The Turbos Are A-Comin'!
 

Further confirmation that existing normally aspirated 911's will get a turbo (not to be confused with the Turbo model - which will be terribly confusing) along with flat-4 turbo's for the Boxster and Cayman.

The best buy of the normally aspirated era might just be the upcoming Cayman GT-4.

Porsche, you're killing me.

http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/...psc83d5e53.jpg

Porsche 911 range goes turbo - BBC Top Gear

Why can't the 911 get the turbo flat6 and the boxster/cayman get the same engine but naturally aspirated. Maybe a flat4 for the base but why even bother making another engine. Giving the 98X cars a naturally aspirated version of the 911s turbo engine will make sense and better define the cars as sporty 2 seaters as well as maintaining a lower power figure than the 911. It would honestly give porsche the right to charge the same for both cars and then let the apples fall where they do.

I'd think it would be more difficult to swap engines (remove the 4 and put in a 6) vs slapping a turbo on an NA 6 engine. Porsche probably knows that many would modify their Boxster/Cayman with a Turbo to make it compete better with the 911.

It's about emissions.

When your foot is not squeezing the life out of the gas pedal, a puny four cylinder can be made to run cleaner.

The same forces that killed the air cooled motor are going to kills large displacement naturally aspirated ones.

I agree, it will be a sad day.

This is largely based on classifying CO2 as an "emission" even though all the plants in the forest love the stuff.

Pretty soon the EPA will regulate how many breaths you can take in an hour, and don't even think about "passing gas".

The more I learn of Porsche's current line-up and read of future offerings, the more I truly doubt the "Bubble" concept of air cooled values.

Great. Now we will have 15 dozen more variants to deal with.

Before I start my rant, let me state that I aspire to be a purist, and I'd prefer to drive an NA powered car. But, as the blood flows back into my head.....

Porsche introduced the 911 Turbo in 1975. Forty years ago. FORTY!!! Since then, many people have aspired to own one. Is anyone really surprised that the turbo has found its way into the 'mainstream' Porsche models? Based on reality and fuel standards, the turbo is here and there's no stopping it.

Are the forthcoming turbos a bad thing? This isn't a handicapped 1975 Corvette V8 with 165 horsepower. We are looking at future Boxsters with 300+ HP, in spite of federally mandated fuel economy standards, even if they are 4 cyl. I'd bet that 80% of us wouldn't know or care what was six inches behind our asses as long as it was 300HP and fairly seamless with the power delivery.

The Macan started the 'all turbo' trend:
Macan S: 3.0L Turbo V6 (340 HP)
Macan Turbo: 3.6L Turbo V6 (400 HP)

Are those bad numbers???? Turbo's are coming, whether we like it or not. Stick with your 986, or as the core says, buy a 993.

To me this argument is similar to the one when fuel injection replaced carburetors. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen any requests for a 4-barrel carb conversion kits for the 986.

-T

Hmmmm...you have to consider the engine characteristics. Turbos are often not what you want when compared to NA:

Torque curve; power band; useable rpm range; throttle response; engine note etc.

Hope they do a good job of it

Agreed, but have you driven a turbo recently? They do a very good job of it, based on the Macan S I was in a few months ago. A very, very good job for a two+ ton vehicle.

My dad said to me 50 some odd years ago "Son if the could the government would tax the very air we breath"

well he is not far off

Dwight

I know things are different now, but...
I grew up in the first era of rabid industry changes in the name of economy and emissions and it was not at all done well then: V-8s that were strangled to death, completely gutless V-6s, turbo 4s that had insane turbo lag and were about as smooth as a lake of cobblestones and sounded like a thrashing machine caught in a garbage disposal, and let's not forget the smoky clattering passenger car diesels and the lovely 4-6-8! In the 1980s it was more prestigious and desired to drive a vintage car (pre-1973) than a new one because the quality and driving experience was so much better.

With that in mind, I think I can be forgiven for automatically getting a monster eye twitch when I hear about the projected changes to Porsche's current seamless, heavenly-sounding engines with the near limitless pull. Hopefully my fears will be completely unfounded.

I'm not afraid of change, but I'm always looking at it sideways.

Will reply in order

- No, Turbo's are good and here to stay. They just add another level of complexity some do not want.

- 100% of us will care what's behind our asses when it comes to servicing and repairs. Talk to someone who's had to pay for a PDK issue.

- I never said to buy anything, just opining that the air cooled market will likely remain strong as a result of Porsche's current direction and air cooled limited availability.

:cheers:

A power adder,like a Turbo may be the only way that a sports car can make respectable power and conform to the ever strengthening grip of CAFE.


Standing by to purchase one each of all the new engines as soon as I can get my hands on them. History proves that geting started with the identification of potential problems as early as possible, is a smart decision.

Can't wait!

"- 100% of us will care what's behind our asses when it comes to servicing and repairs. Talk to someone who's had to pay for a PDK issue. "

Agreed on possible repair issues, but it looks like Jake is already on the case! And I never said I wanted my turbo with an automatic....

In regards to the 993, please note that past performance does not predict future value....

:)

I am against the trend. But why does everything have to have more power. If we can have reasonable but more desirable performance without a turbo and maintain the emissions why not?

It's fun reading this thread as everyone is clearly either in the:

"you damn kids, get off my lawn" or "cool, bring it on" camp.

The busted knuckle mantra "there is no replacement for displacement" is making more than a slow exit and, from what I've experienced, it's not all bad. Advancement in turbos makes them nothing like the 951s or old SAABs. Mix in some serious computer controls along w/ direct injection and you can plot a HP/torque curve anywhere you like on the map - just name it. That's the upside and (in my opinion) only reason they are now taking hold. The efficiency gained, much to the chagrin of green-weenies, has been there for quite some time. Now that "we" have the power we want they are adaptable... even if reluctantly so.

Now where's the damn newspaper this morning? ;)

Look at modern F1. 1.6 liter v6's with a hybrid system and a turbo. they do they same lap times as 2.5 liter v8's with no turbo, and run on 1/3 less fuel. Sure they sound like vacuum cleaners, but its all worth it to save the enviroment right? Well, that's for someone with more power than us to decide, sadly.

The average new Porsche buyer in 1985 would care.

The average new Porsche buyer in 1995 didn't care.
(Boom economy but no interest in Porsche)

The average new Porsche buyer in 2015 doesn't care... at all.


The new Porsches will all be quicker than anything that came before it.
They will suck down less gas. And there will still be a metric ton of used water-cooled Porsches that go faster than the dwindling supply of air-cooled cars with still relatively low costs to maintain. So for 'cars and coffee', track, AX, or just parked in the garage until the next impulse purchase takes its place, water-cooled either NA or VW Turbo, will suit 9 in 10 used Porsche buyers just fine. The one guy objecting being the one who wants to row his own gears (a shrinking pool), is nostalgic about Porsche and actually has enough money to keep bidding these air-cooled prices yet higher (another shrinking pool in the long term). The millenialls as a class, only care that it's a Porsche, they don't see the fuss in water-cooled vs. air cooled, or NA vs. Turbo.

Conclusion: this changes very little other than making Porsche even more profitable as it will no doubt be cheaper for them to make more power with these VW turbo engines. I don't buy this idea that it's because they have to meet the gubimint standards. The bulk of the sales for Porsche are from the SUVs and sedans, and will eat up even more of the pie going forward. If the standards going forward remain on a fleet basis (targeting the models that actually rack up mileage like Cayenne), then these non-purist Porsches could do nearly all the heavy lifting to keep MPG's above the very low standards set by the U.S., while keeping the smaller % of sales from the beloved flagship variants on NA power. The Maccan is predicted to push Porsche north of 200K cars this year. And if Porsche were to fall below the fleet standards, the penalties would equal a tiny drop in the ever-growing Porsche profit, largely thanks to globalization, Chinese billionaires, etc.. Bottom line, Porsche could easily afford to keep the 911 NA nostalgia going in avoiding these VW Turbos. And it could arguably be more profitable to simply pay the fines and meet the purist demand for their very high margin NA 911's. This is Porsche we're talking about here, not Lotus or Caterham.
If Porsche are getting behind VW Turbos, it's because they like the other kind of green, the Ben Franklin kind.

And the 356 guys didnt like it whenthe 911 came out, the watercooled 911 wasnt seen as a pure aircooled 911 when it was introduced and let's not get started on manual transmissions . The fact is over time Porsche needs to make advancements to stay profitable and relevant. If you can afford a six figure 911 or an optioned out cayman, boxster, cayenne or macan pushing close to six figures you shouldnt worry about repair costs. If you want to play you have to pay. I say buy what you like and can afford. No one is forcing a turbo four banger boxster on anyone when it probably will come out. Happy motoring!