911 Club Coupe

[MikeD]

I don't think any of us who drive the newer cars have any less passion than you guys - although maybe we have less discretionary income to spend on car mods and racing.

Oh brother . Kim, I was talking about Porsche the company, not owerns. Thought that was pretty obvious, but I guess not.

[Bob Gagnon]

Kim-

Please don't get me wrong I don't think YOU and other late Porsche owners are not passionate; I just don't think the cars are created with the same passion by their makers as they were some years ago.

A passion for profit, but not a passion for building something cool from a gearheads point of view.

The point is not that the cars are faster or slower, it's what is inside when you take them apart. One either appreciates this or doesn't. Most apparently don't, or Porsche would not build some of them the way they do. Their per unit profit margin is the highest in the industry by a long ways, around 30% average per vehicle when most makers are way under 10%. Porsche could give a little more and make a little less, especially now that they are solvent.
They don't have to because, as you point out, very few appreciate it and they are in the business to make money.

The point is the old 911's are taken apart and made faster because they can be taken apart and made faster. Some of us enjoy doing this, some don't. You can't do this on the garden variety 996 and Boxster cars today, the GT3, Turbo and GT2 can be taken apart and made faster though.

I bet if Porsche felt heat from some competition or an existing market that demanded it, they would build better cars for the same price.

[Kim Crosser]

Oh brother . Kim, I was talking about Porsche the company, not owerns. Thought that was pretty obvious, but I guess not.

Uh, I kinda got that - my reply was a bit tongue in cheek too (note the green with envy guy at the end).

I look at Porsche and see a company that makes a bunch of affordable and fun street cars (Boxsters, Carreras, Cayennes), some more or less affordable almost race cars (GT3, GT2, Cup Cars, etc.), and an exotic high-end sports/race car (CGT).

For $50-100K, you can get a really nice street car that you can play with on the track (and maybe even embarass some older 911's ). For $100-175K, you can get some pretty effective race cars - some of which are streetable. And if you want the ultimate, for $440K, you can get a full-on, ultimate technology uber-car.

So, complaining that the affordable street cars aren't built like race cars doesn't make sense to me. If you want the race car, buy the race car model - don't expect Porsche to make their street cars into race cars for you...

[kary]

Kim, quit using logic and reason and facts, throw terms like passion, quality and feel into the argument, you know the terms with no meaning that advertiser and politicians use to death, they are the only way to explain why the old cars are better

Jad, those terms that you find useless are why Porsche is getting away with selling these cars today. This will change over time when people realize that their cars are not like those of the first 35 years to so. Porsche can only ride that wave so long. Also, if you think having a JD Powers rating is important, remember that Porsche never really cared in the past about such ratings as they just built cars that worked and they took care of any issues if there were issues, so worrying about these industry ratings is just dumbing down the stature of Porsche to the lesser makers. This allows those makers to catch up when the difference before would have been impossible to bridge. But then that is again wht the average public wants, to feel that they have a rating rather than a quality car.

Also, when Kim provides some facts that are on topic I am happy to discuss. His opening paragraph about the high volume $1000 computer really cracks me up because that is exactly what I see in the new Porsche cars, high volume, low quality, but not low price.

If folks think that because their cars are faster as an argument for better, come on out and tracjk your car, we will see who is still running over time, but then you will find that out on the street in due time like so many have with engine and tranny failures.

Kim, there is a really great page which I post each time I post event results that provide database reporting on how many cars are in events, how many cars of each class, and how many people participate in competition events. Try looking at it and you will there are far more than 125 people participating. Your numbers are more accurate for time trial only, auto-x is far beyond your numbers alone.

Bob, you have been on topic and right on the money all through this thread, your comments are accurate, experienced, and without emotion, BRAVO!!!

[kary]

So, complaining that the affordable street cars aren't built like race cars doesn't make sense to me. If you want the race car, buy the race car model - don't expect Porsche to make their street cars into race cars for you...

As noted earlier, you clearly do not understand where Porsche made its mark which has allowed them to enjoy the success they have.

Unfortunately there are many folks like yourself that are fueling the change in Porsche, but you have to understand where they were to understand where they are now.

[Kim Crosser]

Hi Kary - minor point, but I said "racers in PCASDR". Yes, there are more than 125 persons participating, but our AXs usually draw quite a few drivers from neighboring regions. Even if the number is really 150, or (pretty unlikely) 200, that is still only 7.5-10%.

Also, I understand that when Porsche was a 1-car or 2-car brand, the cars used lots of interchangeable parts, and enthusiasts could easily tweak their cars by replacing parts, whereas the more modern cars aren't easy to work on. When was the last time ANY make of production car was easy to modify? I stripped my 1972 MGB roadster down to the bare block and rebuilt it without help, but how can anyone do that on any current car without a fortune in electronic tools?

You complain that Porsche has moved away from what made them a success, yet on the face of it, that statement doesn't make any sense. A few years ago, when Porsche was a small, boutique car shop, they almost went under. Now, they are making record profits by building cars that more and more people want to buy. I think the latter is a better definition of "success" than near-collapse.

Guys, I have to say this sounds a lot like people that complain that a particular band has "gone commercial" when they start making money and selling lots of albums. Yeah - they aren't your private cult car maker anymore, but they must be doing something right...

Ok - any other long term Porsche fanatics that I haven't ticked off yet?

(In case anyone hasn't figured it out yet, I love to play the Devil's Advocate.)

[Jad]

Kary,

You say if Porsche would build a better car, more would buy it. When they built the car your way in the 90's, they couldn't sell any and were going bankrupt. Once the started with the cheap Boxsters and 996's, they have sold a ton and been very profitable-they are a business recall. What do you base this riding on history as the only thing that sells todays Porsche theory?

Bob, you have been accurate as Kary said, but I don't understand why being able to make a GT3 faster, or an old car, makes it a better car? Yes, with modern engine management, the cars are shipped to adapt to run near optimum under all conditions, but how does that make a carb better just because YOU (certainly not me) could adjust the carb to be better for you usage than the factory setting?

Kary,

Still using vague concepts and guesses- JD Powers should be ignore? And your facts justifying this theory? Come out to the track and see who is still running over time - makes a nice political statement, but certainly has no facts or support beyond your opinion. I will happily put my 996 against ANY stock old ORIGINAL 911 - the ones with oil leaks, chain tension failures, overheating, etc. Yes, you can fix all the problems and build a reliable racecar now, but Porsche didn't do anything better then unless you talk RSR or basically unavailable models. You have to heavily modify your 993 to even compete with Boxsters and still most complain they are at a big disadvantage. According to your wild guess, yours may win a 24 hour race with reliability of the turtle versus the hare, but none of us will ever treat our cars that way, so who cares......and maybe a Camry would be even better for reliability since speed doesn't matter

I race an old car cause its cheap and I'm cheap. When we start having big prize money, I will be in a new car for sure.

[ajackson]

It is pretty much always the case that the past was the "golden age" and the stuff now sucks. I remember reading something about how the 356 owners were complaining all day long about the new 911 and how Porsche was losing its soul. Though no one would admit it, I bet in 20 years we'll reminisce about the 996's and how whatever is new then has no soul.

[ttweed]

My question still stands - if the new cars aren't as good as the old cars, how come the new cars are beating the old cars on the track?... (Plop - sound of gauntlet being thrown down.)

A review of the 2004 autox results comparing GSS class with LSS does not support this assertion, Kim. Nor does a review of GS results vs. LS in 2005.
(Whack- sound of gauntlet picked up and slapped across new-car owner cheek.)

TT

[Jad]

The last AX sure does.....and by several seconds.

[ttweed]

The last AX sure does.....and by several seconds.

The last autox was the first one I've missed in the last 2 years, so I would say the data is "anomalous" for that one.

TT

[Jad]

In my stat classes, we generally threw out outliers, so you don't count in any of the results

[ttweed]

In my stat classes, we generally threw out outliers, so you don't count in any of the results

You know what Mark Twain said: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies & statistics."

TT

[Dan Chambers]

My question still stands - if the new cars aren't as good as the old cars, how come the new cars are beating the old cars on the track?... (Plop - sound of gauntlet being thrown down.)

A review of the 2004 autox results comparing GSS class with LSS does not support this assertion, Kim. Nor does a review of GS results vs. LS in 2005.
(Whack- sound of gauntlet picked up and slapped across new-car owner cheek.)

TT

Tom:

You know as well as I that you're scewing the Data Paradigm to fit your argument. You can't compare a National and Regional Award winning driver (you) in GSS to less experienced, less skilled drivers in LSS (sorry, LSS guys, no offense intended). That's like comparing Steve G. in his 914 to a rookie A-X'er in a GT-3 or 997 S. Although statistically, the early 911 (yours) and 914's should be slower than the GT-3/997, other factors prevail. So, playing loose with the data is only argumentitive trickery. (?Ever think of becoming a lawyer? )

Nice try, though...........

Kary:

It's my recollection that Porsche has always built two "types" of auto's: one for street, and one for racing. One was built to be fun, fast, and fairly reliable as well as affordable (Not unlike the 996/GT-3 of today). The other was a street car that was heavily modified for the "rigors" of autoracing.

Off the top of my head, and without referencing books:

1.) 356 A/B/C and the PanAmericana racing coup/550 Spyder
2.) 911 and the RSR
3.) 924 and the 924 GT-S Turbo(?)
4.) 914 and the 914-6 GT

In just about every model Porsche built for the street, they took said street car and modified it for racing. The standard street cars were more or less platforms for their racing bretheren. I'll have to agree with Jad, that given the purely stock early 911's (up to, say the 78 to 82 SC's) and the purely stock newer 993/996/997, the issues of reliability, race-track readiness, and over track performance vs. street performance haven't changed much. As the cars have evolved, their street appeal, their track-rediness, their convertability have been consistant. And as Chris Huck points out, their overall increase in price in real-time inflationary dollars is low to insignificant.

As an owner of an "older" Porsche, and "house mechanic" to 2 "older" Porsches, I can tell you, these are NOT maintenance-free super reliable, never need a thing, turn the key and drive for 300K miles cars. An older Porsche is like dating a super-model: lots of fun to drive, great to been seen on the street with......but require high maintenance and big $$$$.

The way I see it, the more things change, the more they remain the same.

DC

[Kim Crosser]

My question still stands - if the new cars aren't as good as the old cars, how come the new cars are beating the old cars on the track?... (Plop - sound of gauntlet being thrown down.)

A review of the 2004 autox results comparing GSS class with LSS does not support this assertion, Kim. Nor does a review of GS results vs. LS in 2005.
(Whack- sound of gauntlet picked up and slapped across new-car owner cheek.)
TT

Uh, Tom:
(looking at 2005 "street stock" (xSS), considering "old" as classes A-K, except 928S):

9/10 AX - top 14 xSS places are new cars (oldest is a 1991 928, otherwise 993 or later models), first old car 2.6 seconds behind LSS
8/13 AX - top 13 xSS places are Boxster, 993, 996, 997, first old car 4.1 seconds behind top
7/10 AX - top 8 xSS places 993 or later, first old car 3 seconds behind top
6/25 AX - top 14 xSS places are 993 or later, first old car 5.2 seconds behind top
5/15 AX - top 16 xSS places are 993 or later (plus 1991 928 11th), first old car 3.6 seconds behind top
4/30 AX - top 6 xSS places are 993 or later, first old car 3.3 seconds behind top
3/26 AX - top 6 xSS places are 993 or later, first old car 3.75 seconds behind top
1/30 AX - top 8 xSS places are 993 or later, first old car 4 seconds behind top

(thwack, thwack, thwack, ... phew, my arm's getting tired)