Porsche
- Thread starter Vulcan
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Back in the '80s my mother had a 924 (not a proper Porsche, I know) that I used to take up to Exeter (he nearest dealer) for servicing.
I was there one summer, the new registration was to come in three weeks later. I was drooling over cars (all red, of course) in the showroom idling my time away, and I spoke to the salesman. That 928 S4 is waiting for a personalised plate, it goes out next month, he said. You'll never guess what happened - an old man came in, flat cap, gabardine mac, Tesco shopping bag ......... and said he'd like to buy that one for his wife. I said, OK, I'll sort the finance out, but he asked would it be OK to pay by cheque as it wouldn't be picked up for weeks. Of course, I said, no problem at all. Of he went, quite happy. About twenty minutes later he came back in and said I'd better give him the cheque back. I said ah, you've changed your mind, then? No, he said, I forgot it's my daughter's birthday at the end of the month so I write you another one - I'll take the little car at the back as well (the 911).
I was there one summer, the new registration was to come in three weeks later. I was drooling over cars (all red, of course) in the showroom idling my time away, and I spoke to the salesman. That 928 S4 is waiting for a personalised plate, it goes out next month, he said. You'll never guess what happened - an old man came in, flat cap, gabardine mac, Tesco shopping bag ......... and said he'd like to buy that one for his wife. I said, OK, I'll sort the finance out, but he asked would it be OK to pay by cheque as it wouldn't be picked up for weeks. Of course, I said, no problem at all. Of he went, quite happy. About twenty minutes later he came back in and said I'd better give him the cheque back. I said ah, you've changed your mind, then? No, he said, I forgot it's my daughter's birthday at the end of the month so I write you another one - I'll take the little car at the back as well (the 911).
I had a test drive of a 944 many years ago. I spoke to the company rep accompanying me and asked if anyone ever pranged one on a test drive. Very rarely, she said, but we had a beauty about 18 months ago - someone in a new 928 S4 decided in their infinite wisdom to overtake on a blind corner at 70mph and collided head on with week old BMW 635csi, writing the pair of them off.
Clearly a controversial opinion here, but I think the electric Macan looks fantastic, in fact I think the regular Macan is probably (in my own very non-professional opinion) the best all-round car on the market! Great styling, super luxurious, drives as close to a sports car as an SUV can, practical enough to be a 1-garage daily driver, and enough confidence driving round pothole ridden country lanes.
Don't get me wrong, I'd much rather have a 2 car garage with a 911 and a Defender, but a Macan is as close to the middle of that venn diagram as you can get!
Problem is the EV... it's not just the Tycan that's depreciated horrifically, going rate is 50% depreciation over 3 years across the board. Electric car schemes / tax incentives will continue to fuel the fire.
Don't get me wrong, I'd much rather have a 2 car garage with a 911 and a Defender, but a Macan is as close to the middle of that venn diagram as you can get!
Problem is the EV... it's not just the Tycan that's depreciated horrifically, going rate is 50% depreciation over 3 years across the board. Electric car schemes / tax incentives will continue to fuel the fire.
How's the run costs Derek?
I owned a Cayman 981 for a couple of years, didn't cost me a penny in anything other than servicing over those 2 years, and sold it for the same price I bought it for (with an extra 20K miles on it!).
Have been thinking about a low price Boxster recently as a fun 2nd car, you're absolutely right on prices bottoming out and starting to go up. Same with the 911 986s & 987s.
sploo
Somewhat extinguished member
Exactly this.Yes it's interesting isn't it.
I think it comes down to differing knowledge levels giving the different perspectives. As an engineer I just see extra mass without extra useable volume... compare for example ford focus and ford Kuga, pretty much built on same platform but the kuga is made to 'look' bigger but actually isn't in reality. But it is heavier and so slower and less fuel efficient, higher centre of gravity so handles worse, and arguably looks worse if your aesthetic preferences are built around function followed by form, and not the other way round.
I think your techy minded types will see the inefficiency and find the shape unattractive for that reason, and others just see it as 'bigger' therefore more car for your money
Martin
It's a bit like the joke about a trike: all the downsides of a car, with none of the advantages of a bike.
sploo
Somewhat extinguished member
But... the Macan wouldn't be a much better sports car than the Defender, and about as good off road as a 911 (excluding the Dakar, of course
)worn thumbs
Established Member
Is it possible that the colour of the car in the first post came about because somebody or other bet one of the ad men that he couldn't make a most unlikely colour fashionable?
Anybody fancy opening up a discussion on sharpening ?
stuart little
Established Member
I ran Range Rovers for years with a 911 in the garage. Was never even remotely tempted by the Cayenne and the Macan is neither one nor the other. Now my 911 (991 Carrera S) is over 3 years old it has extended warranty which costs around £75 /mth. Range Rover extended warranty was £161 a month. Simple insurance risk assessment - it’s not if a Range Rover will break down but when! Porsche never misses a beat!
Attachments
Lons
Established Member
sploo
Somewhat extinguished member
A lad I used to work with once tried to sharpen an old Peugeot by bouncing it off several trees. It didn't end well.
He did it freehand though.
Porsche ruined the 911 when they changed to a water cooled engine to try and dampen the noise for the US market, look up IMS bearing problems and those fried egg headlight 911's are so much cheaper on the second hand market just due to the ugliness.
It was definately a turning point in the 911's character and what had made the 911 such a classic, as mentioned it was also when they introduced the engine destroying bearing failure on the IMS shaft which had not been an issue on the aircooled models. The aircooled engine is more compact, no water jackets round the cylinders or heads and the IMS was shorter, with the watercooled engine they just used a longer IMS and created a problem which for Porsche should have been picked up in design.
I think Porsche will always be synonymous with aircooled engines, look at the 917 which is probably the most powerful car to have ever raced in the Can Am series with 1500 Hp on tap and only changes to the rules ever stopped it's total domination at both Le Mans and the Can Am series so the original 911 aircooled will always be the 911 to have as it shares the aircooled pedigree.
TomGW
Established Member
The first thing I got done on my Boxster was to replace the IMS bearing with a ceramic bearing. It has been a summer car for most of its life, garaged and currently 57/58k miles so should see me out.
Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)
Established Member
Alec, the 986S gets serviced once a year by a Porsche specialist (not a dealer), and has been in his care for around the 15 years of ownership. Costs are about the same as my wife's Golf. I don't factor in the improvements I have made to the car as these were a choice and not a necessity. Many assume that Porsche are expensive to run, but they are so well made that they go and go. Parts can be expensive, but then so can they be for other cars, but fortunately (touch wood) it is an infrequent need.
I recently attended a Porsche event here in Perth (I had not been to one in about 20 years).
What really struck me was how large the new generation Boxsters and 911s have grown. By comparison, my 986S and the 911s of the 90s were really quite smallish cars. The new look bloated to me. I really am happy with my 22-year old car. Keep in mind that I have my professsional rooms alongside my home, and do not have to travel to work. Most driving is on weekends, and the 986S has only done 90K km.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Last edited:
If they truly were “worse in every measurable way” why do they sell so well? The Tesla Model Y was the best selling car in both Europe and America last year. I’ve had modest size SUV’s for nearly 20 years now. After test driving the first one I knew there was no going back to a saloon or hatchback. Far more comfortable and a better driving position. Also a darn sight easier to get in and out of many of them. They also seem to fare better in crash tests.
I agree about the ease of getting in and out - it's the only thing I miss about not having a Range Rover anymore. My daily now is a 5 series BMW which I find is very low for daily use. Saying that, it is far more fun being a 3 litre twin turbo! Almost as fast as the 911 and, with four wheel drive, certainly better in the wet!
As to why folks buy big fugly SUV, look no further;
Arms race to the bottom
There was another study from Uni
Michigan looking at purchasing rationales, which I can't find now.
Where a consumer can choose between a regular vehicle or an SUV-type vehicle (i.e. excluding professional or locality, eg builders and folks living off road etc) basically the high driving position and bulk make women feel faster, and allow men to project masculinity.
The Detroit car industry tried to suppress that study because it found essentially that men who scored high in perceived masculine attributes (income, sports involvement, # children, self-esteem etc.) generally drove station wagons, mpvs, and other types of family- and group- oriented vehicles, whereas men who scored lower on the self-esteem scale drove SUVs.
The controversial conclusion was the men who were having lots of kids (i.e sex) and were involved in tonnes of sports (physically active, social group leadership) needed roomy vehicles to move a their kids, their teams, and their gear.
On the other side, men who lacked self confidence and felt oppressed drove SUV and light trucks to project masculinity and virility.
In short, guys with big 'richards' drive mini vans.
Arms race to the bottom
There was another study from Uni
Michigan looking at purchasing rationales, which I can't find now.
Where a consumer can choose between a regular vehicle or an SUV-type vehicle (i.e. excluding professional or locality, eg builders and folks living off road etc) basically the high driving position and bulk make women feel faster, and allow men to project masculinity.
The Detroit car industry tried to suppress that study because it found essentially that men who scored high in perceived masculine attributes (income, sports involvement, # children, self-esteem etc.) generally drove station wagons, mpvs, and other types of family- and group- oriented vehicles, whereas men who scored lower on the self-esteem scale drove SUVs.
The controversial conclusion was the men who were having lots of kids (i.e sex) and were involved in tonnes of sports (physically active, social group leadership) needed roomy vehicles to move a their kids, their teams, and their gear.
On the other side, men who lacked self confidence and felt oppressed drove SUV and light trucks to project masculinity and virility.
In short, guys with big 'richards' drive mini vans.
