Danno

"One thing to remember though- many cars don't actually come to production as they are originally advertised. Oftentimes, tested prototypes are faster"

Yeah, just like when the SupraTT first came out. C&D had the first test and they pulled a 0-60 time of 4.6s and 1/4-mile in 13.1s @ 109mph! WOW! But all the later testers got 4.8-5.1 0-60 times and 13.2-13.4s 1/4-miles. Can we say RINGER!

special tool

Anyone who has taken apart and put together Porsches and any other make can attest to the better build quality. Porsche does things that make even BMW look like junks. They use triple square bolts on the cv's so you CAN'T reuse them (or you'd be real stupid to), and BMW uses regular allen heads that guys reuse - and they fall out. Bmw doesn't put 700 friggin heat shields on one car, either. Porsche doesn't have to do these things, but they do - you get what you pay for. And I don't want to even get started on US cars.
Second thought, maybe I will get started. I had to put in a new hub assembly (totally sealed $259.01 unit to save install time) on my 2000 38,000 mile Chevy POS 3/4 4x4 pickup. Front driver side ate it's bearing - what century is this? The steering colum also rattles like a Brazilian musical instrument. The 6 liter engine burns 2 quarts in 3000 miles (6 liters, 300 hp. - dispicably low output to be burning oil) This fing thing cost $35,000. It is a piece of f-ing sht - the third door slaps around when you close it. And lest any Ford dummy give me a wiseguy response, I have a friend with a 2001 350 that has had tranny work done twice, turbo seals and rear main. They are all junks, period.

The Al Show

MY OPINION ON GERMAN ENGINEERING
Bob S. I think your confusing engineering with manufactuing.Or maybe you haven't had enough experience with non-Porsche cars.
I'm an old hot rodder who used to hate any imports. Having owned a 356 didn't change my mind. I still can't accept a rear engine Porsche as a great car. There's just too much weight in the back. It is the best engineered rear engine car made but not my kind of car.I thought the 924 was a step in the right direction but with the underpowered 4 cyl VW engine it just seemed doomed to fail. I was suprised by how much power the the 944/924S engine could squeeze out of 4 cylinders. That is where the german engineering has American carmakers beat. It depends on the priorities of the Engineering department. If your boss wants you to design a car that can be mass produced cheaply and be easy to service thats where your focus is. If the boss wants a car that handles and performs better than any other car in it's class you design something like a 944 Porsche. I own around 50 cars and the 924S is the only import in my collection. Unless you count my 89 T-bird that was made in Canada. American car owners need to re-engineer the suspension and engine to get the performance that comes as standard equipment on a Porsche. The special edition cars like the Neon SRT are just designed as an afterthought with bolt on horsepower not engineered performance.
The worst engineering I have ever seen on an import is the brake system on a Rolls Royce/Bentley. After rebuilding them it was still a scary experience. The owner said they were better than they had ever been.

Snel

I must add my thoughts of the Neon SRT-4 to all of yours. It has been 16 years since my 951 was manufactured. Given the fact that it still makes others look slow and retarded I am more than pleased with its 7500 dollar price tag from six years ago. I would hate to lose a race to a 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4 especially when I consider the stereotype that is built in my mind towards the typical american car owners (not to mention rice and neon lit junkies.) Yet, the 951 was not designed to drag race. It still shines in its balance of power, handling, STYLE, and poise. Also, I get over thirty mpg on the freeway at or over the speed limit. For me not to mouth off with colorful explicatives I must simple think of how many years this 951 has ran trouble free and how well it has done it. There are pioneers and there are technology freeloaders. Porsche AG has been one of the few pioneers for many decades. I hope their increased profits and the lost of Ferry does not change their mission of heritage.

As for the NEON SRT-4, amazing numbers for under $20,000. IT IS 2003! I just wonder (like many others) if the integrity will really be there.

Ken D

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by Danno:
[QB
Yeah, just like when the SupraTT first came out. C&D had the first test and they pulled a 0-60 time of 4.6s and 1/4-mile in 13.1s @ 109mph! WOW! But all the later testers got 4.8-5.1 0-60 times and 13.2-13.4s 1/4-miles. Can we say RINGER![/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Or the ever-classic GTO vs GTO in Car & Driver, where the Pontiac out-accelerated the Ferrari by posting a supposed 4.6 sec 0-60 time. That was one heavily breathed-on Goat...

Red 944

I think I'm definately going to take one for a test drive. I bet it's a fun little car

fpena944

Turby,

If you feel bad about a Neon beating you, remember that your car is 17 years old. So it took Detroit 1/5th of a century to match your performance figures? Not at all impressive...

Lumbergs Lackey....MmmmKay

Not to mention that the Neon will get spanked in the getting booty category. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Douglas_T

The Dodge & Chrysler products have had alot of tranny iproblem/issues. How is a tranny going to hold up on that car? These kids will be all in the service dept talking about the next race...I could have beat that Vette or Porsche if only my tranny would have held up....sheesh...

Luke

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by Kierf - ¿§?:
<strong>The SRT-4 is way under rated.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Manufacturer's Claimed Horsepower : 215 hp @ 5400 rpm
Manufacturer's Claimed Torque : 245 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
HP as measured at the wheels : 223 hp @ 5600 rpm
Torque as measured at the wheels : 250 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm
Redline : 6000 rpm </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Rated at 215, but put down 223 at the wheels? </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">who told you this? Once the SRT-4's ecu see more than 245 lbs/ft of torque is shuts down!

Turby

fpena944,
One did not(would not) beat me. Although I did lose a drag to a modded AWD talon turbo in a stock 951. Obvisly our cars are superior, but it is kinda cool that these "regular" cars are getting some good HP.

Bob S. 1984 Silver

Al:

I have been around since God was a kid...Have worked on all makes of American and Foreign cars since the early 60s...Even had a 1966 Corvair Corsa (turboed) that I owned for 25 years. Until we relocated, my wife drove a 1987 Sundance. Couldn't pry the keys out of her little grubhooks. She sold it for $500 in 2001 with 137k on the clock. During all that time I replaced (1 radiator, two sensors, and of course brakes, shocks, and (in the Northeast, a nearly annual event) exhaust systems. I still disagree that the engineering of any car is vastly better than any other; it is the execution that makes the difference in durability. Mechanical engineering is mechanical engineering. Bean counters are bean counters. I had a 924 as well. Aenemic to be sure, but put in in context of the times. It was designed during the time that gas was becomeing dear and the EPA was beginning to flex its muscles. However, this does not excuse the clutch housing design which is fine for initial build at the factory, but a nightmare to the aftermarket. In addition, How does one explain the timing belt problem in the 944? How does one justify a design that rquires a $500 tool to adjust the belt to prevent $2,000 worth of repairs? At least in my 924 I could (and did) change the belt on the side of the road one night. How does one explain the need to remove any number of parts on later iterations of the 911 design to do a simple oil change? These examples may be excellent examples of engineering theory, but they make the vehicle less servicable than just about any other car, forcing the owner into the waiting arms of a dealer who can really put a dent in their credit card!!! A large part of the problem may be the folks who make the financial decisions, forcing design compromises. But, there were very basic engineering flaws in the 944 that were never corrected over the 9+ year run. How about # two bearing journal and the poor placement of the oil hole? Yes, I like the body design of every Porsche (well, the jury is out on the Cayenne), and my 944 looks great even standing still. Which it does a lot, since I am somewhat of a perfectionist. I like to tear apart and innovate more than I enjoy driving. Tinkering improves at least one member of the breed....

My early engineering career was spent in the research labs of GM. I know just what happens when the engineer gets it right and the accounting department says to make it cheaper. Obviously, both quality and servicability suffer...

Finally (and please forgive me)...If the Neon model in question had an additional say $5,000 worth of stiffening and refinement, it would still be less than half the cost of what the 944 would cost if manufactured today. So where is the added value?

Not looking for an argument, just stating an opinion. Love the cars..They are a challenge to keep in top notch condition!!!

Cheers!!

Bob S.

Robby

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by Bob S. 1984 Silver:
Finally (and please forgive me)...If the Neon model in question had an additional say $5,000 worth of stiffening and refinement, it would still be less than half the cost of what the 944 would cost if manufactured today</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Actually, truth be told, the Turbo S cost ~$50K in '89- THAT was 14yrs ago!

I've been on both sides of the fence w/my Porsche- I've loved it AND hated it- felt it was an engineering marvel AND the worst POS ever made. In the end, I believe that much of the way a car will stay together is due to the way they are maintained. Several have said how creak-free these cars are- even cabs- I have not seen this- my car makes a lot of little noises- especially over RR crossings, etc, but part of that can be attributed to the hatchback design, AND, the fact that it's 15yrs old and 12 of those yrs were spent in the hands of jack-asses- I try not to blame it on the car

Bob S. 1984 Silver

Yikes!!

Didn't know the price was that high. I agree with you on the hatchback design, although for usefulness, this wide opening clamshell is about the best design out there. I do wish they had done something similar to the Camaro with the hinges bolted directly to the glass instead of to the thin aluminum frame.

So what would that $50k translate to in today's dollars? Sounds like it would be in excess of $75. Does that sound right? Man, that sounds like a lot of kopeks for a four cylinder car. Maybe that is why the later models are so scarce, what with a price like that!! Has the price of the Boxster risen comparably each year? Will the company price that model out of existence soon as well?

Most of the noises in my '44 seem to be related to the dash and the aforementioned rear hatch. Engine noise is nil, but I did replace the sound deadening hood pad a few years ago. I tried it without, and it was a tad noisier. I will admit the body is stiff, and seems moreso since I replaced every suspension bushing including the motormounts a year ago. Like I said, as far as running gear, I am somewhat fanatical. Interestingly, my wife's old Sundance when we lived in Roachester NY, although it suffered through 13 winters and had some minor rust was fairly rattle free (also a hatchback). And, you ain't seen potholes until you have driven in the rustbelt in late winter after umpteen freeze-thaw cycles-more like tank traps!!

I agree with Robb on maintenance, thinking that most of us Porsche owners, even with so called "entry level vehicles" (that is what the local PCA chapter told me) do tend to take much better care of them than folks with Hondas, Nissans, or Neons. And, I do think that is a huge factor in the longevity of most Porsches.

Cheers, folks..

Bob S.

Robby

Yeah, my '88 Turbo S's window sticker shows ~$46K (I'd have to dig it up for the exact price), which is a little cheaper than most I've compared to- I know the '89's were a little steeper. The magazine "as tested" prices in 1988 were:

MT- $47,432
R&T- $48,060
C&D- $48,350

So, I would say that you're pretty damn close in assuming that it would run ~$75K now. One thing to remember though, is that back then, this was one of the hotter cars out there- now days, due to competition, technilogical advancements, etc, the average car is closer to a Turbo S than it was in '88/'89, therefore, to keep competitive in the market, the price has had to go down, while the performance has had to come up. The Boxster S is as strong & impressive a car as the Turbo S (although I'm not much of a Boxster fan AND the aftermarket bang for the buck isn't near what the 951's is) and what are they running? I think they're in the $55K range... At any rate, it's a lot of $ to justify- even in '96, an M3 was ~$40K and could hang w/a Turbo S everywhere except for top speed- well, I like the interior of 951's much better, but still. It's not really a thing that can be justified anyway I guess. Afterall, cars, no matter which ones, are some of the worst investments we regularly make. But what a dif it can make to keep one well mainatained...

Oh yeah, I'm getting mostly noise (squeaking, etc) from the hatch & sunroof, as well as a little wind noise- I'd love to re-paint & re-seal the entire car, but...$$$$$ <img border="0" alt="[crying]" title="" src="graemlins/crying.gif" />

<img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" />