As long as no-one gets personal, there's no harm in expressing different opinions.
It's not much of a debate/discussion if everyone just agrees.
"Fried egg headlights" was partly a joke. However, the single most obvious external difference when confronted by a car park full of models in the future will be the headlights.
It will also distinguish the pre/post facelift versions. The other difference will be the absence of the reflector stretching between the rear lights (although the 996 C4S has it).
As for "futuristic design" it was supposed to be funny.
Personally I think the market was getting used to the change in design and that the older look was no longer necessary - indeed the 997 has come in for quite a lot of criticism in the looks deopartment for not moving the game on.
It seems waiting lists are not that long for it either, so whether the facelift will prove successful, we'll see.
The looks have to be appealing and whether it will get new people in through the door (rather than repeat custom) is not clear.
Personally I think it was a mistake to go backwards, the shape should have evolved further.
The styling of the 996 was handled under styling director Haarm Lagaay, who also oversaw the 997 (before he retired).
I haven't found the name for who styled the 993.
Form is supposed to follow function, that is one of the requirements. I think that is not too contronversial.
The drag coefficient for the 993 was less than the 964, the 996 is less than the 993, the 997 less than the 996.
The same engineering requirements are at work here.
I accept that the silhouette of the 996 was not identical to the 993, but then the 993 was not the same as the 964.
But the design requirement that it should be obviously a 911 does apply.
I thought I would include some details on the 996 below. Not to knock the 993, but just to provide some information.
If you are interested the design requirements for the 996 development team were:
- Cmopared with the previous models, enhance comfort and sportivity
- Retain the 911's typical character
- Increase the interior space while retaining the characteristic shape
- Flat-6 engine to be wated-cooled; retain is typical sound (which comes mostly from the induction system and the cam chains), be more powerful and use less fuel
- High active and passive safety, thank to superior handling, brakes and high performance, stiff body structure, high side intrusion protection and standard airbags
- Improved lightweight suspension systems, retaining the strut and lower wishbone (pseudo McPherson) system at the font and multi-link system at the rear
- Six speed, cable operated manual gearbox and five speed Tiptronic automatic
- Significant weight reduction compared to the previous model
- Reduced service costs
- Worldwide environmental legislation must be met
- Extensive recycling possibilities
- Modular construction and extensive component sharing with the Boxster for econimical production and prevention of errors in the assembly process
- Pricing to a level similar to the forerunner's, thanks to optimised production costs
- Development and production quality to the highest level
Compared to a 993, the 996 is 18.5 cm longer, 3 cm wider and the wheelbase is 7.8 cm longer.
The front was made more rounded to make parking easier.
The rear overhang is almost the same, so the front overhang is about 10cm longer for better frontal impact safety (to conform with legal requirements).
996 C2 is 45% stiffer in torsion and 50% stiffer in flexion than the 993. The C4 body (on which the GT3/2 and TT are based) is 49 and 82% and this was further improved in '02 models.
The weight of the C2 is 50kg less at 1320 rather than 1370kg.
(Although made from steel, the 996 is lighter than the all aluminium 360 Modena, this is through the use of tailored blanks and modern build technology sucj as laser welding.)
(The 993 was lighter than all its competitors except the Honda NSX, which was the same but used aluminium.)
The rear spoiler reduces drag by 5% and reduces lift on the rear axle by 86%, but this is similar to the 993.
The flush side panels, optimised underbody, more inclined windscreen, more sloping front and deletion of the rain gutters all contribute to lower Cd of 0.3 and an overall lower total drag.
(FYI - before the 964 came out, the drag Cd had risen to 0.42, the 964 got this down to 0.32 mostly by giving it a smooth underbody, the 993 raised it to 0.33)
The reduced slope of the bonnet on the 993 increased the capacity of the front locker by 30%.
The 993 had the windscreen recess reduced by 3mm and the side windows recess reduced by 7mm, which was taken further on the 996 by having frameless doors.
The distance from the bottom of the front bulkhead to the bottom of the rear seat was increased by 112mm, which allows the seat to move 40mm further back and give more room in the back.
Elbow room was increased by 22mm and shoulder room by 63 mm.
The front suspension, although of the same type, was a new design, while the rear was an evolution.
Front and rear track was increased by 5 and 6 cm.
Elimination of the air cooling fan made the engine 120mm lower, which allows for the inclusion of a shelf behind the rear seats.
The most important reason for abandoning air-cooling was that experiments made with 4 valves per cylinder had indicated that adequate cooling of the cylinder heads and valve seats was impossible to achieve.
Four valves per cylinder was essential though to achive a high specific power output, while also meeting emmissions requirements.
Liquid cooling also does away with the fan which is a major source of noise, and makes heating a lot more simple.
However, it does add weight. FYI - on the 3.4 the water pump circulates 14,000 litres of coolant per hour, or the whole contents every 5.75 secs.
70% goes through the heads, 20% through the block and 10% through the oil/water intercooler.
(Better cooling allows the turbo to have higher compression, 9.4:1 rather than 8:1, which results in 22% lower fuel consumption).
BTW - 80% of the components are different betweem the 3.4 and the 3.6 C2 engines.
In order to have PSM, you have to have drive-by-wire throttle control, so not physical cable.
For the gearbox on the 996, the GT3/2 and TT use a development of the G50/53 box from the 993 GT2.
The GT3 has G96/50, the TT G96/51 with output shaft for the front wheels, the GT2 G96/88 with its own oil cooler,pump and oil jets for the gears. All gear ratios bar 2nd can be changed.
For all 996 they are actuated by Bowden cables rather than rods, which reduced noise in the cabin.
For the C2/4 and new box G96/00 and G96/30 were developed. The targets were:
- Reduce the length (it is 43mm shorter)
- Reduce the weight (it has a higher torque rating but is 2.5kg lighter)
- Improve the efficiency
- Lower the shifting forces
- Oil change intervals of 100,000 miles
The 996 rack and pinion is now located ahead of the front axle, rather than behind it.
Brake discs were increased to 318 from 302mm, the rears unchanged at 299. Disc thickness was unchanged at 28 and 24mm front/rear.
It wouldn't be complete without some figures:
964 Carrera 2 Coupe (1989) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 5.5
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 12.9
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 21.3
1km from standing - 25.0
Max speed - 164
993 Carrera 2 Coupe (1993) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 5.2
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 12.4
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 21.1
1km from standing - 24.7
Max speed - 166
996 Carrera 2 Coupe 3.4 (1997) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 4.9
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 11.0
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 17.9
1km from standing - 23.9
Max speed - 174
996 Carrera 2 Coupe 3.6 (2002) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 4.7
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 9.9
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 15.7
1km from standing - 23.2
Max speed - 177
(Personally, I find these a little hard to believe, since they are quicker than the times they got for the GT3, although several magaizines got 10 or just under for 0-60).
If you are interested the turbo and GT2 have not made the same progress.
Turbo 3.6 964 (1993) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 4.6
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 9.5
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 15.0
1km from standing - 22.5
Max speed - 179.5
Turbo 3.6 993 (1995) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 4.3
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 9.5
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 15.1
1km from standing - 22.4
Max speed - 181
Turbo 3.6 996 (1995) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 4.3
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 9.5
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 15.0
1km from standing - 22.6
Max speed - 191
993 GT2 road version (1995) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 4.0
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 8.4
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 13.3
1km from standing - N/A
Max speed - 184
996 GT2 (2001) Auto, Motor & Sport
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 4.0
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 8.5
0-200 kph (124 mph) - 13.1
1km from standing - 21.8
Max speed - 196
Just for completeness
996 TT with X50 (from Autocar)
0-100 kph (62.5 mph) - 3.9
0-160 kph (99.5 mph) - 8.4
0-200 kph (124 mph) - N/A
1km from standing - 22.1
Max speed - 190
I think the difference in the driving experience between 996 and 993 is down to reduced noise, smoother ride and easier controls.
Whether you like this or not is personal preference. But the evolution of the car and it's abilities can't be knocked.
]
