99 C2 vs other years, re: performance

I drove a 99 C2 all stock cab 6-spd and thought it felt remarkable fast to me. (and I know fast cars). I see some people state that the 99 is lighter, some benefit to having a real throttle cable, some benefit to no PSM, while I hear others state that the 3.6 is faster, more power, etc. Then back to the other side, people say the 3.6 is heavier, has e-gas, slower throttle response, etc so is no faster. I've seen remarks like the 99 is < 3,000 lbs - is that true and how much more does a later one weight. What is the consensus - is any year C2 coupe faster in the real world or is it really just negligible? Also, is the cab lighter or heavier than a coupe; I hear conflicting facts on that too. Thanks

The cab is definitely heavier than the coupe. I've driven both e-gas and non-e-gas 996's and can't tell the difference. In fact, I (subjectively) feel the e-gas car responded more quickly.

I own a '99 Cab and drove an '01 and '02 before making my decision to purchase the car I have. I did not drive these back to back but the '99 has always felt very good to me as far as throttle response and handling aside from pushing at times when entering corners too fast. According to my manual the weights stated for an empty car are as follows, varying according to equipment options: Coupe 2909.9 to 3042.2 Cab 3075.4 to 3240.8 The '99s also were available with limited slip diff as an option which is greatly appreciated by some.

99's are the lightest and IMO quicker, especially some of the first cars tested by magazines...........

I've driven multiple examples (some back to back) and the 3.6 cars are noticeably quicker than the 3.4's that I have driven. However opinions do vary (just look in this thread). My advice....head out to a dealership and see for yourself.

[QUOTE=Ray S]I've driven multiple examples (some back to back) and the 3.6 cars are noticeably quicker than the 3.4's that I have driven. Not sure I agree with this but do what feels right to you. I had a 99 for a bit and could not tell any real world difference between the 3.4 & 3.6. The small difference in HP should be offset by the small weight difference. One might 'feel' faster but many people think the 99's are the fastest of the NA 996 models. GT3 excluded. Any difference should be very small between the two.

Bottom Line: I've been reading these posts for years and have concluded that no one, regardless of the year of car purchased, feels that they made the wrong decision. Everyone seems to be extremely happy with their purchase. Every year has subtile features that make it better 'um some, worse'n others. All owners seem to boast about the good features and downplay the negative ones for their year, myself included. You will most likely immensely enjoy your purchase regardless of your decision as to the year. I don't feel you will make a mistake.

I agree. Maybe it was one of the factors that influenced me when I got into a 997s with a lot of expectation and was a bit underwhelmed - when I was really excited

how true

[QUOTE=Truble10] the 3.6 is no heaver then the 3.4

Race another MY 996 doing so will definitely answer your question.

First, you have to look at when the car was produced. The 99' model year lasted almost 2 years with the first cars being built in late 97'. There were a lot of production changes across the first model year to fix a lot of issues. By 00', these changes added 10kg (22 lbs) more weight. The 99' is definitely not below 3000 lbs. Car and Driver's long term test 99' coupe (production car high optioned with the 18" wheels) weighed 3149 lbs w/o driver. Although the first pre-production Euro car they tested was 2900 lbs, none of the US production cars they tested weighed less than 3100 lbs. The weight difference between a 99' and an 00' are negligable when considering the additional improvements. In 02' when the engine was enlarged from 3.4l to 3.6l there were a lot of changes made to the suspension, chassis, body and drivetrain. These changes added 25 kg (about 55 lbs), but were more than made up in their benefits in all performance areas. The 3.6l models are rated faster in all areas of acceleration and top speed over 3.4l models regardless of year. Tiptronics add 122 lbs over comparably equiped Manuals. Cabrio and Targa models add almost 200 lbs over coupes. A C4 is 122 lbs heavier than a C2. A C4S (Turbo wide-body chassis) is 276 lbs over the same year C2. If you want the lightest car, buy a low option manual C2 coupe. If you want the heaviest then its a high option Tip C4S Cab with a hardtop (about 4000 lbs).

nope, mine is still the best.....................

Porsche lists the 3.4l C2 @ 2,910 lbs. Porsche lists the C4S cab w/tip @ 3,362 lbs, the hardtop weighs 74 lbs. A targa is 154 lbs heavier then the coupe, and the cab is 176 lbs heavier. The performance difference is negligible, less then two tenths of a second 0-62, and will come down to the driver. The biggest thing that will affect performance is a tip ( ~ .5 seconds 0-62 ), because of the slush box not the extra weight. The C4S has the same top speed, 174 mph, as the 3.4l. The 3.6l is rated at 177 mph, I really wish I had those extra 3 miles an hour. The 3.4ls don't have the variocam plus surge at 3200 rpms. Another plus of a MY99 with cable throttle is that LSD was an option, look for one w/LSD. Do some reading about the RMS, not a big deal, but something you should know about. The thing I'd be more concerned w/in an early M96 motor is the porous block problem. Your coolant mixes w/the oil and if enough coolant ends up in the oil, the bearings, rings and valves are damaged and it can be catastrophic. I'd look at getting a late '99 if you're set on the cable throttle vs. e-gas.

<The thing I'd be more concerned w/in an early M96 motor is the porous block problem> you need to check your facts. there has never been a porous block problem on a 996..you are confusing this with a known _boxster engine_ problem on 98 and 99 cars

A SEARCH ON 'POUROUS BLOCK' IN 996 FORUM

just because it gets repeated doesn't make it true. i repeat. the 98-99 boxster engine had some issues with pourous block castings, not the 996 different car, different engines i bought a 99 96 and lived on rennlist and other boards since 99. there have been rms issues, and occasional blown engine issues. show me please, any evidence of a pourous engine castings on a 996.

I can definitely tell a performance difference when I put my hard top on or take it off in the spring! Bought my 99 cab new in 99.

I think the early 99's were *very* quick.... I have one produced on 03/98 and it's fast... in fact here is an article you can read about a 99 Carrera: http://www.autocar.co.uk/RoadTest_Summary.asp?RT=200086 that's as fast as they get..... the 02 cars have more "engine flexibility" meaning a flatter torque curve... also quick cars as well... the light chassis and throttle cable of the 99 makes it feel great during hard drivign... and they use motronic 5.2 which responds better to a GIAC flash than 00-05 cars (they use motronic 7.x)... also keep in mind this article has tested a car with 17" rims... that also makes a big difference... probably 1 full second in the 0-100 mph time... you can always get lightweight 18" rims to offset the difference but that is some serious $$$.

Yes the one I drove I believe had 17" stock wheels and yes I would assume that would be a big factor by giving less rot. mass, lower final drive ratio, etc. I just cannot get over how fast it felt. I will drive some more in the coming days and weeks. In fact, though I leased one new a few years ago and drove it daily for 30 months, I went and tested an 03 M3 the same day, which is a very fast car, and it did not even seem to compare to this one 996. As for the engine issues, I've been given so much anecdotal advice, usually suggesting I stay away from 99 996s because of engine failures. Also, one of the most respected service contract companies out there (Warranty Direct, I actually own a business and do some business with them and know some of their execs) no longer will cover 996s due to the engine problems. Sure enough, go right to their site, do a quote, and you will see that they cover all Porsches except that one. Hmmm. I guess RMS is not that big of a deal, I just don't want to get stuck buying a whole motor one day. So in that regard, I tend to want to look at newer 996s. On the other hand that sweet 99 I drove was just insane, and it is right there waiting for me, for a good price, only about 5 miles from my house. The only reason I don't have it in my 3rd garage which is sitting there all clean and empty waiting for a P car, is because it's a cab and I wanted a coupe. But maybe a cab will do...

perhaps the 99's did have more engine failures... if you can find out or if there is data somewhere posted on WHEN in the life of the car these engine failures occur that would be of importance.... for example.... if a car doesn't have RMS for the first 40,000 miles.. it's never going to have it... and if you get it once... statistical evidence says your getting it again.... I have a friend who avoided an early MY 99 and bought a 2001 only to have his engine replaced... hmm... there must be an "interval" where all engine failures requiring replacement occur... and beyond that if you've passed it I say your fine (unless you take it to the track and haven't installed the porsche *oiling* kit - KABOOM)...

Not really. That is a test of a Euro pre-production car, not the test of a US production car; so it has no credibility. Keep in mind that pre-production cars are tweaked and usually lacking safety equipment (side airbags, door beams and improved bumpers) that is finalized for production. Car and Driver also tested a pre-production Euro car in December 1997 that was able to run a 13.2 @107 and had a weight of 2900 lbs. Car and Driver tested 3 99' US production Carreras and not a single one weighed less than 3100 lbs or could run faster than a 13.4 (the first of these tested in May 1998). Coincidentally, neither Motor Trend, Automobile or Road & Track were able to get a production 99' Carrera to go any faster. I wouldn't recommend to put any credit in a pre-production road test. If you really want to find out what your car weighs, put it on a truck or livestock scale (remember to zero the scale first). There are better results on the 3.6l side. Both Car & Driver and Motor Trend each had a long term 3.6l US production C4S in their test fleets. Even with the extra weight (the one in Car and Driver weighed 3424 lbs), they had much better results. Car and Driver got a 13.0 @ 108 while Motor Trend got a 12.9 @ 108.7, both significantly faster than any 3.4l either ever tested despite the weight. Unfortunately, neither tested a 3.6l C2 for comparison; but both C4S tests were at least a half second and 4 mph faster than any of the early 3.4l C4's they tested. On the European side, Autocar did test a production Euro spec 02' 3.6l Carrera in December 01' that ran a 12.9@112, yes still faster than the early pre-production 3.4l car they tested.

it does have credibility... its YOUR assumption that they are tweaked and usually lacking safety equipment.... so that car had no door beams? no side air bags? and improved bumpers... well that's your opinion and willing to bet that it did. motortrend did test a 99 that did 60 in 4.6 and the quarter in 13.1 ... and for the records were not talking about C4 just C2's and *MY1999 specificaly with throttle cable* and *NOT* model year 2000-2001 with E-GAS... I have no data on the C4's... yes the 3.6 C4S is fast but I can still pull one in my C2 and I've done (very very slowly) so lets not start a flame war here... it's the only reason I get on here and give my opinion cause I've raced one from a rolling start.... here is a link with a lot documented accel times... the 3.6 engine does have great engine flexibility - i.e. - a wider torque curve... http://www.weissach.net/996-997_RoadTestSummary.html here is another site where you can compare a 99 to an 02 in the dropdown listbox and compare laptimes... www.track-challenge.com pretty similar... nobody is blowing anybody else away... and again were not talking about any 3.4... but the MY99 3.4 cars... from 1998-1999 cheers P.