Porsche... Pay attention to this
08-27-2018, 12:16 PM
#31
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Robert Linton
I simply thought that as people appear to be interested in restomods, I would point out others
But while all of this is interesting, there still is no definitive answer to the compliance of Singer with any laws, rules, statutes or regulations, including, but not limited to, U.S. Federal and State. And no amount of blowing smoke at me is going to change this.
But while all of this is interesting, there still is no definitive answer to the compliance of Singer with any laws, rules, statutes or regulations, including, but not limited to, U.S. Federal and State. And no amount of blowing smoke at me is going to change this.
08-27-2018, 12:32 PM
#32
The same questions apply to any turner or restomod company. And the same terrible legal scenario could apply to any such company. Perhaps why I have never bought nor will I ever buy such a car. Nor am I now, or have I ever been an investor in (debt or equity) or lender to any such companies.
08-27-2018, 12:44 PM
#33
SJW, a Carin' kinda guy
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
There are very specific regulations on modifying a car in the US. Generally speaking, on a federal level they deal with emissions and VIN fraud.
Beyond that, you can pretty much do what you want. I can’t see how singer would run afoul of any regulations assuming the engines have cats. The main hurdle they have, as I see it, is getting the engine modifications CARB certified.
Beyond that, you can pretty much do what you want. I can’t see how singer would run afoul of any regulations assuming the engines have cats. The main hurdle they have, as I see it, is getting the engine modifications CARB certified.
08-27-2018, 01:21 PM
#34
Collabs with F1 engineering firms can't happen for production cars; it would be too expensive and the margins would be too low (Lexus LFA is a good example of this). Low production and special cars are perfect for insane collaborations because people are willing to pay the price and both companies can make money.
08-27-2018, 01:39 PM
#35
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Robert Linton
The same questions apply to any turner or restomod company. And the same terrible legal scenario could apply to any such company. Perhaps why I have never bought nor will I ever buy such a car. Nor am I now, or have I ever been an investor in (debt or equity) or lender to any such companies.
08-27-2018, 02:24 PM
#36
Race Director
The problem is this forum represents a small group of enthusiasts that would want/pay Porsche to make a smaller, light weight, raw model that would be within reach financially by the majority.
This is why Singer and some others' exist although they cater to the wealthy who do not ask how much would it cost
This is why Singer and some others' exist although they cater to the wealthy who do not ask how much would it cost
08-27-2018, 02:26 PM
#37
It bears repeating: Singer wants $1.8M for the DLS.
Kudos to them for building such beautiful and highly specialized cars, but I fail to see what Porsche should "pay attention to." Porsche's core market and business model require scale that does not easily facilitate hand-building cars for only a few dozen buyers at sky's-the-limit prices. We've all seen how tightly they manage their manufacturing process to keep costs down. Also, as Bob Linton points out, Porsche is not able to skirt around current emissions and safety regulations. I'll let those more technically-inclined opine, but it seems that bringing a 991 or 992 down to anything approaching 2,100 lbs. may simply be legally impossible.
Moreover, Singer is clearly chasing a retro-minded sensibility. There is nothing wrong with that--and, in fact, I quite admire their work. However, Porsche itself has to be very careful about tethering itself too tightly to the past. In addition to building fun, inspiring cars, it has to stay at the front of technology and continue winning races.
So, the R and GT3 are not analogous to the DLS or Singer's other cars, and cannot be, but are they at least the best driver-focused cars Porsche can derive from their mainstream production while keeping prices reasonable? That is the more relevant question.
Kudos to them for building such beautiful and highly specialized cars, but I fail to see what Porsche should "pay attention to." Porsche's core market and business model require scale that does not easily facilitate hand-building cars for only a few dozen buyers at sky's-the-limit prices. We've all seen how tightly they manage their manufacturing process to keep costs down. Also, as Bob Linton points out, Porsche is not able to skirt around current emissions and safety regulations. I'll let those more technically-inclined opine, but it seems that bringing a 991 or 992 down to anything approaching 2,100 lbs. may simply be legally impossible.
Moreover, Singer is clearly chasing a retro-minded sensibility. There is nothing wrong with that--and, in fact, I quite admire their work. However, Porsche itself has to be very careful about tethering itself too tightly to the past. In addition to building fun, inspiring cars, it has to stay at the front of technology and continue winning races.
So, the R and GT3 are not analogous to the DLS or Singer's other cars, and cannot be, but are they at least the best driver-focused cars Porsche can derive from their mainstream production while keeping prices reasonable? That is the more relevant question.
08-27-2018, 05:14 PM
#38
Advanced
Obligatory:
For those that didn't watch the video: Porsche will do what makes them money, as is their right as a business. And they're pretty good at making great, enjoyable cars while doing that. They don't owe us enthusiasts, who are a tiny portion of their market, anything. As evidenced by the fact that they continue to sell record numbers of cars, they have a pretty good handle on what the market wants.
With respect to the safety thing, at the federal level in the US small-volume car manifs are generally exempt from federal safety regulations, but they do this through loopholes related to "kit cars". Signer, even if their cars were classified as "new," would almost certainly fall into this category, just like Ariel does with the Atom. At the state level, rules vary by state. Some are very strict about it. Some aren't. The Fed recently passed more comprehensive regulation on the subject called the Low Volume Motor Vehicle Manufactures Act of 2015. For some reading on the subject, see here: https://blog.myclassicgarage.com/low...e-31490e005cb3. As others have said though, Signer currently gets by by using the body-in-white of an existing vehicle and simply replacing all the parts, which in the US means it's still the 964 donor, not a new vehicle. The fed wasn't really interested in solving the Ship of Theseus Paradox.
For those that didn't watch the video: Porsche will do what makes them money, as is their right as a business. And they're pretty good at making great, enjoyable cars while doing that. They don't owe us enthusiasts, who are a tiny portion of their market, anything. As evidenced by the fact that they continue to sell record numbers of cars, they have a pretty good handle on what the market wants.
With respect to the safety thing, at the federal level in the US small-volume car manifs are generally exempt from federal safety regulations, but they do this through loopholes related to "kit cars". Signer, even if their cars were classified as "new," would almost certainly fall into this category, just like Ariel does with the Atom. At the state level, rules vary by state. Some are very strict about it. Some aren't. The Fed recently passed more comprehensive regulation on the subject called the Low Volume Motor Vehicle Manufactures Act of 2015. For some reading on the subject, see here: https://blog.myclassicgarage.com/low...e-31490e005cb3. As others have said though, Signer currently gets by by using the body-in-white of an existing vehicle and simply replacing all the parts, which in the US means it's still the 964 donor, not a new vehicle. The fed wasn't really interested in solving the Ship of Theseus Paradox.
Last edited by aruisdante; 08-27-2018 at 06:10 PM.
08-27-2018, 10:50 PM
#40
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
jWell.... You have to read the article first which was very interesting if you can get through the whole thing. Williams was 100% focused on on every detail that would increase performance. Singer tempered that with retaining the raw experience. The combined result apparently is what we all talk about so much on this forum and why the 997 4.0 gets such high marks around here. The 992 appears to be a technological leap perhaps - we will see.... but will it loose what makes the 997 4.0 so special and what we love about driving Porsches? Anway this isn’t anything other that a pilosophical conversation so don’t take it for more - the point being Porsche will need to conciensly try to engineer that “experience “ into the cars at the expense of chasing competitors performance numbers or achieve both which would be masterful while dealing with the regulatory side of the business.
And there's nothing in that article that is relevant to Porsche qua publicly traded company.
08-27-2018, 11:05 PM
#41
Whether it is legally required seems to be a matter of some debate but my question was does it meet any of the safety and/or pollution standards that, e.g., a $50,000 Porsche must, and is there any written certification of this by a reputable independent organization,or, for $1.8 million, could it be 'unsafe at any speed'?
08-27-2018, 11:09 PM
#42
Rennlist Member
Perhaps a better way to frame my question is this: "If you go in a ride with your friend (a young doctor in the prime of his/her life) in your new $1.8 million Singer with its air bags removed, do not tell your friend that the air bags have been removed (normally no one would start a ride in the country with saying "beware of driving with me as I/Singer have removed the airbags), let alone have her/him sign a waiver, have an accident such as hitting another car in which your friend dies, which accident is clearly proven to be your fault, and it is proven that if you/Singer had not removed the airbags (will not even discuss all of the hard surfaces in the interior of the new Singer [i.e., e.g., possible head impact]) your friend would have lived, will your insurance company cover you and how will a jury react when your (now dead) friend's family sues you (clearly you have deep pockets as you paid $1.8 million for the car) and it is clear that you/Singer have knowingly and willingly removed the airbags and have not subjected the car to appropriate (as defined by plaintiff's counsel) safety tests (regardless of whether or not the law requires it), particularly in light of and given the removal of the air bags and the redesign of the interior?"
08-27-2018, 11:12 PM
#43
08-28-2018, 01:10 AM
#44
Didn't we answer this question in another thread? It's not a new car. It's a rebuilt old car. The standards that apply to it are the same that apply to the donor car when it was originally sold new. No different than the guy down the street who owns a stock 964 and no different than any of the dozens and dozens of car customizers who do resto mods of all types. Do you think the thousands of resto mods that get built every year meet current safety and emissions standards?
08-28-2018, 05:07 PM
#45
Three Wheelin'
Yeah, I have to agree with Evil and Ipse. Porsche is restricted by national regulations. They will never be Singer nor would they ever want to be. It's the other way around. Other car manufacturers should strive to become better than Porsche or, at least try to imitate Porsche.
It's nice there are restoration modifiers like Singer but there is no comparing Singer to Porsche. Singer is a niche modifier. For the guy who wanted an 70 or 80s air cooled/styled Porsche but never got one or, couldn't afford one you call Singer or, BBi or, Sharkworks. Sure, I'd like an 89 Speedster or Turbo in mint condition but, no, I'm not going to spend $400k on a Singer restomod Porsche that costs that much because they spend ungodly time and spare no expense on parts to handcraft an old Porsche. For me, I think a '73 RS like Stacy's would be the way to go if we're talking about getting a historic Porsche. Now that's a car that might be worth the $500k to $1.2M we see them go for sale.
Dan (probably would never buy a Singer)
It's nice there are restoration modifiers like Singer but there is no comparing Singer to Porsche. Singer is a niche modifier. For the guy who wanted an 70 or 80s air cooled/styled Porsche but never got one or, couldn't afford one you call Singer or, BBi or, Sharkworks. Sure, I'd like an 89 Speedster or Turbo in mint condition but, no, I'm not going to spend $400k on a Singer restomod Porsche that costs that much because they spend ungodly time and spare no expense on parts to handcraft an old Porsche. For me, I think a '73 RS like Stacy's would be the way to go if we're talking about getting a historic Porsche. Now that's a car that might be worth the $500k to $1.2M we see them go for sale.
Dan (probably would never buy a Singer)