Can't afford a 964 then buy a 993
Discussion
Coming to them from primarily a water cooled background I am lucky enough to own both a 993 and a 964. The 993 is an extreme version of a clubsport spec car ( rose jointed etc) and the 964 is a pretty extreme road spec C2 but without rosenoints. They both share identical braking and chassis set ups so it's an interesting comparison as both cars are performance 'optimised'. Interestingly when the weight and rose joint advantages of the 993 are factored out they are both VERY similar cars dynamically. So close that if they shared the same body shape a driver could be confused into thinking that they were the same car. Ultimately at 10/10ths the 964 will default to oversteer a little (very little) more earlier than the 993 and as such is a little more playful. Both cars are beautifully benign and tactile when compared to the brutal and more challenging 996 GT3's that followed them. But the difference between the 964 and 993 is nowhere near as marked as say the difference between the 996 and 997 GT3. Arguing between them is in my opinion an excersise in splitting hairs.
Drivers and owners of both 993's and 964's will of course argue the differences between them but in my experience, when both cars are optimised, there is very little between them dynamically. Both truly lovely cars and both equally worthy of their coveted status. It comes down to a taste in asthetics. I wouldn't be parted with either of mine.
Drivers and owners of both 993's and 964's will of course argue the differences between them but in my experience, when both cars are optimised, there is very little between them dynamically. Both truly lovely cars and both equally worthy of their coveted status. It comes down to a taste in asthetics. I wouldn't be parted with either of mine.
Orangecurry said:
True, but with going from 964 to 993 there was a big improvement by removing/stopping all of the rust areas except screen surrounds (same central upper bodyshell) but instead introduced the rear chassis-leg dirt-trap 
Also there was a big step-up by getting rid of the rear trailing arms and using the rear of the 989 instead, which you only know is there as the rear of the 993 is fatter.
968 did the same thing by removing the bottoms of the rear section of the front wings and leading part of the rear quarter as both were replaced with badly IMHO fitting clip on PU side skirts (both of those areas are the main rust traps on the late model 944 (having said that my 968 failed an MoT for rear torsion tube mounting corrosion, another rust area not improved). That was another Porsche obsession back then, stupid PU panels with black plastic beading seal that shrinks and is a PITA to replace whilst neatly introducing another water trap and corrosion route.Also there was a big step-up by getting rid of the rear trailing arms and using the rear of the 989 instead, which you only know is there as the rear of the 993 is fatter.
Orangecurry said:
Mine is embarrassingly clean, and silver (which may reflect differently) but shows no line on that boundary.
(ETA doh! that obviously can't be caused by the rubber door seal leaving a mark, as that's not on the outer/door boundary)
But I would be very interested in what they think/find - good luck
Under that plastic strip two thirds of the way toward the front is another area I have seen where the 993 can get rust for some reason.(ETA doh! that obviously can't be caused by the rubber door seal leaving a mark, as that's not on the outer/door boundary)
But I would be very interested in what they think/find - good luck
Edited by Orangecurry on Friday 14th October 11:43
Orangecurry said:
Thanks - I find all this stuff fascinating.
So they simplified it all for the 993, and reduced weight at the same time.
I still lie awake at night trying to figure out how 5% is transferred to the front wheels of the 993 in normal (no slip at the rear) operation.
Is this achieved by the density of the fluid in the VC? (Internet opinions vary.)
In contrast to the 964, the 993’s 4-wheel drive system was rather conventional and simple, but it actually performed far superior in real world. Instead of epicyclic differential and mult-plate clutch, it used a simple viscous-coupling LSD as centre differential. To most FF car, viscous-coupling means understeer, but for the rear-wheel-drive-based 911, it means very much loyal to the Carrera 2’s character yet provided superior grip when needed.So they simplified it all for the 993, and reduced weight at the same time.
I still lie awake at night trying to figure out how 5% is transferred to the front wheels of the 993 in normal (no slip at the rear) operation.
Is this achieved by the density of the fluid in the VC? (Internet opinions vary.)
To make the viscous-coupling always engaged the front wheels, the rear tyres were made marginally smaller in diameter, enhance established a small speed difference between the drive shafts to front and rear. With the speed difference, the viscous liquid normally transferred 5-15% torque to the front axle, which was much less than the 964’s system. In abnormal conditions, that is, whenever one axle lost grip, the viscous-coupling LSD may send up to almost 100% torque to the other axle.
Both the center LSD and rear LSD were now pure mechanical, but clever electronics was used in the newly-added ABD (Automatic Brake Differential). Again, ABD was simple yet effective. It was just a program, sharing all the hardware with ABS. Whenever rear wheels spin, it braked the spinning wheel thus the rear differential would send more torque to the other wheel. It was particularly useful for extreme conditions such as on snow, while LSD covered most normal conditions.
The 993's system weighed only 50 kg, that’s just half of its predecessor. Energy loss was also halved. It made the 993 Carrera 4 nearly as quick as the RWD version. Production cost was reduced as well.
ras62 said:
To make the viscous-coupling always engaged the front wheels, the rear tyres were made marginally smaller in diameter, enhance established a small speed difference between the drive shafts to front and rear. With the speed difference, the viscous liquid normally transferred 5-15% torque to the front axle, which was much less than the 964’s system. In abnormal conditions, that is, whenever one axle lost grip, the viscous-coupling LSD may send up to almost 100% torque to the other axle.
Nahhhhhhhhhhhhhh I've read that too, but it is not true.Quite easy to prove - the C4 has 225/40 265/35 18" tyres, which when new are bigger at the back - at some point the rears will have worn down to exactly the same circumference as the fronts, and there would be no transfer.
Or on 17s when new, the difference is 0.16% - not enough to transfer anything when the customer drives off in his shiney new car.
Only the WB car on 18s has slightly smaller rear tyres from new.
It's also not an engineering solution (i.e. relying on a variable such as tyre-wear), and Porsche of the 1990s would have sought one.
As I said, the most likely way (that I've found) of delivering a steady 5% (no less) would be in the designed 'thickness' of the fluid in the VC causing 5% transfer with no slippage at the back.
n12maser said:
I'm not convinced they removed/stopped all rust areas on the 993, I'm just starting to get some bubbling around the sill that needs to be dealt with over the winter, classic 911 weakness area. Also have a tiny bubble appearing in one of the roof gutters. It's only because they're newer that they're not suffering as much corrosion as the 964 and earlier
The rust issues I have seen on various 993s have been the well documented front scuttle, below the rear glass on the corners and the one of late, rear chassis legs which may or may not require repair, it does seem some are more prone than others on the latter. The front or leading edge of the cills can also suffer from surface rust but generally this is pretty cosmetic. I've only seen once (on a Vario 136K mileage) 993 rust on the B pillar, which though bubbling wasn't anywhere near to the same extent as B post bubbling of earlier 911s especially 3.2s and SCs and also some minor bubbling along the door opening drivers side.
One to look out for is with the 964. Around five years ago Adrian Crawford said to me in passing that if you removed the front wheel and liner and pushed hard enough against the bulkhead towards the cabin, that on many a 964 he'd checked out you could (literally) almost push your hand through it, something he pointed out that few people would think of checking for rot; myself included.
Steve Rance said:
Drivers and owners of both 993's and 964's will of course argue the differences between them but in my experience, when both cars are optimised, there is very little between them dynamically. Both truly lovely cars and both equally worthy of their coveted status. It comes down to a taste in asthetics. I wouldn't be parted with either of mine.
Having owned both I couldn't agree more. I've ended up with just a 964 as I prefer the looks.I haven't posted much on PH in recent years but I've really enjoyed this thread, thanks all! .. it's such a breath of fresh air compared to the usual stodgy fare on many Porsche forums.
Nice to see some insight and wisdown from you Steve Rance. Some things don't change!
I'm into my tenth year of 993 ownership this year, and have been fortunate enough to drive several 964's and other 993's in the intervening time ... I think there's very little in it, though the 964 seems more foucused , the 993 feels slightly more mature and cultured .. all depends on what you're looking for.
It was interesting to see the similar manufacturing numbers, and how small a percentage are manual coupes.
Chrystal ball in hand I reckon both types will now keep neck and neck into the future .. whether it will mean gains or falls is another matter.
Nice to see some insight and wisdown from you Steve Rance. Some things don't change!
I'm into my tenth year of 993 ownership this year, and have been fortunate enough to drive several 964's and other 993's in the intervening time ... I think there's very little in it, though the 964 seems more foucused , the 993 feels slightly more mature and cultured .. all depends on what you're looking for.
It was interesting to see the similar manufacturing numbers, and how small a percentage are manual coupes.
Chrystal ball in hand I reckon both types will now keep neck and neck into the future .. whether it will mean gains or falls is another matter.
Sensible money for a good 964 C2. http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds?Category=us...
I wish!
Not much time for going on the lash these days .. but definitely my fingers are going more sausage-like.
Though I DO miss our nights out ole buddy!
Back on track, I don't believe it was mentioned before, and I know it's an obvious point but..
if you drive a standard 964 back to back with a similar 993, there is a HUGE difference in power.
And the way it's delivered is also quite marked.
The 993 has it in spades over its older sister.In particular , the vario power band kicks in waaaaay earlier.
Ballcock said:
roygarth said:
Ballcock said:
there is a HUGE difference in power.
LOLNo comparison.
I've had/driven several of each and I wouldn't describe the power difference as 'huge'.
But if that's your definition of 'huge' then I cannot argue with you.
I drove a 993TT once and would describe its power difference over any 993 as 'huge'!
roygarth said:
Ballcock said:
roygarth said:
Ballcock said:
there is a HUGE difference in power.
LOLNo comparison.
I've had/driven several of each and I wouldn't describe the power difference as 'huge'.
But if that's your definition of 'huge' then I cannot argue with you.
I drove a 993TT once and would describe its power difference over any 993 as 'huge'!
Edited by Wozy68 on Wednesday 19th October 12:26
Wozy68 said:
roygarth said:
Ballcock said:
roygarth said:
Ballcock said:
there is a HUGE difference in power.
LOLNo comparison.
I've had/driven several of each and I wouldn't describe the power difference as 'huge'.
But if that's your definition of 'huge' then I cannot argue with you.
I drove a 993TT once and would describe its power difference over any 993 as 'huge'!
Edited by Wozy68 on Wednesday 19th October 12:26
Different car I know, but my AM Vantage feels slow - put your foot down on a twisty road and there is no urgency at all - and on a straight road, it feels like the acceleration is pretty poor. However - take a glance at the speedo, and it does indeed shift - it just never feels like it does. I'm absolutely sure my Cayenne would get left behind by the Vantage - but it feels like it accelerates quicker.
Gassing Station | Porsche Classics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff