Where's the 959?
04-07-2007, 02:17 PM
#31
Advanced
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is one that was on the road. These pictures were taken last year on the way back from Oxford, Ohio from the P2O gathering..
The 959 is owned by the Taj ma Garaj. The website is.....
www.tajmagaraj.com
The 959 is owned by the Taj ma Garaj. The website is.....
www.tajmagaraj.com
04-08-2007, 08:14 AM
#35
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by adixon
Here is one that was on the road. These pictures were taken last year on the way back from Oxford, Ohio from the P2O gathering..
The 959 is owned by the Taj ma Garaj. The website is.....
www.tajmagaraj.com
The 959 is owned by the Taj ma Garaj. The website is.....
www.tajmagaraj.com
04-08-2007, 04:24 PM
#37
Intermediate
Join Date: May 2004
Location: dayton, ohio
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cobalt
I find it funny how he can have such an extensive collection and get just about all his facts wrong about some rare models he owns. His facts on his 94 turbo S are particularly off.
"Yep, that annoyed me too"
Gentlemen,
Ordinarily I don't respond to Taj bashing, but I am in this particular instance.
It wasn't my intention to get either one of your butts up in the air. Minutia such as this that disturbs you is most usually posted by the webmaster.
What is listed about them doesn't change the fact that they are special P-cars in any way shape or form.
The more important fact is that they are really garaged there, at least from my perspective.
When the misinformation on the site has you really ready to pull your hair out, simply go to Taj Foolery and relieve some of your stress.
Some of the humor to be found there is reportedly enjoyed by many.
If that still isn't enough, you can contact me directly, at www.tajmagaraj.com, with the proper information, as you know it to be, and we'll give it a look.
Or you can still continue to kick my tires. It's all right by me.
Best Regards,
John
04-08-2007, 07:17 PM
#38
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tejas
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saved the Taj thing on DVR when it was on the speed channel. J Dixon seems like a cool guy. Eric McKenna posts on the Pelican forum all the time and he was the one driving the car that day. One lucky guy as his father in law is J Dixon if I recall.
04-09-2007, 11:29 AM
#40
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by dixons993
quote: nathanUK '81 930 G50
"Yep, that annoyed me too"
Gentlemen,
Ordinarily I don't respond to Taj bashing, but I am in this particular instance.
It wasn't my intention to get either one of your butts up in the air. Minutia such as this that disturbs you is most usually posted by the webmaster.
What is listed about them doesn't change the fact that they are special P-cars in any way shape or form.
The more important fact is that they are really garaged there, at least from my perspective.
When the misinformation on the site has you really ready to pull your hair out, simply go to Taj Foolery and relieve some of your stress.
Some of the humor to be found there is reportedly enjoyed by many.
If that still isn't enough, you can contact me directly, at www.tajmagaraj.com, with the proper information, as you know it to be, and we'll give it a look.
Or you can still continue to kick my tires. It's all right by me.
Best Regards,
John
"Yep, that annoyed me too"
Gentlemen,
Ordinarily I don't respond to Taj bashing, but I am in this particular instance.
It wasn't my intention to get either one of your butts up in the air. Minutia such as this that disturbs you is most usually posted by the webmaster.
What is listed about them doesn't change the fact that they are special P-cars in any way shape or form.
The more important fact is that they are really garaged there, at least from my perspective.
When the misinformation on the site has you really ready to pull your hair out, simply go to Taj Foolery and relieve some of your stress.
Some of the humor to be found there is reportedly enjoyed by many.
If that still isn't enough, you can contact me directly, at www.tajmagaraj.com, with the proper information, as you know it to be, and we'll give it a look.
Or you can still continue to kick my tires. It's all right by me.
Best Regards,
John
Don't get me wrong, the collection is very nicely put together and the cars are all quite unique. You have great taste. Any of us would love to have the means to put a collection like this together. I am sure they are all part of the collection. I was not commenting on the cars but the content which has many incorrect statements. If it were my collection I would personally verify that every fact was as accurate as possible, however, that is me. It is not my job to point this out on the Taj site. IMO it is the webmasters responsibility to do the appropriate research to verify the info is correct otherwise don't post statements based on hearsay about a model that are incorrect. Many people look at a site like this and read the posted info as gospel. As you know it is a big responsibility to keep the info accurate.
We have had many discussions on the 964 turbo board and the flachbau is a tremendous car, unfortunately they only produced the 385 HP as claimed by the factory and they definitely do not do sub 4.0 sec 0-60 times. Even at less Hp than some newer turbo models they were very fast and still hold their own today. www.flachbau.com has all the info needed.
You will find on Rennlist if something is not listed with the correct info it has a tendency to be called on, which is what I did. I was not intending to offend just point out the obvious about info that was more than just slightly off. I see nothing wrong with what I did and I feel I would have enjoyed the site better if the facts were accurate with more pictures of the cars.
I made a comment the other day about someone selling a 94 turbo 3.6 and the ad claimed only 90 imported into the US. We all know that number is way low and even with only 409 stock 3.6T's imported it is still a relatively low production Porsche. I am not going to contact the seller and tell him he is wrong, although we all know he is.
Thank you for the link, if you would like to address the incorrect info I would be more than happy to help. You have a great collection and Kodos to you for trying to share it with the rest, instead of locking it away in a garage out of site from the rest of the world.
04-09-2007, 08:31 PM
#41
Intermediate
Join Date: May 2004
Location: dayton, ohio
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cobalt
John,
Don't get me wrong, the collection is very nicely put together and the cars are all quite unique. You have great taste. Any of us would love to have the means to put a collection like this together. I am sure they are all part of the collection. I was not commenting on the cars but the content which has many incorrect statements. If it were my collection I would personally verify that every fact was as accurate as possible, however, that is me. It is not my job to point this out on the Taj site. IMO it is the webmasters responsibility to do the appropriate research to verify the info is correct otherwise don't post statements based on hearsay about a model that are incorrect. Many people look at a site like this and read the posted info as gospel. As you know it is a big responsibility to keep the info accurate.
We have had many discussions on the 964 turbo board and the flachbau is a tremendous car, unfortunately they only produced the 385 HP as claimed by the factory and they definitely do not do sub 4.0 sec 0-60 times. Even at less Hp than some newer turbo models they were very fast and still hold their own today. www.flachbau.com has all the info needed.
You will find on Rennlist if something is not listed with the correct info it has a tendency to be called on, which is what I did. I was not intending to offend just point out the obvious about info that was more than just slightly off. I see nothing wrong with what I did and I feel I would have enjoyed the site better if the facts were accurate with more pictures of the cars.
I made a comment the other day about someone selling a 94 turbo 3.6 and the ad claimed only 90 imported into the US. We all know that number is way low and even with only 409 stock 3.6T's imported it is still a relatively low production Porsche. I am not going to contact the seller and tell him he is wrong, although we all know he is.
Thank you for the link, if you would like to address the incorrect info I would be more than happy to help. You have a great collection and Kodos to you for trying to share it with the rest, instead of locking it away in a garage out of site from the rest of the world.
Don't get me wrong, the collection is very nicely put together and the cars are all quite unique. You have great taste. Any of us would love to have the means to put a collection like this together. I am sure they are all part of the collection. I was not commenting on the cars but the content which has many incorrect statements. If it were my collection I would personally verify that every fact was as accurate as possible, however, that is me. It is not my job to point this out on the Taj site. IMO it is the webmasters responsibility to do the appropriate research to verify the info is correct otherwise don't post statements based on hearsay about a model that are incorrect. Many people look at a site like this and read the posted info as gospel. As you know it is a big responsibility to keep the info accurate.
We have had many discussions on the 964 turbo board and the flachbau is a tremendous car, unfortunately they only produced the 385 HP as claimed by the factory and they definitely do not do sub 4.0 sec 0-60 times. Even at less Hp than some newer turbo models they were very fast and still hold their own today. www.flachbau.com has all the info needed.
You will find on Rennlist if something is not listed with the correct info it has a tendency to be called on, which is what I did. I was not intending to offend just point out the obvious about info that was more than just slightly off. I see nothing wrong with what I did and I feel I would have enjoyed the site better if the facts were accurate with more pictures of the cars.
I made a comment the other day about someone selling a 94 turbo 3.6 and the ad claimed only 90 imported into the US. We all know that number is way low and even with only 409 stock 3.6T's imported it is still a relatively low production Porsche. I am not going to contact the seller and tell him he is wrong, although we all know he is.
Thank you for the link, if you would like to address the incorrect info I would be more than happy to help. You have a great collection and Kodos to you for trying to share it with the rest, instead of locking it away in a garage out of site from the rest of the world.
Anthony,
Your points are very well made. The specifications listed on the Taj website with regard to the Turbo S are being temporarily removed. The information that you and Nathan referred to were, in fact, for the 1997 Twin Turbo, not the Flachbau.
The site, www.flachbau.com, is very informative, but I was unable to find the specifics in a similar format as to the ones used on the Taj Ma Garaj website.
However, the site has about everything else you ever wanted to know about these special cars. Not surprisingly my car, #480442, is listed there.
You are more than welcome to send me the correct information or where it/they can be found.
In any case, we won't post the specifications for the 1994 Turbo S until we know them to be the right ones. It's one thing to be wrong or off just a bit, it's entirely different to confuse one car with another.
Thanks for your interest in the Taj website, it is appreciated. You and Nathan should know we never claimed to be completely accurate.
It begs to be pointed out that there are times that when incorrect information can be beneficial. There is a very good reason my wife is such a bad judge of size and distance, but that was intentional.
Thanks,
John
04-10-2007, 10:53 AM
#42
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by dixons993
Anthony,
Your points are very well made. The specifications listed on the Taj website with regard to the Turbo S are being temporarily removed. The information that you and Nathan referred to were, in fact, for the 1997 Twin Turbo, not the Flachbau.
The site, www.flachbau.com, is very informative, but I was unable to find the specifics in a similar format as to the ones used on the Taj Ma Garaj website.
However, the site has about everything else you ever wanted to know about these special cars. Not surprisingly my car, #480442, is listed there.
You are more than welcome to send me the correct information or where it/they can be found.
In any case, we won't post the specifications for the 1994 Turbo S until we know them to be the right ones. It's one thing to be wrong or off just a bit, it's entirely different to confuse one car with another.
Thanks for your interest in the Taj website, it is appreciated. You and Nathan should know we never claimed to be completely accurate.
It begs to be pointed out that there are times that when incorrect information can be beneficial. There is a very good reason my wife is such a bad judge of size and distance, but that was intentional.
Thanks,
John
Your points are very well made. The specifications listed on the Taj website with regard to the Turbo S are being temporarily removed. The information that you and Nathan referred to were, in fact, for the 1997 Twin Turbo, not the Flachbau.
The site, www.flachbau.com, is very informative, but I was unable to find the specifics in a similar format as to the ones used on the Taj Ma Garaj website.
However, the site has about everything else you ever wanted to know about these special cars. Not surprisingly my car, #480442, is listed there.
You are more than welcome to send me the correct information or where it/they can be found.
In any case, we won't post the specifications for the 1994 Turbo S until we know them to be the right ones. It's one thing to be wrong or off just a bit, it's entirely different to confuse one car with another.
Thanks for your interest in the Taj website, it is appreciated. You and Nathan should know we never claimed to be completely accurate.
It begs to be pointed out that there are times that when incorrect information can be beneficial. There is a very good reason my wife is such a bad judge of size and distance, but that was intentional.
Thanks,
John
Mark S who goes by the name Flachbau on Rennlist. He has spent considerable time compiling all the info for the Flachbau site. I am sure he would be more than happy to provide you with the most accurate info possible. You can contact him through the flachbau site.
I will look at the other areas in the site, which sound interesting. I wish you the best with the collection. Are you planning on adding anything else? If I find anything I can be of help with I will pass it along.
Regards,
Anthony
04-10-2007, 02:16 PM
#43
Advanced
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anthony,
JD's latest purschase was a 997 GT3RS, with ac/delete ( as it should be seeing that it's an RS ) Orange / black. It's a stunning machine to see in person.. pictures do it NO justice!
It's perhaps the best one in the collection, IMHO. If I were to exclude the 1973 911RS and the 1955 550.
Stunning car John!
JD's latest purschase was a 997 GT3RS, with ac/delete ( as it should be seeing that it's an RS ) Orange / black. It's a stunning machine to see in person.. pictures do it NO justice!
It's perhaps the best one in the collection, IMHO. If I were to exclude the 1973 911RS and the 1955 550.
Stunning car John!
04-10-2007, 02:47 PM
#44
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by adixon
Anthony,
JD's latest purschase was a 997 GT3RS, with ac/delete ( as it should be seeing that it's an RS ) Orange / black. It's a stunning machine to see in person.. pictures do it NO justice!
It's perhaps the best one in the collection, IMHO. If I were to exclude the 1973 911RS and the 1955 550.
Stunning car John!
JD's latest purschase was a 997 GT3RS, with ac/delete ( as it should be seeing that it's an RS ) Orange / black. It's a stunning machine to see in person.. pictures do it NO justice!
It's perhaps the best one in the collection, IMHO. If I were to exclude the 1973 911RS and the 1955 550.
Stunning car John!
Very Nice!! My first color choice too.
04-10-2007, 03:02 PM
#45
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cobalt
Very Nice!! My first color choice too.