[QUOTE=dreamtripper007;5266501]
... And I don't think every discussion should resort to "try driving one on a track" or "try running at WOT on a track." Most owners don't track their cars, but most do get on and off an on-ramp every day.
QUOTE]

I get your point here and of your post and i don't really disagree:

But i think that if you are going to talk about the best qualities of the 911 thru the years, it necessarily comes down to racing. I am no track junkie. However, for me at least, the thing that makes me smile each and every drive, is the suspension - how it puts down power, how it steers/feels, and how it is, for lack of better words, solid and unflappable. And where these attributes are best noticed is in curves, on elevation changes, etc., and these are most safely found at a track.

As I said previously almost any car could use more power and/or torque. The thing to me that sets the 911, and other Porsches apart, is how great the suspension is and that is what, IMHO, the other cars mentioned lack.

We all want everything all the time (at least I do), but I have to wonder what a true super car powered 911, retaining the same quality suspension, would cost. I have not driven a CGT so I cannot comment on its suspension and it is not rear engined, of course, but we know what it costs.

The 911 is compromised to a price point as are most cars. I would rather have the suspension than the power for my money, FWIW.

 

If you put that amount of torque on any vehicle, may it be the GT2 or other you will find yourself in the same situation. Thats why you drive the car to your limits, not the cars and gradually learn. And I agree not driving it in the winter, but the same can be said for any high powered sports car...thats why you buy the SUV. And we are not talking about awd, they have their own place and use in the world willingly sacrificing some performance and adding to cost in maintenance, gas and maybe in overall reliability. JMO, I had a 2007 Z06 and its clearly not the same machine as the 50th anniversary C5.

 

Yes, that's fine so long as the weight reduction doesn't come out of the safety margin in the car. And often that is what happens. I don't want a 2900lb 911 if it means I'm instantly dead in an accident. To lower weight and keep the safety margin intact, composite materials must be used. And that adds alot to cost.

 

Don't agree. IMO the rear engine has potential for faster laps in the hands of a skilled driver. But, it makes the car less stable. Stability is engineered in, but not organic.

 

Yes, it is underpowered. For this kind of money, it should keep up with Corvettes. But, I also know that more speed is insane on the streets. I'm glad I'm limited by this engine and I really enjoy driving the car. I just have to stay my desire to drag race onto the freeway. The total car is amazing and really fun to drive and I have to remember that. The 997 is designed to be driven in cities, not the track. I have to admit that it's over engineered even for that. So, I have to trust the Porsche people to build a car that really is designed for the way I use it. They have faster ones if I think I need it but do I really? No, it's just my ego.

 

Yes, it is underpowered. For this kind of money,

A decently equipped 997 will stciker in the $80s, and the sticker for a GT-R is around $70K. The GT-R will blow away a base 997 in every performance category. As a matter of fact according to a comparison test in the May issue of R&T, the GT-R outperforms the Z06 and 997 turbo. The GT-R is listed at 480 HP, but there's no way that is accurate based on the car's acceleration times and its nearly 4K lb curb weight. Maybe 480 at the wheels would be a better estimate.

So yes according to the price of the 997 and its competition, I would have to agree with your assertion. However, there are many criteria that we must evaluate when making a car buying decision, and HP is just one. If HP is at the top or near the top of your personal car buying criteria, the 997 wouldn't be a good choice, especially if you are a value oriented buyer.

 

I agree. Buying a Porsche is never going to be a rational decision - there are so many intangibles that make the car desirable that can't be quantitatively measured.

It's why this argument will never end - it's not only a different set of quantitative measures (hp vs. lap times) but also the qualitative aspects of the car that are hard to define and put a real price on that are being compared and contrasted.

Is a souffle in fact just an overpriced omlette???

 

One of the most important facors for me is whether the car I buy puts a smile on my face every time I drive it. I've been buying Porches for almost 40 years and they have never failed to meet the smile test. There are lots of cars out there with much more HP than a 997 but will they pass the smile test after you become accustomed to the incrreased HP, and you will become accustomed to it. I have friends with 993s that are grossly underpowered by todays standards, but no one could be happier than they are with their cars.

 

I remember a year or so ago there was an article in the Wall Street Journal about jewelry and brand names. They compared equivalents pieces from Tiffany as well as from other jewelers without the same cachet. From an objective standpoint, a diamond is a diamond is a diamond, given that all aspects are equal (cut, clarity, color, etc. etc.). The testers in the panel could not from an objective standpoint justify the price premium that Tiffany carried over the regional jewelers. However, when it came to wearing the jewelry, the panel was also unanimous. They *all* felt better when they were wearing the Tiffany jewelry, even though objectively the stones, etc. were no better than the others. They concluded, therefore, that purchases of luxury items such as jewelry cannot be limited to "objective" measures because jewelry is so much about how it makes the wearer *feel*.

I think the same argument can be made for sports cars.

No matter how fast or how well tuned Chevy or Nissan can make a car, at the end of the day, it's still a Chevy or Nissan. I'm not saying this to be elitist. You'll find this sort of argument in any car forum, with the Audi drivers versus the Mitsu/Subie drivers, the BMW drivers versus the Lexus/Infiniti drivers.

Expanding fast1's point about whether the car puts a smile on his face every time he drives it, I'll take that a step further and ask: how about a car putting a smile on someone's face just *thinking* about owning it and not even having to drive it? I feel that way about my C4S in a way that I've never felt about any other car.

I don't care if I'm going to have to point-by a Z06 or a GT-R at the local race track. I used to track a highly modded Audi S4 that passed everyone in my run group. Yes, I got some enjoyment when I passed M3's, M5's, and 911's but it was a fleeting feeling. I had to be actively driving it on the track and passing those other cars to extract the joy out of the car. When it was in my garage or when I drove it around town, I felt nothing. In fact, I wish I had those other cars that I passed at the track.

Now I have an a 911. And I'm enjoying every minute of ownership, even when I sitting here at a computer and not driving it. 0-60, 100-0, HP at the wheels... they're all just numbers that have absolutely no bearing on how much I love being a Porsche 911 owner.

 

This is true, there's just something about the Porsche badge and how it makes you feel. In addition the 911 is unique with the rear engine design so at the minimum it's something really different as well.

 

Now I have an a 911. And I'm enjoying every minute of ownership, even when I sitting here at a computer and not driving it. 0-60, 100-0, HP at the wheels... they're all just numbers that have absolutely no bearing on how much I love being a Porsche 911 owner.

That's a great point. For those who feel the same as we do, a Porsche is a geat value. For others who want to have the fastest car at the lowest possible price, there are better choices than a Porsche. There is no right or wrong answer as to which choice is better, unless someone can't determine in which camp he falls.

 

HUH? you can't be serious! The track is where the Carrera S or not S really shines!

 

I have been a posche owner for about 3 weeks now. And while I love the 911 and would without a doubt purchase another one...I do believe that porsche is starting to fall behind in the horsepower wars. I just read where BMW's 1 series has an identical 0-60 time as the base 911. That seems absurd! Yes...0-60 times are not all of the equation...but it is certainly part of it. I would guess that 10 years ago this would not have been the case. I would imagine that 10 years ago porsche's 0-60 times were in fact better than the vast majority of cars on the planet. And now...way too many of them have caught up or indeed passed them. I would also wager a guess that the replacement for the 997 will shave off about .5 second on their 0-60 times accross the range of models (turbo excluded).

 

Kidding right ??

The world record 0-60 time for production street cars was the Ford RS200 (?) with 3.07s.

So if the C2S shaves .5 sec off its time that is HUGE... doesnt it get tested to 3.9sec today ??

You need double the torque (like the turbo) to get less than .5 secs off this time

DSG probably would pull .1sec max of the 0-60 with the quicker shift 1-2

 

I didn't know that the c2s was tested at 3.9? If that's the case than they need to tell someone!

I guess I'm more refering to the tiptronic. (I know...I may be the only person who really likes this transmission) It sounds like a change to DSG may well cut a full .5 sec off the current tip...without any horsepower changes. But I do believe that the 911 will become much quicker (across the line) in the next iteration.