|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
174.68.76.189
In Reply to: RE: Nice video posted by Mike B. on March 24, 2015 at 19:23:43
Porsche is master of parsing. Give the number of models / combinations and the OPTION BOOK which goes on for PAGES, I really can't speak to 'general configuration'.
Last time I looked at a simple model call out on their website, there must have been more than a DOZEN 911 models. 3 or 4 or maybe even 5 horsepower ratings. Targa? Convertible? 'S' models and whatever else.
Trying to keep track of Porsche models, combinations and permutations is a full-time job. Must be 4 or even 5 years ago CD or RT did a 'comparo' of the 911 series and the than new coupe. Cayman? I can't keep it straight. The TOP Cayman model is priced right near where the 911 starts. And than it gets weird as the 911 goes to over 2x the price of the TOP Cayman.
I drove a friends Boxster. I thought it was 'friendlier' to drive than my S-2000 while riding on the SAME TIRES. Bridgestone Pole Positon S-02s in the SAME sizes front and rear. The engine developed its power more evenly thruout the rev range. The S-2000 went NUTS above about 6500 revs to the 9000 rev redline.
A quick look at the Website shows only 4 Cayman models. That' sure makes it easier on ME.
Even the base model probably handles well and goes fast enough for ME. Hell, I drive on California FREEWAYS, after all. A quick blast up Mt Palomar would NOT be out of the question, though.
Isn't the Cayman technically a MID engine while the 911 is rear? That was what CD or RT 'blamed' the handling differences on in general FAVOR of the Cayman. At that time. Of course, one thing you can't predict is DEVELOPEMENT of a chassis / engine. Don't forget that the 'Vette is STILL running a pushrod V-8. And it is a 2-plane crank. If they went to a single plane crank, they could get another 2000 revs out of it and REALLY have the ultimate pushrod motor.
In short? Stay tuned for NExT years whatever. If I had a COST NOT OBJECT car in this category, I'd either OPT for a Nissan GTR (need a good test drive) or forget the whole thing and get a Masaratti. I think they are BEAUTIFUL and wouldn't care if it wasn't the 'baddest-fastest' on the block.
Too much is never enough
Follow Ups:
The S2K is a bit schitzophrenic, kind of a Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde scenario. Having had mine for almost a year (although the last five months were in storage) I can easily believe that the Boxster is "friendlier". Interestingly, that characteristic seems to be what a lot of people like about the S2K, though - mild mannered Clark Kent at lower RPMs, Superman above 6500 (although my '05 only revs to 8K).
People seem to love it or hate it depending on what's important to them. If the characteristics that some people regard as its faults don't bother you, it's a great car. If not, you either won't buy it or will wish you hadn't. Kind of like a lot of speakers, actually...
A few things about the S-2000 than I'll drop it.
I think they fiddled with the suspension, mainly the rear, several times during the run of car. A major change separates what is the major revision of the car. '04? '05? My '03 had a glass rear window, tweaked rear suspension and the 9000rpm engine. (2.0)
IF (big IF) you drove UNDER 6500 revs, quite a number of cars were faster. Taken to redline, you were in weird territory.
The YouTube video of the preproduction car at the 'Ring' is pretty cool. And in traffic. The driver in regular shoes and WHITE socks is one HECK of a Pilot.
Too much is never enough
As I understand it, the motor was stroked to increase lower RPM torque, some trans ratios changed to take advantage of the higher torque, and some suspension changes were made to address an oversteer issue that was taking some drivers that weren't as competent as they thought into very dangerous territory, i.e. "a two-liter sports car with an afterburner" as one pundit put it. There were a lot of people buying the cars that really couldn't handle them, and consequently getting into trouble when they found that out too late.
Yours being pre-'04, I'm guessing that you'd have preferred the updated model. Or maybe not. They still eat rear tires for lunch.
Sounds almost as if they've built an old-style turbo engine without actually using a turbo! :-)
First,
I SHOULD have owned stock in Bridgestone or Michelin. No question that REAR tires were Disposible at best.
The characteristic engine was brought on by a VERY aggressive use of the Honda VTEC system of variable valve timing.
And YES, be CAREFUL at limits. I had the rear end go 'LIGHT' on me once when blasting down the hill from Mt Palomar. I had just entered the roller coaster twisties at the bottom of the hill and going over a rise I felt the rear end WANT to come around. I corrected and BACKED OFF. Turning my S-2000 into an Ash Tray was NOT in my plans for that day.
And in point of fact, for a lower powered car, the MIATA is actually more drivable for the novice.
And FUN with all 4 wheels / tires the same size you can do a rational rotate and even get some better tire life than the S-2000 folks.
Too much is never enough
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: