The myth of 911 handling
Discussion
I can't recall how many times over the years I have read about how challenging 911 handling is and how it has been brought under control over the years by Porsche. However, this doesn't fit in with my own experience. I've owned 911 models ranging from 1972 through 2009 and never had a problem. On the contrary, I've always found them brilliant. True I haven't tried driving too fast in poor conditions nor slammed the brakes on mid corner but that sort of behaviour would likely cause problems with most cars (at least without full traction and stability control).
I even had my first drive a few weeks back in a short-wheel based 911 from 1966. Apart from feeling a bit more nimble I didn't find it to be a problem (driving hard over Welsh country roads). Quite the opposite: it was brilliant fun.
Is it modern tyres and grippier rubber that make a difference? Or are stories of early 911-shaped holes in hedges just an urban myth?
I even had my first drive a few weeks back in a short-wheel based 911 from 1966. Apart from feeling a bit more nimble I didn't find it to be a problem (driving hard over Welsh country roads). Quite the opposite: it was brilliant fun.
Is it modern tyres and grippier rubber that make a difference? Or are stories of early 911-shaped holes in hedges just an urban myth?
If you're driving hard say for example on a hill climb etc they do swap ends easily when the driver runs out of talent - SWB even more so. For normal fast road driving I find my early 911 a doddle and far more engaging and fun than many modern high horsepower cars I've been lucky enough to drive such as 599, Macca, 991 TTS, 458 etc. In fact they're so good I seriously feel like buying every good condition early 911 I can get my hand on and hoard them like treasure but whats the point if you don't get to drive them!?! I tend not to give my 997 turbo a second glance nowadays unless the weather is not good. The 3.2C is surprisingly swift too for an older car. This mind sound daft but on a give and take British B road I don't think there would be much in it between an early 911 like a 3.2c or 2.7RS and a 997 turbo (only because you'd be in a hedge in a 997 turbo as its too quick and big for a typical country B road). I also prefer the handling on the earlier cars - don't ask me why but the earlier cars feel better planted and more like a sports car. By way of comparison my 997 can feel a bit too soft occasionally when hustling it along - I actually managed to bottom it out on a country road the other day. Progress? What progress?
When people go on about 911's being hard to handle it means 1 of 2 things;
1 - They are a crap driver
2 - They are driving it incorrectly, and probably like a FWD hatchback!
As long as a 911s suspension is in good condition and set up correctly, it will go around corners just fine!
If you want, you can compromise a little speed into the corner and use that great traction to get on the power far earlier than most front engined cars! Start learning how to trail brake and control the weight transfer correctly and you will experience one of motorings great driving pleasures.
1 - They are a crap driver
2 - They are driving it incorrectly, and probably like a FWD hatchback!
As long as a 911s suspension is in good condition and set up correctly, it will go around corners just fine!
If you want, you can compromise a little speed into the corner and use that great traction to get on the power far earlier than most front engined cars! Start learning how to trail brake and control the weight transfer correctly and you will experience one of motorings great driving pleasures.
Edited by mollytherocker on Monday 7th July 21:44
Hey molly,sounds like you know what you are doing
I saw a 1973 911 do a standing start at a hillclimb and passed the 64 feet marker in 1.92 secs,thats more than 1 g.there aint many modern cars that can match it.The best traction of any sports car wet or dry,and no traction control apart from the right foot.!
I saw a 1973 911 do a standing start at a hillclimb and passed the 64 feet marker in 1.92 secs,thats more than 1 g.there aint many modern cars that can match it.The best traction of any sports car wet or dry,and no traction control apart from the right foot.!
Handle brilliantly as long you avoid swapping ends under a) trail braking / leaving it too late to brake on turn in and b) lift off when committed. Two errors that forged the ill mannered reputation in the early days.
Most impressive bit for me is wet handling - particularly ability to get the power down early. Just squats and goes.
Most impressive bit for me is wet handling - particularly ability to get the power down early. Just squats and goes.
Yellow491 said:
Hey molly,sounds like you know what you are doing
I saw a 1973 911 do a standing start at a hillclimb and passed the 64 feet marker in 1.92 secs,thats more than 1 g.there aint many modern cars that can match it.The best traction of any sports car wet or dry,and no traction control apart from the right foot.!
I am just a keen amateur fella, nothing special at all.I saw a 1973 911 do a standing start at a hillclimb and passed the 64 feet marker in 1.92 secs,thats more than 1 g.there aint many modern cars that can match it.The best traction of any sports car wet or dry,and no traction control apart from the right foot.!
I enjoy the challenge of getting the best out of them, which is why I like the older analogue cars. You cant rely on any help, its just you!
IMI A said:
By way of comparison my 997 can feel a bit too soft occasionally when hustling it along - I actually managed to bottom it out on a country road the other day. Progress? What progress?
Weight is the enemy. A 2.7RS is around 1000kg, a 3.2 Carrera around 1200kg. 991 Turbo S I am guessing comes in at 1650kg. Trying to harness all that extra mass is not an easy task. Whilst some has come around because of safety legislation a lot of it is to do with all the extra toys and nanny state electronics that these bloated 911's have graemel said:
Weight is the enemy. A 2.7RS is around 1000kg, a 3.2 Carrera around 1200kg. 991 Turbo S I am guessing comes in at 1650kg. Trying to harness all that extra mass is not an easy task. Whilst some has come around because of safety legislation a lot of it is to do with all the extra toys and nanny state electronics that these bloated 911's have
Thats the irony isn't it? The heavier they get, the more power they pile on and the more electronics are required to reign it all in. This makes it even heavier and so we need more power and more....etc etc!They need to get all of the s
te off and get the weight down! Then they can put smaller tyres and brakes on which means even lower weight etc etc etc!Rant over!
mollytherocker said:
Thats the irony isn't it? The heavier they get, the more power they pile on and the more electronics are required to reign it all in. This makes it even heavier and so we need more power and more....etc etc!
They need to get all of the ste off and get the weight down! Then they can put smaller tyres and brakes on which means even lower weight etc etc etc!
Rant over!
More electronics = faster car. This trend isn't going to stop anytime soon as the number of buyers who are willing to buy a slower more stripped down but more engaging car to drive are vastly outnumbered by those who point to various performance claims/toys etc in the newer cars.....They need to get all of the s
te off and get the weight down! Then they can put smaller tyres and brakes on which means even lower weight etc etc etc!Rant over!
isaldiri said:
More electronics = faster car. This trend isn't going to stop anytime soon as the number of buyers who are willing to buy a slower more stripped down but more engaging car to drive are vastly outnumbered by those who point to various performance claims/toys etc in the newer cars.....
When you read enthusiasts on here talking about 0.2 secs comparisons meaning one car is 'better' than another, you know all is lost.
Without proper weight transfer, A light front end - understeering 911 is no myth....
Also snap oversteer at higher speeds I imagine was a problem for less experienced and skilled drivers in days without traction systems (lets not forget the looking cool power oversteer)
It's just the handeling characteristics of a rear engined car ... Becomes a lot more clear driving in the wet
Also snap oversteer at higher speeds I imagine was a problem for less experienced and skilled drivers in days without traction systems (lets not forget the looking cool power oversteer)
It's just the handeling characteristics of a rear engined car ... Becomes a lot more clear driving in the wet
stef1808 said:
Without proper weight transfer, A light front end - understeering 911 is no myth....
Also snap oversteer at higher speeds I imagine was a problem for less experienced and skilled drivers in days without traction systems (lets not forget the looking cool power oversteer crashes)
It's just the handeling characteristics of a rear engined car ... Becomes a lot more clear driving in the wet
Also snap oversteer at higher speeds I imagine was a problem for less experienced and skilled drivers in days without traction systems (lets not forget the looking cool power oversteer crashes)
It's just the handeling characteristics of a rear engined car ... Becomes a lot more clear driving in the wet
mollytherocker said:
When people go on about 911's being hard to handle it means 1 of 2 things;
1 - They are a crap driver
2 - They are driving it incorrectly, and probably like a FWD hatchback!
this, :-) 1 - They are a crap driver
2 - They are driving it incorrectly, and probably like a FWD hatchback!
but the forum has gone so far down hill that's not a suprize what gets said here these days.
stef1808 said:
Without proper weight transfer, A light front end - understeering 911 is no myth....
Also snap oversteer at higher speeds I imagine was a problem for less experienced and skilled drivers in days without traction systems (lets not forget the looking cool power oversteer)
It's just the handeling characteristics of a rear engined car ... Becomes a lot more clear driving in the wet
Sounds like the 911 handling like this needs a good set up and good tyres,and a little understanding how these cars work.Also snap oversteer at higher speeds I imagine was a problem for less experienced and skilled drivers in days without traction systems (lets not forget the looking cool power oversteer)
It's just the handeling characteristics of a rear engined car ... Becomes a lot more clear driving in the wet
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff