I need one! 2010 911 SC

[m21sniper]

You realize 911s are not race cars, and are not piloted by professional race car drivers, right?

There is a reason that rear engine rear wheel drive cars are all but extinct (and were never very popular among car designers) you know.

[island911]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

You realize 911s are not race cars, and are not piloted by professional race car drivers, right?...

Okay, let's go w/ that argument. Why does a 951 or 928 need 50/50?

[m21sniper]

It creates nuetral handling and allows for a wider range of throttle/braking settings in curves.

Hit the brakes in an earlier 911 in a curve, and it's a 180 into the wall ass end first. Do the same in a 928, and the car just simply slows down as the driver intended.

I don't think you could find many(if any) automitive engineers that would ever argue that a rear weight bias is preferrable to a 50/50 balance. To the contrary, a rear weight bias limits the operating envelope, and can be quite dangerous...especially to the uninitiated.

The early Porsches, and especailly the early Turbo cars are legendary for their "twitchy" handling. It's that engine way out back that causes that amigo.

[island911]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

It creates nuetral handling and allows for a wider range of throttle/braking settings in curves.

Hit the brakes in an earlier 911 in a curve, and it's a 180 into the wall ass end first. Do the same in a 928, and the car just simply slows down as the driver intended.

I don't think you could find many(if any) automitive engineers that would ever argue that a rear weight bias is preferrable to a 50/50 balance. To the contrary, a rear weight bias limits the operating envelope, and can be quite dangerous...especially to the uninitiated.

The early Porsches, and especailly the early Turbo cars are legendary for their "twitchy" handling. It's that engine way out back that causes that amigo.

Okay, first of all, stop writing "nuetral" it's "neutral." Second, you didn't answer the Q about why 50/50 is NEEDED (non race drivers and all). Third, yeah, I understand your mental model of performance. I understood it when I was 10.

What if I argued with you that a shot-gun was a better offensive tool than a rifle?

[Schumi]

A rearward weight bias an a car that is rear wheel drive is better from a performance standpoint. More weight over the driven wheels is necessary to allow adequate power deliver under corner exit. A good targeted weight split for a RWD car is actually about 44/56 F/R. I engineer open wheel, mid engine single seater formula cars for a living. I'm currently redesigning a car due to it's current weight bias being 47/53, and it needs to be more like 45/55 for what I need.

The engine in the 911 has polar moment inertial effects on it's handling as well, which are negative. This is why a 40/60 weight split with a 911 actually works. It's also compensated in the fact that the rear track on a newer 911 is, I think, 2 or 4 inches wider than the front.

This is not optimum. In fact, formula cars are designed with the front track generally about an inch wider than the rear.

It all goes back to a little thing called TLLTD: total lateral load transfer distribution. The general aim is to have a total lateral load transfer distribution around 5% higher than your weight bias.


I have otehr **** to do right now than explain this further but- in the end- Sniper- 50-50 is great for a neutral road car but not optimum to power delivery and traction in corners. This isn't especially noticed in the 944 as it's quite lacking with the power side of that equation.

The 911 however has to make compromises due to a 40-60 (or, on older cars, worse- 35-65) weight split.

The optimum is in between, for a RWD car.

Front wheel drive... well... lets not even go there.

[porsche4life]

There Sniper. There is your engineers opinion.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by island911

Okay, first of all, stop writing "nuetral" it's "neutral." Second, you didn't answer the Q about why 50/50 is NEEDED (non race drivers and all). Third, yeah, I understand your mental model of performance. I understood it when I was 10.

What if I argued with you that a shot-gun was a better offensive tool than a rifle?

At close range a shotgun is infinitely better than a rifle. Every pull of the trigger results in 15 .33 cal pellets going downrange(for 3" mag 00 buck), as opposed to a single rifle bullet. At close range nothing on earth short of a mini-gun can match the sheer firepower of a high capacity full or semi-auto shotgun.

Sorry for the typo.

Originally Posted by porsche4life

There Sniper. There is your engineers opinion.

Which largely agrees with what i said....50/50 is better for a road car. 911s and 928s and 944s are road cars.

One other thing i didnt get into is what happens when that rear mounted engine torque is applied. Make a large and sudden throttle change in a curve in a 911, and you'll find out.

PS: A properly designed suspension will "load up" the weight on the rear tires when the throttle is applied. The 928 does this brilliantly....it is a tremendous launching machine.

[island911]

Thx Schumi

Originally Posted by m21sniper

At close range a shotgun is infinitely better than a rifle.
....

So then close range fighting is better than having a rifle and some distance?

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by island911

Thx Schumi

So then close range fighting is better than having a rifle and some distance?

You're asking an ex sniper this question?

Show that you care, reach out and touch someone.



That being said, sometimes the badguys show up at short range. When they do, a 12ga semi-auto is damn near impossible to beat.

[RedBaron]

Yeah for $240,000 I will have to say no thanks.

I'd rather get a 997 GT3RS and still have 100k to play around with.

[dd74]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

Well, when the 928 was new it pioneered 4 wheel passive steering. It used a rear mounted LSD transaxle to obtain a perfect 50/50 weight balance- a config. that has since been copied by countless sports cars, including all the C-5 and newer vettes IIRC.

So? Where's the challenge in driving something that involves less driver input? Stuff like what you listed above has marked the death of the "proper sports car," IMO, which the 911 still mostly is.

[island911]

it's a nice bit of kit.

Originally Posted by kaisen

Wow, I love the 'new' Fuchs

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by dd74

So? Where's the challenge in driving something that involves less driver input? Stuff like what you listed above has marked the death of the "proper sports car," IMO, which the 911 still mostly is.

A challenge is not what im looking for in my sports car. Power, performance, handling, braking, styling, yes.

Challenge?

No.

The challenge should be something the dude trying to keep up with me has to deal with.

[island911]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

A challenge is not what im looking for in my sports car. Power, performance, handling, braking, styling, yes.

Challenge?

No.

The challenge should be something the dude trying to keep up with me has to deal with.

Well then, with their lightening quick wheel controls/management, you should definitely get a Cayenne. ...maybe the Panamera when it's out.

[m21sniper]

If i liked SUV's, and had more money than sense, or i got one for a ridiculously low price, i would buy a Cayenne turbo.

And immediately rebadge it as a VW Toureg. WHAT A SLEEPER! >:}

[dewolf]

Snipe has never owned a 911 from any era. I think you need to have owned one and driven one hard to truly appreciate the machines they are. They are still the most recognizable sports car ever made. Your right in that it may be a tired design, but is is one that never gets tiring to look at.
And having had my 930 to 270kmh I can you tell you that twitchy thing wasn't all that apparent to me. The thing felt rock solid.

[m21sniper]

Oh i've driven the snot out of a friends 87 911 Turbo. (BTW, he loves my 928S, as he's had it well into triple digits when i let him drive it too)

Again, i have praised the car several times as being a tremendous performer. My main problem with them is their looks- the newer ones especially are very boring and tired looking, and the tail-happiness of the earlier cars.

[island911]

YES, tail-happiness!

I drove the snot out of my friends 951. Very civilized.
Just a bit of time driving 928's. Very civilized as well. Seemed to have a bit more under-steer than the 951.

[teenerted1]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

I think they cannot make a better car the 911 .

you just emphasized the why its till around not why its gone.....

they did it right the first time so why deviate perfection

[scottmandue]

Breaking news...

Later today Sniper will be logging onto a country western BBS and trying to convince them the Dixie Chicks are AOK.