EVO magazine 911 article

[rlw]

Has anyone else read this yet? They drive most models from a 2.2 to a 991 and say, more or less, that the 964 and 996 are the nicest to drive. The 993 is damned with very faint praise as is the 3.2. The 997 is Ok but has lost a bit from the 996. The SC is also highly praised, more so than the 3.2.

Mirrors my thoughts, especially on the 993 which I found very dull. Also, as I have said before, my 3.2 was the worst car I have ever owned for many reasons, not least the driving experience which even my heavy old wide bodied 964 C4 bettered in every way.

And CAR has the 911 as THE car of the last 50 years. Neat.

[clockworks]

There's a long thread about this somewhere.
I must say, having read the article, I saw it slightly differently - the 964 and 996 were the cars that exceeded expectations, on the basis of what has been said and written about them over the years - rather than actually being the best cars.

[Slippydiff]

If I had a board rubber, I'd throw it at you

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Write a thousand times " I must keep abreast of the threads on PH"

[DYKWIA]

And read the article again! The 996 definitely did not do better than the 997, pretty sure the 996 got a more detailed write up because it was a surprise, plus the 997 is the outgoing model so a lot has been written about if over recent years, but as they say "the 997 sets the benchmark for all future 911s". Check the star ratings at the end, the only models to get 5 stars were the 3.0 SC, 964 and 997.

[rlw]

Slippydiff said:

If I had a board rubber, I'd throw it at you

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Write a thousand times " I must keep abreast of the threads on PH"

Sorry - threads need more obvious titles...................

[rlw]

DYKWIA said:

And read the article again! The 996 definitely did not do better than the 997, pretty sure the 996 got a more detailed write up because it was a surprise, plus the 997 is the outgoing model so a lot has been written about if over recent years, but as they say "the 997 sets the benchmark for all future 911s". Check the star ratings at the end, the only models to get 5 stars were the 3.0 SC, 964 and 997.

"sets the benchmark" to me says that anything after has to be better, not that the benchmark is the best. But I take your point nonetheless.

[DYKWIA]

rlw said:

"sets the benchmark" to me says that anything after has to be better, not that the benchmark is the best. But I take your point nonetheless.

I would disagree. If something is the benchmark then it is simply the standard by which all others are measured against. It is telling, therefore, that the hugely accomplished 991 only managed 4.5 stars whilst the more involving 997 scored 5.

[spareparts]

From the 2004 997 (that was a better quality 996)...
to the 2012 997 TurboS (that has been compared to the Veyron)...

...there has been no single 911 generation that has made as much technological or performance progress as the 997.

The 997 represents the zenith of the Porsche development curve, the finale of the 5 clocked dashboard and classic 911 cabin architecture. The 997 has rapidly approached the envelope of the laws of physics... anything after will be so incremental to make advancements a little superfluous and synthetic. Long live the 997.

[spareparts]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Indeed, in 2004 the 997 was only a refreshed 996.

But by 2012, the 997 has a completely new engine and new 4wd drivetrain, with:
PDK
DFI
PDCC
PDLC
VTG
PTM
Torque vectoring
Dynamic engine mounts
Almost halved the time to 60mph
20k mile service intervals
Only 225kg CO2 emissions
Etc...

That is more technological progress than any other 911 generation.

[PiB]

That's a good point about the 997's bells and whistles. Isn't the 997 somewhat bigger than a 996 so I don't see quite how it's just a "revised" version. I saw a 997.2 GT3 RS parked on a busy street near me and thought "that things gigantic".

But tut tut why in the states have I only gotten issue 174 only last week. I'm not calling "spoiler" on the OP (I had seen the previous thread anyway) but WOW that's over a months time delay difference!

[spareparts]

PiB said:

That's a good point about the 997's bells and whistles. Isn't the 997 somewhat bigger than a 996 so I don't see quite how it's just a "revised" version. I saw a 997.2 GT3 RS parked on a busy street near me and thought "that things gigantic".

But tut tut why in the states have I only gotten issue 174 only last week. I'm not calling "spoiler" on the OP (I had seen the previous thread anyway) but WOW that's over a months time delay difference!

Bodywork styling makes the 997 appear larger, and it is wider by a fraction. But is is mostly bodywork and optical.

A new dfi engine and viscous coupled 4wd--> PTM drivetrain are a bit more than just bells and whistles!

[spareparts]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I didn't say inter generation. I said within the same (intra) generation.

The tech introduced during the 997 generation is huge progress and advanced the 997 from a glorified 996 to sharing almost everything (including engine+drivetrain) except the new chassis with the 991.

[g7jhp]

The article is dependent on all models being perfect examples of their type.

I loved my 3.2 so much so I had a second which I also loved. I also owned a mint 993 (C4) which I didn't warm to as much.

Now on a 996 (turbo) which is great and next I'd love a 997 (GT3)!

[PiB]

I can't really comment since my only experience is with the 993 Turbo. I'm disappointed with the steering compared to the e36 M3 - chalk that up to the 4x4? Stock Monroe suspension is harsh. Slightly odd pedal placement that takes some getting used to. I had to completely change how I sit compared to the M3 but I'm used to it now. That said, it's beautiful. People love it. It's a charming mix (possibly bizarre) of old and new technology (of it's era).

Just my gratuitous humble opinion.