996 Turbo / Manual: how involving?
Discussion
I know this has been discussed many times so I am asking you if:
- you have driven both a 996/7 C2 and a 996 Turbo (or 4s)
- you are a keen driver and do look for involvement
About me:
- I am not really after the Turbo's extra power
- it's more because of the value it presents and the reliable Metzger engine
- my ideal car would be a 997S Gen 2 but it is above the limit, GT 3 too extrem (little boy in the back)
- I do look for driving involvement and do think the C2's steering does move much more in your hands than the Turbo's
- so 996 C2 sport pack ideal car but that breaking enginge...
Anyone?
Best,
Seb
- you have driven both a 996/7 C2 and a 996 Turbo (or 4s)
- you are a keen driver and do look for involvement
About me:
- I am not really after the Turbo's extra power
- it's more because of the value it presents and the reliable Metzger engine
- my ideal car would be a 997S Gen 2 but it is above the limit, GT 3 too extrem (little boy in the back)
- I do look for driving involvement and do think the C2's steering does move much more in your hands than the Turbo's
- so 996 C2 sport pack ideal car but that breaking enginge...
Anyone?
Best,
Seb
I would not discount a GT3. I have rear belts in mine and my little boy sits in there with more room than you would find in a c2, c4 or turbo. The GT3 is not extreme either if you do not want it to be. The car can be driven like a ford focus if you want. I think the value of a GT3 is also better than a turbo.
I suspect if the 997 gen2 c2s is outside your budget then so is a good 996 gt3.
I have driven both the 996 turbo and c2 - both are real world fast and have good levels of feedback and feel. The turbo is of course extremely quick and IMHO looks the better car with the turbo alloys and spoiler etc, however some prefer the more traditional 911 look in the c2s. The c2 is also pretty good on the track though anything more than occasional use could prove expensive. The one I drove eventually got the systemic problem with the oil breather putting oil into the engine.
Also some consider the turbo more of a daily driver because of its 4wd. It does mean you have more time out in the English sunshine
In term of reliability, the 996 c2s engine problems only effects around 5% of the cars. If you buy from hartec and any of good indys they will warrant you against this. The turbo, though much much more reliable, does blow the occasional engine especially if over revved - see previous threads.
I have driven both the 996 turbo and c2 - both are real world fast and have good levels of feedback and feel. The turbo is of course extremely quick and IMHO looks the better car with the turbo alloys and spoiler etc, however some prefer the more traditional 911 look in the c2s. The c2 is also pretty good on the track though anything more than occasional use could prove expensive. The one I drove eventually got the systemic problem with the oil breather putting oil into the engine.
Also some consider the turbo more of a daily driver because of its 4wd. It does mean you have more time out in the English sunshine
In term of reliability, the 996 c2s engine problems only effects around 5% of the cars. If you buy from hartec and any of good indys they will warrant you against this. The turbo, though much much more reliable, does blow the occasional engine especially if over revved - see previous threads.
Gents, people do go on about the reliability of the turbo engine. Yes, it is less likely to go pop but the general running costs on average more than make up for this. Hartech charge about £60 more a month for a turbo on the maintenance scheme for a 10,000 mile policy. The parts are also 50% more expensive. Accordingly, for me to run one over my 996 C2 (which is on the scheme) I'd be paying about £1000 a year more - a bit more I suspect. Turbochargers go wrong. There are more hoses and leaks etc. 3 radiators. Expensive tyres. Like for like the turbo is about £10k more expensive than my C2 also. That's £10K of interest / loan interest. Floor for turbo is about £16K for a mega miles well maintained car. Floor for C2 is £8K for a mega miles well maintained car.
Summary: turbo would have to be a better drive because the value is not really there. A GT3 on the other hand...
Summary: turbo would have to be a better drive because the value is not really there. A GT3 on the other hand...
It's as involving as you want it to be.
As has been said before, the Turbo's epic starship acceleration and power is its party trick, and its a great feeling! But the Turbo is such a capable car, very nimble and lively on the twisties when in the right gear and on the boil, and when you get a straight, the power catapults you down the road accompanied by a metallic, howl and whoosh of turbos, then if you want to pop to the shops its very docile.... hugely capable in all situations, and weathers, and a great place to be, comfort, toys etc, I personally think the Turbo looks stunning, wide, low, aggressive gaping mouth, filled up at the local Shell the other day and had to double take how beautiful a machine it was from the 3/4 view, noticed a few people front gawping too.... stunning machine, i am 10 months into ownership and came from a hardcore vx220, with a history of club level car racing too, didn't want a road going race car anymore, wanted something for all occasions, that excels in every situation rather than one trick pony....
Had driven 996 C4S / 996 GT3 / 997 CS and the Turbo by far for me was the best choice!
hope that helps
As has been said before, the Turbo's epic starship acceleration and power is its party trick, and its a great feeling! But the Turbo is such a capable car, very nimble and lively on the twisties when in the right gear and on the boil, and when you get a straight, the power catapults you down the road accompanied by a metallic, howl and whoosh of turbos, then if you want to pop to the shops its very docile.... hugely capable in all situations, and weathers, and a great place to be, comfort, toys etc, I personally think the Turbo looks stunning, wide, low, aggressive gaping mouth, filled up at the local Shell the other day and had to double take how beautiful a machine it was from the 3/4 view, noticed a few people front gawping too.... stunning machine, i am 10 months into ownership and came from a hardcore vx220, with a history of club level car racing too, didn't want a road going race car anymore, wanted something for all occasions, that excels in every situation rather than one trick pony....
Had driven 996 C4S / 996 GT3 / 997 CS and the Turbo by far for me was the best choice!
hope that helps
Schuse said:
I know this has been discussed many times so I am asking you if:
- you have driven both a 996/7 C2 and a 996 Turbo (or 4s)
- you are a keen driver and do look for involvement
Yes to both.- you have driven both a 996/7 C2 and a 996 Turbo (or 4s)
- you are a keen driver and do look for involvement
I've driven a 996 C2 (hard at Bruntingthorpe, amongst other times) and owned a 996 turbo for two years, and the difference in steering feel etc is nowhere like as much as some people on internet forums would have you believe (most of whom haven't driven both, I should add).
The 996 turbo is 100% 911 which means excellent steering feel and feedback, and I was always amazed at how communicative my 996 turbo felt after driving other cars.
Everyone is different, and there are (of course) some purists who just don't get on with 4wd (I wouldn't choose 4wd for a track car either) but for fast road it was brilliant - remember - it is 95% RWD most of the time. Some actually prefer the 4wd as it has more weight over the front wheels.
Turbo lag is absolutely minimal, to the point of imperceptibility.
In terms of running costs, someone once posted their running costs of their 996 Carrera and my turbo was no different, and it will really depend on the individual car. My turbo was very reliable during my ownership (which started at 72k miles).
ScienceTeacher said:
Roughly. Look at the price of brakes, tyres etc.
The turbo has bigger brakes / tyres than the NA cars so that's not surprising. So some consumables do cost more, but I think the fact that "parts are 50% more" is a fairly sweeping statement.We all have different views of what's affordable - I can't compare to an NA car, but I would guess my turbo averages about £2.5k a year for servicing and tyres. It manages around 19mpg on mostly short journeys and will hit 30 on a long run. Overall, for what it does - I think it's a surprisingly economical car.
Having said that, and to answer the OPs post - I personally would not describe it as an involving drive. When mine was a daily car, it was excellent at that and for occasional blasts. But it's currently more of a weekend toy, and for me - it doesn't succeed at that particularly well. A little too sterile.
davek_964 said:
ScienceTeacher said:
Roughly. Look at the price of brakes, tyres etc.
The turbo has bigger brakes / tyres than the NA cars so that's not surprising. So some consumables do cost more, but I think the fact that "parts are 50% more" is a fairly sweeping statement.We all have different views of what's affordable - I can't compare to an NA car, but I would guess my turbo averages about £2.5k a year for servicing and tyres. It manages around 19mpg on mostly short journeys and will hit 30 on a long run. Overall, for what it does - I think it's a surprisingly economical car.
Having said that, and to answer the OPs post - I personally would not describe it as an involving drive. When mine was a daily car, it was excellent at that and for occasional blasts. But it's currently more of a weekend toy, and for me - it doesn't succeed at that particularly well. A little too sterile.
There is an awful lot of crap talked about the Turbo etc etc, turbo lag, not involving, above all drive some for yourself and make your choice, The 996 Turbo/S was a top of the range 911, so is an amazing bit of kit, it does depend on how you drive it, where you drive and what you are looking for in a car / driving experience, for me it's more involving than my vx220, which was brash, noisy and like a go cart, reading endless peoples opinions doesn't replicate the feeling you will have behind the wheel when you decide to unleash 420bhp 
much better than a 993 too
much better than a 993 too
I ran a 996 C2 with sports odd and ends for 4 years, weekend and track toy kind of use. Great car.
Test drove both 997 C2S and 996 Turbo back to back. Absolutely loved the Turbo, the deal was done the second it hit full boost. Never thought about the 997 again. But each there own.
I've now had the Turbo coming up 5 years and still get a real buzz from it. It ain't cheap to run, but name another car of this performance that is. I generally average about £1500 / year.
Best advise ultimately is get out there and drive a few, see what YOU think.
Test drove both 997 C2S and 996 Turbo back to back. Absolutely loved the Turbo, the deal was done the second it hit full boost. Never thought about the 997 again. But each there own.
I've now had the Turbo coming up 5 years and still get a real buzz from it. It ain't cheap to run, but name another car of this performance that is. I generally average about £1500 / year.
Best advise ultimately is get out there and drive a few, see what YOU think.
I have had my 996 turbo since 2004 and still get a thrill every time I drive her. The great thing about these cars is you can just poodle around town or cruse up the motorway and she feels very comfortable and composed, but drive it hard and IMHO it is one of the most involving cars I have driven. Totally ballistic in a straight line and supper steady round the bends, perfect for B road blasts.
davek_964 said:
ScienceTeacher said:
Roughly. Look at the price of brakes, tyres etc.
The turbo has bigger brakes / tyres than the NA cars so that's not surprising. So some consumables do cost more, but I think the fact that "parts are 50% more" is a fairly sweeping statement.We all have different views of what's affordable - I can't compare to an NA car, but I would guess my turbo averages about £2.5k a year for servicing and tyres. It manages around 19mpg on mostly short journeys and will hit 30 on a long run. Overall, for what it does - I think it's a surprisingly economical car.
Having said that, and to answer the OPs post - I personally would not describe it as an involving drive. When mine was a daily car, it was excellent at that and for occasional blasts. But it's currently more of a weekend toy, and for me - it doesn't succeed at that particularly well. A little too sterile.
NA engine always more involving. Older variants always more involving but has side effects.
I am 8 months into turbo ownership and whilst the feedback at the wheel isn't as direct as a Caterham or Elise (that I've used on tracks), in the real world a turbo does all you need in terms of handling unless you are intending to use the public roads like a race track! Besides, under hard acceleration the speed shocks you into focusing where you are pointing and the front end goes very light until the everything balances up at about 75ish. I've also averaged 26.8mpg on a run with the mrs and the kids in the car. A superb car for most real world situations.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff