RE: Has turbocharging ruined the 911
Discussion
nickfrog said:
Good post. Porsche AG don't make second hand cars so they don't give a damn about those who moan about new cars not being to their very exacting standards despite their ability to drive/assess a car being questionable, at best. Those guys were never in the market for new cars anyway, hence their bias.
What an obnoxious post. Go and buy a 4 cylinder Cayman and report back when you lose the will to live.ORD said:
What an obnoxious post. Go and buy a 4 cylinder Cayman and report back when you lose the will to live.
As nobody has actually driven one yet....And as they're talking about 350HP+ it wont be slow, may prove cheaper to run, can't be any less unreliable, could be lighter and most importantly further improve the dynamics. There's always the original 200HP 2.5 to 'cherish' for the enthusiasts.
In the ten years I've been driving turbos have always been my choice of car. I'm still searching for a R34 skyline now. My last one was fantastic. Porsche turbos just get better with every model. People who say the first ones were best are avin a laugh. The 991 turbo isn't my favourite looker but is the best Porsche ever including the V10. Great car sadly I can't afford yet.
Porsche are one of "the" companies when it comes to turbocharging road cars, I don't know whether they have the honour of being the first, but they are certainly one of the first and there's been a turbo in a Porsche pretty much constantly for 40+ years now. If there was even the slightest way to keep an NA engine in the base model I am sure they would have done it, but seeing as we have people in this post complaining about the low HP figures Porsche give out for the money, I think it's pretty clear this change needed to happen. No, the first models aren't much more powerful than the models they replace but I think this is a good starting point.
There is a massive pantheon of cars which have been turbo'd in the past and I am looking forward to this bold new era, whilst being appreciative of the fact we are going to be sampling the finest N/A engines ever made. I'm pretty sure the GT team at Porsche made the new GT3 engine such a screamer because they knew it'd be the last one.
Just some of the awesome forced induction cars from past and present which spring to mind include the Ferrari 288 GTO/F40, Nissan's many Skylines, the Bugatti Veyron, the Jaguar XKR, the Aston Martin V8 (Old one), Porsche's own 911s/959, Subaru's WRX/Sti stuff, the latest generation of AMG engines.
I think something like the new AMG 2.0 turbo would go quite well in a Boxster or Cayman, on song it's a decent motor even if it is partnered up with an awful gearbox.
There is a massive pantheon of cars which have been turbo'd in the past and I am looking forward to this bold new era, whilst being appreciative of the fact we are going to be sampling the finest N/A engines ever made. I'm pretty sure the GT team at Porsche made the new GT3 engine such a screamer because they knew it'd be the last one.
Just some of the awesome forced induction cars from past and present which spring to mind include the Ferrari 288 GTO/F40, Nissan's many Skylines, the Bugatti Veyron, the Jaguar XKR, the Aston Martin V8 (Old one), Porsche's own 911s/959, Subaru's WRX/Sti stuff, the latest generation of AMG engines.
I think something like the new AMG 2.0 turbo would go quite well in a Boxster or Cayman, on song it's a decent motor even if it is partnered up with an awful gearbox.
otolith said:
Do you really need to drive it to know how they blown four and NA six will differ, and which you would prefer?
I'm sure some people do because they have no particular preference. What's baffling is that some people don't seem to be able to believe that some other people don't need to drive it to know. otolith said:
Do you really need to drive it to know how they blown four and NA six will differ, and which you would prefer?
He didnt say prefering a 6 cylinder he said lose the will to live with the new Cayman whichbis plainly rubbish.Some people may prefer the turbo engine, as it will feel faster at lower revs, and if thats the case who is anyone on here to tell them they're wrong?
chrispmartha said:
Some people may prefer the turbo engine, as it will feel faster at lower revs, and if thats the case who is anyone on here to tell them they're wrong?
Is anyone telling them they're wrong? I've missed it if they are; I've just seen lots of people saying they know they wont like the new cars. There is, of course, nothing whatsoever wrong with preferring turbocharged four-pots to naturally aspirated 6-pots. It is very odd how some folk carry on. If they don't want a 911 turbo nobody's making them buy one!
As ever, I'm very interested in all sportscars and if I wanted a 911 certainly wouldn't rule out the turbo versions unless I'd been for a drive and found the experience disappointing. Nor would I rule out the latest Ferraris and McLarens.
Similarly the forthcoming 4-pot turbo Boxster/Cayman. Somehow everyone thinks the Alfa 4C is the best thing since sliced bread but their brains melt at the prospect of a vaguely similar engine in a Porsche. If you mention the improved torque of a turbo as compared with the flat-6 they get all grumpy in an "if you want a diesel" sort of way.
As ever, I'm very interested in all sportscars and if I wanted a 911 certainly wouldn't rule out the turbo versions unless I'd been for a drive and found the experience disappointing. Nor would I rule out the latest Ferraris and McLarens.
Similarly the forthcoming 4-pot turbo Boxster/Cayman. Somehow everyone thinks the Alfa 4C is the best thing since sliced bread but their brains melt at the prospect of a vaguely similar engine in a Porsche. If you mention the improved torque of a turbo as compared with the flat-6 they get all grumpy in an "if you want a diesel" sort of way.
Ozzie Osmond said:
Somehow everyone thinks the Alfa 4C is the best thing since sliced bread.
Do they? Every review I've read has been pretty scathing and the few people I know who've driven them have been thoroughly uncomplimentary as well. I certainly have no wish to try driving the 4C or a turbocharged Cayman, although I think the turbocharger might suit the GTish nature of the 911 better.
Edited by kambites on Saturday 16th January 14:01
otolith said:
Do you really need to drive it to know how they blown four and NA six will differ, and which you would prefer?
Not in theory, but nobody drives a theory?It's like Porsche have announced they're engine partnering with Chinese diesels, such is the level of scepticism. I've lost count of the threads slagging off the various derivatives for the known issues. All of a sudden it's a 'gem'. You couldn't make it up.
kambites said:
Is anyone telling them they're wrong? I've missed it if they are; I've just seen lots of people saying they know they wont like the new cars. There is, of course, nothing whatsoever wrong with preferring turbocharged four-pots to naturally aspirated 6-pots.
The phrase was 'lose the will to live' that kind of implies a negative chrispmartha said:
kambites said:
Is anyone telling them they're wrong? I've missed it if they are; I've just seen lots of people saying they know they wont like the new cars. There is, of course, nothing whatsoever wrong with preferring turbocharged four-pots to naturally aspirated 6-pots.
The phrase was 'lose the will to live' that kind of implies a negative Obviously trying to tell someone else that they're going to hate it is idiotic.
kambites said:
Ah, sorry I missed someone saying that other people would "lose the will to live"? I only saw people applying that sort of comment to themselves.
Obviously trying to tell someone else that they're going to hate it is idiotic.
I agree ORDs post was idiotic thats why I replied to it.Obviously trying to tell someone else that they're going to hate it is idiotic.
chrispmartha said:
kambites said:
Ah, sorry I missed someone saying that other people would "lose the will to live"? I only saw people applying that sort of comment to themselves.
Obviously trying to tell someone else that they're going to hate it is idiotic.
I agree ORDs post was idiotic thats why I replied to it.Obviously trying to tell someone else that they're going to hate it is idiotic.
for many there's something very life affirming in driving a sports car flat out - a "slow car fast" type of thing. It's what makes Fiats, Alfas, Suzuki Swifts and older hot hatches so much fun. The big boys version of this style of driving used to be Porsche, and a screaming flat six behind you.
You used to have to earn that delight as a 911 below 3k rpm could be easily stalled. The reward above 4.5 was heavenly.
Turbos and long gearing transform the 911 into a luxury GT car; they'll sell loads. But i can still justifiably mourn the passing of an icon.
Some people here seem to worship all progress as necessarily for the best, maybe they embraced the Apple Newton and MiniDiscs.
The gearing is very sad. Turbos are getting better and the lag will improve over generations. But providing a box that can't be stirred at high revs reflects emissions rules dominating everything. A 911 in seventh is economical, but that i can only red line in 2 gears is criminal.
You used to have to earn that delight as a 911 below 3k rpm could be easily stalled. The reward above 4.5 was heavenly.
Turbos and long gearing transform the 911 into a luxury GT car; they'll sell loads. But i can still justifiably mourn the passing of an icon.
Some people here seem to worship all progress as necessarily for the best, maybe they embraced the Apple Newton and MiniDiscs.
The gearing is very sad. Turbos are getting better and the lag will improve over generations. But providing a box that can't be stirred at high revs reflects emissions rules dominating everything. A 911 in seventh is economical, but that i can only red line in 2 gears is criminal.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff