Why was the 968 short lived?

Porsche dropped the 968 and 928 due to poor sales, a problem they had from the late 80s to the early 90s, even for the 911. Also, making the 3 different models was expensive because they shared few parts in common, especially on the chassis. The Boxster saved the company because it's immensely popular and shares lots of components with the 996 - too many in the opinion of some 996 owners, but this makes use of their building facilities much more efficient. Thing is, Porsche is heading down the same road again. The 997 and new Boxster share fewer components, you've got the Cayenne which doesn't share any, and rumor has it there's a sports sedan or luxury GT in the works. Emanuel

To tack onto what Emmanuel was saying...he is correct about the poor sales of all models from the late 80's to early 90's, but by '94 or '95 you would have thought the 968 would have made a nice alternative to the 911 or 928, but here are two other reasons the 968 failed...perception and price. Americans, and to some degree Canadians, have issues with symbolism. Only in North America does "Acura" exist. The reason... a North American, looking for status would not buy a Honda, so Honda came up with a fancy sounding name to impress the shallow North American car buyer (Don't believe me, Google Honda NSX, you will see that beautiful sportscar with an H on the nose) Well, the 968 had the same issues, you can still see it when the occasional Vette owner stops over here yammering on about his V-8. North Americans have a perception that 4 cylinder means economy, not sporty and at close to 50 Grand a 968 was seen as "not a sports car because of it's engine" (but a much, much lesser car such as a BMW 325 was acceptable because it had 6 cylinders) without even looking at its HP and Torque numbers. Also, in poor economic times, 50 Grand for an "entry level" model was a bit steep. I personally do not like the "borrowed" looks of the 968, but would own one in a second. It is really a shame because the Europeans had a turbo charged model called the 968TS and it had over 300HP and had

0-62 times around 4.3 seconds...so much for crappy 4 cylinder performance, eh? Since Porsche is dependant on North American car buyers, the 968 was discontinued.

Anyhow...While a 968 would run circles around a first or second generation Boxster, the perception about 4 cylinders (and the engine being in the wrong place) killed it from the get go. It has been said, but bears repeating...the 924/944/968 line of Porsches are the biggest steal on the sports car market.

"Sm704" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

I agree with a lot of what your wrote about US sports car perceptions, but it doesn't explain the failure of the V8-engined 928 to gain good ground here, and the Mazda MX-5 became a sales phenomenon while the 968 was in it's death throes. I think a large segment of Americans don't mind 4-cylinder sports cars, but they *do* mind paying Corvette money for a four-banger. I think it was more price than engine. The 968 is under-appreciated though. If I were going down to one Porsche, it's likely the one I'd go with. Can't stand the cabs, though. Emanuel

When Porsche decided to discontinue the 944, they should have discontinued the 928 along with it, and focused on the 968 and 911 variants. The 968 is basically the result of the 944 and 928 having a child together. The 968 offers the best of both worlds. There really was no need to sell the 968 alongside the 928.

I agree with the child together comment. I th>give to own that beauty. 355HP, Black w/tan interior, handled like a dream. >

That's my point - I think it was price more than anything that killed both water-pumpers. The 944 started out as an entry-level model, and yet the 968 cost more *10 years ago* than the Boxster S does *now.* That's insane. The GTS I can be more forgiving of since it was the equivalent of the current Carrera GT - it's supposed to have super-car pricing. I'm working on a spreadsheet comparing the 1987 928S4 to the 1999

996, and it's wild how close that 17 year-old car is in performance to the outgoing 911. The 928 has a 1 mph slower top speed, is only 4" longer, 3" wider, 1" lower in height, has 20 more hp and 16 cf (!) more cargo space. Disadvantages are the S4 is 400 lbs heavier, braking distance from 60 mph is 15 feet longer, and 0 - 60 mph is .5 to .7 seconds more (depending on your source). The S4 can be found for $10k-$15k all day long, less than half the cheapest 996s. The GT and GTS would likely top it, but those seem closer in price to used 996s. Emanuel

The 968 was designed by engineers to be proper sports car, and it is, but unfortunately it was too expensive to make, hence Porsche didn't make money on them, the economy in the early nineties didn't help.

Boxster has been 'designed' by Wiedekings bean counters to be cheap to build. It's only recently the engineers got a chance to improve the stupidly named thing to deserve the P badge. (But I still don't like it.)

Sm704:

Yes, even today there isn't another proper sports but practical 2+2 coupe or cab. They had the chance to have that niche to themselves but they just abandoned it.

Which is why I still have 968 Cab 11 years on.. Find out all about 968's on the discussion forum of

Regards, Martin

Martin,

Your fit of Intra-Porsche snobbery has given me a fine way to post what will probably be my last post to AAP, since I am getting out of the Porsche stable shortly.

You said: "Boxster has been 'designed' by Wiedekings bean counters to be cheap to build."

I paid almost 50 grand seven years ago for a chance to play in that 'cheap' environment. Maybe that's chump change for you, I dunno. But comparitively, the cost of entry for the venerable 914 (what, don't like that 'cause it wasn't a real Porsche, either?)was less than Boxster. Likewise the 924, certainly (most Intra-snobs hate that one too, so go ahead and malign it)was also relatively inexpensive. A base 944 (hate that one, too, even though it is a cousin of 968? or only hate the four cyl?)was not too pricey. And 356's weren't outrageous to build or buy, or at least they didn't compare to the out of pocket bite of a 'Whale Tail 911" back in it's glory. I'll bet you think that is among the 'true' breed, yes?

You go on: "It's only recently the engineers got a chance to improve the stupidly named thing to deserve the P badge."

So, when it was released as a perfectly balanced, mid-engine, long-lasting, new design, with features some would think of as sport-car-like, i.e. excellent brakes, nimble handling, responsive but not overpowering free revving motor, tightly built, snugly fitted, reasonable on fuel, FUN to drive, ...etc, etc, you find all of that to not measure up somehow...? What exactly are the faults that kept the Boxster from meeting muster, in your amazingly jaudiced eyes? I guess all those buyers and almost everyone in the automotive press who heaped (and continue to heap) praise on it must be stupid, to you?

You even malign the very *name*? Even though a bit unweildy and quite likely to be shortened to "Boxer" by the auto press and even potential buyers when it first arived, I don't recall that it met with any resistance or untoward comment until you say it now.

Huh.

Did it have some glitches? Sure, any ambitious and complex undetaking is hard to do perfectly on the first pass. Cheesy windshield wash aiming. Quaint spelling on the climate control. Optimistic speedos. Are those really the hallmarks of a dismal design concept failure?

Of course, you go on with: "(But I still don't like it.)", so maybe you should just not answer anything I ask here, because after all, it's more fun and easier to nurture our ignorance and stupid preconceptions/superstitions than it is to go through the *effort* to actually examine them and confront them head on, and consider whether they are even worthy of holding...

Hey, don't think I am a wild eyed "Boxster's-rule" nut -- I did enjoy my car immensely, but right now it is on the auction block as I pursue a totally different automotive adventure. You know, Variety. You ought to think about it sometime.

Farewell AAP!

GS Arctic Silver 1998 Boxster w/ sport package

Hey GS...

What direction are you going? There was a question in Excellence a few years back that went "For what a new Boxster costs, why can't I save half of my money and buy a low mileage 968? After all the 968 has more horses." The answer was... " While the 968 is a fine car, just drive a Boxster and you will know why it is superior. Then it basically went into everything you said. I have only one issue with the Boxster...there are too many out there. It is like the early 80's and the 944 all over again. I definitely prefer the Boxsters look to the 968, besides modernizing the

944's rear end, the 968 is hard to get used to looking at. Kind of mish mosh of the 944, 911 and 928.

Porsche tried a similar tack with the 968. As an improved 944S2 it was to originally be called the 944S3, but Porsche felt that promoting the car as a "new" model would stimulate sales.

Devils944S2 said the following on 1/15/2005 11:38 PM:

I hadn't seen that. Good points, though: If I couldn't have worked the scratch for the new Boxster, and was willing to bet on a used car, that would have been reasonable alternative. Heck, I would not put down 968 even one little bit -- the ones I have seen look great, and the cool-factor is there, too, due to rarity....

Amen! I only happened to take mine to SoBe area once,(I am not the SoBe type!) and Holy Cow, it was like flies at an picnic! It was raining Boxsters, in all colors of the jelly-bean jar (The kids just love those bright colors!)

I happen to like Boxster over 968, but I don't demand everyone agree -- that is what makes the world go 'round!

As to the direction I am going personally, there is no doubt what I am doing, the only doubt left is how to execute it:

I am absolutely committed to scratching a many-years-old, very specific itch I've had, by acquiring a 1940 Ford Coupe, with a V-8.

I have been eye-balling the few specimens that seem to be on the market right now, and have narrowed search to a couple of good candidates.

I expect to close a deal in a week or so, and I could pop in one more time to let the group know how I made out.

My Best to everyone on AAP!

GS

1998 Arctic Silver w/sport package...for now! Ebay item # 4520248658

Ha! I've been looking at old cars as well, but my candidates are the late 30s Packards or 1950 Fords - the slab-bodied models like the Custom and Deluxe. Good luck with your search, Emanuel

How could a Porsche driver go from a 968 or "Boxer" to an old Ford? That's got to be a painful change w/r/t performance, comfort, handling, etc.

Going from a Boxster to a '40 Ford must be like going from Ruth's Chris steak to McDonalds!

I drive either a '98 VW Jetta TDI or a "rolling restoration" 1960 MGA 1600 roadster. One is novel and simple while the other reliable and efficient... and they are both cheap enough for a schlub like me.

Mike

1998 VW TDI 1960 MGA 1600 Roadster 2001 Volvo V70/XC 1973 Porsche 914... in my near future

So were the cars expensive to make, or did Porsche's marketing totally fail to read the market, year after year?

Would you give an example of the 'cheap design' of the Boxster? I've got one, and aside from lame "leatherette" and the false buttons in the dashboard, which the 911 had too, I discern no "cheapness".

They were expensive to make. What saved Porsche's ass with the Boxster is that the model shared a LOT of parts with the 996, which meant less development, less tooling to make the two models, and an easier-to-manage supply line. This way, bad sales of one doesn't leave the company stuck with a bunch of parts - they can use most of them on the other model. Both cars are watercooled flat-6s that share a front clip and lots of the interior. By contrast, there's very little that my 3 Porsches share in terms of parts. Not just the body, but the interior switchgear, engine systems, the whole enchilada. A bad year for 944 or 928 sales means a lot of crap they're stuck with. Porsche brought in Japanese industry consultants, Deming disciples, and eliminated those kinds of inefficiencies from their manufacturing process as a result. Also, the market for sports cars and high-end classics took a hit in the early 90s after Black Monday, and all the model lines took a hit. The 911 survived because its the franchise at Porsche - sales sucked just as bad for it. The Boxster came along as the market recovery hit full steam, powered by the dot.com boom. When the dot.com bust hit, eBay went from 20-25 boxster listings on average, to 50-100 consistently. Fortunately that market dip wasn't as global *and* the Cayenne arrived to bolster sales by tapping into a new market. Emanuel

Dan Stephenson said the following on 1/17/2005 5:49 PM:

Visor covers & retaining clips.

(Sorry, but I have to concede at leat that much. But there isn't too much more.)

Seems I remember that Ford(?) brought in some Japanese production line experts back in the 70's to help improve Ford's efficiency. And what company first developed the production line? Ford!

Don:

Ehm, no. Ford copied the production techniques from other non-auto manufacturer, but I forgot who... Regards, Martin