twins vs last gen cayman?

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by Ernest72

My BRZ is about 16 months old and I have a JDL UEL and Q300, cosworth air filter, perrin intake tube (sound generator delete). Other than that stock. The car is a blast, but many days I think about picking up a used last gen Cayman. Only thing stopping me is better gas mileage and less maintenance of the BRZ. Also likely the BRZ is more reliable. I also have two kids, so having the rear seat helps. I do still have my 04 WRX so, the 2 seater is still an option. But staying with the BRZ for now, however I still think about it weekly. I will likely get a Cayman in the future.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Porsche sports cars are some of the most reliable vehicles you can buy. Of course, there's the cost factor for when it is unreliable. But it doesn't happen much.

But look out for the newer models. way more complications

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Multilink has ZERO to do with rigidity, and everything to do with facilitating complex and advantageous geometry changes throughout the wheel's travel. You can make a MacPherson strut suspension as rigid as a bank vault, but it still won't perform as well as a multilink setup because it doesn't manage the wheel's geometry as well. That's not marketing hype - it's simple math.

Here is the rigidity part I was mentioning. It is the housing of the shock part:



You are absolutely right about your definition on multi-link, but strictly speaking Cayman does not have a multi-link design. This caused the confusion.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Here is the rigidity part I was mentioning. It is the housing of the shock part:



You are absolutely right about your definition on multi-link, but strictly speaking Cayman does not have a multi-link design. This caused the confusion.

I don't think shocks are load bearing in multilink suspensions and I don't think Macpherson struts would be categorized as better by anyone in regards to performance.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by fatoni

I don't think shocks are load bearing in multilink suspensions and I don't think Macpherson struts would be categorized as better by anyone in regards to performance.

Of course MacPhersons designs are not superior. We were just discussing if the technically limited suspension of Cayman is better to the one of our cars. None of them is really a multilink suspension. You can check a diagram of suspension evolution here:



The only real multilink rear suspension is the one used in 911.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Of course MacPhersons designs are not superior. We were just discussing if the technically limited suspension of Cayman is better to the one of our cars. None of them is really a multilink suspension. You can check a diagram of suspension evolution here:



The only real multilink rear suspension is the one used in 911.

Look, I don't doubt the cayman is better than the frs. My point of contention is why you think it is better. Your evidence to support your conclusion is wrong.

[WolfpackS2k]

My Cayman has MacStruts front and rear. The great irony is that it's the most expensive sports car I've ever owned and yet has the most basic suspension design.

Porsche claims the multi-link setup used on the 911 "doesn't fit" on the Cayman. Whether that's actually true or not...

BTW the GT4 utilizes the 911 GT3's front suspension - double wishbone set up.

[strmshadow84]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

My Cayman has MacStruts front and rear. The great irony is that it's the most expensive sports car I've ever owned and yet has the most basic suspension design.

Porsche claims the multi-link setup used on the 911 "doesn't fit" on the Cayman. Whether that's actually true or not...

BTW the GT4 utilizes the 911 GT3's front suspension - double wishbone set up.

It's false It would cost a lot of money but it's definitely doable. Almost everything they "claim" won't work on the Cayman but with the 911 is false, gotta pay if you want more hp.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

My Cayman has MacStruts front and rear. The great irony is that it's the most expensive sports car I've ever owned and yet has the most basic suspension design.

Porsche claims the multi-link setup used on the 911 "doesn't fit" on the Cayman. Whether that's actually true or not...

BTW the GT4 utilizes the 911 GT3's front suspension - double wishbone set up.

Wait, I didn't realize the Cayman had struts on all 4 corners! Wow, my (ex) MR2 (RIP ) is as advanced as a Porsche! lol

I didn't realize the 911 had struts at the front too, with the GT3 getting an upgrade.

To answer the OP's question, my parents have had a 981 for 4 years and I owned an FR-S last year (sold it; didn't like it). No comparison, more horsepower, higher rev limit, better sound, much higher quality interior, much more confidence on the road (okay I admit, my FR-S did not have stickier tires).

Brand new BRZs on the lot when I went to a dealer had buzzing interiors, Limited trim cars had really crappy center console buttons. The Cayman has zero weird noises inside after 4 years, the loudest thing is the engine, followed by the keychain or my metal watch strap. I will say some of the plastic pieces have become discolored by sunlight, and the door panels warp, but almost all cars are still under warranty so it can get replaced for free.

The base 2.7 is honestly as much power as I would want on the street, because revving it out to hear its beautiful sound brings you over the speed limit very fast. It puts the power down very well, and has an excellent traction control system that stays out of the way. By contrast the twins have front weight bias and little grip at the back, so you could add more power but your tires will slip quite a bit (admittedly, I have not tried slicks or max performance tires, which might hold up to a supercharger okay, but I don't think UHP summer tires would be able to hold down a supercharger very well). I am not a track junkie so I can't comment on whether the handling can be much better with different suspension and tires, but on the street my FR-S was always kicking its rear end loose with a bone stock engine, and I really didn't like that. The traction control also sucks, it will cut off power completely for a fixed amount of time, and given how much the car liked to wag its tail, that was happening all the time.

Of course, there is a huge difference in price, and there are 2 less seats in the Cayman. Basically, don't compare these cars; the twins should be compared to an M2 or M4, because there is usable space in the rear that compromises the performance. I think the twins are a bit more sporty than a BMW, and have a bit less room but are still very practical.

[nikitopo]

Some figures on skidpad lateral acceleration:

Scion FR-S with stock tires: 0.89g
Scion FR-S with Dunlop Star Spec's (215 size): 0.94g
Scion FR-S with Dunlop Star Spec's (235 size): 0.96g

Subaru BRZ 2017 with stock tires and revised suspension: 0.90g

Porsche Cayman S 2014 with stock tires: 1.04g

Sources:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cult...ransformation/
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...rm-test-review
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...al-test-review

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

BTW the GT4 utilizes the 911 GT3's front suspension - double wishbone set up.

Both the GT3 and GT4 use a front macpherson strut setup. Porsche makes it confusing by calling the lower control arm the "lower wishbone", but if you look at the layout it's still a strut setup.

There are some really great pictures of the GT3 front suspension in this article:

https://www.elephantracing.com/tech-...sion-overview/

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Some figures on skidpad lateral acceleration:

Scion FR-S with stock tires: 0.89g
Scion FR-S with Dunlop Star Spec's (215 size): 0.94g
Scion FR-S with Dunlop Star Spec's (235 size): 0.96g

Subaru BRZ 2017 with stock tires and revised suspension: 0.90g

Porsche Cayman S 2014 with stock tires: 1.04g

Nice, I didn't think of checking that.

The stock tires are Goodyear Eagle F1 (max performance summer), which are actually less sticky than the Star Specs!

Tirerack tested both on a BMW F30 sedan and the Star Specs come in at 0.93g while the Eagle F1 was 0.89g.

So in short whatever Porsche did to that car, it sticks to the road way better than the FRS does. Maybe massive negative camber would make things better, I dunno. I still don't think the rear end grip problem can be fixed, seeing how there's only I think 20-30% more grip that can be added by switching to aggressive compounds.

[venturaII]

Or maybe it's the fact that the Cayman uses 235/265 tires on a car only ~150 pounds heavier than the 86, and has better weight distribution for holding steady state g's. And let's not even get into weather and surface conditions when comparing test results from two different dates and locations.. So, explain the whole multilink thing again...?

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Or maybe it's the fact that the Cayman uses 235/265 tires on a car only ~150 pounds heavier than the 86, and has better weight distribution for holding steady state g's. And let's not even get into weather and surface conditions when comparing test results from two different dates and locations.. So, explain the whole multilink thing again...?

A Cayman S '14 model is more than 300 pounds heavier comparing to a 86/BRZ '14 model. This is based on curb weight according to EC standards. Not the 150 pounds you mentioned. The only way to achieve a smaller weight difference is by cheating like measuring the car without fluids etc. Additionally, the tests I provided seem to be pretty much consistent. Similar figures were reported in other cases. Do your homework better next time.

[Deep Six]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Some figures on skidpad lateral acceleration:

Scion FR-S with stock tires: 0.89g
Scion FR-S with Dunlop Star Spec's (215 size): 0.94g
Scion FR-S with Dunlop Star Spec's (235 size): 0.96g

Subaru BRZ 2017 with stock tires and revised suspension: 0.90g

Porsche Cayman S 2014 with stock tires: 1.04g

Sources:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cult...ransformation/
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...rm-test-review
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...al-test-review

I'm not very familiar with skidpad testing but I am surprised that the tire upgrades didn't yield more significant improvements. Probably needed alignment and suspension changes to take advantage of the bigger, stickier tires.


Now as far as lap times go, I am certain that huge improvements can be made relatively inexpensively. I bought my car used from a friend of mine just as an experiment to see what could be done on a budget. Went to Roebling Road repeatedly to evaluate the progressive changes. This track is 2 miles comprised of primarily fast sweepers.


Completely stock with 10,000 mile Primacy's and upgraded brake fluid the car ran 1:30 and tires were the overwhelming limiting factor. Slow but it was fun.


Cheap coils, with moderate camber changes and 225 RS's yielded 1:26


Using 245 R7's, much more camber and zero rear toe along with header and E85 tune and the results were amazing. 1:20:4 which is really damn fast for a car spec'ed this way.


I think the cost of mods at that point was around $5K but the car could now more than hold it's own against Caymans and many others.