When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Its just silly to think they ever would make something crappy just so the next one will look better.
Maybe you’re right, and there are some elements of the 996 where I’m sure they were thinking, hey this is smoother and more modern, better looking... but I really struggle to picture someone looking at the 996.1 headlight next to a 993 headlight and thinking... “yes. Much better”.
Originally Posted by chuck911
In hindsight it meant just what they said it did- smoothing out cash flows to allow more consistent development of the sports cars that are a less reliable market.
I would describe it more as converting brand equity into cash (because really what’s the point of brand equity if you don’t?), particularly now that it’s a part of VAG so the Porsche portion doesn’t need to have smooth cash flows, but I guess when the Cayenne came out it was more of an important consideration.
The 360 is too pretty?!? That fat jelly bean with the tall flat front bumpers!?!
More likely it went "****, we really screwed the pooch with this one. Alright, we can't run away from it too fast or we'll look silly. Let's have a half baked transition model before we make a pretty one".
The 360 is too pretty?!? That fat jelly bean with the tall flat front bumpers!?!
More likely it went "****, we really screwed the pooch with this one. Alright, we can't run away from it too fast or we'll look silly. Let's have a half baked transition model before we make a pretty one".
Huh do you not love curvy classic cars? E-type, DB4, 250GTO? Modern cars that use that sort of classy lines are the best, the 911 being a perfect example. Not to worry though, Scion has plenty of xBs to sell you if you think anything curvy looks like a jelly bean.
The 360 is too pretty?!? That fat jelly bean with the tall flat front bumpers!?!
More likely it went "****, we really screwed the pooch with this one. Alright, we can't run away from it too fast or we'll look silly. Let's have a half baked transition model before we make a pretty one".
Lol. To each their own, but I feel the same way.
A sidewalk observer's guide to the mid-engined V8 Ferraris:
308 GTS/S: Could only be a Ferrari.
308 GT4: I hear those handle really well.
Mondial: Isn't that the Ferrari that Gary drove in Weird Science?
288: OMG, that Ferrari is the business.
328: Yep, that's a Ferrari.
348: Mmm, well...it is a Ferrari.
355: Ferrari is BACK!
360: Uh, is that the new Celica? (CS excepted)
430: Pretty sure that's a Ferrari, but what's the story with the front bumper again? (Scud excepted)
458: Ferrari is BACK!
488: Yep.
—Submitted from the glass house called "914 owner and fan"
I am sure there is a corollary to this for 911s...which could become its own thread—and probably best written by a Ferrari enthusiast.
Originally Posted by Dewinator
Huh do you not love curvy classic cars? E-type, DB4, 250GTO? Modern cars that use that sort of classy lines are the best, the 911 being a perfect example. Not to worry though, Scion has plenty of xBs to sell you if you think anything curvy looks like a jelly bean.
Wait. Did you just try to link the 360 Modena to the E-type, DB4, and 250 GTO? Please pass whatever glasses you are wearing my way—maybe they will help me link my 914 to the Countach?
The only thing I absolutely don't like is the front bumper. Just not feeling that strong horizontal line. Actually showing the 991.2 right below it magnifies how bad it is. The 991.2 is design perfection for me. It is the chiseled version of the 991 range. Athletic and beautiful at the same time. The new rear might as well be 991.3 as others have stated. Not so crazy that I have strong opinions.
02-28-2018, 11:51 PM
