So the test driving begins - TT RS!

[Fr0dders]

no you wouldnt

Just get a yellow one with a big sticker on the front that says "move out of the way peasants" and you'll be laughing

 

[rypt]

How much are imported Ford Falcons?

 

[Besty]

My slagging off of the C4S may have been crude and did not come across as a factual argument but, I will stick by it.

I have to question how many Porsche's some of you guys have driven to think that the C4S is the performance pinnacle of the 911 range. Maybe they are a good 2nd hand buy but, in comparison to a C2S that is all they are. I don't mean any offense to C4S owners in this statement but they are not a true drivers car.

Before you eat me for breakfast, allow me to illustrate my argument with some facts.

We are talking up to 250Kg difference between a 987 class car and a C4S and most of that weight is added at the wrong places (front and rear).

This makes a massive difference in the performance and handling of the car. Ceramics are a waste of money when you weigh in at almost the same as an SUV, an exaggeration but it stands up to scrutiny

The Gen2 Turbo won't suffer from the outright speed problems as it has a nuclear reactor for an engine which means that the power-to-weight ratio is blown to pieces but at £115k in a decent spec, you need to be committed to pick it over the GT3 which, is the best car I have ever driven.

The 997 C4S Gen1 is a slower car than a Gen2 Cayman S in hot spec, this is a factual statement.

The Boxster Spyder is faster than a C4S Gen2, this is a factual statement based around personal experience (amateur road and track work) and available technical information. I would assume from this that the Cayman R is quicker still.

Both of these mid-engine cars are quicker due to power to weight and weight distribution.

This is why the Gen1 RS cars use the shell of the C4S but not the running gear, it is just too heavy and does not provide significant performance increases to justify the cost.

The C4S is aimed at people who live in snowy/icy conditions for large parts of the year so they do not lose 911 sales, it is not the performance model of the 911 range.

 

[Housey]

Let me guess, you own a Boxster?

 

[Gibbo]

My slagging off of the C4S may have been crude and did not come across as a factual argument but, I will stick by it.

I have to question how many Porsche's some of you guys have driven to think that the C4S is the performance pinnacle of the 911 range. Maybe they are a good 2nd hand buy but, in comparison to a C2S that is all they are. I don't mean any offense to C4S owners in this statement but they are not a true drivers car.

Before you eat me for breakfast, allow me to illustrate my argument with some facts.

We are talking up to 250Kg difference between a 987 class car and a C4S and most of that weight is added at the wrong places (front and rear).

This makes a massive difference in the performance and handling of the car. Ceramics are a waste of money when you weigh in at almost the same as an SUV, an exaggeration but it stands up to scrutiny

The Gen2 Turbo won't suffer from the outright speed problems as it has a nuclear reactor for an engine which means that the power-to-weight ratio is blown to pieces but at £115k in a decent spec, you need to be committed to pick it over the GT3 which, is the best car I have ever driven.

The 997 C4S Gen1 is a slower car than a Gen2 Cayman S in hot spec, this is a factual statement.

The Boxster Spyder is faster than a C4S Gen2, this is a factual statement based around personal experience (amateur road and track work) and available technical information. I would assume from this that the Cayman R is quicker still.

Both of these mid-engine cars are quicker due to power to weight and weight distribution.

This is why the Gen1 RS cars use the shell of the C4S but not the running gear, it is just too heavy and does not provide significant performance increases to justify the cost.

The C4S is aimed at people who live in snowy/icy conditions for large parts of the year so they do not lose 911 sales, it is not the performance model of the 911 range.

So your saying a Cayman S is quicker than a C4S? If so can you back this up with any factual evidence?

Also a C4S is what 50-70kh heavier maximum than the 1390kg C2S model and most of that extra weight is over the front end of the C4S. Surely the extra weight in the front end is a benefit to the C4S in some ways not to mention its 4WD system as well. Surely the C4S just feels a little nose heavier and bit more sure footed and not quite as edgy as the C2S, but apart from that its still a Porsche 911 with razer sharp steering and fantastic handling.

The 2009 Cayman S onwards got LSD and new 3.4l engine producing 320BHP. This has been tested to achieve 60mph in as little as 4.8s-5.1s and get too 100mph in 12s flat.

I don't need to say but all of that is slower than a 2006 C4S which develops 355BHP and has been tested to hit 60mph in as little as 4.2s and 100mph in 10.5s region.

So what makes you believe the Cayman S is faster when all test show the C4S to be quicker?

 

[panthro]

How much are imported Ford Falcons?

Way too much to make it a worthwhile choice. Plus I wouldnt compare a Falcon to any of the shortlisted cars.

 

[Fr0dders]

The Taurus SHO is the car that should have been sold here as the Mondeo ST.

But neither the Mondeo ST or Taurus SHO are aimed at the Evo X. As said above, not really comparable to anything mentioned here.

 

[Besty]

Factual information is one thing, subjectively speaking the Cayman S is the faster drive for me.

The Power-to-weight figure should guide you as to the general performance of the cars without getting too geeky about the numbers.

C4S Gen 1 = 226 BHP/Tonne
Cayman S Gen 2 = 229 BHP/Tonne

The 0-60, 0-100 times are in the same ball-park, due to the extra engine displacement in the C4S, the gap above 100 will obviously widen.

The 1/4 mile times are almost identical, I would expect that the Cayman's use of PDK and Launch control would help it against the added grip of the Gen 1 C4S from a standing start.

Lap times are 3 seconds quicker in the Cayman S favour, the source I use is:

http://www.autozeitung.de/vergleichstest

For the Gen2 C4S, on the same track, this becomes a 2 second victory for the C4S, it will be wider on some tracks.

The times Walter Rohl posted on the 'Ring for the Gen2 C4S against the Gen2 Cayman S are about 1.5 seconds apart.

 

[DM]

My slagging off of the C4S may have been crude and did not come across as a factual argument but, I will stick by it.

I have to question how many Porsche's some of you guys have driven to think that the C4S is the performance pinnacle of the 911 range. Maybe they are a good 2nd hand buy but, in comparison to a C2S that is all they are. I don't mean any offense to C4S owners in this statement but they are not a true drivers car.

Before you eat me for breakfast, allow me to illustrate my argument with some facts.

We are talking up to 250Kg difference between a 987 class car and a C4S and most of that weight is added at the wrong places (front and rear).

This makes a massive difference in the performance and handling of the car. Ceramics are a waste of money when you weigh in at almost the same as an SUV, an exaggeration but it stands up to scrutiny

The Gen2 Turbo won't suffer from the outright speed problems as it has a nuclear reactor for an engine which means that the power-to-weight ratio is blown to pieces but at £115k in a decent spec, you need to be committed to pick it over the GT3 which, is the best car I have ever driven.

The 997 C4S Gen1 is a slower car than a Gen2 Cayman S in hot spec, this is a factual statement.

The Boxster Spyder is faster than a C4S Gen2, this is a factual statement based around personal experience (amateur road and track work) and available technical information. I would assume from this that the Cayman R is quicker still.

Both of these mid-engine cars are quicker due to power to weight and weight distribution.

This is why the Gen1 RS cars use the shell of the C4S but not the running gear, it is just too heavy and does not provide significant performance increases to justify the cost.

The C4S is aimed at people who live in snowy/icy conditions for large parts of the year so they do not lose 911 sales, it is not the performance model of the 911 range.

Iv driven lots and lots of Porsches and all i can say to you is you must live on a race track because 9/10s of what you have just said makes jack **** difference day to day.

Saying that i will also add that i dont bother trying for any land speed records when i do drive, but ask yourself, because life is about balance is it not, is it not sometimes better to sacrifice a tiny edge in outright performance in favour of rock solid handling, bearing in mind our man Gibbo lives in mainland UK with 300 days of rain, not a bone dry little Britain based at Brands Hatch?

 

[Gibbo]

Factual information is one thing, subjectively speaking the Cayman S is the faster drive for me.

The Power-to-weight figure should guide you as to the general performance of the cars without getting too geeky about the numbers.

C4S Gen 1 = 226 BHP/Tonne
Cayman S Gen 2 = 229 BHP/Tonne

The 0-60, 0-100 times are in the same ball-park, due to the extra engine displacement in the C4S, the gap above 100 will obviously widen.

The 1/4 mile times are almost identical, I would expect that the Cayman's use of PDK and Launch control would help it against the added grip of the Gen 1 C4S from a standing start.

Lap times are 3 seconds quicker in the Cayman S favour, the source I use is:

http://www.autozeitung.de/vergleichstest

For the Gen2 C4S, on the same track, this becomes a 2 second victory for the C4S, it will be wider on some tracks.

The times Walter Rohl posted on the 'Ring for the Gen2 C4S against the Gen2 Cayman S are about 1.5 seconds apart.

On the road power to weight means very little. Its more down to BHP, torque and displacement which is something the 911 wins on everytime.

The 0-60, 0-100 and 1/4 mile are not even remotely close.
0-60mph 911 C4S been tested as low as 3.8s, but 4.2s is what most achieve, the best Cayman S time is 4.8s with most struggling to hit 5s. Thats a whole second.
0-100mph the gap widens more, Cayman S is above 12s, C4S has been known to hit practically 10s flat, with most achieving 10.5s.
Above 100mph the Cayman would not see which direction a 911 went as that is when 911's really get in their stride.
1/4 mile in a Cayman S is 13.5s @ 107mph against a 911 C4S time of 12.8s @ 111mph.

The difference between a 12s and 10s 0-100mph cars is huge. Because from a roll the faster 0-100mph car just walks away, its only off the mark if the faster car fluffs the launch you might have a chance.

That 1/4 mile time is a huge difference, do you realise how hard and how much money it takes to make a car 0.1s in the quarter mile, yet the 911 is over 1/2 second faster, performance wise they are not remotely close.

Also I've been reading rennlist, 911 and other Porsche forums and guys there who have owned both Cayman S and had C2S, C4S and other 911's all say the same the 911 is noticably faster and quite easily so. They consider it an upgrade.

I think the Cayman S is amazing, I've driven one breifly and liked it but it did lack grunt and I tried to keep up with a friends 911 C2S and it was hopeless to try doing so because the 911 just walked away there was no point at any speed where the Cayman S was quicker or able to keep up.

 

[DM]

Never mind all that its the bloke in the 997 that gets the girl, not the Cayman

 

[eidolon]

Also I've been reading rennlist, 911 and other Porsche forums and guys there who have owned both Cayman S and had C2S, C4S and other 911's all say the same the 911 is noticably faster and quite easily so. They consider it an upgrade.

There's no denying that the 911 is faster, it has to be otherwise Porsche would've dropped a clanger by releasing the Cayman however a lot of 911 and Cayman owners I've spoke to reckon that the Cayman is the better car to drive. It's not as fast but let's be honest, when you've got something that handles as well as the Cayman, do you really need any more power on the road?

What it doesn't have is the image that the 911 has, it's always going to be seen as the poor relative however plenty of "real" Porsche owners freely admit that it's a hell of a good car and in a lot of ways, the better car. Guess it just depends if you want a car that's going to impress the neighbours or not.

 

[Gibbo]

There's no denying that the 911 is faster, it has to be otherwise Porsche would've dropped a clanger by releasing the Cayman however a lot of 911 and Cayman owners I've spoke to reckon that the Cayman is the better car to drive. It's not as fast but let's be honest, when you've got something that handles as well as the Cayman, do you really need any more power on the road?

What it doesn't have is the image that the 911 has, it's always going to be seen as the poor relative however plenty of "real" Porsche owners freely admit that it's a hell of a good car and in a lot of ways, the better car. Guess it just depends if you want a car that's going to impress the neighbours or not.

I always here this but do you need more power on the road? My response is "you can never have enough power"

My Mustang was a perfect example, I could use all of its near 600BHP on the road and absolutely loved doing so.

Yes I will agree that when I drove the Cayman S it did not feel like it was gonna kill me, it was very sure footed and very quick on steering but it just lacked go, it was the 303BHP version, so was before the newer 2009 model which got 320BHP and LSD.

To make a Cayman S keep with a 911 its gotta be the PDK version with 320BHP and then you might just stand a chance if the 911 Gen1 driver fluffs up a gear change.

I do like power in my cars, there is no better feeling than selecting 3rd or 4th and just going wide open throttle and experience good acceleration and this is an area the 911 just kicks the Cayman ass.

However I have looked at tuning and Cayman can be taken upto 350ish BHP without spending a fortune and I'd say at those kind of power levels it won't hang around, add a PDK version into it and you should have a Cayman that can beat a stock 911 C4S.

But the C2S is quicker again, they have been know to gallop to 100mph in as quick as 9.6s and do the quarter mile in 12.3s

I like the Cayman but I just think the lack of grunt would get to me, I need to be as close to 400 horses as I can, not further away. But I shall give a Cayman S a test drive to see how the new 2009 car drives, might even try the PDK version.

 

[DM]

I know i keep banging on about the boring every day bits but also dont overlook 2 extra seats, that makes for a far more practical car.

 

[Joshy]

I don't know a lot about 911 but I honestly had no idea that C2S and C4S cars were that fast! The mistake I make is looking at horsepower and really 355 isn't all that impressive especially in something that doesn't seem all that light, but 0-60 in the low 4s and 0-100 in 10 seconds certainly is!

So in the real world a 997 C2S/C4S isn't far off the performance of a 996 Turbo apart from the placebo turbo effect? I know someone who is looking into 911s but had pretty much settled on a 996 Turbo because he thought 997 Cs were going to be too slow .

 

[Fr0dders]

Porsche have been specializing in bending the laws of physics for years now. Rear Engined Rear Wheel Drive cars have no right handling as well as the 911 does.

Advantage of that Rear Engine Rear Wheel Drive is all that weight sat over the back wheels. Gives incredible traction.

Think it was housey that said theres little point in getting a carrera 4 over a carrera 2 because of the great traction the 2 has due to the weight over the rear wheels.

 

[DM]

There is an advantage with a C4 it makes driving very much easier at the expense of a little bit of steering feel.

But another point to make is if you got 10 randoms off the street and told them to drive both cars 8 of them wouldnt tell which was the 4WD car.

You got to remember these are EPIC cars you can afford to lose a fraction of feel and performance for surefootedness, it still leaves plenty of epicness left.

Its not like giving up the turbo on an Evo.

As for a 996 turbo or a 997, its got to be a 997 surely, just a better place to be in every way, i know what the answer to that will be, well you can tune a 996 turbo easy, but really once you get to spending this money on a car, you just buy the right car first time round and enjoy it.

One trip to Chris at Centre Gravity to get whatever might be worn sorted and reset, then bang, your good to go.

 

[Housey]

But another point to make is if you got 10 randoms off the street and told them to drive both cars 8 of them wouldnt tell which was the 4WD car.

True that.

One trip to Chris at Centre Gravity to get whatever might be worn sorted and reset, then bang, your good to go.

Did my wife's MX-5 recently too!

 

[Besty]

On the road power to weight means very little. Its more down to BHP, torque and displacement which is something the 911 wins on everytime.

The 0-60, 0-100 and 1/4 mile are not even remotely close.
0-60mph 911 C4S been tested as low as 3.8s, but 4.2s is what most achieve, the best Cayman S time is 4.8s with most struggling to hit 5s. Thats a whole second.
0-100mph the gap widens more, Cayman S is above 12s, C4S has been known to hit practically 10s flat, with most achieving 10.5s.
Above 100mph the Cayman would not see which direction a 911 went as that is when 911's really get in their stride.
1/4 mile in a Cayman S is 13.5s @ 107mph against a 911 C4S time of 12.8s @ 111mph.

The difference between a 12s and 10s 0-100mph cars is huge. Because from a roll the faster 0-100mph car just walks away, its only off the mark if the faster car fluffs the launch you might have a chance.

That 1/4 mile time is a huge difference, do you realise how hard and how much money it takes to make a car 0.1s in the quarter mile, yet the 911 is over 1/2 second faster, performance wise they are not remotely close.

Also I've been reading rennlist, 911 and other Porsche forums and guys there who have owned both Cayman S and had C2S, C4S and other 911's all say the same the 911 is noticably faster and quite easily so. They consider it an upgrade.

I think the Cayman S is amazing, I've driven one breifly and liked it but it did lack grunt and I tried to keep up with a friends 911 C2S and it was hopeless to try doing so because the 911 just walked away there was no point at any speed where the Cayman S was quicker or able to keep up.

I think we will have to agree to dis-agree on this one. I don't place much value in 1/4 mile times as a measure of driving pleasure or outright cornering performance, if it were, we would all be buying rice rockets.

Power-to-weight and good distribution of it is why Lotus still produce some of the worlds best handling cars.

That said, if there is someone out there that can demonstrate a stock Gen 1 C4S posting a 11 second 1/4 mile time then I will eat my own car keys.

I was not posting about the C2S specifically, this is the opposite experience to the C4S although, the official 'Ring times from Porsche for a Gen 2 Cayman S beat the Gen 1 C2S time's, you can't really argue with that one, I can only assume that you were in a older Cayman on your test run or, trying to drag race.

I don't have any issue with 2nd hand buys but from brand new, the C4S is a hard sell at £95k in decent spec.

Anyway, good luck on the hunt, if you flex your budget you could get into a Boxster Spyder with Ceramics or a 996 Turbo S, both will be quicker than a lumpy C4S

http://www.911virgin.com/porscheforsale/177/BoxsterSpyder3.4/

 

[Housey]

Factual information is one thing, subjectively speaking the Cayman S is the faster drive for me.

The Cayman is an easier car to exploit.

The Power-to-weight figure should guide you as to the general performance of the cars without getting too geeky about the numbers.

C4S Gen 1 = 226 BHP/Tonne
Cayman S Gen 2 = 229 BHP/Tonne

The 0-60, 0-100 times are in the same ball-park, due to the extra engine displacement in the C4S, the gap above 100 will obviously widen.

The 1/4 mile times are almost identical, I would expect that the Cayman's use of PDK and Launch control would help it against the added grip of the Gen 1 C4S from a standing start.

Lap times are 3 seconds quicker in the Cayman S favour, the source I use is:

http://www.autozeitung.de/vergleichstest

For the Gen2 C4S, on the same track, this becomes a 2 second victory for the C4S, it will be wider on some tracks.

The times Walter Rohl posted on the 'Ring for the Gen2 C4S against the Gen2 Cayman S are about 1.5 seconds apart.

You can always spot the Cayman driver, he's the one telling the world why his car is better than a 911, which I'll never understand. I think the Cayman is the better car but it's cynical Porsche who is yet to make a proper one for they have the 911. It's only recently they put an LSD on it for christ sake and Cayman owners should simply smile and be satisfied with their epic car rather than often trying to tell anyone who will listen that it's quicker, better, more sorted, has a better layout and is just better than a 911. Much of this argument actually stands the test too but the reality is and they never seem to understand this one............it's not an icon!

Yet....