Porsche 718 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Prior to my 718S I had a 981S. The only thing I miss is the flat six, but I wouldn't go back at the expense of the low-end torque I have now. Why doesn't Porsche offer a Cayman with a base 911 engine (ie, turbocharged six)? Is it a space issue? Is there some other consideration I'm missing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
This has been covered before and yes, it is definitely a space issue. The turbos and ancillary plumbing require a fair amount of additional space and there wasn't room for both. This video by savagegeese shows an under-body view of the engine in the Carrera T.


The underbody part starts around the 6.00 mark and they move to the rear around the 8.00 minute mark. Obviously the layout is flipped around but you can see there is literally zero space there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Just took the engine cover off to replace the air filter.....that's about as tight as an engine bay can get ... plus more heat/mass etc....you'd have to redesign the chassis and probably the interior rear to do so.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
space was available for a single vgt turbo similar to the TPC layout. Porsche would of had a 450hp plus car on their hands that would smoke GT3 cars. I know I have the beast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
I am so sad they are getting rid of the turbo engine. I will not buy another non turbo after having the 718. That low rpm torque is the most important for me. I mainly do city driving and that acceleration at low rpm is amazing and makes the car so much more fun to drive than my 981. Some said sound was the most important then they can cheaply get a bicycle and a trombone and have it all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
I was under the impression only the GTS was converting to the NA6, the Base and S are keeping the Turbo 4.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
228 Posts
@OhRichman is correct that the turbos are not going away--they live on in the Base and S. @ritchieg I do love the turbo torque also, but I'll repeat myself and say I'd also be quite interested in a NA six with a hybrid boost on the low-end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
523 Posts
@OhRichman is correct that the turbos are not going away--they live on in the Base and S. @ritchieg I do love the turbo torque also, but I'll repeat myself and say I'd also be quite interested in a NA six with a hybrid boost on the low-end.
Me too, you first! ;)

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
If I understand correctly, the raison d' etre for turbochargers is for meeting government economy standards. I am certainly a sincere advocate of protecting the environment but I still have to believe there has to be some reasonable bang for the buck. I have never seen a comprehensive analysis showing the improvement in economy provided by turbo chargers gives any real improvement with respect to protecting our environment considering everything it takes to engineer, manufacture and install turbochargers in a vehicle including natural resources, transportation costs, energy, emissions, etc. The car is also more complicated mechanically because of turbo support systems like the soak back pump etc. and that also takes some finite hit on the environment. Additionally, the difference in how one drives with a turbo must also be considered as that probably significantly negates a turbo's economy adavantage. My experience with two essentilly identical vehicles, with & without turbos, underscores all these considerations in my mind and makes me believe a turbocharger really provides no consequential increase, if any, in gasoline economy and therefore emissions. I had a 2011 BMW X3 28i with that wonderful in line 6. In 2016 I bought another 28i X3 but it came with a 4 cylinder turbo and an incredibly over engineered 8 speed automatic transmission. Its performance unacceptably and unpleasantly sucks in the default "Comfort" mode and only approaches that of the 2011 in Sport mode. However, I see a zero difference in economy, probably because I always compensate for the pathetic default performance by never ever using Comfort mode and always apply more throttle than needed on the 2011 for the same response. I said all this because it leads to my willingness to pay a reasonable gas-guzzler tax if I could only get a car without a turbo and the incredibly annoying lack of instantaneous gratification to a throttle input. Of course I deeply believe we all must sacrifice to protect our environment but in the case of turbochargers, I just don't believe, when considering everything, they accomplish squat unless one is willing to sacrifice performance and throttle response and that is something I do not think most buyers of Porsches are willing to do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
If I understand correctly, the raison d' etre for turbochargers is for meeting government economy standards. I am certainly a sincere advocate of protecting the environment but I still have to believe there has to be some reasonable bang for the buck. I have never seen a comprehensive analysis showing the improvement in economy provided by turbo chargers gives any real improvement with respect to protecting our environment considering everything it takes to engineer, manufacture and install turbochargers in a vehicle including natural resources, transportation costs, energy, emissions, etc. The car is also more complicated mechanically because of turbo support systems like the soak back pump etc. and that also takes some finite hit on the environment. Additionally, the difference in how one drives with a turbo must also be considered as that probably significantly negates a turbo's economy adavantage. My experience with two essentilly identical vehicles, with & without turbos, underscores all these considerations in my mind and makes me believe a turbocharger really provides no consequential increase, if any, in gasoline economy and therefore emissions. I had a 2011 BMW X3 28i with that wonderful in line 6. In 2016 I bought another 28i X3 but it came with a 4 cylinder turbo and an incredibly over engineered 8 speed automatic transmission. Its performance unacceptably and unpleasantly sucks in the default "Comfort" mode and only approaches that of the 2011 in Sport mode. However, I see a zero difference in economy, probably because I always compensate for the pathetic default performance by never ever using Comfort mode and always apply more throttle than needed on the 2011 for the same response. I said all this because it leads to my willingness to pay a reasonable gas-guzzler tax if I could only get a car without a turbo and the incredibly annoying lack of instantaneous gratification to a throttle input. Of course I deeply believe we all must sacrifice to protect our environment but in the case of turbochargers, I just don't believe, when considering everything, they accomplish squat unless one is willing to sacrifice performance and throttle response and that is something I do not think most buyers of Porsches are willing to do.
Why did Porsche create the 911 Turbo? It wasn't for mileage, it was to go racing and win races. Every thing else follows from that point.
Sort of throws a monkey wrench into the above I believe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,008 Posts
I am so sad they are getting rid of the turbo engine.
Yesterday I went out and looked under the hatch of my Cayman and discovered that the engine was gone! It just disappeared. I guess someone from Porsche took it away. :( I haven't driven any since the last time I parked it and it was running just fine then so I think the engine must have been there. Just to make sure I hadn't lost it in the driveway I checked under the car and there it was, tucked up under the body in front of the rear wheels after all! Whew! It scared me for a minute though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
Why did Porsche create the 911 Turbo? It wasn't for mileage, it was to go racing and win races. Every thing else follows from that point.
Sort of throws a monkey wrench into the above I believe.
I did not know that. I had understood the reason for current popularity of turbos was to help meet the government mpg standards. Maybe both reasons apply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
I did not know that. I had understood the reason for current popularity of turbos was to help meet the government mpg standards. Maybe both reasons apply.
You are both right, turbos allow a manufacturer to extract more power from the same capacity engine (930 Turbo) or to use of a smaller capacity engine to create the same amount of power as a larger one (for e.g. the F4T) . The recent move to turbos was largely driven by the latter in that there was a need to lower emissions, and turbocharging is seen as an efficient and cost-effective way of doing this (one just has to look at how frugal turbo diesels are). However as @Barryng that theoretical advantage is largely negated in real world use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,008 Posts
I don't know much about Porsche's early history of using turbos but my recollection of the turbo 911 is that it came about during either the ~1970 push for cleaner air or the OPEC oil embargoes of the early 70's. I should look it up in one of my books. It was essentially a way to keep power up while getting better mileage and/or cleaner air. Of course you can defeat the effect of better mileage by driving it harder, but you can do that whether it has a turbo or not.

I've mentioned this before but what most people see as turbo lag is better described as rpm lag. To reach a higher top speed you need more power. Since power is torque times rpm an engine designer can do that either of two ways, either give it more torque or let it spin faster. More torque usually means more displacement but since racing and tax regs usually limit displacement most sports car manufacturers opt for higher rpm. In general that means losing torque at low rpms in order to get more at higher rpms. Every sports car engine ever made that was worth much has had to spin up before generating much torque. The low torque below 2000rpm in the T4 718 engine is no different from any engine I've ever owned. Watch the boost gauge and you'll see it climb, but that's because the engine is spinning up. The causality doesn't go the other direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
Yesterday I went out and looked under the hatch of my Cayman and discovered that the engine was gone! It just disappeared. I guess someone from Porsche took it away. :( I haven't driven any since the last time I parked it and it was running just fine then so I think the engine must have been there. Just to make sure I hadn't lost it in the driveway I checked under the car and there it was, tucked up under the body in front of the rear wheels after all! Whew! It scared me for a minute though.
Jim:
That must have been a scary moment!!?
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top