Dilemma - Page 5 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

Not true, there are many more happy Cerbera owners than unhappy ones, but only (mostly) the unhappy ones post in PH. Budget £2K per year for maintenance and you'll be OK. For the Porsche the servicing will be cheaper than the TVR, but, its not got a V8! As you discovered, try out as many as possible of each and decide which suits you best.

do you have a mate with something similar already...? Garages don't tend to treat you like something off their shoe so much if you turn up in a decent motor... Cheers, Matt.

A few months ago, I was in a similar situation, but I was looking at an Esprit or Caterham as an alternative. If you are after an extreme car, the only way to go is to get a 964RS. You will get one for your budget, and a nice one, too. - The 964RS is currently non-depreciating, unlike most cars in the world. - It makes the Turbo 2 seem a bit soft. Believe me, I drove the 3.6 Turbo 2 before the RS and the RS is more of a beast overall. - Performance is OK (0-60 in 4.9, 0-100 in 12, top speed 160+) but brakes are legendary and handling is pure track car. If you need an everyday car, the Turbo 2 is more of a sensible option, but will cost you 30% more to run. A very, very sensible everyday Porsche proposition is the 993 Carrera, but this is not in the same excitement league as a 964RS. If you can stretch to 33k, I saw a 993RS for sale in the last Porsche Post. These *are* better cars in many ways than the 964RS, but whether they are 8k better is a different argument. Especially if you do a lot of track work and get the 964RS Motec'd to 320bhp. If you are near High Wycombe, Scottster and I will take you out in a 993 Carrera and a 964RS, and you can see what suits you. Alternatively, if you are free on Sunday, let me know, as we may be meeting up with a Turbo 2 owner. Cheers Domster

Never driven a Cerbera so I'm not qualified to comment on that bit, but with regard to 911s in your price range, have you tried Prestige & Performance in Uxbridge? [url] www.911virgin.com [/url] I bought my 930 Turbo off them recently and had a good experience (so far - might change my mind if the engine blows up!). I'm a bit older than yourself being early 30's but had also experienced not being taken seriously at other places when I turned up in my daily runaround - a beaten up 135k mile 318i estate. The guys at P&P seem like genuine enthusiasts who recognise another and based on my experience seemed pretty straightforward. They generally have a reasonable selection of interesting cars. A lot of their 911s seem to be cars they have sold previously and then the owner has come back a couple of years later to trade up to something else, which I guess suggests they don't piss their customers off too badly! Good luck and let us know how you get on. Chris

I feel a Domster comment coming on.

kevinday - sorry, didn't mean to upset anyone, its just that when I started to looking at a new car, I never thought I could afford a TVR. Found out I could actually get quite a nice one so started on my research and found PH... M@H - Nice car isn't a problem, I already drive a £30K motor, private plate and so on, but if thats what they are judging me on then I'll take my money elsewhere. Sorry everyone, I'm really not an angry person, but have been given the run around something cronic recently. domster - thanks for the info, I've been recommended an RS by a friend who has a GT3, can't praise it enough - will take you up on your offer. This weekend may be a problem, but will drop you a line to sort something out if that's OK?

I'd be interested to know what sort of running costs go with a Turbo 2 as I am considering either that or a Tuscan once I sell my flat.

Sorry, still relatively new here so don't get it? - please explain?

My ex-boyfriend used to have an 911RS, I think. He didn’t like that much because it was really hard to control and he crashed it into a hedge. It didn’t feel as fast as my Boxster either and was very uncomfortable. Nice colour though.

Sorry pitgirl, but unless your boxster has been breathed on by Messrs Gemballa, Ruf or Techart, your ex's 911 would not have been an RS. DAZ Hmmm.....Am I right Domster? or are RS's slower than boxsters. PS Domster check your email

Pitgirl your boy friend wasnt called George was he? as Dom and I both know of an RS that went into a hedge coz a certain George couldnt handle it. Daz is spot on tho, no standard Pox'ter (not a spelling mistake, im not a fan) is gonna be quicker than a 964RS excepting a B road so bumpy the RS owners spleen shatters and his eyes shake out. Lots of RS copys on earlier cars tho, so it could have actualy been a 1970's 150bhp 2.7 under the body kit.

I'm not sure how an old RS is any faster than a new boxter s, with 260 ponies and circa 1100kg's AND superior weight distribution. I'm sure things have moved on in the last 15 years. Mind you, it would be annoying if you were a die hard 911 fan and some bird whipped yer old rusty ass. >> Edited by tailslider on Tuesday 8th October 15:44

Standard new 2.7 Pox'ter figs 0-60 6.4 0-100 15.5 and if you mean an early 2.5 car well you might as well look under the smart car performance figs........ oh NewGuy the 'Domster moment' reply is about Henry at 911 virgins. As lots of PHers are not fans of him.

New boxter s has 260bhp - the same as an RS. Weight is the same too. Obviously if your talking 'modified' then Gemballa may have an answer to that too.

George? I'm 22 not 45.

I had the same problem when trying to demo a TVR Cerbera at most of the local midlands dealers, in the end I gave up and bought a Porsche instead. I am also for my sins work as a salesman for Jeep for the last seven years, and even this did not help. Unfortunately "most" sales people tend to pre-judge, and my youthfull looks went against me. My advice is drive everything you can, if a garage or salesperson is not willing and eager to let you demo the car at that time, then try to make an appointment to drive one, if they still have any objections then take your business elsewhere, or insist on seeing the sales manager. It is suprising being on the other end of the sales process how bad things are, and certainly opens your eyes.

Well, the 3.2 was my original choice because of its looks - could anyone put an est annual figure for running costs on this?

Interesting, thanks. It was more his brother I dealt with (Tom if I remember right), who seemed OK. Love to know more of the background if anyone can do so without the risk of a law suit! Chris

Yeah, Henry is a and his brother Tom is just as bad, minus the charm and charisma! His missus was by the best ambassador for the business, but I spent my cash privately. He wouldn't come clean as to a few points on his cars - felt he may have had something to hide, and he got arrogant quite quickly if you had a little Porsche knowledge to match. You get what you pay for with Henry. His cars are cheap for good reason, but to be fair to him, he does make his money by volume not value, ie he only makes a modest sum on each car, unlike a main dealer for example. Buyer beware, and above all, beware of Henry being a bit up himself >> Edited by domster on Tuesday 8th October 16:06 >> Edited by domster on Tuesday 8th October 16:06

No problem. Email me through my profile and I'll give you my mobile number etc.

The Turbo 2 will be less expensive to run. They are about 25-30% more expensive to service than N/A models of the same type, though. This is not just bigger brakes etc but also because the turbo engine can suffer from oil leaks and turbo problems.

Ah yes, there's a good thread called "buying a 911" The conversation is particularly passionate...Made me chuckle anyway

Acceleration wise, a 964RS is quicker than a standard Boxster and virtually identical to a Boxster S (0-100 in 12 seconds). Top speed is 163mph for the RS, but friends have seen 175mph on the clock. It could pull 177mph in theory. Not sure how this correlates with Boxsters (limited to 155?) or how accurate the 175mph run was. Fastest I've done in it is 160mph. Handling wise, an RS would creep away from a Boxster on a smooth circuit, but not on a bumpy B-road. The Bosxter will be easier to drive. Basically, as iguana has said.

So pitgirl, you're 22 and that was an ex -boyfriend right?

A Turbo 2 3.3 (320bhp) would still need about 2k a year to realistically maintain. What you won't get are the need for huge on-off costs, eg an engine rebuild like you may get if you got a dodgy Cerb. I spent almost 7k in a year on a Lotus Carlton, so 2k is quite a good figure. Phew, this is like the domster side show, so I'll shut up now

Oi NewGuy NO!!!! you come on here with ya fancy ways and try and snatch nubile young wenches from under the noses of the old hands on PH Oh dear oh dear oh dear, it looks like my man Mungo might have to be informed about this type of thing..... Hmmmmm I shall have to think of a suitable punishment for you young man........

Has anyone on here run a decent mileage Turbo 2 for any length of time?

It's not so much the cost that worries me, more the fact of having the car off the road for long periods of time. Only have space for one car and with the winter coming, the bike needs to be packed away - oh yes, I hate the bus!!! At what kind of mileage would you expect to start replacing turbo's etc?

Tee Hee Hee!

[Image-only or quote-only post; no author-written text.]

He, he. Yes, I've heard the speed six is the one to go for. Look into it...

Please don't outcast me already - I'm sorry...

Just remember your place: sloppy seconds.

I think weve shown him tailslider.. So anyway, Pitgirl you are only 22 huh..........

Is there something I should know here?

22, fit, blonde and flexable? Have you seen the big city lights at all?...

I have a great big lamp in my apartment...

Ultra Violent is currently running one. My mate Bernard has had one for yonks with 400bhp (I can get you his email address if you want). You can't escape the odd clutch (1500 GBP) brakes or tyres bill, plus they cost a bit more at service time. You may have one or two little niggles with them that you wouldn't with an N/A one because of the added complication of the turbo charger set up. Turbos are good for 100k miles. It's mainly small misfires and oil leaks.

The Office was classic last night, eh?

Well, now you do have my attention, but where is pitgirl??? I feel so guilty having dragged all this up on my first therad and I don't even know her name or phone number or or or or or ......

Didn't see it. I love it though.

...yes, oil leaks that reputedly end up costing thousands to put right for new seals etc.

and did you note the casual " my ex boyfriend" comment earlier too.... 22 and single.... Mungo... >> Edited by M@H on Tuesday 8th October 17:18

This topic has gone well off the deep end, back to the point: With regards servicing, are we still looking at about 12K miles between and does anyone know a basic cost?

A specialist 12k service is about £400+vat for an NA 964, so probably about £500+ for a turbo (?) and £250+vat for a 993. 6k interims are about £100. >> Edited by Basil Brush on Tuesday 8th October 17:34

Sorry lads, i'm into girls. Had too many bad experiences with men. Racing Drivers/Bankers/models, they are all the same. My mate was just telling me that old 911's are made from VW bits and rust to pieces, so I have no idea how you guys expect to beat my nice new Boxster.

pitgirl, there are loads of great bars near me to pull girls. We can go together, then all back to mine for a nightcap. What do you say?...

I'm running a T2 at the moment. I'll post full details to your questions later. But in short, don't buy a NA (unless it's an RS) car they're for lady-boys...

You'll have to get the nice new Boxster first - I think you'll prefer it to the MX-5 though. The rusty old 911 thing stopped in 1984 with galvanisation, and the VW thing stopped when the 968 disappeared in about 1994. People like 911s for the character their flawed conception has given them. Boxsters are better in many ways but lack the classic feel of a 911. A Boxter S is a good car, but they would only beat an earlier normally aspirated 911 from before 1989 with ease. Between 1989 and 1997, a Boxster S could match or beat a standard normally aspirated 911. After that, the 911 will beat it. As for Turbo and RS models, well, my 1992 964RS has 15bhp more than a Boxter S and weighs 100kgs less. It also has four pot brakes from a 911 Turbo at the front, four pot brakes from a Cup race car at the back, and race derived suspension. Under 90% of conditions it will be quicker than a Boxster S, simply because it is a virtual race car. A Boxster S isn't. The 1973 RS is still considered to be one of the best sports cars made, by those who have owned or driven a vast array of Porsches, Ferraris and the like. I'm not a fan of the older Porsche myself, but some of these guys have driven enough interesting cars to have a valuable opinion, so I have an open mind. That isn't to denigrate the Boxster, but it does show that some of the older 911s can still teach the newer Porsches a thing or two. Younger doesn't necessarily mean better, and it certainly doesn't mean more exciting, as anybody who has driven a 996 vs 993 will testify.

Newguy, you should go for the beetle

Had considered the VW but it would cost just too much in dash flowers! Pitgirl, I'm really sorry for dragging you into this, but on the other hand - 22, gorgeous, into girls too and drives a Boxter, could you be any more perfect??? Finally, thanks to everyone for the advice. Will keep you posted on any developments.

OK, so the T2 then. Well running costs are great, so far it's the cheapest car I've owned (and no I didn't own a TVR before). The nice thing about Porsches are that things tend not to break and they last a long time. Yes the disks and pads are more expensive, but i've detected no noticeable ware in 8000 miles. Again depending on wheels, tires can be a bob or two, but even Scottster found time to squeeze on 18's so NA cars don't necessarily escape there. Turbo's are good for 80k and cost about a grand new, however you are better exchanging the old one for a hybrid at the same cost. You do have an LSD and a few more oil pipes to worry about but they tend to be well behaved. The thing to remember is the turbo was, specials aside, the top car, so everything on it is bigger and better... Everyone winges about oil leaks and flywheels. But this really shouldn't be an issue. The very first 964's didn't have head gaskets and some heads warped. This is created a true oil leak (i.e. mega bucks to fix). Porsche quickly realised their error and in 91 did things properly with gaskets. There was also the issue with the DMF failing. This is a pain because it is an engine out job to fix (about £1000). Again Porsche got on the case and in 90/91 started using a different brand fly-wheel. This, by the way, is statistically more reliable than the 993 DMF, which you never hear about. The Turbo (all years) used the new DMF from day one, and the 3.3 and 3.6 engines had the appropriate gaskets. You will find cars that appear to leak oil, however there are many innocuous sources of oil. Any one of the oil pipes may have split (you'll know about that one) or come loose. The oil return tubes, once rusty, seep oil. Also the sump for the turbo can leak from the drainage point (just requires a new washer 2min job). Which car to go for????? Well, if you have the cash in stock form the 3.6 is the better car. However, pound for pound I would go for the 3.3. The 3.3 uses the last development of an engine that started life in the early 70's and as such is about as reliable as they come. It is probably the most developed engine Porsche put in a production car. Although it shares humble roots with the 930, they are in fact very different engines. It has a K27 (7200 quick spool) turbo as used on the 3.6 (instead of the k26 on the 930), bigger intercooler, and much revised intake and flowing. Porsche managed to squeeze 10% more power out of the 3.3 T2 engine with 10% less boost. It is a very efficient engine. Yes it uses CIS, and yes fuel bills will be big. You have the modern handling of the 964 with the legendary boost characteristics of the 930. Seems like a nice package to me. It’s also worth noting the big BHP is easily achievable. You can make mid 400’s with just bolt on mods. 480 bhp is a natural stopping point as here on in you’ll need to change the CIS to a fully mapped ignition (which the 3.6 T didn’t have either). If you’re interested, and near to central London, drop me a post and I’ll show you what it’s all about…

Hmmm. After UVs post, maybe I'll get one...

UV - you really need to get a life buddy, Quote "NA cars are for lady-boys" - everyone knows Turbos are for people who can't get a blow any other way!! Iguana - As for the raging boners on here due to Pitgirl's revelations I'd advise you to let 'Newguy' try that one first. She's probably more like a pitbull mate. (no offence PG ) I think the lads should be provided with piccies. That's the only way Kleenex's JIT system will handle the imminent PH induced overload.

She sounds more like a man in disguise to me.

Nah, loves Boxsters, gotta be a girl

Says all you need to know about Pox'ters in one short statement!!!

Just in reply to earlyer stuff and how certain members of PH think a Pox'ter is quicker than an RS may I point you towards Autocar Test figs even the S ( which i do grudgingly admit is a fine although lacking in power automobile) only posts 0-60 in 6 & 0-100 in 14.2 so im kinda failing to understand which bit of those figures is faster than the RS's 0-60 in 4.9 & 0-100 in 12!!!!!!!!!!!

I read somewhere that the S did 0-100 in 12 seconds. Maybe it was the TVR Tuscan S.

Blimey Ive just finished typing what feels like an essay and here i am again. Right SB930 ref your motor the simple answer is yes. However its a bit different for you as you car has torsion bar suspension unlike UV's 964 or 993s etc so its never going to feel the same. Yes your car is a bit soft, but it sort of fits the type of car. Firmer or in reality as its an old car now, just new standard shocks would probabally firm it up nicely. Changing Torsion bars is not as cheap as changing springs but yes its an option but i dont think I would do that in your position, maybe just twist 'em a bit to lower it a tad. I have driven that car properly hard and although its not race car firm its a long way from a wallowy boat. Have a chinwag with G force or Bob Watson they will obiously want to sell you something! but do know their stuff. UV, cool, i diddnt know you had Roook stuff on the beast, yeah on fast A roads it is sweet ill bet, but im sure on a twisty B road you never forget where that engine is tho and that it has more weight slung out the back that a norm asp car..... fun tho 'eh!! bet ya looking foward to the extra power when she is back ......

Strange how Porsche's best handling cars seem to be regarded as the runts of the litter - 944, 968 and Boxster. I haven't had the pleasure of a turn in the Boxster, but the only criticism I seem to remember sticking to the 2.5 was it's lack of grunt - throw it around a twisty road and all the journo's raved about it's handling then and now....

"Ignorance is bliss..."

...it's easy to make slow cars handle well.... Oh, and I get between 8-20 MPG. Problem is there is no efficient zone. At top whack you may as well put fuel in some one else's car for all the good it's going to do you... And at slow speeds excess fuel is used to cool the engine. So, might as well nail it cause you ain't going to save fuel pottering around.....

....or rather it's easy to make cars designed with perfect weight distribution handle well.... Don't get me wrong, I love my slow old 911 and I'm drooling to have a shot in McNab's TT, but you can't possibly argue that it's been easier for Porsche to engineer the 911, 964, 993 and 996 into their ultimate forms than it would have been to do so to a front engine / rear drive layout or mid engine platform. The forthcoming Carrera GT is surely the proof.....

...but then it wouldn't have been the icon it is.

Does that mean you is from Lesbania? My uncle Jemal went there on holiday once... Bennno

Nah, i also drove both and let the garage keep the M3 i had on order for over 2 yrs when it finally arrived. The BM is all over the shop (as is my 330i sport co car) whilst my 996 3.4 is absolutely planted with tremendous feedback and grip. The M3 even sounds naff a sort of tinny rasp at best not as turbine like as a 996. To be fair the porsche takes a bit of time to appreciate...for sure its smooth, but after a while you realise just how quickly you are going and just how much feedback you get. When i have been driving the porker all weekend and get back in to my 330 its a bit like why's the traction light flashing, whys the traction control cutting in constantly and why is the steering so light. Just my 2p worth, but on anything other than paper they dont compete. Bennno

err Carrera GT is proof of what, it was designed to be a race car originaly and although that plan is temporarily scrapped now it will be a very expensive supercar. All the sucessfull Porsche le mans type race cars from the 1960s Carrera 4 through to 906, 908, 917, 956, 962, GT1 are all basically mid engined racers. The GT1 and in very limited numbers (7 i think)the 962 were available as road cars they were not rear engined and a half million quid car diddnt take much away from 911 sales then... And anyway Ferrari make mid engined and front engined cars for its different markets, and they like porsche, keep at least 1 model that has developed an iconic status ie small 2 seat and mid engines = 246,308,328,348,355,360 as they know they would loose so many sales if they got away from this formula and only sold front engined. Im not sure why Porsche diddnt stick with front engined cars along with the 911, falling sales along with a ressesion and the huge costs needed to update I guess. However the Boxster has filled the less expensive gap and is hugely profitable so they have no need to currently. With the cayenne platform things may change in the future surely a modern version of a 928 like GT must be on the cards.... Certainly the 911 has always struggled dynamically to keep up with the competion on the old 911 chassis, which is why from 964 on the torsion bars were ditched & 993 had diferent more advanced rear suspension and the 996 is a totally new car in every respect. It may be easier to make a more normal layout sports car and give it good handling but no one else has made a rear engined one for 40 continuous yrs. Looking at the 996 it does retain elements of earlier cars that actually propogated this 911 iconic stautus and its feels differnt to other sports cars, so on it will sell. As for handling the 968CS is one of the best handling Porsches ever made but it still diddnt sell very many. The rear engined 911 has over 40 yrs developed in to an icon and you dont want to kill the goose with the golden eggs etc etc Lots of gibberish in there, i do appologise its late & im tired but there is some good stuff in there too i hope. >> Edited by iguana on Thursday 10th October 02:13

What's wrong with an Arctic/Boxster Red one eh ? And you live nearer to me as well.....mutter mutter

It is only cos I have seen Don's Boxster in the fleshola. I'm sure the Gregsters'/Emma's are both lovely, too. Do they have Sport Contact 18 inch wheels, though? They are the ones to go for.

The whole rear engine thing sometimes gets completely out of perspective. Remember that a mid engined car (in the simplest terms) only has the weight of the gearbox behind the engine to help balance it. In a 911 it is in front of the engine. The G50 is an alloy casing, so we are not talking about thousands of kilos here. There are some TVRs that have the engine so far back in front engined configuration that they are really mid engined in terms of balance. If the 944/968 had the gearbox attached to the engine in the normal front engined way, rather than a cunning transaxle, it too would have been just another front wheel drive understeerer, rather than the sublime drive it can be. Also remmeber that the 911 has a massive fuel tank in the front, plus the spare wheel, to help balance things up a little. Remember the really long GT1? Well it was mid engined and based on a 993 - they just chucked the gearbox on the back and moved the engine to where the rear seats would have been. So if you want a two seat 911 with better balance it's possible*. But you lose the rear seats... The rear engined config in the 911 was obviously derived from the beetle, and had its heritage in clever packaging, a bit like the A class of its day. A boxer engine is flatter, and the rear passengers in a 911 are virtually sitting over the cylinders. It is quite a compact, short wheelbase design and one of the few sports cars to offer 2+2 configuration, something which has contributed to its appeal over the decades, no doubt! Although it's not without its dynamic shortcomings... and dynamic benefits. Traction is astonishing, especially off the line or out of a bend. The point is that the 911 is a flawed gem, but still a gem - and they have polished out many of the flaws over the years, through clever revisions and new designs. My 964RS feels like a mid engined car 90% of the time - you only really notice the rearward bias under heavy braking, where you have to be quickwitted, especially with RS suspension and steering guiding the front wheels onto the nearest tramline... But the stiff suspension sorts it out a lot - cornering in the dry is so mid engined in feel that an Elise driver would almost cry in disbelief that he was driving a 911. The 3.2 does feel a little like you are driving a hammer, with the handle sticking up in the air in front of you, and the head weighing you down at the back - but not all 911s feel the same. *This is, of course, what the Boxster really is!

I had a wicked 2 days with a Boxter S whilst my 996 Targa was in. Lovely car to drive. looooovly..... zooom here zooomm there.... but I need the extras space in the 911. The look of the 911 is wow but the boxter doesnt do it for me visually. years of preconditoning I suppose to the 911 shape. The extra power in the 996 is good and I love wow factor of it. I would not though be unhappy at all if I had to save money and get a Boxter S at some stage in the future. Both cars are super in different ways. You will get as much fun from both cars. Zoooooooommmmmmmmmm

I have got a Boxster/P oxster, I think it's okay, but will have a Turbo 2 next, I think. Anyway NewGuy have you decided what to have next, have you got any cars to go and see this weekend ? Pic of me Boxster with a few Ruff bits on it on the link, may sell it in the near future for a T2, if so will put it in classifieds. http://community.webshots.com/user/time176

Nice looking car, Time. I suppose the main reason the 911 is such an icon is because it is, quite simply, a design classic. Well, it was in a book that I have called design classics, and who I am to disagree? This guarantees that architects, interior designers and people called Lawrence will all buy a 911 at some stage. The 944 and Boxster aren't design classics, hence cult status may always elude them. It's the star quality that ensure people will always love the 355 and slag off the 348 - they are fundamentally similar, but one design 'just works' so much better.

Boxster's are fine, and I'm not into slagging off anyone else's take in cars, but the thing that seems a shame is that so much was lost in the transition from the original concept car to production Boxster with regard to size, shape and purity of the design. If Porsche had the nerve to go with the original concept pretty much unaltered without compromising to satisfy the demands of the US market, then I think people's views of the Boxster would have been very different. Might even be driving one myself! Chris

I agree with you, have you ever seen the German company Stola's speedster version? it is close to that original concept & does look (in my opinion) good. Mind you the lunatics also shove a modded 996turbo engine in the thing with 450bhp!!! hell & fecking spring to mind! Mind you look at the pics of Time's Boxst it looks just like a 996 turbo from the front 3/4 view with that new bumper

PS appols to all for my late night ramble, I babble on at the best of times but after a bit of wine...well thats the result! pps Chris N that Dax Tojeiro of yours looks a heck of a lot of fun!! >> Edited by iguana on Thursday 10th October 12:23

Only pulling yer leg fella ....I'm sure you've seen Don's at least twice now. It's a lovely car. I've only seen pics of it next to his gaff, but Lapis is a super colour. [contentious_mode_enable] No, it hasn't got 18s on it, just the standard 17s, and for good reason. We both drove a 2.7 with 18s on it, and it felt really twitchy and tramlined like nobody's business. I've read a number of articles that slagged 18s on a Boxster, saying it spoilt the handling. Likewise the Porsche test driver who took us out in an S said the same thing. Apparently the 996 does not suffer from this affliction. It's all down to personal taste really. I do like the look of some of the 18 inch wheels you can get, but it wouldn't be top of my options list, let's just say that. [contentious_mode_disable]

Thanks guys, it looks good from the rear with new rear Ruff spoilers and sports exhausts. But it does tramline loads, as it has 18's on it, having said that I need a pair of new front boots. I have driven one with 17's and it felt much better to me. Has anyone made an "S" perform any quicker with any mods ? ie. re-mapping the fuel or any induction mods.

: Just back from Spa I use a 944 turbo. 1 x other 944 turbo there, a track day special, 1 x 968 cab. All took to Spa-Francorchamps extremely well. It was only on the Kemel straight that some 993 turbos, 996 turbos could hold there own. But not against the 944 t Track day special. Also 1 x 2.7 Boxster was there, the usual big grins. Day 1, 50 cars booked on, 4 went out with punctures, 3 with mechanical problems, track was empty at 15:00. Day 2, total of 25 cars booked on. Both days Open Pit lane, 09:00 to 18:00, no lunch break. Awesome. : I did 250 miles on a dry track, the 944 special did 210/220 milesm, that was on the first day. >> Edited by Pete Cros on Thursday 10th October 12:57

Certainly does.

I want / crave a Turbo 2 (400BHP is so attractive) though I haven't been out in one yet or shown the capabilities of the RS (need to book up for that too). The drawbacks that I have are only down to age, but from what I've read so far, this doesnt seem to be too much of an issue, provided she was loved. Am fast moving away from the TVR fantasy due to cost and think I shall follow my dreams to Porsche ownership. As for the weekend, I'm desperately undoing anything that I was doing in the hope to drive some cars - Think I might borrow a Bentley Red Label so as I'm taken seriously. Oooooo its soooo exciting

NEWGUY. If you are interested in RS's and turbos you really SHOULD reconsider Domsters very kind offer of a ride in his RS this sunday. DAZ >> Edited by Dazren on Thursday 10th October 13:54

I should have my T2 back on Saturday, 400Bhp and no exhaust Foget Doms shopping trolly, take a ride in a mans car

There really isn't any considering to be done, am really looking forward to it and appreciate the kind offer. I didn't want to seem ungrateful and if my previous reply seemed that way, I apologise.

And of course Sunday will see you curiously drawn to a ride in a Cerbera .....

Likewise, can't wait! Have tried to contact both you and domster through the direct e-mail thingy here, did you receive them or am i just a compete technophobe???

You have mail....

You have mail....

Don't fall for it Newguy, UV will have you doing funny handshakes and joining the Turbo club before you can say "how much is that doggy in the window".... and he'll probably give you a good rate for that too!!

What exactly have you had done then UV? Steve

Newguy, can't remember getting an email. Try emailing through profile again. Maybe the system is slow. You haven't appeared rude, in any event. It's just that one or two of us may be getting together in Newbury on Sunday for a quiet drive, and you could perhaps see the cars in the flesh. UV's car is quite nice. Perfect for a hooker shagging coke snorting city boy, but a little overstated for me

Peter, is your 944 red? ISTR a rapid well developed one at Bentwaters last November? Iguana - spot on the early 911 stuff. I was lucky enough to get an extended drive in J99 SMO - one of the 2 Rubystone press cars back in 1991. At the time I had a 2.4 E, freshly rebuilt by (still) the best kept secret in the 911 world and pushing out 180 bhp and riding on green Billys too. The RS was eerily similar to my baby (much more rapid of course, but steering feedback, throttle response etc virtually the same). Having had a ride (sadly not a drive) in an ex John Fitzpatrick rhd 2.7 RSL (let's not go down that route again!) I still can't believe how perfect the 2.7 RS was and is - heck it's even endorsed by Atomic Kitten! Domster, sorted that throttle out yet, BTW? Had a good hack round Brands at Caterham Festival Saturday, only 100 cars on the parade lap and plenty of room to tackle the bends at good speed. They've gone and ruined Graham Hill though, double apex now forcing late entry and nasty, nasty kerb on exit (not good news in my er.... slammed to the ground SLR....)

Hi Rubystone Throttle: the plastic throttle pedal has about half a mil travel before the plate is depressed - not stuck on properly or something, so will get drilled pedals and sort it out. I'll also get the cable checked, a throttle body conversion and eventually Motec. Then the throttle response will be as sharp as an iguana's claws. Glad you had fun at Brands... there are times when only a Seven will do.

Blimey Rubystone us in agreement over something, what ever next!!

Iguana - yeah, felt charitable today, plus I found out you worked for the good guys :-)...I remember the days - dealership the size of an aircraft hangar, crap coffee and you could pick up a Suzuki jeep as well as get your 911 serviced - the (bad) old days..... Still not sure why everyone likes Turbo IIs though - remind me of the "Dynasty/Dallas" era - big puffy sleeves and lots of glitter (ducks head below parapet)

Rubystone I just thought you had read a book or two and seen ya '74 Carrera 2.7 & '74 3.0RS confusion... Anyway Rubystone as a nickname is fine but its really only German for dark pink!! >> Edited by iguana on Friday 11th October 10:47

Nope, I stand by what I said. 3.0 RS is IMHO the best 911 ever, ever made (OK so the 993 GT2 is pretty awesome too)...should make for some lively debate now :-) Rubystone? I believe the factory refer to it as "knob- end red"

Thats not what im on about I mean when you wrote this "Avoid 2.7s like the plague, except for the RS 2.7 impact bumper" As in there is no such car..... you were getting ya impact bumper 2.7 Carreras & ya 3.0RS's mixed up and thats what started the rather long debate. I mean come on if you know who my 'Teachers' were, am I likely to have been wrong on that..... Anyway on a serious note, do you honestly prefer the 3.0RS over a 2.7RS?? Having driven both Im suprised you think that, as despite having a few more horses its slower cos of the drag from extra rubber on the road & wider les aerodynamic bodywork and is much less tactile & slingable than the 2.7, certainly not as nice in road driving IMHO.

Never been lucky enough to have driven the 3.0 RS. Just love its smooth looks and heritage. I'd never get that and an RS 2.7 Carrera muddled up BTW ;-). Are you sure the car you drove was a genuine 3.0 RS - your "teachers" were rather fond of building (in the main good) replicas back in the early 1980s...

yeah Ive driven real 3.0RS at £100k+ and real 2.7 lightweights etc etc. But also replicas of both, ( one not long ago) which to be honest I usually enjoy more if its done properly, ( and as long as its got a mechanical injection engine) as Im not as scared of thrashing a £15-20K replica as I am of the rather pricer real thing not that its stops me mind you!!. >> Edited by iguana on Friday 11th October 23:58

I agree ref replicas, was sorely tempted to go check out the car that Paul Stephens had (still has?) for sale recently - if he'd dropped it down to the £15k mark would have been v tempting as a different track day car.

I drove that 3.0RS rep at Paul Stephens ages ago for 911 & Porker world mag (in june issue) it was quite good actually. Based on a '74 2.7 Carrera and had a proper 2.7 mechanical injection engine, it was running really wide wheels ie 9j & 11j but suprisingly drove fine. Its gone now but it did take a while to sell and with a price drop I certainly would have been tempted myself.

I am currently trying to decide between a 911 and a Cerbera. There's about £26k in the pot to spend and I'd ideally like a Turbo 2 or an early 993 (about '94) The TVR appears to be frighteningly expensive to run and from most of the threads I've read so far, there aren't any happy tales to tell. I have been back through the history pages and have quite a lot of info although the thread Cerbera v 911 never really reached a conclusion! What I have found though is that "you must drive lots and make up your own mind". Problem. As I'm only 22 all the garages I go to treat me like s*"t and after about 4 weeks hunting, I still haven't been in a 911. Dream Machines were absolutely fantastic, helpful etc etc but anyone selling a Porsche......... Can anyone recommend a good garage?