Handling differences b/t RWD vs. AWD on the track?

So last week I was driving around a track (for the 1st time) in a 997 C2. My impression in the corners is that the car understeers quite a bit under hard braking into the corners and accelerating smoothly out of the apex is a bit tricky. Close to the limit the back end gets a little twitchy. It was harder to drive well compared to an M3 and Cayman. They didn't have an AWD 997, so has anybody here driven a RWD 911 back to back with an AWD 911 on the track? What difference does the AWD drive make to the handling?

AWD will understeer even more.

AWD is completely awesome for the streets as I've come to appreciate, but for track duty, I still very much prefer the feel and controllability of RWD.

Thanks, I suspected it would. Where in the corner does it understeer more? My intuition (which has been known to lead me astray) is that trail braking into the corner, the AWD understeer will be about the same or maybe less (due to the extra front end weight). As the throttle is added through the apex to the track out I would imagine the power to the front wheels would cause the "extra" understeer. Am I about right? Is the AWD less twitchy at the limit than the RWD or is it about the same or more twitchy?

AWD in these cars make it neutral. It doesn't understeer or oversteer. That is why they say "Its like driving on rails!"

"If you want rails, get a train."

With regard to the 996s, Excellence magazine had an article in the 12/02 issue on the 9964S comparing it to the C2 and said the it was about 4 sec faster around Nurburgring. A similar distinction between the 997s should apply. "[T]he Carrera 4S lapped the Nurburgring in less time than the faster-accelerating and more slippery standard Carrera could. Admittedly, the difference with the factory's test driver behind the wheel was just over four seconds over 14 miles, but there's more to the story. The C4S instills so much more confidence that we're certain the C4S would handily show its taillights to lesser Carreras in the hands of an average driver down the same stretch of road or track."

And if you're driving like it's on rails, then you ain't driving fast enough.

Actually understear or just not overstear as much or as expected with RWD..??

Remember, though, that in 2002 the C4S had bigger tires and brakes and a stiffer suspension than the C2. Most people think that was the main difference in the cars, not AWD. Unfortunately, there was no 996 C2S for comparison. It'd be interesting to see a good comparison on the Ring with the 997, now that there are "S" versions of both.

If AWD would make a car handle better for street driving, then why are most sports cars only RWD (beside to avoid the weight of the AWD system)? The 911tt are AWD to make the average driver handle the power better of the car but the GT2, GT3, ... are all RWD only. So I agree that average drivers might feel better/faster with AWD but this doesn't make the car faster.

I bought a 996 C4 so that is proof it is the better car!

Racing is about the driver's skill and not the car. As mentioned above, if I ran around the track on rails faster than everyone else, would I be the better driver? Same applies to cars running training wheels (AWD). I faster driver is harder to find than is a faster car.

What is funny is if you look at the official Nurburgring times, the 996 3.4l C2 was 6 seconds faster (8:17 vs 8:23) than the 996 3.4l C4. If the 4WD was better, why does Porsche makes it best sports cars RWD: the GT2 and GT3? Both are built on 4WD chassis without any of the front drive assembly. They take this weight penalty for the extra stiffness, but not the drivetrain. Are you aware a 02' C4S weighs 276 lbs more than a comparable 02' C2? Unfortunately, over 95% of the time the front drivetrain only adds weight which slows acceleration, reduces handling and increases braking distances. It only comes into play when the front end slips (Understeer). From the factory with the base suspension, these cars do pronouncely understeer at the limit. With M030, ROW standard, ROW m030 or GT3 suspensions they are very neutral by comparison. Hence when the front already has traction, you aren't going to get the benefit from 4WD. Keep in mind that all those Nurburgring times are with ROW suspensions that are very neutral compared to the US standard suspension. There are obvious advantages to 4WD on a wet or snowy road, but none on a dry track with a properly setup car. Hence why the best handling Porsche 911's will ALWAYS be RWD.

GT2 and GT3 are made for racing classes where AWD isn't allowed?

You might want to recall the Trans Am Series of the late '80's. Audi competed with their 200 Quattro and later with their 90 Quattro. Both were later rendered obsolete by rules changes banning AWD. They were faster in both the wet and the dry. However, it the wet, the advantage was laughable. Trans Am Quattro Did you ever see one of those launch off the line? Or an A4 Quattro in the Speed Challenge Series? Does a C2 have better turn in that a C4 or TT. Yes. I've owned and tracked them all. But your across the board statement regarding "training wheels" might be rejected by Hurley Haywood, Hans Stuck and the others who campaigned the Quattro in Trams Am and IMSA GT racing. When you have an opinion, express it as one. Don't try to make it into a fact when it isn't. Cheers,

Thank you for confirming my opinion.

Any RWD sportcars doing the Dakar?

In GT classes, AWD is not allowed. That is the major rationale for RWD only, besides weight savings. But what is Porsche's thinking really regarding AWD and performance: the no-compromise, 959 "supercar" was an AWD? The Carrera GT is a RWD (is there any Carrera GT based racing vehicle out there??)??

the 959 was designed for the dakar rally and, as such, HAD to be AWD. it was homologated to make it race legal, which is why it was sold to the public. the carrera GT was designed from the get go to be a road going super car and so was chosen to be RWD.

C'mon folks - it's pretty simple. AWD understeers more than RWD. Period. Your tires can only take so much, and give so much traction. Basically anytime you are asking the front wheels to accelerate AND corner, then some of the traction from cornering is going toward acceleration, and they will lose cornering traction and start pushing at the limits. It's the same reason why front-wheel drive cars understeer so heavily and suck so bad at handling. As far as the 959 goes... that car was designed as a super-car to be driven in all conditions, and was a test-bed for all of Porsche's technology. Traction control and electronic aids and such- 4 wheel drive - it's all for making it fast in every condition - for any driver... oh yeah, and to enter in the Drakar rally. Why is "jumper5836" talking about the Drakar anyway lol. We are talking about the race track, not a cross-country, offroad rally.

You forget 1 MAJOR factor in these series in the 70's: the weight rule. Although AWD drivetrains weigh MORE than 2WD drivetrains, they were allowed to run in the SAME weight class. Given the 600+ hp those cars had, the 2WD cars didn't have as much traction coming out of corners. To make it worse, the rules only allowed balasting weight in very particular locations placed high and within the passenger compartment as to not give a handling advantage. In the real world, this is more than made up by the additional weight incurred on the vehicle from the AWD drivetrain. When the rules were corrected to reflect the actual drivtrain weight (to have AWD immediately added 150 lbs the first year and 200 lbs the second), Audi's domination completely ended. The same thing happened in Touring Car where FWD, RWD and AWD were initially allowed to run in the same weight class. Keep in mind FWD was developed for simplier packing for assembly and reduced weight. Weights are now staggered with FWD the lightest, RWD in the middle and AWD the heaviest. Usually it is the FRW or RWD that win, not the AWD cars. Since the winners of each race now have a weight penalty added for the next race, the Audi's will still occassionally win one.

There's also a reason that Porsches only give a small amount of torque (5%) to the front wheels, and it only increases as the rear wheels lose traction- because they want the AWD to handle similar to a RWD! It still doesn't, but it's a good compromise. There's also a reason that Ferrari doesn't even bother with AWD - no need to if you aren't trying to make a car that is fast in every condition for the "average" driver. They just want cars that you can steer with your right foot, and remain nicely balanced doing so. AWD would totally screw up that equation.

Ummm. front wheel cars understeer because of a severe front weight bias; but yes, if you break the traction with throttle the car will of course understeer. Remember the 1984 Honda Prelude? It was close to being neutral and subjectively outhandled every car tested but a 944 in Car and Driver (including the 911 of the time). On real world (crappy) roads and in wet conditions i"ll take 4wd everytime. I know..

"There's also a reason that Ferrari doesn't even bother with AWD - no need to if you aren't trying to make a car that is fast in every condition for the "average" driver. They just want cars that you can steer with your right foot, and remain nicely balanced doing so. AWD would totally screw up that equation." First of all, I'll correct your statement above - please visit this link: Ferrari AWD And I'd love to hear your rationale on why Lamborghini Gallardo and Murcielago are both AWD. 996 and 997 Turbo? Audi S4/RS4/RS6? Subaru WRX? Mitsu EVO? All pretty darn fast DRIVERS cars... Depending on the actions of the driver, suspension setup, tire inflation, and other factors, a vehicle's inherent understeer/oversteer tendencies can be overcome. I know because I've driven FWD, RWD, and AWD on the street. And on the track over a period of about 14 years. Am I the second coming of Ayrton Senna - no. However, I can tell you that vehicle handling dynamics are more than just what wheels are driving the vehicle and weight distribution...

Well, some of those are/were predominately FWD with the AWD added on as an afterthought. And some like the 911 Turbo might be just cause it costs more and Porsche wants every dime they can squeeze out of the buyer.

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/roflmao.gif

The 959 was not designed for the Paris-Dakar; although it did win that race, it was also used in AWD form for Le Mans ( Type 961: the first ever AWD car in Le Mans according to Excellence was Expected ) and placed seventh. That's a good indication, at least back in the 1980s, that Porsche felt AWD technology could be successful both in offroad and track racing, or it would have created a RWD version of 959 just for Le Mans.

My whole point is the sports cars are made for different reasons. While the U.S doesn't give a **** about rally racing, the rest of the world does. I guess were just a bit more intelligent and get board of going round an oval.

I am not buying one new though, and when I buy it it will be the Turbo. Why? Because I've driven both the C2, the C4S, and the Turbo....for the money difference in the used market, Turbos are a bargain for what they offer (GT1 engine block, big red brakes, stronger gearbox, and the acceleration!!!) So don't be so quick to dismiss Turbo preference as bling-bling worshipping....

Just like not being so quick to dismiss the AWD preference as a non-performer preference.

If you hope to demonstrate your superior intelligence, you should learn to use the correct words unless you are saying you get hit with a piece of plywood when you drive around an oval?

Hey, the C4S has big red brakes too.

nit pic if you want, intelligence is not based on a misspelled word.

It is a factor when the writer is attempting to show their superiority over the reader. BTW: it is NITPICK.

over the reader. my intention was to the idiot I responded too and it was not intended to show superiority but to help out a tunnel-visioned person to hopefully see the light thats around him.

Ouch. it's intention, not intension. We need to git the spill cheker workin

Walter R�hrl prefers to be in a c4 instead of the c2...an article I read. WE all know he is THE Porsche test driver... In other words GOD Im sure someone will come back with.... "because of his Rally history." BTW: Jumper5836... leave the US out of this... were not all unintelligent.

your right I should. maybe we should get the spell checker working. couldn't hurt us both.

I am not sure where you'd get that....I am planning on buying AWD!! Plus I just mentioned that clearly in the 1980s Porsche thought AWD as the frontier in performance driving on or off the road, when it brought 959 AWD to Paris/Dakar and entered the 959/961 AWD to Le Mans.

Anyone ever hear of pikes peak. I hear yah. just wondering why nascar get broadcasted in HD but try and find any other race that isn't nascar and it won't be.

C4S has the Turbo red brakes, but not the GT1 engine block, nor the stronger gearbox, nor the sweet acceleration....

First of all, let me defend my statement by providing the text from the very link that you provided me: "The �insertable� AWD system allows you to have the best of both worlds - RWD on the track , and AWD when traction levels are low. Add to that, they probably are worried that with 800hp vehicles on the way, most Ferrari owners will need extra help to keep their vehicles under control. And that quote exactly is the reason for AWD on all those cars you named. The closer to RWD that you can make the car feel, the better. This is one of the highest praises reviewers give to the EVO, in fact - that it handles almost like a RWD car! The WRX (which I used to own) understeered, as does the STi, and both the Turbo versions of the Porsche also understeer more than their 2wd counterparts. All that said - the fact is that awd is easier to drive and less likely to swap ends, especially with all the electronic aids working. An average driver can drive close to or even pass the limits with less reprocusions and so they are safer to the typical driver.

Maybe you should just watch it on one of your Canadian HD broadcasts. It's not our fault that stockcar racing took off like it did, no need to bash an entire country.

it's also got the steeper depreciation curve, the gearbox that pops out of 2nd gear, turbo lag, and busier looks haha just giving u a hard time jimbo

Sorry, that wasn't meant for you.

You missed "were" vs. "we're" in the same sentence. :-_

Well, my point wasn't to dismiss, but since you mentioned it, yes, I do believe the very wealthy bling-bling crowd generally buys the most expensive product in a give line-up (while often not understanding or needing the performance aspects involved). I was commenting on the factory's business/marketing beliefs potentially being the same (as my own). Bill

Not disagreeing- in fact, I think we're probably pretty close on our opinions here. The link was to show that Ferrari is exploring AWD. Also, whether AWD is an add-on to another platform (FWD or RWD) doesn't seem to be the core of the issue here; rather, it makes more financial sense for these companies to modify existing platforms than to start from scratch. I agree that AWD cars tend to be 'easier' to control, but 'better' is subjective. I've had a lot of fun driving FWD on the track, as stiffening up the rear with bigger swaybars would help bring the rear end around when cornering. Much of the reason you see understeer was stated earlier - rear tires are bigger and have more grip than the fronts. For 'average' driver safety, understeer is safer than oversteer, and Porsche has for years worked to tame dangerous oversteer by putting larger rear tires on than fronts. Still, the laws of physics can only be bent so far... When it comes down to it, whatever you drive, drive safely and have fun - and if you feel the need for speed, take it to a track event!

I haven't been to the board for a while, so i came late to this party. This particular party has had several iterations over the years on this board. Do a search, and you'll spend all day and night reading. Numbers/Stats in the 'ring state that the stock 996 C4S is faster than the stock 996 C2, which in turn is faster than the 996 C4. True, as someone else has stated, there is no 996 C2 "S" to compare to the 996 C4S, unlike the 997 variants. I disagree with the much stated opinion that AWD increases understeer. Maybe it does in other cars, but not in the Porsche C4S. On the track, together with 996 C2's, I and the other drivers find that the AWD allows the C4S driver to get on the gas earlier and more aggresively getting around the corners. That means there is LESS understeer UNDER POWER. This results in faster exit speeds and therefore higher speeds down the straight. Again, I don't know if that is all due to AWD, or is it because of all the other things that are standard on the 996 C4S that are not standard on the 996 C2.

I don't think that anyone is stating that the C4 is not faster around the track than is a C2 for the average driver....at least I am not. The point being made is that you do not have to have the level of driving skills to get the AWD around the track in the same amount of time as you do the same RWD car. So, when you compare the 2 cars around the track, it is exactly that...comparing 2 cars. Racing is all about the driver's skill and not the car's ability. Hence - the restrictions on what cars can be involved in a race. For tracking, AWD is nothing more than training wheels as is PASM.

I like my training wheels! I fully admit that I am not the best driver in the world but have turned some decent times at the ring (9:48 give or take with 3 laps) and really enjoy the extra security of driving fast on twisty Autobahns when the weather is less than perfect. I have driven both and bought the training wheel version but I can promise you that if you pick a regular day in Germany and drive cross country in a C2 and C4 that the odds are the C4 will win since it is always raining somewhere. But heck enjoy what you bought and learn to drive it the best you can, I would be happy with either car!

Don't misinterpret my comments to mean I do not think the C4 is a great car. The comments were directed more to those who track their car and then state that they can beat a C2 around the track, claiming, because if that, they are the better driver.

Do not worry I did not, both are great cars!

not true. think about it in terms of driving: what happens when you weight the nose and lighten the rear? you OVERSTEER (think trailing throttle oversteer or too much brake on corner entry). FWD cars understeer because the front tires use grip to accelrate, leaving less grip to turn with.

I'm not sure you were refering to me with my previous post, but I'll respond in case you are. Nowhere in my post is there a mention of better driver. I do mention that the C4S, regardless of who is driving, can exit corners faster than the C2. The C4S can, and does, make the lesser driver faster than a better driver in a C2. That's just one of the many reasons I like my C4S!! Now, if I put R-compounds on the car, competition suspension, that will make the car even faster, and a lesser driver like me willl even look better against much better drivers. I'll take all the advantages I can get .

Okay. I am sorry too for misunderstanding.

All bling-bling worshippers buy the most expensive cars (i.e. Turbo). But that does not mean all Turbo buyers are bling-bling worshippers.

OK....I'll chime in as I did a BUNCH of research.....those that think the AWD understeer is a result of the system is wrong.....my C4 Cab has all the understeer dialed out....now has anyone driven a 997 AWD? I have, and its absolutely amazing...as all articles have said, its better than the C2....I have driven a 997 C2 as well. On a 996, if you have a suspension, and correct alignment, you will eliminate the understeer which is the weak point in the 996 system...the 997 system does not have this....which is faster around a track? depends on the driver....they behave differently...if you try and drive a C4 like a C2, it wont be fast....and vice versa...but a C4 driven like a C4 will be VERY fast...as will a C2 driven like a C2....I think you will find the differences in times negligable....Its funny we talk about a few seconds over such a long technical track like Nurbergring....Bottom line is they are both fast and buy the one you like the best.

Very true! It is an unfortunate side effect that enthusiasts and non-bling buyers have to pay top dollar as a result though.