Other than the dry sump, are there other specific technical problems with the 986/987/996/997 vehicles as "weekend warriors"?
Jad wrote:Thanks for the answer Bob, that was very informative and even unbiased - not expected on the forum
rss996 wrote:Having owned a 2000 996 and a base 05 997 I will give you my thoughts on this matter.
I am 35, married w/3 kids....had no prior knowledge of racing and did not follow or get into racing until a few years ago.
1. The typical Porsche buyer today ( and for quite a while I gather) does not care or know much about its racing history. Also, buyer does not know much or care about dry sump, integrated dry sump or wet sump.
Porsche figured out that they better sell to the masses or just vanish into thin air....They build a race type car (GT3) for the racers and a street car for guys like me who, at this stage in life, will not go to the track and race. We still want a fast car that handles well and yet can be taken out with the wife and a couple of kids tossed int the back.(997)....
If a company dwells too much on the past they wont last long into the future....You guys should be happy Porsche did what they did to survive and jsut keep on "fixing up" those old cars of yours in order to keep up with us.."Per Jad of course"....
I do agree that Porsche is a little out of hand with all the extra money they charge for bells and whistles....I bought a pretty basic 997 and did not fall inot the trap of getting reemed for a bunch of extras...
The more I learn about this stuff and after sitting in arbitration with Dynes V. Porsche, I can tell you that Porsche is in this for the money now( aren't most companies) and does not mind just flipping the bird to a certain small percentage of customers when it comes to racing the new era of P-cars.
I love my 997 and it fits the need of most people on the street. I am having a blast really getting to know and learn how to drive(auto x) etc....
We have a great bunch of teachers in this club!
Anyway, I can see how the old guard is upset at Porsche but you know what , they don't care because they know the future of Porsche lies in the younger up and coming generation who will buy their cars for different reasons than the days of old....
Just my .02!
Chris Huck wrote:"Imagine what Audi could do if they really wanted to build a sports car. I wonder what Porsche will do to differentiate itself in the future when just being a "Porsche" may not be enough."
They DID - The TT! and wasn't that "Special." LOL
The TT was a direct competitor to Porsches' lowest ranked model that has been touted as the better car in all the car magazines ever since.
But Porsche didn't rest on their laurels! The 1997 Boxster WAS pretty nice, but look what the 2005 Boxster S (and now Cayman S!) has grown into!
More powerful, better handling, quieter, more standard features for similiar 1997 Boxster money, only roadster on the market with head protection airbags, finally an excellent stereo, and cupholders too ;^)
If you guys knew the PCNA/PAG employees that I do, you'd know they are just as enthusiastic/passionate as you guys! About the cars!
They're always trying to find out what they can improve or enhance with newly developed technology. They never feel the project is "done."
MikeD wrote:Chris Huck wrote:"Imagine what Audi could do if they really wanted to build a sports car. I wonder what Porsche will do to differentiate itself in the future when just being a "Porsche" may not be enough."
They DID - The TT! and wasn't that "Special." LOL
The TT was a direct competitor to Porsches' lowest ranked model that has been touted as the better car in all the car magazines ever since.
But Porsche didn't rest on their laurels! The 1997 Boxster WAS pretty nice, but look what the 2005 Boxster S (and now Cayman S!) has grown into!
More powerful, better handling, quieter, more standard features for similiar 1997 Boxster money, only roadster on the market with head protection airbags, finally an excellent stereo, and cupholders too ;^)
If you guys knew the PCNA/PAG employees that I do, you'd know they are just as enthusiastic/passionate as you guys! About the cars!
They're always trying to find out what they can improve or enhance with newly developed technology. They never feel the project is "done."
Chris, I respect your enthusiasm. However, maybe if PCNA would honor the warranties of the cars they distribute I could get excited about all this "new technology" you speak of. As much as I like the new Boxster S and now the Cayman S I doubt I will ever buy a new Porsche again. Or at least if I do it will be under the understanding that the warranty is useless to me.
Bob, what you say makes a lot of sense to me. When I get around to buying a "street" car it will likely be an M5 or RS6. More room and enough performance to have some fun on the street. Makes more sense to me than a 911 at this juncture. If Porsche really does come out with a 4 door sedan it would be cool, I'm sure. But most likely priced so as to make the M5 or RS6 a better choice.
Chris Huck wrote:This is my personal response and does NOT represent PCNA or PAG-
But first - What warranty does Porsche Motorsports offer? NONE! They make/sell "track" cars. I sell "street" cars.
If a customer buys a car from me I tell them the factory warranty is 4 years / 50,000 miles from the original sales date and covers all defects in parts and workmanship. Full details are in the Warranty booklet in the Owners' Manual portfolio.
PCNA provides a warranty to show they stand behind their products based on how they are expecting them to be used and to "take ownership" of and remedy any mistakes in production.
There are many things that could put more strain on a component than was originally intended.
The 1997 Boxster was not designed to run with ultra-low profile 18" wheels. The impact from bumps could damage the chassis so would void that portion of the warranty and PCNA would not cover the repair. But there's no impact on the engine or electronics so they would still be covered. Subsequent chasis were reinforced and now we even have 19" wheels. (see - they ARE paying attention to what customers want!)
Sticky "slicks" could cause excessive wear to the steering system, a racing seat might not work properly with factory seat belts, a racing suspension could lead to cracks in the chassis, drilled holes for a harness could cause cosmetic damage not covered by a "warranty." Missed shifts / overrevs could damage the engine, hitting the Q's swail too hard could cause damage to oil pan, suspension or chassis. Life expectancy of clutch, tires, brake pads and rotors are shorter. "Slammed" shifts can damage the shifter housing.... But I don't think there are ANY surprises here!
a - yes unless there was obvious excessive use or acted upon by an outside influence.
b - no!
c - no!
d - Warranty is not voided. Components that are damaged by outside forces are not covered. Defects in parts and workmanship are covered.
Keep in mind the GT3 is still a "street" car. One example would be the plastic shifter housing v/s a GT3RS metal housing. But the plastic housing doesn't chatter or vibrate so which one is better? Which costs more to design and engineer? GT3 has a warranty, RS doesn't! GT3 gets an oild change every 15,000 miles, RS WAAY more often. Our engine should last 150,000 miles + before rebuild, RS 10 hours!!! Who should pay more? I'll let this group decide ;^)
And Mike - FWIW - We just double checked in the PCNA computer system and found your warranty is NOT cancelled. They did already cover it once, they just won't cover an ADDITIONAL steering rack if needed. Yours wasn't faulty, it was worn out LOL Rest of the car no issues ;^)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 102 guests