911 is not for me

So I was at the dealer getting my headlights replaced under warranty due to weird 'cracking/pealing issue' (expect its the stupid coating they put on them). It was taking longer than expected and I got a fully loaded 911 S convertible as a loaner for 1 hour while they finish up (and supposedly go drive it for 30 min with sports mode and traction control off...). First thing I noticed, this 911 was a loaner and you can tell how its been mis-cared for. The paint had so many tiny problems (swear i think someone key'd a small section or something) and the full leather interior was in pretty bad shape for a 2013 car with only 900 miles (it had lots of character spots that's for sure). It was rather depressing to see such an expensive the car (probably 150k+) so neglected. I went for a drive to a few local stores less than 10 min away. When I got to Whole Foods to get breakfast, I decided since I have the opportunity, I should rather drive around (not every day someone gives you the keys to a loaded 911...). It would be interesting to compare after getting 20k miles on a base boxster; before getting the boxster, I did look into a base 911 and decided it was too expensive. It was a monster. The car had like every option, including AWD, rear steering, sports chrono, and PSE. The 3.8L engine would rev in a very mature way (compared to my 2.7L boxster) and you could feel the power (its fast, but not neck snapping fast). The AWD with rear steering was really impressive and made the car feel really agile in a 'tank-like' fashion...it wanted to stick to the road and just keep going without drama. You'd have to seriously push the car to the limits to get it to lose traction. It was a monster, but somehow I felt underwhelmed. While the engine was big and powerful, it didn't feel that responsive. It was a surprise to me is that it had a similar hesitation acceleration problem as my 2.7 boxster (from a dead-stop or rolling less than 10 MPH, RPMs slow down or dip around 4000 when you floor it). The engine didn't really seem at home in high revs or rough driving. I can take the base boxster to the 4-7 RPM range, everything is smooth, and the car seems to deal with it like its its business as I toss it around...but the 911 felt rough and jerky, preferring to go through the gears and briskly accelerate in well planned lines. 6th gear has enough power that while having your foot slightly on the gas, you'll be going 100 before you know it. The 2.7 will downshift, rev really fast, scream as you feel low gear torque, and be very passive in the high gears; while the 3.8 is slower to rev, giving you acceleration before you even rev high, preferring to stay in high gears (or get in a lower gear and zoom to illegal and dangerous speeds). In normal driving, its really easy to make the 911 go fast by just staying under 3 RPM because it has so much low end power (or its tuned that way). From the overall experience, the smaller 2.7 engine is more fun and feels faster (than it really is) because you can realistically rev it high in normal driving - 1st and 2nd gears on the boxster are completely usable and get you to 70 MPH. Its hard to even compare which is faster in a practical sense because though the 911 is faster, you need to pull out a stopwatch to prove it because both feel fast from the driver's seat. I recently got intake and exhaust upgrades and compared that to a 911 PSE. I was surprised to find that the 911 sound is really tame, even when you floor it with the top down, PSE enabled, and sports plus. The 3.8 with PSE had a low rumbling sound and you get lots of gurgles/popping in sports mode, but it just didn't think it sound any better than a 2.7 boxster (especially with my aftermarket exhaust). It sounded good and I could definitely enjoy it, but I simply just wasn't impressed for the 'top of the line' experience...was expecting more I guess. The interior of the car was near identical to what you'd find in a 981. Really, it was mostly the same thing other than a small seat behind (well more of a shelf). I did find that rear visibility is limited due to a small high rear window, but otherwise I'd expect something better for a car that is supposed to be 'the next level.' My overall impression after I drove back to the dealer can be summarized as underwhelmed. This was ironic to me, because I thought that i'd love a 911 as an upgrade from a base boxster. Instead, I left thinking how I like my boxster and not even caring about the extra 911 power and fancy powertrain tech; the extra stuff didn't make it more fun. If anything, the 911 drive had me thinking my boxster is perhaps as good as it gets from a new Porsche car experience and if I want more, I need to look at a Ferrari or something. I can see the 911 as potentially a great car for track duty and as an effortlessly cruising trophy for an older person, but that doesn't appeal to me. IMO, cayman/boxster is a better value and experience for someone under 30 like me and perhaps Porsche intentionally has this design, but I hope they'll change things where I can get inside a 911 and actually want it more than a base boxster.

Re: 911 lost its way? Totally agree with your assessment and as a (considerably) older person, I have no interest in a cruising trophy. I still get stunned disbelief when I tell people I got rid of my 991 Turbo S for a Cayman GTS, but they just don't understand how much more alive and fun the Cayman is on American roads. Though many people will aspire to "step up" to a 991, take it from someone who has had a number of them - it's not a step up when it comes to getting jollies on the street.

Re: 911 lost its way? Opinions are opinions. There are no right or wrong answers. Cool I appreciate you had one. Question: Setting aside the technical mistakes (e.g., no S car has RAS), if you have never owned and lived with a 911, then how can you say its "lost it's way"? You have nothing to compare it to. You haven't owned and lived with say an air cooled 911 or a water cooled one. So how can you possibly say "its lost its way" when you have no idea what it used to be? Sorry. This statement makes no sense to me. Setting aside that you don't seem to have any basis of comparison, your fundamental premise is the age old question "is it more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow "? Nobody can answer that. All the answers are opinions. Looks like this has been debated before http://www.planet-9.com/981-chat/77586-comparing-base-versus-s-torque-curves.html Every one of us, all of us, rationalize our buying choices based on personal biases, finances, money, etc. its like saying " all those GT3, GT3RS, GT2, 458, Lambo, Audi R10, Bugatti, etc. owners can't possibly be having fun. Why spend all that money? I also guess all those GT4 buyers who will use their car on the street won't have fun either. Many, many have proclaimed the car is solely for DD. How can they possibly be having fun? They will NEVER use it to its full ability. In fact, every car faster than a base 981 can't be fun. Of course I have extrapolated that but that is basically what you said. Its no different than Miata owners think you are crazy buying a base 981. What's the point? You can't go 160 MPH. So why did you buy it? And that is why the " is it more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow " question never gets answered. We should all be driving VW bugs because 40 HP is the most you will ever need. Think about what you wrote " my [base] boxster is perhaps as good as it gets from a new Porsche car experience" Now go write than on a 911 forum. Let us know how that goes. Then try it on all the supercar forums. See what they say. edit. BUT I should say as an opinion and for your needs. Cool. Its what you need. Nothing wrong with that.

Re: 911 lost its way? I ought to give Miata another chance. The one test drive I took years ago was not impressive. Coming from the 914, the Miata felt unwilling to respond to steering inputs. Anyone else compare the two? OT, I know... Ought to try a 991, too, but don't want to lust for something that expensive.

Re: 911 lost its way? My overall impression after I drove back to the dealer can be summarized as underwhelmed . Based on your evaluation criteria, I can see how you would reach that conclusion but as a former owner of a 997S and one who has tracked a 991S on several occasions, I have a different perspective. The 991S is an engineering marvel as far as I'm concerned. You can use it as a DD or take it to the track, and it will serve either role extremely well. It's on the track however where the 991S really shines. I expect that if you tracked a 991S, especially if you attended a performance driving school, you'll have more respect for what a 991S offers.

Re: 911 lost its way? I thought this was going to be a discussion about 991 vs prior gen 911s rather than Boxster vs 911. I like the 991, but for an open car I'd probably choose a Boxster GTS over a 911 cab. now for 911s, I'm starting to think about the 964 C2s. Probably already waited too late, seems they're going up...

Re: 911 lost its way? I really like driving the Boxster/Cayman but I don't think I would be underwhelmed by a new 911 because I have owned an old 911. (See Avatar.) Back in the mid-seventies that car was my pride and joy. I loved it. I thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. However, if I had the chance to drive that car again and if I tried to drive it the way that I drive my Cayman now I would probably end up hurting myself. The 911 has come A LONG, LONG WAY. Just because it is easier to drive doesn't make it underwhelming. You don't know what progress is until you have experienced the past. (I think I will write that down. I don't usually come up with pithy sayings.) :cheers:

Re: 911 lost its way? Everyone will like the 911 turbo models

Re: 911 lost its way? ^^^^^^ Also ... You can't miss something you've never had. ...... You can't miss HP, if you have never lived with it You can't miss climbing Mt. Everest, if you've never been to Nepal You can't miss Chocolate frosted donuts, if you've never tried them You can't miss being married, if you were never married And that is one of the my two points. If you have no frame of reference, there is nothing to discuss. The second point was .... I WISH I could buy a 488. I WISH I could come up with the $$ to buy a FeFI (when it comes). And I would LOVE to buy the upcoming GT2RS or the 911 R. That would be so .... AWESOME. But in the meantime, I can rationalize that those buyers will never use those cars to their full ability so I will have more fun in my much slower car. Sorry - not buying that. (and, of course, that's just my opinion). And I base that on real life experience.

Re: 911 lost its way? I wonder if this could be a C4S thing since the car was described as AWD. I've not got a chance to drive a C4S yet. However, my experience with other AWD cars with sporting pretensions is that they give the impression of being ultra stable and just a little slower to respond to steering inputs than a Cayman or C2S. Always seemed a consequence of the stability even on AWD cars set up to be predominately RWD. I've got to get around to driving one of these soon for other reasons. Be interesting to see if Porsche overcame this feeling. So just speculation for the moment. It would make sense though for a car that's maybe intended to be more of a long distance GT. Nervous on the edge handling gets a little old after long hours on the interstates. Little surprised about engine response. I've found the 3.8 lively even compared to my somewhat modified 3.4. Wonder if it had problems. Then the 2.7 is rev happy from what I can remember. Been a while. Not mentioned but I wonder if it's PDK in normal not Sport mode. The PDK wanting to stay in higher gears would make the car feel like described. I'd expect different tuning to make use of the extra torque instead of downshifting as readily. I do agree that the Boxster is the better looking open car. But that's just me. Whatever, each to their own.

Re: 911 lost its way? By no means am I trying to trash talk 911 and calling them bad cars (obviously they're great), its just that I was expecting a lot more from something so expensive. In my mind, costing 3-4 times a base boxster, I was expecting to get 3-4 times the enjoyment/ thrill and that simply didn't happen for me. No doubt others get a different impression. My point is 911 lost its way is it used to be the car people sought after from Porsche as a gold standard. I can't personally see that the case and think a cayman/boxster offers everything (plus more perhaps) more at a substantially lower cost. I could certainly see if money isn't an option, you'd want to get a 911, but from someone who counts their money, it would be REALLY hard (for me) to justify paying so much for a 911 when you see a boxster or cayman parked near by. It just doesn't seem you have to get a 911 to own a Porsche anymore.

Re: 911 lost its way? Interesting thoughts about the 911 as the top dog. So has the relationship changed 986 to 996, 987 to 997 and now 981 to 991? Have the cars narrowed or widened in objective and subjective terms? One could look up all the numbers, but seems to me there has always been a camp that sees the 911 as the only Porsche and others that see the value of the 911 over the mid engine cars as not worth the cost. The latest Pano touched on a similar subject for the GT cars in the RS review- GT4 to GT3 to RS. GT4 is a screaming deal (in Porsche context), Is the GT3 worth the 45k premium? Well there is the 9k motor (recent reported valve train issues notwithstanding). And is the RS worth the 45k above the 3? for 22lb less weight and +25hp? No right or wrong, just individual judgement.

Re: 911 lost its way? Two things. First, your prices are far off. A 981B is $52,100 A 991S is $98,900 It’s not 3- 4 times more. It’s not even twice as much. If you choose to spec the car with options like AWD, and all kinds of fluff, you can spec a $200,000 car. But that’s up to you. The fact is a base boxster is about ½ the cost of a 991S. Second, unless you live with the cars, drive them all the time, you have no idea of the total set of little things that add up, the holistic experience. You don’t really think that more HP cost $48,000? As zedcat mentioned, is 25HP worth $45K for an RS or a non-RS car? A PCM is PCM. Seat belts are seat belts, etc. What you are describing is the law of diminishing returns. You will never get a 100% better experience at twice the price. NEVER. If I bought a $2,000,000 Bugatti should I expect that the car would be 20 times better than a 911? Never. You ALWAYS pay much, much more for tiny gains as you approach the limit. Think about top speed. You can look up the equations but to go from 171 mph to 181 MPH with no aerodynamic changes costs a LOT more HP than you might think. Tiny bits of performance cost $$$$ Zedcat touched on this but I'll be more specific. In 1982, 944 buyers said the exact same thing. Why buy a 911? It was a dinosaur. Everyone knew rear engine was lame. It's not like the current generation of 981 buyers just invented that. 987 buyers knew it. 944 buyers knew it. 914 buyers knew it. Everyone knows it. By 1988, the 944 Turbo was FASTER than the 911. Now there was zero excuse for buying one. Where is the 944 today? Oh yeah, dead. And the 911 today? About 25 variants exist? The current hot one is the GT3RS. GT3s are so yesterday (being facetious here). They are about to come out with a GT2RS, 991GT, and rumored 991 R (~$280K), all street cars. I understand what you are trying to say. I said the same thing decades ago. But it's all a matter of scale. Some people view the S cars at the bottom of the heap, low tier. Remember, it’s a world wide community. So in concert with your thoughts, “I … think a cayman/boxster offers everything (plus more perhaps) more at a substantially lower cost” … remember the 991S is about twice the cost of a base Boxster. … I'll say - I think the 991S offers everything (plus more perhaps) more at a substantially lower cost [than say a GT2RS or 991R]. After all, those cars will cost 2.5 x that of an S car. In other words, why should I pay $250,000 for a GT2RS? That's nuts!!! See the point? It’s all a matter of scale. You’re rationalizing. I could certainly see if money isn't an option, you'd want to get a 911, but from someone who counts their money, it would be REALLY hard (for me) to justify paying so much for a 911 when you see a boxster or cayman parked near by. It just doesn't seem you have to get a 911 to own a Porsche anymore. Similarly, one can also rationalize “I could certainly see if money isn't an option, you'd want to get a 991GT3RS, but from someone who counts their money, it would be REALLY hard (for me) to justify paying so much for a 991GT3RS (nm a GT2RS) when you see 991S parked near by. It just doesn't seem you have to get a RS car to own a Porsche anymore. [Besides, I don’t want that silly RS boy racer wing all the time]” See the point? Different financial POVs entirely. You do realize the only really worthy Porsche cars are the RS cars? Those are the ones that are truly worth something down the road. See the point? It’s all from where you are coming from. Everyone is different.

Re: 911 lost its way? The 911 I took out for a spin was loaded and definitely in the 150k+ range (when new). No doubt a base car is only 2x the base boxster too, but then you have the same argument... is a 911 2x the enjoyment? Is the exhaust and engine going to be 2x, the seats 2x more comfortable, etc? Its not because its really very much the same if not identical (like the seats are 100% the same, for example). Well yea like I said its obviously a different points of view depending on how much money you have and I'm not arguing that. I'm sure some rich guy is thinking 'I'm not buying anything short of exotic and handmade...a cayman s (or 911) is a cheap factory car I'll never drive.' That's not a typical situation nor can Porsche run a company with customers just like that. My opinions come from a young(er) guy making perhaps a bit more than middle class. If I wanted to dedicate my money to a 150k 911, I might be able to. Point is I absolutely don't feel the need for it after driving the car....if someone gave me 1mil, maybe...or probably not as I'd get something else (or even just a loaded boxster... or two). I'm not saying 'no one should get a 911,' but rather 'from my OPINION, I don't see the appeal as it being a next step up.' Perhaps Porsche should release a new car I'd be envious over (kind of a real 'next level' boxster or cayman). A mini 918 maybe, but then again, that's why they have a boxster to fill that gap and I'd rather just see improvements over time. Let the 911 reign as the ridiculously overpriced old man's trophy or track toy - I don't care.

Re: 911 lost its way? Since you have a base, there's a GTS, and a GT4/Spyder which are significantly better than a base..

Re: 911 lost its way? Ah yes....after all this is the Porsche community so of course they will! :hilarious: Well said! As a final note, I do NOT think the 911 has lost its way. :taunt:

Re: 911 lost its way? Minthral, btw, I totally get where you are coming from and empathize. Its all just perspective. Porsche is not a company for those seeking to spend little money. Everything, as you know is expensive. When your car is 10 years old, the maintenance will cost more than today along with everything else. They are not brand for people trying to buy cheap cars and they really do not want you to buy another entry level car. They want you to move up. I know some people don't like to hear that but they call them (their words) Entry Level for a reason. Just saying ... But I do completely empathize, not sympathize, but empathize. Been there, done that. When I bought my first Porsche, I rationalized it too. After all, rear engined "bugs", and they were advanced bugs, were so outdated. They looked kind of funny and air cooled? Who did that? VW bugs. Why was anyone paying so much money? And I, and everyone else, rationalize buying stuff today too. Everyone does.

Re: 911 lost its way? The 2.7 981 and 3.8 991 are quite different things, same ancestry but very different driving experiences. Moving from one to the other requires a bit of recalibration, it took me a while moving from a 3.4 987. Once it's clicked however the 991 becomes a very responsive, agile and hugely fast machine and you are grateful up for the fancy performance gubbins that helps keep you on the road. I guess the garage lent the OP the 991 Cab in the hope that this might lead to a trading up sale at some point, and looks like they failed. However providing loaners in a shabby state is an unforgivable error. Would make me wonder if they treat their cars like that are they going to treat my car, or me, any better?

Re: 911 lost its way? No complaints for the 911 being fast and agile. The performance is great. My problem is I didn't find the car 'the next level' of enjoyment past a base boxster. Both cars in my mind offered the same experience, but one is bigger and more expensive. The bigger and more expensive one should somehow offer a bigger and more expensive experience, which wasn't there for me. Perhaps it takes time 'getting used to,' but way it works for me, I know that I either like it immediately or not. The thing is, if I hadn't driven a base boxster and went straight for the 911, it would feel like a new great experience, but otherwise its just the same. I do agree it was a sales pitch as I have been looking at 911's while in for service the sales person knew about it. I'm sure they mistreat cars as there are plenty of complaints this shop will cause dings....not to mention someone went for a joy ride in my car for some reason for 40 min (per PCM) after replacing my headlights. I avoid this dealer, but this was warranty work so... Again, I am not saying a 911 is a bad car, but in my mind, underwhelming and not desirable when you can get a 981 instead.

Re: 911 lost its way? Did I miss anything? Carrera S has rear steering? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: 911 lost its way? I'm not sure what you expect from driving a car. If every incremental increase in pricing made driving a better experience I could understand what you're saying but that's just not the case. As someone said above, if you want to rationalize fun for money spent, get a Miata. There is just no formula I know of that says more money means more fun - if that were the case driving a Rolls would be orgasmic. Sorry, I just can't buy your rationalization.

Re: 911 lost its way? You know, actually only the turbo has rear steering. I was told the S I drove did, but per the configuration that is not possible.

Re: 911 lost its way? Owning both a Cayman/Boxster and a 911 at the same time is the best way to truly appreciate the subtle and not-so-subtle differences between the cars. Moving from one to the other, confirmation bias starts to cloud the discussion (if you bought a 911 after owning a Cayman/Boxster, or vice versa, we would naturally look for ways to confirm to ourselves and others that we made the right choice). I'm on a two-day road trip right now in the Cayman, and while I am enjoying getting back into PDK, I realize again how much more comfortable our 911 is as a highway tool. But I'm also enjoying how much easier it is to load gear in and out of the Cayman trunk as opposed to the back seat of the 911. The extra 88 hp our 911 has over the CS isn't needed, but it's noticed. At the end of the day, neither our CS or GTS is a "better" driving tool, but they are very different and excel at different things. If I had only driven a Cayman and 911 for a few hours each, I might have a difficult time justifying the extra cost of a 911. Owning each simultaneously for a few years now, I greatly appreciate the differences in the platforms and would be hard-pressed to pick one over the other.

Re: 911 lost its way? Everyone has some kind of confirmation bias. In your case, you are comparing a 987 with a 997 albeit GTS. There is a fairly big distance between 911 generations as evidenced by the 991 being faster than both the 997GT3 and 997 TT at the ring, something which at first no one wanted to believed. With something like 70% new parts, its not the same car. Similarly I am sure the next generation, expected around MY19, founded upon an entirely new modular architecture will be an entirely new ballgame. BTW, my wife agrees 100% that the hatch in the 987CS was very convenient. But the 981CS hatch was about useless. Generations change. Opinions change. We need to be comparing same generation cars. Other wise we might as well be talking about 986 Boxsters and 996 cars.

Re: 911 lost its way? I have a 987CS and 991GTS. The cars are entirely different and the 991 took a while to get comfortable with as initially the rear weight bias left me feeling a little nervous about the cars handling; I was simply not as comfortable with the cars handling compared to my cayman. After having driven it for 4 months, my initial concerns no longer enter my mind and the handling and rear grip are phenomenal. Rotating the rear with a bit of throttle is a lot of fun. The Cayman is perfectly balanced and easy to drive from day 1. If you jump out of a cayman / boxster into a 911 and drive it like you'd drive your cayman, you're going to feel 'what's the big deal' and am not surprised you felt underwhelmed. However spend some time in the car and learn its nuances, idiosyncrasies and learn to drive it properly you'll start to get the 911 thing.

Re: 911 lost its way? I believe the GT3 also has rear wheel steering.

Re: 911 lost its way? I understand the OP's post... I was hoping to trade my Cayman for a Lamborghini but after a few test drives, I found the Gallardo may have cost 3 times the money but didn't offer much more driving pleasure. So I gave Ferrari a chance. Long story short I'm happy with the Cayman... Wouldn't have belevied it until I drove the cars for myself. (This isn't a knock against 911, Ferrari or other expensive cars , just a shout out to how good Porsche made the box/cayman when it comes to dollars spent vs fun on public roads.) FTD score (fun to drive on public roads based on agility, weight, responsiveness, and feel... Also known as smiles-per-mile). Mustang = 1 Corvette = 1.5 Cayman = 2 Lamborghini 560 = 2.2 Ferrari 458 = 2.4 Ferrari 430 Scud =2.5

Re: 911 lost its way? I can't see how a test drive like this could conclude the 911 has lost its mojo. I love the Cayman platform, but it serves a different purpose. The overall character is still relatively Porsche, but it's mid-engine and will have a different feeling. The most important thing though: The Cayman is a much cheaper car. The Cayman will be a terrible car if it were priced at 100K+, but it's a great "bargain for money" in comparison to the 911 cars. There are a lot of bargain for money out there compared to Caymans as well. So does that mean Caymans have lost it? I think it's difficult to conclude these things without actually having owned both cars for a proper duration. Anyway, at the end of the day, the two cars target different segments. The Cayman is a more agile and more fun car. The 911 Turbo is a much more mature and capable car.

Re: 911 lost its way? Reading some posts, I still think some might be are misunderstanding the point. It's not about whether a cayman is better than a 911, but rather what is satisfactory. This is hard to understand if you are the type who's going after the fastest car with the most options; or buying/leasing a new car very year. It's like driving a car and realizing you don't need to go any faster nor should have a bigger engine, opposed to driving the same car and thinking what if you had more HP/options. It's also like trying to explain why you drive a manual when PDK is superior. There are diminishing returns and most people will not get more satisfaction by buying a 150k 911 instead of a 60k boxster/cayman. For example, the previous statement "the 911 turbo is a much more mature and capable car." What does that even mean? Assuming you like to floor the gas pedal at every stoplight then slam on bigger brakes and are such an excellent driver on the track that you are bored and need something that can gas further limits, a 911 turbo is no different. In a practical sense, I am going to floor the gas pedal, hear a lot of noise, go fast, and be satisfied with either car...both cars will have enough power and traction to through curves at very high limits. So why do I need a 911 turbo? Only reason I can think of is so I can brag I have a 911 turbo or I'm someone with a serious track/race hobby. The irony is most people may never even push their car to the limit, 911 or 981, nor are they extremely serious racers. Thus, you should get cheaper cayman/boxster. Point of the post is the 911 is perceived and called the top of the line car. Cayman/boxster are supposedly entry level and should be looking up at the 911. Someone who buys a base boxster should be dreaming to buy a 911 one day. I simply don't think this is the case anymore...fact that gt4 is a cayman is a good indication too. 911 can RIP as far as I'm concerned and it has lost its way. IMO, cars like the boxster and cayman are Porsches future in the current trend.

Re: 911 lost its way? Respectfully disagree. Your last statement may be true for you but not in general. The 911 outsells Boxster+ Cayman combined (May 15 US sales 911:841, Box+Cay: 611). Similar trend last 5 months and same for 2014 (source- Panorama ) So sales don't reflect such a trend. Whatever, to each his own. Cheers

Re: 911 lost its way? Americans don't like 2-seaters and/or small cars in general.

Re: 911 lost its way? Since opinions are opinions, nobody is going to change your mind. That’s fine. Its all good. Everyone likes different things. I'll try to focus on facts here and its not to convince you of anything. If you understand the Law of Diminishing Returns, they as I pointed out before, you should have known that buying a car twice as expensive would never get you twice as fast (or whatever). Your expectations did not jive with reality. Your pricing is way off. You can build a $110K 911 faster than the car you drove. One example, an obviously abused one, cannot speak for entire class of cars. I submit the following: If I read this VWVortex.com - 2015 Subaru WRX STI vs. 2014 Porsche Cayman | STANDING MILE there is absolutely no way the Base Cayman 981 is worth the money. For much, much less money, I can buy an AWD flat 4 turbo car (boxer engine), by a brand renowned for its AWD capability, easily tuned to get far more HP (of which the Cayman is not). Why would anyone ever buy a base Box/Cay when they can have more fun at half the price? :crazy: Those base 981 buyers are throwing their money away :hilarious: That is your argument. ... "In a practical sense, I am going to floor the gas pedal, hear a lot of noise, go fast, and be satisfied with either car...both cars will have enough power and traction to through curves at very high limits. So why do I need a base Porsche 981 at twice the price? Plus I have AWD AND I can tune this car cheaply for more HP!!! " What a waste of money base 981 cars are. :taunt: Oh, how about a 987S Spyder? Hmm. That didn't go to good. Looks like a 987 Spyder was a waste of money too. Thus you wasted your money when you could have an STI . Amazing how those arguments work? They are entry level by definition. They are the cheapest and lesser performance. Because you don't like that moniker doesn't change the pricing, performance, or PAG marketing strategy. A Honda Civic is entry level to the Honda Accord. The Toyota Corolla is entry level to its big brother the Toyota Camry, etc. Zedcat already said this but sales do not match your perception. If want you said were true, 911 sales would tank and 981 sales soar. All the people voting with their wallets would speak. But they don't. Why is that? 911 can RIP as far as I'm concerned And that's OK. Different people like different things. For you, that's all good c ars like the boxster and cayman are Porsches future in the current trend. What you don't address is that PAG exists to make money. That is THE reason for their existence. They have always been a high end (not exotic but high end) company selling cars to the monied. Average incomes of 911 buyers are far higher than US median salaries. Many are sold for cash or leased. Comparably few are financed. This is easy to see. Read the 911 forums. It's all about money. It always has been. Porsches future is in SUVs. The Box/Cay barely registers. Their profits are dismal in comparison. In terms of production numbers, their sales combined in 2013 was 17.4% of production. In 2014 it was 11.4%. And they are the future of the company? Hmm. Since they were the cheapest, and today on par with Macans, any guesses on the percent profit? What does the average 981 sell for, maybe $65 - $70K? Traditionally 911 sales are about 25% base, 25% S, 50% TT so maybe $145K? Combined box/cay production in 2014 was 73.5% of 911 production. Maybe they contribute 4 – 5% of overall profit? In profitability, would anyone notice if they stopped making the entire line? If they stopped making them tomorrow and focused exclusively on 911s, 960s, Macans, Cayennes, and maybe some sedans would the company suffer financially? They can’t make enough Macans now. What if they converted the factories to increase Macan production buy the 24,000 981s they sold in 2014? It would cut the Macan wait down from 5 months to 2 months? It might increase profitability and make the stock holders happy? Staggering to think about huh? In the sports car line the future is the 960/988/FeFi. They don’t want you buying $52K boxsters. The real money is in those $150K cars you don’t like. They want you buying those $150K cars so that you won’t blink when they start selling $300K Ferrari Fighters. Take a close look at Porsche Dealer new car inventories. Look at the number of 991 TTS cars in the $200K range on the showroom floors. Actual production numbers and sales do not support your perceptions. I would be very, very glad these cars even sold. In a world where they can’t build SUVs fast enough to meet demand, priced similarly to the 981, one might seriously question the financial viability for their continued existence. As a gateway product to their core sports car business, the business case for their existence has some merit. As a standalone product (as you suggest), buried in a SUV company, it would likely die quickly without the 911 cachet and massive support from its large customer base that buys 5, 10, 20 cars over a lifetime. BTW, what was the trap time of that Cayman in that video? 14.2? Don’t challenge a Macan. D925D528-9692-49F5-B235-AAC40A2272D0.jpg Photo by Rsmiling | Photobucket 12.766. I’m only making a point here about where the future is heading. I’m not suggesting a Macan is a sports car because its not. But AWD, room for four, and quick. Which cars do you think are the future? Wait. What is the Ring time for a base Boxster/Cayman? The 981S time is 7:58. The 987S time is 8:18. What about the base cars? While not recorded, I can believe a 981 base car is as quick as the 987S times. What about a Macan? Google it. It’s faster. Maybe it is a sport car? That can’t be right. :crazy: Seriously, I really do understand where you are coming from. But the future is where the money is and the money buys 911s, Macans, and Cayennes. The 981 "appears" to be a niche product that acts as a gateway drug. Granted there are multiple box/cay buyers. There is no doubt about that, but the actual sales statistics don't support your theory. And if a FeFi is built, everything will move upscale as the 911 becomes the "entry level" car to the 960/988. Look around you at the holistic picture of all the cars sold. Look where the profits come from. If you want to talk trends, think about those trends. Who is buying what?

Re: 911 lost its way? I stopped reading the previous post as soon as I saw STI vs base cayman, drag race pics, and 'what car is faster.' This is exactly what I mean by missing the point.

Re: 911 lost its way? Ahh, but that was exactly your argument. For substantially less money, the STI is more than the equal performance wise than a base 981. So why waste the money? It's your own argument. The base 981 has lost its way when I can buy more for less.

Re: 911 lost its way? That is not my argument. In fact, I state its not about performance but rather the experience. STI and a base 918 is completely difference experience.

Re: 911 lost its way? Just speculation on my part since I've only known a grand total of two Ferrari owners, but I suspect that the driving force behind the decision to buy a Ferrari is not performance. Do buyers of $20K+ Rolex watches buy them because they tell time better than a $100 Casio? People buy these high end items not because they are significantly better than their less expensive competition, they do so to send a message that they are highly successful. It's all about prestige. To the general public the 911 was, is, and probably always will be the quintessential Porsche, notwithstanding the performance improvements of the Boxster\Cayman line over the past 15+ years. A $100K 991S can outperform a $70K 981S, but is the performance difference enough to warrant the $30K+ premium. I didn't think so, but I can appreciate that many others do. Moreover, since the median income of a new 911 buyer is in excess of $400K a year, I suppose that $30K won't sway their decision. Since I'm below the $400K median income, the $30K premium was the deciding factor in my purchase.

Re: 911 lost its way? I bet they are - you could by at least 25 STIs for the price of one 918