718 Positive Vibes Thread...
Discussion
bcr5784 said:
If you stick a 718 in PDK in manual (or have a manual car), cruise along at 2000 revs and then floor it, precious little happens. I have seen figures that suggest it takes 3 seconds at that speed for the turbo to spool up. I tried that test myself and would agree that it takes about that time before the car really goes.
Do you have a citation of this three second figure? Considering the 718 S will get to 60 in just over 4 seconds ... I cannot understand a 3 second delay for the turbo to spool up. If that were the case we'd be looking at a much higher 0-60 time.Any links you have to shed light on this 3 second claim?
And peak torque in the 718 S comes in at 1950rpm (1900rpm in the base 718), so again I can't understand the '2000 revs and then floor it, precious little happens', when peak torque is achieved before 2000rpm. So again, any links you have to back this up would be welcome.
Edited by Timbola on Thursday 22 September 10:21
edo said:
and there goes this thread too ffs.
I wouldn't take it personally, or think it's specific to the 718 (although that is taking a lot of flak.) Every thread on here has people being negative:718 - turbo flat 4
981/S - lack of pull at low revs, PDK vs manual
981 GTS - just a CS with some small add-ons; X73 vs PASM
GT4/Spyder - flippers/paying overs/residuals
These things happen in every thread. You did quite well to get that far without the engine being mentioned!
Not sure if had this one
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimresnick/2016/09/20/...
"I focused on driving the 2.5-liter S engine in a manual transmission Cayman. Beyond the power output of 350 horsepower and 309 lb-ft of torque (the base car offers 300 horsepower and 280 lb-ft of torque), this powertrain simply does not feel like a turbocharged engine, but like a much larger engine. With outstanding grunt just off idle, a stout midrange and soaring high-winding power at the top of the tach, the S reaches 60 mph in merely 4.0 seconds and has one of the broadest usable powerbands I’ve encountered in years, from about 1,800 rpm right up to the 7,500 rpm rev limiter."
"However, what truly impresses is a bit esoteric, though remarkable. The 718 shows a total absence of flywheel effect, hesitation or lag from throttle application, despite being turbocharged, a format that often precipitates lag. That’s a genuine engineering achievement that requires charts, graphs, computational fluid dynamics and quadratic equations to explain, but the result is pure joy and liveliness uncommon in turbo engines. Not even the purest purist could find fault with this kind of rapid response. "
Clearly this chap hasnt met the PH keyboard warriors
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimresnick/2016/09/20/...
"I focused on driving the 2.5-liter S engine in a manual transmission Cayman. Beyond the power output of 350 horsepower and 309 lb-ft of torque (the base car offers 300 horsepower and 280 lb-ft of torque), this powertrain simply does not feel like a turbocharged engine, but like a much larger engine. With outstanding grunt just off idle, a stout midrange and soaring high-winding power at the top of the tach, the S reaches 60 mph in merely 4.0 seconds and has one of the broadest usable powerbands I’ve encountered in years, from about 1,800 rpm right up to the 7,500 rpm rev limiter."
"However, what truly impresses is a bit esoteric, though remarkable. The 718 shows a total absence of flywheel effect, hesitation or lag from throttle application, despite being turbocharged, a format that often precipitates lag. That’s a genuine engineering achievement that requires charts, graphs, computational fluid dynamics and quadratic equations to explain, but the result is pure joy and liveliness uncommon in turbo engines. Not even the purest purist could find fault with this kind of rapid response. "
Clearly this chap hasnt met the PH keyboard warriors
edo said:
Clearly this chap hasnt met the PH keyboard warriors
One wonders if he's driven the car. Ouch! But seriously...718 has a lot more grunt than 981 and the engine is IMO particularly well paired with the PDK transmission, not least because it suppresses the turbo characteristics from low rpm. As I've mentioned elsewhere the base car with PDK looks an absolute bargain.
Personally I think it's impossible to say which engine is "better". They are simply "different". But if you want "faster" the 718 would surely tick that box. I bought my 981 after direct comparison with the 6-cylinder Lotus cars. I imagine there would be a bigger contrast if that side-by-side comparison was made today.
Timbola said:
Do you have a citation of this three second figure? Considering the 718 S will get to 60 in just over 4 seconds ... I cannot understand a 3 second delay for the turbo to spool up. If that were the case we'd be looking at a much higher 0-60 time.
Any links you have to shed light on this 3 second claim?
And peak torque in the 718 S comes in at 1950rpm (1900rpm in the base 718), so again I can't understand the '2000 revs and then floor it, precious little happens', when peak torque is achieved before 2000rpm. So again, any links you have to back this up would be welcome.
The 3 second delay has no effect on 0-60 times - if you rev to (say) 5000rpm and drop the clutch then turbo lag doesn't enter the equation. Any links you have to shed light on this 3 second claim?
And peak torque in the 718 S comes in at 1950rpm (1900rpm in the base 718), so again I can't understand the '2000 revs and then floor it, precious little happens', when peak torque is achieved before 2000rpm. So again, any links you have to back this up would be welcome.
Edited by Timbola on Thursday 22 September 10:21
The fact that peak torque occurs at 2000 revs does not mean it's lag free at those revs - it requires the turbo to have spun up for this to be true, and from a neutral throttle this takes time (turbos spin at anything up 100000 revs or so). Unfortunately I can't find the article on the 718 (it was quoted by cmoose..... if you want to look for it) - but here's one on the (turbo) Mustang which shows an exactly similar effect at similar revs, and quotes Porsche as saying the same about the new 991.2 turbos. http://blog.caranddriver.com/turbo-vs-non-turbo-pu... I have driven the 991.2 and found it had LESS noticeable lag than the 718 All pure (current) turbos suffer from this effect to a greater or lesser degree. It possible to overcome it with electrical assistance, but I'm not aware of it being in production on any car yet (but it is just around the corner).
Edited by bcr5784 on Thursday 22 September 15:10
LiamH66 said:
pete.g said:
That, surely, is lag?
I would have bought a 718 had I not found a CGTS, so I'm not trying to pee on anyone's bonfire, but positive vibes can't just mean ignoring things.
No, being under 2000 rpm is just being outside the operating envelope of the turbo. Lag is generally defined as a variation in torque delivery that is time dependent with a fixed throttle position - i.e. in the operating range, but waiting for the turbo to start spinning. Used to be a real problem back in the late 80's, but turbo technology and engine management advances through the 90's pretty well sorted it. We used to video the boost gauge in race cars back then, as data acquisition was in its infancy, and wasn't particularly fast or user friendly. When you had it so it barely flickered on an upshift you knew you were about there. As a converse, roadgoing Tickford Capri turbos, whilst a brilliant anachronism, could build an extra 7psi of boost mid-corner that made getting out the other side of it a serious challenge. And that was if you were on the right revs, and feathering the throttle because you knew it could all get a bit out of hand.I would have bought a 718 had I not found a CGTS, so I'm not trying to pee on anyone's bonfire, but positive vibes can't just mean ignoring things.
If the 718 has any turbo lag (as defined above), I have struggled to find it. As for positive vibes, Porsche engineers deserve a few. While everyone's complaining about the soundtrack, I've driven a couple of the finest 4 cylinder turbo cars ever made. Begs the question of just how much power the 718 GT4 is going to have if turbocharged - I'm guessing it could easily go north of 400hp, but depends how much room they have to play with in head gasket sealing and temperature management.
Good call on the Cayman GTS - I have always preferred naturally aspirated engines that can spin at a reasonably high speed. But I do think they've pushed the boat out to make the 718 a bit special. I have to be a bit biased, because I've ordered one, but I honestly think they have an outstanding engine package.
Liam
Edited by LiamH66 on Thursday 22 September 00:57
bcr5784 said:
All pure (current) turbos suffer from this effect to a greater or lesser degree. It possible to overcome it with electrical assistance, but I'm not aware of it being in production on any car yet (but it is just around the corner).
If you are talking "anti-lag", or boost enhancement as some of the engine management specialists call it, it has been commonplace in motorsport for the best part of 20 years now. There is absolutely no way on earth that the 718 S doesn't have it, and in a particularly refined form. Just listen to the exhaust note on a neutral throttle in a corner when you have the sport plus mode engaged and you've pressed the "wake up, time to go" button. The controlled misfire is unmistakable. Similarly, using launch control with PDK (haven't tried it in a manual car yet), I would put money on there being more than a little positive boost pressure (i.e. turbo spinning and ready) before you even think about releasing the brake. I have calibrated engine management systems on a few vehicles with boost enhancement over the years, but never achieved the finesse the 718 has. (Hopefully because no-one was willing to pay for the time involved rather than any lack of ability on my part. 
)There might be some electrically driven way of getting boost at engine speeds lower than the turbo can get spun by exhaust gas availability, but I still think the Porsche R&D team have made a pretty good job of the 718 with well proven technology.
Liam
pete.g said:
Thanks for that and good luck with the car. One of my mates still has a Capri 3.0S -it's enough of a handful without the threat of a turbo kicking in mid corner.
There is a cure for that. Long story, but built a 3.1 RS Capri to satisfy a customer's boyhood dream many years back. Only problem he had that it wasn't terribly quick compared to cars of the day. So we sourced an immaculate Capri 1.6L and turned it into everything the RS wasn't by fitting a 2.0 litre Cosworth RS500 spec engine and enough of the right bits to make it fun and usable. Back on topic, it didn't have much lag, but it didn't do so much under 3500rpm. And somewhere between 3500 and 4000 rpm all hell broke loose - you just couldn't get off the throttle quickly enough, but you knew if you got off it too far you'd be in the hedge backwards. It was a quick car, but it was serious handful, and you had to use all the revs to make it go. Fortunately it had a small enough steering wheel that it could be twiddled to opposite and back again fairly quickly.I hadn't seen the car for a year or 2 when I next came across it, and it had a lower ratio diff fitted (i.e. should have been even more of a handful). But it had also received a 5 link back end from Maidstone Sports Cars to replace the "cart springs". Don't know what has happened to the car in between time, but it was the most fabulously benign handling Capri I have ever driven, despite having at least 300bhp at the flywheel (which equated to about 500bhp at the mouth for Cossies back then). Would have been a load of chassis/suspension work, but they used to do the same for the MG R-V8 and the transformation was similarly outstanding.
Not sure if they'd fancy doing another - but you could always ask. They don't make them like they used to - thank God!
Liam
For some positive vibes ... an excellent post from user gcurnew on the Planet 9 forums, in a thread titled 'The reason why I personally will never buy a 718 ( and maybe you shouldn't )', who puts a response together much more articulately than I.
____________________________________________________________________
This thread is based on what I consider to be a false premise: that the FI 4-pot boxer engine sounds bad. Journalists (real and imaginary ones) are just as resistant to change as the rest of the population, and it's entirely expected that as keepers and protectors of mainstream thought they cling as dearly to the status quo as the rest of the human race. Change is threatening. Change requires revisiting assumptions. Embracing change often requires swimming against the current of conventional thinking.
Conventional thinking is is that the Porsche flat 6 in NA guise sounds awesome. As the owner of two such engines, I'm left scratching my head at that notion. Frankly, we bought our two Porsches despite - not because - of the the sounds they make. They were purchased for all their other performance attributes, and sound was not at all a consideration. If it had been, other vehicles from other marques would likely have earned spots in our garage.
From my perspective, the Porsche flat-six sound isn't really all that refined, and more than one person has asked me what's wrong with my 911. One hardcore Ford V-8 owner put his cards face up on the table when he opined/asked "You paid how much for that clattering piece of crap?" Point being, despite protestations to the contrary here by sixaholics, the Porsche flat-six sound isn't universally accepted as being especially sonorous. (Take fawning, compromised journalists and Porsche owners out of the equation when refuting that position.) A case could be made that every other marque has an iconic engine or two that their respective faithful think sounds better than any ICE ever made, Porsches included. BMW fans have the old NA inline-6, Jaguaricon has the V-12 (ditto Ferrari), GM and Ford both have V-8s with classic muscle car tones, amd Mercedes has its own variation of the V-8 rumble with the old non-turbo AMG 63 mills.
On this forum and in the automotive media, a vocal group of traditionalists are fixated on the fact the NA six has been replaced by a FI four. I'm one of the few here that thinks the flat four actually sounds quite awesome, and the auditory track and even the minimal increase in NVH dials back the cushy/luxury factor that was beginning to plague the Boxster/Cayman line, returning it to a more visceral and edgy place that non-conformist two-seat coupes and roadsters occupied throughout the 20th century.
I think Porsche absolutely made the right call by deciding to move the mid-engine cars from not-quite-911 status to their own market niche. I fully expect that the FI 4 will prove to be step one in a two-part transition to to a forced induction 4-cylinder/electric hybrid offering in the next generation platform.
And I'm more than OK being one of the very few here that like the 718...how it looks...how it performs...how it sounds. I just wish the sixaholics would PLEASE stop trying so hard to convince those who like the new direction Porsche has taken with the 718 that their thinking is misguided. I'm a pretty savvy consumer, and a long-term aficionado of the two-seat performance car genre. I get the history, I get the arguments, I even get the passion. Maybe just dial it back a few notches so this board can get back to being the more pleasant place it was before the 718 stirred things up.
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
This thread is based on what I consider to be a false premise: that the FI 4-pot boxer engine sounds bad. Journalists (real and imaginary ones) are just as resistant to change as the rest of the population, and it's entirely expected that as keepers and protectors of mainstream thought they cling as dearly to the status quo as the rest of the human race. Change is threatening. Change requires revisiting assumptions. Embracing change often requires swimming against the current of conventional thinking.
Conventional thinking is is that the Porsche flat 6 in NA guise sounds awesome. As the owner of two such engines, I'm left scratching my head at that notion. Frankly, we bought our two Porsches despite - not because - of the the sounds they make. They were purchased for all their other performance attributes, and sound was not at all a consideration. If it had been, other vehicles from other marques would likely have earned spots in our garage.
From my perspective, the Porsche flat-six sound isn't really all that refined, and more than one person has asked me what's wrong with my 911. One hardcore Ford V-8 owner put his cards face up on the table when he opined/asked "You paid how much for that clattering piece of crap?" Point being, despite protestations to the contrary here by sixaholics, the Porsche flat-six sound isn't universally accepted as being especially sonorous. (Take fawning, compromised journalists and Porsche owners out of the equation when refuting that position.) A case could be made that every other marque has an iconic engine or two that their respective faithful think sounds better than any ICE ever made, Porsches included. BMW fans have the old NA inline-6, Jaguaricon has the V-12 (ditto Ferrari), GM and Ford both have V-8s with classic muscle car tones, amd Mercedes has its own variation of the V-8 rumble with the old non-turbo AMG 63 mills.
On this forum and in the automotive media, a vocal group of traditionalists are fixated on the fact the NA six has been replaced by a FI four. I'm one of the few here that thinks the flat four actually sounds quite awesome, and the auditory track and even the minimal increase in NVH dials back the cushy/luxury factor that was beginning to plague the Boxster/Cayman line, returning it to a more visceral and edgy place that non-conformist two-seat coupes and roadsters occupied throughout the 20th century.
I think Porsche absolutely made the right call by deciding to move the mid-engine cars from not-quite-911 status to their own market niche. I fully expect that the FI 4 will prove to be step one in a two-part transition to to a forced induction 4-cylinder/electric hybrid offering in the next generation platform.
And I'm more than OK being one of the very few here that like the 718...how it looks...how it performs...how it sounds. I just wish the sixaholics would PLEASE stop trying so hard to convince those who like the new direction Porsche has taken with the 718 that their thinking is misguided. I'm a pretty savvy consumer, and a long-term aficionado of the two-seat performance car genre. I get the history, I get the arguments, I even get the passion. Maybe just dial it back a few notches so this board can get back to being the more pleasant place it was before the 718 stirred things up.
____________________________________________________________________
Edited by Timbola on Friday 23 September 07:47
LiamH66 said:
If you are talking "anti-lag", or boost enhancement as some of the engine management specialists call it, it has been commonplace in motorsport for the best part of 20 years now. There is absolutely no way on earth that the 718 S doesn't have it, and in a particularly refined form. Just listen to the exhaust note on a neutral throttle in a corner when you have the sport plus mode engaged and you've pressed the "wake up, time to go" button. The controlled misfire is unmistakable. Similarly, using launch control with PDK (haven't tried it in a manual car yet), I would put money on there being more than a little positive boost pressure (i.e. turbo spinning and ready) before you even think about releasing the brake. I have calibrated engine management systems on a few vehicles with boost enhancement over the years, but never achieved the finesse the 718 has. (Hopefully because no-one was willing to pay for the time involved rather than any lack of ability on my part. )
There might be some electrically driven way of getting boost at engine speeds lower than the turbo can get spun by exhaust gas availability, but I still think the Porsche R&D team have made a pretty good job of the 718 with well proven technology.
Liam
The anti-lag system as used on race and rally cars is not (as far as I am aware) used on any road cars, but the 718 does have an anti lag system as used on the 911 turbo to keep the turbo spinning after lift off. (It is suppressed in sport mode so you get the pops and bangs that many seem to like). And I agree turbo design and management has come a long way since the days of the 2002 or saab turbos (or even my Legacy). That said the 718 (note I am talking about the base car which I have driven - not the S which I haven't). Does suffer. Put it in 7th (manual) at 70 on the motorway (2000 revs) , floor it and NOTHING happens for a while - it's actually worse than the 981 2.7) I expect the S to be much better - larger engine, less boost and twin scroll turbo. The 911.2 which has even less reliance on the (twin) turbos has much less intrusive lag than the base 718 to the point where I could happily replace my 981S engine with that (if that was possible). Would I be happy with a 718S I'm not sure - as I say, I haven't tried it, but, for me, it would have to have a lot less lag for me to be happy. But, as I say, we are all different and there is a lot to like about the base 718 - steering, handling, infotainment and great bang per buck (and hence value for money).)There might be some electrically driven way of getting boost at engine speeds lower than the turbo can get spun by exhaust gas availability, but I still think the Porsche R&D team have made a pretty good job of the 718 with well proven technology.
Liam
Ozzie Osmond said:
7th gear acceleration from 70 mph in a manual car..... ??
In that type of driving I suspect a £35k Mustang would blow any £70k Porsche into the weeds.
Manual is a 6 speed, so I assume he means pdk in manual mode. Either way, why would you do that in a sports car.In that type of driving I suspect a £35k Mustang would blow any £70k Porsche into the weeds.
Moving on.....
Ozzie Osmond said:
7th gear acceleration from 70 mph in a manual car..... ??
In that type of driving I suspect a £35k Mustang would blow any £70k Porsche into the weeds.
The point I was making 70 in 7th in a 981s is (on the motorway) perfectly useable and (even in auto) will go up modest gradients without a downchange. Simply not possible with a base 718. Not sure what point you are making re Mustang - the 2.3 pulls similar gearing (in 6th) to the 718 in 7th and looks as if it has similar lag, so I would expect similar response issues at that speed (though I've not driven one). The 5 litre would doubtless be a different kettle of fish, but the 3.7 has slightly more torque but higher gears than a 981S so might be similar to it (not driven either of them).In that type of driving I suspect a £35k Mustang would blow any £70k Porsche into the weeds.
Ozzie Osmond said:
7th gear acceleration from 70 mph in a manual car..... ??
In that type of driving I suspect a £35k Mustang would blow any £70k Porsche into the weeds.
The point I was making 70 in 7th in a 981s is (on the motorway) perfectly useable and (even in auto) will go up modest gradients without a downchange. Simply not possible with a base 718. Not sure what point you are making re Mustang - the 2.3 pulls similar gearing (in 6th) to the 718 in 7th and looks as if it has similar lag, so I would expect similar response issues at that speed (though I've not driven one). The 5 litre would doubtless be a different kettle of fish, but the 3.7 has slightly more torque but higher gears than a 981S so might be similar to it (not driven either of them).In that type of driving I suspect a £35k Mustang would blow any £70k Porsche into the weeds.
heard you the first time.
Moving on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-x3wjVANUM
plenty of info here.
Moving on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-x3wjVANUM
plenty of info here.
Gassing Station | Boxster/Cayman | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff