• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

air-cooled vs water-cooled...

A

andylawcc

Lifer
Jeremy said diehard Porsche fans were dissappointed when they introduce the 911 with a water-cooled engine, but isn't water-cooled engine supposed to be 'better' ?
 
Weight is a bigger concern than power IMO.

Weight effects handling, accelerating, and braking.

The engine can really only do so much to over come the weight (only helps accelerate).
 
If you can cool an engine without water, that is better.
Weight...losing weight is like gaining horsepower.
Power Consumption..takes power to turn that water pump.
 
Takes power to turn that fan as well.

What are we talking about? 2 gallons? 16-17lbs? + radiator (??5lbs). You can probably subtract 3-5lbs for the cooling fan and fiberglass shroud of the 911. What about the extra weight of the 12 qts of oil for the dry sump?

Doesn't seem like Porsche had a problem making power with an air cooled engine. Didn't they get 1000-1200HP from the 917 flat 12 engine? AFAIK Porsche did convert to water for power and emmissions. I think it's more of a 'We're cool because we're different thing'
 
Its just because the 911 has always been aircooled up until 96 or so. Its more of a thing where people liked the way things were. I'm sure there are plenty of VW purists who are pissed that the current beetle is FWD with an inline 4.

Personally, I told my gf if she wants a 911 we're getting her an aircooled one. They look better and sound correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top