911 Porsche 911. The best car ever made?

[PC Valkyrie]

I never said it was better around the bends. Remember you said -> " In other words, is a rear engine layout better in anyway over a mid-engine layout??......I doubt it...." Don't go changing the game on me. Also, have you ever driven a 911? I've driven a 996 Turbo on numerous occasions and it has very little trouble negotiating turns.

Sorry, never meant to "change" the game on you. Remember, I made that original post 2 months ago.....LOL

But here is another thought after thinking more about this tonight. Does a rear engine layout actually improve acceleration over a mid-engine layout? In a mid engine car, the engine is just in front of the rear axle, while a rear engine car has the engine just behind the rear axle. In both cases, there is significant weight over the rear wheels, especially under acceleration when there is rearward weight transfer. So does the 911 actually have a technical acceleration advantage over the Cayman (if they both hypothetically had the same HP)?

And no, I've never driven a 911 (although I SO WANT to someday). I've only had the opportunity to drive a Boxter.

 

[Imhotep Evil]

Fancy electronics can't overcome physics. Manufacturers agree. They put warning signs all over the place. I don't know what you're getting at with "super fast fancy semi-automatic transmissions, active suspension and movable aerodynamics". These are features that any car can have. All I'm talking about is engine layout.

These can bend the laws of physics and negate partially or entirely mecanical/layout advatages depending on circumnstances. BTW the rear layout wasn't there because of fast acceleration. With them a rear engined layout doesn't make sense vs. a mid one.

An no, you can't put this on every car due to financial resons, you can put some tough.

Show me.

Now this is sad.
Another Porsche guy who doesn't know anything about the history of Porsche and that of the 911.

I never said it was better around the bends. Remember you said -> " In other words, is a rear engine layout better in anyway over a mid-engine layout??......I doubt it...." Don't go changing the game on me. Also, have you ever driven a 911? I've driven a 996 Turbo on numerous occasions and it has very little trouble negotiating turns.

The GT2 is the de facto 911 Turbo, wereas the de jure 911 Turbo is a very user friendly Porsche full of WRC and F1 developed driver aids. It's nicknamed by old Porche fans/owners/race drivers as the "even my grandma could drive fast thru a corner "Porsche" ".

You wan't to see how a "real" 911/Turbo can corner drive a 930 and/or a 964 Turbo.

 

[Porsche Guy]

Sorry, never meant to "change" the game on you. Remember, I made that original post 2 months ago.....LOL

You asked if there was any way in which a rear engine layout was better than a mid engine setup. I answered your question. I never said it was better for negotiating turns. When you made the post is irrelevant.

But here is another thought after thinking more about this tonight. Does a rear engine layout actually improve acceleration over a mid-engine layout? In a mid engine car, the engine is just in front of the rear axle, while a rear engine car has the engine just behind the rear axle. In both cases, there is significant weight over the rear wheels, especially under acceleration when there is rearward weight transfer. So does the 911 actually have a technical acceleration advantage over the Cayman (if they both hypothetically had the same HP)?

I read it in CAR magazine a while ago. I don't have the article anymore but they took a bunch of sports cars and did straight line acceleration and braking comparisons. They said the 911's rear engine layout was the best.

And no, I've never driven a 911 (although I SO WANT to someday). I've only had the opportunity to drive a Boxter.

Never driven a boxter but I want to. I've heard good things.

These can bend the laws of physics and negate partially or entirely mecanical/layout advatages depending on circumnstances.

They do not bend the laws of physics. If they did, physics would need to be rewritten.

BTW the rear layout wasn't there because of fast acceleration. With them a rear engined layout doesn't make sense vs. a mid one.

I don't know what you're getting at here.

An no, you can't put this on every car due to financial resons, you can put some tough.

We are talking about engine layout not electronic aids. They change the game and add to many "what ifs" to the equation.

Now this is sad.
Another Porsche guy who doesn't know anything about the history of Porsche and that of the 911.

You haven't shown me anything to prove this. If it's true, great. I learned something new. No need to be snobby about it.

The GT2 is the de facto 911 Turbo, wereas the de jure 911 Turbo is a very user friendly Porsche full of WRC and F1 developed driver aids. It's nicknamed by old Porche fans/owners/race drivers as the "even my grandma could drive fast thru a corner "Porsche" ".

Ok, so what's your point? Are you saying I'm a grandma? The 911 Turbo may be user friendly but like I said before, driving aids can't overcome physics.

You wan't to see how a "real" 911/Turbo can corner drive a 930 and/or a 964 Turbo.

Will do next chance I get.

 

[Imhotep Evil]

I don't know what you're getting at here.

After WWII the Porsche family lost control of KDF/future VW (because of the allies). So what he was left with was with some plans. Basically because of the conditions the only way to build anything was on existing material.
So instead of a pure/true sport car he build a VW Bettle roadster witch was named Porsche 356/1, in Gmünd Austria.
Later production was shifted to Germany and Porsche begun replacing VW components with their own.
Now the rear engine layout had nothing to do with sport car acceleration, but with the Bettle's space saving practical layout.
By pushing the engine in the rear, Bettle, or in the front, Mini, you save space, but you do get headakes too.

They do not bend the laws of physics. If they did, physics would need to be rewritten.
......................
We are talking about engine layout not electronic aids. They change the game and add to many "what ifs" to the equation.
......................
The 911 Turbo may be user friendly but like I said before, driving aids can't overcome physics.

They do bend the laws of physics, just look at the early 1990s Formula 1 cars (active ride), or the F1 Brabham fan-car, or the WRC cars (pre tri-Active Diferential ban).
Or for production, look the Cayenne and/or X5 who are sporty despite the fact of their mass and high center of gravity.
Or the 911 Turbo who is fast thru corners not because of its layout but because of AWD, electronical aids, active suspension, etc.
It's those things that neutralize its steering and keep the rear in its place.
On a 930 try do that ("driving" it as if it were a 996/997 Turbo) and you risk loosing your life. It wasn't knick named the widow maker or death on 4 wheels for nothing.


For more AWD, electronical aids ask Martinbo and chokoa.

Will do next chance I get.

Well good luck, maybe you'll get it.

Ok, so what's your point? Are you saying I'm a grandma?

Me nope, some old Porche fans/owners/race drivers.
The word they use for someone "driving" (usually a 996 or higher) Porsche 911 without knowing its history and quirks and isn't a very good/pro/race driver is poseur.

 

[Brendan Moore]

After WWII the Porsche family lost control of KDF/future VW (because of the allies). So what he was left with was with some plans. Basically because of the conditions the only way to build anything was on existing material.
So instead of a pure/true sport car he build a VW Bettle roadster witch was named Porsche 356/1, in Gmünd Austria.
Later production was shifted to Germany and Porsche begun replacing VW components with their own.
Now the rear engine layout had nothing to do with sport car acceleration, but with the Bettle's space saving practical layout.
By pushing the engine in the rear, Bettle, or in the front, Mini, you save space, but you do get headakes too.








They do bend the laws of physics, just look at the early 1990s Formula 1 cars (active ride), or the F1 Brabham fan-car, or the WRC cars (pre tri-Active Diferential ban).
Or for production, look the Cayenne and/or X5 who are sporty despite the fact of their mass and high center of gravity.
Or the 911 Turbo who is fast thru corners not because of its layout but because of AWD, electronical aids, active suspension, etc.
It's those things that neutralize its steering and keep the rear in its place.
On a 930 try do that ("driving" it as if it were a 996/997 Turbo) and you risk loosing your life. It wasn't knick named the widow maker or death on 4 wheels for nothing.


For more AWD, electronical aids ask Martinbo and chokoa.






Well good luck, maybe you'll get it.






Me nope, some old Porche fans/owners/race drivers.
The word they use for someone "driving" (usually a 996 or higher) Porsche 911 without knowing its history and quirks and isn't a very good/pro/race driver is poseur.

And the only thing I would add is the "inspiration" Porsche received from closely studying the rear-engine, aircooled V8 Tatra and the rear-engine, air-cooled flat-four Tatra designed by Hans Ledwinka. Ledwinka sued Porsche for copying his design and received a settlement from Porsche after a judge agreed with him.

 

[yaubrandon]

Well, I'm not sure about you folks, but I reckon the 911 is quite simply the best car ever created.

It's so perfect, that in nearly 45 years of life, Porsche only did bother changing the air-cooled engine to a water cooled engine and the 996 had the most hideously shaped headlights since the Ford "Froggy" Scorpio.

The 911, however, never ever had a "bad" version. At each evolution, the 911 just got better and better.

The current 997 iteration is highly reguarded as the best 911 since the 993.

Anyone agree with me?

Agree*10000

And the 996, though 'fried-egg' head lamp, its the gen which let Porsche grow further in the whole world. It is easier to drive and the Tiptronic is getting more popular than ever.

 

[Imhotep Evil]

Wheelbase lenght, Quaife, wide(r) rear tires, spoiler, moving the fuel tank, pushing the engine a bit more in front, electro nanies, camber, suspension geometry ...


... so the 911 remained the same ?!