RE: Porsche 911 (991.2) Carrera T | Spotted
Discussion
chirurgus said:
This would be fantastic fun and perfectly suited to daily driver duties.
I agree with the comments already made regarding the poor quality body kit. These areas in particular make it look very amateur:
Not sure what the issue is here, its just where the kit wraps around at the ends to stop debris damaging it?I agree with the comments already made regarding the poor quality body kit. These areas in particular make it look very amateur:
Fantastic thing in my eyes, love the retro trim Id imagine in the flesh the car looks even better.
Just lovely.
1974foggy said:
Not sure what the issue is here, its just where the kit wraps around at the ends to stop debris damaging it?
Fantastic thing in my eyes, love the retro trim Id imagine in the flesh the car looks even better.
Just lovely.
The issue is that it looks stuck on, which it is. Which may not bother you. Looks chintzy to me.Fantastic thing in my eyes, love the retro trim Id imagine in the flesh the car looks even better.
Just lovely.
R33FAL said:
If only these were NA.... Porsche massively missed a trick by using the 3L Turbo engine
They'd ditched the NA engines for the Carrera, so using NA in the 991T would have been a very costly affair.That said, a 991.1T, now that could have been sweet. Though only if they'd made more effort with the weight saving. If they genuinely took some of the weight out of a 991.1 3.4, fitted bits like the improved shift from the 991.1 GTS, improved the steering map etc, put it on smallish wheels, would have made for quite the modern classic.
But I agree re the turbo lump. You read a lot of guff about it not having any lag. It's b
ks. It has lag and that typically elastic turbo throttle response. It's a nice engine of its type, but an actual NA lump would be far preferable in this kind of car.rampangle said:
They'd ditched the NA engines for the Carrera, so using NA in the 991T would have been a very costly affair.
That said, a 991.1T, now that could have been sweet. Though only if they'd made more effort with the weight saving. If they genuinely took some of the weight out of a 991.1 3.4, fitted bits like the improved shift from the 991.1 GTS, improved the steering map etc, put it on smallish wheels, would have made for quite the modern classic.
But I agree re the turbo lump. You read a lot of guff about it not having any lag. It's bks. It has lag and that typically elastic turbo throttle response. It's a nice engine of its type, but an actual NA lump would be far preferable in this kind of car.
Porsche really mess with heads, for years turbo is their premium and fastest range topper. That said, a 991.1T, now that could have been sweet. Though only if they'd made more effort with the weight saving. If they genuinely took some of the weight out of a 991.1 3.4, fitted bits like the improved shift from the 991.1 GTS, improved the steering map etc, put it on smallish wheels, would have made for quite the modern classic.
But I agree re the turbo lump. You read a lot of guff about it not having any lag. It's b
ks. It has lag and that typically elastic turbo throttle response. It's a nice engine of its type, but an actual NA lump would be far preferable in this kind of car.All models get turbos and it’s then suggested they’d be better without…go figure.
bennno said:
Porsche really mess with heads, for years turbo is their premium and fastest range topper.
All models get turbos and it’s then suggested they’d be better without…go figure.
Not really. The 911 Turbo has always really been the chestwig chariot of the range and only the range topper for a certain subset of customers. For others, the (say) 964 RS would have been the pinnacle of desire rather than the Turbo of the era. Ditto GT3 models from introduction in 1999.All models get turbos and it’s then suggested they’d be better without…go figure.
It's a personal preference thing but there's a reason why both the GT3 and Turbo have existed for some time. Personally, I'd take a plain Carrera over a Turbo let alone a GT3 over a Turbo.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Yeah, it really depends on your preference. I personally really don't like turbo engines. Last thing I'd want in an F80 was more boost and power. Happily take less power for a precise NA experience.Of course, more power AND a precise NA experience would be even better. But Any GT3 from the 996.2 onwards has enough power for my needs. Sure, modern turbo stuff punches miles harder in the mid range, but that's not something that gives me any enjoyment due to the delivery and response characteristics.
But I do get how slow a GT3 will feel to someone used to and who prefers modern turbo engines. If that's your thing, a GT3 isn't going to make much sense.
For me this a perfect blend of the best 911 models,for road use.
First of all 991 GT3s are more expensive or will have huge miles on them. Also they are much stiffer for road use and very lacking on low - mid range torque which this is not.
They must be would up best 6-7 K rpm to get the best performance.
With this only LIGHTLY tuned engine ( which is quite pegged back as standard) , it has masses more torque so for fast road use could be a lot more fun / useable, but still nice to rev out when you can.
You could also get a 991 turbo for similar or less money, however that is much less involving to drive and has a very subdued engine note.
It is also obviously PDK only and awd.
So a RWD, turbocharged ( with 992 SC power) , manual , lightly stripped out 911 driver focused 911 is very appealing.
The 991 Carrera T is also a pretty rare model as some have noted above.
I believe Litchfield also provide their own drivetrain warranty. These engines are pretty sturdy, only issues are with the stock turbos and Turbo oil feed lines, which I imagine Litchfield will have gone over. They do some of the world's most impressive R35 engine builds and tuning so they know what they're doing .
First of all 991 GT3s are more expensive or will have huge miles on them. Also they are much stiffer for road use and very lacking on low - mid range torque which this is not.
They must be would up best 6-7 K rpm to get the best performance.
With this only LIGHTLY tuned engine ( which is quite pegged back as standard) , it has masses more torque so for fast road use could be a lot more fun / useable, but still nice to rev out when you can.
You could also get a 991 turbo for similar or less money, however that is much less involving to drive and has a very subdued engine note.
It is also obviously PDK only and awd.
So a RWD, turbocharged ( with 992 SC power) , manual , lightly stripped out 911 driver focused 911 is very appealing.
The 991 Carrera T is also a pretty rare model as some have noted above.
I believe Litchfield also provide their own drivetrain warranty. These engines are pretty sturdy, only issues are with the stock turbos and Turbo oil feed lines, which I imagine Litchfield will have gone over. They do some of the world's most impressive R35 engine builds and tuning so they know what they're doing .
Maxym said:
Leaving aside the Litchfield treatment of this one, the 3 litre engine in the basic T is very good. Plenty of power for road use, linear delivery and, despite what has been said above, no turbo lag.
I think I read there were ten (Miami) blue Ts registered. Mine’s one of them.
It 100% has lag. Literally impossible for it not to have lag. Hard to understand how people make objectively false claims like this.I think I read there were ten (Miami) blue Ts registered. Mine’s one of them.
It’s also not remotely linear in throttle tip in and feels nothing like an NA engine in that regard. And many others tbh.
There will be lag. It’s just that manufacturers are getting more adept at hiding it. My old 997.2 turbo had lag, despite the twin turbos, but it was there. Jumping from that into an old 987.1 Boxster was like night and day. The throttle response in the smaller car felt fantastic, and then after selling the 911 and getting a Caterham 420R it was game over in seconds. As a fun car I’ll never go back to a turbo. When I push down on the accelerator I want the car to do exactly what I want without having to wait, even if that wait can be measured in milliseconds.
at the price.Chubbyross said:
There will be lag. It’s just that manufacturers are getting more adept at hiding it.
I think the problem is that people think lag means "push accelerator, count to three, feel boost". That's old school lag. Lag today is more a case of push the accelerator and feel the torque swell as the boost builds, with that process essentially beginning immediately.Whereas in an NA motor you get the full torque the engine is capable of at that point in the rev range as soon as the engine responds to the input. Which is what makes NA feel so much sharper and more precise, while modern turbo lumps only have a tiny bit of lag but still feel very imprecise and as though the throttle is attached by an elastic cable. I find that pretty horrid. But there's no doubt the market loves turbo engines. So most people aren't bothered and indeed don't even notice.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I also like direct response, I believe one ex car I've owned had the most of that that I can remember.Yes it had some lesser things, but the throttle response I never forget, just looking at the gas pedal and of it went, sadly it had a short powerband, but even driving say just 30km/h it still felt very connected with me, via vibrations and sound.
It was a TVR Griffith 4.3 BV it was not perfect, but the things I highlighted were, throttle response and even at low speeds very involving.
If you never had one, try one (a good example)
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff