Mabuhay

Hmm... I hate to say it since I love the 997, but don't they already race together and the Porsche's get spanked each time in the American Le Mans series against Ferrari's, Aston Martin, Saleen, etc.? I believe the Corvette's (gulp!) has won it several years in a row or something like that?

allegretto

You do understand

I collect "collectable watches". I can buy a digital Casio for $50 that will tell time much better than a $150,000.00 Patek Philippe

Guess which one I own?

mb996

From an engineering and performance perspective, Porsche has been resting on their laurels for far too long. Slow and steady improvements are great until the competition comes along with a disruptive change (Z06). There is no reason Porsche can not lighten the 911 by a few hundred pounds (while still keeping most of the safety features and creature comforts). Taking 300 pounds off the car would be a good first step, even if using aluminum/carbon fiber/etc. added 10K to the price. Taking 500 pounds off while keeping the safety margin and creature comforts would be an engineering miracle. Taking 800 pounds off, now that is a challenge.

JohnnyBahamas

I agree. Porsche needs to push it and the good news is that they have in the past, so they can in the present. The Cayman is the platform IMO. With the proper engine the Cayman would give Ferrari nightmares... much less GM. Imagine the Cayman as a $100,000 Carrera GT and that's what I was hoping for when they annouced it.

I think Porsche really missed a significant first strike with the Cayman.

500

997's need a power increase period. Geez even every 500 model MB are all becoming 550's, now with 382 hp and 389 lb ft of tq...that's an 80 hp increase folks. A light car like a CLK550 will be offering very strong performance close to a 997, not to mention the new CLK63 with 503 hp, seven speed paddle shifts all for about $76k...yeah 997's need more power Scotty.

icruze

As a 997S owner I was not bothered by the MT article. In fact it shows what a great car the 911 is. It was selected to compete against the performance of a Z06, the luxury and excusiveness of the AM, and the handling/nibbness of the Cayman. No other car in this group could have done this. For example just think of the Z06 v. AM matchup. The AM isn't in same league as the Z06 in performance but would obliderate it in the styling and exclusivity.

So the article gives some ammo to my corvette buddies to give me a hard time with...but I live content knowing that I (like all of the other 997 owners here) could have bought a Z06 if I had wanted to but willingly paid a premium not to be a "corvette guy."

texas911

Has Porsche hit the wall with the flat 6?

pcar964

Self-imposed wall, perhaps. Look at Colin's (Ninemeister's) thread on their 993 heads... They're getting 360bhp from 2 valve air cooled motors from a simple head redesign and cams, and that's just an independant shop. Using water cooled heads and 4 valves, I see no reason why the most profitable auto manufacturer in the world can't squeeze 120bhp/liter out of their motors like Honda and BMW (without turbocharging).

Anyone's guess as to why they haven't, although I have some pretty strong hypotheses.

black993man

I'm surprised nobody's yet mentioned the 997 vs. Aston Martin Vantage article that was the very next page in the Motor Trend issue. Suddenly, the MT editors' focus shifted from a comparison of performance to which car has more style and visual appeal. Their conclusions were that the Porsche was "plenty good looking, but it's just so very, very familiar" and that "If you want your $70,000-plus to swivel heads, this Porsche is likely to disappoint". Whereas they pointed out the Aston Martin is "knee-weakingly beautiful"... "Savile Row bespoke tailoring versus [the Porsche's] Hugo Boss off the rack". They took this different approach because the performance angle wasn't defensible in that case. Funny they didn't mention style in the prior article comparing with the Z06. I chalked both up to a need to take a controversial stand and offer a conclusion that would sell magazines. No doubt, hats off to Chevy for a phemonenal performance value, but numbers don't tell the whole story of ownership as we know.

It wasn't until the final article ("Has the King Lost It's Crown") that MT observed "the 911 remains among the most accessible exotic cars on the planet" and "an exotic car that can be driven as comfortably in traffic as on a race circuit". Their final conclusion was that "clearly the most serious threat to the 911's supremacy would appear to be the one from within" (referring to the potential of the Cayman).

OCBen

Hmmm, if you're a sensible man and realize that the basic function of a time piece is to tell time, I would say you would opt for the better watch - the one that tells time more accurately, the Casio in this case.

BiggerTwin

If any of us were sensible and realized the basic function of a car is transportation none of us would drive Porsches. My quartz Speedmaster X-33 is a "better" timepiece than my original movement Speedmaster that I have to wind every weekend but I still wear the old one anyway. I like the way it looks, its old world craftsmanship, its ties to my past and its historic value. Probably a lot of the same reasons people buy the 911.

Considering the Carrera won the comparison I don't see why anyone would be upset. The Vette is faster, the Aston more exclusive and the Cayman handles better. Even so, the overall balance of the Carrera kept the crown. What's not to like?

Alan

allegretto

Yes, very logical

Now, if you bought the Casio a year ago for $50, what is it worth today?

If you bought the PP a year ago for $120K and can sell it today for $150K what would a "sensible" man do?

I'll tell you that one of these two watches is in my safe today, you'll just have to figure out which one...

fast1

For those of you who posted that you test drove the C6 Z06, please tell me the name of the Dealer. It's hard enough for me to find the dam car, and then when I do, the Dealer has the car ropped off, and thinks he's doing me a big favor by letting me sit behind the wheel. When I ask for a test drive, the salesman begins to laugh hysterically. I did spend some time behind the wheel of a friend's Z, but not enough to really make any definitive judgements. It doesn't take long however to determine that the Z is super fast.

The Z has a curb weight of a little over 3K lbs, and when you couple that with around 480 lb/ft of torque, you have the recipe for one fast car. Each manufacturer has its own idea as to how to achieve increased power. GM likes big engines, while Porsche likes turbocharging. Personally I couldn't care less how a manufacturer gets the power, as long as it produces.

Each of us probably uses the same criteria for evaluating a Sports Car: acceleration, braking, cornering capability, top speed, quality of materials, fit & finish, and reliability. What will vary is the importance we place on the different criteria. Hence we can all look objectively at the same criteria and form different conclusions.

In my case I place a great deal of emphasis on performance. I was always impressed by Ferraris and Porsches because they were either the fastest or best handling cars on the road. I wouldn't get much satisfaction losing to a car in a road race, but thinking that the seams on my car are more evenly aligned or that the plastics used in the interior are superior. But that's me and I certainly don't mean to disparage anyone who places a great deal of emphasis on those items.

The reason that I probably won't be buying a C6 Z06 is the Chevy Dealers. The Chevy Dealers near me are the pits, and I can't imagine getting my $70K Z serviced at any of them . I guess I got spoiled by the service provided by Porsche/Audi.

OCBen

Au contraire, BiggerTwin.

Nice counter point, btw, but you didn't follow the argument through. And that would be to say that since the basic function of a car is transportation a sensible man would opt for the better car, where better would have to be defined. ... In a watch, when it comes to the basic function of keeping time, accuracy is the most important attribute, and so the more accurate the watch the better the watch.

In a car, better could mean more reliable or better build quality, better handling, better braking, better acceleration, more fun to drive – or all of the above factored in together to yield a synergistic sum where the whole is greater than the sum of the attributes. And so a sensible man might just opt for the Porsche.

I don't think that "more fun to tell time with" would fly as a selling point for a sensible man - it might for a 9 yr old.

The Vette may well exceed in one of these attributes, but it is the synergist sum that would appeal to a sensible man....in my opinion.

allegretto

[QUOTE=OCBen]Au contraire, BiggerTwin.

Nice counter point, btw, but you didn't follow the argument through. And that would be to say that since the basic function of a car is transportation a sensible man would opt for the better car, where better would have to be defined. ... In a watch, when it comes to the basic function of keeping time, accuracy is the most important attributeQUOTE]

Ben, you are a very clear thinker

Why is the definition of a better car somthing to be defined yet when it comes to a better watch you casually assume that you can define it?