rawky

Bad: The rear hatch release mechanism! Silly Design!!

jon928se

No Rumour - by 75mm - from Anatole (Tony) Lapine at Euro 928 2002.

Mike Frye

On the upside, I'd say that clearly the design was not built with 'obsolescence' in mind. It was built to be serviced with parts that seem to have been designed with no regard to cost. In most cases all of the functional parts are made to the tightest tolerances, out of top quality materials. This is a double-edged sword in some cases, but it shows that quality was the overriding factor in engineering the parts and the design.

Safety: The car is inherently extremely safe and the design elements are incorporated in a way that didn't sacrifice the look or function of the car. Instead of using real bumpers, they figured out how to paint the plastic bumper covers with a paint formula that wasn't widely used on cars at the time. In the rear, the spare tire is actually part of the crash worthiness design. 'Crumple zones' were first introduced in the 928. All of it contributes to an extremely safe car, especially for it's time.

The transaxle is my favorite part of my car. Replace the front of the exhaust system with a set of crossovers and you don't just add lots of power, but it makes it possible to change your clutch without dropping the exhaust system or any part of the drivetrain.

For me, the engineering of the car seems like it all contributes to the whole. Everything contributes to the design and there are no parts that don't (with the exception of a few US federally mandated pieces ).

The downsides are just functions of the upsides. When you have a car that's designed without regard to cost, you're going to pay through the nose for each unique part that doesn't exist in any other model on the planet. You want a 928, you're going to pay for it one way or another.

Lizard928

There are a few componants that could have been designed better with what we have availible to us today. But overall these cars are engineered properly and not thrown together like the cars today.

I constantly see people complaining about things where if they looked at 99% of the cars built from that same period they would not be complaining about. Yes these cars do have some leaks, nothing compaired to a car of similar vintage that hasnt been completely gone over.

But I do agree on the tranny fluid being a bugger to change. But then again I think we should all just have manuals and that autos should not be allowed!

123quattro

That is one of the very neat features of these cars. On a C5/C6 Vette you have to remove the rear subframe and trans to pull the clutch, and then get an alignment.

On the downside though, the engine is way too heavy for what it is. It needs to loose 100+ pounds.

hacker-pschorr

Suspension maybe, drive train not so much.

Pontiac had a very similar front engine / rear transmission drive train in the Tempest back in 1961.
The biggest difference is the Tempest used a 3/4" flexible steel drive shaft. It rode on bearings inside a solid steel box which connected the engine to the transmission.