So what constitutes a "proper" Porsche then?
Discussion
OK flameproof suit on but I am genuinely curious on this one.
First thing's first I have a new 987 Boxster, had it a couple of months, first Porsche, and the only sort I've ever driven too.
I'd like to think I haven't simply fallen for hype and have brought a car for its engineering/capabilities and not simply the badge on the bonnet - either way it'll take a driver much better than me to push to car even vaguely near its limits.
I've got a decent sense of humour and have no problem at all with people taking the mickey about hairdressers car, gay car, couldn't afford a 911 etc. I waited long enough for the thing so I've probably heard it all
What I'm interested in is some reasons from those who genuinely don't think the Boxster (and I guess the Cayman) are a "proper" or "real" Porsche?
(genuinely curious not sitting in a corner crying as I have a tiny cock and can't afford a real car)
First thing's first I have a new 987 Boxster, had it a couple of months, first Porsche, and the only sort I've ever driven too.
I'd like to think I haven't simply fallen for hype and have brought a car for its engineering/capabilities and not simply the badge on the bonnet - either way it'll take a driver much better than me to push to car even vaguely near its limits.
I've got a decent sense of humour and have no problem at all with people taking the mickey about hairdressers car, gay car, couldn't afford a 911 etc. I waited long enough for the thing so I've probably heard it all
What I'm interested in is some reasons from those who genuinely don't think the Boxster (and I guess the Cayman) are a "proper" or "real" Porsche?
(genuinely curious not sitting in a corner crying as I have a tiny cock and can't afford a real car)
I guess a "real" Porsche, what ever that means, is summed up by the amount of involvement you have with the car whilst driving. My 3.2 Carrera is pretty raw, but certainly not agricultural, and I can feel every single weight shift and road undulation. It also goes like a train and sounds pretty decent too by all accounts.
oh, and REAL Porsches give flame
oh, and REAL Porsches give flame
Edited by burriana on Thursday 14th December 08:22
The Boxster is a 'real' Porsche, in exactly the same way as the Cayman and 997 are 'real' Porsches. They all have sporting DNA, evolved engineering and class leading performance, handling, braking, build quality, etc, etc.
Just read any road tests and you'll understand why it has been such a success.
Just read any road tests and you'll understand why it has been such a success.
jvr said:
ballcocks
Thou shalt not use my name in vain
.. 'Course it's a shaggin real Porsche .. Does anyone remember the Porsche boxster game for PS1 when the car first came out in '97? ...I was addicted to that game , not because the gameplay was particularly inspiring , but it meant I could slaver over the cars lines , and of course ,(virtually) drive a real Porsche .. I still have the game .
It's too easy to forget what a piece of exotica it was , when the boxster first broke cover.
tony.t said:
I guess most of us have our own idea of what a "proper" Porsche is. I always wonder what the factorys idea of what a Porsche should be like.
I find it amusing that Humpty Dumpty was a tiptronic Speedster.
I find it amusing that Humpty Dumpty was a tiptronic Speedster.
Not a question you'd want answered at the moment, I'd say. Porsche still like to make a meal about their 'Philosophy of Ing', but 'Ing' at Porsche these days is short for market'Ing' and account'Ing'. The factory's ideal Porsche today would be something with low development and tooling cost (shared with VW) that could spawn loads of variants, and had a profit margin of 85%. The engineers, if they were allowed to have their way, would no doubt have a different vision, but it would be one that cost too much in R+D for customers that Porsche AG see as being ready to pay the big bucks without all the engineering bruhaha.
loach said:
.. but 'Ing' at Porsche these days is short for market'Ing' and account'Ing'.
It's a sad thought Loach , but most likely true..
Question is , if you want to buy a performance car , either new or second hand , where are you going to go for engineering excellence , handling and (perhaps most importantly to the more impoverished of us!!) outright reliability.
Porsche , even with all it's newly acquired abacus operators , is still top of the league...
.. Or is it??
This is an interesting question with a complex answer:
A 'proper' Porsche would be a vehicle made by Porsche.
A 'fakey plasticky' Porsche would be a car made by a company other than Porsche (take Audi for example). Therefore an A4 Porsche would be considered not to be a 'proper' Porsche.
You're welcome and I will not charge for this information.
Mark
A 'proper' Porsche would be a vehicle made by Porsche.
A 'fakey plasticky' Porsche would be a car made by a company other than Porsche (take Audi for example). Therefore an A4 Porsche would be considered not to be a 'proper' Porsche.
You're welcome and I will not charge for this information.
Mark
hutchingsp said:
What I'm interested in is some reasons from those who genuinely don't think the Boxster (and I guess the Cayman) are a "proper" or "real" Porsche?
The Boxster has its roots in Porsche from the 50's era of the 550 spider, so there is a good history behind it, it's just not continuous (bar the 914/916).ballcock said:
loach said:
.. but 'Ing' at Porsche these days is short for market'Ing' and account'Ing'.
It's a sad thought Loach , but most likely true..
Question is , if you want to buy a performance car , either new or second hand , where are you going to go for engineering excellence , handling and (perhaps most importantly to the more impoverished of us!!) outright reliability.
Porsche , even with all it's newly acquired abacus operators , is still top of the league...
.. Or is it??
No -you're right. It's still the place I'd go for my car in that segment. Which is probably even more depressing than what I originally said. I've had an E46 M3, and though it was brilliant, it wasn't as good as my 996s. Actually, I didn't even like it more than my 993s. The RS4 lacks a sense of occasion, an M5 is a different car altogether, a Ferrari is just wrong for me, Mercs are sh*te, I'd be mortified in a Corvette, a Noble is too much of an unknown quantity, the new Esprit has been shelved etc etc.
Porsche is right. Why bother making carbon-fibre part of the structure? Why bother ditching the cheapo steel panels? Why go to the trouble of developing a new powerplant for the sports car range that doesn't leak oil or blow up? Why bother making thes things 1% better than they need to be in any department, when each 1% improvement in any given area probably shoves R+D costs in that area up 10%, and has a negative impact if any on overall profitability?
Like you point out, ballcock - Porsche's marketing slogan these days shouldn't be so much focused on the engineering behind the cars; it should just be "Well? WTF are you looking at? What else are you gonna buy, dumbass?"
Edited by loach on Thursday 14th December 00:22
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff