27 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH2nd gear... underwhelming?
Leading reported evidence
Check garage
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Check garage' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check garage' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
The engine does not run out of steam above 4K on a properly running M96.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
My 3.4 C2 start losing steam at 7,000, so I don't really like to make use of the 7,000-7,200 range.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
27 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T091943Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Unfortunately, I don't have any data to share as this is more of a feeling. I don't necessarily think there is anything wrong mechanically or otherwise, but wanted to see if anyone else feels the same way.
To me, second gear is kind of lame - it feels like at wide open throttle the engine just runs out of steam after about 4k RPM and just sucks wind. 3rd, 4th, 5th and even 6th are pretty impressive all the way through the powerband but I consistently find myself wanting more push out of 2nd in the higher revs. Not sure if this is just a function of the gearing, me being silly, or otherwise.
Cheers
Charlie
Second gear in both the 986 and 996 is invigorating. The biggest problem in the 996 is the damn rev limiter.
The engine does not run out of steam above 4K on a properly running M96. In fact, the power curve continues to grow toward redline, while the torque curve is typically a little flatter. There isn't any place in the 2nd gear curve I'd think "dang, this sucks."
If every gear pulled like second gear on my 996, I would be in prison or the morgue.
Driving any car is subjective, and me trying to guess what's wrong with yours when yours doesn't seem to act like mine is tough - but your comment (2nd gear is underwhelming) is pretty much as opposed to how I feel about 2nd gear in my 996 as possible...
Interesting, thanks for the feedback everyone. It seems I'm alone on this one. I highly doubt it's any mechanical issue as the engine seems very very strong in the higher gears.
As as someone mentioned this is pretty subjective. At this time I'm going to assume my expectations are just too high or miscalibrated. My previous car was a 3 liter Z4 and first and second felt similarly fast/snappy - but after that the power difference between the two just couldn't be compensated with gearing and the 911 walks away.
There you go. The torque of the BMW straight sixes just feel waaaaay different than these M96s. The 996 still feels "slow" off the line compared to my old S52, let alone my S54, despite the bigger displacement.
If there were more affordable ring & pinion options out there, it would make things interesting. But like you said, once you get to the higher rpms it's all fine and dandy.
Ok that makes me feel better. At highway speeds the 100hp difference is VERY noticeable - its actually a bit scary how quickly the speedometer climbs with the pedal down, but it just wasn't dramatically different in the lower speeds. I think you're right.
Be aware these cars -- well the MY 2000's and later -- are equipped with E-Gas and this and the DME work together to allow the driver to demand whatever amount of torque he wants and both try to deliver this amount but are in some way constrained.
IOWs, WOT under same cases does not result in the throttle body butterfly valve opening all the way. The amount of opening is limited and the rate at which the butterfly valve can open is also limited.
What I have noticed with my 2002 Boxster (and I actually noticed this first with my 2002 VW Golf TDi) is at lower engine speeds stepping on the gas (fuel) pedal hard results in slower acceleration than feeding in the gas (fuel) pedal at a pretty good clip but still short of just slamming the thing down to the carpet.
Experiement with your car and try hard acceleration runs from a roll in 2nd gear. But instead of slamming the pedal to the WOT position push it down and see at what rate of opening delivers the best acceleration.
I think you'll find less is more in this case.
Nope, brand new clutch (properly broken in of course).
I think it's more a matter of subjectivity - but the comment earlier about the egas is interesting - I'd never considered that. Going to play around a bit more and see if my opinion changes.
Are we talking about a C2 or the C4S from your avatar? I think it makes a difference in this conversation.
I had my old C2 Cab and my newer C4 Millennium Edition coupe here at the same time for about a month and was able to do immediate back-to-back comparisons several times.
I noticed the difference between the two drivetrains most with both 1st & 2nd gear at lower RPM. The C2 felt most-notably quicker at the lower end of the tach in those two gears vs. the C4. Upwards of 3500-4000 RPM, they were about the same.
The C4 feels a little more docile/civilized overall vs. the C2, which had a more visceral "twitch-happy rear-end" feel. But for the C4 to feel as fast as a C2, it's imperative to stay above 3500 rpm.
Overall, I really like both and it would be really tough to pick a favorite. My wife would pick the C4 for sure, though.
I'm talking about the C4S. I've driven a millennium edition C2, but its been about 4-5 years so I can't remember the details.
Thanks everyone that has responded. I've confirmed this is simply a subjective/personal experience comparing to previous cars and not anything wrong mechanically or otherwise with my car. I was more interested to see if others felt the same way (it seems clear that in general, they don't).
The only additional advice I can provide is for you to resist the urge to short-shift out of second...if you look at the HP/TQ curves, you want to wind second out for max acceleration, even if it seems awkward to do so...
I think the 996.1s feel different than the 996.2 (3.4 vs 3.6). My 3.4 C2 start losing steam at 7,000, so I don't really like to make use of the 7,000-7,200 range.
The 3.4 torque is lower than than 3.6 below 4,000 RPMs, so if fact, 2nd gear actually feels a lot more powerful to me in the 3.4 versus the 3.6 for that reason.
Also, you're going upwards of 70mph in 2nd gear, while some cars aren't that tall in 2nd gear, resulting in more torque feel.
All in all, these 996s are runners, not sprinters, and with "only" 300HP, won't be slamming you in your seat upon acceleration.
996TT, well, that's a whole different level of torque
