911 in 2004 (Source= R&T)

According to the latest Road and Track, the 911 might receive the V8 from the Cayenne. Opinions? It'll be fast alright...but a V8 doesn't sound like a Flat 6. Also the V8 will weigh more than the flat 6...thus increasing weight.

Why in the world!! IMO, if it works for a SUV it can�t work for a sportcar; big, heavy and slow reving V8 on a 911? I don�t care how much power it has, its not about power but overall sport performace. Maybe for an MB automatic but I don�t think Porsche has gone that mad to use the SUV�s V8 on the 911, they can still pull some more power from the current 6 cilinder boxer engine and maintain its caracter. Carlos.

Character - smaracter :-) I'd love to have the sound and low end torque that only a V8 can provide in the back of my 911! I also don't think it's a given that the weight will be that much higher. There are other materials that can be used on that motor and perhaps some other weight adjustments made to the car to compensate for the weight. Then again, let's not forget the TT is 3500! So, the non-TT is already considerably lighter than the current beast. Personally, I've not seen too many people complaining about the weight of that 420hp/420 lb monster :-)

With BMW picking up the pace with their V8s, I've wondered what might become of the current day's 911 derivatives to pack in more power. A flat 8? A V8? In spite of my personal preferences for the V8, I think Porsche would be nuts to move away from the boxer engine configuration--fans of the 911 might well turn away. Perhaps a flat-8? I bet they could fit one in the Boxster, creating an "uber roadster." On the other hand--ignoring buyer acceptance issues--perhaps Porsche could actually build a light V8 and make it work in the butt end of the Carrera. It wouldn't be the first time they've considered it: http://www.pelicanparts.com/literatu..._blueprint.htm

What's so awful about a V-8? Those guys in Italy make a pretty decent lightweight V-8. And remember, Porsche has built some sweet ones as well. Their V-8 finished second in the CART championship ('89 I believe), and probably would have won outright in the next year if the team owners hadn't changed the rules to effectively outlaw the team (again, as I recall-someone correct me if I have this wrong) Also wasn't the TAG F1 engine a V-8? When you think about it, didn't life get more interesting when the factory went from a flat 4 to flat 6? It could happen again. And who knows, maybe the next 911 engine will even be ahead of the rear wheels (I guess I can think such provocative, even blasphemous, thoughts -- I've already got my flat sixes.)

ok, why not put the motor, a flat configuration, right on top of the rear axel? This way they can still call it a rear engine for traditionas sake, but in reality it's more of a semi mid/rear engine. Better weight distribution.

Yes, a more powerful mid-engine would be fantastic. Wouldn't it be great to get near 50/50 distribution?

Nothing at all wrong with V8's, per se. I used to own one of those Italian V8's, in fact. Sounded better than anything I've had the pleasure to be near. But it was mid-engined, and cab-forward to fit the engine in there. And long. Now then -- there is no way to fit a V8 into a 911 and still have it be a rear-engined car with the approximate same shape and size. Won't fit. Maybe a flat 8, but anybody who has seen how the current flat 6 is wedged in there knows there is no way a 911-shaped GT car will ever hold a V8.

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] http://www.renegadehybrids.com/images/911eng.jpg

Note the dramatic lack of accessory and auxilliary equipment, such as alternator, power steering, air conditioning, etc. Also the severe lack of plumbing. So, even if this is a real V8 block in a real 911 chassis (of which there is some doubt), it definitely is not one with more power than the current 3.6 at 320 hp, is not one which would ever meet current pollution requirements, does not use fuel injection (would you like a single carb with your V8?), and won't provide the things a modern production car must have. And if this is the real thing, I bet it gives whole new meanings to the terms "trailing throttle oversteer", "tail happy", and "polar moment of intertia". Basically, it's an unusable pig. So, I say again, odds are better than 99 out of 100 that Porsche will not put a V8 into a 911 body and still have it look like a 911. Never a Dull Moment

Chris : Did you read the page that the image links to? I never said it was a good idea, I just said it will fit. Personally I think that Porsche should build a good mid-engine car with a good weight ratio.

Chris check out the latest Road & Track. they have a spy photo that they claim is a test mule for the next generation car. still looks like a 996, only longer. I was trying to figure where exactly the engine was, but couldn't tell for sure. Mike in chi

I can't BELIEVE George hasn't shown himself here!

Sorry, Tabor. I hadn't noticed that the photo was a link as well. I'll go take a look.

As far as weight is concerned, I believe a small block chevy V8 is actually lighter than a flat 6. Personally I'd like to see Porsche either go to a flat 8 (for tradition) or start mass producing a flat 6 GT3 engine variant with 350-400 hp. And make it available only in a "S" version...

Porsche must try to use engines across its model range to save money and add performance. A small hitech V8 midshipped, in a 911 with 4 valves with paddleshifters ala Ferrari /BMW and 400-450HP normally aspirated could be a blast all day long. The current Porsche GT3 engine is supergreat......but is developed and folks there isnt much more power to be had in that drivetrain. Perhaps a fresh sheet of paper is what Porsche is thinking. Might be better than OK

Here in Spain, the magazines say that in 2004-2005 the 911 will get a 3.8 liter engine with 350HP. This is to differentiate it more from the Boxer which at that time will get a "coupe" version with 230HP or a 3.4liter 290HP version. Carlos from Spain 996 C4

This week's Autoweek has pix of a "mule." Wider, taller and longer than current 996. I just don't know what I would do with a preturbo 450 bhp!

Is this a MY2004 available late 2003? Or MY2005 available in 2004? Never understood what "due for introduction in 2004" means? If it's introduction to the press, that mean we can't get it until 2005? Can't wait! Already started a $10K investment portfolio in speculative stocks... challgenging myself to make enough money for an trade-in in 2004. Paul

Why does reality bother some of you so much? Ask the Porsche race drivers who are getting their *** whipped every race by the V8 BMW's if they'd like a V8! I hate to be this crude but like George Carlin I point out stupidity when I see it. 1. Carlos from Spain, you're an idiot. Many V8s are not necessarily big, heavy or slow revving. But they can be very powerful. George's IRON BLOCK, PUSHROD v8 weighs 100 lbs LESS than an alloy, high tech porsche turbo motor. I have said this several times before on the boards but reality apparently poses an unsurmountable obstacle for some of you. Also George's v8 will rev to 7200 in a hummingbird's heartbeat. And if you think the current motor has more power in it, call Pete at Andial with your wondrous suggestions. He's looking EVERY DAY. 2. Chris Johnson, you're an idiot too. What do you mean IF? It's there in the picture. Tabor kelly is not some schill for Renegade, he's a PURIST. Lack of accesory belts? What do you think, they drive the car 'till the battery runs down then put in a new one. George's car has much more in the area of creature comforts now than when it left Stuttgart. And those sweet revving and sounding Italian V8's don't make the kind of power George does either. VERY few rev as quickly either. And at the 100 to 1 odds that you mention, how much would you like to wager. If you bet enough, I pay for the plane ticket to fly you in and prove you're a fool. I have NO doubt that Porsche can build a fine, powerful, superior V8. Time marches on. Reality, it's a bitch. PS the V8 that Porsche built was the fastest NA car in the stable every year it was built. My 14 yr old one still beats $60K to $80k 6 cyl. wundercars regularly.

Carlos from Spain (idiot) I can tell by reading your post you have not a clue about performance nor going fast. My V8 weighs 100lbs less than the porsche motor and revs faster than any porsche motor I have seen. I have a rollor motor so it's not the same as some pickup truck motor that you might think. Chris Johnson (moron) 99 out of a 100 well I guess the SWAMP MONSTER is 100 because it lives and breathes. I would say a few twin turbos will tell you the same that have crossed my path. If porsche wiil get their head out of the sand and go ahead with the V8 like I did 3 years ago it would be first on race day instead of last in line. Just some food for thought Rod Simpson goes 1.22 at willow springs with a 911- V8 porsche. Team factory porsche can't touch him whats wrong with that picture? SWAMP MONSTER

"Many V8s are not necessarily big, heavy or slow revving." Some excerps from Bimmer magazine re: the new M5 V8 engine in the M3GTR vs. the 6 cylinder they were running: "It (M5 V8)...only weighs six pounds more than the inline six. It also sits down in there nicer than the six, which means it has a lower center of gravity". For those complaining about Porsche possibly putting in an 8 cyl in our 911s, just ask the guys driving the factory Porsche GT3s after the end of this racing season what they think. Now that BMW has gotten the reliability and fuel consumptions problems taken care of, the Porsche GT3 drivers are likely to be eating a bunch of V8 M3GTR tail pipe this season!

George and Carlos, it�s very easy to insult over the net, but I�m not( I�m 29 yoa. and quite mature - in reference to the rennlist post "rennlist ages" of which you two were the subject of due to you imature way of interacting with other people). Now, if you re-read the post again (and I suggest you two do this regularly to avoid looking "idiotic") you will notice I was reffering to a V8 DESIGNED FOR A SUV! (which is what the original post said.)which are heavier and larger and NOT REFFERING TO HIGH-END SPORTCAR V8� (The F360M and Vette Z06 are good examples of sport-oriented V8�s.) If Porsche develops a V8 911, I don�t thick its going to be from Porsche�s SUV platform, which was the post I responded to. Carlos and George, there is notthing wrong with posting your opinions, but the way you express them will get you nowere and make the other members loose respect and credibility for you. Carlos "from Spain". 996 C4

Carlos from Spain, Regardless of what you may think, my reading and comprehension skills are high. I clearly understood what you said in your original post. If you have been influenced to change your opinion now that is entirely up to you. And as to your claim of whatever level of maturity, I think that will be judged by the content of your posts rather than claims. Your statement that "I was reffering to a V8 DESIGNED FOR A SUV! (which is what the original post said.)which are heavier and larger and NOT REFFERING TO HIGH-END SPORTCAR V8� (The F360M and Vette Z06 are good examples of sport-oriented V8�s.)" indicates the depth of knowledge you posess on this subject. Engines are rarely "designed" for the tasks which the end up performing. The Porsche flat six evolved from the flat 4 designed by Dr. Porshe for Hitler's "peoples car." I don't think the 993tt was envisioned at that point. The small block Chevy's first job was powering the '55 Chevy sedan. Not one engineer involved in that project would have believed that it was capable of producing 800 hp for 500 or more miles of racing. Ferarri is a different story. A sound design provides a platform from which engineers can tune the engine in whatever direction they need to go.

Whew - the things people argue about. Just for a little clarification - the Autoweek article also mentioned the possibility of a Flat 8 that produces better than 450hp. There are pros/cons to both engine configurations. A few things you can be sure of: (1) The rear/mid engine configuration will continue (2) Porsche will continue to provide a vehicle of higher performance and handling than previous model years. If they use a V8 to accomplish that goal, you can be sure it will not be big, heavy, and slow reving. (3) Porsche is more concerned about performance than tradition. It understood the requirements for water cooling in the larger engines and it went that way. If they feel an alternate engine configuration is the way to achieve its performance goals, there is no doubt it will proceed in that direction.

I love my Porsche but you guys take it to another level. WOW JD 2000 C4

Yes, I'd say so. All this talk of a new Porsche is very exciting to me. We have the 993's and now the 996's , not to mention all the other's (I love 928's and have one too) and the idea of more Porsches is great to me. I don't want to own them all; the 924's and 944's didn't do much for me, the 911's after '73 and up to the 993 aren't really apealing to me, but that's alright. Just my preference. But then I can always find some affinity for anything with the Porsche moniker. I love these cars and the company and love being a part of the group. So, sentimentality aside, when I catch wind of something new brewing in Stuttgart, I get excited and wait with salivating attention to the next incarnation from my favorite car manufacturer. I appreciate the need for criticism and critique, especially from those of us who own and use these vehicles. I know the company listens. But the vision of Porsche, in the beginning, was one man's. And the success of the organization to date in astonishing. I say to Porsche thank you and well done...and keep up the good work. As I did with my 996, I look forward to driving another new Porsche off the lot and marveling in the performance and aesthetics to come from 50 years of the relentless persuit of driving perfection. .02�

Now thats more like it, Carlos. That last post was an excellent and well put post. No flamming and no getting **** about irrelevant matters. I didn�t intend to bother to reply to the following posts since I though it was going to be like the other ones but you showed me otherwise Now, the thing about that high-end sportcar engines are not designed for the specific car... Porsche has been doing that since the 60�s! Has you seen Porsche develop�ng an engine (especially whan it comes to the 911 which is our subject) that was designed for other cars. So if Porsche is going to drop a new engine on the rear of a 2005 911 then its sure not going to be a multipurpose engine (such a the GM or Chevy small block) and its going to be "designed" with the 911 in mind. Same goes for Ferrari, Lotus, Lamborghini, Maseratti, Aston Martin, Bugatti,BMW M cars... and the list goes on. You may be confused by American sport cars which are a different story but Porsche is European as the others I mentioned. Personally I would not mind an 8cil. engine on the new 911 but only if it does not hinder performance-handling at all whatsoever no matter how much more HP it adds, i.e. I�d rather drive a Lotus Elise than a Mus"tank". But if someone can do that its going to be Porsche so why worry. It would preffer a flat-8 rather than a V8 but a flat-8 is less space efficient than a V8 so it would be interesting to see how they solve it. Carlos

Whoa! It would not be the first time Porsche used a truck engine in one of their cars. The 924 used an engine that was originally desinged by Audi, but was also used in AMC trucks! Now, Porsche slapped a new head on it and it was fine. Also, Aston Martin's new V12 is essentially 2 Ford Taurus V6s. Finally, you say good things about the Vette V8, but then you say bad things about it, what gives?

Adrial, There is additional detail in the latest Autoweek regarding the next generation 911 (997). They surmized that since the test mule they saw was wider and longer than the current 996, it could potentially mean there would be room for a larger engine. Autoweek went on to speculate that it could be a flat 8 (Porsche has a great deal of experience with flat-8's) or the V-8 from the Cayanne (sp?). They went on to say that sources from Porsche implied the newest engine would be an evolution of the current 3.6 liter motor (not the M96) and could have 3.8 liters and about 350 HP. We'll see. T.Marc Jones 996 C4 SF CA

Before ya'll become orgasmic thinking about the flat engine design, Here's a few people who haven't been pursuaded. All of the formula 1 teams, all of the racers at Indy, all of the cart teams and everybody else in the world but Porsche and Subaru. My bet is that most of the people here talking about how poorly a v8 would fit in a 911 have never seen one. The thing that amazed me when I first saw George's car was how well the Chevy v8 fit the car. No doubt a Porsche designed v8 would fit "like it was made for it."

Actually the most space efficient would be a V8 (with the exception of Volkswagen�s VR�s setup) and like Carlos said, the only ones using boxer engins is Subaru and Porsche because they are more expensive and a lot wider (the advantage is that they are better balanced that a V8). So if space is a problem a flat-plane crankshaft V8 would be nice such as Lotus, Ferrari an TVR�s rev-happy/high top-end flat-plane V8�s. Anyway, the rumors here in Europe are still that they will "just" increase displacement to 3.8l and 350HP for 2004-2005, like T. Marc Jones says. I could live with that Tabor, that was a good example (924 engine), but thats why I said "specially when it comes to the 911" since there are a few exceptions as with everything. As far as Vette�s LS1 (cross-palne crankshaft BTW) engine, I think its a really good, in fact brilliant, engine but not my personal type of engine. So I may say good things about it and some bad things. I personally like high-fast-reving engines with a kicking top-end which are more harmonious with my driving style (such as BMW M3 L-6 3.2l and F360M 3.5l V8) vs. torquey and large displacement engines. But thats just a matter of personal taste which matters very little here Carlos from Spain.

Really? I think that the LS1 is an aluminum version on an engine that was designed in 1955, and that it isn't anything special. I also think that it makes the Z06 fast I agree 100%. But I hear that you can make a Chevy 350 rev aweful fast. But I have no personal expierience with them.

Hey guys, it appears to me that the car you are talking about is the new Porsche 928. From what I've read it's to be ready in 2004, powered by the engine, transmission and rear axle developed for Cheyenne. The engine is mounted in the front just like the good ole 928s. Therefore, it could look just like a longer 996. Personally, I think it's great that they are putting the 928 back to life!

For those of you who dislike the idea of putting a V-8 in the back of a 996, I really want to know, why? The 996 is not what a 911 used to be. It is far closer to a GT car than the 911 of the '80s. No offense intended, I prefer the 996 to the old 911. But the car has changed before, why are you so against it changing again. I recently heard that Porsche will soon be producing a "new" 911, lighter and more like the old 911. While still producing the current 996. Personally, I like this idea.

Now that would be IDEAL!! If it happens I'll be happy...even though I can't afford one...I will be able to in ohh...10 years when they come down in price

Not likely. The Chevy small block is a real boat anchor. It's 100 pounds heavier than a Ford small block, even.

George took his flat 6 out and wighed it. Then weighed the chevy 350. He says the chevy was lighter. But I think he had a 930.