Which is faster, 996.2 (C2) or 997.1 (C4)?

I just posted the same question on the 997 forum, but I guess it's equally appropriate for 996 forum readers. (And I'm curious to see if in this forum it will get completely different responses ... ) Anyway, I’m trying to decide between buying a 3.6 liter 996 (996.2) and a 997.1. While the 997 may have many advantages, the only one I am willing to pay so much more for is PASM. And while ride quality is more important to me than speed, I now think both the standard 996.2 and the 997.1 with PASM ride well enough, so the remaining big question for me is speed on track. (And while one would generally expect newer cars to be faster, the 996 actually has a slightly better power to weight ratio … .) So I looked for lap times, starting with the Nurburgring of course, and yes, the 997.1 is 2 seconds faster. But then the 996 was driven by a Horst von Schauma (spelling?) (who is undoubtedly good, but is still a journalist, not a professional), and the 997.1 was driven by Walter Rohl, which surely counts for some of the difference (he’s 4 seconds faster than von Schauma in the Carrera GT, if I remember correctly), and the tires were three years more modern. On the other hand, the 996 had the sport suspension (though not the X74 suspension), and did the 997.1 driven by Rohl have PASM? If not, maybe the PASM car would be much closer to the PASM (and LSD) equipped 997.1 C2S with a LSD which did 8m02 (again driven by Rohl). I’ve found a few other times for other tracks, but there is always the question of which driver, which suspension option, which tires, what weather, LSD or not, etc. However, surely many members with one of these cars have shared time on tracks with friends with the other, or have even owned both. Can anyone share any insight into which is faster, 996.2 (3.6 liter, with standard suspension) or 997.1 (3.6 liter, with PASM), and how much? Actually, my initial question (in the title of this thread) is 996 C2 versus 997 C4. That’s because I’m going to buy a Targa, and the 996 Targa is 2wd whereas the 997.1 is 4wd. So while what I ultimately care about is which Targa is faster, I figure that whatever is true for the 996.2 C2 and 997.1 C4 will be more or less true of the targa versions. Similarly, while I’m not going to buy a US car, I figure that in this case, what is true in the US is true ROW. And any insight related to 996.2 versus 997.1 would be greatly appreciated (but please do specify which cars and suspensions are compared)! Thanks!

On a dry pavement and uless you are pushing some really high HP where traction is an issue, a 2WD will always be faster than an AWD. Every time power gets transfered, you loose HP.

Don't take the nurburgring times with a grain of salt. Difference in temperature, humidity, driver differences... On a course that long makes comparing times down to a few seconds pretty moot in my opinion. I'd take the RWD car every time, personally I like the lower weight, less power train loss, and typically under steer less compared to AWD. But if you're just comparing a 997 to a 996, I'd take a 997 if $ was no deciding factor, but personally not the C4.

unless you are getting 10/10ths out of either car - who cars, they are both fast and not more than a few 10th of a second apart from each other I drive an 86' stock 3.2 with no motor mods and 199 hp (dyno'd) and on any given Saturday I can be faster than either of those cars - or slower and at the end of the day we all get together and smile - so again - who cares buy the one you like and enjoy it - if you find your data logger says you are on 100% throttle 80% of the time and you are really concerned about getting 0:03 removed form your lap times - readdress the question

I would say they are virtually identical. And +1 to what Ed said, I would look more at dragtimes.com, or something of the like to compare the 2...not a race course that takes 7 minutes to go around..and not comparing a journalist with a professional driver. If you've ever watched a pro drive a street car, the first thing they do is disable as much of the electronics as possible, so PASM would not have played a role in his times. Also like Ed said, buy the one you enjoy the most, that you will keep the longest, if that is your intent for your car. Cheers, DS

2002 Coupe 0-60 was 5.0 seconds 2005 C4 was 4.8 A wash in the real world. The actual answer would almost exclusively depend on conditions and who was driving. Given a choice between a 996.2 and a 997.1 I would go with the 997 if price were not a consideration. The rule of thumb has always been to buy the nicest, newest 911 you can afford. I love my 996, but may move to a 997.2 in the future. If nothing just to get a newer, lower-mileage car with a better interior.

IMHO, posted times, specs, etc. are nice to know (good for bragging rights and bench racing) but are not worth crap if average Joe Citizen is unable to extract the full potential out of the car. So my 2 cents: test drive both cars then buy whichever you're faster on.

IMO isn't speed a little strange to differentiate these cars by? They are very different in many ways, other than speed. Fastest 996 Carrera was the 2004 40th AE 4.8s with LSD and 345HP as far as i am aware.

Of all the Porsche's I drove on the Nurburgring, I found the 996.2 to be the fastest. Hence I now drive a 2002 as my daily....heh heh heh. That aside, in general a Narrow Body car will be "faster" than a Wide Body car (due to drag), assuming identical engines and a 2WD will be "faster" than a 4WD, assuming identical engines (due to weight). The only real comparison that you can do between the scenarios are looking for published figures from Porsche themselves. While still possibly not correct, at least the source would be consistent. It's not like EVERY engine on a 996.2 has 320hp. Some have slightly more, some slightly less, maybe Manfred does something slightly different than Klaus on the line...(although part of their testing after assembly supposedly figures this out). Everyone just uses the published Porsche figure as the reference to compare items unless actual examples are available for testing/measuring at the same time, same place. Also, a Targa with PASM likely has all kinds of other options on it anyway. Some will make one car heavier, some will make another ride worse. Can't really compare cars that are that close in speed without having the actual two examples on hand and testing them at the same time. Hell, if one of them has the tires inflated several PSI different than the other, that will affect BOTH ride and speed around whatever course is used...or just on the way to work in the morning.

Thanks everyone for the responses. I appreciate the insight, and also see that I should clarify some things. First, my interest is in how fast they are on track, not in a straight line. Second, while 2 seconds around the Nurburgring might not matter, I am wondering - and trying to find out - if the difference might not be a lot bigger. If the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove did not have PASM, then maybe half the 13 second difference between it at the 997.1 C2S with PASM was PASM. (I very much doubt 9% more hp could cut even 6 seconds off.) And maybe a 996 without the sport suspension would be 5 seconds slower. That would mean a 5 + 6.5 + 2 = 13.5 second difference. On a normal race track, that would suggest a 3-4 second difference, and that's huge. For that, I would pay more for the 997.1. On the other hand, maybe the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove did have PASM, and Rohl is 4 seconds faster than von Schauma in all cars, and the tires were two seconds faster, and 4wd makes the 997 C4 four seconds slower than the 997 C2. That would mean that - thanks to lighter weight and 2wd - the 996 is 8 seconds faster than the 997.1 C4. Which would make it a huge shame to pay for the 997. Yes, the main thing about track days is enjoying yourself and improving. But it is still more fun for me if I'm somewhere near the middle of the pack - not so fast that I'm constantly stuck behind slower cars, nor so slow that I can't pass anyone and I'm always looking over my shoulder. And any 911 I can afford will be slower than most of the cars at track days I attend (this year, much less three years from now). Also, I always want my next car to be meaningfully faster than the last one. The first time I drove my current car on track, it was thrilling. The last time, a bit dull (no, it wasn't the Nurburgring). And it's not clear the 911's I'm looking at will be that much faster. So every bit counts. And yes, maybe it is strange to differentiate the cars based on this. But of the things that I know about the two cars, there is nothing that makes me want to pay a lot more for the 997, and of the things I don't know, the only thing that would make me pay a lot more for the 997 is if it is a lot faster on track. If it is, I'll happily pay a lot more. (Well, there is one other thing I don't know yet, but hope to learn by test driving - if the 997 is (so much) more comfortable that it's a lot more fun to drive fast on the roads I am stuck driving on, even if the 996 is as much/more fun on smooth roads.)

Quotes source post: 10122926

Invius, can you let us know what that is based on? Your experience on track, perhaps? Thanks!

I would skip the C4 unless your climate really necessitates it (and probably even then)... And I imagine a 997 C2 is slightly faster than a 996 C2, there is a delta in price between the two though. As a side note, the proliferation of electronics in the 997 would make me shy away from them, unless you're going for MK2 C2S or something, at which point you get a meaningful upgrade.

996 40th Anniversary w/x51 & LSD

I agree with several of the above posts. My owners manual says the top speed is: C2 177mph C4S 174mph Why does it matter? Either car is faster than any of use can drive it and either can be modified to be faster than the other. Like any of us is ever going to approach anywhere close to these speeds, what in the world are you looking for? I have got mine to 75mph on IH-10 a few times if that impresses you. And,, Invius, why must Mr. Cash flip us off everytime you post?

RS, I've driven both (had a friend that had a 997 C4, that sold it and got a GTS, and test drove a MK2 C2 before I bought my Mk1), but no track experience with either. I'm basing my assessment on the fact that the 996 is lighter, but slightly less HP than the 997, however it is RWD, which is going to be faster off the line than than AWD (when comparing apples to apples) in almost every circumstance where road conditions are not a factor...so tit for tat, I think you'll end up pretty close to even. @Krazy, Because he's the man, that's why. Cheers, DS

I think you'd have fun in either and unless you are Lewis Hamilton your laptime would be limited by other things...you can find a nice 996.2 with pasm. For $25-30k. Yes 997.1 has nicer interior, a bit more power but will be at least $45k unless very high miles ....996 is definetely performance bargain ...just get good ppi and change oil often ....

Quotes source post: 10123475

LOL - this

trap speeds will tell which one is faster. Why no 997C2?

If you are really worried about speed why not just get a 996 turbo? It would cost about the same as a 997.

Quotes source post: 10124108

Which ones faster? Yah, he ought to get a turbo like I should of.

Quotes source post: 10124108

AMEN. +1000. case closed

Quotes source post: 10122992

Sorry your wrong (from the owner manuals) 0-100 (62 mph) 996.2 C2 5.0 sec 997.1 C4 5.1 sec 997.1 C2 5.0 sec How could it be faster is has only 5 hp more the the 996.2 and weights 364 lbs more. Quoted from http://www.fastestlaps.com 997.1 C2 Max speed 285 kph (176.7 mph) 0 - 100 kph 5.0 s 0 - 200 kph 16.5 s 997.1.C4 Max speed 280 kph (173.6 mph) 0 - 100 kph 5.1 s 0 - 200 kph 18.2 s 996.2 C2 Max speed 285 kph (176.7 mph) 0 - 100 kph 4.7 s 0 - 200 kph 16.2 s

Quotes source posts: 10123475, 10124124

Hmm, I thought I was pretty clear about this, but in case not, I don't care about top speed or acceleration (and if I did, I would have no trouble finding the answer). I care about which is faster on track.

Quotes source post: 10125548

That's gonna be a very tough question to answer for most as there are way too many variables. Unless you're comparing fully stock to stock configuration which is basically moot point since barely no one keeps their car stock. Even just changing tires could have an effect on lap times. So I think you should divert your interests elsewhere like interior/exterior and stuff that are more easily quantifiable with less variables, to make it a more meaningful decision IMO.

alpine003, everything you wrote makes perfect sense. In my case, speed on track is not the first question, but it is the remaining question. If the speed on track is the same, I buy a 996. But if, as I can imagine due to PASM, the 997 is a lot faster on track, then I'm happy to pay extra for a 997. Re. modifications, all true, but nonetheless, having seen what modified and unmodified examples of my current car and other common (at track day) cars with similar on-paper stock performance can do, I have a pretty good idea of how they compare, both stock and modified, and I could easily advise someone trying to choose between them based on track speed. (Alas, there aren't too many Porsches at track days I attend that aren't turbos, GT3s, or GT2s, so my experience doesn't help in my case.) But I'm assuming that my local track scene is unusual, and hoping there are lots of forum members with regular Carreras who spend time on track with friends with other regular Carreras ...

What Alpine said and those cars are so close that the "fastest" on the track would depend on the driver. rs10 are you just fishing? You never explained what your doing.

IMHO, the only noticeable features between 996.2 and 997.1 is the interior and exterior. The others are so minute that it's not worth the added expense if those two aspects aren't as important and you're seeking maximum value. I've driven both(albeit not on the track) and have friends that have taken theirs on the track that have come from 996's that say the same thing fwiw.

Quotes source post: 10125548

Depends on the track. A C4 should be quicker for a less skilled driver but with a skilled driver the C2 will be quicker. The C4 on a track with long straights will suffer because it can't accerate as quickly. There is very little difference from laptimes from the 996.2 and 997.1. With both being stock the 997.1 has slightly better suspension and braking.

Quotes source post: 10125753

Sounds to me you already have your answer.

Well it's definitely helpful info, and I'm definitely learning! I'll post again a bit later to share some additional, potentially helpful info I found.

As promised ... I’ve also been looking up laptimes online, and while I haven’t quite answered my question, I have reached some helpful conclusions, which I thought I’d share: 1. For every water cooled Porsche, it seems pretty clear that 4wd cars are faster than their 2wd equivalents on short tracks, and a lot slower on the Nurburgring, though the Nurburgring gap seems to be decreasing (at least from 996.1 to 996.2). I’d guess that the 2wd cars are generally faster on tracks where their lap time is above ~1m40s, which is actually not that short. (Though what matters is probably not just the total length of the track, but also the number of curves (or similarly, the average distance between curves) and the width.) 2. PASM is worth about 5 seconds at the Ring on the 997.1 (according to Porsche). I’m guessing the difference is proportionally smaller on smoother tracks – except maybe where you use rough curbing at every entry, exit, and apex. 3. And yes, Walter Rohl is also worth a few seconds :- ) . Apparently 6 seconds versus von Saurma in the 997.1 C2S with sport suspension and LSD. 4. And here’s an intriguing one. The 997.1 (C2S) is faster with the sport suspension (20mm lower, with LSD) than with PASM. By 3 seconds at the Ring. So where does this leave me? Let’s see. I’m now pretty sure the 997.1 C2 Rohl drove at the Ring didn’t have PASM. Add PASM, and it could do ~8m10. Add 4wd and it can do 8m16, at best. Take out Walter Rohl, then 8m20 – 8m22, at best. Versus 8m17 for the 996.2. Problem solved then? Not quite. Remove the sport suspension from the 996.2 and ... . Well, how bad could it be? The sport suspension is probably worth less than 4 seconds (seems to me the difference in ride quality is no bigger than between PASM normal and sport settings, which make a 3 second difference, and 4 seconds is a lot for a suspension change that doesn’t have too much impact on comfort or height). So we have 996.2 with 8m21 or better, and 997.1 C4 with 8m20 – 8m22 or worse. Advantage 996. Probably. But on most tracks, the numbers improve for the C4, and on short tracks, the C4 is probably a lot faster ...

Don't really understand your logic on why you're so caught up on lap times but whatever your method to your madness, I hope you can decide on a car. I recommend you watch an old episode of Top Gear where Jeremy compares the "new" 997 to the 996. I think you'll find it hilarious.

Quotes source post: 10128741

My favorite Top Gear ever! Except of course for the one where Jordan drove the time lap and could not get the seat belt around her big, perfect, awesome *****.

Quotes source post: 10125719

The single best most cost-effective thing that you (or anyone) can do to make a given car faster around a track is education, i.e. a driving course. The more the merrier. The car is somewhat irrelevant. A standard 996 with a very good driver is very likely going to be faster (and safer) around most racetracks/cloverleaf-overpasses/winding roads than the average weekend warrior in their GT2/3/Turbo/whatever that can plant their foot on the Go-pedal on a straight but then really does not understand the car in the corners since their only driving education was given by their gym coach in 10th grade and whatever they picked up watching LeMans on TV. Seen it over and over again. It's especially fun to watch when you see a run group out there where everyone is popping off about how great they are or they show up all Nomex'd up etc. and then an instructor goes out there in whatever rental car they got at the airport or takes an underpowered POS and runs with them or off into the distance. Get the car YOU like best and be done with it.

For the vast majority of drivers all of these numbers don't mean a damned. I've seen 996TTs passed by 944s at track days. Driver skill and experience is the ultimate determiner of lap time. Everything else is armchair racing...

I dont see how this point can be made any further. The horse has been beaten enough post mortem. Its obvious this is just some kid with nothing better to do.

Quotes source post: 10129054

...

Quotes source post: 10128981

WalterRohrl and rpm's S2, thanks for your posts. WalterRohrl, you began by quoting my words: "(Alas, there aren't too many Porsches at track days I attend that aren't turbos, GT3s, or GT2s, so my experience doesn't help in my case.)" And then continued: So I fear I may have been a bit unclear. When I wrote my "experience doesn't help", I meant it doesn't help me know how the 996 and 997 compare, because there aren't enough people driving normal 996s and 997s at local track events for me to have a good feel for how fast they are. The value of training, education, etc. are all very clear, and I'm sure this will be helpful insight for many readers of this forum. I've done some, and look forward to more. However, if the 997 is, say, 2 seconds faster around the typical 3 mile/5 km track, then I'm probably going to be significantly faster in the 997 than I would be in the 996. That's what I want to know, because if it is not significatly faster, then I'm not willing to pay much extra. And therefore ...

... Thanks everyone for sharing many helpful insights! Based on what I've learned here and elsewhere, I've concluded that the 997.1 C4 is probably not significantly faster than the 996.2 on what in my mind are typical tracks (~3 miles / 5 km long). I will therefore focus on 996s, unless I find a great deal on a 997. However, if anyone else has the kind of track experience that enables comparing these cars and disagrees with my conclusion, please let us all know! Thanks again!