Cayman GT4: Where are we up 2 now? Déjà vu Edition

[Motorhead]

David,

I think that the LA Auto Show would be a good time to launch one or both the cars (the States like their Caymans and it's a very important market for Porsche) for 2019 UK deliveries. There's no reason why PDK won't be an option this time given the adequate development time which has been available and the experience gained with the Clubsport race car.

I'm still not convinced about an RS version being made available though.

Jeff

 

[Brian_Innes]

Regarding the recent posts on respective exhaust sounds of Porsche flat-4t cylinder and flat-6 cylinder engines, these 2 graphs may be helpful. The sound check graphs were commissioned by Porsche during the design stage of the 718 exhaust systems.

At idling revolutions there is little difference in the graphs, until at least 3000 revs. At tick-over, the engines produce remarkably similar sound graphs. The darker colours are low frequency, the lighter colours high frequency sounds.

As Jeff has already pointed out, the short audio clip taken at the "spy shot" is inconclusive. To be sure which engine the test mule was using, would require a drive-by audio recording with the engine on full throttle and at least 3000 revs.

For what it's worth, I've already nailed my opinion to the flagpole on what I think the new GT4 will be powered by.

The 718 GT4 will be a 2.8 flat-4t. (I have my hat standing by suitably seasoned).......

As for an RS version, I think that's unlikely to happen.

Brian

 

[Motorhead]

That's right Brian. The plots you've shown were most probably generated from WOT runs in a lower gear from idle to max - you can then see clearly how the engine orders develop throughout the speed range.

The Spyder clip is very low speed, meaning that it's down in the bottom LH corner of specral map, making a definitive analysis tricky. However, we are of the opinion that the dominant engine order in the spectral map we're viewing is 3rd rather than 2nd because it better matches the engine revs/min profile, leading us to believe that we're listening to a 6-cylinder engine rather than a 4.

For anyone interested in some background information on this, it's much easier to see what's happening in the spectral map shown below which looks like a (sound pressure level?) plot for a 4-cylinder engine run-up. A 4-cylinder engine generates 2 firing cycles or pulses/rev so at 5,200 rev/min 1st engine order (1EO) is equivalent to 5200/60 = 85.25Hz; 2nd EO = 170.5Hz, etc., the map being dominated by the even engine orders radiating from the origin. A 6-cylinder engine has 3 pulses/rev and will be dominated by 3EO, 6EO, etc. It follows that for a given engine speed a 6-cylinder engine will exhibit a higher frequency content than a 4-cylinder and is possibly one reason why many find its sound preferable.

As an aside, one interesting feature thrown up by this spectral map is the significant resonance around 700Hz excited by the different EOs as the engine is run up.

Jeff

 

[Motorhead]

Although the hydraulic front-axle lift system was available for the 991.1 GT3 it wasn't an option for the GT4 for some unknown reason, although the front end assemblies are either identical or very similar.

I wonder if this time round it will be? Although an expensive option at £1,599, the additional 30mm clearance could save a lot of front end splitter damage..!

Jeff

 

[Twinfan]

Although the hydraulic front-axle lift system was available for the 991.1 GT3 it wasn't an option for the GT4 for some unknown reason, although the front end assemblies are either identical or very similar.

I wonder if this time round it will be? Although an expensive option at £1,599, the additional 30mm clearance could save a lot of front end splitter damage..!

I'd personally save the £1600 and buy as new splitter as needed - cheaper, and doesn't add any weight plus extra complications to the car []

 

[Motorhead]

On balance I'd have to agree with you David, although I wouldn't think that the latest electro-hydraulic system adds a significant weight penalty.

I suppose that a lot depends upon owner location and car useage - urban environments and regular trips to Europe via ferry could make it a very useful option.

Jeff

 

[Steve Brookes]

For the next one I'd suggest they offer the option of rear parking sensors and/or reversing camera. I can understand why these weren't available on the first one (keeping it as track focused as possible) but although they're not necessary, they would be very useful on occasions. I guess it will be too much to ask do something about the parking brake which I find poorly positioned and not intuitive to use. These are my only two gripes about my old one though! []

 

[Twinfan]

I believe the new 991.2 GT3 can have a rear camera as an option, so I would expect the next GT4 to have one available too...

 

[ralphmusic]

Jeez guys, I thought it was a enthusiasts' car although I had my doubts with deviating stitching.

 

[Twinfan]

I'm afraid they're more "lifestyle" cars now than anything else. Far too many of them are for polishing and sunny sunday runouts only, including RS models

The rear parking camera is genuinely useful though to be fair, I have it on my GTS and it's worth its weight in gold when parking at my house.

 

[Motorhead]

Sadly I have to agree with you David; and Ralph, not all GT cars are owned by serial track day enthusiasts like yourself. In fact I'm willing to bet that a majority of them don't even get to see a track and their owners are more concerned about day-to-day usabilty where options like rear parking sensors and a front-axle lift system are very useful.

Steve's gripe about the electric parking brake is well-founded. Personally I hate the things, and in particular Porsche's totally counter-intuitive implementation (push to apply and pull to release - who dreamt that up?) and inaccessible location by your right knee - pathetic..! Thankfully my 987.2 CS has a proper manual handbrake but I'm afraid that, like manual transmissions, manual "anything" is on its way out.

Jeff

 

[Ray]

Sadly I have to agree with you David; and Ralph, not all GT cars are owned by serial track day enthusiasts like yourself. In fact I'm willing to bet that a majority of them don't even get to see a track and their owners are more concerned about day-to-day usabilty where options like rear parking sensors and a front-axle lift system are very useful.

Steve's gripe about the electric parking brake is well-founded. Personally I hate the things, and in particular Porsche's totally counter-intuitive implementation (push to apply and pull to release - who dreamt that up?) and inaccessible location by your right knee - pathetic..! Thankfully my 987.2 CS has a proper manual handbrake but I'm afraid that, like manual transmissions, manual "anything" is on its way out.

Jeff

Jeff,

Agree fully with your post, push to apply and pull to release. I still cannot get used to the thing, it would seem more logical to have it operate: Pull to apply and push to release. Has anyone ever made a comment to Porsche regarding this issue I wonder?

Being old school I would prefer a hand brake lever but people keep wishing to move with the times.

Ray

 

[ralphmusic]

......

Steve's gripe about the electric parking brake is well-founded. Personally I hate the things, and in particular Porsche's totally counter-intuitive implementation (push to apply and pull to release - who dreamt that up?) and inaccessible location by your right knee - pathetic..! Thankfully my 987.2 CS has a proper manual handbrake but I'm afraid that, like manual transmissions, manual "anything" is on its way out.

Jeff

But the ?old? Mercedes parking brake was great, you could have an automatic with a third pedal for the parking brake

 

[Motorhead]

Agreed Ray. I can understand the trend to de-clutter the centre console (although Porsche then decided to make a buttonfest of it instead on the 981..!) but why not just have a mini-lever behind the gearlever/selector like many other manufacturers?

I think quite a few people complain about the illogical function of the EPB. I have a theory that it was designed by the same engineer who thought that push to change up, pull to change down on the Tiptronic and PDK selector lever was the way to go. They can be identified easily in the Porsche design centre - they're always walking around backwards..!

PDK appears to be the transmission of choice these days and the desire for a traditional handbrake has declined, drivers just standing on the footbrake when in stationary traffic - and dazzling the driver behind them to boot..! The handbrake has now become a parking brake.

Apologies for getting off-topic.

Jeff

 

[Motorhead]

......

Steve's gripe about the electric parking brake is well-founded. Personally I hate the things, and in particular Porsche's totally counter-intuitive implementation (push to apply and pull to release - who dreamt that up?) and inaccessible location by your right knee - pathetic..! Thankfully my 987.2 CS has a proper manual handbrake but I'm afraid that, like manual transmissions, manual "anything" is on its way out.

Jeff

But the ?old? Mercedes parking brake was great, you could have an automatic with a third pedal for the parking brake

I think that was very much the American way Ralph. Back in the day I seem to recall most US cars I drove having that feature. Having to stamp on the pedal to release the brake whilst simultaneously applying the throttle was a rather weird sensation.!

Jeff

 

[Steve Brookes]

Jeez guys, I thought it was a enthusiasts' car although I had my doubts with deviating stitching.

He he I think you'll include me in the enthusiast camp Ralph! [] I'm coping without the reversing sensors but need to remind myself they're not there (I had them on the CR). Although they detract from the track focus philosophy, like others, I think they are a bonus when optioned. Especially for reversing in and out of garages and congested paddocks. Even more so when wearing a helmet. I'll always remember the day when Chris gently reversed into Kevin's 964RS...there was no harm done but but the atmosphere was certainly tense for a few moments.

 

[ChrisW]

So do I .... I was watching a guy out of the side window who was watching and I assumed would tell me if there was a problem.

Clearly not ...

Yes I also hate the electronic handbrake.

I also have one on my Audi RS3 and BMWi3 ... the RS3 is even automatic. Much nicer ...

 

[Brian_Innes]

I had interesting conversations with Aberdeen and Perth OPC centre staff at the weekend regarding the forthcoming new 982/718 GT4. The latest rumour going up in this neck of the woods is the engine will be a flat-4 turbo. If it is, my feeling is the capacity will be tweaked to 2.8, with a revised single turbo, and redesigned exhaust system circa 430bhp and 500+Nm torque.

I'll be delighted if it's true, as my experience thus far with this engine is that is has huge potential. That doesn't mean that if it turns out to be a flat-6 n/a I'll not be interested. I'm open-minded about the cylinder count.

Whichever engine Porsche choose for the new GT4, for sure it will be a significant step up from the 981 model GT4 and the dynamic performance will set new standards for the mid-engine sports car platform.

I can hardly wait.

Brian

 

[Twinfan]

They must have started that rumour - no-one else seems to be claiming an F4T is coming! All the press comments state a NASP F6.

 

[Motorhead]

Brian,

From my perspective, the Porsche Centres always seem to be the last to know what's happening..!

I remain open minded; but from the evidence I've seen from analysis of the very limited YouTube sound clip of the Spyder, my money is still on a 6-cylinder rather than a 4 at the moment.

Jeff