cntlaw

I would like to hear your user experience

thanks

vitaman

I sold a C4S last month and am picking up a C55 next week.
Will report back after the 1000 mile baby the baby period.

cntlaw

Great man and rich man , thanks!!
Guess you will get the 997 later
cnt

ntguru

I have a C32 and just sold my 996TT (long story). What sort of info are you looking for?

lap

at least for the moment

Comparables
1 = c32 (stock)
2 = 2002 996 Targa (PSS-9s)
3 = 1989 Speedster (B&B Tri-flo; Koni Yellow & aggressive suspension setup)

RANKING

Comfort: 1, 2, 3 (Notes: c32 does not have PSS-9s on yet [still debating on S4] ; speedster = go-cart; Targa = inbetween comfort & all out sport)

Acceleration (0-60) : 2,1,3 (slight edge to 996 with c32 very close behind; although my Speedster did do a 5.1 run once!)

Acceleration (Highway pulls) 2,1 (very close gap) ............... sigh...3 (gotta put that Autothority Air Mass Sensor kit on!)

Fun Factor Track : 3,2 .. 1 (remember c32 @ STOCK suspension & Michelins -enuf said!!)

Fun Factor City : 1 (WOW & SLEEPER baby!!!) .... 2, ....1 (too much attention)

Fun Factor Highway : 1 & 2 (toss up both in straight line performance, very very slight edge to 996 -remember on long trips c32 wins, HANDs DOWN! Also, c32 will pull with the best of them) then 3 (speedster will keep up with most vehicles -it is a 150mph car after all- but does not have the raw pulling power of the more modern two)

OVERALL:
Each does something slightly better than the other and each is a BLAST to drive that puts a WIDE smile on my face (& usually a frown on the opponents) with its own UNIQUE individuality.

You can find a pic of all 3 in the photo section.
Hope this helps.

Cheers!

Vader13

I have driven a 996 and own a C32.. totally different cars...

ntguru

FWIW, I ran a 996 convertible from about 45mph on to about 125 and my C32 slowly walked on him. I do not know the year it was so I don't know if it was the 296ish HP version or the 320.

pointman

had both a tt and a 32... sold both under 15k

derAMG

great info lap!
how about reliability and mainteinence cost for both manufactuer?
thanks... i would really like to get into porsche, but people around me makes it sound very scary.

cntlaw

Thanks

I asked because I am curious how 'much' is the different since the price is almost double here.

cnt
p.s. Incidentally , I did a bit of mild ( my C55 mileage is only 1800 km as has to be mild ) chasing with a 996 Carrea 4S. He was fast, but I wasn't too 'slow'.

cntlaw

I am sure
Apart from the obvious differences which I could guess about a 996
- lower center of gravity
- more noisy engine
- lighter body weight
- better cornering


in terms of the feel of speed / acceleration , how is that ?

cnt

cntlaw

WoW !!!! that's what I want to hear !!!!

cntlaw

Great man . That's close to what I like to hear.
I thought the 996's 200 kg less body weight could be much faster than C55?

BTW , any one here has the 996 S version?

simonlam168

I had owned 993 Turbo S and 996 Turbo.
But sold a few years ago.

vitaman

The published times for the Carrera C4S (1/4 mile in 13.7 sec @105 mph) are very similar to the C55
The Handling is far better on the P Car and the Braking is some better too.

ntguru

I know you asked primarily about performance comparisons of the two cars, but one other thing to consider is the C32 has taken a beating on depreciation/resell. If you typically lease, I wouldn't be shocked to see you able to get a very slightly used C4S for the same or even lower monthly payment than a new C55. I was looking at the W211 E55 but I was able to lease a 996TT for several hundred a month less. With the 997, I would expect you could get some killer dealers on 996s.

Other things: dunno about the NA 996, but with the TT look for $150 oil changes. Even with AWD (rear-biased), my TT rear tires only lasted about 8K miles.

Here's my scorecard:

Acceleration (0-x)
P 996TT: 9 (AWD rules on these cars)
C32: 5 (would be 6 but for traction problems + obnoxious electronics)

Acceleration (highway)
P 996TT: 9 (this thing is a monster)
C32: 6

Comfort (quick note: I am tall and thin, and cars like Lexus are way too softly sprung for my liking)
P: 5 (stiffer ride than C32, not that much though, and the seats are awesome--I had the sport seats)
C: 7

Handling
P: 8-9
C: 5 (for the sport model, I find the C32's handling to be sloppy)

Brakes:
P: 9
C: 6
The P-cars just have awesome brakes. The c32's are excellent under 95% of driving conditions, but hitting the C's brakes hard from triple digits speeds causes a lot of dive and some skittishness that I didn't like.

Maintenance/cost (both cars were still in warranty)
P: 3 (somehow, those $150 oil changes were amusing and worth it every time you drove it)
C: 7 (no real out of pocket expenses)

Wow/fun factor
P: 7 (everyone knows what it is, valets jump you ahead of rest of "normal" cars, you get parking right out front, people move over on freeway when they see it coming)
C: 5 (no one knows what it is, fun to surprise sports cars from stoplights or on the freeway)

My short take is this: both are fantastic cars. The C is a sporty sedan that IMHO is calibrated a bit more toward comfort than competitors (S4, M3). For normal quick driving around town, it's outstanding. Push it harder (track, back roads in the Hocking Hills) and the calibration thing becomes apparent.

lap

But believe it or not, I would give the reliability nod to Porsche. Just look at their Customer Satisfaction Rankings (& the fact that I get a follow up phone call to assess my satisfaction after any time I bring the 996 in). That is not to say that MB has not treated me fairly (for the most part) but I just feel that there is too many electronic "gadgettery" in the MBs. I think Porsche has a "simpler" car. I would also say that I further believe my 1989 will be the most reliable of them all (for the same aforementioned reason).

The problem begins when we want more & more from our vehicles (& not just cupholders ) ESP, ASR, even ABS, etc. These items all add to the complexity of our vehicles (& in most cases compensate OUR BAD DRIVING HABITS -- sorry had to vent, I'm so tired of overweight SUV's & or cars attempting dangerous manuevers simply b/c the ELECTRONICS allow them, not the Driver's skill ). These things are complex, and eventually some of them will break $$$$.

A few years back, on another board, I commented that our c32's reminded me of the old Mach-1s or GTO's of yesteryear. I also followed up that comment with the caveat that it would be interesting to see the cost of "restoring" one of our electronically "advanced" vehicles 30 years from now as compared to the more "simpler" older muscle cars.

That being said: Let's install 8 Piston 15" BREMBOs on all 4's on cars w/ more than 300hp; Eliminate ABS & all other electronic-aids; & mandate special licenses to handle the beasts :p [ed note: PLEASE give writer a chance to run & put Flame Suit ON! LOL]

ntguru

I concur with lap. Reliability definitely goes to Porsche!

cntlaw

Ntguru ,

Thanks taking your time to reply.
All points are valid and true also here in HK; except the initial cost and running cost. The 911 will be hell. Here in HK, for new , the cheapest 911 Carrera is HK 1.3million. The C55 is 0.85million. These come to 166K vs 108K.
The vehicle insurance in HK is hell. Even I have max. experience car owner discount, I m paying USD 1700 per annum for the C55. I guess it willl be double for the 911 as it is considered as a "sport car" by most insurance firms here.

Put details of finanical aside, I am more concern is the "driving fun & handling gain" for the cheapest 911 comparing with the most expensive C class.
As I never drove a Porsche, I want to know do I really feel a very big difference in their "power" in mst aspect.

Actually , you have answered already.

cheers
cnt

zoink

Had a C4S (save $$$ for 997 ) and still have the E55...... drove a C32 but not C55....

For daily driving, E55 or C32 is much better..... and as for performance, well, you could already beat 99.9% (not very often I meet M5s, M3s, Porsches, Ferraris, etc. and even if I do, 99.9% of them do not want to "play")

For weekend driving, C4S was a lot more fun..... toss it around and you'll feel glad to have a Porsche

cntlaw

True to my thoughts.

Would that 'extra power' from a 911 really because it is 200kg lighter in weight than the C55?

Based on figure, the power and torque should be pretty close.

Would I also enjoy as much as a 911 if I am on a SLK55?

Anyone rich gentemen here who owned/plan to own 911, C32/C55 and SLK55 ?


cheers

cnt

cntlaw

Great man! A strange friend of mine in HK buys nothing but always preowned 911 Turbo, He only drives it once or twice a month at weekends.

How does it feel between the power of C32 and the 911 Turbo or non Turbo if you ever drove one ?

cnt

zoink

I wouldn't say C4S is a lot faster than E55 or C32..... yes, you somewhat could feel that but I always thought it was due to one or more the following reasons:

1. Lighter - lighter car always gives you "faster" feeling. Just compare a manual 4-cyl civic vs. C240..... I somehow feel that Civic is faster than C240.

2. Sport-tuning suspension, seats, etc. - more road feeling

3. Manual - this may very well make the car faster... but only if you know how to drive it. Otherwise, it would only feel faster just b/c you are busy watching RPMs and changing gears (just like watching movie by reading a caption.... it just sometimes makes you feel the movie is too fast )

Once again.... just my 2c.... if you could try it, judge it yourself. For me, it's not a comparable car even though performance wise they're comparable.

cntlaw

Vitamin
Now you have the C55, congrats !!
Tell us more about your experience with 911 and C55
Love to hear more

cheers
cnt

cntlaw

Vitamin
Now you have the C55, congrats !!
Tell us more about your experience with 911 and C55
Love to hear more

cheers
cnt