Porsche Active Ride

[Mr.Smith]

Any thoughts on Porsche Active Ride?

Does it sound like it will give it less engaging ride?

Sponsored

 

[Vercingetorix]

No brainer. I consider it a must on every new car I will ever buy. Steel springs are 19th century.

 

[RAHRCR]

I have PDCC and really like it. Creates great range from sporty to luxury and some steps in between. Active ride appears to take things up a notch. Only real drawbacks are the cost and the fact that this is 1st gen tech for Porsche. I would definitely get it if I was only keeping the car for the warranty period. If I was planning for longer than that, I might hold off to see how this system survives in the real world.

 

[wurzitup]

Kyle Connors (I think it was) very initial review of it was it was somewhat disorienting or disconcerting as the car is "doing" or behaving in a very unusual way in its extremely flat or "helicoptering" behavior.
It's a cool party trick, but for USD$ I don't know that I'd opt for it without trying first. Pretty pricey.

 

[Mr.Smith]

Kyle Connors (I think it was) very initial review of it was it was somewhat disorienting or disconcerting as the car is "doing" or behaving in a very unusual way in its extremely flat or "helicoptering" behavior.
It's a cool party trick, but for USD$ I don't know that I'd opt for it without trying first. Pretty pricey.

That's my concern. I would need to drive it hard to get a better understanding of the system

 

[Boss Hogg]

The proactive leaning and helicoptering seems to be what is most unusual and contentious from the early drives but this aspect of the system only operates on normal mode and can be turned off. I think PAR looks like a great innovation and will spec it, am sure Porsche will have tuned it for engagement in sport plus.

 

[WasserGKuehlt]

No brainer. I consider it a must on every new car I will ever buy. Steel springs are 19th century.

Air suspension is/will be standard on the 9J II. PAR is "active", using electric motors to change the position of suspension elements/geometry of the suspension to counter or accentuate their natural movement. Air is too slow (and, also, 20th century ).

 

[WuffvonTrips]

I'm intrigued to try it, though can't say I've ever noticed the roll or pitching of my humble non-PDCC Taycan on road or track, but then pushing on track with PDCC models isn't the unnatural experience I'd expected, so I'm keeping open-minded.
Here's the relevant graphic from the tech presentation for comparison-

 

[f1eng]

I'm intrigued to try it, though can't say I've ever noticed the roll or pitching of my humble non-PDCC Taycan on road or track, but then pushing on track with PDCC models isn't the unnatural experience I'd expected, so I'm keeping open-minded.
Here's the relevant graphic from the tech presentation for comparison-

The graphic makes it look like PDCC doesn't disconnect the ARB when straight ahead.
Which is poor and disappointing.

 

[f1eng]

The Formula 1 active suspension's benefit was to optimise the aero platform, particularly with the pre-Senna's death flat bottomed cars which were hideously unstable without.

The benefit in grip and handling dynamically was there but small.

Iirc when emulating the difference between the normal spring/dampers and fully active dynamically the car gained about 0.1-0.2 secs/lap whereas using it to optimise ride height for downforce in corners and drag on straights was about 1.7 secs quicker.

Not sure the gain on a road car is worth the long term cost of maintenance of such a complex system...

My oppo at Lotus tried to sell their Active Suspension to road car makers in the US back in the early '80s (they were part of GM at that time) and they told him the BOM cost their current suspension elements was $5, springs 25 cents each, dampers a dollar each! Their active system had 4 Moog servo valves at $1000 each plus struts and controller. No sale

 

[WuffvonTrips]

The graphic makes it look like PDCC doesn't disconnect the ARB when straight ahead.
Which is poor and disappointing.

I suspect that the graphic is based on technical data as cherrypicked and seen through the lens of the marketing department, so might not be the fairest representation of PDCC now that it's superseded by a more complex and expensive system.

 

[W1NGE]

Any thoughts on Porsche Active Ride?

Does it sound like it will give it less engaging ride?

This is effectively the rebranded Porsche Dynamic Chassis Control (PDCC) of old with the neat feature of raising the car height on entry (ideal really but not at the price!).

Mainly for track focussed driving - car will be as flat as possible through corners etc.

Most times you will not notice it's presence and will undoubtedly ask yourself the question "why did I spend £6K on this option?"

In summary, more engaging if you fancy yourself as Lewis Hamilton!

 

[RAHRCR]

PDCC does more than simply keeping the car flat….this is one of the most misunderstood Porsche options. The active ride isn’t a rebranded PDCC, it’s a completely different approach. In general, Porsche handling is excellent and when you spec more handling related features you get more range of usability not a trade off in handling or comfort. That said, you also get more complexity. It’s the cost and complexity that I am concerned about.

 

[Perry]

This is effectively the rebranded Porsche Dynamic Chassis Control (PDCC) of old with the neat feature of raising the car height on entry (ideal really but not at the price!).

Mainly for track focussed driving - car will be as flat as possible through corners etc.

Most times you will not notice it's presence and will undoubtedly ask yourself the question "why did I spend £6K on this option?"

In summary, more engaging if you fancy yourself as Lewis Hamilton!

The main USP of Active Ride over PDCC is not actually track performance, but increased comfort. It goes so far that most of the new features are only active in Normal mode and not Sport or Sport Plus.

Here's the section about Active Ride from the PDF that was posted earlier:

 

[JAGMAN]

RAHRCR and Perry make good points. One of the often misunderstood benefits of PDCC is the increased comfort. By not using traditional sway bars the suspension is de-coupled and therefor each corner is truly independent. Whereas in a traditional anti-roll bar setup a bump on the left is transmitted to the right via the anti-roll bar.

I’d put that point in a similar category of misunderstanding as carbon ceramic brakes; where the primary benefit is reducing unsprung mass and reducing rotating mass. I’m sure someone will say that they have better high temp resistance, which is true, but your daily driver isn’t an F1 car.

Sponsored