I have had my BMW for about 3 months now. I have a 325is. Anyhow...for what I use it for (commuting) it is a great car. It has a little kick, it has plenty of comfort and maintenance is much cheaper than my S2 ever was, yet, I long for my Porsche. The BMW just feels second tier to the Porsche. I look at the engineering and think, for the "ultimate driving machine" this thing has a shitload of plastic. I know you went from older Porsches to newer BMW's and I went from a newer Porsche to an even newer BMW, but, do you like them both equally or favor one over the other? Also, money being no object, would you buy a 911 or an M?
For years, I've tended to drive something other than my Porsche for everyday use. I tried a BMW, but found much of what you have...not to mention they're not all that comfortable. Finally, I decided to purchase a pre-owned Lexus, GS-400, which has loads of comfort, and all the power of a BMW 540 series. Recently, I acquired an '02, low mileage Carrera Cab, and decided to forego the extra costs of the 3rd car. So...we sold my wife's aging ES-300, and she's driving the GS-400, and I'm using the Carrera for my everyday car.
Sure...it's not as comfortable as the GS, but the driving experience is good for the soul and I get to enjoy it to a greater degree.
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:36:27 -0800, "Devils944S2" wrote:
I like both marques, but I personally wouldn't get post-1989 911 no matter the cost - I wish Porsche could drop the damn thing, but its fans won't let them and that's a shame. Every other model of Porsche built since the 70s has shown that Porsche can make cars superior to the 911, but don't because for their customers the 911 remains the ultimate Porsche. It's a delusion that grows more pathetic with every new version, and Porsche looks sillier and sillier playing along (such as their requirement that none of the press directly compare the Cayman to the Carrera during the initial model launch). If money were no object and I were shopping for a new Roadster, I'd get the new M Roadster over a Boxster S. I chose my current Z4 over the Boxster and I still like it better. I think the Z4 is under-appreciated by the press in the US, though even in Europe the Porsche usually wins by decision. The Z4 offers a better value for money than the Boxster, especially used, and I like the looks much more. When I test drove the two, I came away thinking the Z4 was a bit torquier with a stiffer chassis, but with brakes and suspension slightly inferior to the Boxster. I feel that when some relatively inexpensive upgrades (most significantly dropping the run-flat tires for grippy normal ones), the Z4 becomes vastly better than the Boxster while still costing less. If I were shopping for a coupe, I'd get the Cayman S over the upcoming M Coupe - though that's a much closer call since the latter reminds me of the departed 944. :) The Cayman is gorgeous though, and better-looking than the Z4 Coupe inside and out, especially comparing the rears. epbrown
No worries, I just wanted to get some opinions...The comfort level in my 325 is pretty good, it's just for what they cost it seems they could be of higher quality. Now, as for Lexus, I pretty much would trust ANYTHING Toyota makes, but, excepting a few models, find the looks a bit bland. Would love to have an Acura or Lexus luxury model without a doubt.
They only made 17 of the Turbo S, and 4 of those were the RS racing models. It's not like that car was ever in real production. It was (is) a tremendous machine, but the air had gone out of the 944/968 balloon re. sales - they didn't hold it back to "protect" the 911.
I don't. My 2002 996 goes 0-60 in under 5 seconds, tops out at 177 and pulls .9+ g lateral acceleration with the stock suspension. The ROW sport suspension puts the car right at 1 g. The car gets over 26 mpg on the highway and is incredibly comfortable on long trips. There's nothing delusional or pathetic about that kind of performance. The 997 Carrera S is even less delusional and pathetic.
Yeah, the 911 has the engine in the rear and if you have to have the car's weight distributed evenly it's not the way to go. If you take the time to understand and become competent with the handling traits of the 911 (which has always been trailing throttle oversteer), the car is no slouch.
In the film notes for Pulp Fiction, Quentin Tarantino talks about Elvis people and Beatles people. He says Beatles people can like Elvis, and Elvis people can like the Beatles, but somewhere deep down in your soul you make a choice, you pick a side, you take a stand. There are driving enthusiasts, and there are 911 fans. Driving enthusiasts can like the 911 (and indeed, I'd say all the serious ones do), and 911 fans can be driving enthusiasts (and again, I'd say there's some serious overlap, but the latter group has some posers, imo). But the dividing line for the 911 fan is this: if Porsche told you they could make a better car than the 911 - better in every way - but they'd have to stop production of the 911 to make it, would you tell them to keep making the inferior car, the 911, or tell them to make the best driving tool they can make? You're absolutely right that the performance of the 996 and 997 are astounding (of course, I found those numbers astounding back in the
80s, when they applied to the 928S4 and its descendants). But Porsche can make a better car, better at every single quality you name above. Not 10 years from now using new techniques, not 5 years from now after working out some tweaks, but tomorrow, using existing parts right from the bin. The idea that the 911 is a good car is fact. The idea that it's the best car Porsche can make in that price range - that's delusional. They could make a Cayman *tomorrow* that would beat the 997 like a red-headed step-child, on road and track, over hill and dale... but they won't because more people care about the name, engine placement, and "iconic shape" of the 911 than actual performance. And that's pathetic. "Flagship" should mean more than this - than winning a thrown fight, outrunning a hobbled opponent, than high-level posing. The 911 once earned the title - now it's just handed to it. I love what the
911 was, and I hate what it's become - a figurehead rather than a standard bearer. epbrown
Great comments from those of you who know your Porsches. I am looking at the outrageously beautiful 2006 Cayman. Price wise it sells for almost $30K less that the newest 911 with similar options! It seems hard to justify the 911's additional expense if the performance and style of these two cars are comparable. Any comments from you guys or gals?
-----
2001 MB SLK 230 White/Black
1986 944 with automatic transmission! Unfortunately, totaled in a rear end collision on the 405. No personal injury whatsoever.
You owned a 944 and you even have to ask that question? Cayman, Cayman, Cayman. Way way more car for your money. Go drive it you'll like it, a lot. don "It's not how fast you go, It's how you go fast"
Very convenient of you to determine that "driving enthusiasts" have their stuff in one bag, while "911 enthusiasts" (of which I am most certainly one) don't. Any objective data form the basis of your opinion, or is this just a feeling?
Better or different? Straight line and lateral accelerations can be put anywhere you want depending on engine output and the car suspension, so what you're really talking about here is handling characteristics. A mid engine design like the Cayman with its low polar moment of inertia will feature more neutral handling and will turn in easier than a 911. It's a more forgiving setup than the 911 for the great unwashed multitude of drivers who will instinctively lift out of the gas if the car gets out of shape, but if they get it to 11/10ths that low moment of inertia will make it spin like a dervish. If you get the tail moving on a
911 you need to start making inputs right now, and if you lift at 11/10ths you're gonna loop also. The 911 configuration is unique in the realm of high performance cars and certainly flies in the face of conventional wisdom as to what constitutes an optimal platform. But the fact remains the car is one of the best sports cars in the world and can generate performance numbers on a par with any of its contemporaries.
The 928S4 was (is) a terriffic machine, and if I came across a clean, well maintained one or a GTS I'd jump on it. But the S4 didn't get to 60 in under 5 seconds (more like
5.3) and topped out in the low to mid 160s. It was the arguably the best GT in the world at the time, but poor sales ultimately doomed the 928 line. 911s have always sold.
Better - Different again.
This the better-different argument again. I'm 6'2" and don't fit too well in Boxster (haven't sat in a Cayman yet). If all Porsche offered was the Boxster, Cayman and Cayenne, I'd be driving something else. The 911 is absolutely the better car for me, and I know what to do with trailing throttle oversteer.
You can pump up the Cayman but you can pump up the 911 also. The 997S gets to 60 in about 4.5 or better, tops out over 180 and pulls 1+ g. lateral acceleration - that's some serious performance, and once again, hardly pathetic.
We've both posted in here for some time and I know you speak from a position of knowledge and conviction. Porsche could certainly turn up the wick on the Cayman, and there are many who would love to see a higher performance variant. I just can't agree with your assertion that the 911 has become a figurehead. The performance figures don't lie, and while you may prefer the mid engine layout, the fact that the 911 has retained its shape and configuration for 40+ years doesn't negate its innate greatness.
Jim...I disagree here. Without U.S. sales, there would be no Porsche, or Porsche as we know them. The 968TS was made 2 years before the death of the line...Since the performance of the 968TS was so great, it was never coming to the states because it would have out performed the 911 of that time (the
964) at a much lower price. The 964 Turbo had numbers identical to the 968TS and cost $95K. I would assume the 968TS would have commanded under $50K. Therefore a limited number were built and never brought into the U.S. Porsche wanted the 968 to succeed, don't you think a 968 supercar may have helped boost the profile? The 959, though a 911 variant, suffered the same fate (kind of) since the USDOT would not sign off on it, it was made in very limited numbers only in Europe. If the car is not coming to the states...it will be limited. The 944 Turbo Cabrio never came here either (based on the Turbo S) it would have run circles around a standard 964 Cab for $30K less... That new Cayman is something else, but I can guarantee we will never see its full potential because it must remain sub to the 911 line.
Nothing will negate the Porsche 911s innate greatness and history - not even if Porsche drops it and makes something else. That's my entire point. As you write above, performance figures don't lie - and the performance figures make it clear that the Cayman is a better car than the 911. The 911 design has had it's day, and Porsche engineering has moved beyond it - the fact that they have to turn *down* the wick on one of their own designs just to keep it ahead, that even with 30+ less horsepower they're scared of a direct comparison between the two, shows that it's day is done. It's my opinion that a true 911 enthusiast won't care that the car's not new, or that other cars are faster. My SC could have been smoked by a Mini Cooper S or a kid in a Honda Civic, and I never gave a damn. Love the car for what it is, and let other cars rise to their own level. If the only way Porsche can sell a new 911 is to hold back newer, better designs, something's wrong with the people buying those
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.