New Arrival

[Lancerlot]

Could it be that the socket accepts a charge but disconnects following a set period of discharge? Regards, Clive

ORIGINAL: chrisH Nick, Ah, so the 991 has a different socket design to the 981, I wonder why they did that? With the new electrical system the 991's and 981's don't need charging as often as pwebb already said. Chris

 

[chrisH]

ORIGINAL: pwebb ...and to underline that my OPC strongly advised not to attach crocs to the battery posts as there are some further electronics on the negative side which can be damaged, and to only use the cigarette lighter in the armrest.

On the 981 you don't have a choice and have to use the +ve on the battery and -ve earth post stud ONlY, as I said earlier.

 

[BigCat]

I received the same advice from OPC as Peter not to attach direct to the battery. I use the armrest socket and can confirm that's enabled all the time.

 

[chrisH]

ORIGINAL: Lancerlot Could it be that the socket accepts a charge but disconnects following a set period of discharge? Regards, Clive No, its a set time period of 3 minutes after ignition on, IIRC.

 

[Motorhead]

ORIGINAL: lowndes One of the difficulties I find is disaggregating the individual dynamic effects of some of the P acronyms. So for instance is it PASM or PDCC or PSM or PTV+ or a computer controlled combination of some or all of them which is helping through the bends? And particularly with PTV I have always thought that you should get a warning light to show that braking forces are being selectively applied and concomitant brake wear increasing. In this context let me shine a light (pun intended) on one further P device. Having spent a pleasant hour comparing and contrasting recent motoring and house renovation experiences with Mike (Spook on here) and his daughter at the Silverstone Macan launch, it was fully dark when I left the OPC. Traffic on the A43 was minimal and I made good progress down to the Bicester turn. From there to home is 20 miles of decent flowing road and unusually there was hardly any traffic. And here’s the point. PDLS+ is superb. It might be stretching a point to suggest that the beams of light are curved but the effect is pretty much the same. It is uncanny the way the system lights up the road ahead with clear white light exactly where you want it. Whether the bend ahead is fast and open or sharper and tighter the lighting is perfectly distributed in both range and intensity. In slow bend you can see the light beam sweep across the curve then as speed picks up on the exit the range increases to light up the road much further ahead. Oncoming traffic? No problem PDLS+ dips automatically as it does when coming up behind slower traffic. The system seems to me near perfect and the only time it was caught out was when it dipped the lights because it was fooled by some round reflective bend indicators into thinking they were oncoming traffic. Whether it is worth an eye watering extra £1926 (or £1449 over standard turbo offering) will depend on various factors including how much night driving is planned. But hopefully in the future prices will start to come down as the system becomes more widely specced across the range. Personally having viewed is with some scepticism in the past it has moved right up my list of priorities to sit alongside (yet another pun) heated seats [] Cheers

Agree totally with that Nick. I specced PDLS on my Cayman; no auto-dimming was available at the time and I'm sure the technology has moved on since then. It did seem a little odd at first but then you realise that the beam is pointing where you're heading - and looking - round the bend rather than focussing upon the hedge or tree directly in front of you. Very intuitive, and a worthwhile option in my view. With my night vision deteriorating in advancing years, I'm keen to grab any technology which can help when driving around my rural Bedfordshire roads. Jeff