Planet-9 Porsche Forum banner
  • NOTICE - Before adding photos to posts on Planet-9, please review: Posting Photos on Planet-9

GT4 vs. 718

25K views 72 replies 31 participants last post by  josephvman 
#1 ·
I know this isn't comparable at all. But i wanted to get your guys opinions. The 718 boxster S just lapped the Nurburgring at 7:42. How do you all think it will compare to the gt4. I didn't think it would get that close. anyways im happy with my GT4 haha:hilarious:
 
#2 ·
Part of the grand scheme marketing push. The new motor had to run a couple clicks faster than ....fill in the blank ... To get any traction in the market place.

That it got that close to a GT4 time is quite amazing regardless, but torque and HP can cove a lot of sins.

D
 
#23 ·
Torque on the Ring REALLY covers a lot of sins. The blind rises lead to some sharp turns and some mild turns followed by long uphill straights. If you don't know the track...and that takes a lot of laps an practice, you don't know which is which and you have to slow for each one. With massive power, you can accelerate up the hills and GO. With a "momentum car", you lose half a minute! No doubt a GT4 is the better track car. The ground clearance makes it impossible for my use and the motor is too big for touring in my opinion. I like that the 718 S gets great mpg. I like that it's more of a normal car and not a rocket ship. The only thing that's "wrong" with it is that it's unproven, in my mind, for DE use. How will it need to be modded to provide enough engine cooling for an hour or more of sustained track use? Are the heat shields sufficient for this or will the turbos melt things when the car gets really hot?

I would trust Porsche but look what happened with the 987.1. Insufficient oiling, blown up motors, IMS & AOS problems, power steering overheating. I thought it was the perfect sports car...Track on weekends, drive on weekends.

:cheers:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baystater
#11 · (Edited)
God bless your gift of sarcasm.

If you never drive the Nordschleife, it doesn't matter whether you drive a Fiat Panda or a 991 GT3 RS.

If you turn a 12-minute Nordschleife Bridge To Gantry lap in a Renault Twingo, you're probably also going to turn a 12-minute lap time in a GT4.

It is not until you have made the investment to develop your skill set beyond the limits of Pandas and Twingos, that you will be able to exploit any THEORETICAL advantages of cars like the GT3 and the GT4. You cannot buy your way into a materially faster lap time. What you CAN do, is to piss off faster drivers, by using an even faster car to prevent them from passing on the straights, and then parking it in the corners. I keep enough bail money in my pocket to cover a misdemeanor assault charge, for just this reason.
 
#18 ·
Yes, the 718 sounds like a Subaru Outhouse.
 
#19 ·
After watching this video, I feel so lucky to have been able to custom order my GT4. I'm sure the 'New' flat four turbo will be fast or faster going forward but for me it's more about the total experience not just the lap times.
The sound of the flat six is an integral part of the experience and so far I'm not a convert.

https://youtu.be/71dPKCqVegs
 
#20 ·
I remember the dismay of many when the 981 CS came out and ran times equal to or better than the Cayman R if memory serves. Get what meets your personal requirements and enjoy the ride.................Actually I solved this problem personally a few years back when I went from the Cayman R to the 2014 Cayman 2.7L and have never looked back (current 2016 Cayman is also 2.7L with main difference being X73..).
 
#35 · (Edited)
......Actually I solved this problem personally a few years back when I went from the Cayman R to the 2014 Cayman 2.7L and have never looked back (current 2016 Cayman is also 2.7L with main difference being X73..).
Yep, that's the secret of avoiding the need for more speed. I also purposefully downgraded in power (911 3.6L to Cayman 2.7L,) so each incrementally faster car that comes out doesn't tempt me anymore. :hilarious:
 
#24 ·
Lol. Torque means squat. The Nordschleife is all about momentum. This is because speeds are generally fairly high. The faster a vehicle is driven, the more of it's power required to maintain the current speed, and the less power available to accelerate it. For example, it requires 0% of a vehicle's power to maintain a speed of zero mph, leaving 100% of it's power available to accelerate it. At top speed, a vehicle is using 100% of it's power to maintain that top speed, leaving 0% of it's power available to accelerate it. During Touristenfahrten, you can really only make BTG (Bridge To Gantry) runs, but when using the full straight in between those two points, many cars will reach their top speed right after the gantry. During my wife's 911 GT3 RS taxi ride during a VLN race weekend at the Nordschleife, her taxi driver (Sabine Schmitz) topped 320 kph (200 mph) just past the gantry, according to the on-screen telemetry on the video she gave us.
 
#25 ·
X:

You're talking about running down the 2-mile back straight with Sabine at 200 in a GT3RS and then you're talking about it being a momentum track? I'm confused.

Have you actually DRIVEN the track yourself???? In a normal street car?

There is over 1000 feet of elevation change with a lot of ups and downs between highest and lowest points and 150 turns of every description. Many turns are preceded by rises in the track that don't allow you to see what's ahead until it's too late. Some turns are decreasing radius, then they put an increasing radius turn with a climb after it...slow too much for one of those and your lap is blown in a momentum car. In a powerful car, you don't lose so much time.

My point is, if you're not Sabine, you don't know what's over the rise and you have to slow down. If you have torque and power, you can speed back up, even if it's uphill, in the momentum car, you wait.

If you have momentum, it means you didn't slow down. Fine, if you know the track and know what's over that hill. I have personal experience about what happens when your driving partner fails to consider that, btw.

It's a lot of track to learn. If you live in the US and only go once a year, it will take several years to learn it...and some German lessons wouldn't hurt. Nowadays, you can buy a video game/simulator with the track on it and try to memorize everything, but it's still tough and takes a lot of real track time in addition to get a proper lap....but you can save a slowing down mistake much easier if you have POWER.

:cheers:
 
  • Like
Reactions: K-Man S
#29 ·
"The Cayman S lap times might still be a bit faster as coupes tend to have less chassis flex."

This is what interests me in this comparison. I'd like to quantify what the Caymans 40% stiffer (so says Porsche) frame means in the performance numbers against the Boxster. Certainly on the Ring.
 
#31 ·
It probably depends upon what tires are on it. Tires capable of higher traction, are capable of imparting higher loads upon the chassis while cornering hard. At some point, the loads are high enough that chassis flex becomes a component of how well the car controls the location and orientation of the tire's contact patches. An absolutely rigid chassis, is not the ideal- there is an optimum flex, that works with the suspension and the tires, to provide the best performance. I suspect that both the Cayman AND the Boxster are probably stiff enough for anything up to and including track day tires.
 
#32 ·
I absolutely love my GT4. So far, the best car I've ever owned and I'm lucky enough to have owned a lot.

I bought this car knowing it wasn't the quickest, the fastest, etc. and that for less money I could buy several cars that had what are worthless to me magazine stat's which were more impressive.

I'm sure the 718 is a great car and I'm sure the low down torque of the turbo motor will make it feel quicker, if not actually make it quicker... and I don't care. Not one bit.

I love naturally aspirated motors. I can not stress how much I love the way the drivetrain in the GT4 feels, sounds, behaves. I've not heard the 718 in person but the videos don't make the sound promising. Moreover, to be honest, my GT4 is already more car than I am driver. We all like to think we're Senna reincarnated but very, very, very few of us are good enough to really exploit these cars... OK, I'm not. And no number of AutoX or Track days will ever get me there.

So in short... 'Ring times are neat in a nerdy, magazine racing time kind of way. But they're meaningless to me... especially in this case.

Now if the next GT4 comes with the 4.0L motor out of the current 911R... and isn't unobtanium... then maybe I'm interested. Until the... I couldn't be happier.
 
#33 ·
I couldn't agree with you more! Just the looks alone does it for me. I got the car because I felt that it fit me quiet well. I have been racing for over 10 years now, so I think ill be able to use this car to its fullest potential (ill let you know this summer once I take it to the track). But besides the shear speed of it, the looks and sound of the car is just astonishing. At the end of the day we know which is more special. Cheers, i hope you are enjoying your GT4!
 
#36 ·
It's simply silly and rather meaningless to draw anything other than very broad conclusions by comparing 'ring (or any other track) lap times driven on different days by different drivers under different or unknown conditions (i.e., ambient temps, track temps, humidity, tires, wind, and myriad other factors). Yes, everyone does it, but everyone happens to be wrong.

In any case, I doubt anyone here could achieve the manufacturers' 'ring times we read about. It's the magician, not the wand that makes the magic.


Dan
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#37 ·
Amen... :)
 
#40 ·
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.
 
#41 ·
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:
 
#42 ·
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.
 
#50 · (Edited)
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?

Speedometer Gauge Auto part Tachometer Measuring instrument


Who said car makers never had a sense of humor? Smokey Yunick would have done something like this.
 
#60 ·
Do you remember the SVO's version of the government-mandated 85 mph speedometer?
That is hilarious! I never knew they did that...
 
#51 ·
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.
 
#52 · (Edited)
...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:

 
#54 ·
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? :)
 
#55 · (Edited)
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! :)
 
#58 ·
"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.
 
#61 · (Edited)
Cayman vs boxster - Page 2 - Porsche General - PistonHeads

"A bit google suggests stiffnesses of (in NM/deg):
early MX5 4,800
Elise s1 10,000
Z4 14,500
BMW e46 coupe/saloon 13,500 - 16,000
Boxster 16,000
Ferrari 360 23,000
Z4 Coupe 28,000
Cayman 31,500

We know cars are getting stiffer. I wouldn't say stiffer is automatically better. There are some brilliant cars out there with poor torsional stiffness (by today's standards) - mx5, 205gti, elise. Even the e46 comes in less stiff than a Boxster and I never heard any complaints about them.

Cornering loads are small compared to this. Consider that a boxster weighs about 1300kgs, say 1600 fully loaded (and to make the calcs easier). It can corner at about 1g, creating a centripetal force of about 1600N. The rigidity is 16,000 NM/deg. Assuming the cornering load is shared between the two outer wheels alone and pessimistically assuming the chassis is 45 degrees to the load (unlikely unless you're russ swift). That equates to 400/16000 = 0.025 degrees of flex. If a cayman flexes half that, do you really think you'll notice that extra 0.0125 degrees? (Feel free to correct me if my engineering maths is wrong, it's been a while!).

Porsche want you to feel slightly better about the Cayman so you'll pay a premium to buy them. If it didn't have some mythical handling advantage, you'd just buy the cheaper boxster. IMHO it's 99% marketing hype, 1% real world."

https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/porsche-boxster-vs-cayman-0390

"Unlike many convertibles, the Boxster and Cayman were developed to cope without a roof from the outset, meaning the handling differences between the two are minimal. If you really throw both down a road with enthusiasm, the Cayman reveals itself to still be the marginally more stiff of the two.


That’s nit-picking of the highest order, however – both cars are staggeringly good from behind the wheel.


- See more at: https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/porsche-boxster-vs-cayman-0390#sthash.dRJqMKkU.dpuf"
 
#65 · (Edited)
True.That's how the Federal Govt does it in modern times, and it always works when threatening funding. I lived in LA (Louisiana for those of you unaware) from 1989-2006. It was legal to drink and drive there most of those years, as long as blood alcohol was not more than 0.1%. One by one, every state made it a felony, and soon moved to 0.08% for the legal limit. LA was one of the last states to do this, and did it only because Federal Highway Funds would be held back if LA didn't comply. But it was still somewhat loosely enforced, depending on area, and LA's thousands of drive-thru frozen daiquiri shops survived. They have to put a little piece of tape across the hole on top so it is sealed, and then hand you the straw.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top