Lies, damned lies, and statistics
 

Recent speculation on future Porsche pricing got me thinking, and the winding road I went down lead to a few interesting conclusions. Among them:

• The 991 GT3 is among the best "performance bargains" in Porsche's history.
• Porsche carefully manages "price/ performance", and has for decades.
• Porsche has not engaged in the recent "price/ performance" arms race between other manufactures.

These conclusions may seem obvious, but I didn't expect they'd be "provable". Through the magic of statistics, however, perhaps they are? Or you can try anyway, assuming you're bored and willing to spend a little time geeking out. Which I clearly am...

How does one define "performance"? Porsche largely seems to define it by power to weight ratio, and within their sports cars they generally suggest higher power to weight is worth more money. Surprisingly so.

Below is Porsche's current base hard top sports car lineup, with power to weight on the vertical (hp/ton), and list price (in log scale) on the horizontal. And a trend line...

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...2dfed69f49.jpg

The higher the power to weight ratio, the more expensive the car (in general). Cars above the line seem particularly "good value", assuming you believe better power to weight is indeed good, as Porsche seems to suggest. And the 991 GT3 is a long way, relatively, above the trend in the current lineup. Thus it seems a particular bargain by Porsche's standards...

The apparent trend got me thinking. How has it evolved over the past few decades? Surely improving technology means more performance is available for your dollar today than it was a decade or two ago? Yes and no, it seems. Today's cars clearly have higher power to weight ratios, but largely due to inflation they are also more expensive. So again plotting new MSRP, despite fluctuations in conversion rates and inflation, the trend seems remarkably consistent:

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...7ed533cff7.jpg

Is it chance that the unprofitable 90s are also a low point above?

Interesting... So how do other manufactures compare? Well they tend not to have clear a trend. BMW is more of a scatter plot, but some manufactures are relatively behaved:

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...073785ebcd.jpg
Clearly Chevy is known for low priced power. Ferrari was more of a surprise...

Finally- is the relatively large advantage Ferrari and Corvette seem to have a recent trend, or has it been this way for a while? Answer- it's recent, because the competition is moving fast:

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...c3c950f290.jpg

Ferrari and Chevy have clearly chosen to exploit advances in tires and electronics to push performance and hence price/ performance over the last decade. And in comparison Porsche has chosen not to.

Porsche remains hugely profitable, so I'm not sure this means they are doing anything wrong. In fact I'm not sure I like where the chase for more and more power is leading. However I'm also not entirely comfortable with where the trends above lead.

Exactly how long will they keep it up, I wonder?

Food for car geek thought...

Note the log scale on the cost axis! :o

Pretty cool stats. Well done.

gotta love it.... this is brilliant !

another interesting benchmark might be Nurburgring times vs price.

More useless statistics, just drive and enjoy! I don't need a graph to tell me how brilliant my car is!

really interesting... throw an ariel atom in there and lets see an outlier

Awesome work Pete! Really interesting data there. I almost forgot there whas a thread rating system, since I haven't used it but once or twice before. 5 stars man, 5 stars.:thumbup:

Wait, 515hp for the 991 GT3RS? As the graph from the GT4 thread states. Mathematically, that makes more sense! Yeah, that's it. Starting to see that number thrown around now instead of the previous 510.

Very interesting. Great stuff!

Just note that if power/weight is linearly related to log prices, this means that it become exponentially more expensive to buy an extra unit of power/ weight. Also, one factor that might affect the relationship above is the level of interest rates, disposable income and perhaps some other factors, so if you're really serious about it I would suggest controlling for interest rates in this experiment. Nonetheless, really cool. It would be interesting to put several brands together, and see where P's line up (above or below the regression line) relative to other brands.

Nice job and thanks for sharing

Great reading. Thanks for sharing interesting material.

We need guys like you at my firm. If you ever consider a move, PM me, I am serious :-)

Awesome stuff Pete, Nate Silver will be proud. I think I am going to geek out on it. I have a bunch of similar calculations lying around from before GT3 was released, trying to predict it's power/price. :cheers:

That's really cool Pete this is awesome. I took the liberty in taking your model and plotting an extra point for the RS. What was interesting, let's say Porsche goes by the model you presented then and if:

GT3: 475 @1430 kg - 332 hp/mt $131,000 Turbo: 520 @ 1594 kg - 326 hp/mt $151,000 Turbo S: 560 @ 1627 kg - 344 hp/mt $182,000

After plugging in those numbers and if this is the model then my hypothesis for the RS should look something like this.

GT3 RS: 500 @1415 kg - 353 hp/mt $162,000

Following the linear curve of the Turbo and Turbo S with the GT3 being an outlier, then the RS following the same outlier would should fall at a price of $162,000 MSRP.

The 458 Speciale may represent an interesting data point as well...

Great read Pete, thank you.
Zulu, I'll take that as a confirmation the new RS needs to have more than 500HP and or be lighter than 1415KG to be $180K :-)

This is cool data. Can you do a graph of the Porsches without the Carrera GT and 918, plotted with linear scale on the X axis, then fit a 2nd or 3rd order polynomial and extend the trend line? Or if you post the data, I can do it.

Correctamondo

Grumpy Ralph... You don't need a graph, but you did need more power!
Ha. Despite the fact that my girl would love Austin, I think I'm staying put. But thanks ;-)
I used USD and US (short) tons, not metric, but I came to the same conclusion. If the RS comes in at 500 hp it will be right on top of the old 4.0 RS, which itself is right on the line. So either it will be a step back on Porsche's "value" scale, below the new GT3, or the rumored price, power or weight will need to give. My crystal ball, unencumbered by data, suggests they will maintain the price but rate it at more power- 515 hp? Or perhaps the 991 GT3 was a one-off exception to the rule...

The data set I used for those that want to play. Current Porsches are right off the US website:

HP, Curb Weight , MSRP
Cayman 275 2888 52600
Cayman S 325 2910 63800
Cayman GTS 340 2965 75200
Base Carrera 350 3042 84300
Carrera S 400 3075 98900
50th 430 3109 121400
GT3 475 3153 130400
Turbo 520 3516 151100
Turbo S 560 3538 182700
918 Spyder 887 3692 845000
918 Weissach Edition 887 3602 929000

Historic Porsches
2005 Carrera S 355 3130 79100
Carrera GT 605 3040 448000
1999 Carrera 996 296 2901 67500
1995 Carrera 993 272 3020 59900
1990 Carrera 964 247 3031 51200
1984 911 Carrera 207 2756 32000
1980 911 SC 180 2557 27700
1980 928 231 3197 38800
1986 Porsche 944 Turbo 217 3040 29500
1987 Porsche 928 S4 320 3505 58900

Chevrolet
Corvette 455 3300 54000
Z06 650 3524 79000
Camaro V6 323 3750 24700
Camaro V8 426 3860 34500
Z28 505 3837 72305
Camaro ZL1 580 4120 55505

Historic
2001 Z06 385 3115 48500
2006 Z06 505 3130 65800
2015 Corvette Z06 650 3524 79000


Ferrari
F458 562 3274 237300
F12 730 3362 316000
LaFerrari 950 2767 1350000
F458 562 3274 237300
F458 Speciale 596 3070 298000

Historic
1996 F550 485 3726 196300
2002 F575 540 3814 214700
2006 F599 620 3721 264000
2013 F12 730 3362 316000
Enzo 651 2767 643000
F360 405 2844 138225
F430 483 3197 170000

This is all very cool stuff. I seriously wonder if anyone at Porsche keeps an eye on this forum? Threads like this and a few other threads I would think would be very valuable to Porsche about there customers wants and needs for new products.

Then I'm reminded Porsche keeps putting Center Lock wheels on its cars so I doubt if they read and seriously consider what we say on these forums.

Great work Pete. Well done. Mark

Very nice data. Excellent work.

Cool stuff. Thanks.

I'm not quite sure what I think ... Clearly Porsche marketing is gaming their lineup, as we already knew, and on one level it's easy to feel played and insulted. On the other hand, there are clearly some upsides to the strategy, and it's not clear where the fault, if any, lies.

We know that the Cayman S uses the same motor as the base Carrera but with software that cuts 25 hp. If it wasn't limited it'd be both quicker and less expensive- would the business case for the base 991 go away in that case? And would that be Porsche's fault, or its customers?

The simple fix to the case above would be to make the base 991 even faster, but is that really a solution? When you look at a bell curve of the customer's driver ability, how fast a car can most really handle and enjoy on the street? Yes technology means you can make a car quicker, but taking the Ferrari F12 is an example, with even Jeremy Clarkson suggesting it's too fast, the question becomes should you?

Porsche seems to be handling this question so far by emphasizing the usability of its power. While the new BMW M4 is significantly "above the line" in terms of power/ weight vs cost, on track that power largely only gets the rear end all the more sideways. In the Porsche tradition, by contrast, a Carrera S converts similar power into lots of forward momentum rather than tire smoke.

Interestingly both strategies so far seem to result in more similar speed per dollar: witness the 991 GT3 running the McLaren 650S and 458 Speciale close on the track despite a 25% power to weight disadvantage, or the 918 beating the higher power P1 around the track, while arguably being far more usable nearly everywhere else. In fact if you plot track time vs $, cars that do particularly well often have similar philosophies of "usable power", ie the GT-R, Z-28 and GT3. These are all "giant killers", at least looking at their track performance vs the spec sheet, a tradition that goes way back at Porsche and one they seem intent on upholding.

While this is something I can respect, I see a couple problems.

First, this path seems to require doubling down on the stupendous grip the street cars already have, and I must admit that I get pleasure from the feel of a car moving around. While this is a feel you get in spades from older Porsches with less grip, it's already relatively difficult to find the space to access this feeling in a modern one on the street. Exactly how limpet-like will future Porsches become?

Second, this strategy only goes so far. The old Z06 was already a beast at the 'Ring- give it the Z28's suspension magic plus power and the new one's going to be epic. Will the Porsche track faction, largely composed of the part of the bell curve that can handle the power, be OK with being left behind? I note that while JC felt the Ferrari F12 was too much, the Stig felt it was exactly his kind of car. And that power to weight is a half million plus car on Porsche's current curve, with the new Z06 not far behind. Is that what Stig wannabes are going to need to spend to get that kind of chassis mobility?

I don't have good answers to the above. Do you split the lineup, and allow the GT cars their own price/ performance curve, even as the GT cars are becoming more streetable? Do you simply lie through your teeth with the GT cars, as BMW did with the 1M, under-rating it enough that the M3 guys would be OK and hoping no-one notices?

I imagine the debates within Porsche, and between Porsche and VW, must be fascinating. One thing is clear- the mathematical precision here clearly comes from the top, and ties lots of hands if you're developing a car.

This is one of the things I was hoping for the GT4. That Porsche would make the GT "pecking order" separate from the normal pecking order like BMW/MB or Audi does with M/AMG and RS respectively - BMW (and their customers) seems okay for M3 having better performance (read power-to-weight ratio) than a 535i or even a 550i, but just not M5. Heck, even 1M (and coming M2) definitely beats the 535i (and probably beats 550i too) in the power-to-weight metrics. Same with AMG, A45 is definitely higher up in the performance pecking order than bunch of vanilla C and E models, but just not the AMG C and E. No one at any of these companies seem to be loosing sleep over it.

It will be awesome if Porsche also took a similar approach for the GT line. Which would make it ok for a Cayman GT4 to outperform a base Carrera and even Carrera S as long as it doesn't step on GT3's toes. Well at least, one can hope.

ps. Love your posts, both substance and style. :cheers:

There is precedent for this within Porsche, ie the Panamera gets its own curve:

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...be20d87b53.jpg

While the SUVs get their own line too, above the sedans surprisingly.

Once upon a time cars like the Club Sport, RS America, etc used to be both cheaper and lighter, so it has been done. And on that topic, those cars did very well over time, enough so that I thought it'd be interesting to graph. I know that in the long term the RS America, Clubsports, GT3s have outperformed- in part because of their relative "value"?

The counter argument is that you don't want to piss customers off, and I think quite a few regular 964 owners probably were pissed when a lighter, faster, cheaper model came out. You can deal with this argument partly by making the cars less luxurious and practical, but the 991 GT3 has gone in the other direction. Still...

This is great stuff. Thanks for posting!

Cool, let us hope the GT3 existing at a slightly elevated point is not an anomaly but rather a germinal point for a "GT" curve.

Thanks Pete! Fantastic analysis as always. Would you be willing to show us the graph with these other special edition cars included please? Also, can you show us where the other current Motorsports editions show up (RSR, R, Cup, etc), that is if pricing and performance info is available for these cars (I'm assuming you might be able to get that info if anyone can)? I wonder how the GT cars will line up compared to the Motorsports cars. Any comments on the 960 (well, on the rumours surrounding its performance and price) and how it could compare?--in case this provides some insight on where the future might lead.

The SUVs and sedans play in a much more competitive segment, so I would think pricing would have to be less. Some might also argue that with higher volume, prices are able to be lower than the sports car line. My cynical side prefers to think that instead Porsche pricing is based on what they can get, rather than some markup over cost.

Good stuff Pete!

Graphs are like maps to me. Fantastic!

Did you get the Ferrari performance data from Ferrari? If I missed it I apologize.

I keep thinking about that old Chris Harris article he wrote about Ferrari and their ringers they hand out to journalists and such. If Ferrari's numbers are suspect, it only helps the Porsche delta.

Cheers!

It gets complicated- cars like the 968 club sport were never available in the US, etc. But for a couple cases:

The 964 RS America had a 3% better power to weight ratio than the C2, but cost $10k less. Overall it performed 24% better on this scale than the C2. According to Hagerty, an average C2 has lost 66% of its value, while the average RS America has gained a nearly identical amount.

The 968 Club Sport, another budget enthusiast model born in the dark early 90s before Porsche systematically did currency hedging, was again a bit over 15% cheaper and significantly lighter, in total 29% better than the base 968 on the scale. Today Club Sports seem to trade for over 2x, maybe 3x the base model.

Perhaps because both of these models came out in the early 90s, shortly after a big dip in the value of the USD vs the DM, neither does terribly well outright on the price/ performance scale, though both are obviously much better than the cars they are based on. They may have been desperate attempts to prop up sales, but collectors and history seems to have judged them very well.

Turns out that the GT3 Cup falls quite in line, see below, perhaps fitting. Meanwhile the GT3 RSR needs to run under minimum weight rules and intake restrictor plates to comply with a class, so it actually does rather terribly.
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...5cdfe7c56c.jpg

Way off into the "pure speculation" weeds...

The 991 GT3 is 15% "above the line". A 280k 960 at 3150 lbs and 15% above the line would come in at exactly 600 hp, while "on the line" would be just under 580 hp. If you think it's 3300 lbs/ 280k power would go up 25 hp, while every $1500 in price +/- is equivalent to 1 hp. So this pattern, if they stick to it, draws a pretty small box to work within. Total speculation, of course...

I'm going totally of published figures for power, MSRP, etc. In fact I think the GT guys are gaming, under rating the GT3 so that they don't "break" the system. Which would mean the GT3 is an even better value on this scale than it looks. Though still no where close to something like the Z06...

Pete, this is as good as it gets. Beautifully explained AND TIMELY.:thumbup:

Usable power is becoming increasingly important given the apparent race to increase hp throughout high performance cars. The reality is that though I love my 991GT3 with its modest hp (compared to other high performance cars) there are very few places the power can be used unless it is tracked on a major circuit. Driving it I feel handcuffed. The car aches to show it prowess but there are precious few venues to allow it to do so.

So the question becomes are these cars from a value standpoint worth it? My GT3 can be the best performance value of the century but what good is the performance if it cannot be used?:crying:

Thank you Pete! Superb!! I suppose PAG can arbitrarily add or delete superfluous features and raise or lower the price accordingly to make sure pricing conforms to this line. Nevertheless the consistency of all these data points suggests PAG cares about this relationship between performance and price and actively controls either or both. The fact they seem to care enough to do this (vs pricing to achieve other goals) leads me to imagine at its heart PAG remains true to its engineering and motorsports roots.
I'd be curious to know if the relationship holds using German pricing and in other global markets (I presume it does).

And that applies to so many cars. Sports cars are getting faster and in many cases need to be wound up to higher speeds to feel sporty, but roads aren't correspondingly being designed/built to accommodate faster cars, and worsening traffic congestion doesn't help either.

I suggest that you take it to the track at least once and see what you think.

I think this is the crux of Porsche's dilemma.

Race cars largely stopped getting faster three decades ago. F1 cars and endurance racers were capped, Group B rally was killed, and everything in between was carefully legislated. Even 30 years ago race cars had outgrown both courses and drivers.

Nothing has limited the street car, however. The best drivers in the world were once unable to control Group B cars on real roads, but today a Ferrari F12 achieves similar power to weight ratios, while a LaFerrari comfortably eclipses them. Driver assisting electronics might let today's mortals play champions, but Group B proved the point: using that much performance is impossible virtually everywhere!

Porsche knows this, and takes the tact of a WRC car instead, which despite being less than half the power to weight of Group B use big improvements everywhere else to make them just as fast down a tight course. A mortal can still only use a fraction of that performance on the street, but they can use more of it. The latest GT3, PDK and rear wheel steering only, seems almost a study in making a car faster without resorting to a higher power to weight ratio, while the 918, as fast is at clearly is, takes the philosophy even further with four wheel drive.

As good as Porsche is at making all this power usable, however, the fact remains that these are ridiculously fast cars- shorts of a track, the autobahn or a few clear corners you simply can't use all of them. Which, as you've found, is a huge shame, because driving a fast car slowly gets frustrating. At the same time on the track you can use all of that performance, and many wish for more!

It seems Porsche has long been trying to walk a middle ground, making cars that are great for both street and track, but it seems that's getting harder and harder to do.

Personally I solve the dilemma by having a slower car I can use nearly all of for the street, then a fast car that's generally ludicrous on the street but a blast in the right setting. If the GT cars get their own line I think this would be the argument- horses for courses are at some point required. And that's an argument I think I buy into- I'd love to see them cut loose for the competition oriented "specials", while focusing highly on involvement for some fraction of the street cars. But that would seem to mean pushing the GT cars and street cars further apart, where if anything the newer less compromised GT cars and street cars seem to be moving closer together.

Perhaps there are not enough like-minded customers to justify that strategy, or perhaps the high point for the GT3 really is the start of a trend. Either way they seem tricky waters to navigate, but we'll get a hint soon with the RS and GT4...

One last chart... I looked for outliers to the trend, and found two. The 2011 Boxster Spyder and 2011 GT2 RS are above the trend line, the latter dramatically so. These are recent and very driver focused models- they seem to indicate with the 991 GT3 that there is a new trend for Porsche's "hottest" models, though not all of them- the Cayman R did poorly, for example.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...a08f0ddc21.jpg

There is suggestion that the GT2 RS was a direct response to the Nissan GT-R's 'Ring time. Suggesting that perhaps when push comes to shove, Porsche will engage in the HP war after all. For that kind of car, here's hoping!

How last GT3 RS show against previous GT3 RS?

same question for last GT3 vs past GT3s

Entertaining stuff Pete, though pity the poor Boxster - doesn't even get a ranking ;)

GT350 looks set to be the real giant killer in terms of $/perf.

IMO the way forward should be less weight, though it's not nearly as easy as more power and hence more costly. But boy does it pay healthy dividends.

I know this was an old thread, but would like to see these with inflation adjusted prices. Good stuff.

Nice to meet a fellow super geek on the internet. I created a similar car stat hp/wt chart about 6 or 7 years ago on M3 forum based on nurburgring times and power to weight ratios. It's fascinating. I got all kinds of vehement arguments about tires and suspension setups and massive amounts of hyperbolic nonsense, but the stats are the stats. With the exception of the Nissan GTR (which was probably under-rated for power at the time), there is an absolute relationship between power to weight ratio and ring time with very little variance:


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...57454d38fa.jpg

Pete,

Anyway to graph in the 1973 Carrera RS? Inflation adjusted?

Dan (curiously would like to compare that to a 991 GT3)

The new 992 Carrera S and Speedster inspired me to refresh this four year old thread with data from the last couple years. The Speedster in particular surprised me somewhat with it price/ performance vs previous trends. First the old data:

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...50aa1059eb.jpg

Updated with the 2019 lineup for comparison. I note that the bottom of the lineup has gotten significantly "better" vs the trend with the 718 4 cylinders. Perhaps a response to the loss of those cylinders or slow sales? The base Carrera seems to have dropped relative to the trend by this measure, while the updated 991.2 GT3 and new GT2 RS both look very good. The Speedster meanwhile appears to be the largest outlier on the low side even when compared to other open topped 911s:

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...f5309c2b73.jpg

Finally Porsche's strategy with regards to $ per straight line performance continues to diverge from a number of other makes. Ferrari in particular has apparently doubled down on adding cheap power, while the just released numbers for the 2020 Carrera S show that if anything Porsche has reversed course and is heading in the opposite direction:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...4aba03fc52.jpg

What this all means for GT drivers isn't clear to me, but it's interesting...

Interesting how much of an outlier it is. A sign of a shift in pricing strategy from Porsche to extract more of the market value in MSRP v the past. Especially interesting in that it isn't a small numbered run, even while being a "special". I also don't see them chasing the power war with Ferrai, Macca and others outside of a GT2. More emphasis on balance, handling and experience. In this regard it would be a shift back to the past. Also opens up room for perhaps that middle ground between 918-level hyper car and upper end of the 911 range.

Agree, I don't see Porsche participating in an HP war. They have never done this, it's more about the sum of all the parts, not just the HP.

They'll compete on HP only with the hypercars every decade or so, but otherwise they will let Mclaren, Ferrari, Lambo, Corvette. etc engage in crazy HP wars as today's cars already have far more power than can be used safely.

Agree with signes in that Porsche is trying to extract more $ via MSRP, which makes sense for special cars like Speedster, GT2RS that people have been flipping, but not for the carrera. The 992 carrera is already overpriced, and there is a lot of competition in that price segment, and with ubiquitous and cheaper turbo power available from other luxury brands, there are just so many other options out there. I can think of many other cars and brands I'd purchase before a $135,000 Carrera