guyin559
Soon Porsche will introduce a four door car to further expand its line. They already have the Cayenne SUV, and have according to recent tests "softened" the standard Carrera and Turbo models. Do these actions, along with prices that are creeping closer to "exotic" car levels show that Porsche is moving away from their traditional "enthusiast" clientel and aiming for the Grand Touring market?
there is nothing "Grand Touring/GT" about the GT3. It is as much a tourer as was the similarly mis-named GT-40.
And yes..Porsche has always made luxurious machines...but in the past they would have never compromised performance for driveability,except for the 928..which was never really accepted by the majority of Porschefiles anyway.
By "soft" I do not mean the suspension...I mean "Soft" as in focus...as in the latest 911 turbos handling being widely panned by the motoring press.
Answer
I think you need to look at this in historical perspective. First, Porsche has always produced GT cars. While we look at something the the 356 as spartan today, the fact is that in it's day, it was a luxury sportscar. Likewise, look no further than the 934 for a supposed race car, although one that came with power windows and a full leather interior (when introduced in the early 1970s). The current offerings reflect the same trends.
As far as expanding the line, again, look back at the company's history. You are talking about a "sports car" company that has made a tractor, came close to producing sedans back in the 1960s (if not for the failure of planned business partners), and has always justified it's large engineering department by doing design work for other companies. Porsche was planned as a car company, and was merely a sports car company to start as that's what was able to be produced and marketed at the time. If anything, expansion of the line is a return to the original intent, and not a departure from it.
As for price. yes price's have gone up. However, if you look at relative price in terms of what can be purchased, you'll find there has not been anywhere near the variation that you seem to think. If you look at the current buying power of a dollar and compare, you'd find that a 1980 911SC would cost a little over $90k. And considering trade differences in the US economy verses Europe, it could easily be argued that Porsches are less expensive today than 20 years ago!
While I hold great affection for many of the classic Porsches, and spend much more time behind the wheel on these cars, the fact is the newer cars are by far the fastest and most capable sports cars they've yet to produce. The current GT3 is the most best track car the factory has ever delivered (unless you look at the GT3RS).
The company has evolved, and will continue to evolve. But everything that made a Porsche special then is still pretty much there today, even if many of the specifics have changed.
EDIT: Grand Turismo/GT - as the name itself has a few different meanings, it's hard to say it's a misnomer. On on hand you have a GT car meaning a sports car that is a little more luxury car at the expense of being a more pure sports car. On the other hand, you have GT meaning a street car that is used to homogulate a car for use in GT Class racing, which is just the opposite of the other meaning. The GT3 is named for the later (as was the original GT40, which was introduced to compete at Le Mans in the late 1960s after Ford was spurned in their efforts to buy Ferrari).
Having sampled quite a few Porsches over the years at track events, I cannot say I see how drivability has been sacraficed. The current cars are more pliable and faster in EVERY aspect than the earlier cars. I have a personal fondness for the earlier cars, and greatly enjoy the extra skill it requires to drive them at the limit. But there is no denying that the new cars are superior in every aspect of performance (the new turbo included).
I think you need to look at this in historical perspective. First, Porsche has always produced GT cars. While we look at something the the 356 as spartan today, the fact is that in it's day, it was a luxury sportscar. Likewise, look no further than the 934 for a supposed race car, although one that came with power windows and a full leather interior (when introduced in the early 1970s). The current offerings reflect the same trends.
As far as expanding the line, again, look back at the company's history. You are talking about a "sports car" company that has made a tractor, came close to producing sedans back in the 1960s (if not for the failure of planned business partners), and has always justified it's large engineering department by doing design work for other companies. Porsche was planned as a car company, and was merely a sports car company to start as that's what was able to be produced and marketed at the time. If anything, expansion of the line is a return to the original intent, and not a departure from it.
As for price. yes price's have gone up. However, if you look at relative price in terms of what can be purchased, you'll find there has not been anywhere near the variation that you seem to think. If you look at the current buying power of a dollar and compare, you'd find that a 1980 911SC would cost a little over $90k. And considering trade differences in the US economy verses Europe, it could easily be argued that Porsches are less expensive today than 20 years ago!
While I hold great affection for many of the classic Porsches, and spend much more time behind the wheel on these cars, the fact is the newer cars are by far the fastest and most capable sports cars they've yet to produce. The current GT3 is the most best track car the factory has ever delivered (unless you look at the GT3RS).
The company has evolved, and will continue to evolve. But everything that made a Porsche special then is still pretty much there today, even if many of the specifics have changed.
EDIT: Grand Turismo/GT - as the name itself has a few different meanings, it's hard to say it's a misnomer. On on hand you have a GT car meaning a sports car that is a little more luxury car at the expense of being a more pure sports car. On the other hand, you have GT meaning a street car that is used to homogulate a car for use in GT Class racing, which is just the opposite of the other meaning. The GT3 is named for the later (as was the original GT40, which was introduced to compete at Le Mans in the late 1960s after Ford was spurned in their efforts to buy Ferrari).
Having sampled quite a few Porsches over the years at track events, I cannot say I see how drivability has been sacraficed. The current cars are more pliable and faster in EVERY aspect than the earlier cars. I have a personal fondness for the earlier cars, and greatly enjoy the extra skill it requires to drive them at the limit. But there is no denying that the new cars are superior in every aspect of performance (the new turbo included).
Why is it just now that we're finally catching up to the car performance of the 1950s- early 1970s?
Bay
We have luxury cars that have anywhere from 300-400 horsepower. We have passenger coupes with 400+ horsepower and we have sports cars with similar stats. Wait, what's that? You're saying we've been here before and that it's stupid to be bragging about this? Ohhhh that's right. WE HAVE BEEN HERE BEFORE. In fact we were there in the late 50s to early 70s. My 1964 Cadillac Coupe Deville is rated at 340 Horsepower. This more than the modern Cadillac DTS and due to all that superfluous electronic equipment and airbag related crap it weighs about the same. My Cadillac also more torque than a Modern day Corvette or Dodge Viper at an astronomical 480 lb/ft.
This is not even the most powerful Cadillac engine of all time the 400 horsepower 550 lb/ft torque monster the Cadillac 500. No modern day engine has anywhere near that torque rating.
The Impala SS of the time? Don't even try contending. It's high end engine the 427 had over 425 horsepower. More than the BMW 5 series and probably had a much better torque rating.
Near the end of the corvettes Full power I believe it was near to cracking 500 horsepower, stock. Only recently has only the highest end corvette begun to crack that level of raw power.
This is only the performance related part of the comparison. The amount of plastic in modern cars is around 250+ pounds not including the body panels. (yes, no more metal for us modern folks).
Cars of the 50s 60s and early 70s had virtually no plastic. It was all metal, leather, and chrome. QUALITY MATERIALS NOT SHITTY RICER PLASTIC. The fan in my 1964 Cadillac is METAL NOT PLASTIC LIKE THE NEW CARS. The bumpers on my Car? CHROME, HARD, STRONG, LONG LASTING CHROME. If I hit a car I will have a little scuff while your entire front end or rear end will collapse in. (I've seen it happen before. Someone hit my Cadillac). I came out alright while the person in the plastic ricer needed to go into the emergency room. I thought I had a hit a pot hole. Hilarious. Also, I like my interiors to be exciting and revolutionary. Not bland enough to fall asleep to. I'd like to keep my soul thanks.
And styling? Enough said. I like to eat Jelly Beans, not drive them. I'll keep my originality thanks.
Many topics including leg room, trunk space, ease to work on, reliability, and FAR cheaper repairs have not been touched on because I know they are self explanatory. And although I know you'll ***** about things like Fuel Efficiency and smog/emissions. Let me just say at least my car doesn't have a Hybrid battery that does far more damage to the environment than my car did in 46 years and 86000 miles. And safety? How is thick sheet SteeL and a thick steel frame, not plastic, STEEL not safety? I didn't know plastic is stronger than steel. Gosh. I guess its safe to leave loaded guns in the corner of day care centers now to.
I guess your so called "superior" jelly bean cars aren't after all. Japan killed what it meant to be a real car.
Plastic and tiny 4 cylinders is sporty? Btw my Cadillac can smoke a ricer any day of the week.
its not even a v4 you tool its an inline 4.
Answer
Japan killed the real car? The Lexus LFA begs to differ, my friend. The Toyota Supra begs to differ. The Acura NSX begs to differ. Japan REINVENTED THE CAR. American cars use to have such big engines because they were solid Detroit rolling iron, solid metal. Japan started making lighter, faster, speedier cars. A car could have a 2 liter v4 and feel sportier than a Caddy with a v8. Japan has such a following in the street racing world. I guess it must be because...they killed what it meant to be a real car.
Sit the fuck down.
You. Could. Not. Smoke. My. Car.
Period.
Lexus IS350.
No seriously.
It would not happen.
I've beaten Corvettes.
And I also own a classic car man, 64 Impala coupe. So don't think i'm just some ricer fanboy. There is a difference between a Japanese Performance car and a ricer. Hint: Accords and Civics are not performance cars.
Japan killed the real car? The Lexus LFA begs to differ, my friend. The Toyota Supra begs to differ. The Acura NSX begs to differ. Japan REINVENTED THE CAR. American cars use to have such big engines because they were solid Detroit rolling iron, solid metal. Japan started making lighter, faster, speedier cars. A car could have a 2 liter v4 and feel sportier than a Caddy with a v8. Japan has such a following in the street racing world. I guess it must be because...they killed what it meant to be a real car.
Sit the fuck down.
You. Could. Not. Smoke. My. Car.
Period.
Lexus IS350.
No seriously.
It would not happen.
I've beaten Corvettes.
And I also own a classic car man, 64 Impala coupe. So don't think i'm just some ricer fanboy. There is a difference between a Japanese Performance car and a ricer. Hint: Accords and Civics are not performance cars.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment