View Single Post
Old 04-29-2013, 07:04 AM   #13
986_inquiry
2006 987
 
986_inquiry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: st. louis
Posts: 443
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by southernstar View Post
986inquiry, thanks for your review. I suspect that the 2.7's you were testing were running poorly, because upon introduction Porsche's notoriously conservative numbers and all contemporary reviews of the 2.7 determined that it was quicker and that the improved torque (and flatter torque curve) meant that it was mcuh more flexible. Indeed, some reviewers felt that the improvements were greater than the numbers suggested.

The gear ratios in the 2.5 had to be higher than ideal as the engine just didn't pull very well at low RPM's. The increased stroke and improved fuel injection addressed those issues.

Brad
i owned a 98 and test drove another 98 and a 99, all felt the same. Test drove several 2000-2004 2.7 and two S, 2001 and 2004, and a 99 911. About a dozen porsches within a few months. All the 2.7 felt slower past 60 mph, and the S's were the only cars that felt similar to the 2.5. 911 was in a different league.

maybe all the 2.7's i drove were bad and maybe all the 2.5's i drove were running strong, but from my experience the 2.5 is faster than a 2.7 past 60. Even the 2006 2.7 I purchased does not feel as fast as the 98 IMHO
__________________
2006 987 2.7 manual silver/black, PASM, OEM drilled rotors, heated seats
1998 986 2.5 manual black/tan with bad engine = SOLD
986_inquiry is offline   Reply With Quote