docfink

Mr. Harris makes some pretty strong and interesting comments regarding Porsche's, and in particular, the 911's direction. He believes the 997.2 is too watered down with too many variations. The DFI engine whirrs "sillently"; the steering "inert", the switchgear "average". He basically states the need to make the 911 "special" again.

His points are well-taken. He only has passion for today's GT-Series cars. I think the question is this: Can Porsche make a series car that can be driven with passion on the road and bring excitement on the track without costing more than it does today? Maybe the GT3 can be a DD, but it seems a bit hard-core for that. I'm one of the few that admit to liking the nav system, the leather, power seats, sunroof, etc.

Being a Porsche newbie and having dreamed of owning one of these since about age 5, I have to admit that I expected to be blown away from my first drive, but I wasn't. It's likely that I'm an early middle-aged guy now, so blood-curdling excitement doesn't occur like it used to, and maybe I felt (and still do, a bit) some buyer's remorse spending what I did. However, the car, its raw (for me) steering, ride, and power have increasingly impressed me over over the past 9 months of ownership. The car has more passion than anything I've driven before--but my '02 MINI Cooper S was special too--just not as solid or powerful. My '91 MR2 Turbo felt like a rocket when the turbo kicked in and was a blast. Since I'm not coming from a high-end vehicle, my 911's sound and power are special to me, but I haven't driven a 993 or earlier car.

Can a car like a no-frills 993 even be made today? Would people buy it? Even Lotus will soon be changing their Elise to make it more of a DD. What do you think--are today's 911's too boring and corporate? Is Mr. Harris correct?

stevepow

When I look at 911s historically, the car seems to be on track with its original intent, even though some confuse that intent with other things:

"The Porsche 911 classic was developed as a much more powerful, larger, more comfortable replacement for the Porsche 356, the company's first model."

Of course over the years, power and comfort and large are all relative terms.

I was under the impression that you can buy a no frills 911 today. Do people buy them? Maybe a few, but there seems to be a base level of options that, at least, dealers think are necessary and most custom orders seem even more loaded up.

I think the current option set and flexibility is pretty decent. Porsche has to aim somewhere between toy and transportation with these cars - too much toy and sales would drop off a cliff - and too much transportation and then it is just another car.

I really enjoy my car - been wanting a 911 since forever - and for me, the first drive was exciting - and every time I drive it, I enjoy it more. It is special.

Maybe Chris Harris is simply jaded, or likes to play jaded on TV, or just needs to pony up the $$$ for a more extreme 911 - or order a very base 911.

Too many choices... Even by '67, just a few years after the 1st 911, there was the 911, the 912, the 911S, the 911R, coupes, cabrios, and targas...seems like business as usual to me.

BoxsterG

I too am feeling less enthusiastic on my current Porsche. I haven't driven it since early December and have no plans to this weekend. I was excited about the DFI engine and many other features that the 997.2 brought with it. However, it never seemed to provide the experience of the Porsches of old. The engine is too quiet and I missed that whirling the older engines used to provide. Though I changed the exhaust using a bypass pipe it isnt the what I had hoped.
I keep telling myself that I am just trying to compare the past with the current. I dont appear to have any interest in the new model either and it appears to move away from Porsche' I like.

kosmo

P is trying to be too many things to too many people.
I agree w/ the switchgear and too many variations comments. IMO there s/b no difference b/w the reg and S models, and kill the targa. the switchgear needs to be better. As far as engine sounds I luv the gt3 but wonder if I would like it everyday. Im actually thinking about tubi as a "compromise".

FYI CH also has a m3, and while not directly comparable, i prefer the P

swajames

Chris Harris owns a 997.1 GT3 and he gave the GT3RS his vote as it won the recent EVO Performance Car of the Year award, beating the 458 Italia which came second. In the past, he's also owned a GT2. He is a huge Porsche fan. He was one of a couple of journalists picked to drive the 24 hrs of the Nurburgring with Walter Rohrl in the factory Porsche team GT3 RS.

ADias

Chris Harris is a good car journalist, but he has his flaws. His comments on the base car are nonsense. If anything, what he criticizes applies from the 996 on and the 997.2 is actually an improvement.

Leader

It's a rhetorical discussion at best, a journalist's exercise at worst.
In reality, it comes down to what you personally feel a 911 should be.
But, in the end, it's difficult to mount a credible argument against Porsche's success.

pilfjd

You have your purists and you have the real world. The real world moves a bit too fast for the purists out there. Like someone previously stated before, Porsche is trying to please everyone, and in today's economy it only makes sense. That being said, I was quite impressed during my first test drive in a Porsche just last year. Being a rear engined flat six is enough to give the car that "je ne sais quoi" in my eyes.

Mike in CA

This is my 3rd 911 ('84 3.2 Carrera, '99 996) and it is far and away the best in both a quantitative and qualitative sense. I don't have access to Mr. Harris' piece in Excellence but just based on the quotes in docfink's post I would disagree with his POV that the 911 is no longer "special".

Just as they always have, back to the earliest days of the 356, Porsche has struck a balance with their base series cars between sport and practicality and then beyond that given the owner the option to tailor the vehicle to their needs. Don't like the quietness of the DFI engine?, order PSE. Think the ride is too cushy and the steering not responsive enough?, order sport PASM and dial in a bit more negative camber in front, which is easy to do. And so on.

I don't think having a lot of variations is a weakness. In fact, it's a strength that allows a wide variety of drivers to tailor the car to their taste and make the experience of owning a Porsche special to them. I don't buy into the argument that what someone else does to option their car, or whether the manufacturer builds sedans and SUV's in addition to sportscars, affects my car in any way. It doesn't make it go any slower, corner or brake less well, or look any less attractive. If you think exclusivity is being diluted, then just maybe you're more interested in posing than driving, because the performance of the car stands on it's own, not on what else the manufacturer offers.

There have been many "special" cars that were dismal failures in one or more aspects of the driving experience. There have been very few that offer everyday practicality with maximum performance potential. If you read about Porsche's history you will know that that balance has always been a primary goal of the company. As the most recent in an unbroken 60 year line of sports cars, the 997.2 is still true to that heritage. And that makes it pretty "special" IMO.

kosmo

well said Mike.

Bullit

Agreed kosmo. Mike nailed it with his explanation.....

cbzzoom

This is not a problem for a smart Porsche buyer, but it is a problem for marketing and magazine studies. When you make a $70k car that is not very good with certain options, that is very bad for perception. Also you get magazine tests that don't have the right options and wind up writing bad opinions - for example I've seen a lot of PDK reviews in cars that don't have Sport Chrono.

It may be a strength for an educated buyer, but it is certainly a bad thing for perception and marketing.

The perception of a car model is watered down by the weakest offering available; for example the simple existance of the 2.5 Boxster severely damaged the perception of Porsches for many years as over-priced and under-powered.

Mspeedster

I have the issue and have read the article. I agree and disagree with the points made. Like Chris Harris, I would like to see the base 911 be more raw, pure sport focused, and make all the right noises. A car more like the original 911. I also agree with the article in that Porsche has gone overboard with all these versions that are now availalbe with the 997.2.

But what I don't agree with is that the 911 isn't special. It still is, the 997 is likely the best 911 Porsche has ever made. But the problem is the car industry has brought many worthy competitors. So if you've owned other contemporary sports cars or even sport sedans/coupes (e.g. M3), the gap to the 911 isn't as large as it might have been decades ago.

In the 60's, 70's, and 80's, the 911 had few rivals. Then in the 90's many car makers started to target the 911. The NSX was one example, then more and more different car makes from Japan and Europe raised their own bars to close the performance gap to a 911.

Today, there are many alternatives to a 911. Which I suppose is the point Chris Harris is making. But if all Porsche made was a GT3 version of the car, sales would be very poor compared to what Porsche had accomplished with both the 996 and 997. I see nothing wrong with Porsche's strategy of offering customers their choice of car. Chris makes his choice, by buying the GT versions.

Mike in CA

So Porsche should reduce their offerings to cater to the lowest common denominator? Or they should limit choice or specify fewer configurations to make sure that uneducated buyers/testers don't screw up and damage the marques' reputation? I just think that approach places too much emphasis on perception as opposed to real choice for enthusiasts and more casual drivers alike.

Almost all major manufacturers offer broad model lines. I disagree that a car model is watered down by the weakest offering. The fact that Mercedes builds the A class doesn't diminish the SLS AMG. The Audi A3 doesn't take the shine off the R8 5.2. And I personally think that any supposed shortcomings of the original Boxster were much more of an issue with Porsche "purists" than they were with the general automotive public. In fact the Boxster opened up Porsche ownership to a much wider group of buyers, many of whom have no doubt moved on to more expensive models in the line. Good business!

sclemmons

I have not read the Chris Harris article but I have seen and respect his work.

I am driving my first Porsche now and it still feels special to me.

I came from BMW and see how they have turned it from the great car it was to a great brand for the aspirational customer. They get heavier every year, and need more power, which makes them heavier, which makes them need more power. And the next thing you know they offer free maintenance and the shade tree repair shops falter and we are all captive to the new heavy *** family car BMW instead of the classic hi rev hot rod DIY drivers car BMW. BMW is commercially successful, but is lost as a brand. Their dealers are oriented to grinding up customers from Lexus and Honda, and have no respect for the heritage of the brand, and no respect for customers who have been driving BMW's for 30 years. My 1988 E28 M5 weighs 3400+ pounds, about the same as the new 1-Series M. BMW has seen the last of me. Don't even get me started on the local dealer.

I don't want to see the BMW travesty happen to Porsche, and after being in the Audis around my office full of automatic everything and technology to the max, I fear Porsche may slide in that direction. The more they put in these cars the higher the margins and the more reliant on the dealer the customer becomes. I believe the VW people would love to turn Porsche into an alternative to BMW because BMW is a huge commercial success. I love Porsche, and I think that would suck in the worst way. I have not read the Chris Harris article, but I bet we would hit it off pretty well.