Porsche 911 Carrera 4

[BMWDave]

Link

Porsche 911 Carrera 4  


The Carrera 4 is back, but can the latest 4x4 evolution of Porsche's 911 finally silence its critics? Previous generations of the car have been slammed for lacking the dazzling road manners of the basic rear-engined, rear-wheel-drive machine.

The extra weight and stiffer front suspension brought by the change from two to four-wheel drive has long been blamed for deadening the model's steering feel and reducing agility.

But development takes its time at Porsche. After all, the basic 911 concept is more than 40 years old, and the 4WD version is approaching its 20th birthday. Surely the firm has got it right this time... To make certain, Porsche has come up with two distinct variants of the 4x4: the 'entry-level' 3.6 Carrera 4 and the sportier 3.8-litre Carrera 4S.

Both are very different to the rear-wheel-drive machine, featuring a 1.73-inch wider track, revised front suspension, a larger 67-litre fuel tank and, of course, the 4WD system, upgraded for this model to improve refinement. The new-look body, stretched to cover the widened rear axle, is a fantastic piece of design. Although only subtly different from the basic car, it appears more purposeful and better proportioned, too. From behind the wheel, however, this 911 feels very much the same as the standard model - which is exactly what Porsche wants.

Driven here in Carrera 4 guise, the car sounds gruff and unwilling at idle as the 325bhp flat six-cylinder unit spits noisily through its twin exhaust pipes. But as the revs climb and the engine note evens out, the new machine's unique motor is every bit as menacing as it always has been, and the car feels more urgent than its figures suggest, sprinting from 0-60mph in only 5.1 seconds.

The six-speed gearbox is beautifully weighted, and has a fabulous synchromesh system that means every shift slots home with only the lightest touch. The brakes are astounding, too; fitted with Porsche's carbon-ceramic PCCB discs, they slow the car at a spectacular rate.

So far, so good - although it is the chassis that matters most. And in the main, it does not disappoint. The ride is firm, but not stiff, and this 911 is fantastically responsive to the steering. As with the rear-wheel-drive variant, the new Carrera 4 understeers gently on its 235-section front tyres if pushed hard through a corner, before breaking traction at the back and oversteering. However, we cannot help feeling that, in this situation, the 4WD Porsche is not quite as responsive to the throttle as the standard two-wheel-drive model. Easing off will not snap the nose back into line as quickly as it does in the basic version.

This adds stability, although it could prove frustrating for a small percentage of drivers. Yet while some Porsche purists may continue to scoff at the Carrera 4, we came away impressed. Feeding power through all four wheels does enhance the car's already devastating ability, and although the set-up compromises the handling slightly, we cannot help feeling the critics will have less to complain about this time round.
Dan Strong

[Raza]

Porsches...

AWD...  

[BMWDave]

Porsches...

AWD...

Is the 911 the same with AWD....doesnt it take away the RWD attributes?  Is the Turbo only AWD or also RWD?

[Raza]

Porsches...

AWD...

Is the 911 the same with AWD....doesnt it take away the RWD attributes?  Is the Turbo only AWD or also RWD?

The Turbo is AWD, and it's been called a "point and shoot" supercar...

Which, as you know, I don't like.  The GT2 is RWD with massive power, and the high revving GT3 was also rear drive--both cars harder to drive than the Turbo.  Which is good.  Though the AWD system is not really an active one, it means you have to work harder to provoke the rear end.

[Colonel Cadillac]

I have always loved the Turbo

[MrH]

Though I love Porsches as much as the next guy, I'm a little annoyed with their resistance to change.  It seems pretty obvious that the only thing the 911 has on the Boxster at this point is power.  And they keep throwing power at the 911 to keep the Porsche purists happy by having the 911 be the top dog, when really, their mid-engine setup is more practical, and offers better performance.  The Cayman-S might be the start of Porsche swaying away from the rear engine setup, but I think they should have made this move sooner.

Kinf of reminds me of how they switched from air cooled engines to water cooled.  Porsche purists were pissed, but it was for the better.

The Cayman-S should be a complete beast, but just imagine if they used the 3.8 liter.

[Raza]

Though I love Porsches as much as the next guy, I'm a little annoyed with their resistance to change.  It seems pretty obvious that the only thing the 911 has on the Boxster at this point is power.  And they keep throwing power at the 911 to keep the Porsche purists happy by having the 911 be the top dog, when really, their mid-engine setup is more practical, and offers better performance.  The Cayman-S might be the start of Porsche swaying away from the rear engine setup, but I think they should have made this move sooner.

Kinf of reminds me of how they switched from air cooled engines to water cooled.  Porsche purists were pissed, but it was for the better.

The Cayman-S should be a complete beast, but just imagine if they used the 3.8 liter.

You say Porsche is resistant to change, but do you have any idea the type of outcry that would occur if they tried to sell a mid engined car as a 911?  There's a reason the 911 has a rear engine (not a very good one, perhaps) and it will always stay that way.  There are plenty of things that the 911 has that a Boxster or Cayman will never have.  Saying that the only difference is power is like saying the only difference between a C55 AMG and an S500 is size.

[MrH]

Though I love Porsches as much as the next guy, I'm a little annoyed with their resistance to change.  It seems pretty obvious that the only thing the 911 has on the Boxster at this point is power.  And they keep throwing power at the 911 to keep the Porsche purists happy by having the 911 be the top dog, when really, their mid-engine setup is more practical, and offers better performance.  The Cayman-S might be the start of Porsche swaying away from the rear engine setup, but I think they should have made this move sooner.

Kinf of reminds me of how they switched from air cooled engines to water cooled.  Porsche purists were pissed, but it was for the better.

The Cayman-S should be a complete beast, but just imagine if they used the 3.8 liter.

You say Porsche is resistant to change, but do you have any idea the type of outcry that would occur if they tried to sell a mid engined car as a 911?  There's a reason the 911 has a rear engine (not a very good one, perhaps) and it will always stay that way.  There are plenty of things that the 911 has that a Boxster or Cayman will never have.  Saying that the only difference is power is like saying the only difference between a C55 AMG and an S500 is size.

Admit it though, they are only keeping the 911 with the engine hanging out its ass to keep the Porsche purists happy.  Realistically though, if they made a mid engine car with the 3.8 liter, it'd destroy the 911.  It seems to me like they just keep throwing more power at a fundamentally flawed layout.

Maybe this is a bad analogy, but it reminds of me Honda.  Sure, they make a damn fine FWD car with a lot of power (see TL), but when it comes down to it, they are just refining something that is fundamentally flawed.

[Raza]

Though I love Porsches as much as the next guy, I'm a little annoyed with their resistance to change.  It seems pretty obvious that the only thing the 911 has on the Boxster at this point is power.  And they keep throwing power at the 911 to keep the Porsche purists happy by having the 911 be the top dog, when really, their mid-engine setup is more practical, and offers better performance.  The Cayman-S might be the start of Porsche swaying away from the rear engine setup, but I think they should have made this move sooner.

Kinf of reminds me of how they switched from air cooled engines to water cooled.  Porsche purists were pissed, but it was for the better.

The Cayman-S should be a complete beast, but just imagine if they used the 3.8 liter.

You say Porsche is resistant to change, but do you have any idea the type of outcry that would occur if they tried to sell a mid engined car as a 911?  There's a reason the 911 has a rear engine (not a very good one, perhaps) and it will always stay that way.  There are plenty of things that the 911 has that a Boxster or Cayman will never have.  Saying that the only difference is power is like saying the only difference between a C55 AMG and an S500 is size.

Admit it though, they are only keeping the 911 with the engine hanging out its ass to keep the Porsche purists happy.  Realistically though, if they made a mid engine car with the 3.8 liter, it'd destroy the 911.  It seems to me like they just keep throwing more power at a fundamentally flawed layout.

Maybe this is a bad analogy, but it reminds of me Honda.  Sure, they make a damn fine FWD car with a lot of power (see TL), but when it comes down to it, they are just refining something that is fundamentally flawed.

The rear engine rear drive platform may not exactly have the same characteristics of the mid engined platform, but there are things that a 911 can do that a Boxster cannot. Mid engined cars do come with caveats, you know, and an inexperienced driver can cross the threshold very, very quickly, whereas the 911 gives you a little more warning.  

What you're basically saying is "All cars would be better in they were mid engined, rear wheel drive".  Fundamentally, I agree with that, and my favorite cars do have boxer sixes behind me, but there's alot to be said about what's best and what's right.

[R33 GT-R]

Nothing like whipping a porsche into a frenzy of understeer.

[MrH]

Though I love Porsches as much as the next guy, I'm a little annoyed with their resistance to change.  It seems pretty obvious that the only thing the 911 has on the Boxster at this point is power.  And they keep throwing power at the 911 to keep the Porsche purists happy by having the 911 be the top dog, when really, their mid-engine setup is more practical, and offers better performance.  The Cayman-S might be the start of Porsche swaying away from the rear engine setup, but I think they should have made this move sooner.

Kinf of reminds me of how they switched from air cooled engines to water cooled.  Porsche purists were pissed, but it was for the better.

The Cayman-S should be a complete beast, but just imagine if they used the 3.8 liter.

You say Porsche is resistant to change, but do you have any idea the type of outcry that would occur if they tried to sell a mid engined car as a 911?  There's a reason the 911 has a rear engine (not a very good one, perhaps) and it will always stay that way.  There are plenty of things that the 911 has that a Boxster or Cayman will never have.  Saying that the only difference is power is like saying the only difference between a C55 AMG and an S500 is size.

Admit it though, they are only keeping the 911 with the engine hanging out its ass to keep the Porsche purists happy.  Realistically though, if they made a mid engine car with the 3.8 liter, it'd destroy the 911.  It seems to me like they just keep throwing more power at a fundamentally flawed layout.

Maybe this is a bad analogy, but it reminds of me Honda.  Sure, they make a damn fine FWD car with a lot of power (see TL), but when it comes down to it, they are just refining something that is fundamentally flawed.

The rear engine rear drive platform may not exactly have the same characteristics of the mid engined platform, but there are things that a 911 can do that a Boxster cannot. Mid engined cars do come with caveats, you know, and an inexperienced driver can cross the threshold very, very quickly, whereas the 911 gives you a little more warning.  

What you're basically saying is "All cars would be better in they were mid engined, rear wheel drive".  Fundamentally, I agree with that, and my favorite cars do have boxer sixes behind me, but there's alot to be said about what's best and what's right.

You're saying the 911 has an advantage over the Boxster because its suspension is more tuned to understeer?  If anything, given equal suspension setups, a RR car should oversteer like a bitch compared to a mid-engine design.

And why is what's right not what's best?  I think there's a lot of potential for a mid-engine Porsche with the 3.8 liter.  Purists be damned, I wouldn't want a inferior drive train lay out because a few people would cry if they switched to a mid engine design.

[Raza]

I said nothing about understeer, I meant snap oversteer, which happens with mid engine cars.

And I'm not saying that a mid engine car with the 3.8 wouldn't be awesome--I'm saying it wouldn't be a 911.  You guys just don't get my respect for heritage yet, do you?

[MrH]

I said nothing about understeer, I meant snap oversteer, which happens with mid engine cars.

And I'm not saying that a mid engine car with the 3.8 wouldn't be awesome--I'm saying it wouldn't be a 911.  You guys just don't get my respect for heritage yet, do you?

I'm not much of a man for classic cars.  I'm not saying I despise the 911 by any means.  I love it.  I'm just disappointed a little.  They wouldn't even have to market a new car as the 911.  Keep the 911 as rear-engined, make the back seats bigger, and market it as the everyday sports car, and through in a mid engine car with a 911 engine into the mix. Market that as the all out sports car.

[Raza]

I said nothing about understeer, I meant snap oversteer, which happens with mid engine cars.

And I'm not saying that a mid engine car with the 3.8 wouldn't be awesome--I'm saying it wouldn't be a 911.  You guys just don't get my respect for heritage yet, do you?

I'm not much of a man for classic cars.  I'm not saying I despise the 911 by any means.  I love it.  I'm just disappointed a little.  They wouldn't even have to market a new car as the 911.  Keep the 911 as rear-engined, make the back seats bigger, and market it as the everyday sports car, and through in a mid engine car with a 911 engine into the mix. Market that as the all out sports car.

The 911 is an everyday sports car.  The Cayman and Boxster are the all out sports cars you are referring to.  I had a suggestion with my front engine 929, but every shouted me down.  

[TBR]

I said nothing about understeer, I meant snap oversteer, which happens with mid engine cars.

And I'm not saying that a mid engine car with the 3.8 wouldn't be awesome--I'm saying it wouldn't be a 911.  You guys just don't get my respect for heritage yet, do you?

I'm not much of a man for classic cars.  I'm not saying I despise the 911 by any means.  I love it.  I'm just disappointed a little.  They wouldn't even have to market a new car as the 911.  Keep the 911 as rear-engined, make the back seats bigger, and market it as the everyday sports car, and through in a mid engine car with a 911 engine into the mix. Market that as the all out sports car.

I believe you just described Porsche's current strategy, the 911 already is the perfect every day sports car imho and the Boxster and Cayman are all out sports cars.

[R33 GT-R]

Don't forget the 959, now that's a sports car.