Once Feared For Its Explosive Properties
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. A little respect, please. Yes, we know it contributes to pollution, and yes, it is "nonrenewable," and yes, we still haven't learned to use it as efficiently as we could. But the fact remains: no other fuel delivers so much energy in such a small package with such flexibility, utility, safety, and simplicity. That's precisely why it caused so much national heartburn when its price spiked this summer. It was like suddenly being told you had to pay for air. At the pump in about 167,000 locations across the country. Ready to power a Lamborghini or a leaf blower. U.S. refineries currently wring about 20 gallons from each 42-gallon barrel of oil they process. And although this mysterious mixture of hydrocarbons has been adulterated, oxygenated, and reformulated to improve its performance and reliability and comply with ever-more-stringent air pollution standards, gasoline remains an incredibly elegant helpmeet for our personal transportation. Once feared for its explosive properties, sometimes used as a cleaning fluid, and often dumped by early refiners as a "useless" byproduct, gasoline grew to become the magic elixir of the modern world. We've lost sight of the magic because gasoline is so commonplace. We grumble about its price, but we don't really think about its true value to us. Whatever the price, gasoline is still an extraordinary bargain. The utter simplicity of its daily use belies its exceptional complexity. Gasoline comes to us through a prodigious formulation and delivery infrastructure. It leaves refineries mostly through pipelines and is stored in bulk terminals near main consuming areas. Then, it is pumped from the terminals into tanker trucks that typically hold 10,000 gallons. Special additives such as ethanol or detergents that keep fuel systems clean, as well as lubricants and stabilizers, are blended into the gasoline as it goes into the tankers.
And it did everything with less drama. That said, when one of them needed to go, it was the 991 that got the boot and the Spyder is still in my garage. The Spyder is simply more fun to drive. But it's not more capable that a well speccd Carrera. Just gonna leave this here. On a short, tight track like that, which should heavily favor the 981, the base, no option 911 beats it handily and looks way more composed doing it. The 911 chassis has been refined over decades and people forget how epicly good it is. On a short, tight track like that, which should heavily favor the 981, the base, no option 911 beats it handily and looks way more composed doing it. The 911 chassis has been refined over decades and people forget how epicly good it is. Porsche keeping things ops normal. That track may be short but the section which should favor the Boxster is the shortest section.
A 981 S versus a 991.1 S is a no brainer. No 3.4l mid engine layout is going to make up that power deficit. On even smaller tracks, I've seen a Carrera 4S whip a Carrera S, and much worse than the 981 Boxster S versus the 991 base. In the end, you only find these minute differences when driving these cars at 10/10ths. Any can please you depending on what you want and value. I like hearing the motor so I don't want the most powerful I can get. I also like lots of road feedback. I should have never sold my Cayman R. Now I'm living with my GT4 knowing I can't use as much of the car whenever I want. All depends on the specs of the 911. My 991.1S would smoke my Spyder down a twisty road. Better in every respect, performance wise. More power, better brakes, better turn in, more mid corner grip and put the power down better on corner exit.
And it did everything with less drama. That said, when one of them needed to go, it was the 991 that got the boot and the Spyder is still in my garage. The Spyder is simply more fun to drive. But it's not more capable that a well speccd Carrera. Interesting comments. I wonder how much of the difference is from more power vs better handling. When watching videos, I compare the minimum corner speed of my 986S race car at Sebring (the track where I have the most seat time) with many a 911, including GT3鈥檚. In most cases, I meet or exceed the cornering speeds of those cars. And I鈥檓 comparing cars driven by people with similar experience to me. Just worried spider might be a pain with manual top. Yes. TOTAL pain. Leaves you sore and gassed from all the physical exertion. Avoid at all costs. Spyder top is also known to cause dandruff and falling arches. I will miss mine and will always remember fondly. Nelson, say it ain't so! Marketplace Parts Marketplace Vehicle Marketplace Vendor Announcements Rennnlist Help and Announcement Forums Rennlist Forum Glitches - post them here. Test posts are permitted.
Mounted in the rear of the machine, the next Porsche 911 Turbo Convertible will get a twin-turbo 3.8-liter flat six-cylinder engine. Going forward, all 992-era 911 Carrera will get turbos, but the actual Turbo model will come with extra power and performance potential. Current output is rated at 540 horsepower for the standard Turbo Convertible, while the Turbo S model gets a bit more at 580 horsepower. Both models are expected to get a decent power boost across the board, up to about 560 horsepower in the base-model Turbo and upwards to 600 to 610 ponies in the S variant. The extra power will also translate into extra performance, shaving off about a tenth or so from the current models鈥?0-to-60 mph times. We think a 0-to-60 time under the 3-second mark is definitely within grasp for the standard model, while the S should do the benchmark in roughly 2.8 seconds. Some reports are even pointing to rumors that the Turbo S will get a hybrid upgrade. If so, expect it to pull tech from the Porsche Panamera Turbo S E-Hybrid, making upwards of 700 horsepower when it鈥檚 all said and done.