Second thoughts on a Cayman GTS - Page 1 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

With Henry ( http://www.evo.co.uk/porsche/911-carrera/16923/201... ) giving such a great review of the new turbocharged 3.0 Carrera engines, is anyone having second thoughts on how good Porsche could make those new turbo charged fours for the Boxster/Cayman 981.2? I'm waiting for a possible CGTS allocation, could it worth waiting for the 981.2?

Will that flat six twin turbo ever see the inside of a Cayman. Nice colour that 991.2

anonymous said: [redacted] Exactly it'll be gash.

Whilst I would agree that a NA engine will undoubtably be more of a drivers engine my point was that if Porsche can make such a good job of the 6 pot turbo, why won't they make a great job of the 4 pot turbo?

Whilst I would agree that a NA engine will undoubtably be more of a drivers engine my point was that if Porsche can make such a good job of the 6 pot turbo, why won't they make a great job of the 4 pot turbo?

This is an interesting opinion, Mr. Frankel's review of the 981 Cayman was spot on, in my worthless opinion anyway. http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/road-cars/opinio... Edited by robj4 on Tuesday 10th November 20:52

robj4 said: This is an interesting opinion, Mr. Frankel's review of the 981 Cayman was spot on, in my worthless opinion anyway. http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/road-cars/opinio... Edited by robj4 on Tuesday 10th November 20:52 A lot has changed. The frustrating thing is that, relative to the realistic alternatives the 911 is still the 911. There aren't many things you could substitute it for with a straight face. But I agree that it's appeal for some of us started to wane after (or even during in some cases!) the 997 generation (excluding GT models - I would love a 7.2RS). So many of our heroes seem to be selling out as grow older, at least in terms of their politics and the company they keep. Impressive on paper, slightly underwhelming (if comfy!) in person. Losing some of that certain something. A bit like the rest of us... I don't own a 911 and might not get the chance any time soon (if ever) but having driven a tired 964, a 993 and a 996 C4, all of which I enjoyed hugely (albeit as slight variations on a very distinctive and tactile theme compared to most mainstream transport) I'm not liking the sound of these very much. But I guess they are more usable so you don't fell bad about having a classic in the garage Pleased that Frankel is still jotting for Motorsport though.

anonymous said: [redacted] Not picking a fight Jeremy and the offer still stands to have a spin in the C4S, but have you ever driven a JDM Subaru Impreza?, 2 ltr rev hungry, 8000rpm redline 360hp (after a remap) four pot flat four turbo? It's pretty f king good, in fact let's be honest it's not even just the better JDM car that's fun, all the STI impreza's are a hoot to drive, just the JDM being a bit special. So if the new four pot in the Cayman is as good or better than the JDM Impreza lump what's the worry other than history? Edited by Budflicker on Wednesday 11th November 06:00

Budflicker said: So if the new four pot in the Cayman is as good or better than the JDM Impreza lump what's the worry other than history? Edited by Budflicker on Wednesday 11th November 06:00 Having enjoyed owning 2 scoobies I have a lot of sympathy with that point of view. It frustrates me that detractors lump all turbos together, ignoring how many turbos the engine has (BMW use up to 4) and whether they are fixed or variable geometry, single or twin scroll or electrically assisted. I have absolutely no doubt that Porsche COULD produce a 4 pot turbo with which I would be perfectly happy. UNFORTUNATELY it seems that Porsche are going for a single fixed vane turbo, which I suspect won't be that inspiring, given that it has to satisfy economy constraints. But we will see.

Also this one http://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/911-carrera-s-2... If I was in the market I'd buy a 981 Cayman right now and keep it till I died.

I can't normally be ar$ed with these new v old threads but a flat four? Honestly! The engine in a sports car is vital to it's character and a flat six is a marvellous thing to wring out. I can't think of a worse option than a flat four- they're low rent, Briggs and Stratton sounding lumps of awfulness. Quoting Subaru's doesn't help, it reinforces the point. Not sure on turbos, I might end up going against the grain- dunno.

I know it's a done deal for the 981.2, but will sales figures change future versions? The people who take time to read and post in forums, usually care about what they are driving. Will the general public just carry on ordering what they want, sometimes people just want THAT model. Can Porsche go back on their plans? Or is this a done deal to keep the top of the range RS versions as they want? I was told that Aston Martin only offer the Cygnet so they can keep offering the the top range engines, don't know if that's true.

Budflicker said: Not picking a fight Jeremy and the offer still stands to have a spin in the C4S, but have you ever driven a JDM Subaru Impreza?, 2 ltr rev hungry, 8000rpm redline 360hp (after a remap) four pot flat four turbo? It's pretty f king good, in fact let's be honest it's not even just the better JDM car that's fun, all the STI impreza's are a hoot to drive, just the JDM being a bit special. So if the new four pot in the Cayman is as good or better than the JDM Impreza lump what's the worry other than history? Edited by Budflicker on Wednesday 11th November 06:00 My last car was a JDM WRX STI Impreza which had been fiddled with my Litchfield imports (It was a Type 20). I massively prefer the 3.4 NA lump in my Cayman R. Then again, in my 18 months of Impreza ownership I never really got the whole Impreza thing. It had tons of grip and could devour roads at a terrifying pace but somehow it left me a bit cold and uninterested. Strangely enough, so did the two days I've spent with the Cayman GTS, albeit for very different reasons.

Boggle73 said: I know it's a done deal for the 981.2, but will sales figures change future versions? The people who take time to read and post in forums, usually care about what they are driving. Will the general public just carry on ordering what they want, sometimes people just want THAT model. Can Porsche go back on their plans? Or is this a done deal to keep the top of the range RS versions as they want? I was told that Aston Martin only offer the Cygnet so they can keep offering the the top range engines, don't know if that's true. Ive heard the same story, what i cant understand is why porsche couldn't release something polo sized to keep the n/a engines in the sports car range.

Would make total sense if that has any truth to it. We have heard the number 717 I think, passed around somewhere. Could this be the new smaller model?

chriscoates81 said: Ive heard the same story, what i cant understand is why porsche couldn't release something polo sized to keep the n/a engines in the sports car range. Aston did do that for that reason but I have been told from someone in the know that it didnt work out for them, it offset the emissions and let them continue at the other end of the scale but i dont think it was counted as such due to type of engine/parts/companies involved etc. I think people will keep buying the cayman even with the new turbo engine, the majority of people I would think arnt that bothered about what is powering it as long as it does what they consider a decent job. personally I jumped at the chance of getting a flat 6 as that noise and the technology is cracking

chriscoates81 said: Ive heard the same story, what i cant understand is why porsche couldn't release something polo sized to keep the n/a engines in the sports car range. Whether the car would actually sell or not, either way it would devalue their brand. What they should do is offer plugin hybrids with N/A engines. Best of both worlds - massive torque, razor sharp throttle response, emotional sound and stupid low CO2 numbers with the current test cycles. The reason why they can't do this is because it would be too heavy in the current cars, they'll need a carbon fiber tub to offset the weight of the motor and battery. That would require a complete redesign which isn't on the table until the next generation. BMW's i3 proves that the technology is ready for mass market carbon tubs at the premium price point. The material is not pretty but it works and even the i3 is a brilliant handling car due to the unusually low centre of gravity. Imagine that as a low slung mid-engined car with Porsche's sportscar DNA. It would be absolutely spectacular and I hope that Porsche is heading in this direction. So in my eyes turbo engines are nothing but a stop gap.

EricE said: Whether the car would actually sell or not, either way it would devalue their brand. What they should do is offer plugin hybrids with N/A engines. Best of both worlds - massive torque, razor sharp throttle response, emotional sound and stupid low CO2 numbers with the current test cycles. The reason why they can't do this is because it would be too heavy in the current cars, they'll need a carbon fiber tub to offset the weight of the motor and battery. That would require a complete redesign which isn't on the table until the next generation. BMW's i3 proves that the technology is ready for mass market carbon tubs at the premium price point. The material is not pretty but it works and even the i3 is a brilliant handling car due to the unusually low centre of gravity. Imagine that as a low slung mid-engined car with Porsche's sportscar DNA. It would be absolutely spectacular and I hope that Porsche is heading in this direction. So in my eyes turbo engines are nothing but a stop gap. I think the problem with that in a 911/cayman/boxster is sheer space. I imagine that batteries + electric motor would take up more space than the turbo and intercoolers just fitted. Actually i guess it would be easier in the cayman/boxster as there is a bit more space at the back. Ive not looked into it but is the i8 quite light?

MrLizard said: chriscoates81 said: Ive heard the same story, what i cant understand is why porsche couldn't release something polo sized to keep the n/a engines in the sports car range. Aston did do that for that reason but I have been told from someone in the know that it didnt work out for them, it offset the emissions and let them continue at the other end of the scale but i dont think it was counted as such due to type of engine/parts/companies involved etc. Aston had the cygnet to get their fleet average figures down. Porsche may not need to if they are considered to be part of the VW empire as VAG can use their economy models to get Porsches fleet averages down.

I had my 2003 E46 330ci straight six for 9 years. Becoming costly after 130k miles I looked for something else. Audi TTS S-Tronic beguiled me with its "blap... blap... blap..." on acceleration, but after 15 months I tired of the turbo cutting in and out and not allowing a linear power curve linked to my right foot. The other thing wrong with it was the 4WD. Very sure footed I'm sure BUT I could never work out its limits. Now I'm in (since Friday) a base Cayman PDK. Once again I have a free revving, high revving, RWD car with a great engine note. I for one will never touch another turbo'd petrol car again (wife's A3 2.0 Tdi is great!). So as the previous poster said, I'll have to take this one to my grave. Now maybe, just maybe, Porsche will get it right with the 4 pot 981.2 turbo but unless it has twin turbos, which I doubt in the base model, it won't be one I'd ever consider. I guess not many 911 991 owners have complained about their set up? Is that because all the "enthusiasts" are keeping their NA cars for ever, and the new owners are buying just for the sake of having the newest toy?