Porsche 911 Turbo S Cabriolet review: first UK test - Top Gear | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Tech

Porsche 911 Turbo S Cabriolet review: first UK test – Top Gear

Published

 on


The 911 Turbo S Cabriolet, in the UK. But hasn’t it just started raining?
Well it is June. Fortunately, we got into the new car at the tail end of the hot weather, grateful for the fact that this first lockdown-easing drive involves a convertible roof. Porsche’s rules meant picking the car up from the company’s HQ just outside Reading, where it had just received the sort of deep clean that banishes all bug-like life-forms, including sub-atomic ones.
At the risk of sounding like a prissy purist, isn’t the 911 Turbo a car best enjoyed with a proper roof?
We’d tend to agree. The new Targa does the rug-ruffling cool thing, especially in its recently unveiled Heritage Design form, and you could make a case for the standard 911 soft-top.
But a 641bhp turbo with no roof? That’s the ultimate poser’s Porsche, the Beverly Hills plastic surgeon’s car, all the gear and no idea. But then we drove it, on some of Britain’s best roads.
First impressions?
Well here’s the thing. With this car, they can lull you into a sense of false security. You know about the 50-metre test, the idea that you can pretty much get the measure of a car within the first 50m? That’s true here, in the sense that this is a Porsche 911, so you sit quite low, you can see out in every direction much more effectively than in many equivalent supercars, it feels compact (if not quite as wieldy as earlier iterations), and all the control weights are nigh-on perfect. The 911, after all, is the definitive driving machine.
With no set route, I simply pointed the new Turbo Cab down the M4 and onto the A34. Its eight-speed PDK ’box shuffles imperceptibly into, erm, top gear, bumbles along on a negligible amount of revs, and despite having tyres the size of small planets, is almost limo quiet on a steady-state motorway cruise. It wasn’t until I saw the signs for Southampton that, initial acclimatisation complete, I properly buried the throttle pedal for the first time. At which point, well, words fail me. Apart from the naughty ones I can’t repeat here.
Can you try, please, otherwise this’ll be a short story.
Of course. TG’s latest print issue had the new 911 Turbo on the cover, with a bunch of turbo-related stories in support. History tells us that early adopters – in motorsport and on the road – had to cope with ferocious lag, which made the original mid-Seventies 911 Turbo, to give you one notable example, quite the beast. Forty-five years of progress has all but eliminated the scourge of lag, but the 930 Turbo’s 2020 successor still serves up so much thrust even on modest throttle loads it’s like surfing a rocket. Its ability to cover ground quickly is almost but not quite beyond belief. You are here. Then you are… there. The bit of tarmac in between is simply vaporised. In my experience, only the McLaren F1 and Bugattis Veyron and Chiron pull off the same trick. And one of those has a race-inspired V12, the others 32 cylinders and eight turbos between them.
But hasn’t that been a Turbo trait for at least the last two generations? Intergalactic acceleration yes, but rather clinically executed…
True. But this 992-era car somehow manages to stir a bit more emotion into the mix. It’s the difference between Arnie in the original Terminator film versus the joke-meister in T2: Judgment Day. Part of the experience is knowing that you are sitting in front of another piece of Weissach-created engineering magic. Full disclosure: the latest regular Carrera didn’t fully do it for me, itself now (twin) turbocharged in the modern idiom, a 3.0-litre flat-six making 450bhp. Wrangling the necessary efficiency out of it messed with its mojo a bit.
The new Turbo S engine is based on that unit, but it’s now 3745cc, has a wider bore, a new cooling system that feeds air via those pumped rear wheelarch intakes and two additional ones above the rear wing grille. There’s a new cooling system, symmetrical turbos with variable turbine geometry and electrically adjustable wastegate flaps, and piezo injectors: it’s more responsive, more powerful, torquier, more efficient, more everything.
More fun? Because no matter how fast the previous Turbo was, it was the GT3 that usually generated the big thrills.
Unquestionably. Having peeled off the A34 and into the south-west’s beautiful countryside, we traversed Hampshire, Sussex, Wiltshire and Berkshire, looping B-roads rising and falling and then flattening out towards Salisbury plain. The Turbo burbles unobtrusively through villages, its wider front and rear track (by 45mm and 10mm respectively), potent looking rear end and reworked front visual signifiers lost on all but the most well-informed.
When it’s safe to do so, third gear unleashes volcanic performance, and the sensation as you pass the 2,800rpm boost threshold and ride out the acceleration to the 7,000rpm red line is the sort of thing someone would make a fortune out of if they could bottle it. Now factor in what it’s like with the roof down: you can hear the turbos sucking, blowing and chumpfing, a sonic brew that alters in real time depending on what you’re doing with your right foot. What lag there is actually becomes part of the experience. The sense of thrust is amazing.
But is it all a bit sledgehammer smashing a nut?
I’ve driven every significant Porsche 911 there’s ever been, and this new Turbo won’t placate the diehards who hymn the lost art of steering feel. Nor does its tail do that signature 911 thing of hunkering down as you launch yourself out of a corner and then wonder what amount of bobbing nose understeer you’ll have to contend with on the exit. Those days are gone. No, it simply erases corners, like they’re not there. The front and rear end are in constant and crystal clear contact with each other, and the chassis firepower – all-wheel drive with a front axle that can handle 368 torques alone, active rear axle, all the high-end PASM, PDCC and PSM software – combines to deliver a car of unfathomable depths.
The front wheels are 20in shod in 255/35 Pirellis, the rears 21in wrapped in 315/50 rubber, and the immense mechanical grip is augmented by an enhanced set of aerodynamic aids: there’s an air brake, and the redesigned front and the new rear spoiler increase downforce by 15 per cent over the previous car. A rotary dial on the steering wheel moves through wet, normal, sport, sport plus and individal mode. In sport plus, the downforce on the rear wing is increased to 170kg. Braking, the oft-overlooked yet critical part of the equation, is by standard ceramic discs, 420mm at the front, grabbed by 10-piston calipers. The retardation is obviously immense, but there’s terrific feel too. The result is a car whose limits are so high, in all weather conditions and regardless of the road surface beneath, that is impossible to disrupt. If this suggests a certain thuggishness, that’s not the case, although it is true that other cars are more nuanced, will convey more detail about the road and its composition, that weigh less and move around a bit more, if that’s your bag. That it weighs an extra 69.8kg over the coupe is neither here nor there, although at 1.7 tonnes overall it’s no featherweight.
Still, few if any cars combine the Turbo’s unbelievable velocity with its sense of control and crushing capability: Ollie Marriage of this parish recorded a 0-60mph time of 2.5 seconds, 100mph in 5.6 in the coupe. These are extraordinary numbers.
Back to the convertible bit, now.
Well, you pays your money etc. And as it costs £165,127, we’re talking a chunk of change here (£10k more than the coupe). And our test car added some interesting extras. Some, like the adaptive cruise (£1203) and Lane Keep Assist (£749), are a waste of time. But we’d like the Sports exhaust (£2180), the Burmester audio (£2256), and even the air vents can be trimmed in leather (£1313). All up, this is a £178,414 car. Sheesh. The roof goes up or down in 12 seconds, and clever design ensures that there’s minimal turbulence at motorway speeds in the cockpit. A rear wind deflector tames the airflow inside at higher speeds. The body itself is rock solid, the whole thing feeling as meticulously well-engineered as you’d expect. We’d go so far as to say that the Cabriolet, even in Britain’s perpetually unpredictable climate, is the Turbo to go for. Simply because in a car that delivers an overwhelming sensory overload, the rush of air over your head adds yet another dimension.
Hmm. You liked it, then.
We’re in a world in which internal combustion is under threat, and it feels like the ‘traditional’ supercar might be about to run out of road. The new 911 Turbo S suggests that the end of days isn’t here just yet. It requires monumental self-discipline, and can do things only the very best fast cars before it managed to do. But it also morphs into a remarkably comfortable everyday car, complete with Porsche’s latest and impressive UX. It is completely uncompromised, and mesmerisingly good.
Specs: 3745cc, flat 6cyl twin turbo, 8sp PDK, 641bhp at 6750rpm, 590lb ft at 2500-4500rpm, 0-62mph 2.8 seconds, top speed 205mph, 25mpg combined, 257g/km CO2

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Slack researcher discusses the fear, loathing and excitement surrounding AI in the workplace

Published

 on

 

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Artificial intelligence‘s recent rise to the forefront of business has left most office workers wondering how often they should use the technology and whether a computer will eventually replace them.

Those were among the highlights of a recent study conducted by the workplace communications platform Slack. After conducting in-depth interviews with 5,000 desktop workers, Slack concluded there are five types of AI personalities in the workplace: “The Maximalist” who regularly uses AI on their jobs; “The Underground” who covertly uses AI; “The Rebel,” who abhors AI; “The Superfan” who is excited about AI but still hasn’t used it; and “The Observer” who is taking a wait-and-see approach.

Only 50% of the respondents fell under the Maximalist or Underground categories, posing a challenge for businesses that want their workers to embrace AI technology. The Associated Press recently discussed the excitement and tension surrounding AI at work with Christina Janzer, Slack’s senior vice president of research and analytics.

Q: What do you make about the wide range of perceptions about AI at work?

A: It shows people are experiencing AI in very different ways, so they have very different emotions about it. Understanding those emotions will help understand what is going to drive usage of AI. If people are feeling guilty or nervous about it, they are not going to use it. So we have to understand where people are, then point them toward learning to value this new technology.

Q: The Maximalist and The Underground both seem to be early adopters of AI at work, but what is different about their attitudes?

A: Maximalists are all in on AI. They are getting value out of it, they are excited about it, and they are actively sharing that they are using it, which is a really big driver for usage among others.

The Underground is the one that is really interesting to me because they are using it, but they are hiding it. There are different reasons for that. They are worried they are going to be seen as incompetent. They are worried that AI is going to be seen as cheating. And so with them, we have an opportunity to provide clear guidelines to help them know that AI usage is celebrated and encouraged. But right now they don’t have guidelines from their companies and they don’t feel particularly encouraged to use it.

Overall, there is more excitement about AI than not, so I think that’s great We just need to figure out how to harness that.

Q: What about the 19% of workers who fell under the Rebel description in Slack’s study?

A: Rebels tend to be women, which is really interesting. Three out of five rebels are women, which I obviously don’t like to see. Also, rebels tend to be older. At a high level, men are adopting the technology at higher rates than women.

Q: Why do you think more women than men are resisting AI?

A: Women are more likely to see AI as a threat, more likely to worry that AI is going to take over their jobs. To me, that points to women not feeling as trusted in the workplace as men do. If you feel trusted by your manager, you are more likely to experiment with AI. Women are reluctant to adopt a technology that might be seen as a replacement for them whereas men may have more confidence that isn’t going to happen because they feel more trusted.

Q: What are some of the things employers should be doing if they want their workers to embrace AI on the job?

A: We are seeing three out of five desk workers don’t even have clear guidelines with AI, because their companies just aren’t telling them anything, so that’s a huge opportunity.

Another opportunity to encourage AI usage in the open. If we can create a culture where it’s celebrated, where people can see the way people are using it, then they can know that it’s accepted and celebrated. Then they can be inspired.

The third thing is we have to create a culture of experimentation where people feel comfortable trying it out, testing it, getting comfortable with it because a lot of people just don’t know where to start. The reality is you can start small, you don’t have to completely change your job. Having AI write an email or summarize content is a great place to start so you can start to understand what this technology can do.

Q: Do you think the fears about people losing their jobs because of AI are warranted?

A: People with AI are going to replace people without AI.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Biden administration to provide $325 million for new Michigan semiconductor factory

Published

 on

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Biden administration said Tuesday that it would provide up to $325 million to Hemlock Semiconductor for a new factory, a move that could help give Democrats a political edge in the swing state of Michigan ahead of election day.

The funding would support 180 manufacturing jobs in Saginaw County, where Republicans and Democrats were neck-in-neck for the past two presidential elections. There would also be construction jobs tied to the factory that would produce hyper-pure polysilicon, a building block for electronics and solar panels, among other technologies.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said on a call with reporters that the funding came from the CHIPS and Science Act, which President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022. It’s part of a broader industrial strategy that the campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, supports, while Republican nominee Donald Trump, the former president, sees tariff hikes and income tax cuts as better to support manufacturing.

“What we’ve been able to do with the CHIPS Act is not just build a few new factories, but fundamentally revitalize the semiconductor ecosystem in our country with American workers,” Raimondo said. “All of this is because of the vision of the Biden-Harris administration.”

A senior administration official said the timing of the announcement reflected the negotiating process for reaching terms on the grant, rather than any political considerations. The official insisted on anonymity to discuss the process.

After site work, Hemlock Semiconductor plans to begin construction in 2026 and then start production in 2028, the official said.

Running in 2016, Trump narrowly won Saginaw County and Michigan as a whole. But in 2020 against Biden, both Saginaw County and Michigan flipped to the Democrats.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

The Internet is Littered in ‘Educated Guesses’ Without the ‘Education’

Published

 on

Although no one likes a know-it-all, they dominate the Internet.

The Internet began as a vast repository of information. It quickly became a breeding ground for self-proclaimed experts seeking what most people desire: recognition and money.

Today, anyone with an Internet connection and some typing skills can position themselves, regardless of their education or experience, as a subject matter expert (SME). From relationship advice, career coaching, and health and nutrition tips to citizen journalists practicing pseudo-journalism, the Internet is awash with individuals—Internet talking heads—sharing their “insights,” which are, in large part, essentially educated guesses without the education or experience.

The Internet has become a 24/7/365 sitcom where armchair experts think they’re the star.

Not long ago, years, sometimes decades, of dedicated work and acquiring education in one’s field was once required to be recognized as an expert. The knowledge and opinions of doctors, scientists, historians, et al. were respected due to their education and experience. Today, a social media account and a knack for hyperbole are all it takes to present oneself as an “expert” to achieve Internet fame that can be monetized.

On the Internet, nearly every piece of content is self-serving in some way.

The line between actual expertise and self-professed knowledge has become blurry as an out-of-focus selfie. Inadvertently, social media platforms have created an informal degree program where likes and shares are equivalent to degrees. After reading selective articles, they’ve found via and watching some TikTok videos, a person can post a video claiming they’re an herbal medicine expert. Their new “knowledge,” which their followers will absorb, claims that Panda dung tea—one of the most expensive teas in the world and isn’t what its name implies—cures everything from hypertension to existential crisis. Meanwhile, registered dietitians are shaking their heads, wondering how to compete against all the misinformation their clients are exposed to.

More disturbing are individuals obsessed with evangelizing their beliefs or conspiracy theories. These people write in-depth blog posts, such as Elvis Is Alive and the Moon Landings Were Staged, with links to obscure YouTube videos, websites, social media accounts, and blogs. Regardless of your beliefs, someone or a group on the Internet shares them, thus confirming your beliefs.

Misinformation is the Internet’s currency used to get likes, shares, and engagement; thus, it often spreads like a cosmic joke. Consider the prevalence of clickbait headlines:

  • You Won’t Believe What Taylor Swift Says About Climate Change!
  • This Bedtime Drink Melts Belly Fat While You Sleep!
  • In One Week, I Turned $10 Into $1 Million!

Titles that make outrageous claims are how the content creator gets reads and views, which generates revenue via affiliate marketing, product placement, and pay-per-click (PPC) ads. Clickbait headlines are how you end up watching a TikTok video by a purported nutrition expert adamantly asserting you can lose belly fat while you sleep by drinking, for 14 consecutive days, a concoction of raw eggs, cinnamon, and apple cider vinegar 15 minutes before going to bed.

Our constant search for answers that’ll explain our convoluted world and our desire for shortcuts to success is how Internet talking heads achieve influencer status. Because we tend to seek low-hanging fruits, we listen to those with little experience or knowledge of the topics they discuss yet are astute enough to know what most people want to hear.

There’s a trend, more disturbing than spreading misinformation, that needs to be called out: individuals who’ve never achieved significant wealth or traded stocks giving how-to-make-easy-money advice, the appeal of which is undeniable. Several people I know have lost substantial money by following the “advice” of Internet talking heads.

Anyone on social media claiming to have a foolproof money-making strategy is lying. They wouldn’t be peddling their money-making strategy if they could make easy money.

Successful people tend to be secretive.

Social media companies design their respective algorithms to serve their advertisers—their source of revenue—interest; hence, content from Internet talking heads appears most prominent in your feeds. When a video of a self-professed expert goes viral, likely because it pressed an emotional button, the more people see it, the more engagement it receives, such as likes, shares and comments, creating a cycle akin to a tornado.

Imagine scrolling through your TikTok feed and stumbling upon a “scientist” who claims they can predict the weather using only aluminum foil, copper wire, sea salt and baking soda. You chuckle, but you notice his video got over 7,000 likes, has been shared over 600 times and received over 400 comments. You think to yourself, “Maybe this guy is onto something.” What started as a quest to achieve Internet fame evolved into an Internet-wide belief that weather forecasting can be as easy as DIY crafts.

Since anyone can call themselves “an expert,” you must cultivate critical thinking skills to distinguish genuine expertise from self-professed experts’ self-promoting nonsense. While the absurdity of the Internet can be entertaining, misinformation has serious consequences. The next time you read a headline that sounds too good to be true, it’s probably an Internet talking head making an educated guess; without the education seeking Internet fame, they can monetize.

______________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a self-described connoisseur of human psychology, writes about what’s

on his mind from Toronto. You can follow Nick on Twitter and Instagram @NKossovan.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version