Crown

Nice!

Sport Auto magazine revealed to car enthusiasts the results of another super test. This time the German journalists made performance tests of the new Porsche 911 Turbo S. The tests included acceleration and braking dynamics of the car, Nürburgring and Hockenheim lap times, and dynamometer measurements. Let us remind that the powertrain of this car consists of a 6-cylinder 3.8-litre twin-turbo boxer engine. The car is offering 560 hp and 750 Nm of torque. The power is transmitted to all four wheels via a 7-speed direct-shift PDK gearbox. It should be noted that this Porsche had demonstrated great performance and scored 98 out of 100 points. Below you can find the data received during the tests:

• Power, torque: 607 hp, 784 Nm (Dyno measured) 
• Weight: 1595 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 3.0 sec
• 0-200 km/h: 10.0 sec
• Top speed: 318 km/h
• Braking (100-0 km/h) with warm brakes: 31.9 m
• Braking (200-0 km/h) with warm brakes: 128.1 m
• Hockenheim lap: 1:08:7 min
• Nürburgring lap: 7:34 min

Source: http://www.sportauto.de/

sportcars-history.com

RC:

EnglishManInNY:

RC already told us no GT2 awhile ago - I guess probably a GT2RS with well over 600hp and much much lighter than the TTS...

Both, GT2 and GT2 RS are "under consideration", whatever this means.

At some point I heard that the GT2 would be too close to 991 Turbo S performance but you never know if Porsche made up their mind. I am pretty sure that they build whatever the market is asking for.  

If they don't announce a GT2 or GT2RS rather soon (this spring) chances are very low that such car will still make it to the market: historically it has been very rare that it takes them longer than 3 years to launch a successor. Obviously, the reason is that buyers probably take a new acquisition decision after approx.  3 years of ownership the latest. The GT2RS was launched end of 2010… Now guess...

My logic: if they don't show the GT2/GT2RS now they already gave up those buyers with a particular interest in these cars. Should they launch a GT2/GT2RS in 1-2 years most of the original GT2/GT2RS customers will already own/drive another car (Porsche or other brand) that replace their old GT2/GT2RS 

I believe the demand for the GT2 (996 and 997) wasn't high. Not many brave drivers around who could also afford this car. Also the GT2 RS was introduced as an engineering example by the Motorsport dept. because they didn't have anything more  to show at the time.

CEO Muller admitted in an interview in 2013 that Porsche are considering the so-called 960 with a flat 8 in the middle.

This is what is expected from Porsche by the many friends of the marque  rather than another 911 version.

"Form follows function"

inspite of being totally in awe of the turbo S' performance in the supertest i went to see how the F458 italia did in the same test:

http://www.sportauto.de/supertest/ferrari-458-italia-im-test-auf-der-nordschleife-forza-italia-1913091.html

given that the turbo S wore the Dunlop Maxx Race semislicks (which are definitely available as an option for the car, but how many buyers of the turbo S will really order them?) and the F458 had normal Michelin SS, the laptimes at the nordschleife and at Hockenheim are not really any more in favour of the turbo S. accelaration is a bit better, certainly also due to AWD and the stickier tyres.

i am wondering why they did not do the supertest of the turbo S with the tyres most buyers will have on the car. if there is no bias in this, then i don't know....

andyFE:

inspite of being totally in awe of the turbo S' performance in the supertest i went to see how the F458 italia did in the same test:

http://www.sportauto.de/supertest/ferrari-458-italia-im-test-auf-der-nordschleife-forza-italia-1913091.html

given that the turbo S wore the Dunlop Maxx Race semislicks (which are definitely available as an option for the car, but how many buyers of the turbo S will really order them?) and the F458 had normal Michelin SS, the laptimes at the nordschleife and at Hockenheim are not really any more in favour of the turbo S. accelaration is a bit better, certainly also due to AWD and the stickier tyres.

i am wondering why they did not do the supertest of the turbo S with the tyres most buyers will have on the car. if there is no bias in this, then i don't know....

The UHP tires were actually a disadvantage in this test and while I don't think it was done by purpose, I also think that the 991 Turbo Supertest has a bit of a "smell" to it. The title on the Sport Auto front page "Better than the GT3?" actually says a lot of where the Supertest is supposed to go (or not). Sport Auto (and Porsche for that matter) were under a lot of pressure from car enthusiasts since their GT3 Supertest and the results which apparently didn't please many. So Sport Auto had two possibilities: Not post a 991 Turbo S Supertest, which would have raised suspicions or post one under less than ideal conditions, so the car doesn't perform better than the GT3. I know this sounds a bit far fetched but looking at the Hockenheim Kleiner Ring result and comparing the Nordschleife result to it, doesn't add up. Especially since it was exactly the same car. Also, the false hp dyno testing result leaves a bad taste in my mouth, such errors shouldn't happen at Sport Auto.

I agree with you: Why didn't Sport Auto test the 991 Turbo S with the standard PZero tires? This would have been actually more interesting for me, as a customer. I also suspect that with the regular tires, the car would have achieved the same time under the same road conditions or maybe even a second or two less. There is also no mentioning if Horst von Saurma used the Sport Plus mode during the test and how much it influences not only track performance but also 0-200 and 0-300 kph performance figures. To be honest: I expected a more thorough test from Sport Auto but I like the conclusion of the test, which is true in my opinion. I just wonder, based on the results, how the heck did HvS actually come up with this (correct) conclusion based on the test results?  

Personally, I couldn't care less about this Supertest because I know what my car is capable of...or not. I am very pleased with my car and apparently Porsche is very pleased with the Supertest result but to be honest, the Supertest left a lot of questions out in the open but not because the car was too fast but in my opinion too slow. The false dyno hp claim actually made the Turbo S look even more bad because many would say now: Look, this car has 607 hp and is still slower than the GT3 on the Nordschleife.  I know we shouldn't take these reviews too seriously but Sport Auto and the Supertest had always a certain importance to me, they represented a benchmark. I am a little bit disappointed with the execution, not the result.

--

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Turbo S, Porsche Boxster S (981), BMW X3 35d (2013)

RC:

andyFE:

inspite of being totally in awe of the turbo S' performance in the supertest i went to see how the F458 italia did in the same test:

http://www.sportauto.de/supertest/ferrari-458-italia-im-test-auf-der-nordschleife-forza-italia-1913091.html

given that the turbo S wore the Dunlop Maxx Race semislicks (which are definitely available as an option for the car, but how many buyers of the turbo S will really order them?) and the F458 had normal Michelin SS, the laptimes at the nordschleife and at Hockenheim are not really any more in favour of the turbo S. accelaration is a bit better, certainly also due to AWD and the stickier tyres.

i am wondering why they did not do the supertest of the turbo S with the tyres most buyers will have on the car. if there is no bias in this, then i don't know....

The UHP tires were actually a disadvantage in this test and while I don't think it was done by purpose, I also think that the 991 Turbo Supertest has a bit of a "smell" to it. The title on the Sport Auto front page "Better than the GT3?" actually says a lot of where the Supertest is supposed to go (or not). Sport Auto (and Porsche for that matter) were under a lot of pressure from car enthusiasts since their GT3 Supertest and the results which apparently didn't please many. So Sport Auto had two possibilities: Not post a 991 Turbo S Supertest, which would have raised suspicions or post one under less than ideal conditions, so the car doesn't perform better than the GT3. I know this sounds a bit far fetched but looking at the Hockenheim Kleiner Ring result and comparing the Nordschleife result to it, doesn't add up. Especially since it was exactly the same car. Also, the false hp dyno testing result leaves a bad taste in my mouth, such errors shouldn't happen at Sport Auto.

I agree with you: Why didn't Sport Auto test the 991 Turbo S with the standard PZero tires? This would have been actually more interesting for me, as a customer. I also suspect that with the regular tires, the car would have achieved the same time under the same road conditions or maybe even a second or two less. There is also no mentioning if Horst von Saurma used the Sport Plus mode during the test and how much it influences not only track performance but also 0-200 and 0-300 kph performance figures. To be honest: I expected a more thorough test from Sport Auto but I like the conclusion of the test, which is true in my opinion. I just wonder, based on the results, how the heck did HvS actually come up with this (correct) conclusion based on the test results?  

Personally, I couldn't care less about this Supertest because I know what my car is capable of...or not. I am very pleased with my car and apparently Porsche is very pleased with the Supertest result but to be honest, the Supertest left a lot of questions out in the open but not because the car was too fast but in my opinion too slow. The false dyno hp claim actually made the Turbo S look even more bad because many would say now: Look, this car has 607 hp and is still slower than the GT3 on the Nordschleife.  I know we shouldn't take these reviews too seriously but Sport Auto and the Supertest had always a certain importance to me, they represented a benchmark. I am a little bit disappointed with the execution, not the result.

--

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Turbo S, Porsche Boxster S (981), BMW X3 35d (2013)

hi RC, 

i basically agree with your assessment except that 13 centigrades are rather good for the HP dunlops and puts them already at an advantage over the MSS tyres.

what this tells me is that one should NEVER buy a car because of (super)tests and numbers only. it is what you feel when you drive the car.

andyFE:

 

what this tells me is that one should NEVER buy a car because of (super)tests and numbers only. it is what you feel when you drive the car.

 

I would actually rely much more on user experience reported on the internet rather than reviews in reputable car magazines. Yes, some user experiences may be "rigged" (this seems to happen with many products advertised/discussed on the internet) but I guess if you read user reports carefully and take your time, you will soon realize which ones to trust or not. Also some user reports are full of praise but lack any criticism at all. These overly enthusiastic reports are usually done by new buyers (who see the positive things only at first) or buyers who want to see the positive side only. Not really a problem but if a report is too enthusiastic and lacks any negativity, I would be careful. This doesn't mean it is rigged but I would wait with a buying decision based on that. After a couple of months, the buyer could change his opinion. The novelty factor of course plays a big role too.

I remember how enthusiastic I was about my former Panamera Turbo S but I realized only after a couple of months that I couldn't live with the massive body size, the numb steering feel at lower speeds and the limited luggage room.

Now, after owning my 991 Turbo S for over 3 months (and almost 7000 km), I can only criticize a few points:

1. Lack of exhaust sound below 3000-4000 rpm and under 1/3 throttle: Not really a problem since I can play with the throttle but I wish there would be more in the lower rpm range. In the upper rpm range, I am perfectly happy. More exhaust sound would be annoying.

2. Throttle response from standstill could be slightly better, the car takes a fraction of a second before it starts fully accelerating (not even close to launch control but I guess this has liability issues).

3. PDK could shift faster at lower(!) rpm and less throttle. It doesn't really matter, performance-wise but it has to do with emotions and the shift feel. Also, I wish the PDK lever shifting pattern would be the same as on the GT3 (lever up is shifting down and lever down is shifting up).

4. The interior could be nicer, I also wish Porsche would have used a different speedo cluster with digital displays. Not really a problem but it is kind of boring if all 911 look the same in the interior.

5. My right knee rubs on the left side of the middle console. Since I love wearing jeans, the seam of the jeans rubs on the left side of the middle console and...on my knee. I already have a small wound there and this is really annoying. I would appreciate a softer material or some sort of small cushion in the area. I heard that I'm not the only one with this (small) problem.

6. Too much "silver" on the exterior of this car, which makes it way too elegant: A "black" option for the front lights, the rear model designation (lettering), the rims, etc. would be very welcomed.

7. The rear seats (typical for the 911) are not really usable, even my kids hate them. Is it really that difficult to improve them? I doubt it.

Overall only very small issues though. 

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Turbo S, Porsche Boxster S (981), BMW X3 35d (2013)

I had a chance to have a look at the Sport Auto Supertest of the Turbo S. One of the reference cars is the 12C which the Turbo either equals or beats on most counts and it is only slightly inferior on very few points.

The McLaren cost 20% more than the Porsche and it  is neither a beautiful car nor a legendary brand (a la Ferrari) to command that price. The expensive carbon tub? Apparently this doesn't improve the performance significantly compared to the humble underpinnings of the  "turbo Carrera".

As to the looks, I find the Turbo S in the sapphire blue colour as tested, very arresting and dynamic. The 12C is neither striking  like a Lambo nor beautiful like a Ferrari. Of course the 12C  being a low, mid-engined two seater with 2 huge intakes on either side attracts a lot of attention, but it is not exotic looking.

Do you still think that the Turbo S with all the kit and performance @ 200K EUR is expensive? I don't

--

"Form follows function"

RC, I know of at least one, very reputable, tuner that is building an exhaust for the 991 TTS that should improve, dramatically, the exhaust note as well as add HP gains.  Given you geographic location, are you working with or know of other, experienced - credible, tuners working on the same?  

reginos:

I had a chance to have a look at the Sport Auto Supertest of the Turbo S. One of the reference cars is the 12C which the Turbo either equals or beats on most counts and it is only slightly inferior on very few points.

The McLaren cost 20% more than the Porsche and it  is neither a beautiful car nor a legendary brand (a la Ferrari) to command that price. The expensive carbon tub? Apparently this doesn't improve the performance significantly compared to the humble underpinnings of the  "turbo Carrera".

As to the looks, I find the Turbo S in the sapphire blue colour as tested, very arresting and dynamic. The 12C is neither striking  like a Lambo nor beautiful like a Ferrari. Of course the 12C  being a low, mid-engined two seater with 2 huge intakes on either side attracts a lot of attention, but it is not exotic looking.

Do you still think that the Turbo S with all the kit and performance @ 200K EUR is expensive? I don't

--

"Form follows function"

I did not see the test and did not want to reply to this but here it is: you know on the mclaren forums namely the 12c forum, no one i repeat no one talks trash about the 911 in any version, especially the 991TTS. for some reason on this forum the 12C seems to be a thorn in the eye of many. I owned 911 turbos before incuding a 997TT that I loved and miss a lot, but to compare a 911 shaped car to the so called non exotic 12C is just ridiculous. I have one now and let me tell you that while no one gave another look at my 997TT, i find scores of people crowding the 12C wherever it goes and while driving it. these 2 cars cannot and should not be compared, period. they are for different people with different purpose.

Yes the performance is close but not that much, a lot of the magazine references use numbers from the 2012 pre-updated model like the ring time which is by the way quicker than the TTS. we also now know that the 2013 models might be even quicker than the 12s with the update. the aesthetics of any car is very subjective and i perosnally found the 12c pretty unimpressive when the coupes came out, but when u look at a spider in person its a totally different car. as far as price i think it is ridiculous again to compare a model that is built in the tens of thousands of examples per year, to a model that built 3500 examples in 3 years. i dont care how fast the TTS really is, it is just too common to command such a price, when for the lay person it looks exactly like another 911.

ps: this is coming for a hardcore porsche fan, but lets stick to reality. the newest 911 turbo failed to become the monster that destroyed everything on the road, like its predecessors did and that alone makes the price hike preposterous in my opinion.

2011 CTT, 2013 12C Spider, 2013 A5 cab, 2014 4Runner Trail Edition

I agree. The 12C is a different car from a Porsche and attracts a different buyer. Other than performance, there are no parameters to compared them.

FWIW, regarding the P1, Jay Leno a huge car guy and Porsche enthusiast ordered the P1. He ordered it because he was so enamored with his 12C.

AAHTT:

reginos:

I had a chance to have a look at the Sport Auto Supertest of the Turbo S. One of the reference cars is the 12C which the Turbo either equals or beats on most counts and it is only slightly inferior on very few points.

The McLaren cost 20% more than the Porsche and it  is neither a beautiful car nor a legendary brand (a la Ferrari) to command that price. The expensive carbon tub? Apparently this doesn't improve the performance significantly compared to the humble underpinnings of the  "turbo Carrera".

As to the looks, I find the Turbo S in the sapphire blue colour as tested, very arresting and dynamic. The 12C is neither striking  like a Lambo nor beautiful like a Ferrari. Of course the 12C  being a low, mid-engined two seater with 2 huge intakes on either side attracts a lot of attention, but it is not exotic looking.

Do you still think that the Turbo S with all the kit and performance @ 200K EUR is expensive? I don't

--

"Form follows function"

I did not see the test and did not want to reply to this but here it is: you know on the mclaren forums namely the 12c forum, no one i repeat no one talks trash about the 911 in any version, especially the 991TTS. for some reason on this forum the 12C seems to be a thorn in the eye of many. I owned 911 turbos before incuding a 997TT that I loved and miss a lot, but to compare a 911 shaped car to the so called non exotic 12C is just ridiculous. I have one now and let me tell you that while no one gave another look at my 997TT, i find scores of people crowding the 12C wherever it goes and while driving it. these 2 cars cannot and should not be compared, period. they are for different people with different purpose.

Yes the performance is close but not that much, a lot of the magazine references use numbers from the 2012 pre-updated model like the ring time which is by the way quicker than the TTS. we also now know that the 2013 models might be even quicker than the 12s with the update. the aesthetics of any car is very subjective and i perosnally found the 12c pretty unimpressive when the coupes came out, but when u look at a spider in person its a totally different car. as far as price i think it is ridiculous again to compare a model that is built in the tens of thousands of examples per year, to a model that built 3500 examples in 3 years. i dont care how fast the TTS really is, it is just too common to command such a price, when for the lay person it looks exactly like another 911.

ps: this is coming for a hardcore porsche fan, but lets stick to reality. the newest 911 turbo failed to become the monster that destroyed everything on the road, like its predecessors did and that alone makes the price hike preposterous in my opinion.

the MP4-12C might not be the most pretty of all supercars, but it is a supercar after all: mid engined, two seater, low seating (the turbo S seems like and looks like an SUV in comparism, and what are those useless rear seats all about ????), carbon tub and a cabrio version which is totally on par. sort of everything the TTS is not, at a rather similar price point. and after all the MP4-12C is faster. this does not take away anything from the technological-engineering achievement which the TTS undoubtedly is, but at the end of the day it is a car sharing looks with ten thousands of other 911 and many of its components and most of its interior with hundred thousands of other porsches, SUVs and panameras. this takes - and the awkward exterior design- takes away a lot from the turbo (S). porsche should have let the design team of the GT3 do the job.

I personally disagree. I saw an orange 12C and a white 991TT side by side at the dealer and mostly everybody (surprise!) concurred the 991TT is the prettier one.  I was even offered a good deal for the 12C but it doesn't bring me any emotion to be honest. Far from a 458 too. You need a PhD just to get in and out of the car. Sorry.

2014 991 Turbo (on order, Nov Prod)
2012 991 C2S w/Fabspeed SOLD
2011 Ferrari 458 Italia Rosso Mondiale / cuoio
2011 Turbo S Cab SOLD
2010 BMW AH7 
2010 Caddy Escalade
2006 Cayman S First P car, SOLD

AAHTT:

reginos:

I had a chance to have a look at the Sport Auto Supertest of the Turbo S. One of the reference cars is the 12C which the Turbo either equals or beats on most counts and it is only slightly inferior on very few points.

The McLaren cost 20% more than the Porsche and it  is neither a beautiful car nor a legendary brand (a la Ferrari) to command that price. The expensive carbon tub? Apparently this doesn't improve the performance significantly compared to the humble underpinnings of the  "turbo Carrera".

As to the looks, I find the Turbo S in the sapphire blue colour as tested, very arresting and dynamic. The 12C is neither striking  like a Lambo nor beautiful like a Ferrari. Of course the 12C  being a low, mid-engined two seater with 2 huge intakes on either side attracts a lot of attention, but it is not exotic looking.

Do you still think that the Turbo S with all the kit and performance @ 200K EUR is expensive? I don't

--

"Form follows function"

 

Yes the performance is close but not that much, a lot of the magazine references use numbers from the 2012 pre-updated model like the ring time which is by the way quicker than the TTS. we also now know that the 2013 models might be even quicker than the 12s with the update. the aesthetics of any car is very subjective and i perosnally found the 12c pretty unimpressive when the coupes came out, but when u look at a spider in person its a totally different car. as far as price i think it is ridiculous again to compare a model that is built in the tens of thousands of examples per year, to a model that built 3500 examples in 3 years. i dont care how fast the TTS really is, it is just too common to command such a price, when for the lay person it looks exactly like another 911.

I think this is the Turbo's main issue for many. Its external similarity with the Carrera. Of course, styling is a matter of personal taste.  And not everyone is attracted by the "exotic" look.

However, although the Turbo is not a totally bespoke model, we know that the two Porsche models are far apart in technology and performance potential. The Turbo S test data is excellent (sometimes of theoretical value)  but its real world road performance, which is what counts for many buyers, even more outstanding.

The Turbo can do all (or almost all) that the 12C can do, and much more given its interior space, practicality, AWD, ground clearance etc. These aspects add even more value IMO.

I am not knocking the McLaren and I respect the Woking engineers for their achievements. The 12C, like the 458 have their own lucky buyers. I am just questioning the theory that the Turbo S is unrealistically priced given the competition.

--

"Form follows function"

andyFE:

AAHTT:

reginos:

I had a chance to have a look at the Sport Auto Supertest of the Turbo S. One of the reference cars is the 12C which the Turbo either equals or beats on most counts and it is only slightly inferior on very few points.

The McLaren cost 20% more than the Porsche and it  is neither a beautiful car nor a legendary brand (a la Ferrari) to command that price. The expensive carbon tub? Apparently this doesn't improve the performance significantly compared to the humble underpinnings of the  "turbo Carrera".

As to the looks, I find the Turbo S in the sapphire blue colour as tested, very arresting and dynamic. The 12C is neither striking  like a Lambo nor beautiful like a Ferrari. Of course the 12C  being a low, mid-engined two seater with 2 huge intakes on either side attracts a lot of attention, but it is not exotic looking.

Do you still think that the Turbo S with all the kit and performance @ 200K EUR is expensive? I don't

--

"Form follows function"

I did not see the test and did not want to reply to this but here it is: you know on the mclaren forums namely the 12c forum, no one i repeat no one talks trash about the 911 in any version, especially the 991TTS. for some reason on this forum the 12C seems to be a thorn in the eye of many. I owned 911 turbos before incuding a 997TT that I loved and miss a lot, but to compare a 911 shaped car to the so called non exotic 12C is just ridiculous. I have one now and let me tell you that while no one gave another look at my 997TT, i find scores of people crowding the 12C wherever it goes and while driving it. these 2 cars cannot and should not be compared, period. they are for different people with different purpose.

Yes the performance is close but not that much, a lot of the magazine references use numbers from the 2012 pre-updated model like the ring time which is by the way quicker than the TTS. we also now know that the 2013 models might be even quicker than the 12s with the update. the aesthetics of any car is very subjective and i perosnally found the 12c pretty unimpressive when the coupes came out, but when u look at a spider in person its a totally different car. as far as price i think it is ridiculous again to compare a model that is built in the tens of thousands of examples per year, to a model that built 3500 examples in 3 years. i dont care how fast the TTS really is, it is just too common to command such a price, when for the lay person it looks exactly like another 911.

ps: this is coming for a hardcore porsche fan, but lets stick to reality. the newest 911 turbo failed to become the monster that destroyed everything on the road, like its predecessors did and that alone makes the price hike preposterous in my opinion.

the MP4-12C might not be the most pretty of all supercars, but it is a supercar after all: mid engined, two seater, low seating (the turbo S seems like and looks like an SUV in comparism, and what are those useless rear seats all about ????), carbon tub and a cabrio version which is totally on par. sort of everything the TTS is not, at a rather similar price point. and after all the MP4-12C is faster. this does not take away anything from the technological-engineering achievement which the TTS undoubtedly is, but at the end of the day it is a car sharing looks with ten thousands of other 911 and many of its components and most of its interior with hundred thousands of other porsches, SUVs and panameras. this takes - and the awkward exterior design- takes away a lot from the turbo (S). porsche should have let the design team of the GT3 do the job.

 

The MP4-12C also is a car with synthetic suspension feel (due to computers working in unpredictable ways) and a bad seating position. I cannot see why somebody would consider the MP4-12C more a "super car" than a 991 turbo S 

thats 100% incorrect. the seating position is great, ive driven this car for hundreds of miles at a time in great comfort and the suspension feel is better than my old 997TT which was too soft in comfort mode and too harsh in sport mode. oh and unlike the TT, it doesnt sound like a vacuum cleaner that makes me buy an expensive aftermarket exhaust..... . on the other hand there is no question the TT is the more reliable car and is prob bullet proof, but like christian said porsche should have upped the ante to over 600hp and made it king again for about 150-160k. if that was the case, i would be driving one today instead of the 12c.

--

2011 CTT, 2013 12C Spider, 2013 A5 cab, 2014 4Runner Trail Edition

Actually, in reality TTS is more than 600 HP, it was measured on the dyno. I think it is not a great suprise that porsche is tend to lower the figures on the official data. I am very far from these 2 cars, but I don't understand, why Porsche cant even be more expensive than Mclaren. Porsche brand is much greater than mclaren... Technology is incomparable too, imho. How can people compare these two cars and brands in terms of technology when mclaren isn't able to design an engine...

sportcars-history.com

kudryavchik:

Actually, in reality TTS is more than 600 HP, it was measured on the dyno. I think it is not a great suprise that porsche is tend to lower the figures on the official data. I am very far from these 2 cars, but I don't understand, why Porsche cant even be more expensive than Mclaren. Porsche brand is much greater than mclaren... Technology is incomparable too, imho. How can people compare these two cars and brands in terms of technology when mclaren isn't able to design an engine...

maybe this can help bring you up to date: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkKT0rcTByM&feature=em-share_video_user

2011 CTT, 2013 12C Spider, 2013 A5 cab, 2014 4Runner Trail Edition

Cocodrilo:

I personally disagree. I saw an orange 12C and a white 991TT side by side at the dealer and mostly everybody (surprise!) concurred the 991TT is the prettier one.  I was even offered a good deal for the 12C but it doesn't bring me any emotion to be honest. Far from a 458 too. You need a PhD just to get in and out of the car. Sorry.

+991!

Two completely different cars for completely different people. Personally, i would be embarresed driving a McLaren. 

Suzy

2013 Porsche Boxster S (MT) | Basaltblack metallic
2012 Audi SQ5 TDI | Lavagrey metallic
 

AAHTT:

thats 100% incorrect. the seating position is great, ive driven this car for hundreds of miles at a time in great comfort and the suspension feel is better than my old 997TT which was too soft in comfort mode and too harsh in sport mode. oh and unlike the TT, it doesnt sound like a vacuum cleaner that makes me buy an expensive aftermarket exhaust..... . on the other hand there is no question the TT is the more reliable car and is prob bullet proof, but like christian said porsche should have upped the ante to over 600hp and made it king again for about 150-160k. if that was the case, i would be driving one today instead of the 12c.

--

2011 CTT, 2013 12C Spider, 2013 A5 cab, 2014 4Runner Trail Edition

 

 

I find the seats and the seating position in the McLaren extremely bad. Also, the suspension setup of the 997 turbo is widely known for its flaws and problems (front axle grip in particular). I am comparing to the current cars not to the old turbo but to current production cars and Porsche GT models.

The major problem of the McLaren is its synthetic feel. That's why I don't enjoy driving it enough to consider one.

AAHTT:

kudryavchik:

Actually, in reality TTS is more than 600 HP, it was measured on the dyno. I think it is not a great suprise that porsche is tend to lower the figures on the official data. I am very far from these 2 cars, but I don't understand, why Porsche cant even be more expensive than Mclaren. Porsche brand is much greater than mclaren... Technology is incomparable too, imho. How can people compare these two cars and brands in terms of technology when mclaren isn't able to design an engine...

 

maybe this can help bring you up to date: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkKT0rcTByM&feature=em-share_video_user

Hmm. What I should see there?

Mcl use Ricardo developed engine based on old nissan performance block...I believed it is not new to anybody.

sportcars-history.com

MKSGR:

 

The MP4-12C also is a car with synthetic suspension feel (due to computers working in unpredictable ways) and a bad seating position. I cannot see why somebody would consider the MP4-12C more a "super car" than a 991 turbo S 

For all the resons mention before and for the fact that no supercar is build at a 10.000/year rate.

J.Seven

Hank:

RC, I know of at least one, very reputable, tuner that is building an exhaust for the 991 TTS that should improve, dramatically, the exhaust note as well as add HP gains.  Given you geographic location, are you working with or know of other, experienced - credible, tuners working on the same?  

As far as I know (and heard), a tuner could not only achieve a better sound but also raise power by aprox. 20 hp (torque of course would be increased too) without any ECU mods. The problem for Porsche seems to be based on legal grounds, not technical issues. Due to the unique VTG charger characteristics, the sound would be too loud for certification. Porsche is not a very small manufacturer, so they have to fully meet the legal noise emissions standards.

So from a technical point of view, nothing speaks against a sport exhaust from a reputable exhaust manufacturer but you still need to be aware that the warranty for the car could be voided.

I would go with Akrapovic if they decide to offer one. I heard a rumor that they actually were participating in the testing of a titan exhaust for the 991 Turbo S without the necessary (legal certification) result. However, they could offer one as a third party supplier, which unfortunately still affects the warranty.

You usually get what you pay for, just keep that in mind. A 991 Turbo S sport exhaust won't be cheap, especially if it uses a flap system.

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Turbo S, Porsche Boxster S (981), BMW X3 35d (2013)

pretty good review of the turbo S:

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Drives/Search-Results/First-drives/Porsche-911-Turbo-S-2014-CAR-review/

andyFE:

pretty good review of the turbo S:

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Drives/Search-Results/First-drives/Porsche-911-Turbo-S-2014-CAR-review/

Are you sure this is a real review? It reads more like a short piece written together from other reviews, leaving away the details and...emotions.  

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Turbo S, Porsche Boxster S (981), BMW X3 35d (2013)

well, to me it sounds like the tester drove the car at length and reports his impressions. he seems to like the car, no?

kudryavchik:

Actually, in reality TTS is more than 600 HP, it was measured on the dyno.

I thought it was already established that this was a mistake, the testing having been done by the same guys who worked on the Mars Climate Orbiter, or something like that

apias:

kudryavchik:

Actually, in reality TTS is more than 600 HP, it was measured on the dyno.

I thought it was already established that this was a mistake, the testing having been done by the same guys who worked on the Mars Climate Orbiter, or something like that

People don't trust me.  

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Turbo S, Porsche Boxster S (981), BMW X3 35d (2013)