Porsche: For E Brown - OT

I wasn't asked, but I'll weigh in:

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.

Just my 2 cents

"Devils944S2" <net> wrote in message
news:com... 

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:36:27 -0800, "Devils944S2"
<net> 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
--
2003 BMW 325i Black/Black
2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black

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.

"Weekend Guru" <HD net> wrote in message
news:%sOAf.20085$news.prodigy.net... 

E Brown wrote:
 

I accept my delusions with open arms, thank you very much.

DS
95 993 Deluded Coupe

Hey Dead, I don't think he meant it in a derogatory way, probably just a
little frustrated. Porsche does have this history of "holding back" some of
their other creations to "protect" the 911. I mean we never got to see the
968 Turbo S in this country because that thing, in 1994, was going 0-62 in
something like 4.7 seconds.
I like the fact that Porsche retains the car that made them famous. But I
also see E's point.
Me personally...looking at 993 Cabs already...love the look of that
particular 911...so I will be joining you in the delusional club.
"The Dead Senator" <com> wrote in message
news:com... 

"Devils944S2" <net> wrote in message
news:com... 

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.
 

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:37:41 -0800, "Jim Keenan" <net>
wrote: 

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
--
2003 BMW 325i Black/Black
2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black

E Brown wrote:
 

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.