lilbza

You find it weird Porsche would make aesthetic changes to make the car much more sleek and visually appealing? From the example photos above, I'm glad they did. It's also pretty obvious looking at the comparative pictures that the higher deck lid/humps of the Spyder reduce the size of the opening of the roll hoops.

Next time you're driving and it's bothering you, just whinge a little louder to drown out the wind buffeting, problem solved.

348SStb

There’s no problem of wind buffeting.

bbs993tt

Here's my guess - the Spyder is about "less is more" so they left them off.

clutchplate

Porsche probably determined there wasn't enough upside so went with no mesh. Airflow with the top down on a 718 Spyder is pretty decent in fact it seems quieter than with the top up.

Bob Z.

Wind in the cockpit has more to do with seat position (fore & after and up & down) than anything else. And just to be on topic, the mesh was not added behind the seats since it is not needed,, period.

348SStb

Hi Bob. I disagree.

Wind turbulence in the cockpit has less to do with seating position and more to do with how the moving air is handled by the aerodynamic design of the open cockpit with planned handling of the air moving across an open-top car driven by people who the manufacturer knows wish to enjoy the open-top experience. Wind traveling at high speed has to be slowed down and diffused while still allowed to escape so wind turbulence is minimized or eliminated.

For example a 911 Cabrio has a set of rear windows and a wind deflector. There is almost no wind turbulence there. Same with a Mercedes R231 SL. Hardly a hair moves.

The Boxster doesn’t have the luxury of rear windows. The central wind deflector does a decent job, but the mesh behind the seats on the non-Spyder cars provides additional handling of the moving air: the mesh slows down the air and helps diffuse it while allowing it to escape.

=====

This has become a debate and a back-and-forth; I was looking for actual finite answers beyond the abstract “It doesn’t NEED it,” which is a subjective judgment and a complete abstraction — can we be candid about that and agree? So far, nobody knows the real answer beyond the answer that I knew without ever creating this thread, which is “Porsche decided not to include it for a reason.” What’s the reason? And can we retrofit the mesh somehow? Hence, my questions in Post #1. Apparently many of the folks who responded think that my questions are ridiculous, and that's a shame.

I’m sorry, but there’s zero chance that mesh behind the seats in the roll hoop openings WOULD NOT further mitigate wind turbulence. We probably have many, many convertible owners here but since I own no fewer than 8 convertibles at the moment and have owned several dozen more, I know about wind turbulence and factory wind deflecting techniques across many makes; do people think it’s better to have a car that does not deflect the wind very well simply because it’s a convertible? My Boxster GTS with the UGLY mesh behind the seats exhibits very good wind deflection; if I want more wind, I lower the window. If I don’t want more wind, I raise the window. My 981 Spyder exhibits mediocre wind deflection which isn’t as good as the wind deflection offered in my 982 GTS. Am I allowed to make that comparison since I own the two? Does anyone wish to offer an answer as to how I might come up with a factory solution or a near factory solution to add mesh inserts without suggesting I fabricate it on my own or open my own manufacturing facility to do so?

Should I do a test with an anemometer? I actually have one which I use to measure air flow through air conditioning supplies, and I never thought I’d think of using it in a convertible to prove a point. We have a respondent who said he thinks the Spyder deflects wind better than the non-Spyder. Great. So I guess what I observe about my own cars, and something that’s a problem for me which I wish to solve with the help of knowledgeable people — these don’t matter.

Maybe we should just close the thread altogether. This topic really bothers some people. I’m bothered because I thought we could have a more interesting conversation than we’re having. I contribute quite a bit to Rennlist. My Spyder RS Reference Guides thread alone encompassed literally dozens of hours of work in an effort to help not only myself but others. Apparently this particular thread has been responded to almost exclusively by Spyder owners, and as we know, nobody has ugly children. Of course anyone who owns a Spyder thinks it’s the best. In my opinion, which is not biased, the non-Spyder is better at wind deflection; and those who don’t care about that assertion or disagree with it are allowed to not care about it and disagree; but do they need to prevent me from achieving my goal? I care about it, and that’s why I created the thread. Ask a moderator to close the thread if this is such a ridiculous topic.

Actually, I’ll ask the moderator to close the thread.

Please close it.

=====
Removing my subscription to this thread, and I’ll look beyond Rennlist to address a modification that I wish to implement. Maybe on the other online forums and among fabricators and retailers I’ll find much less loathing of this heinous idea.

Bob Z.

I guess I should have said wind "that is felt" in the cockpit has more to do with seat position...

If I sit lower in the car and closer to the steering wheel I feel less wind than if I am higher up and further back.

You may need to contact Porsche to get the answer you are looking for since if they were needed they would have put them in - they care more about function than cosmetics for something like the mesh behind seats.

UncleDude

I think the answer is the mesh just isn’t necessary, otherwise I do feel they’d have put it in even though the area is small. I haven’t read anyone here complain about buffeting noises in the spyder, probably because it fairs pretty well, maybe not as good as the boxster but pretty good.

I know the A pillars in the spyder are shorter than the GT4, are we sure the spyder’s aren’t shorter than boxster? Is the spyder windshield lower? Also noticed the sculpted solid plastic pieces on the spyder, Porsche didn’t ignore the area.

JAhmed

Yikes. Take a deep breath dude. It’ll all be OK.

Dyim

@348SStb maybe you can do a little experiment to see if blocking airflow right behind the seats makes any difference.

Tape up both hoops and use your instrument to measure flow. Compare to leaving it open.

Then we would have objective data to see whether a mesh there will help.

My guess is the hump and smaller opening (compared with other boxsters) already helps with airflow management. Adding screen might help, but makes less of a difference than boxsters.

Drifting

I will first repeat what others have said, which is that the double bumps of the spyder extend up much further than the standard boxster so there is much less airflow expected to pass behind the seats. So there is much less need for mesh in a spyder AND Porsche likely wanted to maximize the cosmetics. Weight reduction is much more of a priority on Spyder and Spyder RS models and so it is also a good reason to leave out the mess on the Spyder models.

Personally, the lack of mesh behind the seats on the Spyder RS doesn't bother me. Also once my car gets to the US, I plan to replace the mesh center wind protector with an a clear glass wind protector from Windschot, so it mesh did still exist behind the seats of a Spyder, that would clash with the clear glass wind protector I will install in my Spyder RS.

Airbag997

My guess is the Spyder specific humps provide a low pressure high velocity path for directed airflow over the rear spoiler. Therefore the majority of air is inherently focused through the center of the two seats vs. the standard Boxster which would have a more symmetrical air distribution across the entire rear opening. The mesh inserts are simply not needed to provide wind deflection for the driver/passenger due to the humps.

lilbza

Don't make him get out his anemometer....

MrFunk

I already answered the question in post 2.
Thread.