998: Evolution or Revolution?
#1
998: Evolution or Revolution?
We're probably a way off seeing this car and this post is not about due dates, but about something a little more conceptual.
If 998 will face a market with more competition on performance/$ then how should Porsche compete? If you were advising Weideking and Mauer on the 998, what should be "Evolved" and what should be "Revolutionized" about the car? Which cars should it compete with? What price should it sell at?
Any suggestions/ideas as to what you would advise?
If 998 will face a market with more competition on performance/$ then how should Porsche compete? If you were advising Weideking and Mauer on the 998, what should be "Evolved" and what should be "Revolutionized" about the car? Which cars should it compete with? What price should it sell at?
Any suggestions/ideas as to what you would advise?
#2
Well at this point it will need IMO to compete with the new E92 M3 that will be in the 400+ hp range, and it best be priced similarly to the 997. Anything less than that and the 998 is suddenly no longer a decent buy even for an exotic when you think about how many other cars out there can outperform it at less cost. Rattles and Korean quality interior construction still need to be addressed. As for looks I am more than fine with the exterior design as it is now. I do not think I could ever grow tired of it. I just think it needs nore power in the base C2, and better quality interior contruction.
#3
I think the car should have the same or slightly more power and retain the same basic look and pricing. The car should be shortened to reduce overhangs and the weight should be reduced. This is a better way than adding horsepower. The interior should have more of what are upgrades as standard. Aluminum look should be replaced with aluminum.
#4
They should keep the 997-way and spend all their money on the following:
1.) Reliability
2.) Weight reduction
We need to get back to the old days when the terms "nimble" and "bulletproof" were in every thread. They've already made revolutions in the 996 days. It's time to sharpen the saw and restore confidence.
1.) Reliability
2.) Weight reduction
We need to get back to the old days when the terms "nimble" and "bulletproof" were in every thread. They've already made revolutions in the 996 days. It's time to sharpen the saw and restore confidence.
Last edited by Mike Murphy; 01-16-2007 at 02:01 AM.
#5
Hopefully they keep the user electronics to a minimum ie anti-bmw and anti-merc
Some of the options are getting pretty goofy IMO and should be bundled ie power seats, bi-xenon, multifunction wheel, stainless steel exhaust and floormats for heaven's sake. I'd rethink the five shades of grey/silver trim standard. Check out a honda to see how to make readable analog gauges.
Some of the options are getting pretty goofy IMO and should be bundled ie power seats, bi-xenon, multifunction wheel, stainless steel exhaust and floormats for heaven's sake. I'd rethink the five shades of grey/silver trim standard. Check out a honda to see how to make readable analog gauges.
#6
Dude, Comparing it to a Honda???
IMHO, with enough driving time, one can tell how fast they are driving just by listening to the engine. I think that's why PCNA put the Tach in front instead of the speedometer.
IMHO, with enough driving time, one can tell how fast they are driving just by listening to the engine. I think that's why PCNA put the Tach in front instead of the speedometer.
#7
Originally Posted by MyEmily
Dude, Comparing it to a Honda???
IMHO, with enough driving time, one can tell how fast they are driving just by listening to the engine. I think that's why PCNA put the Tach in front instead of the speedometer.
IMHO, with enough driving time, one can tell how fast they are driving just by listening to the engine. I think that's why PCNA put the Tach in front instead of the speedometer.
Trending Topics
#8
Evolution for the most part. Lots of opportunities for progress including:
Aluminum chassis
Direct injection (which is rumored to be coming)
Bump in displacement (although a revolution here might be nice vs. squeezing more life out of the current design)
My wish? That would be a GT car from the Panamera that will become the $100k luxo sports cruiser so the Carerra does not have to follow the current path and thus allow it to go back to basics - lighter weight, slightly smaller, touch more power, less luxury, you know what I mean.
Aluminum chassis
Direct injection (which is rumored to be coming)
Bump in displacement (although a revolution here might be nice vs. squeezing more life out of the current design)
My wish? That would be a GT car from the Panamera that will become the $100k luxo sports cruiser so the Carerra does not have to follow the current path and thus allow it to go back to basics - lighter weight, slightly smaller, touch more power, less luxury, you know what I mean.
#10
I'd like to see the following:
- A return to early 996 weight or below (sub 3,000#'s for a low optioned car)
- A further evolutionary development of the interior and exterior
- A new chassis (even stronger/lighter that the 996/997 chassis)
- A new class of watercooled engine that builds on the strengths of past 911's, fixes the M96 problem areas/weaknesses and is suitable for the entire range (998, 998S, TT, GT3, GT2)
- Totally driver defeatable PSM
- Power to weight ratio's that will maintain Porsche's "Ring"/Track dominance vs upcoming competition (Corvette C7, New Vantage, New Supra, New Ferrari Dino, New NSX, New Audi R8, New M3, Nissan GT-R).
- A return to early 996 weight or below (sub 3,000#'s for a low optioned car)
- A further evolutionary development of the interior and exterior
- A new chassis (even stronger/lighter that the 996/997 chassis)
- A new class of watercooled engine that builds on the strengths of past 911's, fixes the M96 problem areas/weaknesses and is suitable for the entire range (998, 998S, TT, GT3, GT2)
- Totally driver defeatable PSM
- Power to weight ratio's that will maintain Porsche's "Ring"/Track dominance vs upcoming competition (Corvette C7, New Vantage, New Supra, New Ferrari Dino, New NSX, New Audi R8, New M3, Nissan GT-R).
#11
Originally Posted by blk on blk
Well my car rattles so much someone the other day asked me if Porsche was outsourcing their interior assemble to Korea. That is the essence of my rant on umgrading the interior construction. I have already taken it in 6 times for eexcessive rattles. they fix it for a day then they come back usually worse than before. This should not be the case for an $80K car.
#12
It's interesting to read all these views on the "911" of the immediate future. Where have you guys been? Porsche is merely evolving the 911 into what the market has been asking for. Porsche isn't doing packages, they're letting you select the car just as you want it. The tach has always been front center on every 911 since 901. Rattles? What are you driving on? I have a cab and figure it has to be looser than any coupe and it's still tight,--maybe on some washboard back road in Colorado? The aluminum chassis is impossible for cost. The DI will allow Porsche to keep the 3.6 and 3.8 displacements without growth,--for now. They'll get the HP growth with that alone. Porsche tried to go with billet aluminum in places but for weight returned to quality plastics painted in aluminum. Much of the desires in this thread are mutually exclusive. It's getting extremely difficult to retain quality in materials and fit and finish as you outsource for lighter assemblies.
#13
I lean toward 'murpheyslaw1978'. The 911 is still 'the car to contend with' for all other makers in it's class. These two attributes I think are the key elements that seperate the 911 from the rest...besides the obvious rear engine design.
#14
Originally Posted by murphyslaw1978
They should keep the 997-way and spend all their money on the following:
1.) Reliability
2.) Weight reduction
We need to get back to the old days when the terms "nimble" and "bulletproof" we in every thread. They've already made revolutions in the 996 days. It's time to sharpen the saw and restore confidence.
1.) Reliability
2.) Weight reduction
We need to get back to the old days when the terms "nimble" and "bulletproof" we in every thread. They've already made revolutions in the 996 days. It's time to sharpen the saw and restore confidence.
+1
#15
1. More power - base C2 should have 350 or more, C2S should have 380-400.
2. Better fit and finish in the interior - squeaks and rattles should be the exception, not the norm.
3. Go on a diet - 3K pounds or even a little less would be nice. Weight is the sports car's enemy.
4. Better gadget list - no satellite radio or MP3 adapter? Ridiculous. These ARE Germans, right?
5. Invest in the dealer network - too many people have terrible interactions with their dealerships. Going to a Porsche dealership should never, ever be worse than visiting a Lexus dealership.
6. Less electronic interference - I agree that Porsche must continue to fight the urge to load their car with electronic nanny-gadgets. I don't want anything more boosting my steering, brakes or otherwise. It's friggin' perfect, leave that stuff alone. Used to love Bimmers, now they're appliances.
Think that's my short list.
2. Better fit and finish in the interior - squeaks and rattles should be the exception, not the norm.
3. Go on a diet - 3K pounds or even a little less would be nice. Weight is the sports car's enemy.
4. Better gadget list - no satellite radio or MP3 adapter? Ridiculous. These ARE Germans, right?
5. Invest in the dealer network - too many people have terrible interactions with their dealerships. Going to a Porsche dealership should never, ever be worse than visiting a Lexus dealership.
6. Less electronic interference - I agree that Porsche must continue to fight the urge to load their car with electronic nanny-gadgets. I don't want anything more boosting my steering, brakes or otherwise. It's friggin' perfect, leave that stuff alone. Used to love Bimmers, now they're appliances.
Think that's my short list.