When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
When 993 came out I was all wobbly-kneed like the rest of ya. Saw it as the ultimate expression of the original design ethos, a thoroughly modern take on the classic 911 look. When 996 came out with its slab-sided visual slipperiness, I was even more convinced the best looking 911 had already been made and it was downhill from here on out.
But a funny thing happened in the ensuing 20 years: the 993 began to look dated, just like all the other 911s that preceded it. And once it was no longer modern looking, I began to see it in a different light. My eyes began to see the laid-back headlights not as "modern" (they are certainly no longer that) but as an aberration of the original design, a visual defect. A smoothing of the stovepipes that foreshadowed the eventual doing away with them altogether.
And the body itself I find to be too slippery and lozenge-like for either my vintage sensibilities or my modern aesthetic. Modern cars have remained aero but have added many harder-edged cutlines back in. And older cars weren't even run through a wind tunnel to start with. But 993 (and 996) both seem too soft and squishy to me now.
So... In the purely visual department give me an 87-89 3.2 for NA, or for Turbo I'll take a 3.6 964 Turbo S (non Flachbau, please).
In fact, comparing the above 3.6 S to the same car but in Flachbau version, you can see why I prefer the full-stovepipe 911s to the somewhat slant-nosed 968-ified 993. Not all will agree of course!
When 993 came out I was all wobbly-kneed like the rest of ya. Saw it as the ultimate expression of the original design ethos, a thoroughly modern take on the classic 911 look. When 996 came out with its slab-sided visual slipperiness, I was even more convinced the best looking 911 had already been made and it was downhill from here on out.
But a funny thing happened in the ensuing 20 years: the 993 began to look dated, just like all the other 911s that preceded it. And once it was no longer modern looking, I began to see it in a different light. My eyes began to see the laid-back headlights not as "modern" (they are certainly no longer that) but as an aberration of the original design, a visual defect. A smoothing of the stovepipes that foreshadowed the eventual doing away with them altogether.
And the body itself I find to be too slippery and lozenge-like for either my vintage sensibilities or my modern aesthetic. Modern cars have remained aero but have added many harder-edged cutlines back in. And older cars weren't even run through a wind tunnel to start with. But 993 (and 996) both seem too soft and squishy to me now.
So... In the purely visual department give me an 87-89 3.2 for NA, or for Turbo I'll take a 3.6 964 Turbo S (non Flachbau, please).
In fact, comparing the above 3.6 S to the same car but in Flachbau version, you can see why I prefer the full-stovepipe 911s to the somewhat slant-nosed 968-ified 993. Not all will agree of course!
964 Turbo is great. One of the locals has one and it's just stunning.
I saw this rear end in a pic this weekend and have to admit it made me a bit weak in the knees with that little flip spoiler.
When 993 came out I was all wobbly-kneed like the rest of ya. Saw it as the ultimate expression of the original design ethos, a thoroughly modern take on the classic 911 look. When 996 came out with its slab-sided visual slipperiness, I was even more convinced the best looking 911 had already been made and it was downhill from here on out.
But a funny thing happened in the ensuing 20 years: the 993 began to look dated, just like all the other 911s that preceded it. And once it was no longer modern looking, I began to see it in a different light. My eyes began to see the laid-back headlights not as "modern" (they are certainly no longer that) but as an aberration of the original design, a visual defect. A smoothing of the stovepipes that foreshadowed the eventual doing away with them altogether.
And the body itself I find to be too slippery and lozenge-like for either my vintage sensibilities or my modern aesthetic. Modern cars have remained aero but have added many harder-edged cutlines back in. And older cars weren't even run through a wind tunnel to start with. But 993 (and 996) both seem too soft and squishy to me now.
So... In the purely visual department give me an 87-89 3.2 for NA, or for Turbo I'll take a 3.6 964 Turbo S (non Flachbau, please).
In fact, comparing the above 3.6 S to the same car but in Flachbau version, you can see why I prefer the full-stovepipe 911s to the somewhat slant-nosed 968-ified 993. Not all will agree of course!
Very interesting perspective. Turbo 3.6 is my favorite Turbo, but I’m in love with the 993. Thanks for posting.
To be fair, I still like the 993 C2S about the best of all NA aircooled non-RS cars -- to me it feels like they put back just enough visual bark to make it more interesting compared to a regular C2/C4. Unfortunately not from the same angle, but you can see how the whole bottom perimeter of the S flares out -- the rockers, the front clip, and of course the fenders are an inch or so wider per side. It works for me a lot better than the slipperier non-S. And the lower front air inlets are worlds better and could still pass for a modernish design.
When 993 came out I was all wobbly-kneed like the rest of ya. Saw it as the ultimate expression of the original design ethos, a thoroughly modern take on the classic 911 look. When 996 came out with its slab-sided visual slipperiness, I was even more convinced the best looking 911 had already been made and it was downhill from here on out.
But a funny thing happened in the ensuing 20 years: the 993 began to look dated, just like all the other 911s that preceded it. And once it was no longer modern looking, I began to see it in a different light. My eyes began to see the laid-back headlights not as "modern" (they are certainly no longer that) but as an aberration of the original design, a visual defect. A smoothing of the stovepipes that foreshadowed the eventual doing away with them altogether.
And the body itself I find to be too slippery and lozenge-like for either my vintage sensibilities or my modern aesthetic. Modern cars have remained aero but have added many harder-edged cutlines back in. And older cars weren't even run through a wind tunnel to start with. But 993 (and 996) both seem too soft and squishy to me now.
So... In the purely visual department give me an 87-89 3.2 for NA, or for Turbo I'll take a 3.6 964 Turbo S (non Flachbau, please).
In fact, comparing the above 3.6 S to the same car but in Flachbau version, you can see why I prefer the full-stovepipe 911s to the somewhat slant-nosed 968-ified 993. Not all will agree of course!
Great perspective NoGa. That 964 Turbo S is the bomb!
964 Turbo is great. One of the locals has one and it's just stunning.
I saw this rear end in a pic this weekend and have to admit it made me a bit weak in the knees with that little flip spoiler.
That is a Singer design I think. I'm not sure if Porsche has ever put a spoiler like this on stock, but I agree. It looks really cool. Great pictures everyone.
My son has a 993TTS and over the years I've probably driven it 1000 miles. Great car and fast, handles great. This past June I picked up a 2015 991TTS. When my son drove it he found it to be so much more than his 993. Better handling, better performance, faster (maybe) and so updated. Yes beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but we both thought the 991 was the better looking car in a different way. His 993 is still beautiful, but so are the current models.
11-12-2017, 06:51 PM
The only Porsche tail end I like better than the duck
