Planet-9 Porsche Forum banner

41 - 60 of 73 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,490 Posts
The Ring and so many other tracks can also have bragging rights from the comfort of ones couch or bean bag chair via X-BOX!

In a lot of ways I am serious (and kidding a little). BUT consider this:

Nissan and other manufactures have placed young adults in their simulators. They then do real on track driving against drivers who are true drivers. Meaning they put the "kids" in a real car after hours of simulator training. Then they allow the kids trained in the simulator to race on course side by side with real drivers that have raced for years. The simulator trained drivers were faster!

Having a 19 year old that has ridden dirt bikes and quads since 4 (advantage yes) BUT has also had a Play Station controller and or X Box controller in his hand since he was four too, I speak from experience a little. It seems that he is far more willing to take a risk on a track with his car than I am. I really think that is because he can literally BUILD his car on X Box and race it for hours on end. If he wrecks it, it is a reset etc. He knows what the limits are and has pushed them with no consequences while gaming. The gaming feel of the car then gets applied to track and daily driving.

It is so funny to see him against other professional drivers on an Auto X course that have $80,000 + in their Vette/Mustang and he's better than they are in a Stock S2000. These same grown men challenge him to a high dollar go cart tracks. He spanks them every time.

I really think there is something to be said for the X-BOX and Play Station "racing" games etc. if you and or someone you know wants to get better and or faster on a real track, I believe it can truly make you better/faster.
Blessed:

I totally understand the value of simulators and X-Box etc. I agree, so long as the software is well written...and most of it is, the benefit, especially on a giant monster of a track like the Ring cannot be had any other way. I'm living proof that not using them can have some bad results.

Just look at the current F1 field and you'll find a good ⅓ of the field being young drivers who have racked up 10 times the simulator miles than in-car track miles. It's the way of the world in road racing now.

In our home, I have a pretty big day job and several hobbies that compete for my attention. We intentionally have one very nice TV and no video games. We watch together....no hiding in one's own space all the time and living separate lives..and shows. We've slept in the same bed (well, not the same actual bed!) for over 30 years too...No TVs in the bedroom...by design.

When the first DOOM! computer game came out for PC, I spent literally an entire weekend on it. Same for DOOM2 etc. Made myself sick on them. I decided, I think wisely, that X-box might be bad for my marriage, my health and my finances, so we never got one. No kids, so there's no one wanting one for Christmas except me...and I won't allow it.

X-box wasn't a choice when I was driving the Ring, however. I gave up on Ring driving before those driving programs came out. Some of the high-buck driving simulators that hook to TV or computer look amazing. I think I would stop eating, going to work....

I still enjoy cars and bikes, but not in the same way or with the same goals as before. I love that "ballet with 3000 lbs of car" thing that I do at the track. I love making music with my Aprilia on a nice day...and still like the "shot out of a cannon" feeling it gives when I give it the spurs. I'll probably never do another bike school and the car schools I do are chosen for a safe track with runoff, good people running the show and students who want to learn the basics. I don't time laps anymore. I can tell when I get a series of corners perfect and squeeze about all the car has to offer out of it. I like entering corners from the wrong side of the road now and then to simulate race situations. i don't compete, just appreciate.

Hope that makes just a little sense to some of us.

:cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts
Makes sense to me.

I've never owned a video game prior to purchasing the X-Box 360. The X-Box was purchased for the singular purpose of allowing us to learn something about the Nordschleife. We have no other games for it. And we haven't used it since leaving on our trip to visit the Nordschleife.

I'm not a video game guy.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,490 Posts
Makes sense to me.

I've never owned a video game prior to purchasing the X-Box 360. The X-Box was purchased for the singular purpose of allowing us to learn something about the Nordschleife. We have no other games for it. And we haven't used it since leaving on our trip to visit the Nordschleife.

I'm not a video game guy.
Sadly, I'm not in the same boat. Once I get started with junk like that, it's a long fall for me to the bottom!!!

:cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Not sure I follow that one, you saying the GT4 will be like an 80's vette?
No, this was more a statement about people than a statement about cars. Just like the V8’s, there used to be a real reason why Porsche chose six-cylinder engines for these cars; now that this reason is obsolete, we still cling to these engines for reasons that have nothing to do with why they were chosen in the first place...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
No, this was more a statement about people than a statement about cars. Just like the V8’s, there used to be a real reason why Porsche chose six-cylinder engines for these cars; now that this reason is obsolete, we still cling to these engines for reasons that have nothing to do with why they were chosen in the first place...
Respectfully disagree. For many, or at least some, of us sports car purchases aren't about numbers. They are about emotion and visceral interactions. As such, a fturbo 4 may provide better low end torque and magazine racing stats but it lacks the sound, feel, and responsiveness that the "obsolete" N/A flat 6 offered.

Just as Porsche found out when they initially limited the GT3 and GT3RS to "superior" PDK only, they found that they missed part of their intended audience. The success of the GT4 and 911R support this. I hope they aren't making the same error here.

By the way, one thing I haven't seen yet mentioned here is that the switch to turbo only was largely driven by non-traditional market forces (fuel efficiency and pollutant requirements). I point that out because buyers didn't want or ask for the change. Moreover the irony is that in real world dribpving, absent long-distance, cruise control type use, these supposedly cleaner and more efficient motors really don't do any better than the N/A driver rains they replace. Sometimes, in fact, if you're in the boost a lot, you'll get worse mileage. Funny since I suspect most of us spend more time canyon carving than driving across rather desert with the cruise control locked in at 72 MPH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
Blessed:

I totally understand the value of simulators and X-Box etc. I agree, so long as the software is well written...and most of it is, the benefit, especially on a giant monster of a track like the Ring cannot be had any other way. I'm living proof that not using them can have some bad results.

Just look at the current F1 field and you'll find a good ⅓ of the field being young drivers who have racked up 10 times the simulator miles than in-car track miles. It's the way of the world in road racing now.

In our home, I have a pretty big day job and several hobbies that compete for my attention. We intentionally have one very nice TV and no video games. We watch together....no hiding in one's own space all the time and living separate lives..and shows. We've slept in the same bed (well, not the same actual bed!) for over 30 years too...No TVs in the bedroom...by design.

When the first DOOM! computer game came out for PC, I spent literally an entire weekend on it. Same for DOOM2 etc. Made myself sick on them. I decided, I think wisely, that X-box might be bad for my marriage, my health and my finances, so we never got one. No kids, so there's no one wanting one for Christmas except me...and I won't allow it.

X-box wasn't a choice when I was driving the Ring, however. I gave up on Ring driving before those driving programs came out. Some of the high-buck driving simulators that hook to TV or computer look amazing. I think I would stop eating, going to work....

I still enjoy cars and bikes, but not in the same way or with the same goals as before. I love that "ballet with 3000 lbs of car" thing that I do at the track. I love making music with my Aprilia on a nice day...and still like the "shot out of a cannon" feeling it gives when I give it the spurs. I'll probably never do another bike school and the car schools I do are chosen for a safe track with runoff, good people running the show and students who want to learn the basics. I don't time laps anymore. I can tell when I get a series of corners perfect and squeeze about all the car has to offer out of it. I like entering corners from the wrong side of the road now and then to simulate race situations. i don't compete, just appreciate.

Hope that makes just a little sense to some of us.

:cheers:

I too work and relax differently. My son is ALL in on X BOX etc. I can add up on one hand the amount of hours I have spent playing videos games. He however hours a day. I am sure that contributes to his abilities being better than mine in SOME things.

Like the above quote...No T.V. in bedroom for 26 years. That room is for two things and sleeping is the other one.

I tease my son and a few others that I would rather live life in the real world rather than pretending to experience things in front of screen. Life is my screen...LOL Same goes for most all social medias. I am too busy living life I don't want to watch others do what I can...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Respectfully disagree. For many, or at least some, of us sports car purchases aren't about numbers. They are about emotion and visceral interactions. As such, a fturbo 4 may provide better low end torque and magazine racing stats but it lacks the sound, feel, and responsiveness that the "obsolete" N/A flat 6 offered.

Just as Porsche found out when they initially limited the GT3 and GT3RS to "superior" PDK only, they found that they missed part of their intended audience. The success of the GT4 and 911R support this. I hope they aren't making the same error here.

By the way, one thing I haven't seen yet mentioned here is that the switch to turbo only was largely driven by non-traditional market forces (fuel efficiency and pollutant requirements). I point that out because buyers didn't want or ask for the change. Moreover the irony is that in real world dribpving, absent long-distance, cruise control type use, these supposedly cleaner and more efficient motors really don't do any better than the N/A driver rains they replace. Sometimes, in fact, if you're in the boost a lot, you'll get worse mileage. Funny since I suspect most of us spend more time canyon carving than driving across rather desert with the cruise control locked in at 72 MPH
You might disagree, but your post actually demonstrates my point exactly. Everything you said is just what the V8 guys said when cars like the Mustang SVO showed up. Numbers vs. emotion, visceral interaction, sound, feel, government vs. market, real vs. best-case fuel economy ... Just subsitute “V8” everywhere you said “Flat-6” and “muscle car” everywhere you said “sports car,” and it all sounds just like the arguments of a 1980 pony car fan.

There may be new things under the sun, but this ain’t one of them.
:cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
You might disagree, but your post actually demonstrates my point exactly. Everything you said is just what the V8 guys said when cars like the Mustang SVO showed up. Numbers vs. emotion, visceral interaction, sound, feel, government vs. market, real vs. best-case fuel economy ... Just subsitute “V8” everywhere you said “Flat-6” and “muscle car” everywhere you said “sports car,” and it all sounds just like the arguments of a 1980 pony car fan.

There may be new things under the sun, but this ain’t one of them.


:cheers:
EXCEPT... Remind me again how the SVO Mustang sold? And correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the V8 still the "hot" Mustang and the engine used in the GT350 today and just about every uber Mustang sold in the last 20 years? Meanwhile the turbo 4 Mustang (as good a sit it is today) remains the rental car/secretary car model.

If anything my points are even better substantiated by your using the SVO as a data point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
EXCEPT... Remind me again how the SVO Mustang sold? And correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the V8 still the "hot" Mustang and the engine used in the GT350 today and just about every uber Mustang sold in the last 20 years? Meanwhile the turbo 4 Mustang (as good a sit it is today) remains the rental car/secretary car model.

If anything my points are even better substantiated by your using the SVO as a data point.
Sorry, was your point about sales numbers? That didn’t really come across in your original post... If it was about sales numbers, are you implying that the 718 won’t sell as well as the 981 because the SVO didn’t sell as well as the V8?

For sales numbers, these aren’t really comparable. Back in 1984, the SVO was faster than the V8, but it was also priced 60% (!!!) higher than the V8. And yes, today the V8 is the “hot” one, but that’s because it’s the fast one. The GT350 has 70% more power and handles better than the 4-cylinder; it doesn’t just sounds nicer.

Sales numbers notwithstanding, waxing poetic about the 981’s emotion and visceral interactions despite it being the slower car sounds like a V8 fan in 1984, not a V8 fan in 2016. There's nothing funny about liking a car that sounds nice *and* goes faster...
:taunt:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts
I was a senior Ford line technician at a Ford mega-dealer back then, and I remember those cars pretty well.

Do you remember the SVO's version of the government-mandated 85 mph speedometer?

66666_3.jpg

Who said car makers never had a sense of humor? Smokey Yunick would have done something like this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts
The SVO was a very different car. 16" wheels (15" on the 5.0), 4-wheel disc brakes (disc/drum on the 5.0), KONI dampers, bolstered seats, I think it even used aluminum front lower control arms instead of the stamped steel ones on the 5.0 cars.

And to be clear, the SVO was faster in every way, than the 1984-1985 175-horsepower V8 with the 4-barrel Holley carburetor, as well as the one-year 1986 200-horsepower fuel-injected V8 engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts
...and here is Ecoboost, son of SVO.

Other than aftermarket programming, the following video depicts a COMPLETELY stock 4-cylinder Mustang. Stock tires, complete stock exhaust, stock airbox, stock automatic transmission with stock torque converter, and running a 12.62 quarter-mile.

That's a full FIVE TENTHS of a second quicker (an eternity in drag racing) than a P-9 member here was able to wring out of his 3.8-powered 981 Boxster Spyder.

You could literally buy a $300 programmer off the internet, go rent a 4-cylinder automatic trans Mustang from the airport, go to your local drag strip, and spank almost any road-going Porsche that showed up.


And here's a lightly-modified 4-cylinder Mustang that would make the most pissed-off 911 ever made, the 620-horsepower twin-turbo 911 GT2 RS "Widowmaker", look like it had shut off at half track:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
No, this was more a statement about people than a statement about cars. Just like the V8’s, there used to be a real reason why Porsche chose six-cylinder engines for these cars; now that this reason is obsolete, we still cling to these engines for reasons that have nothing to do with why they were chosen in the first place...
My original comments were related to What's been fundamental to Boxsters/Caymans to date which has been the intoxicating exhaust note of the flat six. I'm not disputing if there's an environmental reason for a change or not
:cheers:
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,452 Posts
To bring back a topic thread I remember from last April, I managed to capture the sound of both the GT4 and 718 Boxster S in the following video:

http://www.planet-9.com/news-items/161034-porsche-experience-center-atlanta-pecatl.html#post1477058

Although this topic thread debates some theoretical things about 'Ring times and the 718 vs the GT4 it is about as meaningful as me telling you that the GT4 I drove last Saturday spanked every single 718 at the Porsche Experience Center on the track. I have no idea how much experience those 718 drivers had, what their instructors were saying, etc. etc. so again, while fun, not really meaningful, nor was it a race, my goal of continuing to decrease my lap times may not have been their goal. Kudos to the one 718 driver who put the top down (glad their instructor let them).

I did have to chuckle though about one guy who was out on the track at the same time I was. He was "that guy" wearing all the Porsche gear and pontificating to anyone who would listen (he brought friends) about how great the 911 was and his driving prowess, etc. Well after our session was done and we were debriefing in the café I overheard one of his entourage ask him about that blue car and why was it faster and his response was something to the effect that the blue car was "practically a race car". I mean come on, why else would he have been slower in the vaunted 911? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,682 Posts
Also trying to return to the original subject, my guess is the 718 Cayman will not only be stiffer than the Boxster, but also lighter. That should buy some good seconds at Nurburgring. Torque is a big deal for everyday driving, and I love it. But I also love the wail of a Porsche flat 6 versus a Turbo 4 banger.
Im retired, so don't drive as many miles now, and could care less about mpg or PDK. But I do like creature comforts. Now I live in Orlando in winter and Chicago in summer. So I really like my bargain CPO 991 C2S sunroof coupe with 400Hp and 325 ft-lb torque, bought with 3000 miles, that was loaded, with a substantially lower price than a GT4. In fact I paid $1500 less than a similarly equipped new 718S without a sunroof, and got a 5 year Porsche warranty.
But - if Porsche were to offer an upper crust 718 Cayman with a flat 6 in the future, I would really be tempted... Really... I really loved my 981 CS, but have been stuck in that insatiable mode where I always always want more. A little more than two years into retirement, this is my 4th Porsche (I've also have an older Cayenne GTS and a Macan Turbo). This C2S is my second Porsche sports car since retiring in March 2014. Porsche really knows how to tempt guys like me! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
486 Posts
To bring back a topic thread I remember from last April, I managed to capture the sound of both the GT4 and 718 Boxster S in the following video:

http://www.planet-9.com/news-items/161034-porsche-experience-center-atlanta-pecatl.html#post1477058

Although this topic thread debates some theoretical things about 'Ring times and the 718 vs the GT4 it is about as meaningful as me telling you that the GT4 I drove last Saturday spanked every single 718 at the Porsche Experience Center on the track. I have no idea how much experience those 718 drivers had, what their instructors were saying, etc. etc. so again, while fun, not really meaningful, nor was it a race, my goal of continuing to decrease my lap times may not have been their goal. Kudos to the one 718 driver who put the top down (glad their instructor let them).

I did have to chuckle though about one guy who was out on the track at the same time I was. He was "that guy" wearing all the Porsche gear and pontificating to anyone who would listen (he brought friends) about how great the 911 was and his driving prowess, etc. Well after our session was done and we were debriefing in the café I overheard one of his entourage ask him about that blue car and why was it faster and his response was something to the effect that the blue car was "practically a race car". I mean come on, why else would he have been slower in the vaunted 911? :)

I love that guy?
Every time i go to the track I meet him
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
This seems to be no longer true with the 718.
As Porsche does with the 911 - coupe and convertible will have the same hp numbers.

The Cayman S lap times might still be a bit faster as coupes tend to have less chassis flex.
The Boxster chassis has been designed specifically as a convertible from the get go unlike many other convertibles which are sedans with their roofs chopped off, there is hardly any extra stiffness to be had in the Cayman.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
"The Boxster chassis has been designed specifically as a convertible from the get go unlike many other convertibles which are sedans with their roofs chopped off, there is hardly any extra stiffness to be had in the Cayman."

I'm not sure about this. Where'd you get this info? Porsche says the Cayman has 40% more torsional rigidity then the Boxster. To me that's significant and noticeable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
474 Posts
Do you remember the SVO's version of the government-mandated 85 mph speedometer?
That is hilarious! I never knew they did that...
 
41 - 60 of 73 Posts
Top