Curated Content Editor

The 5 Worst Porsches Ever Made According to Some Enthusiasts
By Brett Foote

Nightfly

The 911 is clearly the worst Porsche. Hear me out. At the time it was introduced, Porsche clearly knew that the mid engine design was a better platform. The 1962 F1 car was built around the mid engine design because it was the best engineering known at the time, and all their newer sports prototypes were also mid engine, and would be from then on. Yet, the company continued to plot their road car around a REAR engine design, even knowing that performance wise, it wasn't the best choice, saddled with handling quirks that it didn't need to be. Which perpetuated the use of it to this day. Who knows, if they had gone with a mid engine design back then, how much in the automotive world would have changed. Instead, the Porsche faithful are stuck with a vehicle that has it's roots planted in the dark ages of automotive design. Blasphemy, I know. But it's the truth.

I am the Walrus

#1 on their list reminded me of this;

"Bruce Dern ain't you got somewhere you gotta be" lol

iJeremy

Really scratching my head as to how this article even belongs on an enthusiast's forum? Seems like click-bait if anything and no reason to argue why some folks pride and joy is worse than others. Stirring the pot doesn't do much for the sense of community here IB.

Jack-Porsche

Seems like a weird topic for a forum to promote. Why should we argue over This?
Also, who proof reads this stuff? Boxster was misspelled multiple times!

black944 turbo

This article has to be one of the most rediculous things I have read in a long time. Many of the cars on the list are very very good and I would argue some of the better Porsches ever made.

boingolover

Is it sad I'm just relieved that for once the 996 Carrera wasn't on such a list?

Sue Esponte

I'd like to nominate this piece (of crap) as one of the 5 worst articles ever posted on Rennlist. If it weren't for the fact that the 996 was left off the list, I'd call it cliche.

The qualifications provided for each of the cars was weak, at best.

I'm trying to understand why the original Boxster qualifies as one of the worst. Is it because it was a "tremendous success," "inexpensive," "fun to drive," had a "mid-engine" configuration with a "low center of gravity?" Was it the car's "near neutral handling" and "almost 50/50 weight distribution?" Or, did you have so few options that decent cars had to be listed because...let's be honest...the entire article lacks any real merit.

Oh, no, sorry, it was the "7.6 seconds" that it took to hit 60mph that really killed it. FWIW, that's the time it took the Tiptronic version to hit 60. I'm assuming the author isn't competent at driving a stick or he's just looking for a reason to knock the Boxster because the manual version's 6.9 sec 0-60 time is actually decent for 1996, especially against competitors like the Z3, the Z3, the Z3 and...the Miata? Yeah, "early engines had problems" but show me an older Porsche whose "early engines" didn't have problems of one sort or another.

By the way, a 911 Targa Tip took 7.1 sec to do its 0-60 run back in '96, too.

I'll spare you the sarcastic look at the other cars and even take @nightfly's post a step further by offering up the 993 as the worst Porsche ever made. Why? Because it nearly put the company out of business. How's that for credentials?

-Eric

FWIW, I love the 993 and the 996...and, pretty much all things Porsche.

rpk55

Geeez, No wonder I've been feeling blue already this year. I have two of these awful cars and didn't really know how bad they were until this professional let us all know. Would someone please come get my Bumblebee and my 986S? Might as well take the SC too because I'm sure it's not up to the experts high level of expectations.
I feel better already.