SpeedGeek

But wasn't the lawyer just doing his job? His job is not to be reasonable, his job is to win the case. And the plaintiff lost a husband. She and her lawyer have every right to get from the legal system what it allows. In fact it could be argued that they'd be wrong not to do so.

IMO, the problem is not with the plaintiffs or their lawyers, who are both just following the system. The problem is with the system itself. And the system is a result of a prevailing mentality that allows, even encourages, excessive and often frivolous litigation. "Sh*t happens" is not a concept that many people easily embrace. When we make decisions that end badly, it's always comforting to find someone else to point a finger at. And better still if a monetary reward is the result.

Over here in South Africa, as in many countries, punitive damages are rarely awarded. Real damages, yes, but not punitive. I personally think it's better this way. But as you said, the American system works better than most, overall. Gotta take the good with the bad, I guess.

blake

Although I agree with you overall, how do you rationalize the job of a mafia hitman? I believe blaming "the system" for your free choices in life is a cop out. Sorry, but that is what I believe. What happened to ethics? I don't know how many of these tort/personal injury lawyers sleep at night. But then again, history shows that humans are capable of convincing themselves of anything... That transcends all countries. On that topic, I was watching a show on History channel late last night about Japan and WWII. When a Japanese island fell to the Americans, the local governemnt told the people to kill themselves rather than be eaten by the American savages. Japanese monthers and children were jumping off cliffs rather than surrender, and were petrified of the American soldiers. Conversely, the American soldiers showed their true colors by shooting the Japanese who chose to try and swim away into the ocean by using them as target practice. I wouldn't describe that as a rational move either. On both sides, I would describe the situation as unethical and more representative of primitive society.

In America, our government is represented by the people. Although the system is not perfect, I do believe that we have the choice to fix "the system" if we deem it appropriate. I know many people who do not "sue" when they have the chance. That is how they, and I, live with myself. I don't know - call me ethical or something... but let's hold society to a higher standard.

Rant over - back to your regularly scheduled GT3 programming!

-Blake

SpeedGeek

I agree with the gist of your argument. I certainly concur with your conceptual repulsion of purely frivolous cases - the cases where lawyers and plaintiffs are knowingly filing suit just for the money. Where we differ, I think, is in how we assign responsibility. The final verdict in a lawsuit is determined by judges and jurors, guided by the legal system, not by the plaintiffs or their ambulance-chasing lawyers. Therefore I lay the responsibility on the jurors and the legal system, not the plaintiffs or lawyers. How can it be unethical to file a lawsuit if you end up winning? Winning means the system agrees with your claims. If the system agrees that you're right, how can you be accused of being unethical?

I lived in California for 17 years (1986-2003). During that time I saw numerous no-fault initiatives defeated at the polls (I always voted for them, BTW). But it's quite clear to me that the majority of Californians want to retain the right to sue at will. It's part of the fabric of American society.

Where I totally agree with you is in cases where frivolous suits are filed purely because the lawyer knows the case will be settled out of court. In those cases, and there are unfortunately many of them, the lawyers and plaintiffs clearly need a lesson in ethics. IMO, such cases are basically a form of extortion. But I don't think that's the case with Ben's accident.

BTW, a mafia hitman has an illegal job.

-Warren

Regular GT3 programming to resume shortly...

Jager

OK, it looks like its up to the lawyers in the crowd to put this thing back on track. The 6gt3 is the purist car. The 7gt3 is debatably faster, is heavier, cushier and easier to drive. What is cool about the 6gt3 is that it presented a competence threshhold that scared away average drivers. That's what some of us like about 6gt3's, not just any driver could drive em. Sure, the average driver could sit in one, even make it become mobile on roads. Some could even sit in them, make them become mobile on roads and hold a latte and operate a cell phone simultaneously, as long as they never pushed the car. But they could never DRIVE the 6gt3. Because they don't understand the 6gt3. The average driver was afraid of the 6gt3, and rightly so. The 6gt3 in full howl is not a car for poseurs, the unprepared, the inattentive, the skill-challenged, the slow of reaction, the timid, the rookie, or the latte-sucking cell phone driver closing real-estate deals. Those guys belong in a different vehicle (may I suggest a Cayenne?), not a 6gt3. That is what is so cool about the 6gt3. There is no substitute. Amen.

Can the 7gt3 claim to continue this competence threshhold?

Mark Dreyer

Cool post Jager. Gotta hate those latte-sucking cellphone drivers! :-)))

Talk about hitting a home run with one of your first postings!

mooty

i dont doubt your experience. perhaps you do have a very fast 6.
my data aren't conclusive, i am just basing that on the 6's i ran with. it's clear i can pull on them, and one of them is a FAR FAR FAR better driver than me (pulling him on straights only, on turns he dumps me like i am a bolt anchor).

for ppl with lots of rear engine exp, i dont think 7 is easier to drive. but i do think it's less fun as it's easier to "controllably" hang out the tail of 6 than in a 7. but those who feel 7 is easier to drive, drive it harder, you will find it does the same thing a 6 would do.... i wish i kept my 6 but only in addition to the 7 though.

mooty

yeah, but you are the faster driver.
i am comparing my lap times with ppl whom drove same cars i had (not just gt3's but we both had miata, spec miata, e36m3, lotus etc) so i know his "instrinsic" speed, such that i can rule out driver skills, and i am only comparing speed on straight away to further reduce my poor capability as an variable.


that adds credibility.
VJ may not remember, but he was in my garage buying my motons and we chatted about the 997gt3. he said he didn't like those electronic aids blah blah and so did i. but we both now find RS to be "technically" the better car, not more fun (that's personal).

finally, i have major philosophical issues when ppl compare prices of used 6gt3 vs new 7gt3. one must cmopare new to new like hank said earlier. most 6 are now 3 years old at about $70k. well hell, in 2010, most 7gt3 will be about 70k also. that's the price you should be concerned with.

AllanJ

2010 will be an interesting year with 6-yr old 6gt3s vs 3-yr old 7gt3s. I still think it'll boil down to a smaller group really appreciating the "rawness" of the 6gt3 and a larger group being attracted to an easier-to-drive 7gt3. Especially (in their minds) when the 7gt3 is cushier on the street and with the press of a magic "sport" button, it will be everything they could ever want in a car.

Different strokes....

For the future, I don't see the GT3 series ever going back to the "purity" of the 6gt3, but maybe there will be a way to fully turn off the intrusiveness of the electronic aids? Maybe some kind of "track" button with the appropriate warnings, etc to keep the aggressive US court system away from Porsche?

One can dream.

Cheers,

Nordschleife

Queue lights
Queue thunder
Queue smoke
Queue Hallelulia Chorus
(dramatic pause)
and Enter

A Driving God

(from stage left on his way to Earth from Valhalla!)

Am I the only person who finds the above statement the mostz amazing piece of pretentious TOSH.

So 'average drivers' can't drive a GT3? Bull****!.

The 'average driver' can't understand the GT? Little boys on bicycles with trainer wheels understand the GT3!

The 'average driver' afraid of the '6gt3'? Absolute nonsense, its behaviour is progressive and easily predictable and controllable.

'Not a car for pseurs'? Whatever I might have thought before, I certainly think it is now.


What you have written is the most narcissistic crud I have read in a very long time, I suggest you book an appointment with your alienist.

One of the attractions of the GT3 is that it a brilliant car for people to learn to drive on. I don't have to stop kids or old ladies driving it, its safe and easy. None of them regard themselves as superior to the average driver.

On reading your post, my initial reation was to stick my fingers as far down my throat as possible, your smug self regard was utterly sick making.

R+C

DanH

I assure you, I'm only visiting earth to impregnate your mortal women.




(p.s. are you not being a little harsh - anyone can drive a GT3, but from what I can see a lot did decide it wasn't worth the discomfort if they weren't into the dynamics!)

blake

Nordschleife - Though I deeply respect your opinions & insights most of the time on this board, I have to disagree with you on this one. Jager's post brings up the core reason that I purchased a 996 GT3. However, I did not think the spirit of his post conveyed any inference of superiority.

As I am sure everyone on Rennlist remembers, the 996 GT3 was met in the US with a bit of disdain from the first group of buyers. Many complained that the car was too stiff, too hard to drive, even too fast. I have been following the 911 since the late 1980s, and 100% believe that the 911 has gotten more "user friendly" through the evolution of the 964 to 993 to 996 to 997. I strongly believe that the demograpics of the buyer has changes in the US over the past two decades, and to survive, Porsche had to change as well. So along comes the "throwback" 911 (in 996 GT3 form) and it actually drives like an older, tail happy 911 and I am in heavan. The thing about the old 911 which I truly love is how engaging they are! The best analogy that I can come up with is with skiing. Back in the 1980s/early 1990's, Volkl skiis were the Porsches of the sking world becuase anybody could buy them, and they were just a race ski for the recreational skiier. I remember being on gondolas across America with affluent 40-somethings and 50-somethings who would say, "Oh yea. These Volkls are awesome. However, I am exhausted at noon because they toss me around. I think I need to get a cruiser." It didn't take Volkl long to create their cruiser line, and now Volkls (IMHO) are more popular than ever, but are also more compliant than ever. Is that great for most people? Of course. Is that great for me? Hell no. If I can't ski a ski because I don't make the commitment to it, then I deserve to be thrown on my butt! I love that!

I think of the GT3 in the same way. Truth be told, I absolutely HATE the look of the 996 line. The entire line looks like an aberration between the 993 and 997 line. For external sex appeal, the 997 GT3 rivals the 94 964 Turbo as one of the best Porsches ever made. However, having driven the "7" and owning the "6", I much prefer the 996 GT3 because it is more raw and, here comes the word, *visceral*. I can assure you that at some point in my life, I too will want the compliance of the "7". But for today, Jager nailed it and I agree with him completey - the 996 is still the top of the Porsche, normally aspirated world.

I just hope Porsche continues to make these throwback "racecars for the street". It just doesn't get any better than this!

(Oh, and by the way... I just rented a 997 GT3 from Gotham Cars in NYC for a weekend in November over spirited driving with a buddy (danoberer) here on Rennlist. We'll put the car to the test driving around New England and will let you guys know what we think...)

-Blake

multi21

Uhhh, the word "Visceral" was banned due to it's overuse long ago. Your in violation. Bad form, indeed.

blake

I know, I know... Hence the quotes, and the heads-up.... But is there a better word? Please help me - I can't handle the word withdrawal on this forum!

-B

AllanJ

Ahhh....how easily the written word can be misinterpreted on forums like this....

Robin, I know Jager personally. I've done a ton of autox and track events with him. There is nothing "smug" or "narcissistic" about him. He's a guy who loves driving his car the way it was meant to be driven. You'd really appreciate that.

A lot of what you wrote about the handling characteristics about the GT3 (like being predictable) require a decent alignment. How many came that way from the factory? I think you know the answer. My GT3 was more than a handful when I first bought it and if I let my grandmother drive it she'd fly into a tree. Experienced 911 drivers spun my car! It's in better (more predictable) shape now with a better alignment but taking any kind of turns near the limits requires your full attention and a lot of skill to react properly if it wants to go on you. Especially if you take a car set up for autox to the race track. Now there's a handful! Even more of a handful if you have one hand on a cell phone and another holding a latte.

Anyhow, back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Cheers,

Jager

I had no idea a simple posting could evoke such a *visceral* response