Crown

Board: Porsche - 911 - 997 Language: English Region: Worldwide Share/Save/Bookmark Close

Forum - Thread


    Re: thanks

    Quote:
    icon said:
    w/ the gov't regulations what do you see as a realistic possibility on weight reduction?
    what should porsche's target weight be for the street legal gt3?
    jeff



    Now that's a good (tough) question.

    GT3 is tied to C2/C4/Turbo and thus has many limitations. Add in worldwide legislation as well as demand for luxurious features and the fact that the street GT3 weighs little more than a GT3 Cup (at home, nearly headed for bed, so don't have the figures handy and don't want to work from memory) is deeply impressive. It's not a huge gap from GT3 Cup to GT3 considering safety features, climate control, A/C, a full interior, heavy seats, etc.

    And the new cars are NOT as heavy as we like to think they are. When we weighed a 1989 911 for a recent test, it came out at 2,900+ pounds with a half-tank, or within one pound of the 1999 986 in the same test.

    I guess I'd like to see 50 pounds trimmed with each new generation/update. As we saw from 993 to 996. It wouldn't fix anything right away, but as the years pile on, we would reap some serious benefits, much as we have with horsepower over the last 20 years.

    I'd just like to see the technology applied to keep weight down while adding features used to get the weight down.

    But, unless we as consumers and governments as legislative bodies, make some changes -- or Porsche takes a bold (and risky/impossible to justify) step, I don't see any changes anytime soon.

    And I am very glad that Boxsters don't weigh the same as Elises. A drive in both make it obvious why 2,000-pound cars, as good/fun/exciting as they are, have their compromises in the real world.

    pete

    Re: thanks

    Pete thank you for the article and for coming to the forums
    it would be great if you do it more often

    as far as PASM discussion with frayed as a controls engineer i may be able to say that your general understanding seems quite good !

    obviously there are different methods/tweaks in active suspension systems and i don't know the exact design porsche uses however after owning 997S i can say that i agree with your comment that the system "overcorrects" and reacts to bumps

    frayed the shocks have to be connected to a brain that's how any control system, TC, PSM, etc works the sensor data provides information (feedback) to the brain and the brain sends commands to the shocks

    your are right that there is no road information ahead of time otherwise the control system PASM in this case can be made to work perfectly but the effect of road is seen from the measurements from the chasis/suspension..how the system reacts to that..too much delay or too strong reaction is what makes it feel artificial and that is a matter of tuning

    technically PASM is nothing other than a variable shock system like PSS9 but it changes on its own continuously as opposed to you chnaging it for street/track etc that's it

    pete brings the comparison between porsche and bmw active steering and that is a very good example of that the f430 active suspension seems to have less artificial feel comapred to 997s so hopefully in the future porsche will do PASM better...a key thing why PASM is better i hear (hope) in gt3 over 997 is that springs as stiffer so the system has less to react to..think of a softly sprung car with high shocks rate...so for PASM to feel less artifical is to put even stiffer springs and the car will be great try it!

    Re: thanks

    nice discussion, i enjoyed it. thank you all...

    Re: thanks

    Quote:
    krC2S said:frayed the shocks have to be connected to a brain that's how any control system, TC, PSM, etc works the sensor data provides information (feedback) to the brain and the brain sends commands to the shocks




    If you re read what I wrote, I'm talking about feedback loop *from the shocks*. I don't believe there is any. The data comes from sensors on the chassis, and brake/throttle/steering.

    Let me try again to restate: The data from the chassis corresponds to gross vehicle movements, not high frequency data from stutter bumps on the road.

    Re: thanks

    This has been a really informative and enjoyable thread to read. Many thanks to all those who contributed their knowledge, wisdom and experience.

    Welcome back to Rennteam Pete! I hope you'll contribute more often to these boards.

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Quote:
    excmag said:
    Still not sure I fully understand PASM, and wish Porsche would be a little more transparent about it.



    Have you tried contacting ThyssenKrupp and asking for info on Damptronic? If you can read German there was a 14 page paper "Improvement of Driving Dynamics by Adjustable Dampers." presented at the 13th Aachen Colloquium 2004 "Automobile and Engine Technology" that covers the system. The paper is not available online so you will probably have to buy the proceedings (Book 9682) but the last year I've found the proceedings still available for was 2005. You might also want to try hunting for it at the Institut fur Fahrzeugtechnik, TU Braunschweig.

    Re: thanks

    Quote:
    krC2S said:
    technically PASM is nothing other than a variable shock system like PSS9 but it changes on its own continuously as opposed to you chnaging it for street/track etc that's it





    Does anyone know how we can disable PASM and set the shock manually like the PSS9? Are there little motors that turn the valves we can remove (let them keep operating un-attached so there are no system errors)? I had these on my 996 and I liked them a lot.

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Quote:
    excmag said:
    Quote:
    cnc said:

    I do not understand the benefit of your less than civil tone toward me or others here, but to each their own.

    pete



    Exactly what isn't civil, I have questioned the basis for the perspective, and suggested you might be missing something (and I think you admit your understanding of PASM is limited, as is mine). I find the 997 GT3 far superior, so I too may be missing something.

    I have asked JimFlat6 abou his GT3 experiences to put his opinions in perspective, again without driving the cars the opinions carry less weight. Paper statistics are useless

    Maybe through his GT3 driving experience, he will have the key to the flagpole, but in my driving of stock to stock variants of the the GT3, the 997 wins hands down... and I think that is an important data point for the reader to consider.


    The empirical conclusions you draw about the cars is limited because the set ups were not equalized (even tire pressures) so conclusions are premature, as a scientific experiment it would not get a passing grade. The article while entertaining, and well written, falls short (scientifically) and shouldn't even render a conclusion. In my professional world we would bet run out of town if we tried to draw conclusionss on sloppy inputs (entertainment standards may differ).

    If that criticism appears to be uncivil, I apologize, it is not intended, but it should give the reader pause and insight to consider.

    Again, in my world, stock to stock (versus tweaked to non-tweaked) there is a night and day difference. that is a possibly a more valid comparison.

    Re: thanks

    Quote:
    frayed said:
    Let me try again to restate: The data from the chassis corresponds to gross vehicle movements, not high frequency data from stutter bumps on the road.



    I get you, or at least I think I do.

    But this is the point -- PASM is reactive and, no matter the exact way in which it reacts -- PASM sets itself up for current conditions and then is either too stiff or too soft in the occasional situations (such as the odd freeway lump or the Turn 6 to Turn 7 section at Infineon). By the time it reacts (and if it takes gross vehicle changes to cause a reaction it will be even slower) it's too late.

    Simply put, I prefer a chassis where I've got some basic sense of its reactions and that they will be linear, not late or interupted/altered.

    But, all this is a minor point, and one that I am guessing will bother some and not others (look at the media reports thus far, only Exc. has delved into this -- and hey, maybe we are baked -- though it's worth noting CandD notes "Sudden ride motions" in its "The Lows" column of its GT3 test on the very same car).

    With it has to be considered the monumental improvement in the 997 GT3's steering accuracy over bumps and tracking stability on the freeway, as well as the general goodness of the new rack. I feel a little sharpness has been lost, but the other improvements are major.

    Do the steering improvements outweigh PASM issues? For some, I think they will. For me, I'd rather deal with small directional issues at the front than weight/unloading issues because those rob a tire of its connection to the surface and thus, its traction.

    pete

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Quote:
    cnc said:
    Quote:
    excmag said:
    Quote:
    cnc said:

    I do not understand the benefit of your less than civil tone toward me or others here, but to each their own.

    pete



    Exactly what isn't civil, I have questioned the basis for the perspective, and suggested you might be missing something (and I think you admit your understanding of PASM is limited, as is mine). I find the 997 GT3 far superior, so I too may be missing something.

    I have asked JimFlat6 abou his GT3 experiences to put his opinions in perspective, again without driving the cars the opinions carry less weight. Paper statistics are useless

    Maybe through his GT3 driving experience, he will have the key to the flagpole, but in my driving of stock to stock variants of the the GT3, the 997 wins hands down... and I think that is an important data point for the reader to consider.


    The empirical conclusions you draw about the cars is limited because the set ups were not equalized (even tire pressures) so conclusions are premature, as a scientific experiment it would not get a passing grade. The article while entertaining, and well written, falls short (scientifically) and shouldn't even render a conclusion. In my professional world we would bet run out of town if we tried to draw conclusionss on sloppy inputs (entertainment standards may differ).

    If that criticism appears to be uncivil, I apologize, it is not intended, but it should give the reader pause and insight to consider.

    Again, in my world, stock to stock (versus tweaked to non-tweaked) there is a night and day difference. that is a possibly a more valid comparison.



    Fair enough. The dripping sarcasm just threw me.

    I don't know as the test comes to its conclusions so clearly. Others have said it is somewhat ambiguous, which I feel it is. The model at Excellence is to report what we see, feel, and experience, provide our views, and then do our best to provide the reader with all of the pertinent info on how we got there so they car (rightly) question us if they want to take the time to unpack everything and carefully consider it.

    The real injustice would to have NOT taken into account all the minor differences in the cars, to NOT have weighed the cars, to NOT have checked their alignments, to NOT have brought in a pro driver familiar with 911 handling for confirmation and formal times, etc.

    There are other elements not in the story but done as background research, including a side trip to see a suspension guru when it comes to shock valving to get his input, to check and see if I was crazy.

    The stock vs. stock above all else model is one I like in theory (it is the way to go) but it's not always easy to enact in the real world. In fact, it can be quite difficult. We wanted to find a 996 GT3 with PSCs (recognizing they are slightly different than those on the 997, but closer than PS2s...) and ended up with one that had a few things we weren't told about (the missing seat, the carpeting, etc.). That said, Adam's car wasn't un-representative once its specs are known and considered. But, you are right, it is not perfect.

    That gets back to "scientific" car testing. I've been at car testing long enough to know there are myriad differences you have to deal with. Alignment settings (could these have affected the Z06 vs. GT3 vs. Elise test? we'll never know), driver skill AND preference (from what I understand, Webster is a pretty darned good shoe, but is he inherently faster in a front-engined car?), temp,, road/track conditions, fuels, and the list goes on. And on.

    We checked tire pressures on the 997 GT3, weighed both cars with a FULL tank, and then were clear in the text about the differences between the cars.

    We noted the new GT3 was faster despite its obvious handicaps against *that* 996 GT3, and estimated (using the word "likely") it would be roughly 2-4 seconds faster than a stock 996 GT3 over most north American tracks given similar or equal drivers, tires, etc. It's a prediction, and we'll have to see how it bears out in the next 1-2 years as 997 GT3 owners meet up with 996 GT3 owners on track AND find good, useful comparisons. But talk about un-uniform...

    We noted that the 997 GT3 was faster -- in SPITE OF that particular 996's advantages. We even said the 997 is a better car, emotional considerations aside. But, if faster alone makes a sports/super car better, we should all be driving C6 Z06s.



    pete

    Re: thanks

    Quote:
    easy_rider911 said:
    This has been a really informative and enjoyable thread to read. Many thanks to all those who contributed their knowledge, wisdom and experience.

    Welcome back to Rennteam Pete! I hope you'll contribute more often to these boards.



    Thanks, I'd sure like to, but am awfully busy with trying to get the book out every time -- and when I cave into the temptation to post, I'm all in and it gets addictive... But, when it's a tough topic, like PASM/bushings in 997s, I really enjoy the back and forth with you guys.

    But for you regulars, how *DO* you guys get any work done?

    Cheers!

    pete

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Quote:
    cnc said:
    If you haven't driven any of them, well I can then understand your perspective!



    Ah.... Colm, Colm is that you?



    pete

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    I recognize that guy, lurking in the background, on page 55... Hi Colm!

    Re: thanks

    Quote:
    frayed said:
    Quote:
    krC2S said:frayed the shocks have to be connected to a brain that's how any control system, TC, PSM, etc works the sensor data provides information (feedback) to the brain and the brain sends commands to the shocks




    If you re read what I wrote, I'm talking about feedback loop *from the shocks*. I don't believe there is any. The data comes from sensors on the chassis, and brake/throttle/steering.

    Let me try again to restate: The data from the chassis corresponds to gross vehicle movements, not high frequency data from stutter bumps on the road.



    frayed just trying to help

    the point is even if you don't have direct measurement of bumps in the road this high frequency content will be still observed in other measured chasis signals...even if chasis movements may not have the same size as the bumps it will contain the frequency content and PASM will react to it..ofcourse different tuning can make it react to frequencies up to a different levels as well as how fast and how much(change in shock rates) it reacts

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Pete,

    Yeah cnc is Colm, I haven't picked up the magazine, saving it for my HK trip.

    Now you can sure be I am always civil and not sarcastic.

    That couldn't be me on page 55....I was working that day!!!!!!

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Quote:
    excmag said:
    And, yes, I too think the cars are too damned heavy. I know Porsche sweats the details, and that it's under enormous pressure from consumers to add more equipment, but our world needs a Porsche that takes the lead on lightweight, enviromentally sound luxury and sports cars. Let AMG continue in its horsepower war with itself....

    After the 6,000-pound Cayenne, how about a 3800-4200-pound Panamera?

    And forget more power, let's start dropping pounds with each new model. Real weight (25-75 pounds), every time.

    pete



    Amen to that Recently I read an interview with an MB executive who clearly stated that a major objective for their R&D department is to reduce the weight of their cars (actually he said: right now we are "freezing" the weight and each new model should have significant less weight (e.g. the new C-Class is bigger than the predecessor, but appr.10 kg lighter). If even a sedan oriented company like MB is heading towards the right direction, a sportscar maker like Porsche definitely should think about their priorities for the future car development.

    Thanks for the article - very intersting read

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Quote:
    cnc said:
    I haven't picked up the magazine, saving it for my HK trip.



    Email me your address and I'll send you one. Wouldn't want you to miss all the details since you were slaving away at the office that day instead of hanging out with us...

    So who was that guy wearing sunglasses indoors on p. 55?

    pete

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Colm, I liked the 996GT3. The 997S w/PASM I didnt like. Obviously it doesnt feel as buttoned down or as linear as a 996GT3. I havent had the pleasure of a 997GT3 yet. Pete gave his opinions about PASM in the GT3. It seems not perfected yet. Thats not saying that a 997GT3 is not more advanced than a 996GT3. PASM is just what it is in terms of its behaviour in some situations.

    Is the PASM on the 997GT3 so good in your testing that it makes no sense to to replace it with a Moton or Penske system?

    Your comments to Pete infer you have your own test results with reams of supporting test data all cross collobarated with independent lab reports and track tests. Share the results please. Thanks!

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    My test results are based upon me buying and driving each of the cars in exactly the same circumstances and conditions and forming my own opinion. Would you want it any differently?

    I am not in the business of publishing comparative tests, but if i were I would have a "controlled" experiment to ensure valid comparisons. So, I don't need to provide reams and reams of data to support the conclusion of spending my own money in support of my own judgement. Would you want it any differently?

    For purposes of the board, It should be enough of a data point, to encourage others to engage in their own comparison (however they wish to do so), that a reasonably informed individual spending their own money sees considerable improvement in the new 997 GT3. Would you want it any differently?

    My comments inferred that before jumping to any conclusion on the basis of what anyone writes, one should understand the basis (and bias, if any) of that opinion; and in your case I'll wait until you drive the 997 GT3 before giving your opinion serious weight. I do appreciate your candor in owning up to the fact that you haven't driven the 997 GT3 yet!

    It is entirely possible that I am missing something with regard to the new GT3, but I haven't seen it or heard it yet. PASM at this point, is a "red herring" in my book, but time and greater experience will tell.

    I wait with baited breath!

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    I am sure you wait for everything with baited breath.

    Regrettably, not everyone has acres of money to do their own extensive testing by purchase. Even some who can afford that process seem to be made up of more checkbook than charm, so their comments end up looking ill founded or just mean spirited.

    With Excellence, you meanly sniped at them for not having put together the test that you wanted to see. They are running a magazine, its not a high profit business with budget for all needs and contingencies. Certainly with your business knowledge and financial wherewithall you understand that.

    The detail Excellence does provide has more depth and candor than their competitors. They do provide value to anyone doing research towards a purchase.

    If you wish to enhance their testing ability by all means avail yourself and your resources to them. Would you want it any differently?

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Do I hear 997GT3 MKII in the background?

    Serioulsy, thanks for all the informative posts.

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Talked to a race shopped today has fielded multiple cup cars, 996 and 997s, and have their own GT3 to play with etc etc (one of the biggest race shops in the country)

    Their input is that there is still a chasm of performance to be unlocked with a good damper like a Moton; after all these pasm shocks are jacked up bilsteins. They also stated (i) the 997 GT3 suspension setup is a full order of magnitude improved over the old despite its flaws, and (ii) most, but not all, of the as-delivered handling issues can be addressed with alignment, ride height, and corner balancing. They also cited that driven hard on the track, there remains some rear bumpsteer issues that can be dialed out with careful setup.

    No amount of knob turning will give the supple bump compliance and general chassis control of the a high zoot damper (properly setup).

    I also learned that the AWE/Brandywine defanging of PASM to fit aftermarket shocks does NOT clear the error codes in the brain, rather it just prevents the [beep] light. Not terribly concerning, but your dealer might give you the stink eye when the read out the codes.

    Today, they are test fitting the 18" cup wheels on a pccb car to see if they fit. Looking forward to finding out if you can shoehorn 18's around those big yeller calipers.

    Re: 997 GT3 road test by Exce11ence...

    Quote:

    The only biggies I feel they've got wrong in the last decade:
    -Early eGas (fixed, quietly)
    -996 GT2 pricing strategy (unless they didn't want to sell many)
    -PASM and 997s (there's still hope...)
    -Cayman pricing (unless...well, sorry but I don't really get it)





    Very informative tread, led by true enthousiasts in a civilize ton. It is what Rennteam is all about !

    Concerning the biggy I would have added the 997's Turbo exhaust note, unless it was intentional.

    And FYI, the Ferrari 599 GTB is lighter than the 550/575 Maranello (don't have the exact figures in mind).

    Re: thanks

    'pete' does have lots of Porsche experience and his perceptions are perhaps sharper than some others may like. These are the guys who compared a Carrera GT and brought along a GT2 and a GT3. They expounded in great detail regarding the subtle differences between the 2 and the 3 yet were not faulted when they compared them to the Carrera GT with it's huge intimidation factors. The price and the daunting clutch being two factors that come to mind. Something is better than nothing for a comparison and when the specific merits of each car is noted the results can still be given some weight. Driver ability is another variable; so it could be argued that no test is valid because ultimately each Porsche driver uses a vehicle differently, based on their interests and particular level of skill. The old GT3 was more focused on a specific task where the new GT3 has made some trade-offs to broaden it's appeal. The performance numbers are little more than talking points in a discussion about which car is faster. The subjective feel of the cars is what I believe pete has conveyed quite effectively. Thank you 'pete'. More Please!

    question

    Sorry to cut in guys, but I have a question: is Audi's magnetic ride a better system than Porsche's PASM?

    Better like in faster to react, lighter or more reliable.

    I couldn't help notice over time two things about Porsche: their first version of new tech is usually flawed and they also add later than other car manufacturers new tech. Think about major things like aluminium, DSG, direct injection, etc.

    Re: question

    Quote:
    Pentium said:
    Sorry to cut in guys, but I have a question: is Audi's magnetic ride a better system than Porsche's PASM?

    Better like in faster to react, lighter or more reliable.

    I couldn't help notice over time two things about Porsche: their first version of new tech is usually flawed and they also add later than other car manufacturers new tech. Think about major things like aluminium, DSG, direct injection, etc.


    From what I've read, it is faster reacting than the hydraulic PASM system...that's why Ferrari uses it on the 599GTB .

    Re: question

    First of all I appreciate this discussions. I'd like to read more of these contributions.

    Like many other technical developments these suspension systems are developed by / in collaboration with suppliers. Delphi developed the magnetic ride system that is utilized in GM, Audi and Ferrari products. It is said to be more sensitive than the PASM system. The latter seems to be dependent of the spring settings, to some surprise it works rather well in the Boxster and in the GT3 (due to the smaller spread of ratio compared to the Carrera models).

    I predict that the Mk.2 Carreras will use a revamped version that work significantly better, having addressed the lack of connectivity and overly stiff setting in sport mode. This seems to be reduced in the GT3 to a certain amount of unexpectable behaviour of the suspension system, just as Pete stated before.

    Continue the discussion, guys!

    Re: question

    To me is starting to look more and more like Porsche has a contract in place to sell a certain number of PASM cars in order to get a very good price per unit from the PASM manufacturer.

    So like it or not, they added the PASM to almost all their cars. I wish they switch to the Delphi system but probably they will not do it because they could lose brand image.

     
    Edit

    Forum

    Board Subject Last post Rating Views Replies
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: New 991.2 GT3 (2017) 11/15/18 10:20 AM
    TB993tt
    402635 5188
    Porsche Sticky SUN'S LAST RUN TO WILSON, WY - 991 C2S CAB LIFE, END OF AN ERA 11/17/18 12:03 AM
    Pilot
    320253 1966
    Porsche Sticky 992 (Next 911 generation 2019/2020) 11/17/18 8:30 AM
    Boxster Coupe GTS
    268561 2960
    Porsche Sticky The moment I've been waiting for... 11/7/18 2:43 PM
    Pilot
     
     
     
     
     
    211146 1077
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: 911 GT2 RS (2017) 11/15/18 6:23 PM
    BONES
    190596 2674
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: 991.2 GT3 RS (2018) 11/17/18 2:57 PM
    ZahirD
    121527 2404
    AMG Sticky Mercedes E63 S AMG (2018) - Short Review (updated on a regular basis) 11/15/18 12:15 PM
    RCA
    32063 316
    Porsche Sticky Paint protection film 9/25/18 6:14 PM
    throt
    13981 121
    Porsche Sticky Child seats in a 991 6/18/18 8:51 PM
    Monkey
    13279 31
    Porsche 991 GT3 RS 1/9/18 1:43 PM
    Kimi
    522689 5816
    Porsche OFFICIAL: 991 Turbo and Turbo S 4/3/18 9:15 AM
    KresoF1
    483215 4254
    Porsche OFFICIAL: 911 R (2016) 9/13/18 10:12 AM
    RCA
    278571 2589
    Porsche Cayman GT4 11/16/18 11:30 AM
    RCA
    263575 2611
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New 991.2 Turbo and Turbo S 1/23/18 12:27 AM
    RCA
    191440 1074
    Ferrari 488 GTB/GTS 11/17/18 4:47 AM
    koko
    189326 1738
    McLaren McLaren on a winning streak 10/29/18 5:13 PM
    reginos
    178591 3212
    Porsche Boxster Spyder (981) 8/31/18 10:25 AM
    WAY
    142680 757
    Others Audi R8 V10 Plus (2016 model) - Review (updated Feb 13th 2017) 11/1/18 6:13 PM
    Boxster Coupe GTS
    141757 2234
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New Panamera (2016) 1/6/18 10:41 PM
    Wonderbar
    128192 1284
    Ferrari Ferrari F12 Berlinetta / 599 GTO Successor 5/22/18 9:16 PM
    RCA
    111585 789
    Others VW caught cheating emissions tests 5/3/18 7:52 PM
    CGX car nut
    106455 871
    Porsche Porsche Mission E - the future of Porsche? 11/17/18 4:38 PM
    reginos
    84209 1126
    Porsche Donor vehicle for Singer Vehicle Design 10/13/18 9:50 PM
    RCA
    66571 672
    Porsche UPDATES: 2018 Porsche Cayenne 2/6/18 2:13 PM
    RCA
    57163 423
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New 991.2 Carrera GTS models 11/3/18 11:09 AM
    bluelines
    46620 477
    Others Tesla Roadster 11/14/18 12:48 PM
    lukestern
    43078 1395
    Others Tesla Model X Thread Closed 2/23/18 3:41 PM
    RCA
    42802 1122
    AMG AMG GT R 1/26/18 7:19 AM
    GoHardGT3RS
    41238 597
    Lambo Aventador and SV 11/16/18 9:46 PM
    Topspeed
    39149 471
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New 991.2 Turbo S Exclusive Series (2017) 11/14/18 11:25 AM
    RCA
    39015 637
    284 items found, displaying 1 to 30.