996 lighter than the 993 ? =Internet twaddle
Discussion
Keep reading on here people seem to think the 996 is lighter than the 993. These comments are most likely being made by passing Porsche enthusiasts not true anoraks.
Yes since '97 Porsche seems to have got into a nasty habit of using spurious unoptioned cars to quote their DIN weights from - but the true anorak can see past this:
The reliable German car magazine Sport Auto weighs all the cars it tests in the same way and here are some numbers:
1993 993 C2 272hp = 1363kg
1994 993C2 272hp = 1373kg
1995 993 C2 285hp = 1398kg
1998 996 C2 300hp = 1399kg
2000 996 C2 300hp = 1404kg
2001 996 C2 320hp = 1467kg
2003 996 C2 320hp = 1451kg
That should be conclusive enough to shut up the 993 bashers on the weight- issue your 320hp 996 weighing 1467kg has a power to weight ratio of 222hp/tonne compared to the old 272hp 993 @ 1363kg being 202hp/tonne - not a massive difference
Facts and numbers are here www.einszweidrei.de/
>> Edited by TB993tt on Monday 16th January 12:42
>> Edited by TB993tt on Monday 16th January 12:45
>> Edited by TB993tt on Monday 16th January 13:00
Yes since '97 Porsche seems to have got into a nasty habit of using spurious unoptioned cars to quote their DIN weights from - but the true anorak can see past this:
The reliable German car magazine Sport Auto weighs all the cars it tests in the same way and here are some numbers:
1993 993 C2 272hp = 1363kg
1994 993C2 272hp = 1373kg
1995 993 C2 285hp = 1398kg
1998 996 C2 300hp = 1399kg
2000 996 C2 300hp = 1404kg
2001 996 C2 320hp = 1467kg
2003 996 C2 320hp = 1451kg
That should be conclusive enough to shut up the 993 bashers on the weight- issue your 320hp 996 weighing 1467kg has a power to weight ratio of 222hp/tonne compared to the old 272hp 993 @ 1363kg being 202hp/tonne - not a massive difference
Facts and numbers are here www.einszweidrei.de/
>> Edited by TB993tt on Monday 16th January 12:42
>> Edited by TB993tt on Monday 16th January 12:45
>> Edited by TB993tt on Monday 16th January 13:00
TB993tt said:
Keep reading on here people seem to think the 996 is lighter than the 993. These comments are most likely being made by passing Porsche enthusiasts not true anoraks.
Yes since '97 Porsche seems to have got into a nasty habit of using spurious unoptioned cars to quote their DIN weights from - but the true anorak can see past this:
The reliable German car magazine Sport Auto weighs all the cars it tests in the same way and here are some numbers:
1993 993 C2 272hp = 1363kg
1994 993C2 272hp = 1373kg
1995 993 C2 285hp = 1398kg
1998 996 C2 300hp = 1399kg
2000 996 C2 300hp = 1404kg
2001 996 C2 320hp = 1467kg
2003 996 C2 320hp = 1451kg
That should be conclusive enough to shut up the 993 bashers on the weight issue - your 320hp 996 weighing 1467kg has a power to weight ratio of 222hp/tonne compared to the old 272hp 993 @ 1363kg being 202hp/tonne - not a massive difference
Facts and numbers are here www.einszweidrei.de/
>> Edited by TB993tt on Monday 16th January 12:42
So what? 996 is still quicker.
Wow, 3 mph top speed and 2 tenths to sixty according to porsche. For most 0 - 60 in 5.4 and 171mph from a cooking 993 is fast enough given all the other benefits.
The fact is you get a vastly better built car with loads of character, great feedback from the steering, throttle cable, plus the rod gearchange and pedals. And they sound absolutely lovely with the aircooled fan on the back. It's also the last porsche produced before the accountants really took hold.
A standard 996 feels like a very nice softer GT car in comparision, but the interior and controls feel more like a normal everyday hatch. No real sense of occasion for me. Perhaps that's why many 993 owners move up to GT3s.
It's a personal choice at the end of the day. I really wanted to upgrade to a 997S, took a couple of test drives then did a driving day in one. Almost convinced myself to get one, then drove home in mine and it felt so much more special.
The fact is you get a vastly better built car with loads of character, great feedback from the steering, throttle cable, plus the rod gearchange and pedals. And they sound absolutely lovely with the aircooled fan on the back. It's also the last porsche produced before the accountants really took hold.
A standard 996 feels like a very nice softer GT car in comparision, but the interior and controls feel more like a normal everyday hatch. No real sense of occasion for me. Perhaps that's why many 993 owners move up to GT3s.
It's a personal choice at the end of the day. I really wanted to upgrade to a 997S, took a couple of test drives then did a driving day in one. Almost convinced myself to get one, then drove home in mine and it felt so much more special.
Autocar has the 996 (early C2)at 1320kg & the 993 (late C2) at 1370kg.
I seem to remember reading in several places the 996 was lighter.
Perhaps in the 996 its the extensive use of aluminium - in the 996 all the suspension & sub frames are mostly aluminium, while in the 993 just the rear suspension is ?
R.
I seem to remember reading in several places the 996 was lighter.
Perhaps in the 996 its the extensive use of aluminium - in the 996 all the suspension & sub frames are mostly aluminium, while in the 993 just the rear suspension is ?
R.
Isn't it about time this ludicrous 993 v 996 nonsense was put to rest. Its as interesting as a wet weekend in Cleethorpes.
Its horses for courses, personal perference etc. There is no such thing as a "better" car as one person's preference will always get in the way. "Better" will always only come down to a game of top trumps.
Its horses for courses, personal perference etc. There is no such thing as a "better" car as one person's preference will always get in the way. "Better" will always only come down to a game of top trumps.
fulham911club said:
Isn't it about time this ludicrous 993 v 996 nonsense was put to rest. Its as interesting as a wet weekend in Cleethorpes.
Its horses for courses, personal perference etc. There is no such thing as a "better" car as one person's preference will always get in the way. "Better" will always only come down to a game of top trumps.
fulham911club said:
Isn't it about time this ludicrous 993 v 996 nonsense was put to rest. Its as interesting as a wet weekend in Cleethorpes.
Its horses for courses, personal perference etc. There is no such thing as a "better" car as one person's preference will always get in the way. "Better" will always only come down to a game of top trumps.
Bloody well said !!!!!
The thing is that the 'information' ends up in print and therefore gets an air of reliability. I believe that this month's Total 911 states that the 996 is lighter than the 993 it replaced.
Personally I couldn't care less since the difference in weight is minimal anyway (half a tank of fuel? Too many pies?)
Personally I couldn't care less since the difference in weight is minimal anyway (half a tank of fuel? Too many pies?)
rumplestiltskin said:
Autocar has the 996 (early C2)at 1320kg & the 993 (late C2) at 1370kg.
I seem to remember reading in several places the 996 was lighter.
Perhaps in the 996 its the extensive use of aluminium - in the 996 all the suspension & sub frames are mostly aluminium, while in the 993 just the rear suspension is ?
R.
Back when Autocar used to put all their cars on a weighbridge to measure wet weight there figures may have been relavant. I wish some magazine here would do this, plus put each car on the same dyno just like bike magazines have done for years. Would be nice for the anoracks amongst us.
abarber said:
Autocar has the 996 (early C2)at 1320kg & the 993 (late C2) at 1370kg.
I seem to remember reading in several places the 996 was lighter.
Perhaps in the 996 its the extensive use of aluminium - in the 996 all the suspension & sub frames are mostly aluminium, while in the 993 just the rear suspension is ?
R.
Back when Autocar used to put all their cars on a weighbridge to measure wet weight there figures may have been relavant. I wish some magazine here would do this, plus put each car on the same dyno just like bike magazines have done for years. Would be nice for the anoracks amongst us.
Quite pointless that would be really, as each magazine test features cars with different options fitted. It would only help if they instituted a policy to test only un-optioned cars, which will happen about 7 minutes after hell freezes over I reckon ;-)
The best you can do, IMHO, is work off manufacturer figures according to DIN or whatever... and even that is pretty hopeless.
Ciao
Zak
Hmmm.
20bhp/tonne is quite a bit and 48bhp overall is a lot. The brake/ton figure is good for nearly half a second to 60 and the 48bhp will be good for nearly +15mph, top end.
If you look at what company those bhp/tonne figures put you in, it all becomes a bit clearer.
Not knocking 993s though.
20bhp/tonne is quite a bit and 48bhp overall is a lot. The brake/ton figure is good for nearly half a second to 60 and the 48bhp will be good for nearly +15mph, top end.
If you look at what company those bhp/tonne figures put you in, it all becomes a bit clearer.
Not knocking 993s though.
zaktoo said:
Quite pointless that would be really, as each magazine test features cars with different options fitted. It would only help if they instituted a policy to test only un-optioned cars, which will happen about 7 minutes after hell freezes over I reckon ;-)
The best you can do, IMHO, is work off manufacturer figures according to DIN or whatever... and even that is pretty hopeless.
Ciao
Zak
Problem is quite a few manufacturers have sussed out the relevance (marketing) of the DIN measurement - ie everyone believes it and few indy mags actually do a weighbridge measurement - one can see that they (Porsche) are indeed correct in assuming the punters will buy it, based on some of the reactions posted here.
If you look at the actual test weights which Sport Auto did on the different cars (which include full full tank I believe) above, you can see that they are pretty close together for the same model (ie 272/285/300/320)so options don't vary that much.
Porsche's latest foray into "lightweight deception" was with the Carerra GT - the weight it quoted when it came out was 1380kg and this can be found in the back of most magazines - if you check the Sport Auto data the two CGTs they actually weighed were 1472 and 1473kg. Makes Porsches 1320 claim for the 996 look almost ballpark.
>> Edited by TB993tt on Monday 16th January 20:10
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff