Cayman = Poor mans 911

I have read on other forums where the Cayman is just a subsitute for those that can't afford a real Porsche , ie: a 911 . I have to tell you that I was a die hard 911 /997 fan. I was 99.9% sold that i was going to buy 997 Carrera S. Money was not an issue. My wife actualy wanted me to get the911/997 because that was all I talked about. I have owned 2 Z06 Corvettes, Infiniti G35 coupesand Nissan 350 Z's of late so I'm not totally new to sports cars. I also have had considerable time AutoXing and had a Acura RSX TypeS that was modded primarily for AutoX. The new Boxster S handles better than all of those cars. Didn't say it was faster, just better handling. I don't have a long history with 911 's but I really believe that the Cayman is going to rock the Porsche world. The 911 has been fighting physics forever, and is one of the world best all around sports cars, but the writing is on the wall. The competion is geting better and you have to have a new answer. I think the Caym,an is it. We are going to be on the cutting edge of the Porsche revolution. It has to happen, engineering can only do so much. I really think that the future will bring more HP to the Cayman and that it will eclipse the 911 as the performance porsche , with the 911 being the GT aspirational; car. The Cayman will already beat the stock 911 by 4 seconds on the North Nurburgring (Autoweek) track. All the magazines state that with a 3.8 Carrerqa S engine the Cayman would blow away the Carrera S. It has to happen. Remember the first Porsche was a mid engined car and all of their big time racing success has been with moid engined cars. It has to happen. It's not a bad thing, just evolution. Sorry if this sounds like a rant, but I could have purchased a new 505hp Z06 for what I am paying for my new Cayman , and almost bought as Carrera S. The Z06 will blow the doors off of the Boxster , 911 Carrera S, and GT3 on the track. So what. I have a choice and I excercised it. I think history will bear me out. The times are a changing. We are leading the charge.

Could not agree more. I looked hard at the Z06 and new Carreras but fell for the Cayman . And this is from a long history of 911 ownership/ Porsche ownership. In a few years it would not surprise me to see the Cayman as the model most wanted. It was nice to spend less but that was not the deciding factor. Edited by - Santa Fe on 11/26/2005 4:10:41 PM

A 911 was above my budget, in fact so was the Cayman , but as it grew on me so did my means to come up with more money! You know 'where there is a will there is a way'. My will must have done all the work because the way soon surfaced. Those that knock it probably are jealous for whatever reason they might have. And I really don't consider a 70K car a poor man's anything. I would love to see a survey on how many people spend 70K and above on a vehicle, what do you think 2 or 3 % maybe? FWIW, Russ

. . . at £51,000 for a decent spec CaymanS it's hardly a poor mans anything! Irrespective of power the CaymanS will take more speed in and out of a corner over a 911 C2 (£64,392 GBP for equivelant optional spec), it's just physics = better balance = better handling. I'll be keeping the extra £13,000 GBP's thanks all the same. After today seeing all the CaymanS out in the open next to the 911 's I prefer the look of the croc to those now anyways, much more aggressive, purposfuland compact. Dean

The Cayman S just needs the Limited Slip Differential and the reprogramming of the Motronic to get the 3.4 back in tune -and while your at it raise the rev limit to 8200 - and it's game-on!Or, is that game-over?

. . . game over probably. Slip diffs are great for track use but for every day driving not such a necessity and can make a car quite skittish when just driving fairly normally in my experience. The 911 probably needs all the help it can get due to the weight hanging off the back in those tight turns. Dean

Beat the CARRERA on the Nurburing... Right between the Lamborghini GALLARDO and the Lotus EXIGE on Top Gear's track And at 70K, it aint cheap nor for the poor, just good value... Edited by - Crazy_fast on 11/26/2005 5:37:01 PM

Put it this way. Any model that was not a 911 (914, 944, 968, Boxster , Boxster S ) had been called a poor man's Porsche . I do not like that label as it sounds very condescending. Yet every car has it's own charm. I am 100% sold on my 993 RUF BTR, but I would own a Cayman any day. CP

A couple friends of mine saw the Cayman and said I should get a 911 . It made me think twice. And know I'm more sure than ever- I would actually be bummed with a 911 . Edited by - chrismillion on 11/26/2005 7:22:26 PM

There will always be people who think thisbut there will also be realenthusiasts who understand the driving dynamics of the Cayman. Like you, there are many of us here who could afford a Carrera but prefer a Cayman. Don't let the morons get you down.

Porsche sells sports cars to people who want them for different reasons. The majority of Porsches are not raced or tracked. Although high performance 911s have always been available, the 911 has always appealed to those looking for a sports GT, often as an alternative to the Mercedes SL, CL, BMW 6, Jaguar etc.. In our present times the styling evokes nostalgia for many of those who can now afford such a car, and to others it announces financial arrival while still appearing youthful. I don't discount Porsche 's superb engineering in terms of keeping this 40 year old design contemporary and competitive, but all of this same engineering is available on the Boxster and Cayman . The reaction of both Boxster and 911 advocates strikes me as extraordinarily contradictory. The strident hostility (anxiety?) they invoke seems rather out of place for a car they state should be dismissed as irrelevant, over priced, and underperforming. As Shakespeare said, "methinks the lady doth protest too much". Such a reaction suggests they find the Cayman a threat to their obviously strongly held opinions. I think the 997 is an excellent car, period. It's not my choice, period. The Cayman bashers need to move on. It will be up to Porsche to decide how much impact the 987 platform has on the Porsche lineage. The Boxster could easily be made more muscular both in looks and performance, its just that after 9 years the majority of Boxster enthusiasts have given up on a truly high performance variant coming from Porsche . The same may be true for the Cayman . Until the 911 style ceases to be a cash cow for Porsche there won't be any realignment of the models which certainly makes financial sense. A fully developed Cayman has the potential to entirely overshadow the 997S. If Porsche throws down the gauntlet and engineers the car to race that would herald a shifting of emphasis, since Porsche will presumably not race the M96 engine . In the meantime the Cayman has a lot to offer us.

IMO I think the Cayman is a superior car to a 911 and this is coming from a 4 X owner of 911s . It's only limitation (by Porsche ) is HP. If the Cayman had even the 3.6 engine is would blow the 911 away. However some people also buy Porsches for snob appeal, so if a 911 is more expensive, they can tell there friends they paid more. I have seen the Cayman at the dealer along with 911s . To me, the 911 looks dated, the Cayman looks fresh, a new modern design way overdue by Porsche . 911 owners keeps quoting 0-60 times,while I would certainly welcome a faster time for the Cayman , that is not what buying ANY Porsche is about. If you what 0-60, go with the Z06 and it will smoke all Porsches with the exception of the GT. To me buying a Porsche is about the total package and the Cayman is the best package you can buy short of the GT Porsches. The 911 is a relic of the past and a big money maker for Porsche . As long as there are people willing to pay the extra premium for the 911 mainly for the extra 30HP, Porsche will keep making it. For me, if Porsche had the same HP levels for the 911 and Cayman , AND the Cayman cost more, I would still get the Cayman . It's the total Porsche package. I look at it like a 'Poor mans Carrera GT'.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr id="quote" noshade="noshade" height="1" />I look at it like a 'Poor mans Carrera GT'.<hr id="quote" noshade="noshade" height="1" /></blockquote> . . . perfect analogy! This sums up my feelings about this car so well - we should be comparing like for like in dynamics, engine layout and physics. To be honest, the sorts of people harping on about how much better the 911 is over the CaymanS at the launch evening looked way to old to appreciateany differences and would probably get a heart attack if they ever pushed hardenough on the loud pedal to scratch the surface, nuff said! Dean Edited by - V6 TT on 11/27/2005 04:23:14 AM

DaveC, VicL, You got it right. So did Porsche . They dipped their toes in the mid engine performance water with a mildly tuned Cayman and the car is still a marvel. I never had a 911 , but wanted one for forever. Until I saw the Cayman . The Cayman S stole me away from the 911 . It made me feel traitorous. It is interesting to see how it is having the same effect on previous 911 owners. Fresh is the word. Porsche is in the business to make money. The Cayman , like all the other Porsche brands will get more power. It will eventually eclipse the 911 in performance. It does in the handling department already. It would with the same Carrera engine. It is simply a better platform. The age of horsepower wars will level too. I don't think we will continue to seeing 500 and 600 hp cars given oil price trends. People will want more with less. Cars like the Cayman will provide it.

I have always been a 911 fan but never had the money to get one until a few years ago. When the 996 came out I did not like it as well because it was larger than the 993 (or at least it seemed to be) and the interior seemed 'plush' to me ( more like a touring GT). So I ended up getting a 1998 C4S, a great car (the epitome of my idea of the 911 , air-cooled and all the other superlatives). I will not part with that car. For me, the attraction of the Cayman S is its size (not as big as the 997) and the opportunity to own a mid-engined car. I expect the driving experience to be different from my C4S and believe like others do that it represents modernity for Porsche as an automobile manufacturer. That idea may be further borne out by Porsche 's recent investment in Volkswagen. In any event, It will be a couple of years before I buy the Cayman but I know I will get one just like I did with my 911 dream.

Let me offer a little different point... I did choose the Cayman over the 911 , mainly because I know that the 911 is not for me for various reasons. However, IMHO, Porsche = 911 , period. For Porsche to slow down or abondon the 911 development over Cayman or another platform that may be in thoughts, to me is ridiculous. The charm, advantage and superiority that Porsche enjoys is only and only within the 911 . No other company had the dicipline to continue the development of any of their models for 40 years. The experience, the know-how and the essence that comes with all that work isa uniqueadvantage; Porsche will not and should not give that up. I want the 911 to be the flagship, the one that continues to earn trophies in every race or other competition, I want the 911 to have the most advanced design, I want Porsche to spend months and years fighting aerodynamics for reducingthe Cdby 0.01. To me all that work and engineering for excellence is the essence. Any and all companies strive to have such a distinctive history that they can turn into advantage. You think Porsche would give that up? So, I am sorry, but when anyone suggests that Cayman is a better platform or a better car than the 911 , it sound quite ridiculous to me. Also, 'better' in what way, who defines 'better' for me or another person? As I wrote in the other thread, this is all emotional not logical. If one feels the Cayman is 'better' for them at this point in time, then it is better to what ever you compare it to. However, that does not mean and will not mean that the 911 is no longer the right platform, Porsche proved all doubters wrong for several decades now. 911 is truly the car that embodies all that is Porsche . At the same time, believing in this has nothing to do with what one can afford or not. We all have our preferences. What is quite contradictory is when people make a point out that a 'reasonably optioned' Cayman is almost the same price as a base Carrera and then go on to say that the Cayman is for people who cannot afford the 911 /fckeditor/editor/images/smiley/MWPX/hi.gif Now that is quite ridiculous as well, isn't it? Cheers, Edited by - FT on 11/27/2005 11:56:13 AM

<p align="left">FT, I do agree with you that the 911 is the flagship of the current Porsche lineup, HP and price is all it takes to be the flagship. However, I respectfully disagree with you that Porsche should continue development on the 911platform. The 911 platform has been a liability to Porsche since the late nineties when Porsche decided to not race the 911 turbos against the Vettes in the then GT2 now GT1 category. The current 911GT3 race in the GT2 category basically against itself. Whenever Porsche decides to race in a higher class, it develops a new 'mid-engine' car as in the GT1 and the current RS Spyder . If the 911 platform is so great, why doesn't Porsche enter a 911 turbo in the GT1 class and race against the Vettes? The reason Porsche does not is because it would not be competitive. <p align="left"> Porsche has been trying to get away from the 911 since the 928 days, but loyalist keep buying them. So the 911 has now become the rear-engine 928, a large GT car.As a pure sports car, the engine layout should not be compromised. The top Porsche road ( Carrera GT) and race cars are mid-engined, no compromises. In the end, if Porsche offered the same engines in the Cayman and the 911 , we would not be having this discussion. The buyer who want a faster, better balanced, better handlingsports car will get the Cayman . If they want a larger cruiser with 2 extra seats for the kids will get the 911 .

VicL, I am not sure which series you are refering to regarding GT1/2 classes; I could not look up the rules for it. In the Rolex and GrandAm series they do race in the GT class against all popular brands and models, including Corvette C5 and C6. In Le Mans and ALMS they are in the GT class competing against BMW M3s, F360s, Lambo Murceliagos. Moving up to GTS class against C6R, F550, Vipers, etc is totally cost prohibitive in terms of development. One of the biggest issues is that the C6R through C6R have anywhere between 7 to 18% more track width. Track withincreasescontribute to better handling twice as much as lowering the ride height, and it is not something you can change beyond certain limits from the production version. If you look at the rules of each series, which Speed World Challenge is the most absurd one IMO, there are technical and/or economic reasons why Porsche is not competing. It is not because the engine is in the wrong place /fckeditor/editor/images/smiley/MWPX/regular_smile.gif There has to be a very clear marketing advantage for any car manufacturer to spend the time, resources and money to compete in a given series. I do agree that mid-engine layout is probably the best option; however, it does not mean other configurations does not work. Corvette had a huge engine at the front, no one goes and says it is in the wrong place. Same with BMW which has considerable success in International motorsports, but not as much as Porsche of course. Also, where do you see Ferrari's legendary mid-mounted engines becoming dominant at any place, except F1? I have worked as a chassis engineer for several years, and in my personal experience, where the engine resides is not that crucial, UNLESS you are designing a new car purely for racing from ground up. If you are modifying or improving a given chassis, you design components that will optimize the weight distribution of the vehicle in most conditions. And, I am one of those guys that actually truly do not like 50/50 weight distribution as it presents compromises at all conditions, granted in a balanced manner. But improving a Porsche's handling is tricky but once you know few ground rules, it is quite clear. As for the 928, it is my opinion that strategy (944/924/968, etc.) was the one that brought Porsche to its knees in late 80s through mid 90s. How is a front-engined car better than a rear-engined one? I am not saying rear-engined car is better than mid-engined at all, but when it comes to handling superiority, any can be made to work, and Porsche has proven it. If already proven with great success, why abondon the 911 platform that contains so much heritage and engineering; especially for the purposes selling road-going cars? 911 works, improve it continously and ensure it is always at the top of the ladder, IMO.

FT, The Corvettecould actually be considereda front mid engine car. The motor is set behind the front axle. It also moved to a transaxle design similar tothe 944's. The 911 engineis placed behind the rear axle. If you notice, the Carrera wheel base isalmost 3 inches shorter than the Caymans . Extending the existing 911 platform by 3 inches would further increase the pendulum effect. In fact Porsche has indicated that a future 911 engine may be moved farther forward to improve handing. The Caymans longer wheelbase, identical front track and 1/2' wider rear track than the 911 does indeed constitute a superior platform. If Porsche were designing a racing vehicle from the ground up it would not use a rear engine design. Front wheel drive is not necessarily the way to go either. Just look at the earlier Panoz LMP cars that have gone by the wayside.Just look at the new LMP Porsche that will race next year, it's mid engined. Porsche is also being spanked of late by the V8 BMW M3s in competition. Something has to change. With that said I still love the 911 . It is a classic. It will I believe evolve into more of a strictly GT car in the future with the Cayman picking up the pure performance/racing end of the spectrum. That is not to say that more engineering excellence can't, and won't, improve the 911 , but at some point why bother spending money to try and improve a design that is not conducive to a pure racing application.

FT, I'm compelled to say I think that's the best post I've read on this board, and I've read most of the 5400 to date. God bless the 911 . Without it there would be no Porsche at all. If I had small children, I'd get one. But if you gave me a 997 turbo, I'd trade it in on a Cayman , after a few weeks of course As you said it's all about emotion.

Actually it was Porsche 's outdated manufacturing technology that almost "brought it to its knees" along with an international recession. The 964 of 911 (89-92) series was generally poorly received mainly because it did not appear to be outwardly significantly different from its predecessor despite the fact that it was a major redesign. Porsche adapts their racing cars to fit the current racing rules. Some of Porsche 's major racing victories have been due to their exploitation of loopholes in the rules that gave them the advantage. Once those loopholes were closed they often moved on. What is remarkable about the 911 is Porsche 's engineering talent to successfully adapt the car to changing rules (contrast the Porsche 1974 5mph bumpers to Mercedes version) and technology. The decision to use a rear engine design in the late 1940s was related to Ferdinand Porsche 's previous history with VW and the cost advantages of air cooling. With the advent of watercooling only the shape of the body and position of the engine have actually been carried over for 40 years. Porsche management has less orthodoxy regarding what constitutes a Porsche than any enthusiasts, witness the Cayenne and its success. When the market is ready to move away from the 911 , Porsche will oblige with an appropriate commemorative edition model. Edited by - DaveC on 11/27/2005 4:01:29 PM

These types of discusions, by gentlemen,set this web site above the others. I appreciate the info backing the opinions stated. FT's, Vic'sand KBS's knowledge and opinions make for very interesting reading. That said, I can offer my humble opinion: I have owned both mid engined and rear engined Porsches. Both were fantastic and a blast to drive on both the road and track. There is nothing like getting your 911 's tail out in the breeze in a long sweeper. But as Vic has valid point about the future of Porsche and sport cars in general. I bought my Cayman after finally figuring out that a new car, under warranty, is a much better deal than a used one constantly needing work, especially if you are going to participate in PCA track days.If you add the advances in emmisions and fuel economy without giving up horsepower, then the new acquisition is far more justified. New car, hard top, mid engine.....modern engineering and design. Enough said

Good discussion and several good points no doubt. Let me offer some of my final thoughts on this: I am certainly not saying that rear-engine configuration is ideal, I do believe mid-engine is a better configuration. However, where the engine is located should not get into the equation of Cayman vs. 911 . 911 is Porsche for the fact that it symbolizes all of the company's values, from its shape to character (somewhat define by its engine location), competition history, etc. Cayman /Boxter are new and I do support that Porsche made sure they do no excel over the 911 , just an opinion. Many have taken issue, and rightly so in some ways, that ' Porsche deliberately made the Cayman a lesser car than the 911 '. To me that should not be a shock, the same decision was made in 1992/3 when they gave a green light to the Boxster and required maximum common parts usage between it and the 996 under development. There is no suprise here. Hence the validity of 'you get what you pay for' /fckeditor/editor/images/smiley/MWPX/regular_smile.gif Now if Porsche had truly fully developed the Cayman and priced it between the 911 and 911S, I don't know what would have happened, but a lot of confusing within its customer base; not to mention that the used Boxster market would have crashed and having their owners swearing not buy a Porsche ever again /fckeditor/editor/images/smiley/MWPX/regular_smile.gif Of course that is my personal take. Let me also quote Paul Frere, whom I consider the ultimate authority on Porsche and911 from a racing and engineering perspective: 'The 911 has always been a rewarding car for competent drivers [which is why I know the 911 is not for me /fckeditor/editor/images/smiley/MWPX/wink_smile.gif]. If its 'on limit' handling required some 'finesse', it was not so much because of its rear weight bias or the overhung engine as for its short wheelbase. If the rear end breaks out, the drift andle increases faster if the wheelbase is short than when it is long, which requires a quick and accurate correction by the driver. The racing performance of the 911, past and present, indicates that, properly driven, it is as efficient as any.' (Porsche 911 Story, 1998). Cheers, Edited by - FT on 11/27/2005 5:05:56 PM

FT, You are correct, the 911 is Porsche and has made the marque what it is today. I have always believed that the 911 was the quintessential sports car. There is no subsitute, especialy for the venerable 911 . We are fortunate that we live in such an interesting time in Porsche history. That which came before has paved the way for a new breed of Porsche . Still unmatched by any other automobile manufacturer. Often compared too, but still an uncomparable expression of automotive art and design. VR, KBS

That is another way to summarize my thoughts; however, I also believe you actually made the right choice and went with the Cayman vs. 911; interesting times indeed /fckeditor/editor/images/smiley/MWPX/angel_smile.gif

General Motors has been doing it with the Corvette for 50+ years.