Originally Posted by tmg57

I'm not sure this is an acceptable reason but I believe, as I posted earlier, that it is a plausible reason:

Let's assume that Porsche decided to build "X" number of GT3's. They further concluded that they could sell all of that number with either PDK or manual transmissions. By developing only one of those choices, they saved a substantial amount of money. At this point, it appears that their estimate of the market demand may have been correct. Maybe they chose PDK-S over the manual because it represents a move to the future and appears to deliver a little better performance numbers?

That explanation may not satisfy everyone, but from a business perspective, it seems to make sense. If, down the road, the market tells them that they erred, they can always backtrack.

Originally Posted by Manifold

I think their decision needs to look beyond short- or intermediate-term business/money considerations and show some regard for what Porsche has uniquely been all about since its founding ... the soul of the company. That means offering a manual GT3. No excuses either, they're making oodles of money overall.

Originally Posted by tmg57

No argument, but I would challenge you to explain "soul" to a German CFO.

Originally Posted by Manifold

The company's success to date has been built on its distinct soul. Cayenne sales (and engineering) wouldn't be what they are without that. The 991 GT3 should be the ideal embodiment of that, connecting the driver with the car like few or no other cars can. AP claims that PDK-S doesn't compromise that connection, even enhances it, but now we've heard from respected journalists who've driven the car and disagree. And it's not hard to see that the physicality of manual shifting could never be replaced with PDK, no matter how fast or aggressive it is.

Originally Posted by Manifold

The company's success to date has been built on its distinct soul. Cayenne sales (and engineering) wouldn't be what they are without that. The 991 GT3 should be the ideal embodiment of that, connecting the driver with the car like few or no other cars can. AP claims that PDK-S doesn't compromise that connection, even enhances it, but now we've heard from respected journalists who've driven the car and disagree. And it's not hard to see that the physicality of manual shifting could never be replaced with PDK, no matter how fast or aggressive it is.

Originally Posted by Mike in CA

Whatever. At this point, I'm about maxed out on the speculative and subjective input. I'll be driving the car for myself in a few months and will reach my own conclusions. It's possible I'm making a $150K mistake, but I really doubt it.

Originally Posted by Mike in CA

Personally, I don't see how the "distinct soul" of a car company can rest solely, or even mainly, on the mechanical interface involved with one single aspect of driving and car ownership, but I accept that for some it apparently does.

No matter how you slice it this topic is incredibly emotional, nuanced, and subjective. Almost everyone who cares about Porsche has an opinion. We've heard from respected journalists who agree that Porsche have done exactly the right thing, and respected journalists who think they haven't. In almost all reviews the negatives are footnotes and agreement is unanimous that the car is spectacular, even if some reviewers feel it misses absolute perfection because of the gearbox.

Whatever. At this point, I'm about maxed out on the speculative and subjective input. I'll be driving the car for myself in a few months and will reach my own conclusions. It's possible I'm making a $150K mistake, but I really doubt it.

Originally Posted by Mike in CA

Personally, I don't see how the "distinct soul" of a car company can rest solely, or even mainly, on the mechanical interface involved with one single aspect of driving and car ownership, but I accept that for some it apparently does.

No matter how you slice it this topic is incredibly emotional, nuanced, and subjective. Almost everyone who cares about Porsche has an opinion. We've heard from respected journalists who agree that Porsche have done exactly the right thing, and respected journalists who think they haven't. In almost all reviews the negatives are footnotes and agreement is unanimous that the car is spectacular, even if some reviewers feel it misses absolute perfection because of the gearbox.

Whatever. At this point, I'm about maxed out on the speculative and subjective input. I'll be driving the car for myself in a few months and will reach my own conclusions. It's possible I'm making a $150K mistake, but I really doubt it.

Originally Posted by jumper5836

I highly doubt your making a mistake. Perfect candidate.

Originally Posted by jumper5836

I don't think your getting the point. Those snide remarks aside, mainly we enjoy manuals because it feels like your one with the car. You have to think and evolve your self in it. It's doing what your make it do. You don't get that feeling in a automatic. I am a better driver when driving manual because my head is in the game when driving automatics I don't and I get distracted or I start multi tasking because it's boring.

Originally Posted by Earlierapex

I think it's somewhat reasonable to assume Porsche made an accounting decision to offer 1 transmission and the PDK won due to engineering merits.

I'm not sure. That's a good question. And I agree it's a mistake by Porsche, but it's moot either way. They aren't offering a MT.

This is a near exact "tech evolution" analogy to the current situation, and your avoidance of the question tells me all I need to know.

I don't have an issue with the anti-pdk movement other than the monumental hypocrisy - you want ABS and modern suspensions "forced" on you, but not PDK.

Why aren't you mad at Porsche for not offering a torsion bar suspension and an air cooled engine?

Fair enough, but why get so passionate about where to draw a line in a pretty grey area?

I think Porsche may genuinely be mystified by the whole concept of a pro-performance customer who wants to trade performance for antiquated technology.

Originally Posted by Earlierapex

The main reason sports cars historically used manuals is because they provided better performance relative to torque-converted-based autos.

Now there's no sacrifice at all, and actually INCREASED performance with the dual clutch systems. If the manual transmission had never been invented, everyone would be cheering the evolution of torque converter to PDK.

If none of you "anti-technology" guys had ever driven a manual and walked into a Porsche dealer offering a manual with three pedals and PDK to buy your first car (with no knowledge of or history with how a manual operated), not a single one of you would buy a car that required such primitive interaction.

You would scoff at the sheer engineering idiocy of trying to manage the engine, the brakes and the transmission with 3 different pedals and 2 feet.

The manual transmission design wasn't engineered to be "interactive" and have "character," it was simply the best compromise of design and mechanical tools available at the time.

You guys believe it has "character" because you were forced to adapt to a screwy methodology (3 pedals, 2 feet) due to the fact that it was required to achieve the best performance. A sacrifice clearly worth making at the time.

So now we have this interesting psychological phenomena related to the fact that all that hard work has become worthless. My Holiday Inn Express psych analysis says that rather than just admitting we all spent a LOT of time learning a no-longer needed skill, we rewrite the story so that the unique skill and hard work is still valuable by making claims like "PDK drivers aren't real men and CAN'T drive a manual" - "PDK doesn't have any character" "PDK is for xBox punks" and "why don't you just set your computer for the track and watch it go around by itself!"

The only thing more bizarre than continuing to drive a maximum performance track car with 3 pedals and 2 feet with the objective of POORER performance is the outlandish, ego-driven rationalizations required to institutionalize the reasons for doing so (with the associated internet nods of agreement and mutual cheers of harrumph from the fellow manly men with equally worthless 3 pedal, 2 feet skills).

Originally Posted by wanna911

Based on your theory, If max performance was the only variable and feel and function were not important, classic cars would have no place still being around and should be crushed for lack of technology.


The bizarre thing is those talking about the gain in performance, which is small, don't have any intentions on using said performance gain. Which, even if they did only really matters if you are racing competitively. 90% of cars at a DE even are there to enjoy themselves, for fun. So saving .25 on a shift isn't going to make any difference to them whatsoever........ What you are saying is insightful but is not applicable to the real world in the vast majority of scenarios.

You completely leave out the fact that guys buy cars purely for enjoyment. Having the maximum performance is NOT BY ANY MEANS everyone's goal. If that was the case, we would all be driving around, or tracking only, heavily modified cars built to the tee for maximum performance. No comfort options, no AC, no 18 way seats.

There are too many flaws in your theory to hit on all of them, but that's a start. It doesn't matter how manuals came to be, the fact is that people love them and don't need to have a reason to do so. And computerized mechanicals can't duplicate everything. Some things feel better natural.

Originally Posted by Petevb

I'd argue that it's even more bizarre that some continue under the delusion that the GT3 is a "maximum performance track car".

Porsche makes track cars: RSR, GT3 Cup, LeMans racers. All have cages, no interior, fuel cells and are built for professional competition. The street GT3, on the other hand, is a soft, unsafe and slow track car by comparison. It will get passed by actual track cars costing a fraction as much, its warrantee will go out the window when tracked, and it's not classed to race in any professional series.

It's a street car that one can take to the track occasionally. To imagine otherwise is simply delusional IMHO.

Originally Posted by Manifold

The company's success to date has been built on its distinct soul. Cayenne sales (and engineering) wouldn't be what they are without that. The 991 GT3 should be the ideal embodiment of that, connecting the driver with the car like few or no other cars can. AP claims that PDK-S doesn't compromise that connection, even enhances it, but now we've heard from respected journalists who've driven the car and disagree. And it's not hard to see that the physicality of manual shifting could never be replaced with PDK, no matter how fast or aggressive it is.