Any Targa Owners Not Like Their Targa?
05-07-2003 | 09:11 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Dallas
Any Targa Owners Not Like Their Targa?
I constantly hear that dealers 'can't give' targas away, and that they leak and rattle and weigh too much blah, blah, blah.
I own a Targa and love it. Also, I've seen some used 02's pushing mid to upper $60's on Ebay.
So, what is all the chatter about?
To those that own Targa's, do you love them or do you wish you purchased a different model?
I own a Targa and love it. Also, I've seen some used 02's pushing mid to upper $60's on Ebay.
So, what is all the chatter about?
To those that own Targa's, do you love them or do you wish you purchased a different model?
05-08-2003 | 12:13 PM
#2
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: Roswell GA
I can't speak to the 996 Targa but my 993 Targa is great, no leaks or strange noises, solid all around. The weight issue is a myth, they only weight like 100 lbs more than a coupe and less than a c4s. I have seen them going for a premium on e-bay recently too, one is bid up to $51K and has 60K miles. That's easily $10K more than a like coupe.
05-08-2003 | 03:02 PM
#3
AutoX
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
From: UK
Hi,
The engine on my new C4S (had the car two weeks) failed a few weeks ago with just 1100 miles on the clock. It has taken about three to four weeks to get a new engine - and in the meantime Porsche loaned me a MY02 Targa. Just got the C4S back today.
So, given that I've been driving around in a Targa for a few weeks, what did I think?
o Impressed by the lack of wind buffeting with the roof back. Everything is pretty calm in the cabin, even at high speed.
o Not impressed with the rear visibility when the roof is back. Compared with "normal" visibility, you lose a significant amount completely (maybe 30%) and the remaining 70% is severely degraded in quality (a bit like if you're driving with your rear view mirror on an "anti-dazzle" setting when you shouldn't be.
o Not impressed with the *amount* that the roof opens. It's not much more than a big sunroof - and doesn't give an "open air" feeling to the cabin when the roof is back. Comments from several passengers were along the lines of, "Does the roof only go back *that* far? That's a bit cr*p!"
o Didn't see the point of the opening rear window making the car of a kind of hatchback. But technically it worked well - you don't have to slam it shut, it has motors that shut it properly after you've closed it gently.
The rest of my thoughts on the car are really to do with the fact that it's a C2. I like the way that a C4S drives *much* better than the way a C2 drives. But, obviously that's just a personal thing.
The engine on my new C4S (had the car two weeks) failed a few weeks ago with just 1100 miles on the clock. It has taken about three to four weeks to get a new engine - and in the meantime Porsche loaned me a MY02 Targa. Just got the C4S back today.
So, given that I've been driving around in a Targa for a few weeks, what did I think?
o Impressed by the lack of wind buffeting with the roof back. Everything is pretty calm in the cabin, even at high speed.
o Not impressed with the rear visibility when the roof is back. Compared with "normal" visibility, you lose a significant amount completely (maybe 30%) and the remaining 70% is severely degraded in quality (a bit like if you're driving with your rear view mirror on an "anti-dazzle" setting when you shouldn't be.
o Not impressed with the *amount* that the roof opens. It's not much more than a big sunroof - and doesn't give an "open air" feeling to the cabin when the roof is back. Comments from several passengers were along the lines of, "Does the roof only go back *that* far? That's a bit cr*p!"
o Didn't see the point of the opening rear window making the car of a kind of hatchback. But technically it worked well - you don't have to slam it shut, it has motors that shut it properly after you've closed it gently.
The rest of my thoughts on the car are really to do with the fact that it's a C2. I like the way that a C4S drives *much* better than the way a C2 drives. But, obviously that's just a personal thing.
05-08-2003 | 08:29 PM
#5
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,048
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
I recently went through the buying decision of which 996 to purchase. I think many people either want the full-blown open air experience of a cab, or want a traditional coupe. And the Targa is quite a price premium over the coupe...
On the other hand, the Targas are being offered at very good prices due to soft market conditions.
Two weeks ago I drove a friend's C4 cab, shortly thereafter I drove an '02 Targa at a nearby dealership. I found the Targa to be a great compromise (I already have a nice convertible) at giving an almost open air experience. I also realized how very much I personally prefer the C2 handling to the C4. I think the steering feels more direct and responsive. Anyway, I'm picking up the Targa Saturday.
On the other hand, the Targas are being offered at very good prices due to soft market conditions.
Two weeks ago I drove a friend's C4 cab, shortly thereafter I drove an '02 Targa at a nearby dealership. I found the Targa to be a great compromise (I already have a nice convertible) at giving an almost open air experience. I also realized how very much I personally prefer the C2 handling to the C4. I think the steering feels more direct and responsive. Anyway, I'm picking up the Targa Saturday.
05-09-2003 | 10:29 AM
#7
Three Wheelin'
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,317
Likes: 1
The Targa is a joke.
It's not a real Targa. Why don't they make the Targa's like the older ones?
If they can make a convertible, why can't they make a Targa without the beams/pillars over the windows?
Don't know about the rest of you but for me, if the Targa was like the old style, I would seriously consider buying one.
It's not a real Targa. Why don't they make the Targa's like the older ones?
If they can make a convertible, why can't they make a Targa without the beams/pillars over the windows?
Don't know about the rest of you but for me, if the Targa was like the old style, I would seriously consider buying one.
Trending Topics
05-09-2003 | 03:19 PM
#8
Track Day
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by RR:
<strong>The Targa is a joke.
It's not a real Targa. Why don't they make the Targa's like the older ones?
If they can make a convertible, why can't they make a Targa without the beams/pillars over the windows?
Don't know about the rest of you but for me, if the Targa was like the old style, I would seriously consider buying one.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">The old Targa offered an open roof with the rigidity of the cabriolet. The new Targa offers an open roof with the superior rigidity of the coupe. Far better, in my opinion.
<strong>The Targa is a joke.
It's not a real Targa. Why don't they make the Targa's like the older ones?
If they can make a convertible, why can't they make a Targa without the beams/pillars over the windows?
Don't know about the rest of you but for me, if the Targa was like the old style, I would seriously consider buying one.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">The old Targa offered an open roof with the rigidity of the cabriolet. The new Targa offers an open roof with the superior rigidity of the coupe. Far better, in my opinion.
05-09-2003 | 05:24 PM
#9
Three Wheelin'
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,317
Likes: 1
far better for what?
no one is buying them?
why have it?
My point is that I think, maybe Im wrong, but I think if it was truly more like the old style they would have more buyers.
What is the point of rigidity if no ones buys it?
When you decide to buy a cab or Targa you are not buying it for its rigidity. You buy those vehicles for their open concept, I think at least.
If you want rigid buy a coupe with a sunroof.
Too me the Targa set up is truly dumb, and the sales show that.
no one is buying them?
why have it?
My point is that I think, maybe Im wrong, but I think if it was truly more like the old style they would have more buyers.
What is the point of rigidity if no ones buys it?
When you decide to buy a cab or Targa you are not buying it for its rigidity. You buy those vehicles for their open concept, I think at least.
If you want rigid buy a coupe with a sunroof.
Too me the Targa set up is truly dumb, and the sales show that.
05-09-2003 | 06:21 PM
#10
Racer
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by RR:
<strong>far better for what?
no one is buying them?
why have it?
My point is that I think, maybe Im wrong, but I think if it was truly more like the old style they would have more buyers.
What is the point of rigidity if no ones buys it?
When you decide to buy a cab or Targa you are not buying it for its rigidity. You buy those vehicles for their open concept, I think at least.
If you want rigid buy a coupe with a sunroof.
Too me the Targa set up is truly dumb, and the sales show that.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I couldn't agree more, the Targa sunroof does not open far enough and they added so much weight to make it rigid, I just assume get a Cab if I want open air motoring. Otherwise for a little bigger roof opening why would I pay such a premium over a coupe. They should have made it like the old Targas, they really were "targas" not cars with a little larger than usual sunroof. Just my .02
-Lou
<strong>far better for what?
no one is buying them?
why have it?
My point is that I think, maybe Im wrong, but I think if it was truly more like the old style they would have more buyers.
What is the point of rigidity if no ones buys it?
When you decide to buy a cab or Targa you are not buying it for its rigidity. You buy those vehicles for their open concept, I think at least.
If you want rigid buy a coupe with a sunroof.
Too me the Targa set up is truly dumb, and the sales show that.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I couldn't agree more, the Targa sunroof does not open far enough and they added so much weight to make it rigid, I just assume get a Cab if I want open air motoring. Otherwise for a little bigger roof opening why would I pay such a premium over a coupe. They should have made it like the old Targas, they really were "targas" not cars with a little larger than usual sunroof. Just my .02
-Lou
05-09-2003 | 06:37 PM
#11
Racer
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 480
Likes: 0
From: Danvers, Mass.
You guys are correct about the sales of Targa's. Very slow. A dealer near me had a 2002 silver Targa for over a year before someone finally bought it at invoice price. I think the design and execution is great, but I prefer a coupe. I think the coupe shouldnt even bother with a sunroof.
05-09-2003 | 08:36 PM
#12
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,048
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
They should have made it like the old Targas, they really were "targas" not cars with a little larger than usual sunroof. Just my .02
-Lou[/QB][/QUOTE]
I don't think some people understand that you can NOT make an old style Targa as rigid as a coupe-and rigidity is EVERYTHING when it comes to achieving maximum handling performance whilst still maintaining a compliant suspension. It is the Holy Grail of modern engineering design for cars at all levels--achieving a rigid structure with minimum weight. Porsche states that the new Targa has virtually the same rigidity as the coupe, at a penalty of 150 lbs. The Cab (or a Targa designed like the old Targa) will always be substantially inferior to the the coupe or a new style Targa in rigidity. That's certainly a compromise many people choose with a cab in exchange for open air motoring. I'm willing to give up some of the openness of a cab while still having the rigidity of the coupe.
I haven't seen the torsional stiffness numbers for the various 996 models published, but even with the best manufacturers there is a huge penalty to a cab. For instance, I have two E46 BMW's; also well regarded for their chassis development. The best numbers are for the 4 door sedan, then comes the coupe, then the cab is far behind with the worst numbers (Yes, the 4 doors have better numbers than the coupe thanks to the B pillar). Even fold down rear seats have an adverse effect on the numbers. I can personally tell a big difference in the structure of both the E46 cab and coupe, and the equivalent 996 models. Again, I'm not trying to slam cab owners in any way; it's certainly a reasonable compromise to make. But some individuals need to educate themselves on the well known engineering issues of building a 996 with an old style Targa roof. By the way, "T-tops" as seen on previous Nissans and some Corvettes are only marginally better than cabs for structural rigidity--it's the lateral roof beams which result in structure that won't twist--and the doors are of little help in that regard.
-Lou[/QB][/QUOTE]
I don't think some people understand that you can NOT make an old style Targa as rigid as a coupe-and rigidity is EVERYTHING when it comes to achieving maximum handling performance whilst still maintaining a compliant suspension. It is the Holy Grail of modern engineering design for cars at all levels--achieving a rigid structure with minimum weight. Porsche states that the new Targa has virtually the same rigidity as the coupe, at a penalty of 150 lbs. The Cab (or a Targa designed like the old Targa) will always be substantially inferior to the the coupe or a new style Targa in rigidity. That's certainly a compromise many people choose with a cab in exchange for open air motoring. I'm willing to give up some of the openness of a cab while still having the rigidity of the coupe.
I haven't seen the torsional stiffness numbers for the various 996 models published, but even with the best manufacturers there is a huge penalty to a cab. For instance, I have two E46 BMW's; also well regarded for their chassis development. The best numbers are for the 4 door sedan, then comes the coupe, then the cab is far behind with the worst numbers (Yes, the 4 doors have better numbers than the coupe thanks to the B pillar). Even fold down rear seats have an adverse effect on the numbers. I can personally tell a big difference in the structure of both the E46 cab and coupe, and the equivalent 996 models. Again, I'm not trying to slam cab owners in any way; it's certainly a reasonable compromise to make. But some individuals need to educate themselves on the well known engineering issues of building a 996 with an old style Targa roof. By the way, "T-tops" as seen on previous Nissans and some Corvettes are only marginally better than cabs for structural rigidity--it's the lateral roof beams which result in structure that won't twist--and the doors are of little help in that regard.
05-09-2003 | 08:50 PM
#13
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,048
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
By the way, here are the numbers for torsional stiffness for the E46 BMW for those that understand their importance; I haven't located the numbers for the 996--maybe someone else has them?
Vehicle Type Nm/deg of Torsion
------------------------------
Sedan 18,000 Nm
Sedan w/fold down seats 13,000 Nm
Sport Wagon w/fold down seats 14,000 Nm
Coupe w/fold down seats 12,500 Nm
Convertible 10,500 Nm
Vehicle Type Nm/deg of Torsion
------------------------------
Sedan 18,000 Nm
Sedan w/fold down seats 13,000 Nm
Sport Wagon w/fold down seats 14,000 Nm
Coupe w/fold down seats 12,500 Nm
Convertible 10,500 Nm
05-09-2003 | 10:40 PM
#14
Cap'n Insane the Engorged
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 10,449
Likes: 4
From: Where Mountains Meet the Sea
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Porsche states that the new Targa has virtually the same rigidity as the coupe, at a penalty of 150 lbs. The Cab (or a Targa designed like the old Targa) will always be substantially inferior to the the coupe or a new style Targa in rigidity. That's certainly a compromise many people choose with a cab in exchange for open air motoring.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Funny, the 911 brochure uses the exact same word "virtually" when describing the rigidity of the cabriolet compared w/the coupe, along w/the lift and drag coefficients. It never mentions these factors for the Targa. Cabs also only weigh 22 lbs more then Targas.
This is a Targa, I miss her.
<img src="http://members.rennlist.com/robinwa/TargaWEB.jpg" alt=" - " />
This is a Targa, I miss her.
<img src="http://members.rennlist.com/robinwa/TargaWEB.jpg" alt=" - " />
05-09-2003 | 10:54 PM
#15
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,048
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Rob,
You are correct, Porsche uses the term "virtually" very loosely in respect to the various 996 configurations. There is no way however the cab comes close to the coupe/targa rigidity. I don't know the numbers (wish I did), but I think it's quite evident when driving the various models (I've done a whole lot of that recently). Though the Porsche cabs are certainly well built, the tell tale cowl shake of all convertibles is still there.
You are correct, Porsche uses the term "virtually" very loosely in respect to the various 996 configurations. There is no way however the cab comes close to the coupe/targa rigidity. I don't know the numbers (wish I did), but I think it's quite evident when driving the various models (I've done a whole lot of that recently). Though the Porsche cabs are certainly well built, the tell tale cowl shake of all convertibles is still there.