what is an 'early' 3.4 996?
Discussion
Many years ago I had extensive experience of a '96 P-plate 2.5 986, and also a week with a '04 996 Turbo. More recently I drove a '97 R-plate 996 C2, and I have had an '05 987 S for the last 6/7 years. Granted, I never drove them back to back, but I do recall differences. More importantly, I have driven a Clio 172 and 182 back to back, and the throttle differences were very clear. The differences are very similar to when I drive my '92 MX-5 and my Box S back to back. If the cable is nice and tight, I've found that it's superior to e-pedals. I haven't driven anything modern without a turbo to confirm though, maybe a modern naturally aspirated e-pedal is the equal of its throttle-cabled antecedent. I suspect it's similar to the granularity of hydraulic PAS vs e-PAS.
I don’t dispute a cable throttle normally aspirated 996 will have better throttle response than a turbo 996, or that any of the other comparisons are valid.
But there’s zero difference in throttle response on an early cable throttle 3.4 mk1 and a later FBW 3.4 mk1. They feel the same. You can even left foot brake the FBW car if you want - it doesn’t kill the throttle if you do.
It is not a reason to differentiate between mk1’s beyond some Troy Queef intellectual b
ks.
It’s as bad as people claiming their car is more special because it has no driver aids, then not having the skill to actually drive it beyond the grip limits.
But there’s zero difference in throttle response on an early cable throttle 3.4 mk1 and a later FBW 3.4 mk1. They feel the same. You can even left foot brake the FBW car if you want - it doesn’t kill the throttle if you do.
It is not a reason to differentiate between mk1’s beyond some Troy Queef intellectual b
ks. It’s as bad as people claiming their car is more special because it has no driver aids, then not having the skill to actually drive it beyond the grip limits.
Fair enough Chris. I’m not trying to start an argument, and I haven’t driven a 3.4 with FBW so I’ll take your word for it.
But I do remember the 986 throttle being “crisper” than my 987, whereas a late 986 2.7 I tried felt much like my 987. And I tried the two Renaults on the same afternoon. For me there is a difference. Night and day might be a playful exaggeration but the difference seems greatest when blipping from cold. I dunno, maybe it’s placebo…
But I do remember the 986 throttle being “crisper” than my 987, whereas a late 986 2.7 I tried felt much like my 987. And I tried the two Renaults on the same afternoon. For me there is a difference. Night and day might be a playful exaggeration but the difference seems greatest when blipping from cold. I dunno, maybe it’s placebo…
Fresh Prince said:
a '96 P-plate 2.5 986 v a '04 996 Turbo
a '97 R-plate 996 C2, v an '05 987 S
Clio 172 and 182
The clios are about the only ones that are comparable. Even then they have completely different engine mapping and if we're talking ph1 v ph2 then different gear ratios.a '97 R-plate 996 C2, v an '05 987 S
Clio 172 and 182
I would defy anyone beyond the very best drivers to know the difference even back to back in a like for like 996. And I bet if you stuck a pedal box on the FBW car the majority would say it was the more responsive throttle. Something that's not even an option to try on the cable car.
jonny996 said:
Wow, anyone else noticed the £59,995 996 at 911Virgin. It's a very low mileage 40th anniversary car but £60K has to be a new high for non turbo/GT car
It's not this one is it?ETA - No, I just saw mileage. As you were.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNDfji_onO0
Edited by 1602Mark on Saturday 3rd July 18:53
1602Mark said:
jonny996 said:
Wow, anyone else noticed the £59,995 996 at 911Virgin. It's a very low mileage 40th anniversary car but £60K has to be a new high for non turbo/GT car
It's not this one is it?ETA - No, I just saw mileage. As you were.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNDfji_onO0
Edited by 1602Mark on Saturday 3rd July 18:53
ATM said:
1602Mark said:
jonny996 said:
Wow, anyone else noticed the £59,995 996 at 911Virgin. It's a very low mileage 40th anniversary car but £60K has to be a new high for non turbo/GT car
It's not this one is it?ETA - No, I just saw mileage. As you were.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNDfji_onO0
Edited by 1602Mark on Saturday 3rd July 18:53
jonny996 said:
ATM said:
1602Mark said:
jonny996 said:
Wow, anyone else noticed the £59,995 996 at 911Virgin. It's a very low mileage 40th anniversary car but £60K has to be a new high for non turbo/GT car
It's not this one is it?ETA - No, I just saw mileage. As you were.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNDfji_onO0
Edited by 1602Mark on Saturday 3rd July 18:53
Fresh Prince said:
Fair enough Chris. I’m not trying to start an argument, and I haven’t driven a 3.4 with FBW so I’ll take your word for it.
But I do remember the 986 throttle being “crisper” than my 987, whereas a late 986 2.7 I tried felt much like my 987. And I tried the two Renaults on the same afternoon. For me there is a difference. Night and day might be a playful exaggeration but the difference seems greatest when blipping from cold. I dunno, maybe it’s placebo…
I think you've probably hit the nail on the head, Cmoose's beef was with But I do remember the 986 throttle being “crisper” than my 987, whereas a late 986 2.7 I tried felt much like my 987. And I tried the two Renaults on the same afternoon. For me there is a difference. Night and day might be a playful exaggeration but the difference seems greatest when blipping from cold. I dunno, maybe it’s placebo…
the FBW throttle response on his Gen 1 987 Cayman S, when compared to his previous cable throttle 986 Boxster. Seemingly the 987 Cayman/Boxster had some pretty weird ECU mapping, ostensibly either for noise or fuel emissions, but there was also the issue of 100%/full throttle at the pedal, not translating to 100% throttlebody/butterfly opening ...
I've no doubt all these glitches could (and probably have been) addressed by the likes of Wayne Schofield etc, and in the process the FBW throttle can be made just as responsive as the old cable throttle, if not moreso. It is only a question of mapping the various parameters after all.
Having had a 996 GT2 re-mapped some years ago, I was staggered at the difference in throttle response/boost onset when compared with the factory's best effort ... It was quite literally night and day, and made the driving experience far more pleasant.
Slippydiff said:
Fresh Prince said:
Fair enough Chris. I’m not trying to start an argument, and I haven’t driven a 3.4 with FBW so I’ll take your word for it.
But I do remember the 986 throttle being “crisper” than my 987, whereas a late 986 2.7 I tried felt much like my 987. And I tried the two Renaults on the same afternoon. For me there is a difference. Night and day might be a playful exaggeration but the difference seems greatest when blipping from cold. I dunno, maybe it’s placebo…
I think you've probably hit the nail on the head, Cmoose's beef was with But I do remember the 986 throttle being “crisper” than my 987, whereas a late 986 2.7 I tried felt much like my 987. And I tried the two Renaults on the same afternoon. For me there is a difference. Night and day might be a playful exaggeration but the difference seems greatest when blipping from cold. I dunno, maybe it’s placebo…
the FBW throttle response on his Gen 1 987 Cayman S, when compared to his previous cable throttle 986 Boxster. Seemingly the 987 Cayman/Boxster had some pretty weird ECU mapping, ostensibly either for noise or fuel emissions, but there was also the issue of 100%/full throttle at the pedal, not translating to 100% throttlebody/butterfly opening ...
I've no doubt all these glitches could (and probably have been) addressed by the likes of Wayne Schofield etc, and in the process the FBW throttle can be made just as responsive as the old cable throttle, if not moreso. It is only a question of mapping the various parameters after all.
Having had a 996 GT2 re-mapped some years ago, I was staggered at the difference in throttle response/boost onset when compared with the factory's best effort ... It was quite literally night and day, and made the driving experience far more pleasant.
After all the cable has various linkage points which can add an element of play into the system and the cables themselves have a degree of stretch; whereas the FBW can be fine tuned to the drivers requirements.
CrunkleFloop said:
So this tells me the FBW car is actually the better option than the cable throttle as it can be mapped to be even more intuitive and responsive than a cable can and gives you the option of PSM if you so desire.
After all the cable has various linkage points which can add an element of play into the system and the cables themselves have a degree of stretch; whereas the FBW can be fine tuned to the drivers requirements.
In essence, yes, but I suspect most would rather live with/complain about the FBW "shortcomings", rather than actually do something about it and beat a path to the likes of Wayne Schofield for a "throttle response optimisation map". This despite the reality most likely being the car's drivability would be vastly improved : sharper throttle response, an improvement all round in smoothness/lack of flat spots and increased torque low down and in the midrange (where it really counts).After all the cable has various linkage points which can add an element of play into the system and the cables themselves have a degree of stretch; whereas the FBW can be fine tuned to the drivers requirements.
CrunkleFloop said:
Slippydiff said:
Patience is a virtue when it comes to utilising Wayne's services 
I have FBW in my C4 however It's always felt like the DMF was more response dampening than the throttle, I might have to seek this Wayne fellow out!https://chipwizards.co.uk/
Frequently not easy to get hold off, but he's worthwhile waiting for, bloke's a genius.
Thanks Slippydiff,
Just took a look at his website, I need to sort a very slight coolant leak and radiator resistor first then I'll look to book it in.
Interestingly I note that he suggests an extra hour for mapping a C4, I've converted mine to RWD so I wonder if that would make a difference.
I'll send him a message when I'm ready to make a booking.
Just took a look at his website, I need to sort a very slight coolant leak and radiator resistor first then I'll look to book it in.
Interestingly I note that he suggests an extra hour for mapping a C4, I've converted mine to RWD so I wonder if that would make a difference.
I'll send him a message when I'm ready to make a booking.
CrunkleFloop said:
Thanks Slippydiff,
Just took a look at his website, I need to sort a very slight coolant leak and radiator resistor first then I'll look to book it in.
Interestingly I note that he suggests an extra hour for mapping a C4, I've converted mine to RWD so I wonder if that would make a difference.
I'll send him a message when I'm ready to make a booking.
I'll be very interested to see how it goes. I've just given in the temptation and fitted some eBay headers. They sound cool but I'd have thought tweaking the map might get some additional power too.Just took a look at his website, I need to sort a very slight coolant leak and radiator resistor first then I'll look to book it in.
Interestingly I note that he suggests an extra hour for mapping a C4, I've converted mine to RWD so I wonder if that would make a difference.
I'll send him a message when I'm ready to make a booking.
There is an interesting clip on YouTube of a guy who stage by stage removes the backboxes then removes the cats then dynos the car at each point to see if there is an exhaust restriction. That's on a 997. He does make power at every stage and points out the car runs rich (or lean, can't remember!) at the top end suggesting there is more power to be found. That's on top of driveability improvements as previously discussed.
Anyone know of someone in London/south coast who is a decent mapper?
Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff