991.2 GTS
- Thread starter john synnuck
- Start date
Gorsh said:
I am going for the glass roof again on the GTS. I have it presently fitted to my existing GTS and make the inside a lot lighter. never have the blind closed. I have never experienced any rattlings or rigidity problems. A black glass roof on a white car is a nice contrast.
john synnuck
New member
I notice a number of you who have ordered cars have spec'd power steering plus. Is that as a result of current or previous experience?
This is from the Porsche app, which includes most of the car manuals. It mentions PASM, but is actually referring to PDCC.
My 991 Targa with PDCC, rides much better that the one I test drove without on the road. I have not tried it on the track.
well worth looking into further.
The PASM system actively adjusts the shock absorbers. The adjustable damper system selects the appropriate damping level for each wheel according to the driving situation and driving conditions. Driving safety, agility and comfort are optimised.
Two different chassis setups can be selected at the push of a button:
[*]"Chassis Normal”[*]"Chassis Sport”[/LIST]In Normal mode, the vehicle is in a sporty and comfortable setup.
Sport mode offers very sporty shock absorber tuning, e.g. for driving on the race circuit.
In addition to manual mode selection, PASM also adjusts shock absorber tuning for either sporty or comfort driving, depending on the driving situation.
[h2]Selecting the PASM mode[/h2]
My 991 Targa with PDCC, rides much better that the one I test drove without on the road. I have not tried it on the track.
well worth looking into further.
The PASM system actively adjusts the shock absorbers. The adjustable damper system selects the appropriate damping level for each wheel according to the driving situation and driving conditions. Driving safety, agility and comfort are optimised.
Two different chassis setups can be selected at the push of a button:
[*]"Chassis Normal”[*]"Chassis Sport”[/LIST]In Normal mode, the vehicle is in a sporty and comfortable setup.
Sport mode offers very sporty shock absorber tuning, e.g. for driving on the race circuit.
In addition to manual mode selection, PASM also adjusts shock absorber tuning for either sporty or comfort driving, depending on the driving situation.
[h2]Selecting the PASM mode[/h2]
I have now cancelled my C4s order for an April build 2GTS -
Sapphire blue
Red/black leather
PDK
Rear axle steering
Power steering plus
Plus a few other bits......
No glass roof. (My current one really creaks and rattles)
Trading a 4GTS in for this.
Went for a test drive of a C2s last week with rear steering and power steering plus and loved it. The rwd felt really light and nimble, quite different to my 4GTS. Loved the new 3ltr turbo, really quick although definitely doesn't sound as good.
The new gts is going to be a great car I think/hope.
Can't wait.
Sapphire blue
Red/black leather
PDK
Rear axle steering
Power steering plus
Plus a few other bits......
No glass roof. (My current one really creaks and rattles)
Trading a 4GTS in for this.
Went for a test drive of a C2s last week with rear steering and power steering plus and loved it. The rwd felt really light and nimble, quite different to my 4GTS. Loved the new 3ltr turbo, really quick although definitely doesn't sound as good.
The new gts is going to be a great car I think/hope.
Can't wait.
I have a 997 GTS Conv and was looking at spec for GTS 4 Targa. On the face of it the electric folding mirrors at no cost look a no brainer, however it seems if selected the sports design mirrors are replaced with regular mirrors albeit with illuminated entry/exit. The key TBD for me are seating options, PASM, rear axle steer, front lift and PDCC. I have adaptive seating on 997 GTS and to be honest they are not the best seats I've had. I'm 185lbs 6 foot and above average shoulder width, I use controls to open up bolsters to get decent fit across back and shoulders. So I'm trying to find out if 4 way sports plus seats that are std on GTS are any wider from outset than 997 GTS. I think 14 way seats whicha re a little roomier less bolstered would be perfect but cant get them with GTS package + alcantara package. Then I come to sports PASM which sets the car at -20mm lower with pronounced lower trim at front, current 997 GTS has -10mm lower and is prone to road rash normally over low road furniture. So not sure if PASM at -10mm is possible on gen 2 GTS as no cost option if not then front lift looks more usable/selectable despite cost than initially thought on Gen 2 GTS. I have lift on another car and it is useful. On to rear axle steer, for me this is attractive given it helps the car at lower and higher speeds, in time it may become std but I like it out of all chassis options. I'd pass on PDCC if it were not for possibly having to take Sports PASM instead of regular PASM. I think the stiffer and shorter springs on Sports PASM may need PDCC to make average road driving less of a pain in the back/rear. If only using it for track work, (which it will not be) Sports PASM, rear axle steer would negate need for PDCC. However, UK roads may suit the PDCC. In conclusion, my issue is that I want PDK, the GTS package is attractive but costly (there is no leather alt with double stitch so have to pay the 4.5k for that), then pick a few chassis options and you quickly have a car heading into the 120's. I can convince myself of the PDK, rear axle steer, GTS/Alcantara package, PDCC, front lift and perhaps adaptive seats and pay the final cost circa 124k, are we saying however that the market won't get sticker shock on cars with resale values in 120's for a non turbo model 991? Sorry to ramble but just a few thoughts as I spec my car.
john synnuck
New member
john synnuck said:
Now going for Agate instead of Carmine. Saw a 991.1 in this colour and it looks fantastic.
[FONT=calibri"]Just a few personal observations on some of the points raised.![[FONT=verdana,geneva"]](/forum/styles/default/pcgb/space.gif ". [FONT=verdana,geneva\"]")
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]In my view RWS is the standout difference between 997 and 991. Particularly at low speed where the turn in is noticeably sharper. At higher speed the effect seems less pronounced though no doubt it is still providing a worthwhile improvement over non RWS configurations. Well worth paying for in my view though the long term reliability of the stepper motors is as yet unproven.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]I prefer cars to feel as though they are cornering flat with an absence of roll and therefore I like PDCC. However, it has generally come as standard so I haven’t faced the issue of whether I would pay for it as an option but on balance I probably would. I have not done a back to back comparison with a car without PDCC and quite how much ride control is PASM and how much PDCC is maybe hard to disaggregate. With the best will in the world Porsche offer a distinctly firm ride and it is a moot point whether PDCC adds much to that. It would be nice to think that Porsche might one day move to the more sophisticated systems that are now employed elsewhere.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]N/A or turbo? In the end the 991.1 GTS went because it didn’t quite deliver and the 991.2 C2 loan car proved equally fun to drive. That said if turbo performance were available N/A that would be a thought….
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]I thought the sun roof compromised the stiffness of the GTS and would not spec one again. It also adds weight too high up the car. As Clive has said cutting a hole in the roof will surely compromise stiffness unless reinforcement is added elsewhere. It can be done but at a cost that may not be justifiable for mass market offerings.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]Rear wiper used to be standard but now it is an option I don’t spec it. It is only needed when stationary as the airflow on the move keeps the rear screen clear.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]Outside the GT range I don’t see the need for lift and don’t spec it as it is just another thing to go wrong one day.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]No one has mentioned the second thing I spec after heated seats. PDLS+ a magic box of tricks if ever there was one and well worth paying extra for.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]In my view RWS is the standout difference between 997 and 991. Particularly at low speed where the turn in is noticeably sharper. At higher speed the effect seems less pronounced though no doubt it is still providing a worthwhile improvement over non RWS configurations. Well worth paying for in my view though the long term reliability of the stepper motors is as yet unproven.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]I prefer cars to feel as though they are cornering flat with an absence of roll and therefore I like PDCC. However, it has generally come as standard so I haven’t faced the issue of whether I would pay for it as an option but on balance I probably would. I have not done a back to back comparison with a car without PDCC and quite how much ride control is PASM and how much PDCC is maybe hard to disaggregate. With the best will in the world Porsche offer a distinctly firm ride and it is a moot point whether PDCC adds much to that. It would be nice to think that Porsche might one day move to the more sophisticated systems that are now employed elsewhere.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]N/A or turbo? In the end the 991.1 GTS went because it didn’t quite deliver and the 991.2 C2 loan car proved equally fun to drive. That said if turbo performance were available N/A that would be a thought….
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]I thought the sun roof compromised the stiffness of the GTS and would not spec one again. It also adds weight too high up the car. As Clive has said cutting a hole in the roof will surely compromise stiffness unless reinforcement is added elsewhere. It can be done but at a cost that may not be justifiable for mass market offerings.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]Rear wiper used to be standard but now it is an option I don’t spec it. It is only needed when stationary as the airflow on the move keeps the rear screen clear.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]Outside the GT range I don’t see the need for lift and don’t spec it as it is just another thing to go wrong one day.
[FONT=calibri"]
[FONT=calibri"]No one has mentioned the second thing I spec after heated seats. PDLS+ a magic box of tricks if ever there was one and well worth paying extra for.
Gorsh
New member
Fully agree on that, got it on my BGTS and one of the things I would tick despite the high cost - adds LED lights too which are surely better than Bi-Xenon?lowndes said:[FONT=calibri"]No one has mentioned the second thing I spec after heated seats. PDLS+ a magic box of tricks if ever there was one and well worth paying extra for.
I remain unconvinced rear wheel steer is worth having to the exclusion other features.
The steering angle of the rear wheels is varied by up to 2.8 degrees. So at speeds up to 31 mph, the system steers the rear wheels in the opposite direction, corresponding to virtual shortening of the wheelbase by 9.8 inches. At speeds above 50 mph, it steers the rear wheels parallel to the front wheels, the equivalent of virtual lengthening the wheelbase by 19.6 inches.
Most people say manoeuvrability is noticeably improved at low speed, but the advantages become less obvious at high speed. As its a sports car, is low speed manoeuvrability really so important? Most of us have been doing without it for a very long time now and if the perceived high speed benefits are minimal, is it really worth having in terms of cost, complexity and increased vulnerability of the moving rear wheel mechanism?
If the budget allows I would have everything but if there are budget constraints, I would be looking at PDCC in preference to RWS every time. [
]
Regards,
Clive
The steering angle of the rear wheels is varied by up to 2.8 degrees. So at speeds up to 31 mph, the system steers the rear wheels in the opposite direction, corresponding to virtual shortening of the wheelbase by 9.8 inches. At speeds above 50 mph, it steers the rear wheels parallel to the front wheels, the equivalent of virtual lengthening the wheelbase by 19.6 inches.
Most people say manoeuvrability is noticeably improved at low speed, but the advantages become less obvious at high speed. As its a sports car, is low speed manoeuvrability really so important? Most of us have been doing without it for a very long time now and if the perceived high speed benefits are minimal, is it really worth having in terms of cost, complexity and increased vulnerability of the moving rear wheel mechanism?
If the budget allows I would have everything but if there are budget constraints, I would be looking at PDCC in preference to RWS every time. [
]Regards,
Clive
Gorsh
New member
Lancerlot said:If the budget allows I would have everything but if there are budget constraints, I would be looking at PDCC in preference to RWS every time. [
Regards,
Clive
Clive - you can't have PDCC without also having RWS. On the other hand you can have RWS on it's own - that is why I was asking earlier if anyone had experience of PDCC with RWS, and also RWS on it's own and what they thought of the difference as I wondered if most of the good things people experience with PDCC were down to also having RWS.
I understand what you say, as if budget is tight the car would still be great without these options. From what I have read most owners and testers/reviewers think the RWS makes a real difference and would have it again, where PDCC gets very mixed reviews with many people saying they wouldn't have it again.
The only way is for each potential owner to try both and decide for themselves.
Gordon.
Monty911 said:
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
