Discussion
On the C2 vs C4 debate - 'Grip' and 'Traction' are two entirely different things - a C2 has an EQUAL amount of 'grip' than a C4 but it only has half the available 'traction' on any given surface.
All this talk of 'only useful in the snow' is IMO absolute tripe - I can break traction very easily if 'pressing on' in my C4 on damp roads, yet alone snow. The other benefit of 4wd is that PSM (Porsche Stability Management) runs on all 4 wheels meaning that the car can 'pull' you out of trouble should you need it. With a C2 you are mimited to 'brake' only PSM on the front wheels.
It is without debate that the C2 gives you a 'purer' feeling - there are two reasons for this, one is that you don't have drive shaft's running through the hub (giving extra resistance on a turn) and secondly is you have less weight over the front axle (not necessarily a good thing at speed).
In summary, drive both hard in the wet AND the dry - you will feel the differences then decide.
All the best ...
All this talk of 'only useful in the snow' is IMO absolute tripe - I can break traction very easily if 'pressing on' in my C4 on damp roads, yet alone snow. The other benefit of 4wd is that PSM (Porsche Stability Management) runs on all 4 wheels meaning that the car can 'pull' you out of trouble should you need it. With a C2 you are mimited to 'brake' only PSM on the front wheels.
It is without debate that the C2 gives you a 'purer' feeling - there are two reasons for this, one is that you don't have drive shaft's running through the hub (giving extra resistance on a turn) and secondly is you have less weight over the front axle (not necessarily a good thing at speed).
In summary, drive both hard in the wet AND the dry - you will feel the differences then decide.
All the best ...
richardb.jones said:
On the C2 vs C4 debate - 'Grip' and 'Traction' are two entirely different things - a C2 has an EQUAL amount of 'grip' than a C4 but it only has half the available 'traction' on any given surface.
All this talk of 'only useful in the snow' is IMO absolute tripe - I can break traction very easily if 'pressing on' in my C4 on damp roads, yet alone snow. The other benefit of 4wd is that PSM (Porsche Stability Management) runs on all 4 wheels meaning that the car can 'pull' you out of trouble should you need it. With a C2 you are mimited to 'brake' only PSM on the front wheels.
It is without debate that the C2 gives you a 'purer' feeling - there are two reasons for this, one is that you don't have drive shaft's running through the hub (giving extra resistance on a turn) and secondly is you have less weight over the front axle (not necessarily a good thing at speed).
In summary, drive both hard in the wet AND the dry - you will feel the differences then decide.
All the best ...
All this talk of 'only useful in the snow' is IMO absolute tripe - I can break traction very easily if 'pressing on' in my C4 on damp roads, yet alone snow. The other benefit of 4wd is that PSM (Porsche Stability Management) runs on all 4 wheels meaning that the car can 'pull' you out of trouble should you need it. With a C2 you are mimited to 'brake' only PSM on the front wheels.
It is without debate that the C2 gives you a 'purer' feeling - there are two reasons for this, one is that you don't have drive shaft's running through the hub (giving extra resistance on a turn) and secondly is you have less weight over the front axle (not necessarily a good thing at speed).
In summary, drive both hard in the wet AND the dry - you will feel the differences then decide.
All the best ...
I think your technical arguments are a bit confused
Edited by Geneve on Wednesday 21st June 14:00
richardb.jones said:
a C2 ... only has half the available 'traction' on any given surface.
Well the C4 hasn't quite got double the traction of the C2, as the 4wd is quite significantly rear biased, and the rear wheels have a lot more traction than the fronts (due to the engine being located over them, and being wider), but it's still got quite a lot more. Fundamentally the difference is that the front wheels of a C2 only have to deal with the force of the car changing direction trying to break traction, whereas the C4 also has the force of the engine trying to accelerate (or indeed slow down). But by that token, the C2 has more of the engine load on the rears trying to break traction. So the effect is that a C2 will more readily oversteer, and a C4 will understeer or (more likely) drift through slip on all four wheels.
As a result the C4 can put down more power through the corners, but the steering is less predictable, because the behaviour of the front wheels is significantly more linked to the throttle. As a result the steering is less "pure".
One key benefit of 4wd is that on our god-awful UK roads it gives a lot more predictable car behaviour. If the rear axle hits a bump and looses grip in a rear-drive, you can easily have a near-death experience, whereas in a 4wd the front wheels keep you moving on and stabilise the car. As a result you can press on with a lot more confidence.
Even though I like the purity and oversteer-larks of rear drive, I'd always have 4wd given the choice.
With the greatest of respect to all C4 fans, I have never been able to workout why Porsche ever got into producing the Carrera 4s in the first place. Just why?
Yes they are lovely cars and you can do most of the things you can do with a C2 in a C4 (!). So why?
Is there anything the C4 does that the C2 can't? Is it just they add a tad more stability at high speed in the wet?
We'll gloss over the fact that actually in most cases, the C4 deadens the sportyness of the 911. It rather defeats the objective of having a throttle-sensitive sports car in the first place. Yes and it's nonsense to suggest that the C4 is better in snow, it isn't.
For the amount of money it must have cost the Porsche factory, it really is a guilding job with the slimmest of benefit.
Or was it that they had to produce something stable to take care of 300 bhp plus (the Turbo) and once having invested in the development, and in spreading the costs, it made sense to produce the optional model (and then the Turbo-bodied versions as a further variant).
Or was it to do with old-fashioned Austro-German central European winter driving conditions being borne in mind? Certainly, the racing department would have pointed out what a waste of time it was.
Must have been bloody marginal in the bean counters office that these fresh four wheel drive lines be added. But there we are.
I'm sure there are some die-hards who would indeed, not drive anything else (quite right, that's cool), but all the same, the decision why a company like Porsche went into producing a C4s always appeared a mystery to me.
Yes they are lovely cars and you can do most of the things you can do with a C2 in a C4 (!). So why?
Is there anything the C4 does that the C2 can't? Is it just they add a tad more stability at high speed in the wet?
We'll gloss over the fact that actually in most cases, the C4 deadens the sportyness of the 911. It rather defeats the objective of having a throttle-sensitive sports car in the first place. Yes and it's nonsense to suggest that the C4 is better in snow, it isn't.
For the amount of money it must have cost the Porsche factory, it really is a guilding job with the slimmest of benefit.
Or was it that they had to produce something stable to take care of 300 bhp plus (the Turbo) and once having invested in the development, and in spreading the costs, it made sense to produce the optional model (and then the Turbo-bodied versions as a further variant).
Or was it to do with old-fashioned Austro-German central European winter driving conditions being borne in mind? Certainly, the racing department would have pointed out what a waste of time it was.
Must have been bloody marginal in the bean counters office that these fresh four wheel drive lines be added. But there we are.
I'm sure there are some die-hards who would indeed, not drive anything else (quite right, that's cool), but all the same, the decision why a company like Porsche went into producing a C4s always appeared a mystery to me.
Or why Audi produced the Urquattro?
Diff technology has come on a lot over the years, both in terms of ability and in reliability. I suspect that, like the turbo, it was the only way forward in a bygone age.
To see the benefit of 4WD, you only have to look at rallying. On dry smooth Spanish roads, the 2WD cars are untouchable, even with less power. On loose or wet surfaces, the 4WD cars are quicker by a massive multiple of what they lose in the dry. The simple reason is that you can be on the power much earlier.
If I lived in Spain, or the southern US, I would have 2WD. Living in the UK, I like to be a bit lairy when the mood takes me, not when the weather is playing ball.
With regards to the 911 system, the effect on steering is negligable as the car is 95:05 when it has full traction. Its only when a wheel spins that power is moved around. Try driving a nice open, wet, B road with plenty of 2nd gear corners in both cars and then make your choice. If you will only drive A roads or motorways then just a buy a C2 as traction won't be an issue for you.
Before anyone mentions Formula 1, an F1 car can be driven upside down at any speed over 80mph, so traction is never really a problem once away from the grid.
Diff technology has come on a lot over the years, both in terms of ability and in reliability. I suspect that, like the turbo, it was the only way forward in a bygone age.
To see the benefit of 4WD, you only have to look at rallying. On dry smooth Spanish roads, the 2WD cars are untouchable, even with less power. On loose or wet surfaces, the 4WD cars are quicker by a massive multiple of what they lose in the dry. The simple reason is that you can be on the power much earlier.
If I lived in Spain, or the southern US, I would have 2WD. Living in the UK, I like to be a bit lairy when the mood takes me, not when the weather is playing ball.
With regards to the 911 system, the effect on steering is negligable as the car is 95:05 when it has full traction. Its only when a wheel spins that power is moved around. Try driving a nice open, wet, B road with plenty of 2nd gear corners in both cars and then make your choice. If you will only drive A roads or motorways then just a buy a C2 as traction won't be an issue for you.
Before anyone mentions Formula 1, an F1 car can be driven upside down at any speed over 80mph, so traction is never really a problem once away from the grid.
There does seem to be some confusion on here regarding 4WD systems and grip.
I enjoy measuring my steering, throttle and brake inputs according to road conditions, that's part of the pleasure of driving. A C4 may get me round a damp corner faster than a C2, doesn't mean I'd enjoy it any more. I am not seeking ultimate cross country speed, I'm looking for an enjoyable drive.
Is speed directly proportional to fun? I don't think so, if anything I'd like a bit less grip in my 996. Most of us drive Porsches because we want that involvement, the C2 just happened to provide more for me.
I enjoy measuring my steering, throttle and brake inputs according to road conditions, that's part of the pleasure of driving. A C4 may get me round a damp corner faster than a C2, doesn't mean I'd enjoy it any more. I am not seeking ultimate cross country speed, I'm looking for an enjoyable drive.
Is speed directly proportional to fun? I don't think so, if anything I'd like a bit less grip in my 996. Most of us drive Porsches because we want that involvement, the C2 just happened to provide more for me.
Audi have persisted with 4wd, but struggled to ever make a car that has enjoyable dynamics.
BMW have always maintained that the rear wheels should provide the drive and the front wheels should provide uncorrupted steering. And, virtually all BMWs have provided enjoyable driving dynamics.
The best 911s have always been coupe, manual, lightweight and rwd.
BMW have always maintained that the rear wheels should provide the drive and the front wheels should provide uncorrupted steering. And, virtually all BMWs have provided enjoyable driving dynamics.
The best 911s have always been coupe, manual, lightweight and rwd.
Geneve said:
Audi have persisted with 4wd, but struggled to ever make a car that has enjoyable dynamics.
BMW have always maintained that the rear wheels should provide the drive and the front wheels should provide uncorrupted steering. And, virtually all BMWs have provided enjoyable driving dynamics.
The best 911s have always been coupe, manual, lightweight and rwd.
BMW have always maintained that the rear wheels should provide the drive and the front wheels should provide uncorrupted steering. And, virtually all BMWs have provided enjoyable driving dynamics.
The best 911s have always been coupe, manual, lightweight and rwd.
In your opinion of course.
Wonder why the fastest 0-60 in a Production 911 to date is the Tiptronic, 4wd, lardy 997 Turbo then ?
richardb.jones said:
Geneve said:
Audi have persisted with 4wd, but struggled to ever make a car that has enjoyable dynamics.
BMW have always maintained that the rear wheels should provide the drive and the front wheels should provide uncorrupted steering. And, virtually all BMWs have provided enjoyable driving dynamics.
The best 911s have always been coupe, manual, lightweight and rwd.
BMW have always maintained that the rear wheels should provide the drive and the front wheels should provide uncorrupted steering. And, virtually all BMWs have provided enjoyable driving dynamics.
The best 911s have always been coupe, manual, lightweight and rwd.
In your opinion of course.
Wonder why the fastest 0-60 in a Production 911 to date is the Tiptronic, 4wd, lardy 997 Turbo then ?
If it's the fastest is it the best?
Just a thought.
I don't think there is much question about the 997 Turbo being one of the greatest road sports cars ever produced, so rounded and complete it's capabilities (and superfast).
And the interesting point for this thread is that you can indeed compare it to it's two wheel drive sister model, the GT2. Which is not well rounded at all! Ferocious and focused and wonderful, but definitely not a car to relax in.
Maybe it's clearer as to how the differences between Carrera 2 and Carrera 4 work, by comparing those two models, and 'downsizing' the comparison as far back as you like.
And the interesting point for this thread is that you can indeed compare it to it's two wheel drive sister model, the GT2. Which is not well rounded at all! Ferocious and focused and wonderful, but definitely not a car to relax in.
Maybe it's clearer as to how the differences between Carrera 2 and Carrera 4 work, by comparing those two models, and 'downsizing' the comparison as far back as you like.
ph123 said:
I don't think there is much question about the 997 Turbo being one of the greatest road sports cars ever produced, so rounded and complete it's capabilities (and superfast).
And the interesting point for this thread is that you can indeed compare it to it's two wheel drive sister model, the GT2. Which is not well rounded at all! Ferocious and focused and wonderful, but definitely not a car to relax in.
Maybe it's clearer as to how the differences between Carrera 2 and Carrera 4 work, by comparing those two models, and 'downsizing' the comparison as far back as you like.
And the interesting point for this thread is that you can indeed compare it to it's two wheel drive sister model, the GT2. Which is not well rounded at all! Ferocious and focused and wonderful, but definitely not a car to relax in.
Maybe it's clearer as to how the differences between Carrera 2 and Carrera 4 work, by comparing those two models, and 'downsizing' the comparison as far back as you like.
Yes, I would agree with that ph
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff