'02 C4S Track Impressions

I took my new (to me) '02 C4S with 58K on it to the Oregon Raceway Park last weekend with the NW Quattro Club. This was probably my 10th time tracking (Miatas, multiple Audis, and previously my departed Golf R). I was nervous at first, as the IMS update has not been done, and the car is bone stock, down to the street tires, street pads, and even regular brake fluid. My reasoning was to determine if I was going to keep this car. Why? Well, the 60K service is coming up, and it is clutch + IMS & RMS bearing upgrade, so I am looking at a big hit. If the track performance was not stellar, then I'd sell and move on. I do have a 2016 Golf R on order as a backup. Here are my impressions: 1) fantastic balance, the impeccable steering really shines at the track 2) I can only imaging how much better the grip would be with slicks. But the stock Hankooks did a good job with little wear 3) Having driven a lot of 20V turbo inline 5's in heavy Audis, it was a revelation to not have understeer. 4) power was good, but not great. I am amazed at how you really need to keep this thing above 4K to get some power. I had to downshift to 2nd on 2 turns to get going. 5) I think my previous Golf R (2013) with APR chip was faster at the track, and downshifting to 2nd was not necessary, that car just pulled. 6) Disengaging PSM is sooooo nice! When it was on, several times the brakes applied on a section with a little drop off.....not a good feeling. 7) Very little brake fade, even with stock pads, brake lines and fluid. Summary? Still on the fence. I am glad I did it, really good track car. But I worry about its 13 year age. And how to get wheels/tires to and from the track (>$1K for a roof rack is absurd)? And honestly speaking, a new Golf R with APR chip will be in the 375 hp and defeatable traction control. And I can carry everything to/from the track. But oooohhh that sound, and that balance. Man. Tough choices ahead. IMG_2170.JPG

I just picked up my c4s in February and have not had it to the track yet. Appreciate your post and now I am excited to get it out there! I have a tire trailer I use for my s2....and will be getting a hitch for the 996.... It is very nice to get to the track.... And setup 'camp' with the tire trailer. Made it myself from a harbor freight utility trailer after viewing several other on line. Keep the c4s!

Keep the C4S, Best looking of the bunch. Lots of grip and if you want to hang out on a corner you can remove the front Drive for an event. lightens the car and gives you a new perspective. I still like the AWD but it feels more like a race car without and you don't have to work as hard to go fast.....

Would appreciate any info or link to the hitch and trailer idea. I have wanted a Porsche since my old man brought home a 911 Targa in 1974. He passed last year, left me a "little something", I bought the Porsche to satisfy my yearning and to honor him. I think he'd roll in his grave to have me trade a C4S for a rabbit.

I just took my new-to-me C2 to the track and oh it was so glorious. Totally stock but put track pads/fluid in it. Didn't drive flat out as it was a newish track but oh man that car can go so much faster than I can drive it.

Golf R?...Wow

[QUOTE=I bought the Porsche to satisfy my yearning and to honor him. I think he'd roll in his grave to have me trade a C4S for a rabbit.[/QUOTE] Yes

Keep it. Amazing fun on the track! Be prepared for some expenses tho. The Ferodo brake pads really work for me and I love the Yokohama AD08R's

Randerson...a C4 wouldn't be my choice for a track car. I think you'd find a C2 having more grunt coming off the turns. And you might need more than one track day to make a really informed decision. Forget slicks and racing pads and all the other mods...just see how well you can do with the exact stock set up you've got. Don't worry about the car, work on your technique with the car...see how much you can drop your lap times with more experience behind the wheel of the 996. When you can't wring another tenth of a second out of the car, that is the time to start upgrading. Driving the car the way it is now will make you smoother. I love VW Golfs and I'm sure it was working harder then the Porsche, which may have made it feel faster. But I wouldn't underestimate the strength of the 996 over the Golf R when it comes to track time and wear and tear.

Have to agree with Mr Irish........the car has what it takes......it's the driver that needs the improvement. BTW I tracked a C4 and I loved coming out of a slow corner in 2nd gear. My car was pulling me away while the car behind me was fish tailing. Also PSM comes on when smoothness is not apparent while on the track. PSM actually taught me how to drive the car. OP, don't give up on the 996.

Quotes source post: 12207773

+1 I like the AWD also. Similar circumstances to the OP, my DD for the past 12 years have been A6 Avants. The Porsche AWD and the Audi Quattro systems are very different, at least to me. I didn't like the C4S in the snow. This was my first winter with snows. It could also be that I'm so used to the Audi.

I'd also have to agree with Mr. Irish. C4S is lipstick on a pig and the 996 with least power to weight ratio, not to mention stock setup is more suited to grand touring compared to other models.(flamesuit on, another d�j� vu moment coming...)

I tracked my C4S since 2004. Never had a C2 ever bested it and the 4S tears out of very tight high speed corners which intimates them enough to allow me to get a pass signal. GT3s have but only on the straights. Coming out of corners you can mash the throttle way earlier and forget about it, there will be no funny stuff going on. It just hooks up and goes, maybe only downside is that it's just to easy to drive fast and not require any real driving skill.

Great stuff back from everyone, both technically and emotionally! Understand I have tracked a pretty wide variety of cars, and while I didn't keep track of lap times, I will say my 2013 Golf R with APR stage 1 chip (310 hp at crank) felt faster, at least out of the turns. The Porsche felt more natural at the track, I just expected more power, especially below 4,000 RPM. Having experienced the importance of a proper brake setup, that was my biggest weakness. I was cautious with the brakes, given the stock setup, I would have been more aggressive with proper pads, lines, fluid. Really, that is my only gripe, and it is relative. The only person who passed me in my group was in a Noble, and that car is just a track demon with a sick power/weight ratio. All my past audis (250-300 hp) were front-heavy, understeering pigs. Not well suited to the track. I was amazed at how many E36 and E46 M3's there were (for an Audi event). I got a ride from a guy in an E46 M3, track dedicated, SMG (questionable tranny), massive 275 slicks, big *** brakes, the driver was an instructor and paraplegic . Impressive performance, he was ******* an experienced driver in a 458 Italia. Still trying to figure out how he worked the brake/throttle stick and the gear shifts of the SMG, but I was impressed. Could I have been a better driver? Absolutely, no doubt. But I do think track tires and proper brake setup will pay massive dividends. Former is expensive, latter is cheap. I hear you on the lipstick on a pig comment, and that the C4S is a GT, but I think I'll stick to the C4S vs the C2S, as I live in Portland, OR and AWD is a good feature given our weather. Thanks, Robert

I can add from experience.....IF you add track tires please do something with the oil sump pan. Deep sump pan or spacer to make a deep sump pan just don't leave it stock.

Quotes source post: 12209402

Part of what you are feeling is probably due in part to the gearing - it's really tall and feels slower coming off turns. There are things you can do, but none of them cheap. I'm thinking about putting in a transmission from a 997 (or replace gear sets, but that's even more) - and there are some modest power boosts you can do. As for tires - instead of slicks, why not get some R-comps (Nitto, Hoosier...)? You can drive to the track and still get pretty good stick (you're not cup racing, are you?). As for brakes - stock are really good - yes, you'll want to change fluid and pads....but not much else for a while. A few tweeks, and I promise - you'll be faster than a Golf (and look SO much better). Good luck!

Your Golf R since it's a turbo would have way more torque and a lot sooner. That alone would make it feel faster. na 3.6l doesn't have any power until over 3500 rpm and the torque is barely noticeable and is built up more linear then a turbo'd car. Though it may feel faster I suspect the C4S beat it np for lap times. I never had a problem with the 4S brakes, it simply is not that fast of a car to need more. Though running pagid yellows would give it more bite and grippy tires increase braking ability by a lot, once you do the tires you probably find the stock brakes sufficient enough to not need to run the pads, all though the pads will wear longer then the stock ones but at a cost to more rotor wear.

It would be interesting to compare the actual laps times in the Golf versus the 911. Often cars that feel like they're working less are turning in faster times...

you are comparing torque versus hp. The porsche starts to exhibit its true capabilities very high in the rev band. That with impeccable balance when braking and more neutral behavior during turns will easily trounce any golf (R or otherwise). I would keep the car. You haven't even begun to scratch the surface with the porsche.

Serious you had to drive it yourself to find out how good the 911 is? It would have been easier to watch the Top Gear or Fifth Gear YouTube about it. The 911 has always been the best production sports car that is also a daily driver.

Quotes source post: 12209151

it is ironic that despite 'poseur' status, that the official Porsche test drivers were faster in the C4S than the C2. that written, i could see how a turbo feels faster out of slow corners. the problem that i've encountered with most turbos at the track is heat soak. it's really noticeable. i also find that the combination, in my own personal experience, with nose heavy FWD-based AWD cars and turbos is that all of that synergizes to make for a miserable track day. i also don't think more power solves the issue, because I don't think the 996TT is "moar faster" because I think it also has the heat soak and it's pushy like a mother in law for handling too.

Quotes source post: 12218560

Actually I have a 996TT as well as the 4S. It is very similar to the 4S in handling but getting on the throttle coming out of corners is a lot less secure and can be more scary especially as track grip conditions are worsened all though keeping in a higher gear and managing boost to come on full at the correct time helps in that situation. I get on throttle at the same time and by the time it is full boost the wheels are straight enough to not worry about it. My stock Turbos last all day long with no heat problems. Of course your also going to get more power on colder days. While both carry the speed same in the corners, on the straights it puts the 4S to shame. The entry speeds are much higher then the 4S entry speeds which means a lot more braking is required, the turbo actually requires better brakes, rotors and brake cooling then the C4S for that reason.

"lipstick?" Not really. The loss vs gains argument between the c2/c4/c4s are nominal and all come down to the drivers skills. I had a chance to run about 20 laps at the Milwaukee SCCA Solo event this past weekend and bested the Boxsters and a 2008 Cayman S in my C4S. I have NEVER done Solo racing and consistently put times 1-1.5 seconds faster than other Porsches. I even laid down a better time with PSM turned on by mistake. Of course it also depends on the type of course, but on the tight turns and max speeds of less than 60mph the C4S did rather well.

Quotes source post: 12219377

I agree with this. At least I'm not trying to argue which car is faster around the Nurburgring like that's really gonna matter to the avg Porsche owner on this side of the pond. Yes, there was a post like that before that was asked as a potential owner wanted to buy the" fastest" car. LOL

Quotes source post: 12219428

i raise the point to poke fun at the idea that the C4S is a pig with lipstick. the variability among Porsche test drivers is minimal and the Nurburgring is a controlled situation. ergo, whoever says that is just factually incorrect. the difference between the cars is mostly driver.

Quotes source post: 12219492

My lipstick comment was to the OP's observation that his C4S didn't feel that fast. As for the Nurburgring test, I'll leave it alone as that can go on with an endless debate too. Bottom line though is all of these models are going to be very close to each other. If one cries over the fact that Walter drove one model 0.2 sec faster around the Ring isn't saying much. Could be the German Schnitzel Burrito he had that morning.

Quotes source post: 12219675

oh. then you and I agree. I don't understand Mr.Irish's comment then. I don't think the C4S feels that fast, either, to be honest. but i'm more than well aware my limitations at the track are limiting. not the car's.

Porsche's test results on the Nurburgring actually showed the 996 C4S to be 4.0 seconds faster than the 996 C2, not 0.2 seconds. That being said, I agree that the driver is the biggest variable and that these are all quick cars. I only point it out because many people believe that the extra weight of the stock C4S makes it much slower than a stock C2. That simply isn't the case. Most of us won't drive our cars on the Nurburgring in any kind of a competition anyway, so it doesn't matter.

Quotes source post: 12219887

Actually the Ring is suited for heavy cars. Just look at a BMW m5 for example as that does well there but not at some tracks where weight really carries more of a penalty. Also comparing times unless done back to back by same driver back to back on same equipment is pointless as you can have varying skill, track temps, tires, equipment, etc. the other pointless thing I see is no one drives these cars stock, not to mention hardly no one sticks to original equipment most of the time, so timing becomes further moot point. I think we can all agree that there are too many variables and it's really the user to prove they are not just a poseur.

Quotes source post: 12220052

I think the main reason why the comparison is credible is because Porsche actually brought it up in official press releases in 2002. I wouldn't understand the if the time differential is significant, but they thought so, back in the day. It's not unexpected given the wider tires and slight traction advantage. But we all understand that none of the GT3 variants are AWD...

Quotes source post: 12220572

So was the 265 rear width used on the C2 vs the 295-305 on the C4S? Both on Michelin PS2's? I'm still unclear on this aspect.

After getting used to driving my C4, I am positive that I would run faster than any other car I have ever driven on the track and I'm going to say by quite a bit of margin: 97 A8 with huge brakes and lowering kit 01 S8 07 S8 with V10 engine 93 968 73 Alfa Romeo Spider (just had to throw that in) If you don't think it's going to go quickly around the track, then you must be "FLAT OUT" all the time. You must be moved up to the quicker run group. It basically has nothing to do with the car, but about 99% with the driver. The C4S in the right driver's hands could put so many car with a higher power to weight ratio to shame. You should invest in your driving skills, not in your car. When I took my 968 to the track last year, I did not have track pads. The brakes quickly faded after about 3 laps....oh ****! What did I do? I braked earlier and less frequently and with less force.....what happened? My lap times went down. Wow, think about that. Use less brake, get the car to move in motion with you and the corners and you go faster. $0.02 I just loved my 97 A8: Here's the Alfa with the oil filter spinning loose: Look at under the engine, you can see the oil coming out:

I had a '79 Alfa Spider Veloce! It was really fun when it was in good running condition. Unfortunately that wasn't the case very often.

Quotes source post: 12221648

Trackday Comedy - FLAT OUT - YouTube I'm better at the whole driving thing now and my times in a miata are faster than my times were in my 911. It's unlikely to be the car.

You have 996 TT brakes, a good thing, That said, the AWD car WILL be too much for the stock fluid, then pads - you will reach that point in a few track days.

Quotes source post: 12220654

sorry i never answered your question. I really don't know --i suspect the front tires are the same but the rears might be a tad wider. the party line from Porsche at the time was that the AWD might have helped them consistently do lap times faster than with the standard Carrera.

Original sizes for 996.2 C2 Front: 225/40-18 Rear: 285/30-18 996.2 C4S Front: 225/40-18 Rear: 295/30-18

Quotes source post: 12224544

That is the correct sizing for 996.2 so Porsche did back to back with a 996.2 or 996.1? The conspiracy theorist in me wants to say the gap times are that wide to promote the C4S. I would be curious on the outcome of independent testing back to back. It sure as heck wouldn't sell good at launch if a higher tier car was slower or marginally quicker than their base version IMO.

Quotes source post: 12224573

fastestlaps.com has both the 996.1 and 996.2 C2 running the same lap time of 8:17@Nordschleife For the Vairano Handling Course 996.1 C2 1:24.85 996.2 C2 1:23.20 996.2 C4S 1:21.30

Quotes source post: 12227361

To me that seems more realistic.