Excellent 911 turbo article in Autoweek 11/27 issue
11-26-2006, 02:43 PM
#1
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent 911 turbo article in Autoweek 11/27 issue
This week's Autoweek has an excellent article (p22) on the new 911 turbo showing 99 ft (60-0) stopping distance for ceramics. They say this record-breaking stopping power is in part ceramic related but also ""due to Porsche's vaunted stability management system, which begins pumping hydraulic brake fluid to calipers whenever it senses an abrupt lift. By the time you hit the brakes, the pads are already resting on the rotors, slashing stopping times even further."" Not long ago Motor Trend showed 105 ft for steel discs.
However, the article also includes info on 1st ($28.5K)+5yr total ($69.8Ktotal) depreciation which I think a bit too high especially because of the great demand for these cars. Plus some "true cost to own" info which for the first year article says around $52K. This number includes financial charges, insurance (always high for expensive to fix turbos), repairs(warranty should cover these), maintence(should be very low, just oil change 1st year), fuel, taxes, etc. Autoweek very seldom has a worth while write-up (imo), but this one is outstanding.
However, the article also includes info on 1st ($28.5K)+5yr total ($69.8Ktotal) depreciation which I think a bit too high especially because of the great demand for these cars. Plus some "true cost to own" info which for the first year article says around $52K. This number includes financial charges, insurance (always high for expensive to fix turbos), repairs(warranty should cover these), maintence(should be very low, just oil change 1st year), fuel, taxes, etc. Autoweek very seldom has a worth while write-up (imo), but this one is outstanding.
11-26-2006, 06:31 PM
#2
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: San Diego
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad you mentioned the Autoweek article, I was going to mention it myself but from a reverse point of view. I would hardly call this article excellent when the performance numbers they got are worse/similar to a 996tt (1/4 mile over 12s. and trap speed of 115mph or something). I do think the article is overall in favor of the TT although the depreciation numbers are useless, these guys can write but they can't drive. After one year of getting Autoweek I don't think it is worth it as a car magazine, it is only good for ads and not worth renewing the subscription, but that is just my opinion.
11-26-2006, 10:38 PM
#3
Rennlist Member
Since it was a tip that was tested, how can one criticize the magazine for the times posted? The numbers are reflective of the car provided. If they got good 0-60 numbers, the driver contribution to the rest of the acceleration numbers is non-existant. Perhaps it wasn't fully broken in, maybe the gas was 92 octane,maybe it was hot, maybe they ran a full tank with a fat tester, or maybe the car is a bit "chunky". Magazines that post spectacular times generally abuse the machinery, and owners can't get those times.
Re the magazine, I've been a regular subscriber for 30 years. They seem quite fair to me. The writers are enthusiasts, but aren't afraid to criticize a car. The racing news is pretty current and the letters are balanced. If you haven't attended their day of lectures at the Detroit show, you might try that . It was fairly enlightening when I did it a couple of years ago. Years ago, they sent writers to my home to write up two cars of mine (and were very accurate in their assesment), and wrote up a campaign in vintage Can-Am racing in which I participated and were accurate. So, I don't see what's wrong.
But, that's why they make chocolate and vanilla. AS
Re the magazine, I've been a regular subscriber for 30 years. They seem quite fair to me. The writers are enthusiasts, but aren't afraid to criticize a car. The racing news is pretty current and the letters are balanced. If you haven't attended their day of lectures at the Detroit show, you might try that . It was fairly enlightening when I did it a couple of years ago. Years ago, they sent writers to my home to write up two cars of mine (and were very accurate in their assesment), and wrote up a campaign in vintage Can-Am racing in which I participated and were accurate. So, I don't see what's wrong.
But, that's why they make chocolate and vanilla. AS
11-26-2006, 11:02 PM
#4
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you can run a stock 996tt 1/4 mile in less than 12 seconds I'd like to see it. I thought their article was extremely in favor of the 997tt.
Originally Posted by AAH986
Glad you mentioned the Autoweek article, I was going to mention it myself but from a reverse point of view. I would hardly call this article excellent when the performance numbers they got are worse/similar to a 996tt (1/4 mile over 12s. and trap speed of 115mph or something). I do think the article is overall in favor of the TT although the depreciation numbers are useless, these guys can write but they can't drive. After one year of getting Autoweek I don't think it is worth it as a car magazine, it is only good for ads and not worth renewing the subscription, but that is just my opinion.
11-27-2006, 01:12 AM
#5
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: San Diego
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never said you could run a 996 tt in less than 12 sec., I said the trap time is similar (ok maybe not worse) and the trap speed (same as 996tt), is about 5 or 6 mph less than most other mags we have seen, which to me indicates a mediocre test, that is all.
Plus how can they publish depreciation figures when the car has been out only a few months, how do they know the volume of cars porsche intends to produce? you can't just base them on the history of the 996tt. If you liked the article that's fine, this was just my opinion and as a TT owner since july, I did not like that article one bit.
Vanilla and chocolate like you said.
Plus how can they publish depreciation figures when the car has been out only a few months, how do they know the volume of cars porsche intends to produce? you can't just base them on the history of the 996tt. If you liked the article that's fine, this was just my opinion and as a TT owner since july, I did not like that article one bit.
Vanilla and chocolate like you said.
11-27-2006, 12:45 PM
#6
Race Car
It basically was a "puff" piece to placate one if its biggest advertiser, Porsche. Previously, they had made negative comments regarding the triptonic in the 997TT which Porsche is pushing. As they say, "follow the money". 
11-27-2006, 07:02 PM
#7
Drifting
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Way Back In, New Zealand
Posts: 2,493
Likes: 0
Received 61 Likes
on
23 Posts
the owner's letters were rather less the P fanatics of yore that wrote about the 996 tt, and more the blingsters, altho' one guy said it was like his lexus ans another: "i miss my 993"...
which supports the conclusion i have reached that this thing is a GTO, not a sports car.... anymore.
i still love AW, and it's the only mag i subscribe to
which supports the conclusion i have reached that this thing is a GTO, not a sports car.... anymore.
i still love AW, and it's the only mag i subscribe to
