I still don't see how the 997 Turbo understeers on street tires, I have heavy understeer only with cold Michelin Cup tires. After they increase temperature, they stick like hell but it takes too long during street driving and another problem is dirt from the road which sticks to the tire, the Cup tires are like a dirt collector.
Meaning: Cup tires are useless for street driving, they make the 997 Turbo more difficult to handle, especially since you need to adapt to temperature changes AND you need to have the right tire pressure. Lowering the tire pressure for street driving is too dangerous since the Cup tire builds up heat only slowly (street) and you need to reach the recommended values very fast to avoid longterm (invisible) tire damage. For street driving, stick to street tires, they're even good for a couple of fast rounds on the track.
No matter what the reviews have told us, the 997 Turbo is still a very fast car but I agree that it is more difficult to control at the limit than the 996 Turbo for example. Still, a pro driver can squeeze out a bit more out of the 997 Turbo than he could squeeze out of the 996 Turbo but the difference isn't as big as people may think and it actually is susprisingly bigger on tight tracks with lots of twists and turns. The 997 Turbo did almost the same track time like the 997 GT3 in Hockenheim, a "low speed" track, so I guess that we can still assume that this is an impressive car. However, I think that Porsche made a couple of development mistakes, maybe even by purpose.
I remember when a lot of customers were making complaints about the too neutral setup of the 996 Turbo back in 2000.
They claimed the 996 Turbo is too boring, not involving enough, etc. etc. (sounds familiar?
). Porsche took this to their heart and created a 911 Turbo successor with a more "classic" handling behaviour, meaning: heavy oversteer.
To be honest, I don't like this setup. I drive my car to enjoy it and to be fast. Heavy oversteer may be fun for some adolescents proving their drifting skills but for me, this is actually a fun killer since it makes the car slowlier under certain driving conditions. We could argue all day long what is fun and what isn't but on a AWD car, I definetely expect a more neutral setup, not a behaviour like in a RWD. The latest Sport Auto actually indicates pretty well the existing flaws and although the 997 Turbo is still the hell of a sportscar, the competition is at the same performance level or even slightly better. Of course the GT2 may change things but comparing the new 997 Turbo to the old one, I get a bad taste on my tongue. All that new technology (VTG, PASM, PTM, etc.) and the new 997 Turbo is actually slowlier on the Nordschleife than the old one? (considering that the tested 997 Turbo had Cup tires and the tested 996 Turbo didn't). Then take the additional 60 HP in the 997 Turbo and this car looks even more bad.
Don't get me wrong, I love my 997 Turbo and I would never exchange it for a 996 Turbo again. The only thing I'm upset about is the fact that Porsche did it again: instead of improving a product substantially, they actually just created the same thing around new technology which was actually NOT necessary. There may be some benefit regarding the VTG technology but what is it good to have an electronically controlled AWD if it isn't as good as the "old" mechanical one? I don't get it.
Especially with the manual transmission, the 997 Turbo doesn't seem to benefit at all from the new AWD system. I'm also disappointed that Porsche didn't offer an optional real sport suspension on the 997 Turbo instead of PASM. PASM hasn't impressed anybody so far, so I wonder why they still stick to it? Is it pride? Is Porsche stuck in longterm contracts to achieve a better price? I don't get it. PASM sucks and the only advantage it has is actually a psychological one: making the car stiffer provides a sportier FEEL but the truth is that the car is actually slowlier on ANY track with speeds over 60 kph or so.
With the exception of the Corvette Z06, the 997 Turbo is still one of the best bangs for your buck considering the overall performance and reliability. I'm just not sure if the customers really asked for this? In the "good old days", the 911 Turbo was the synonyme for a killer sportscar. Nowadays, people have the feeling that it is more of a modern do-it-all Grand Tourismo. It still is as fast as a 997 GT3 on tight tracks on the right tires but after a couple of rounds, the additional weight of the 997 Turbo shows. So what is the 997 Turbo? In my opinion, the 997 Turbo is a good successor to the 996 Turbo but unfortunately not the "killer application" I expected from Porsche. The reasons may be obvious: cost AND customer dumbness. Why should Porsche spend more money on a product if it sells anyway? If it sells slowlier, improvements are easily possible since they started with the "base performance". I don't like this strategy at all, it may provide Porsche with additional income from a GT2, powerkit, Turbo S model, etc. but for me as a customer, this marketing strategy is not only obvious, it hits me in the face.
Next time I'll think twice before buying a new 911 Turbo and this comes from a "hardcore" 911 Turbo fan. If Porsche wants my money next time, they need to work harder. Otherwise, I'll have to go shopping elsewhere and it never has been easier to find another "pretty daughter" than nowadays. The competition is getting harder for Porsche.
but very informative as always 
