M4 vs 911 base (991.2)

[asado111]

Porsche all day every day hands down.

[bmw0perat0r]

I too agree, Porsche is the way to go. Thoughts on 911 are simply that it is brilliant. I'm chasing the cayman gt4 - but if that doesn't pan out then I'll be looking at the carrera s or perhaps a turbo.

[W///]

[S65V8]

Originally Posted by dgp

911.2 is a lot quicker than 911.1 S based on car and driver's tests (0-60 in 3.4s vs 4.0 for 911.1 S and 0-100 in 8.5 for 911.2 vs. 911.1S 9.3s). Both were PDK versions, in fact Car and Driver noted 911.2 acceleration was roughly identical to 911.1 GTS

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-4

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-5

Very impressive, kills in the 60, and 0-100 roughly equal to the M4 which has a lot more hp/torque on paper. Lopping off 500 lbs does wonders

[ecf34]

I just test drove the 991.2 C2S today, some thoughts:

The power of the 911 is on par with the M3, I didn't notice any turbo lag. I know that the Motortrend video says there's a lot of turbo lag down low, but I personally didn't feel much.

The suspension of the 911 is noticeably softer than my M3, granted I do have passive suspension on my car. I rode in a friend's M3 with adaptive which is more comparable to the 911's suspension. The difference between normal and sport PASM is noticeable, and there's minimal body roll in both cars. As a DD the 911 is more comfortable for sure.

The steering of the 911 is lighter than in the M, not much road feel in either car though. I drove one with the variable ratio steering which I couldn't even tell until the GM pointed it out to me. I honestly prefer the steering in the M3 because the wheel itself felt better to hold, the 911's steering wheel (non-GT) wasn't as thick and as padded.

The 911 had the sport exhaust, which sounded pretty good. It had the burbling which I really liked. I agree with Motortrend that from the inside the exhaust sounds great, no turbo whistle at all. However, once you lower the window the turbo sound is blatantly obvious, whether that's a good/bad thing is up to you.

In terms of looks, it's a case of classic design vs. aggressive styling. I really like the front of the M3 but I think BMW dropped the ball when it came to the rear, it just looks ugly from the back. The 911 was the opposite for me, as I liked the rear with the 3D lights more than the redesigned front. I was really surprised at how good the ground clearance is in the 911, it's a lot higher than my M3 and I don't think the active front lift system is really necessary unless you live in a really hilly area.

Regarding the interior, there's really no comparison since my M3 has cloth interior vs. full leather in the 911. The quality is much better everywhere you touch, and everything just felt more solid. The front seats have plenty of room, but the back not so much. As a 6'0" guy I could squeeze into the back seats of the M4 but not the 911. I didn't really like the gauges in the 911, I know the 5-pod design is classic but it just seems overwhelming coming from my M3.

In terms of value, the 911 I drove stickered for $123k. Personally, I don't believe the 911 is worth the extra ~$50k over my M3 and I didn't come away loving the car. The driving experience is a little more visceral than in the M but the sacrifices in practicality aren't worth it. At this price I would be looking into the AMG GT, F-type SVR, and even the GTR.

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by ecf34

I just test drove the 991.2 C2S today, some thoughts:

The power of the 911 is on par with the M3, I didn't notice any turbo lag. I know that the Motortrend video says there's a lot of turbo lag down low, but I personally didn't feel much.

The suspension of the 911 is noticeably softer than my M3, granted I do have passive suspension on my car. I rode in a friend's M3 with adaptive which is more comparable to the 911's suspension. The difference between normal and sport PASM is noticeable, and there's minimal body roll in both cars. As a DD the 911 is more comfortable for sure.

The steering of the 911 is lighter than in the M, not much road feel in either car though. I drove one with the variable ratio steering which I couldn't even tell until the GM pointed it out to me. I honestly prefer the steering in the M3 because the wheel itself felt better to hold, the 911's steering wheel (non-GT) wasn't as thick and as padded.

The 911 had the sport exhaust, which sounded pretty good. It had the burbling which I really liked. I agree with Motortrend that from the inside the exhaust sounds great, no turbo whistle at all. However, once you lower the window the turbo sound is blatantly obvious, whether that's a good/bad thing is up to you.

In terms of looks, it's a case of classic design vs. aggressive styling. I really like the front of the M3 but I think BMW dropped the ball when it came to the rear, it just looks ugly from the back. The 911 was the opposite for me, as I liked the rear with the 3D lights more than the redesigned front. I was really surprised at how good the ground clearance is in the 911, it's a lot higher than my M3 and I don't think the active front lift system is really necessary unless you live in a really hilly area.

Regarding the interior, there's really no comparison since my M3 has cloth interior vs. full leather in the 911. The quality is much better everywhere you touch, and everything just felt more solid. The front seats have plenty of room, but the back not so much. As a 6'0" guy I could squeeze into the back seats of the M4 but not the 911. I didn't really like the gauges in the 911, I know the 5-pod design is classic but it just seems overwhelming coming from my M3.

In terms of value, the 911 I drove stickered for $123k. Personally, I don't believe the 911 is worth the extra ~$50k over my M3 and I didn't come away loving the car. The driving experience is a little more visceral than in the M but the sacrifices in practicality aren't worth it. At this price I would be looking into the AMG GT, F-type SVR, and even the GTR.

I've found my assessment similar.
Considering the 991.2 base is as fast or faster and much faster on a circuit, I think you'd need an m4 GTS to keep up with the S.
I think there's still a huge gap between anyone's electric steering and Porcshe's. They've got it nailed and the slightly thinner wheel and less padding adds to the connection, as they've always done. Never loved the squishy feel, but that's subjective.
As I've often said, while being stiff the 911 is just perfectly set up in its dampening and geometry that it soaks up broken pavement in a way I can't think of many other cars can.
I also prefer the sexy aggressiveness of the 911 over the more boy racer m3/4 look. That's certainly a subjective thing though.
Those cars you mention, you could be in a GT3 or turbo for those prices.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by TAL2GK

I'm trying to justify a 911 C2S Cabrio. I drove a base 911 yesterday and the build quality is fantastic. The drive and manual gearbox were also superb, but I do need the rear seats for my 6 month old son. I don't think the Porsche will work until he's in a front facing seat.

This will be a third car, but I'd want be able to go on weekend trips with the three of us.

The 911 will not work with any seat in the rear. You would have to put him in the front.

[drivethemachine]

So what's the verdict, is the base (NON-S) Carrera as fast as an M4 or not?
There is a significant price difference between C2 and C2S and I feel that I might be able to stretch to a base (instead of an M4), but the S just puts it over the cliff for me, especially in contrast to the M4.

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by drivethemachine

So what's the verdict, is the base (NON-S) Carrera as fast as an M4 or not?
There is a significant price difference between C2 and C2S and I feel that I might be able to stretch to a base (instead of an M4), but the S just puts it over the cliff for me, especially in contrast to the M4.

Base vs m4 it's close but the edge going to the 911. On track times I've seen so far it was over a second faster on a 1:3x lap.
Looks like you need an M4 GTS to keep up with the S from the track times I've seen in comparison. Same Hockenheim despite street tires on the 911 vs cup on the GTS (not to mention 80 hp and 100 torque).

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by drivethemachine

So what's the verdict, is the base (NON-S) Carrera as fast as an M4 or not?
There is a significant price difference between C2 and C2S and I feel that I might be able to stretch to a base (instead of an M4), but the S just puts it over the cliff for me, especially in contrast to the M4.

Here is a test of the 991.2 S model.

Hockenheim is 1:09.6 (on a street non cup tire) and the base car I believe is around 1:11.0 (or so I have been told). By comparison, m4 competition is 1:11.9 and m4 GTS on cup tires is 1:09.6.

Carrera S also ran 11.6@121 mph and 0-100 mph in 7.7 seconds or 1.1 seconds faster than the m4 and same as the AMG GT.

If you didn't think they were fast enough before, the base and S model sure are now. The track times before were incredible and now they're even more so.

BTW on the test with the AMG the S was 3.5 seconds faster around Sachsenring and only .4-.5 off the GTR and 991 GT3 respectively. Seems the turbo charging has made a strong case for the 911 and by Porsche.

[dgp]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Here is a test of the 991.2 S model.

Hockenheim is 1:09.6 (on a street non cup tire) and the base car I believe is around 1:11.0 (or so I have been told). By comparison, m4 competition is 1:11.9 and m4 GTS on cup tires is 1:09.6.

Carrera S also ran 11.6@121 mph and 0-100 mph in 7.7 seconds or 1.1 seconds faster than the m4 and same as the AMG GT.

If you didn't think they were fast enough before, the base and S model sure are now. The track times before were incredible and now they're even more so.

BTW on the test with the AMG the S was 3.5 seconds faster around Sachsenring and only .4-.5 off the GTR and 991 GT3 respectively. Seems the turbo charging has made a strong case for the 911 and by Porsche.

How fast was the AMG at the track?

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by dgp

How fast was the AMG at the track?

Uploaded the other page.

AMG was 1:36.80
991.S was 1:33.48

There's a few other notable times they laid out there too for comparison sake.

[dgp]

That's a poor time for AMG...slower than stingray vette...

[dgp]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Here is a test of the 991.2 S model.

Hockenheim is 1:09.6 (on a street non cup tire) and the base car I believe is around 1:11.0 (or so I have been told). By comparison, m4 competition is 1:11.9 and m4 GTS on cup tires is 1:09.6.

Carrera S also ran 11.6@121 mph and 0-100 mph in 7.7 seconds or 1.1 seconds faster than the m4 and same as the AMG GT.

If you didn't think they were fast enough before, the base and S model sure are now. The track times before were incredible and now they're even more so.

BTW on the test with the AMG the S was 3.5 seconds faster around Sachsenring and only .4-.5 off the GTR and 991 GT3 respectively. Seems the turbo charging has made a strong case for the 911 and by Porsche.

Any proof of 1:11.0 run by base 911.2?

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by dgp

Any proof of 1:11.0 run by base 911.2?

I don't. I was informed, 1.5 seconds slower for the base rwd 911. Given the old S ran 1:10.4 and the base C4 was 1:12.2 it makes sense (given the rwd base would be a little faster than the awd model).
Either way, 1:09.6 for the S is mighty impressive given its only making 370 whp and is beating cars that are track day specials and making a lot more hp.
Seeing what the turbo 911 are doing while not losing the penultimate driver's car makes me not worry about how the GT3 will be once it too goes to turbos. The new GT2 RS is going to be a world beater though.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by dgp

That's a poor time for AMG...slower than stingray vette...

Keep in mind that is a non-S. So significantly down on power. Missing trick things like electronic controlled diff, active engine mounts, adaptive dampers, race mode, etc. The equipment on the S all adds up to a much quicker lap time. There is a reason the non-S starts $20k less.

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

Keep in mind that is a non-S. So significantly down on power. Missing trick things like electronic controlled diff, active engine mounts, adaptive dampers, race mode, etc. The equipment on the S all adds up to a much quicker lap time. There is a reason the non-S starts $20k less.

This is true, however, here is what I was able to find for the GT-S. Still not in the 991.2S' league for this track at a 1.7 second per lap slower. That's still quite a huge delta given the GT-S is making well over 100 more whp and is 300 lbs heavier.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

This is true, however, here is what I was able to find for the GT-S. Still not in the 991.2S' league for this track at a 1.7 second per lap slower. That's still quite a huge delta given the GT-S is making well over 100 more whp and is 300 lbs heavier.

To be honest not sure which is faster or if it really matters. We eventually will get a same day head to head. We've seen the AMG GT-S put up some really respectful lap times. Is it the fastest car out there no, but it holds its own. Randy did some really quick times at Willow Springs and Laguna Seca. Faster than 570S, TurboS, 458, R8V10 MkII, etc. Hell even the Stig surprised everyone on Top Gear. The GT-S is no slouch. Really liking the new 991.2 S and non-S. The new turbo powerplants have given them a huge jump in performance, especially the non-S. Also with a tuner friendly ecu. 991.2 is definitely on my radar in the future.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by drivethemachine

So what's the verdict, is the base (NON-S) Carrera as fast as an M4 or not?

They look to have very similar performance numbers. I think it is a toss up.

Originally Posted by drivethemachine

There is a significant price difference between C2 and C2S and I feel that I might be able to stretch to a base (instead of an M4), but the S just puts it over the cliff for me, especially in contrast to the M4.

Just drive both cars. C2 definitely does seem like the bargain 911 now.

[dgp]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

Keep in mind that is a non-S. So significantly down on power. Missing trick things like electronic controlled diff, active engine mounts, adaptive dampers, race mode, etc. The equipment on the S all adds up to a much quicker lap time. There is a reason the non-S starts $20k less.

Still a poor time...

[Tan]

911 is a great car, but I'd save that $20k for other stuff.

[BIGW0RM]

I let go of my 10 month old M4 today for this.
And I have no regrets. ...at all. Ok ok, I lie. The lack of cupholders suck. lol.

2017 911 S.