997 v 997s for poor B roads

[f1ashgordon]

Good morning members. Hopefully as a first post this isn't a resurrection of an old topic but having read many of them, the specific nature of my question has only been covered incidentally as part of the carrera v carrera s debate.

I will be buying a 997 in the next few weeks. I live in the city but my home is in west Wales and the roads I choose to drive, the reason I love cars, are back there. These particular roads are great driving but not brilliantly surfaced and often single track.
Given that most of the driving I'm buying the car for will be on these roads, is the ride of the carrera sufficiently better than the S?

I very much doubt the additional shove of the S will be missed at such low average speeds but I'd love to hear from members who've made a similar choice.

Budget isn't the issue, happy to spend up to £40k - potential for a 997.2 but slim pickings, but should a carrera manual appear, I'd go for that.

My preference is for the purest experience, toyed with the idea of a 4s, still considering, but the greatest pull is for 2 wheel drive manual on smaller wheels.

Tell me I'm wrong/right, comparative test drives on these roads as you can imagine are unlikely (OPC is over 100mile round trip).

And finally, no, don't want a cayman, appreciate it is likely the better car in these circumstances but I must own a 911 first.

Thank you for persevering through this first post.

[csmith319]

An S would actually be better in a lot of cases as PASM was standard and has more compliant suspension in non-sport mode than the standard setup and then firmer in sport mode.

Of course a base carrera with PASM optioned would give you the same and is more than quick enough - plus a fair bit cheaper.

[f1ashgordon]

I did not know that. Any issue with the lowered ride height and std 19" wheels ( finding 18" on a carrera mind you is pretty tricky)?

Yes, definitely cheaper, albeit rarer.

Thanks for the input.

To anyone else reading I'm pretty impartial, not in the slightest bothered whether the car has or doesn't have an s on the back; just after the most suitable car for the conditions.

Edited by f1ashgordon on Saturday 22 December 08:32

[F3RNANDO]

For poorly surfaced gravel and rain strewn single tracks - 4S all day long.

HTH

[wilkos]

997.2 Carrera is almost identical power to 997.1S and it is plenty fast enough for road use.
PASM suspension is very compliant, but go for 18's. I run 18's as a winter setup, and 19's in the summer, and whilst the 19's look better, the car is so much nicer to drive on 18's.

If you can find a .2 Carrera on PASM on 18's then I'd go for that. Should be well within your budget

[Helicopter123]

wilkos said:

997.2 Carrera is almost identical power to 997.1S and it is plenty fast enough for road use.
PASM suspension is very compliant, but go for 18's. I run 18's as a winter setup, and 19's in the summer, and whilst the 19's look better, the car is so much nicer to drive on 18's.

If you can find a .2 Carrera on PASM on 18's then I'd go for that. Should be well within your budget

+1

My 997.2 has PASM and having put the WInter 18's on the ride is transformed compared to the 19's and the road noise from the rear tyres is much reduced. It still handles beautifully and I'm now considering selling the 19's.

997.2 non-s has about the same bhp as the 997.1s and is worth reaching for IMO if you can find a good one at your spec. The DFi engine is a major advance and seems to be bullet proof thus far.

[Geneve]

Some years ago, several motor writers, inc Chris Harris, suggested that the plain vanilla 997 with ceramic brakes (lower unsprung weight) and, I think, 18" wheels, was nicer to drive than the 997 - especially on typical UK give and take road surfaces. However, think you'll struggle to find a 997 with pccbs.

[f1ashgordon]

Thanks for the input gents. 997.2 carrera is the goal but not many about.

Did see 997.1 carrera not too long ago with PCCB, but that's gone now.

Seems like my thoughts aren't too out there.

[Slippydiff]

Hope this isn't heading off topic, I think it's relevant.
Lots of comments regarding how much better the cars are on 18s. A bit of a double whammy with winter 18s, which by their very nature their construction will tend to be different to "summer" 18s ie generally more compliant. With their additional sidewall depth, again they'll provide further improved compliance.

Using the "wrong" 19 inch tyres will impact on the cars compliance massively.

My Gen 997 GT3 was supplied with Michelin Pilot Sport Cups, whose shortcomings in standing water we all know too well. In addition to their behaviour in such conditions, they were a very noisy and harsh riding tyre. With the rears half worn, I swapped to Michelin Pilot Super Sports all round. I was quite happy to run the car with these superior road tyres, even though it meant I may have stood to lose the benefit of the warranty on the car.

The increased wet grip, reduction in road noise and the benefits of the increased compliance were well worth the risk of being refused a warranty claim (though when I spoke with my local OPC about this, they were adamant that as long as any warranty issues were not directly linked to the fitment of the non-N rated tyres, they'd happily process any claim/s)

The MPSS made the car a lot more pleasureable to drive in many ways. From previous experience, I suspect that had I fitted the N rated Michelin Pilot Sport 2s the benefits wouldn't have been so numerous, specifically the road noise and compliance.

In my experience Bridgestones tend to be harsh riding. Continentals not so grippy but more compliant. Perhaps something to consider before tarring all 19" wheel/tyre combinations with the "ruinous" to ride and handling, tag ?

Edited by Slippydiff on Saturday 22 December 11:07

[wilkos]

18" summers would have exactly the same sidewall height as the winters.

My last 4 cars + the wife's have all gone down an inch in wheel size and rode much better on them (all on winter rubber though) . The wheel/tyre combination is lighter so lower unsprung mass, has massive advantages on both ride quality and also suspension control.

It's staggering how much dropping a couple of kg per corner of unsprung weight makes.

Lighter is the operative word, not smaller, but unfortunately the two usually go hand in hand.

Tyres do make a difference, but try smaller wheels and you'll be amazed at the difference.

[AML]

"And finally, no, don't want a cayman, appreciate it is likely the better car in these circumstances but I must own a 911 first."

Understand the need to scratch the 911 itch.... but whatever you do- Don't try a Cayman R on these roads- might just change your mind.
Good luck with the hunt and enjoy.

[Ian_UK1]

f1ashgordon said:

Good morning members. Hopefully as a first post this isn't a resurrection of an old topic but having read many of them, the specific nature of my question has only been covered incidentally as part of the carrera v carrera s debate.

I will be buying a 997 in the next few weeks. I live in the city but my home is in west Wales and the roads I choose to drive, the reason I love cars, are back there. These particular roads are great driving but not brilliantly surfaced and often single track.
Given that most of the driving I'm buying the car for will be on these roads, is the ride of the carrera sufficiently better than the S?

I very much doubt the additional shove of the S will be missed at such low average speeds but I'd love to hear from members who've made a similar choice.

Budget isn't the issue, happy to spend up to £40k - potential for a 997.2 but slim pickings, but should a carrera manual appear, I'd go for that.

My preference is for the purest experience, toyed with the idea of a 4s, still considering, but the greatest pull is for 2 wheel drive manual on smaller wheels.

Tell me I'm wrong/right, comparative test drives on these roads as you can imagine are unlikely (OPC is over 100mile round trip).

And finally, no, don't want a cayman, appreciate it is likely the better car in these circumstances but I must own a 911 first.

Thank you for persevering through this first post.

The difference in ride quality between Carrera/S Non-PASM/PASM doesn't amount to usable/unusable - it's just a question of degree. Any 997 Carrera or S will be fantastic to drive on most (all?) UK roads. It's very unlikely that it should be your overriding criterion when choosing the car you want.

As has been said many times on this forum, the best thing you can do is go and DRIVE as many examples as you can. That way, you'll know whether the the various differences between models are of concern to you or not.

Ian

[shoestring7]

f1ashgordon said:

I did not know that. Any issue with the lowered ride height and std 19" wheels ( finding 18" on a carrera mind you is pretty tricky)?

Yes, definitely cheaper, albeit rarer.

Thanks for the input.

To anyone else reading I'm pretty impartial, not in the slightest bothered whether the car has or doesn't have an s on the back; just after the most suitable car for the conditions.

Edited by f1ashgordon on Saturday 22 December 08:32

Its sidewall depth and unsprung weight that brings the benefits, not only to ride quality but to handling balance and steering. I also remember Harris' peon to the base Carrera on small wheels, his Cayman was likewise a 2.7 on 17" wheels, and he felt it was the sweetest drive. Certainly a C4S I tried for a weekend felt a lumpen thing after my own Cayman.

The only downside I could see in going for PASM is the potential cost of replacements. IMO dampers are a service item with a ~6 year/72k mile life.

My own choice in your situation would be a nicely specified 3.6 with 18" wheels and a set of carefully selected aftermarket dampers.

SS7

[Slippydiff]

wilkos said:

18" summers would have exactly the same sidewall height as the winters.

Wilko, I wasn't suggesting winter and summer 18" tyres would have differing sidewall heights, merely that dropping from 19" summers to 18" winters is a double whammy because the 18" tyres (whatever seasonal useage they're designed for) will have taller sidewalls in addition to which the contsruction of the winter tyres will further impact on their compliance compared to a summer tyre.

[SalesManager]

Do also try a Cayman with PASM.

[FisiP1]

Where roughly are you talking about OP? I'm in Mid Wales(right on the Elan Valley mountain road) so I have a perspective on the likely kind of roads you'll be wanting to tackle.

My first piece of advice may be redundant, because I understand if you simply need to get a 911 ownership experience under your belt that is fair enough. However, from my experience based on a long term ownership of a Gen 1 Cayman on 18s, a short few weeks in a 997 C4S on 19s, and a few months with a new 991 Carrera on 20s, the Cayman rides far better on Welsh B roads than the 911s. This may be because of the high rear tyre pressures required in the 911s because of the engine being rear mounted, or it might just be chassis considerations, but its noticeable on these roads.

Secondly, a 911 of the 996 generation onwards is likely too much car for these roads, it can be a little frustrating to drive a car that feels like it can't stretch its legs. The Cayman is better judged to UK B roads in that regard. The Cayman is also much easier and more forgiving to drive quickly in all conditions, even than the C4S.

I've never had any ground clearance issues in any of those cars, just as an FYI if its anything you are worried about.

On local A roads the comparison is switched somewhat, the agility and poise of the Cayman is far less advantageous and it can, at times, feel inadequate for effortless overtaking with the base 2.7 engine. At speed the ride quality comparisons even up too, the 991 is far more refined than either the Cayman or 997 C4S, both of which are around equal for cruising refinement IMO.

Sorry its a slight tangent from your original question, but that is more or less my experience on the general topic.

In short: Gen II Cayman 2.9, S or R is the car for these Welsh B-roads, the C4S feels far more like a car suited to quicker A-roads, but you'll have great fun whichever way you go.

[Callughan]

Compared to my 996 C4S I can cover ground much more easily in my 997 C4S. Saying that my 996 C4S covered ground much easier than the 997 gen 2 C2S courtesy car I had for a month.

[BnB]

FisiP1 said:

Where roughly are you talking about OP? I'm in Mid Wales(right on the Elan Valley mountain road) so I have a perspective on the likely kind of roads you'll be wanting to tackle.

My first piece of advice may be redundant, because I understand if you simply need to get a 911 ownership experience under your belt that is fair enough. However, from my experience based on a long term ownership of a Gen 1 Cayman on 18s, a short few weeks in a 997 C4S on 19s, and a few months with a new 991 Carrera on 20s, the Cayman rides far better on Welsh B roads than the 911s. This may be because of the high rear tyre pressures required in the 911s because of the engine being rear mounted, or it might just be chassis considerations, but its noticeable on these roads.

Secondly, a 911 of the 996 generation onwards is likely too much car for these roads, it can be a little frustrating to drive a car that feels like it can't stretch its legs. The Cayman is better judged to UK B roads in that regard. The Cayman is also much easier and more forgiving to drive quickly in all conditions, even than the C4S.

I've never had any ground clearance issues in any of those cars, just as an FYI if its anything you are worried about.

On local A roads the comparison is switched somewhat, the agility and poise of the Cayman is far less advantageous and it can, at times, feel inadequate for effortless overtaking with the base 2.7 engine. At speed the ride quality comparisons even up too, the 991 is far more refined than either the Cayman or 997 C4S, both of which are around equal for cruising refinement IMO.

Sorry its a slight tangent from your original question, but that is more or less my experience on the general topic.

In short: Gen II Cayman 2.9, S or R is the car for these Welsh B-roads, the C4S feels far more like a car suited to quicker A-roads, but you'll have great fun whichever way you go.

+1 to all the above ^^^

My old Cayman S was the perfect B-road blaster. But it isn't a 911 and that probably matters as much to you as it does to many, me included. But I'd add that, strictly IMO, the 4wd 911s don't add anything, indeed only detract from the 911 experience. You don't need 4wd for wet roads, especially as you'll be an experienced driver in Welsh conditions. And in winter you need winter tyres. Save yourself some money and weight and put some of the difference towards the right tyres.

[Technomad]

I'm running a 997.2 S under similar circumstances, only up single track and lumpen major roads in the Highlands (and we live half a mile off-road). I cannot praise PASM highly enough - it seems to cope with just about anything that gets thrown at it, never getting worse than moderately firm and not crashy at all (unlike any BMW with runflats). I'm running 19" for both summers and winters but would certainly have gone for 18s if I didn't have PASM. I can't even consider a GT3 hereabouts (daily splitter replacement would beckon) and nor would I go for the -20mm suspension option. IIRC, the PASM runs 10mm lower than a passive sprung car - not enough to make a huge difference.

[F3RNANDO]

Callughan said:

Compared to my 996 C4S I can cover ground much more easily in my 997 C4S. Saying that my 996 C4S covered ground much easier than the 997 gen 2 C2S courtesy car I had for a month.

Must try a 997 C4S but not sure I like the funny headlights!!