03 C4S or 05 Carerra ?

I'm thinking about upgrading from my 01 C4 Cab and for about the same money( low 60's) I can get a preowned 05 911 (not s model) or an 03 C4S low mileage coupe. Should I just go with the 997 or stay with the 996? I don't use the car as a daily driver, just my weekend toy and summer car. Anyone in a similar situation? Thanks for the feedback.

I'd definetly get the base model 997.

I had the same decision a few months ago, and I went with the C4S - THe botom line for me was that the base 997 is just that - a base 911, much like the base 996. The C4S has more character and presence than a base 997, and in the right combo of colors, is a spectacular looking car. I've never driven past a 997 feeling inferior for a second.

The C4S is the best looking 996 ever made, the base 997 ain't.

Funny, I posted a similar thread last month in the 997 forum. I decided after much advice and test drives that the C4S is the one for me. Basically I figure that a) it has more character and is probably the sexiest of the 996's (not that the other variants of that model aren't hot too.) b) the 997 base is a great car and while there are quite a few showing up used at a pretty decent price, they haven't yet taken their biggest depreciation hit IMHO. C) in the last six months of searching, the amount of 996 C4S available for sale hasn't really increased nor have prices moved substantially lower. Basically, they are not building any more 996 C4S' so maybe it's value will strengthen. While the new 997 C4S is improved and quite beautiful is no longer as visually distinctive from the rest of the line. Can't beat that iconic rear reflector strip! I'll be making an offer in the next week or so on one...just waiting for some additional info from the seller. In the end, it's pretty subjective: beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I would go with the 997.

998

I like the extra things you get with the C4S, like bigger brakes and sport suspension and all leather interior to name just a few. Do I feel inferior to the base 997? No way, man. I feel superior. Get the C4S.

I woulda gone for the 997 - no question. If it's your summer weekend car, then you definitely have no need for AWD, which increases the weight, increases understeer (in a car that already tends to understeer because of the HUGE amount of grip it already has on the rear tires), and slows you down. The 997 is already a beautiful looker - better than any 996 (IMO). The only reason to go for the 996C4S is that big fat rear red reflector - a classic Porsche signature, the loss of which I do lament. But for me, having the newer, lighter, sportier version with more warranty makes more sense. As for "feeling superior", I'll leave that for posers. -B

Bob, I would go with the C4S, it has so much character, and I do think the C4S is one of the best looking 911's. jmtc, Rob

Drive them. The 997 and 996 C4S are quite different in character. I find that the 996C4S is much more visceral, while the 997 is more refined. The C4S also looks more aggressive. Overall, I think the 996 C4S will age better styling-wise, and will be more desirable than an entry-level 997. I went through the same decision and bought a 996 C4S.

c4s OR dive deeper into your pocket.....sell your house...get ride of your mistress and get a 997 TT....I am a dreamer....but seriously I would take the C4S...it is a beautiful car!

I think the weight/'understeer' issue is way overstated. It's 281# more than a C2, and runs the 'ring faster. If you're running such fast and consistant lap times where the C4S 'hurts you', maybe you should step up to a cup ride or at the very least a GT3.

C4S, no question in my mind

I would definitely go for the "top model" 996 C4S rather than the "entry model" 997. But like you can see already - everyone has their own oppinion. The only thing to do is drive them both, look inside yourself and then decide

I was driving to work today in my 996 C2 Cab and a silver C4S like the one in Palting's footer was right next to me. I looked at it with envy, as I think it's an AMAZING looking car and pictures (while beautiful) can't do it justice. I don't think you can go wrong with this decision.

The C4S was the good looking 996 for the following main reasons: 1) Bigger hips (sadly missing on the standard 996) 2) Front bumper/spoiler looked better 3) Rear red reflector 4) Standard 18 inch wheels I'll readilly agree that those things all added up served to make the C4S a much more attractive ride to look at than the standard 996, which was a little frumpy by comparison. Those details were well addressed in the 997 though. It already has sexy hips, a great looking front spoiler, and 18's. The rear red reflector is, well, a sad loss. I just can't believe all these status conscious comments about having an "entry level 911" versus a "top model". The top model 911 was the Turbo, and the C4S was a dressed up 911 Turbo fake. The 'S' used to mean more power, but Porsche figured (probably with the 993, just before it was discontinued and they had to make the last year's models attractive) that if you cosmetically alter a standard 911 to resemble a Turbo and slap an S badge on it and some red brake calipers, look out. Compared to it's C2 counterpart, the C4S was heavier, slower, had less steering feel, more aerodynamic drag, and noticably irritating understeer. The understeer was apparent to me off the track, just powering out of a curve or turnpike. I also don't believe that it was faster around the 'ring on warm dry pavement. If it was, then the GT2 and GT3 would be AWD too. But this confirms why the Tiptronic C4S Cab was the best selling 911 in America. I know I'm gonna rustle some feathers with these comments, but I'm just calling it like I see it. -B

I pretty much agree here. I like the way the C4 looks for the 996. It is by far the best looking. However I think the new 997 is a true classic beauty, and would take that every time over the 996. That is tough for me to say considering I just bought my 2004 996 as a brand new car of old stock this past December. I love my car no doubt, but I do like the 997 better. Just my opinion.

I "think" i like the 997 front better (I won't really know unless I own one). But I don't like the rear end of the 997 (the cut lines look artificial - almost Audi TT like). I like the 996 front end and like the rear end esp. with the rear reflector on the C4S. I like the natural look of the 996 interior. Not a fan of the squared off look the 997 interior has. Somehow, the 996 looks more modern to me. I'm sure everyone will agree however that the 997 performs better, moreso, if you are talking about the 3.8L S cars. So, getting the one you really like depends on your taste, needs and budget as well as how you prioritize them. As for me, I always wanted the 996 C4S so it wasn't a hard decision for me. At this point, the only other car I would consider would be a 996TT but even then I've become so attached to my C4S that I don't know how I could part with it. Even the curious george in me hasn't had the urge to drive a 997. However, I will say that the 997TT looks very nice and very tempting!!!

Just to clarify. The "S" logo for the 997/987 edition means more power, same suspension and brakes. The "S" logo for the 996/986 edition means sport suspension and sport brakes, along with cosmetics like all leather interior, wider track, with the same HP. Thus, the C4S is not just a gussied up C4/C2, but actually has better suspension and brakes, and is a performance improvement on the C2 996, as proven by faster times at the 'Ring. That actually was initially confusing for me when I was still shopping for the 987. I was quite disappointed when I found out that the only performance difference between the 987 base and the 987 S was HP. After all, the Porsche is supposed to be the "King of the Twisties", and not simply an HP monster, right? I expected the sport suspension to be standard on the 987S. BUT, there was NO dedicated sport suspension, and I had to get the PASM. I don't know if it's the same for the 997. Is the "S" simply a few HP more with no changes in brakes or suspension over the base C2? If you are looking at a base C2 997, get the C4S instead. If you are looking at a 997S with sport suspension..............I think the C4S STILL stands out from the crowd more .

Well, it's very subjective. I moved from a Boxster S to the 911 and really appreciated the difference. When I sit in a 997 standard model it seems plain to me after all the options I have on my 996. I love the look of the C4S and the one I have my eye on is Cobalt blue with 16k miles on it. so it's pretty rare and I love the color. There are several 997's in the market with <4k miles on them that I think I could buy for mid to low 60's. Anyway, I'll drive both and determine if I pop for either one or wait and buy an 997S later in the summer. Thanks everyone for your honest comments, I'm glad I'm not the only one with a car virus.....

This is all wrong wrong wrong. The C4S was never faster than the C2 around the 'ring in the 996 series. Ever. Period. I have heard that the 997C4S is faster than the 997C2S, but I still don't believe it. Nevertheless, 'ring times by a professional driver are one thing, what the rest of us can enjoy is another. If you drive both cars, you will notice the following, even if you aren't a professional race car driver: (1) the steering on a C4S feels heavier and more "secure" for lack of a better word. Most of us are used to driving cars that have the engine close to if not on top of the front axle. That weight creates a certain feel to the steering that we are all familiar with, and we all like what is familiar. A C4S has more of that feeling, which is attractive to many people, but the fact is that the lighter feel of the C2 is a 911 signature that takes getting used to and is actually more direct and communicative. (2) I described it before, so I won't go into it again, but you will notice more pronounced understeer. It was a well appreciated problem with the C4 and C4S, such that PAG specifically tried hard to remove it from the 997C4/S. Initial reports are promising, though I don't know how they did it with those FAT rear tires - so I remain skeptical. (3) Under reduced traction, the more even distribution of torque combined with the more familiar and "secure" steering feel will make the C4S feel considerably safer, predictable. On snow, the difference is incredible (snow tires mandatory). The C4S looks great - no debate, and those improved looks amply justify it's existence, but Turbo brakes and a sports suspension do not, IMO, justify the 'S' badge. The Turbo brakes are overkill anyways - the major factor limiting breaking on a C2 is frictional coefficient on tires. A clever way for Porsche to get us to fork over more money. Palting - I'm a little confused by your post since it mentions the 987 and then the 997. In the 997 series, the 'S' badge gets PASM standard (considered to be a suspension upgrade by Porsche, also supported by PASM standard on the 997 GT3), 30 more hp, more torque, Turbo brakes, etc. Anyways, I loved the 996C4S because it looked gorgeous, but part of me was disappointed with Porsche for what I perceived as manipulative marketing. I am pleased with the 997 since it corrects many of the styling faults of the 996, without forcing us to deal with AWD, which I consider to be a less sporty set up, and certainly not one that is 'faster at the 'ring'. -B

I'm one of the few that prefers narrow body 996s to the C4S style. The C4S has, to my eyes, too many busy things going on with it- spoilers, vents, air ducts, and they look big and beefy and heavy. When I see one on the road I half expect one of those guys from the Mad Max Road Warrior movie to be driving the scary thing. no offense lol - but I prefer a cleaner looking car like the old school 911's. The base 997 is an excellent car, and more sporty than the C4S - but apparantly that isn't as important as looks to most people. Just because it is a "base" model doesn't mean it shouldn't be considered worthy.

Precisely correct. Whomever said the C4S was faster was mistaken, the reason it was slower was attributed to the heavier weight and AWD which didnt enhance the performance around the 'ring except of course in adverse weather.

Bullet, great input, I have many things to consider now. I think I'll drive the 997 again at lunch today...

Manipulative marketing? Canadians are so argumentative (I should know, my Mom is from Edmonton...)

Why don't you guys look up the 'Ring times before commenting, the C4S was 8:12, the C2 8:17 in '02 Walter R at the wheel, I believe Palting or Jeevas posted the complete 'ring times a few months back. Check it out. Believe it, I don't really don't care. If you really want to see how fast a C4S can go, come to Watkin's Glen with me this year and see for yourself ( not responsible for soiled undies).

I have never seen official Nurburgring lap times for the C4S, if you find them please post them, otherwise it's just guessing. I remember reading awhile back that the C4S was faster than the C4, and may have been faster than the C2 around the ring, however, the C2 was faster 0-60. Of course this is all speculation if there are no official numbers. Rob EDIT: Doc you beat me to it.

Bullet, i agree with you on C4S, but what do u mean by "best selling 911 in america"? no way they sold more C4S than narrow-body 996, am i missing something?

There you go. This was pretty hot topic back in 2002 when I first bought the C4S and joined Rennlist. It took a while, but I thought the matter was pretty much settled already once all the info was out and people knew what they were talking about. In the real world of non-pro driving, numbers really don't prove anything except for bragging rights on boards. What is proven by this thread is that there are proponents for either car, some quite passionately. You'll have to figure out for yourself which one you personally prefer. Test drive both, and make sure you have the correct and total info on both cars, then make an informed decision. It's like a choice between two very gorgeous women. You'll probably form just as passionate an opinion. Porsche and the 911 has a tendency to do that to it's owners .

Bob, you have to drive it and see which of the two you like most and go with it. You can't go wrong with either. Bullet, it's good to see your passion, obviously the "entry level" comment had really ruffled your feathers. How ever, I wan't to correct a few mis-conception,..... Firstly, In the hands of Walter Rohl the C4S had the quicker time at the Ring, that is a fact...you may argue that he did that to sell more C4S, but not that he did'nt run the C4S quicker .... Secondly, A bigger rotor has more material in it so it can absorb more heat. More material also means a larger surface area, which as well as meaning more area for the pads to generate friction with, also translates to better heat dissipation. ie. bigger rotors = better stopping power. The key is heat absorption, the same reason PCCB's are better. Tire friction definitely plays a role as in R-compounds, but if the discs cannot convert that kinetic energy to thermal energy then the rubber makes no difference. Thirdly, you are obviously correct in saying that heavier means slower, so the heavier C4S will be slower if every other criteria is kept the same, but the C4S is markedly different in other areas. Firstly, what factors dictate the load on the tires through a corner. 1)weight, 2) track width 3) center of gravity (cog) 4) the speed. C4S is heavier, but has a wider track and a lower cog. The C4S shares the better brakes and chassis with the turbo, so the only thing that the iconic turbo does better than the C4S is straight line acceleration. I am in no way implying that that the TT and C4S are in the same league at all, but the facts are the factor that puts the TT in a different league all together is the massive power. Through corners they are identical in performance. So, the C4S gives up on weight but gains in a stiffer chassis, better brakes, lower cog, wider track,...is it all that inconcievable that it may be quicker at the ring ? (In top gear, the 997 awd version ran quicker lap than the 2w.d. with the same chassis, brake, and cog, the only difference was the awd, and no it was'nt on rain or snow) Now, even if the C4S is quicker by a few seconds at the ring, who gives a damn, it's a few seconds on a 8 min. lap. The awd and c2 are great cars with different driving dynamics, it's great to have choices, right? I agree that the C4S pushes on slow corners on acceleration, but the C2 has the same problem. (FWIW, the R-compund tires almost totally eliminates it). P.S: Palting claims that after the initial push the awd pulls it in, even on street rubber, I never had the nerves of steel to keep pushing till it grabs, but seeing him drive, I'll take his word for it.

Agree with Jeeva, just take a drive and decide for yourself. The original question centered around choosing btwn a base 997 vs a C4S, many gave their reasons as I did. I think the main thing to look at is resale value in 3-5 yrs, there I don't think there is any comparison, C4S hands down.

That's funny, Jeremy Clarkson makes the same comparison between the TT, C4S, and a C4 in this Top Gear ( it's towards the end). Click - Number 19 996TT vs. C4S - under 996 Videos Silicon anyone?

"silicon"?????....silicon is all fluff,...the C4S is "au-naturel", baby. Yah, I saw that video and Jeremy Clarkson hated the C4S, but that's not saying much if you know Jeremy. But, I miss that show,...he may be biased against Porsches, but gotta love the way he runs that show....that comparision with the models were hilarious...FWIW, even amongst the models, The C4S model was the better choice,...Jeremy does'nt even have good tastes in women (Hey, I just realized that what I am saying here may sound like that the C4 is not a great car, it and the c2 are amazing cars,...but, so is the C4S,...they are all Porsche's for god sake...But, Jeremy is crazy...he picked the bloody M6 over the 997S.....He liked the F40/F50 over the newer supercars including the CarreraGT as the modern ones have electronic gadgetry in them, and then he turns around and picks the 360cs over the gt3RS in another episode as the F-car has the modern electronics and the RS a barebone mechanical car....WTF?????. But, hey he is open about his hatred to all Porsches.

Very nice Rob

Taken from a quick search from google regarding the 996 C4S: �We have given up an almost imperceptible tick in acceleration against the Carrera in favor of more grip and better brakes,� says project engineer Georg Wahl. Measured by a lap on the old Nurburgring�s north loop, the C4S shaves four seconds from the C2�s time, according to Wahl. Stat freaks note: The C4S runs the 12.8-mile Nordschleife in 8:16 seconds (92.9 mph), the Turbo in 7:56 (96.8 mph) and the damn-the-electronics, 456-hp, two-wheel-drive GT2 in 7:44 (99.3 mph). ----- end I do recall when the C4S was released that it was the third fastest Carrera (behind the GT2 and Turbo) at the Ring. I've also watched a Top Gear UK video comparing the 997S and 997C4S around a tight track. Although the Stig felt the 997S was more nimble, he nevertheless managed a better time with the 997 C4S. So, in saying this, I would believe that the better grip and brakes plays a great(er) role in lap times regarding the 996 Carreras. Whereas, the edge does go simply to the added traction capabilities of the AWD system in the 997 models. Since I am a C4S owner, I am somewhat biased. Therefore, I can say that the steering does not feel quite as heavy as others claim. Sure, the weight bias towards the front could cause it to understeer but there's also the benefit that the car's overall weight balance would be more equally distributed front to rear. A negative side effect of having AWD is simply from the added weight and some mechanical power loss. How much however appears to be neglible. Also remember that the awd system in the C4S is not like that of say, Audi's Quattro system which is a 50:50 torque split via a Torsen diff (new RS4 has 40:60). The Porsche viscous coupling system can only manage up to 40% to the front which means that even in extreme cases, it is still a rear wheel biased car. You can get the rear out in the C4S - I've done it several times. It feels like a rwd and if you took the badges off, one probably would never know it was an awd car due to the rear power bias and rear engine configuration. As for other awd cars, you simply cannot get the same feel due to the engine placement. even if you were to muster up the components and tuning to create a rear wheel biased awd car, a tight turn would still characteristically exhibit understeer by way of that engine that still hangs in front of the front axles. Also, given the fact that car manufacturers always stay on the safe side, most cars, even a rwd 911 will come out of the factory leaning towards understeer. I just don't understand just how much understeer a C4S has compared to a C2 that some could gravitate towards the idea that the C4S is some kind of nose heavy pig. And being an Audi owner as well, I certainly do know that the 50:50 split gives a numb feel and is a nose heavy pig... it's as if you were being pushed and pulled at the same time and you plow plow plow. The vehicle dynamics are so different in the C4S's case. Now, I've also had an S2000 and E46 M3 and comparing them to the C4S, the C4S just feels outright solid and musters up an amazing amount of grip while still driving like a rwd. Finally, the benefits of awd are not merely for our harsh weather friends. It's been shown countless times that awd, given enough power to back it up, can perform equally and even surpass any two wheel drive counterpart. It doesn't take a math genius to understand that four is twice of two. that's double the traction capabilities in any condition that is considered slippery (at the limits of adhesion at the track or in the wet). In any case, I like the narrowbodies too and certainly, a base 997, if you can call it that, is still a Porsche Carrera and is one great car! And I do enjoy driving rwd cars as well. if you really must know, the most fun came out of my old 300rwhp zero traction control modded up '89 Porsche 944 Turbo weighing 2900 lbs. Now this thing was a blast to drive. and scary too when that boost kicks in on mid turn! anyway, best of luck! either way, you're gonna get a Porsche so you're really not losing anything at all!

To address some of the points: The 997C2 vs 997C4 comparison on Topgear was at a special stage of the British leg of the world rally championship - that "track" displayed far from pefect road conditions like the ones rally cars are used to and compete in. Under those circumstances and with PCCB's on the C4 (not on the C2), the C4 was 1/2 a second faster around the track (about 1 minute a lap if I recall correctly). Also, the Stig and the host of the show agreed that the C2 was more nimble and more fun to drive with much more communicative steering. I believe that the word they used to describe the steering on the C4 was "ponderous". The C4 will compare favorably with the C2 in traction conditions that are less than good, but on a good dry road or track, it will lose. If I was wrong, then the GT2 and GT3 would be AWD. I do not think that there have been any official 'ring times posted for the 996 C2 since the facelift and increase to 3.6 L & 320 hp. Porsche wasn't dumb enough to advertise that the C2 was faster than it's more expensive AWD 'S' big brother. There were more Tiptronic Cab 996 C4S's sold than any other 996 - the heaviest, slowest, and least sporty 996 of them all. The understeer issue on the C4S has more to do with what happens when you put torque on the front wheels versus the extra weight up front. It is not intuitive, and difficult to explain, but when you put torque on the front wheels, they understeer. I think we've thrashed this one, and I have to say that it's nice to have an impassioned discussion with fellow Porschephiles. Both cars are amazing and sure to bring joy to their driver. I'm hair splitting, but that's what people who's 911's are put away for the winter do while they're waiting for summer! -B

Watch out!! The C4S guys will clobber you with facts! . In contradistinction: 20,832 km 8,20 = 150 km/h Porsche 996 Carrera 2 320 ps, Porsche test drivers 2001. 20,832 km 8,16 = 151 km/h Porsche 996 Carrera 4S 320 ps, Porsche test drivers 2001. Check it out. Same year, same drivers (Rohl) 320 HP engines, post facelift. AND, on dry pavement. Really? That's only if you overcook the corner. Slow in, fast out is the Porsche 911 motto, and more so for the C4S. The front wheel drive pulls the nose around the apex, allowing you to get on the gas sooner, with a resulting faster exit speed and faster time down the straights. You gotta try it sometime, it's a blast!! You are ever so right! Both cars are in the garage under covers. Got nothing better to do than post some facts BTW Rob. I'll accept Jeremy's "silicone" analogy if, by the same token, you accept that the C2 would then be flat-chested .

Just for the fun of it, the new 997S runs an 8:05... even if the base was 10 seconds behind an S which is fairly doubtful, that still puts it ahead of the undisputed 8:16 number of the C4S. Regardless, as it has been stated, magazine racing is only fun for so long, the original poster needs to go drive both, and pick the one he likes better, seems straight forward. I'd rather have a 997 but I'll be waiting until somebody else pays the depreciation for me a bit more.

Actually, there is a lap time for the 997 base. Driven again by Rohl, interview published in June 2004 in WHEELS, on the same track, the time is .........(drum roll)..........8:15!! I second faster than my C4S. Dang!!!! Interestingly, it's the same time posted for the Ruf CTR2 with 520 HP with unknown driver. Hey, Mark, ""youngest 996 owner", how old ARE you?

Bullet, have you ever really driven a C4S near the limit on the track? Mine with x73 and cups doesn't seem to have any of the ailments you guys describe. My, there's a lot of C4S bashing around these parts! Like you said, a passionate discussion waiting for the snow to melt!

I've just turned 19. I'm glad you can finally take a second and appreciate how worthless your car is, since it's 1 second slower on an approximately 495 second lap time. Don't bother selling it, nobody will buy it, just scrap it. (Tongue firmly in cheek). Besides all of this incessant bickering is simply because I cant afford the C4S I want

A few notes: torque steer is a front wheel drive trait found in cars that tend to rear its ugly head the most when these fwd cars have a good amount of power. Like I mentioned, the C4S only has the capability to direct a maximum of 40% of its power to the front. So, in a situation where the rear wheels completely lost traction, the front wheels would be powering and steering (torque steering) but that amount of power (40% x 320 = 128hp) is so small that you would be hard pressed to ever feel any torque steer. Also, in the real world, you'd just about never find a situation in which the rear wheels were consistently losing all traction all the time. and I can attest to the fact that I've never felt the C4S exhibit any kind of torque steer that is found in some of the high powered front wheel drive cars. Also, the statement that the C4S tip is the heaviest, slowest and least sporting is wrong. the heavy weight of the Carreras goes to the Turbo tip. and since the C4S shares the same exact suspension setup and brakes as the Turbo, I'd venture to say that with the C4S cab tip curb weight being less, the Turbo cab tip would be the least sporting. This, obviously, doesn't take into consideration that the Turbo would eat the C4S in a straight line on any given day. Sporty is, however, a subjective word so to me, it means in the Porsche department more about steering/handling than straight line speed. Also, in regards to sportiness, I agree, that any rwd car is sportier than any awd car hence the reason for the GT2 and GT3. But only a really good driver would be able to harness all that power properly w/o snap oversteering or making a mistake such as throttle lift oversteer. That's just inherently the nature of the rwd cars esp. with the engine parked as far back as possible. Porsche did reconfigure the GT2 suspension to counter some of its inherent oversteer characteristics. nevertheless, I'd take a GT2 over a Turbo any day And yes, my C4S is snoring away in the garage while I'm still waiting for the snow to melt i certainly do enjoy these talks though. So long as they are productive though!

It was the narrow body C4 he was comparing it to ( still available RoW - it's only in N.A. that Porsche decided wanted only "fluff" ), which Jeremy describes as, "enough of a handful for most people." Which is exactly how I'd describe my wife who has a PERFECT body I'm just giving you C4S guys a hard time, when you described it as "choice between two very gorgeous women." I couldn't resist posting a link to that Top Gear.

Well, it turns out that trying to get reasonable evidence of a 'ring time is very very hard. There is a website with some info, but who knows how true it is. That site doesn not list a time for the 996C4S. Here's the link: www.track-challenge.com I got it from my friends at Rennteam. -B

At least your trying. You already got a quote from SRC4S and here's a reprint. Click the link at the end for the source, and the full article. "'We have given up an almost imperceptible tick in acceleration against the Carrera in favor of more grip and better brakes,� says project engineer Georg Wahl. Measured by a lap on the old Nurburgring�s north loop, the C4S shaves four seconds from the C2�s time, according to Wahl. Stat freaks note: The C4S runs the 12.8-mile Nordschleife in 8:16 seconds (92.9 mph), the Turbo in 7:56 (96.8 mph) and the damn-the-electronics, 456-hp, two-wheel-drive GT2 in 7:44 (99.3 mph).'" mag one Enjoy.

This site tracks all Ring times. They don't post it until verified. The 997 TT is already on the list and it matched the CGT's time. http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?vie...ID=0&tID=10073 Just so you know, the normal torque split for the C4S is 5% Front 95% rear. I was getting rid of my tires one day and was able to burn off all of the rear tires while the front was untouched. Video anyone? Now toque steer has nothing to do with HP. As the phrase said, it's torque that plays the part. Now a rear engine awd car, essentially a backwards Audi quattro, there won't be any of that. I love my C4S. It's a perfect every day car. But after driving the 997, I just love the trans so much. It almost switched me over to 997CS. Finally, I talk myself out of it with the depreciation hit I already took with my C4S. Didn't want to face it again.

Nice pics, that site doesn't even spell Walter Rohrl's name right.

From those pics, one would never think that the C4S is awd! I've actually seen a number of shots of 996TTs tail wagging. I've had more instances where the tail will happily step out. Makes you wonder when does the front actually engage? Alex, have you felt the fronts pull at all during your tire disposal process?

Alex T, awesome pictures...you've got PSM right?

PSM comes standard with the C4S. If you turn it off you'd never know you were in an AWD car.

There is so much torque going to the rear, it overwhelms the viscous coupling. No front pull at all. Here is a video of the burn. It's clear that the front is not doing anything. http://www.lotususa.com/Alex/911Carr...oMuchFun01.WMV Yes. PSM off at the time of burn. I was really amazed at how easily the tires light up. These are Contis Sport Contcact 2. I now have Mich PS2. It's much harder to even do a burn.

Exactly, the old schoolers refuse to believe that......, the proof is in the pictures...I just wantd to make sure he did'nt somehow totally disable it prior to showing the pictures to them old schoolers who refuse to believe such things can be done on a PSM/AWD car. P.S: Ok, ok I cave in from getting into trouble in the past...old timers=hardcore trackies.

I'd have to go 997. Newer body style and the new interior is pretty nice.

Amazing pics and vid!! With rear spin, the VC is supposed to deliver up to 45% of the torque to the front wheels. You must have just overwhelmed the thing!! Holy smoke.! Literally!

My impression is that the car is delivering lots of torque to the front axle, but the huge amount of power oversteer is overcoming that. I would imagine that that puts alot of stress on the AWD viscous coupling unit. Also, the smoke is usually coming from the one wheel that is spinning much much faster than the other wheel - the inside wheel has lost grip and is spinning much faster than the outside wheel, which has grip, so the car turns. This exaggerated example nicely illustrates what a LSD is for. On the track, wheel spinning is a no no - it makes you slower.

LOL. How bad did the car smell after that? I had read on the PCA Tech section that PSM equipped cars DO NOT have LSD (996 C2 and/or C4. That would include the C4S). The GT2 and GT3 do have it though. Reason is that powering through with LSD with PSM on triggers the system to think it wants to direct the car in a different way: Here's the quote: When Porsche came out with the C4 for Model Year 2000, they said: "As a standard feature, the 911 Carrera 4 has Porsche Stability Management (PSM). A mechanical limited-slip differential would have a detrimental effect on the functioning of the PSM. The 911 Carrera 4 cannot be fitted with a mechanical limited-slip differential." The article also states that there's a version of the LSD that was available to cars after 2004 (most likely the 40th Anniversary intro and on). This particular LSD (option IX75) was available to the AWD models as well but only after '04. Lots of debate on whether it's there or not but that's what I've read. so bullet may be right that we do not have LSD in exchange for PSM. but that would also mean that any PSM equipped car (sans option IX75) would not have LSD as well. BTW, Porsche's option code for LSD has traditionally been M220. So, a C2 w/o PSM would benefit from having M220. The real question is, which is faster around a track? PSM or M220? Sorry for opening up a can of worms, fellas!

I think some of the early 996's had LSD as well, I know none of the 3.6L had any at least until my model yr., 03. (so, it's news to me that it was an option in 04). I know for a fact that the 40th had LSD . It is possiblt that PSM and LSD are mutually exclusive. well, for sure the LSD will be quicker than the PSM car, PSM turned-off is quicker than PSM ON, let alone with LSD. But, when it is off it is NOT overly intrusive, but most trackers who hate PSM don't seem to buy this. So IMO, for tracking LSD is faster, PSM makes it SAFER and if OFF not really in your way. So, the question I may ask is, is a car with no LSD or PSM quicker than the same car with no LSD and PSM turned OFF.

The ealier PSM was incompatible with LSD. As of 2004, I have seen cars with both PSM and LSD listed on the window stickers. The earlier cars with PSM without the mechanical LSD have an electronic version called ABD: Automatic Brake Differential. The statement at that time was that with ABD, there is no need for LSD. The mechanical LSD increases rotational load or resistance on the more rapidly spinning axle to force more torque to the slower spinning axle. ABD does the same thing, but rather than using the differential, it uses the brakes. When the sensor senses that the wheel is spinning insensibly, it pulses the brakes to that one specific wheel forcing torque to the more sensible non-slipping wheel. My understanding is that this occurs at all four corners individually on the C4 and C4S since there are 4 separate half-axles. Now, does a non-PSM car have ABD? My original sticker lists PSM and ABD separately. I assume non-PSM cars would have ABD listed separately as well, if they had it. Check your original stickers, guys, and let us know. Is ABD better than LSD, that's another can of worms. My opinion, as the unbiased owner of a car with ABD, is that ABD is better heh-heh-heh . We need a tongue-in-cheek emoticon I think Alex overwhelmed not only the VC, but the ABD, the tires, the road, even the LSD if he had it. Looked like a heck of a lot of fun!!!

Um. Total peak torque is 273 at the crank. 5% standard to the front = 13.65 ft lbs add 15% loss I'm left with 11.60. I don't think that is a lot. Even at the max 40% is still only 104 ft lbs. minus 15% loss = 88.4 ft lbs. This is also at 4250 rpm, I was at 7000 rpm most of the time. Where do you get "lots of torque to the front axle"? Look at it carefully. Both wheel are doing the same amount of smoke. Just the wind is blowing it away which is coming from the left side of the picture. I'm leaving TWO black lines. Both rears were down to belts when I was done. cars with LSD are the cars that would snap the tail or "power oversteer" like I did. Single wheel burn won't do that because one wheel still has grip. I would know, I had a open diff BMW 540is and a few American sedans. Viscous coupling works by having a liquid material that "drag" the other side to transfer torque. Kind of like a torque converter. http://auto.howstuffworks.com/differential9.htm Therefore, no harm's done. Not to mention the car is still moving and the 5% torque split is about enough at 19 to 1 ratio in wheel spin. Wheel spin doesn't necessarily make you slower. E46 M3s are faster around the track if you drift through corner. (I think it was either Road and Track or European Car that did the test said that) Ruf Yellow Bird did the fastest lap while drifting through all the corners at the Ring. It's how you maintain speed and carry momentum through corners that makes you fast on track or not. Nothing to do with retaining traction at all time. It smell like burnt rubber for the next 5 days. The belts gave on the way home and send tiny little "needles" flying into the wheelwell. Took the shop a while to get all of them out. Did I have fun? Read the name of the file.

This is a facinating discussion but back to the actual topic. I owned and drove regularly an '04 C4s and now drive an '06 997 C4. I had no intention of selling the C4s but unfortunately totalled it. I thought about buying another one but got a great deal of a slightly used C4. I have now driven it for 4 months and it is a much better car in every respect...specifically: - much less understeer....it is almost neutral - much higher quality interior - lighter feel all around and better gear response - easier revving engine (just my personal observation) just my 2 cents.

Oh Yeah,..but you don't have the red rear reflector, do you now? Why the hell does Porsche keep improving these damned cars Kidding, man.....less understeer and a light feel,...that is one sweet machine, enjoy.

C4S or Nothing... Best Looking NA car... If you can swing more $$$, then get a 996 TT than a base 997. "S" or "TT" or "GT2,3" only !!!!

996 C4S styling is much more distintive than the 997 (even 997 C4S) and will remain in stronger demand longer than a base 997. Obviously, i'm a little biased too.

Yep something I didn'nt like at all. Felt like I had five passengers in the car. anyhooo. Most P-car owners never go to a track or autocross so they wouldn't know understeer from their underpants. I would go with the C4S I think it may be become a classic because the 997 looks well....Feminine. and the depreciation (since the original thread starter is buying USED) is going to be slow on a C4s.

C4S

Not true in the case of the 997. The 997 Carrera S comes with big reds from the Turbo.

As for "feeling superior", I'll leave that for posers. I feel very superior when I "pose' with my C4S!

it would have to be c4s cab.or I would go with the 997.

40th Anniversary is best looking 996... *not* C4S IMHO

has porsche changed something in the new 4 and 4S to take away that dreaded understeer that plagued the older C4 and C4S??

Understeer is a non issue, just turn off the PSM.

beg to differ 04 c4s cab=one bad porsche.

As a 996 C4S owner I can relate to your comments about the understeer,but. It is pretty easy to dial that understeer out with some simple suspension work. In my case I installed the X73 suspension and the car is pretty neutral now.

I asked myself the same question 7 months ago. I test drove them both and found the 997 almost too refined. The C4S felt/sounded more raw/visceral. If the 911 will be your daily driver, the 997 may prove better over the long haul. I bought the C4S and and use it mainly as a weekender. I think it is the most distictive looking 911 on the road today. After adding the PSE and B&M short shifter, the car feels and sounds just like I always imagined a Porsche would feel and sound.