Cerb 4.5 versus 996TT
Discussion
As some of you know I departed Cerb ownership a month ago after 5 very happy years with a 1998 4.5 which had the Joolz treatment a couple of times:
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/350034.htm
I went on to buy a 996TT and a few of you asked for first impressions/comparison. I’m no expert but happy to share my limited experience so far:
The one most people will be interested in is ‘performance’ so we’ll get it out of the way first: In a straight line there is very little difference between my 400BHP Cerb and the 911. The Cerb’s delivery is more linear than the 911 but the 911 with twin turbos and around 20% more torque has great whooshes of acceleration. Having said that there is very little lag on the 911 and its so easy to drive that it feels like playstation game.
Handling: I had the Cerb dampers set up fairly hard so it was planted especially at high speed. The 911 bounces around a lot more and I’m only just getting to grips with it. The 4-wheel drive and stability management system mean you can take libertys when exiting a corner. I still remember the first time I exited a roundabout in the Cerb a bit too enthusiastically and the back end headed straight for the ditch! So as you would expect, if it’s damp or twisty the 911 can be pushed harder (especially by an amateur!). The brake pedal feel is far better on the Cerb and the ABS comes in too early on the 911.
Interior: The 911 is as expected – German – and much better finished than the Cerb with more bells and whistles. But (can you believe it) there is no steering wheel height adjustment on the 911 (£100k motor!) so it took me 3 days to find a seating position for my long legs. And the indicator is on the wrong side in the 911. I always found the Cerb seating position very comfortable on long journeys. There is a bit more room in the back of the 911 for my kids but there is less boot space than in the Cerb.
Exterior: I couldn’t even begin choose between them. Both have great attributes, both turn heads.
Finance: I think the running costs will be similar i.e. the 911 needs a £500 or £1k service every year and £900 of warranty plus consumables. You all know the running costs of Cerbs! Depreciation on my 911 will be around £5k pa but that’s because it is much newer than my Cerb so has more to lose. I expect that depreciation on a similar value Cerb would be greater pa than the 911.
Overall: I don’t know why but people seem to want to race you more in the 911 (not that I do). I’ve had several people who I’ve caught up with on a B road who when they realise it’s a 911 behind them suddenly speed up and begin overtaking others. This never happened in the Cerb. The 911 is easier to drive generally, you have to concentrate on the steering because its sensitive/accurate, but it can be driven like any other car at crusing speeds/around town. I can also hear the radio in the 911 which I never did in the Cerb but then there were lots more pops and bangs to listen when in the Cerb. I think I’ll use the 911 more than the Cerb which was one of the main reasons for swapping plus I’ve wanted a 911 Turbo since I was old enough to remember (they began making them in the year I was born) but still think the Cerb is one hell of a car especially for the money. Make sure you continue to look after them – I could be back someday!
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/350034.htm
I went on to buy a 996TT and a few of you asked for first impressions/comparison. I’m no expert but happy to share my limited experience so far:
The one most people will be interested in is ‘performance’ so we’ll get it out of the way first: In a straight line there is very little difference between my 400BHP Cerb and the 911. The Cerb’s delivery is more linear than the 911 but the 911 with twin turbos and around 20% more torque has great whooshes of acceleration. Having said that there is very little lag on the 911 and its so easy to drive that it feels like playstation game.
Handling: I had the Cerb dampers set up fairly hard so it was planted especially at high speed. The 911 bounces around a lot more and I’m only just getting to grips with it. The 4-wheel drive and stability management system mean you can take libertys when exiting a corner. I still remember the first time I exited a roundabout in the Cerb a bit too enthusiastically and the back end headed straight for the ditch! So as you would expect, if it’s damp or twisty the 911 can be pushed harder (especially by an amateur!). The brake pedal feel is far better on the Cerb and the ABS comes in too early on the 911.
Interior: The 911 is as expected – German – and much better finished than the Cerb with more bells and whistles. But (can you believe it) there is no steering wheel height adjustment on the 911 (£100k motor!) so it took me 3 days to find a seating position for my long legs. And the indicator is on the wrong side in the 911. I always found the Cerb seating position very comfortable on long journeys. There is a bit more room in the back of the 911 for my kids but there is less boot space than in the Cerb.
Exterior: I couldn’t even begin choose between them. Both have great attributes, both turn heads.
Finance: I think the running costs will be similar i.e. the 911 needs a £500 or £1k service every year and £900 of warranty plus consumables. You all know the running costs of Cerbs! Depreciation on my 911 will be around £5k pa but that’s because it is much newer than my Cerb so has more to lose. I expect that depreciation on a similar value Cerb would be greater pa than the 911.
Overall: I don’t know why but people seem to want to race you more in the 911 (not that I do). I’ve had several people who I’ve caught up with on a B road who when they realise it’s a 911 behind them suddenly speed up and begin overtaking others. This never happened in the Cerb. The 911 is easier to drive generally, you have to concentrate on the steering because its sensitive/accurate, but it can be driven like any other car at crusing speeds/around town. I can also hear the radio in the 911 which I never did in the Cerb but then there were lots more pops and bangs to listen when in the Cerb. I think I’ll use the 911 more than the Cerb which was one of the main reasons for swapping plus I’ve wanted a 911 Turbo since I was old enough to remember (they began making them in the year I was born) but still think the Cerb is one hell of a car especially for the money. Make sure you continue to look after them – I could be back someday!
Have you got the X50 pack on the TT?
I only ask as I "met" a 996TT on the motorway back down from Stirling, and the Cerb most definately had more. That said, it appeared a bigger victory because, once I'd pulled out a couple of car lengths, he backed off, in a "I wasn't really trying anyway" kinda move.
I only ask as I "met" a 996TT on the motorway back down from Stirling, and the Cerb most definately had more. That said, it appeared a bigger victory because, once I'd pulled out a couple of car lengths, he backed off, in a "I wasn't really trying anyway" kinda move.
Interesting report and some very good view points that could only be established having driven both for a period of time. Two very different cars and each with their 'for and against' sides.
The only thing i have against a Porker, is that, in comparison, id expect the Cerb to get far more admiring looks...I personally rarely give a Porker a second glance.
The only thing i have against a Porker, is that, in comparison, id expect the Cerb to get far more admiring looks...I personally rarely give a Porker a second glance.
Nefarious said:
Have you got the X50 pack on the TT?
I only ask as I "met" a 996TT on the motorway back down from Stirling, and the Cerb most definately had more. That said, it appeared a bigger victory because, once I'd pulled out a couple of car lengths, he backed off, in a "I wasn't really trying anyway" kinda move.
I didn't go for the 450BHP X50 because people tend to ask £5k-£10k more and it really isn't worth it. Plus I gather there is more lag with the larger X50 turbos and you can easily upgrade the standard TT from 420BHP to 500BHP if required. I only ask as I "met" a 996TT on the motorway back down from Stirling, and the Cerb most definately had more. That said, it appeared a bigger victory because, once I'd pulled out a couple of car lengths, he backed off, in a "I wasn't really trying anyway" kinda move.
Phil,
I'm surprised by your sense of 'raptive similarity. I know when I ditched the Wheelermobile for a prev gen Turbo back when, the 911 felt way, way faster and ito grip and poise, there was simply no contest. Guess your Cerb was nicely fettled?
Re the X50 not being worth it thing. Er, no mate!
There's a wick somehwere. Turn it...to 11!
I'm surprised by your sense of 'raptive similarity. I know when I ditched the Wheelermobile for a prev gen Turbo back when, the 911 felt way, way faster and ito grip and poise, there was simply no contest. Guess your Cerb was nicely fettled?
Re the X50 not being worth it thing. Er, no mate!
There's a wick somehwere. Turn it...to 11!
Gazzab said:
My experiences are different - pretty much neck and neck with the TT 911 v a 4.5 cerb but bouncy roads were cleanly absorbed by him whilst I was hanging on for dear life. At over 160 he started to ease away. But this was a non-remapped cerb.
Similar tests, but pre mappage/induction we did a 60-140 run against a 996 Turbo and we had the edge slightly (no more than two cars length though!), no doubt beyond that the superior aero of the porsche would have taken over... now we're mapped, I reckon its close to X50 pace below 140mph. 
Not yet come up against one in competition, but the DMS 996 Turbo entered in the speed trials was a bit quicker - though that probably has north of 500bhp. 
derestrictor said:
Re the X50 not being worth it thing. Er, no mate!
There's a wick somehwere. Turn it...to 11!
Ok There's a wick somehwere. Turn it...to 11!
I said I wasn't prepared to pay the extra not that it wasn't worth it. Each to their own. In normal trim you can lose your licence so easily that I doubt the X50 would make much difference to most of my road driving. If I'd wanted to track a 911 then I'd have gone for a different model. 
HarryW said:
BCA said:
Similar tests, but pre mappage/induction we did a 60-140 run against a 996 Turbo and we had the edge slightly (no more than two cars length though!),.......
2 car lengths is very difficult to acheive and construed as a significant margin IHME/O, perhaps he wasn't trying 
.HarryW said:
BCA said:
Similar tests, but pre mappage/induction we did a 60-140 run against a 996 Turbo and we had the edge slightly (no more than two cars length though!),.......
2 car lengths is very difficult to acheive and construed as a significant margin IHME/O, perhaps he wasn't trying .
Did it three times - not exactly scientific, but still... The driver looked less impressed by the windows on our car going down verrrrrrrry slowly when we pulled alongside. Ah well, you cant have it all eh? Edited by BCA on Monday 3rd March 22:36
BCA said:
HarryW said:
BCA said:
Similar tests, but pre mappage/induction we did a 60-140 run against a 996 Turbo and we had the edge slightly (no more than two cars length though!),.......
2 car lengths is very difficult to acheive and construed as a significant margin IHME/O, perhaps he wasn't trying . Did it three times - not exactly scientific, but still... The driver looked less impressed by the windows on our car going down verrrrrrrry slowly when we pulled alongside. Ah well, you cant have it all eh? Edited by BCA on Monday 3rd March 22:36
Gassing Station | Cerbera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff