Agree here too. There are other unbelievable engines under $60,000 but what BMW did with the M3 is remarkable. The new M3 with the V8 will be a hoss but it won't have that feeling that the current and older models had.

 

I cant think of one. But why is that even a question?

Assuming all other factors except peak hp constant, make 380 HP off of a 19 cylinder engine or a one cylinder engine. It's still 380HP in the end.

 

ok then the 400hp+ GT3 will be OMG impressive... right? :P

I'm impressed by 380hp out of this car, just like I am impressed by the 333hp out of the M3. My point is we are talking about a very exclusive crowd here, there aren't many - and it is impressive for a 3.8L 6 to make just about as much as a 5.7L V8 such as the '01 Z06, for instance...

 

I've always like the Carerra 4S the best, other than the Turbo. But to get 380HP..........

 

this 911 is the highest output normally aspirated 6 cylinder offered to the public, ever. I guess I'm impressed by different things than you and Beltfed... which is fine.

and, I can't make sense out of your reference to making 380hp out of a 19 cylinder engine, at all... we're obviously on different wavelengths here. And that is fine.

 

Let me try to explain it a different way:

It is impressive from certain angles, but none of these angles are of substance.

Does it make better sense now? Substance is 380HP, substance is not, 380HP from half a cylinder and 30cc.

 

that's subjective.

 

How so?

On the contrary actually. What's subjective is to be impressed by specific power. Power divided by displacement. In this case 380HP from 3.8 liters. What is not subjective at all though is the absolute power. In this case 380HP.

Am I wrong?

 

Actually there are N/A 6cyl engines making 400HP and more out there. The TVR Sagaris/Tuscan/T400R with an N/A 4.0L I6 makes 400HP. And the TVR T440R makes 440HP from an N/A 4.2L I6.

Too bad they don't sell those over here.

 

^^^ ahhhh... very very good. those engines are INCREDIBLE!!!!

 

it's subjective to say something is impressive, and something isn't.

i.e. something can be unimpressive to one person but impressive to another... for instance you have been impressed by things I find unimpressive before here, and vice versa

 

Gav says - Power is power.
Srika says - How the power is made is more impressive than the figure itself.

Nothin' wrong with either. Personally, I don't care as much about HP/liter as I do about how much car I can buy for the dollar.

Yes, this H6 is an impressive engine. So are the TVR powerplants. But who cares? Give me a free revving V8 like the new Z06's that has a better balance of HP and TQ in a chasis that can hold its own against the 911 for $30k less and I won't complain.

 

Srika no doubt to be impressed or not is 100% subjective. But there is a clear non-subjective, that is, 100% objective issue at stake here, which you are missing or deliberately trying to. And that is absolute power. Absolute power is as objective as anything can get. If you have two cars making 100HP, they are both making 100HP and that's what's going to show when they race or when they cruise. HOW they make 100HP, from how many cylinders, etc. is the subjective part. And that I do not and cannot argue. You though are avoiding the absolute power argument. I will ask again: Am I wrong?

 

Correct!


Which indirectly means that you do care about the absolute power factor. Which is to be expected and it makes total sense. That's my argument.

You're getting closer to my argument and to the objective point.

There you go. The above shows that you do understand my argument 100%. Because that's how I feel.

For me what's best is a big, high revving normally aspirated engine. So that it makes good (peak) power but also very good power at low revs (most of you call that torque). A good example would have been the V10 in the M5/6 but with more torque. So if that engine was 6 liters large at the same weight as now, it would probably make around 475 pounds of torque or maybe more and make 550HP at 7500 rpm. Great numbers on paper.

Now, there are a ton more factors making an engine a great engine. Many of them, subjective. Throttle response, sound, gas consumption, etc. But if to be theoritical and stand on the numbers factor, the above is my preference and I doubt many of you will not agree. WHo would say no to a NA 6 liter, high revving engine that does not weigh a ton?

 

I was NEVER arguing about "absolute power"... the "absolute power" of this 911 is not what impressed me. so, we were arguing two different things - something you did indentify earlier.

 

 

the blue looks different in these pics... for the better. I wonder which is the more accurate representation of how it looks in real life....

 

Both very good points.

In retrospect - I'm not _as_ impressed with this 380 HP out of an N/A H6 deal any longer. Main reason: they've been producing the same H6 engine for 41 years now. 100 hp/L is a great benchmark to achieve in a naturally aspirated car, but given 41+ years of R&D on the same engine, I'd expect them to be _way_ ahead of the rest of the world. And the torque is still sucky (relatively).

The gearing and overall experience more than makes up for it. But think about it. This engine is older than dirt. Is it impressive that they're doing what BMW and Honda can also do for much, much cheaper? To argue that the S2000 or M3 are less fun to drive than the 911 would ultimately come down to preference, not any other quantifiable or objective reason.

 

the TVR's producing more than 400hp is really quite - and yes it is too bad they don't sell em over here.

 

You never argued absolute power directly. But that was a big part of my point, if not the point itself. That in the end absolute power is what matters in practice which is the objective part.

In other words what I tried to say was, maybe 380 HP from 3.8 liters may be impressive to some, but 380HP is what will be available in the end no matter from how few cubic centimeters it sources.

 

The only thing common with this engine throughout its 41 year life is the theoritical configuaration. That is, that it was a flat six and still is. Everything else has been refined and changed throughout the years. In very major ways (e.g. watercooled from aircooled).

 

When they went with the watercooled stuff with the intro of the 996 (in 1999) it really was an end of an era...

 

Source: carspyshots.net forums

 

I want!

 

:justbrokekeyboardanddeskbecauseofgiganticboner:

 

 

Hawtness...

 

oh my god...............

 

now thats beautiful!!

 

front bumper looks kinda cheap. Dont hurt me

 

Since it looks essentially the same as the previous one, a new Porsche has to excel in a _lot_ more than looks to impress me. This doesn't even look that great. Front bumper - snowplow. Tail wing - too... much. The 993 Turbo S spoilers look best, as far Porsches are concerned.

 

RE: 993 Turbo S spoilers - See Also:

 

LMAO big time!

 

I think the best part is the two vents on the rear...hood. It's reminiscent of...some past Porshce I cant remember the year of. The rear looks great overall in my opinio. IT looks like a very serious performer from the rear.

 

the red one is most likely just what it says, a Carrera S... looks like a GT3 but has the standard 997 motor.

this black one is the GT3, note the center-exhaust that is the most telling sign. look at the size of the rear tires!!!! it is SOOOOOO IMPRESSIVE....

 

Source: Porsche.com

 

Source: AutoWeek.nl

 

the latest issue of Motor Trend is reporting the 997TT will make just over 500hp and will be introduced at the Paris Show. Porsche engineers say the engine can easily handle 700hp, the only limiting factors being cooling and transmission...

 

True.

The funny thing is that they say "the only" limiter factors are cooling and transmission. Like what factor would u like to see Mr. Engineer as limiting to not call it "the only" limiting factor? Oh man...

 

Source: Spy Shots: ’07 Porsche 911 Turbo - - by Brenda Priddy - - Source: The Car Connection