- 10,620
- gtp_jimprower
I would probably end up driving slower than him. I actually FOLLOW the speed limits.
Don't kid yourself... in the UK it's more than likely!
I thought diesel was for tractors
Yeah
How about that 90hp 1.9-liter TDI from the Jetta?
Mmmm.. The sound of that flat 6 revving to 4200 rpm... Sweet !...
There aren't any diesels that'll fit. Subaru is just starting to make flat four diesels... a flat six? Maybe never?
The best you can do with a current-generation CRDi is about 5000 rpm... any higher and it's in danger of blowing to kingdom come. The best fit for a Porsche would be a 3 liter flat-six diesel, because it'd weigh around the same or just a little more than Porsche's current 3.8. But at best, such a plant would be making only 270-290 bhp... not quite 911 power. Bump it to over 300 bhp and it'd be laggy, peaky and would make power over a very small rev range. Would be interesting to drive, but nowhere near as much fun as a gasoline engine... not yet.
Are there any Cayenne diesels? (just checking to see if Porsche even make diesel engines)..
This 911 could be something to compete with the R8 TDI!if it fits in the rear of that why not a 911.
Ive never been a fan of diesel despite what people say... yes it gets you further but there something magical about Petrol!
Robin
I guess we have to wait and see, i have never seen a RR setup + diesel but all the racecars that have them seem to have no issues. Im not in a position to really tell you if that's accurate, some one has to try it.I don't think a heavy torquey engine would do the handing of RR porsches any favours to be honest. BMW have shown you can make a sporty car with a diesel engine, but a sports car... Hmmm..
But some of the diesel bashing is just a little neanderthal.
I reckon with turbocharging that a powerful flat 6 diesel wouldn't be out of the question. It could be made compact too. If BMW can get 100bhp/litre out of their 123 diesel (2 litres, twin turbo) then a 3.5 flat 6 twin turbo diesel could reasonably produce 350bhp and an enormous wallop of torque (and lets be honest, on the road torque is much more important than power - can you imagine how much shove you'd get on the autobahn in a diesel 911?)
I know that as capacity increases the efficiency increases at a lower rate (so a smaller engine is more likely to develop higher bhp/l) but Porsche have the technology (especially being part owner of VW) to make an efficient and powerful large diesel.
It's also not unusual for Porsche to have shared technology with Subaru so I'm sure Subaru could share their experience with their new boxer diesel should Porsche decide to put diesels in their mainstream sports cars.
On the higher-revving note, Honda is known to be developing a 'Type R' diesel engine that has the potential to rev to 7000, as they've said they'll never make a sports diesel unless they can give it the Honda USP of being high revving and exciting. The Mercedes Bluetec diesels work on a similar level, being much smoother and able to produce power like a petrol and torque like a diesel. So a high revving diesel wouldn't be out of the question either.
Also, with a boxer engine it's naturally balanced, so has lower internal inertia and could be made to rev faster.
Lets keep the diesels for something more suitable please. The last thing a rear engined car needs is a heavier engine hanging back there. The only Porsche i can see with a diesel in it's line-up is the Cayenne, but why bother? VW already has a V6 and V10 diesel in their version of the Cayenne.
Yes Audi are putting a diesel in their flagship sports model R8 but then again they have a LMP1 diesel racer and shift a huge proportion of their other models with diesel engines, so it makes sense for them.
and men who can't afford a real Porsche
the last time they did a diesel...
![]()
theyv got a bit of development to do...
![]()