Porsche 991 Information Released

  • Thread starter Tornado
  • 1,004 comments
  • 82,894 views
The best news of all. Let your turbo fans or people who buy 911s for the cachet have a turbo Carrera and let the purist have the modern interpretation of the classic 911 formula.
 
The current Turbo is ~510bhp and the S is ~550bhp so I'm going to go with 530 and 580 for the new ones.
 
Facelift is out and about.


image.jpg


I'm impressed by its Nurburgring lap time, but the fact that both are turbocharged makes me a bit depressed. I guess even the 911 has to comply with the strict demands.

3 liter flat-6 turbo? I'm seeing a modern 930 from those two.
 
I'll hold off an opinion until I see what comments on the throttle response and noise are like now it's turbo'ed.

I'd expect the handling to be pretty much unchanged (would be nice if they've given it the GT3RS steering set-up and PDK maps), with the new engine giving better acceleration (outright and through the gears), faster top speed, lower emissions and better MPG.

If they've managed to preserve the lovely flat 6 noise and sharp throttle, should be a winner.
 
I'll hold off an opinion until I see what comments on the throttle response and noise are like now it's turbo'ed.

I'd expect the handling to be pretty much unchanged (would be nice if they've given it the GT3RS steering set-up and PDK maps), with the new engine giving better acceleration (outright and through the gears), faster top speed, lower emissions and better MPG.

If they've managed to preserve the lovely flat 6 noise and sharp throttle, should be a winner.

I think we're pretty much passed throttle response issues with how good turbo charged cars are now.
 
I think we're pretty much passed throttle response issues with how good turbo charged cars are now.

I haven't driven many modern petrol turbos, and whilst I hear lag is pretty much eradicated, I'd love to see if they have fixed their inability to match a tiny throttle input with a corresponding tiny change in power.
 
I haven't driven many modern petrol turbos, and whilst I hear lag is pretty much eradicated, I'd love to see if they have fixed their inability to match a tiny throttle input with a corresponding tiny change in power.
In my experience... they haven't. They've got very, very close, and the calibration of an electronic throttle has almost as much to do with it these days as aspiration (some NA cars still have poor responses), but the best NA engines are still that much sharper than turbos.

When we got a bunch of super saloons together, all but one - a Panamera GTS - was turbocharged. And the GTS was the only car whose power delivery I felt I could meter out exactly as I wanted it.
 
Do modern day turbos have the same problem that some of the vans I drive have, in that when you lift off the throttle it still accelerates for second or so after you've taken your foot off?
 
Do modern day turbos have the same problem that some of the vans I drive have, in that when you lift off the throttle it still accelerates for second or so after you've taken your foot off?
Well my old 2003 TS Astra Turbo had instant cut when you pushed in the clutch if that answers your question.

In fact it was soo instant it was quite addictive since the woosh sensation shook the car given the torque involved.
 
Not the clutch, but when you accelerate a bit and then lift off.
 
Do modern day turbos have the same problem that some of the vans I drive have, in that when you lift off the throttle it still accelerates for second or so after you've taken your foot off?
That sounds more like a slightly sticking throttle (or whatever the equivalent is in a throttle-less diesel) than it does an inherent design feature, but the large majority of modern cars will shed revs much slower than older ones.

I think @niky has a proper explanation for this, but I believe it's something to do with emissions regulations, and that closing a throttle slowly means you don't get a sudden burst of unburned hydrocarbons.

It makes some cars quite difficult to drive. Something like a VW Up sheds revs so slowly that you basically can't change gear quickly and smoothly at the same time. You can do one or the other, but try and slam through a change and you get a big lunge as there's a mismatch of road speed and throttle opening.
 
Well having just drove my Mazda 2 now, it does a Similar thing actually.

However it does have iLoop a form of KERS which is used as an Alternator instead of an actual Phyiscal Alternator that has probably got something to do with it.

Plus the Skyactiv engines have soo much witchcraft involved.
 
I still hate turbo engines after I drove what was supposed to be a good one, 1.6 turbo four (same as the Mini) in the LCI BMW 120i. It has no power from low revs and was really thrashy and then ran out of puff at high revs.
 
I still hate turbo engines after I drove what was supposed to be a good one, 1.6 turbo four (same as the Mini) in the LCI BMW 120i. It has no power from low revs and was really thrashy and then ran out of puff at high revs.
The layout of the Torque in the 120i (that is not an N20 though?) is similar to what most Economy Turbos do these days, produce big torque early and run out early similar to a diesel.

But a Twin Scroll Single tends to Hold that Torque till the end (atleast my experince with the M135i N55).
 
I still hate turbo engines after I drove what was supposed to be a good one, 1.6 turbo four (same as the Mini) in the LCI BMW 120i. It has no power from low revs and was really thrashy and then ran out of puff at high revs.
To be fair, some of that could be down to low miles. I've found a lot of the stuff I've driven quite tight towards the last few thousand revs, but some really wake up once they've been run in - our long-term Kia Proceed GT was a bit lethargic new but with 20k on the clock felt pretty quick.
 
As @homeforsummer says, it's down mostly to the electronic throttle. Delay on throttle tip in to prevent transitory lean conditions (NOx!), and delay on throttle lift to prevent transitory rich conditions. Even the best naturally aspirated engines now have that fuzzy filter between your foot and the throttle plate.

Would be nice if they built modern throttle pedals with haptic feedback that matches pedal position to throttle plate position. Just so you can "feel" how much opening you have.

Just a thought. I mean, they do artificial kickback for steering wheels... can't be too much of a stretch.

-

While some modern turbos do give you the linear power band you expect of a naturally aspirated engine, but you definitely can still feel the difference in response when you're playing with the throttle in dynamic conditions, such as autocross or drifting.

I don't doubt the new engine will be a compromise in some way. What remains to be seen is how minimal the compromise will be. As a friend said after the announcement, Porsche have been building turbocharged 911s for years. Chances are, they'll be able to take a good whack at it.
 
One name that hasn't been used in a while is SC. They could call it the 911SC. Or even...shudder....the 912.

Don't forget the CS (Club Sport) version of the mid-late 80's 911. Had only a mildly tuned version of the standard 3.2 Carrera's engine, but was stripped out of fripperies and given a tuned chassis in a similar way to the later GT3 and GT3RS.
 
Spot on... that's the feeling i want when I'm mid corner and I'm getting back on the gas 👍
I should add, that PDK has something to do with that too. It seems to avoid kicking down too early to another gear in auto mode, which can be disconcerting mid-corner in a turbocharged car with a lot of torque. And in manual, it's pretty much like an actual manual.
 
Wouldn't be an issue for me as I've only had one 'automated manual', an Alfa 156 Selespeed, and I almost never drove it in Auto mode. If I had a PDK I might use auto mode in town or on the motorway, but I'd not be using it when 'driving for fun'.

Another point for me is how the engine is mapped. I don't want a massive WOOSH of low rev boost that quickly trails away as the revs build... I want the power to build in a more linear manner through the rev range. The low rev turbo WOOSH is fine for impressing passengers, but for driving pleasure it's a PITA as it ruins the balance of the car mid corner.
 
Wouldn't be an issue for me as I've only had one 'automated manual', an Alfa 156 Selespeed, and I almost never drove it in Auto mode. If I had a PDK I might use auto mode in town or on the motorway, but I'd not be using it when 'driving for fun'.
Nor would I typically, but I have to say, modern autos have got so good at changing up and down when you want them to that I sometimes forget the manual option exists until the gearbox really does select a different gear from the one I'd actually want.

And yeah, around town I'll just leave it in auto. Commitment to doing things the manual way starts to take the piss a little when you're changing up and down yourself with the paddles in traffic.

Agreed on mapping too. It's the downfall of some current cars - I'm thinking GT86, where about 50% of the throttle opening seems to be mapped in the first 25% of pedal travel, meaning it feels quite lethargic between light openings and full throttle.
 
Nor would I typically, but I have to say, modern autos have got so good at changing up and down when you want them to that I sometimes forget the manual option exists until the gearbox really does select a different gear from the one I'd actually want.

And yeah, around town I'll just leave it in auto. Commitment to doing things the manual way starts to take the piss a little when you're changing up and down yourself with the paddles in traffic.

Agreed on mapping too. It's the downfall of some current cars - I'm thinking GT86, where about 50% of the throttle opening seems to be mapped in the first 25% of pedal travel, meaning it feels quite lethargic between light openings and full throttle.

Even though I was very much anti-automatic before I bought my car, I have to say that I have barely ever used the manual option on my DSG. In 'sport' mode the gearbox shifts up and down so seamlessly that it's pointless doing it yourself. I can't say I'm a total convert, I still really enjoy the process of using a traditional manual and the satisfaction you get from doing it 'just right' - but for my car, the auto/DSG version is undoubtedly the gearbox of choice for it. I only really ever use the paddles to force an upchange when going up steeper hills when it decides to hold a lower gear. It has enough torque to climb them in a higher gear than it thinks it does without bogging down.

The only real niggle I have with it is, as you said, the lethargic throttle response you get at smaller throttle openings in regular auto mode. At upto say 15-20% pedal travel the response from standstill is virtually none. You end up giving it more throttle and it suddenly wakes up and lurches you forward, even when being careful. Makes smooth city driving a real challenge. Wish it had the option of Sport Mode throttle response with regular mode automated up changes. I guess more recent versions of the DSG and its software mapping make for smoother progress.
 
Software is a huge part of it. I've spent the last few days in a new BMW 335d and honestly the 8-speed ZF in that is magnificent. It rides the torque rather than changing down when you're in Eco Pro or Comfort, it sharpens everything up and uses a few more revs in Sport (without needlessly hanging onto gears when you're obviously not accelerating), and if you use the paddles they're as responsive as any DCT I've used.

A Jag XE with ostensibly the same transmission... not so much. But then I found out last week that ZF leaves about 20 percent of software wiggle room in the gearboxes it sends out. BMW uses that full 20 percent to refine the way the 'box works... some other manufacturers probably don't.

Back to Porsche and PDK, that varies from car to car. I wasn't keen in the 911, but then I wasn't overly keen on the seven-speed manual either. But PDK in a Panamera seems to work as well as any automatic transmission I've ever used.
 

Latest Posts

Back