News

Porsche 911 (996) Turbo X50 versus Maserati 4200 Coupe

Discussion in 'Maserati' started by BusDriver, Apr 3, 2004.

  1. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Porsche 911 (996) Turbo X50 versus Maserati 4200 Coupe
    I test drove both cars back to back on familiar roads

    Acceleration – Tie (Maser Wins on Response, Porsche wins on all-out acceleration)
    Handling – Porsche wins, especially in the wet. Maserati is better on bumpy roads though
    Noise – Maserati Wins
    Ride – Maserati Wins
    Interior – Maserati Wins
    Exterior – Maserati Wins
    Space – Maserati Wins
    Reliability – Porsche Wins
    Cost of Ownership – Porsche Wins
    Ownership Experience – Maserati Wins

    Overall Score:
    Maserati: 6.5
    Porsche: 3.5

    More comments to follow...

    - Jon
     
  2. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Acceleration...

    I consider in-gear response and acceleration (e.g., 50-70mph in 6th) very important

    The Maserati’s in-gear response is electric, and in-gear acceleration is on par with a 550 Maranello. The Porsche’s response is not as good (about a 1 second lag), but the in-gear acceleration is phenomenal as well.

    All out acceleration is superior in the Porsche – about 9 sec from 0 to 100mph versus 11 seconds for the Maserati. But the superior response of the Maser makes it “feel” faster in day-to-day driving.
     
  3. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Handling...

    The Maser overteers on demand, anytime, anyplace. A real handful in wet if ASR (traction control) is disabled.

    The Porsche oversteers less, has better all out handling on smooth roads, but is a handful on bumpy roads. Hard to use the Porsche’s tremendous overtaking power on a country road, as the car bounces all over the place (even when trying to go straight) under hard acceleration on a less than perfect surface.

    Porsche is supposedly much better in the wet though (I have not driven the Porsche in the wet). The all-wheel-drive is very good thing too.
     
  4. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Noise...

    The 996 Turbo, esp with the X50 package, has a "droning" sort of engine/exhaust noise under normal driving, and a rather unpleased exhaust roar under hard acceleration. Gave me a headache.

    The Maser (w stock exhaust), sounds very refined in normal driving – just a nice, low volume, whir of cams, gears, and chains. When you step on the gas in the Maser, the sound is absolutely amazing inside the car, as the intake roar plays in lockstep with the gas pedal.

    BTW, the normally aspirated 996 sounds much better than the 996 Turbo w X50
     
  5. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Ride...

    The Maserati has a better, more comfortable ride and softer suspension than the Porsche 911 Turbo w X50.

    The Porsche has a nasty, thumpy ride on New England roads. Presumably, the Porsche would ride much smoother and softer without the X50 package.
     
  6. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Interior...

    The Porsche’s interior is very ordinary – not at all worthy of a $100K car. In fact, the 996 Turbo’s interior looks very similar to that in my old 1987 Porsche 944. Cartoon-looking tacho and speedo, and seats identical to the old 944.

    The Maserati’s interior is in a different league. Leather headliner, fantastic steering wheel, butter-soft leather everywhere, beautiful gauges.
     
  7. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    I am having fun with this :)
     
  8. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Exterior...
    This is really subjective, but I prefer the Maserati’s looks. The ‘fried egg’ headlights on the Porsche look terrible.
     
  9. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Space...

    The Porsche is effectively a 2 seater. The back seats cannot accommodate 2 adults. Anyone who sits back there, sits on the carpet/shelf with a backrest – ack!

    The Maser has much more room in the back - 4 adults can travel in style. Rear passengers even get a center arm rest!

    Maserati has a bigger trunk than the Porsche too.
     
  10. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    ok, one last one...

    Reliability and Cost of Ownership...
    Just based on what I have read…the Porsche is more reliable, the Porsche depreciates less, and costs less to service.


    Ownership Experience
    I did not like any of the Porsche dealers – they seemed more used to dealing with yuppies than enthusiasts. The Maserati dealer (FoNE), on the other hand, has been wonderful.

    Also, the Maserati is nowhere near as common as Porsche – I like the fact that the Maser is unique.
     
  11. johnw

    johnw Formula Junior

    Jun 19, 2002
    438
    toronto
    Full Name:
    john
    with all due respect, if you think the maser feels faster than an X50 turbo, you aren't driving the turbo properly.

    there is no comparison between the two and the X50 should be snapping your neck back.
     
  12. dave_fonz_164

    dave_fonz_164 Formula 3

    Mar 11, 2004
    1,654
    Montreal, Canada
    Full Name:
    Davide Giuseppe F.
    the interior on the porsche is definately nothing special, to many plastics
     
  13. scott61

    scott61 Formula 3

    Feb 11, 2004
    2,409
    North of Boston
    The price of the 911 turbo with the X50 package would cost at least $140,000 and lets hope you don't want much for options. To get the 911 anywhere near what Maserati gives you with just basic car would cost you at least $150,000. I priced a 911 Cabriolet and could not believe how the price added up if I wanted things like full leather or power seats. And if you want to order car instead of taking something off thier lot, forget about getting anything off
     
    ScottS likes this.
  14. BJS

    BJS Formula Junior

    Jan 18, 2004
    287
    Central FL and SW MI
    Full Name:
    Brad Stephenson
    I'm enjoying it too! Thanks for a fun description of the comparisons.

    Regarding the Maserati's acceleration, somehow Maserati managed to combine two characteristics that are almost always mutually exclusive: free-revving like there's no flywheel at all, PLUS extremly good torque production at low RPMs. What a wonderful engine!

    Posted below are the dyno results from my absolutely bone stock 2002 Spyder. Note that even though there's some kind of problem at the low revs, the Maser is producing gobs of torque all across the RPM band. I'd love to compare it to the Porsche dyno, if anyone has a graph.

    IMHO, those characteristics make the Maser a thrilling ride. :)
     
  15. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    A little background info...

    My comparison between the 2 cars was done in February - in anticipation of purchasing one of them. My last 4 cars were German, and before I drove either car, my initial preference was for the Porsche.

    I considered them priced about the same - higher initial purchase price of the Porsche is offset by lower depreciation and lower service costs over time.

    I bought the Maserati about 6 weeks ago.
     
  16. smg2

    smg2 F1 Veteran
    Sponsor

    Apr 1, 2004
    9,493
    Newport Beach
    Full Name:
    SMG
    the X50 package is a HP gimmic, you sacrafice usable torque to get more HP. if you notice the car will accelerate slower and has a slower top end then the std 996 turbo.

    porsche is trying top play off the need for one to say they have Xnumber of HP for bragging rights. it would be interesting to see a comparison of the std 996 the 996 X50 and the Maser.
     
  17. GarnetRedCoupe

    GarnetRedCoupe Formula Junior

    Mar 21, 2004
    788
    Maryland
    Full Name:
    Steve
    Anyone considering a 996TT should skip the X-50 option and seek aftermarket tuners for more power and less cost. just my $.02
     
  18. scycle2020

    scycle2020 F1 Rookie

    Jan 26, 2004
    3,458
    potomac
    the x50 is faster in all measures than the regular 911tt!!! have you driven both cars back to back? i have and the x50 is noticalbly faster..the car mags results vear this out..if its worth it is another story!!!!
     
  19. smg2

    smg2 F1 Veteran
    Sponsor

    Apr 1, 2004
    9,493
    Newport Beach
    Full Name:
    SMG
    i had to go back and look at the dyno graphs, okay i did confuse the X51 with the X50. the X51 is the worst since it only up HP by 20 and shifts the Tq curve further to the right by about 1krpm. the X50 picks up both HP/Tq but the torque curve is'nt as flat as it could be and it is also moved further to the right. so my appologies for goofing that up.

    however i still believe for the cost of that upgrade you could run over to any tuner and really get a kick in the ass in power output.

    interesting though that the porsche being lighter and having 444hp/457Tq is only marginally quicker than the maser. Porsche touts thier drivetrain layout to having an advantage to laying down power, i don't doubt this at all. notice though the Maser also utilizes a similiar layout although the enigine is in front. must have something to do with it.
     
  20. BusDriver

    BusDriver Formula Junior

    Mar 30, 2004
    389
    Found a way to quantify my impressions…found a dyno chart…

    The 911 Twin Turbo X50 puts out 362-366 rear wheel horsepower
    http://www.ktrperformance.com/services/Dyno_Graphs/Porsche/graph_996tt_ted.htm
    http://www.ktrperformance.com/services/Dyno_Graphs/Porsche/graph_996tt_stock.htm

    The Maser’s 335 rear wheel horsepower (per Brad’s chart above) is less than 10% short of the Twin Turbo’s.

    The numbers back up my impressions – the Twin Turbo has better all-out acceleration, but the Maser’s instantaneous engine response, and quick-shifting Cambiocorsa gearbox, makes up the difference in a real world, two-lane country road overtaking situation.
     
  21. allanlambo

    allanlambo F1 Rookie

    Jun 9, 2002
    4,363
    Maui
    Full Name:
    Allan

    First off, there absolutely no comparison between the 2. The Porsche is miles ahead of the Maser in terms of acceleration. You are looking at Dyno graphs from the Porsche on an all-wheel drive dyno, which is different than a 2 wheel drive dyno. With the driveshaft disconnected, the Porsche makes around 400rwhp.

    In a real test of acceleration, the Porsche would leave the Maser for dead. It wouldnt even be close. The X-50 is a high 11's car @ 120, while the Maser is a 13 sec, 107-110 mph car. 10-13 mph in the 1/4 is HUGE.

    Also, if you are looking for acceleration, a simple chip upgrade on the X-50 by UPSOLUTE, bumps power by 100rwhp.

    I would go with the Porsche, the Maser will depreciate like a rock, its styling is very bland, and reliability suspect.
     
  22. triXXXter

    triXXXter Formula Junior

    Nov 11, 2003
    652
    Ft. Worth TX
    Full Name:
    Steven G. Ogden
    Hey a newbie trying to be the new postwhore.

    Interesting I haven't driven the Maser. but I have driven the tt and I just see these two to be so comparable. Seems like two different cars with two different agendas meeting them in two different ways. AWD rear engine VS RWD front engine?

    Just my thoughts.
     

Share This Page