MKI 996 Compared to MKII
05-08-2010, 11:42 AM
#61
And, frankly, the 997 is even more so. I think it's a lovely car. But, even speaking as a marketing guy, I can't help but look at those headlights and think, "Porsche did this because people whined about it, as opposed to because it's what Porsche damn well wanted to do." The latter is the reason the marque has some mystique. Every time a car company loses its sense of itself and builds a focus group-mobile, I think it's a loss.
As I said, no reflection on how nice each respective car is. More of an authenticity thing.
05-08-2010, 11:49 AM
#62
Drifting
That's a true statement. Without prejudice to which is 'better', the Mk. 1 cars were Porsche's vision, while the Mk. 2 cars were a product of marketing.
And, frankly, the 997 is even more so. I think it's a lovely car. But, even speaking as a marketing guy, I can't help but look at those headlights and think, "Porsche did this because people whined about it, as opposed to because it's what Porsche damn well wanted to do." The latter is the reason the marque has some mystique. Every time a car company loses its sense of itself and builds a focus group-mobile, I think it's a loss.
As I said, no reflection on how nice each respective car is. More of an authenticity thing.
And, frankly, the 997 is even more so. I think it's a lovely car. But, even speaking as a marketing guy, I can't help but look at those headlights and think, "Porsche did this because people whined about it, as opposed to because it's what Porsche damn well wanted to do." The latter is the reason the marque has some mystique. Every time a car company loses its sense of itself and builds a focus group-mobile, I think it's a loss.
As I said, no reflection on how nice each respective car is. More of an authenticity thing.
Last edited by nick49; 05-08-2010 at 05:36 PM.
05-08-2010, 12:45 PM
#63
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Not that there's anything wrong with a nice MKII (or new 997). I just think the engineers tested the "new" MKI 996 in a wind tunnel, and put out an aero dynamic beauty (with Boxster front end). Compare that to a 997, with the flatter (less aero) single headlight, and I have to think the marketing department overrode the engineers/designers to satisfy the purists.
I could be way wrong, and the 997 might be more aero? I doubt it though.
I could be way wrong, and the 997 might be more aero? I doubt it though.
05-08-2010, 05:16 PM
#66
Also a true statement, refreshingly so. The last original chassis, handbuilt car was indeed the 964. The 993 was a transition car whose image is bigger than the car itself, mostly because it is gorgeous to look at and happens to be the last Porsche to lack a radiator.
05-08-2010, 06:13 PM
#67
Racer
Thread Starter
Ok so I test drove the 02 C4S with 13k miles today. Wow, what a beautiful car. Showroom condition. This was the first 996.2 and C4 I have driven and I was very impressed. The suspension seemed much better than the MKI C2's I've driven. Of course part of it could be the low miles and it was just tighter.
My only issue is the Arctic Silver color. Not on my short list of color choices.
I was curious on the bumperettes. I thought they were body colored on the MKIIs and not black?? They were black on this C4S. Did they not start this until a later year?
My only issue is the Arctic Silver color. Not on my short list of color choices.
I was curious on the bumperettes. I thought they were body colored on the MKIIs and not black?? They were black on this C4S. Did they not start this until a later year?
05-08-2010, 06:22 PM
#68
Parts Specialist
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
an MKI with US stock suspenssion is pretty bad... but for $1-2k you can make it really come alive. The C2 is much lighter than the C4S so with it set up right it will be much more enjoyable in the twisties... IMO
05-08-2010, 07:18 PM
#69
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
05-08-2010, 11:58 PM
#70
Three Wheelin'
Since no one's mentioned it before, some Mk I's have cable throttles and no PSM and there is a difference to the way the cars behave/react when driven hard. 1 year of the MK I's had LSDs so that is worth some consideration as well. PSM with the E diff (ABD) doesn't work and you can open up the inside wheel on tighter corners.
I've driven both MK I and MK II back to back on the same autocross course and they have subtle but distinctly different personalities and reactions/feedback to the same input.
For me, I like the more raw feeling of the earlier cars. Yes you can feel the weight difference but the power of the MK II makes up for it. For me when I replaced my first MK I, I had the option for a MK II Aero with X74 (or X71 Can't remember) suspension and other goodies but I passed on it based on how it felt on the Autocross course. It was a bit heavier, the E-Gas was slow to react and the car didn't want to rotate. I ended up getting another 99 with cable throttle, LSD, no PSM (just traction control which can be completely disabled unlike PSM).
My advice, depending on your experience level and priorities on what you want in a car, drive both and see what you like more. For me older was better, it may not be for you.
I've driven both MK I and MK II back to back on the same autocross course and they have subtle but distinctly different personalities and reactions/feedback to the same input.
For me, I like the more raw feeling of the earlier cars. Yes you can feel the weight difference but the power of the MK II makes up for it. For me when I replaced my first MK I, I had the option for a MK II Aero with X74 (or X71 Can't remember) suspension and other goodies but I passed on it based on how it felt on the Autocross course. It was a bit heavier, the E-Gas was slow to react and the car didn't want to rotate. I ended up getting another 99 with cable throttle, LSD, no PSM (just traction control which can be completely disabled unlike PSM).
My advice, depending on your experience level and priorities on what you want in a car, drive both and see what you like more. For me older was better, it may not be for you.
05-09-2010, 12:03 AM
#71
Three Wheelin'
Awesome post.
It's clear the MK2 is the superior car.
Looks are debatable, but the MK1 looks a lot more dated than the Mk2 in and out. Check out the headlights. the MK2 996 can stand on its own set against the 997 because the headlights are more radical/bigger/more modern looking.
And the thing is it's not even that much more expensive. No brainer.
It's clear the MK2 is the superior car.
Looks are debatable, but the MK1 looks a lot more dated than the Mk2 in and out. Check out the headlights. the MK2 996 can stand on its own set against the 997 because the headlights are more radical/bigger/more modern looking.
And the thing is it's not even that much more expensive. No brainer.
05-09-2010, 01:41 AM
#72
Drifting
that's funny cause a bunch of us like the MK1 headlights... nobody I know likes the MKII headlights... something wierd about how they look.... the MK1 headlights are the same shape as the GT1 race car.... I don't think they look more dated at all.... the MKI lights have a nicer shape... but I'll give the nod the MKII bi-xenon lights for a nicer beam and overall better looking light that is emitted...
05-09-2010, 02:55 AM
#73
Not that there's anything wrong with a nice MKII (or new 997). I just think the engineers tested the "new" MKI 996 in a wind tunnel, and put out an aero dynamic beauty (with Boxster front end). Compare that to a 997, with the flatter (less aero) single headlight, and I have to think the marketing department overrode the engineers/designers to satisfy the purists.
I could be way wrong, and the 997 might be more aero? I doubt it though.
I could be way wrong, and the 997 might be more aero? I doubt it though.
I always like the 996 MKII front end better than the MKI. It has larger front openings and a deeper front lip that looks more aggressive than the Boxster front end. They did a lot to flatten the appearance, versus the more egg looking shaped MKI. The front bumper is flatter, but a lot thinner at the tip. The "fried egg headlights" are larger with a flatter profile. The fenders have interesting 45 degree angles at the arches shaped into them. The front on the MKII is also far better functionally: better cooling and 40% less front end lift. Same thing goes for the rear ends. I like the MKII rear end a lot more for the same reasons: lower with more lip and going away from the round egg shape of the earlier MKI rear bumper. It also reduced rear end lift by 25%.
When the 997 came out, I really liked the front end. They kept the low lip appearance from the 996 MKII with a lower profile and went back to the more traditional round headlights. The front end just looked right the first time you saw it. The one disappointment I had with the 997 was the back end. They went to a more rounded bumper and with the taillights no longer lined up with the trunk and bumper lines, it just didn't look as integrated.
Last edited by 10 GT3; 05-09-2010 at 03:42 AM.
05-09-2010, 11:57 AM
#75
Three Wheelin'
Those headlights appeared on the Boxster all they way back in 1996 (97' model year). The 96' GT1 had 993 style headlights. They switched to the Boxster headlights for the 97' GT1, just as the first official pics of the 996 were being released.
I always like the 996 MKII front end better than the MKI. It has larger front openings and a deeper front lip that looks more aggressive than the Boxster front end. They did a lot to flatten the appearance, versus the more egg looking shaped MKI. The front bumper is flatter, but a lot thinner at the tip. The "fried egg headlights" are larger with a flatter profile. The fenders have interesting 45 degree angles at the arches shaped into them. The front on the MKII is also far better functionally: better cooling and 40% less front end lift. Same thing goes for the rear ends. I like the MKII rear end a lot more for the same reasons: lower with more lip and going away from the round egg shape of the earlier MKI rear bumper. It also reduced rear end lift by 25%.
When the 997 came out, I really liked the front end. They kept the low lip appearance from the 996 MKII with a lower profile and went back to the more traditional round headlights. The front end just looked right the first time you saw it. The one disappointment I had with the 997 was the back end. They went to a more rounded bumper and with the taillights no longer lined up with the trunk and bumper lines, it just didn't look as integrated.
Can you explain to me how you think it looks like a fried egg? lol... I 've heard this reference many times and I don't get it... espcially since they look better than MKII lights...
the body kit on a MKII 996 does have sharper lines and 40% less front end lift... to correct that problem on my MKI I installed ROW 030 and that fixed any lifting issues.... its also a better suspension than what comes stock on the MKII;
porsche had updates to their front end 2004 boxster that look really good on a MKI 996; wider slits at the bottom and an overall better look...
overall to stick to the discussion of this post... I don't think the MKII cars are better than the MKI; they both had similar amount of issues with the MKII cars showing more IMS failures than the MKI cars... also as a previous poster suggested the MKI cars had a better rawer "feel" to them than the MKII cars...