 RS - the RS is super smooth, and has a fairly consistent tone through the rev range (until that last banzai 800 rpm). In contrast the R's engine changes character, from smooth and quiet at low revs, to grumbly and purposeful in the mid range, to a fantastic metallic zing at 6,500 rpm, charging to a final howl at the top end. It is enthralling to listen to and for me at least it now betters the Mezger, both in performance and character.
Wow!

turbofreeFLAT6

Original Poster:

318 posts

110 months

Sunday 6th November 2016
quotequote all
Wonderful! I'd love to hear it.

It's weird that Porsche didn't make the same weight-saving in sound-deadening with the GT3, especially the RS.

turbofreeFLAT6

Original Poster:

318 posts

110 months

Sunday 6th November 2016
quotequote all
footsoldier said:
I've never been a fan of any RS (996 on) as a road car (not least because of the wings, cage etc).
I appreciate the theory of wingless-cageless purity and I think it works with the proportions and detailing of more exotic cars but I love the spice that the wing and cage adds to the simple 911 form and the long history of their use in 911 motorsport. The R looks superb in photos but when I saw it at Geneva I felt it looked very much like a Carrera, which made the thick matt stripes appear out of place. If I had been able to order an R I would have gone full elegance and specced GT Silver, no stripes and black wheels.

turbofreeFLAT6

Original Poster:

318 posts

110 months

Sunday 6th November 2016
quotequote all
I assume the 991's structure, being newer than the 997's, is stiffer. It would be interesting to know the stiffness of the cageless R vs the caged RS 4.0.

hondansx

4,569 posts

225 months

Monday 7th November 2016
quotequote all
stefan1 said:
when you get a double de-clutch
Eh?

IcedKiwi

91 posts

115 months

Monday 7th November 2016
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Except for the sheer pleasure of it

stefan1

977 posts

232 months

Friday 11th November 2016
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I beg to differ smile. I rather like that hot knife through butter feeling when you slide in the next gear without needing to use the synchros - it's rather satisfying even if not really necessary!

turbofreeFLAT6

Original Poster:

318 posts

110 months

Friday 11th November 2016
quotequote all
GarageQueen said:
are 4.0's selling now that the R has taken the limelight? could the R affect 4.0 values do we think?
Out of interest I've been charting 4.0 prices vs km since April. I keep mine in France so recorded all cars advertised in Europe and LHD ones in the UK. I kept adding to the one chart and took a screen shot every month or so. Here are my findings:

Summary from April to November 2016:
- In the second quarter, buyers focussed on lower-priced cars.
- At mid-year, interest shifted to upper-middle-priced cars with 5,000 to 10,000km.
- In the second half sellers and buyers were predominantly active at high prices below 10,000km and low prices from 10,000 to 20,000km.
- Median advertised price for cars with 6,000km dropped €15k from July to October - currently €370k (£325k).
- Median advertised price for cars with 6,000km sold or withdrawn rose €25k from June to July then dropped €20k from July to October, a net increase of €5k - currently €365k (£320k).
- No change to highest prices advertised.
- Lowest prices for cars with 6,000km dropped €30k from July to August, then rose €10k from September to October, a net drop of €20k.
- Number of cars coming on the market peaked mid-year.
- Number of cars for sale increased from 18 in June to 25 in August, then dropped to 13 in November. Probably about 8 were withdrawn for winter rather than sold.
- Of the 13 cars for currently for sale 4 have more than 25,000km, 1 is overpriced (20,700km, €405,000) 1 is very expensive (1,700km, €460,000) and the lowest priced does not have the original engine.

Conclusion:
Since April the market has been fairly stable. The main changes have been shifts of focus between various price and km ranges and a further lowering of low-priced cars. It appears that the price correction following the 2015 boom ended in the first quarter for good examples but continued mildly for lesser ones. I expect that when the market ‘reopens’ in Spring 2017, prices will be similar to 2016 or on the rise again. If 991 R prices survive the launch of the 991.2 GT3, which I doubt, the rarer 997 RS 4.0 would have a lot of headroom.

kevs 172

344 posts

189 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
footsoldier said:
I havent driven a 4.0, so quite happy to accept that it might be better (I certainly plan to find out at sone point).
However, I have done 700 miles in an R now, and it's brilliant. It is absolutely not planted on the road if you are pushing, and in fact I've done things with it that i haven't done since my Escort RS2000..!

One thing i've noticed is that on cambered country roads it's definitely better to stay away from sport suspension. I'm taking it on track next week after a few hundred more road miles, so will know more then, but it seems unlikely to be a disappointment.

To me, it is much more 'old school' and direct in feel than a 91RS, not just because of the manual box.
The noise is fantastic, especially with reduced sound deadening. I just don't think I've ever owned a better all round road car.
Like the comparison to the rs2000,I swear I have more fun when I drive my modded Dolly Sprint than my GT3smile
I would love to able to drive an R one day.
Cheers

turbofreeFLAT6

Original Poster:

318 posts

110 months

Wednesday 16th November 2016
quotequote all
Just been looking at gearing (including tyre diameter) for the 991 R. It has a really tall final drive giving overall ratios about 28% longer than the RS 4.0 and 991 GT3 & RS. So how does it do 0-100km/h in 3.8 sec compared to 3.9 sec for the RS 4.0? It just cracks 100km/h in 1st gear! Strange that the tests haven’t commented on it given how they all caned the GT4 (and rightly so) for its high gearing and even it is about 4% lower than the R. To the contrary Chris Harris said he was surprised how much faster the R felt in-gear compared to the 991 RS.

APOLO1

5,256 posts

194 months

Wednesday 16th November 2016
quotequote all
turbofreeFLAT6 said:
Just been looking at gearing (including tyre diameter) for the 991 R. It has a really tall final drive giving overall ratios about 28% longer than the RS 4.0 and 991 GT3 & RS. So how does it do 0-100km/h in 3.8 sec compared to 3.9 sec for the RS 4.0? It just cracks 100km/h in 1st gear! Strange that the tests haven’t commented on it given how they all caned the GT4 (and rightly so) for its high gearing and even it is about 4% lower than the R. To the contrary Chris Harris said he was surprised how much faster the R felt in-gear compared to the 991 RS.
R has first 4 ratios same as 991GT3. It will hit red line at 74mph in 2nd, 91RS hits same at 64mph. The R seems to be geared just about perfect.

turbofreeFLAT6

Original Poster:

318 posts

110 months

Wednesday 16th November 2016
quotequote all
Maybe there's something wrong with my calculations with tyres and speeds but these gear ratios are from Porsche:

I-------------------- 1st --- 2nd --- 3rd --- 4th ---- 5th --- 6th ---- 7th ---- Final drive
997 GT3 RS 4.0 -- 3.82 -- 2.26 -- 1.64 -- 1.29 -- 1.06 -- 0.88 ----------- 3.89
991 GT3 ---------- 3.75 -- 2.38 -- 1.72 -- 1.34 -- 1.11 -- 0.96 -- 0.84 --- 3.97
991 R ------------- 3.75 -- 2.38 -- 1.72 -- 1.34 -- 1.08 -- 0.88 ----------- 3.09

According to my calculations the smaller tyre diameter of the RS 4.0 makes the overall ratios almost the same as for the 991 GT3. The first four ratios of the 991 GT3 and the tyre size are the same as for the 991 R but the final drive of the R is 28% longer.

Edited by turbofreeFLAT6 on Wednesday 16th November 12:14


Edited by turbofreeFLAT6 on Wednesday 16th November 12:15

GarageQueen

2,295 posts

246 months

Wednesday 16th November 2016
quotequote all
turbofreeFLAT6 said:
If 991 R prices survive the launch of the 991.2 GT3, which I doubt, the rarer 997 RS 4.0 would have a lot of headroom.
My fear is that once the GT3 range returns to manual again starting with the 991.2, everything else will soften including 4.0.

Porsche911R

21,146 posts

265 months

Wednesday 16th November 2016
quotequote all
GarageQueen said:
My fear is that once the GT3 range returns to manual again starting with the 991.2, everything else will soften including 4.0.
I have no such fear, can only be a good thing.

isaldiri

18,578 posts

168 months

Wednesday 16th November 2016
quotequote all
turbofreeFLAT6 said:
Maybe there's something wrong with my calculations with tyres and speeds but these gear ratios are from Porsche:

I-------------------- 1st --- 2nd --- 3rd --- 4th ---- 5th --- 6th ---- 7th ---- Final drive
997 GT3 RS 4.0 -- 3.82 -- 2.26 -- 1.64 -- 1.29 -- 1.06 -- 0.88 ----------- 3.89
991 GT3 ---------- 3.75 -- 2.38 -- 1.72 -- 1.34 -- 1.11 -- 0.96 -- 0.84 --- 3.97
991 R ------------- 3.75 -- 2.38 -- 1.72 -- 1.34 -- 1.08 -- 0.88 ----------- 3.09

According to my calculations the smaller tyre diameter of the RS 4.0 makes the overall ratios almost the same as for the 991 GT3. The first four ratios of the 991 GT3 and the tyre size are the same as for the 991 R but the final drive of the R is 28% longer.
Are you sure about those numbers for the R? that's an incredibly low final drive and that would mean the R has even longer gears than the GT4 (even comparing at similar revs) and that can't be right.