Possible 987 Cayman S purchase - advice and help please - Page 5 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

Hi all, I am looking at purchchasing my first Porsche. I gave done quite a bit of research in the past but there isn't a great deal of information on the Cayman, well specifically in the direction I'm looking, so hoping you guys could shed a bit of light... Firstly, the car I'm looking at has PCCB. It's not an option I've had down as a must have but if they are fitted them I want to take advantage of. However, the costs are scaring me when its replacement time. What's the current state of play.... How !much are replacements (a lot of conflicting info)? Do they have to come from Porsche? What are the best iron alternatives and the costs? Is a refurb system available like the 997 etc? Secondly, and I appreciate this is difficult but judging from the pictures, what state are the rotors? Are the wear indicators showing through in the areas where circles are appearing? Thirdly, warranties, are they viable? Who is currently offering the best warrenty? Do they pay on any of the common problems? Fourthly, The car in question is a 2008 gen1 car. It's on 52k and has full Porsche service history, is there anything I should be checking for or aware of prior to viewing? Finally, What must be considered as must have options? I appreciate this is a preferance more than anything else but thought i would ask as this car is really well specced, has every option I'm looking for but if not, I would be interested to hear what is essential. Also what would you expect to get for a 25k budget? Any help is appreciated!

Tubes89 said: Hi all, I am looking at purchchasing my first Porsche. I gave done quite a bit of research in the past but there isn't a great deal of information on the Cayman, well specifically in the direction I'm looking, so hoping you guys could shed a bit of light... Firstly, the car I'm looking at has PCCB. It's not an option I've had down as a must have but if they are fitted them I want to take advantage of. However, the costs are scaring me when its replacement time. What's the current state of play.... How !much are replacements (a lot of conflicting info)? Do they have to come from Porsche? What are the best iron alternatives and the costs? Is a refurb system available like the 997 etc? Secondly, and I appreciate this is difficult but judging from the pictures, what state are the rotors? Are the wear indicators showing through in the areas where circles are appearing? Thirdly, warranties, are they viable? Who is currently offering the best warrenty? Do they pay on any of the common problems? Fourthly, The car in question is a 2008 gen1 car. It's on 52k and has full Porsche service history, is there anything I should be checking for or aware of prior to viewing? Finally, What must be considered as must have options? I appreciate this is a preferance more than anything else but thought i would ask as this car is really well specced, has every option I'm looking for but if not, I would be interested to hear what is essential. Also what would you expect to get for a 25k budget? Any help is appreciated! Well, I'm sure I am in the minority but I'd have PCCB's on my "new" Cayman in a heartbeat. ('course I looked at a low miles used 2014, and 2 new 2015's, yesterday and all 3 had the iron brakes... Just my luck.) Total 911 ran an excellent 2 part, no make that 3 part article on PCCB's. If back issues are available highly recommended. (You can also buy the 1st 50 issues on CD and the last 3 issues contain the PCCB's article.) The dots are the wear indicators. The smaller they get the more worn the rotors are. My info is rotor wear is not usually a problem. Pad wear is and if allowed to get too bad can take out the rotors. Still you want to make sure all rotor surfaces outside and inside are in good condition. Check for chips on the rotor edges. If the lug bolt rods not used when the wheel is removed it can drop down and chip the rotor. Too big a chip can render the rotor unusable. PCCB replacement costs are high. I can't quote any prices. Best I can offer is get a quote from your local dealer. AFAIK there are no aftermarket rotors available. There may be aftermarket pads but I suspect are intended for track use. You can get the PCCB's and pull them off and fit iron rotors and pads. Not sure of the cost and what's involved. A number of owners I suspect have done this. As for the car it is just a used car so you want to be sure to give it a thorough used car check out. My recommendation is to visit the car dead cold and with the A/C off as you go to start the engine be sure all warning lights come on and then go off as the engine starts and runs. Do not overlook this. My Boxster's airbag warning light is on and long story short I taped over this. The tape job is not very noticeable at all - not my intent but I got lucky -- and fooled me the first time I got in the car after the taping. The light was dark and I thought the light had turned itself off but then I remembered the tape job. Damn! Start the engine and let it idle while you walk around the car checking body condition. Listen to the engine for any scary noises at any time after cold start and as it idles and warms up. After some time then have the seller take you on a test drive that covers around 15 miles and allows the driver to demo the car as you intend to use it. Back at the starting point then you take the car out and drive the same route, drive the car the same way. After the above if you still like the car give it a thorough used car check out. Assume nothing works until you verify it does. The check list the techs use to CPO a used car is a good starting point. If after all of the above you *still* like the car and believe you can buy it for a reasonable sum of money then arrange for a PPI. Among other things this gets the car in the air where a close check for any leak sign can be made. At the same time the tech can check the brakes for any signs of distress and get a good feel for the remaining pad (and rotor) life and advise you. Can't help you with warranties. I've only had the new car one and the CPO one. For must have options, I recommend (and have on my 2003 Turbo) -- and some may be standard now -- cruise, OBC, rain sensing wipers, rear wiper, bi-xenon lights, heater/AC with auto climate control, auto dimming mirrors. The Turbo also a single CD player with a 6 disc magazine in the front trunk, but I never use the player. It also has power seats with memory but I really don't use this feature either. I'm the only driver and the seat adjustment seldom gets changed. Oh, no heated seats either. Some recommend these. I had an 08 Caymans S with heated seats but it came with them they were not something I felt I must have. It also had Sports Chrono which I am not sure what good this was. It made the car a bit harder to drive smoothly around town and on the highway. Happy shopping.

Deleted. Duplicate post. Sorry.

You'll find PCCBs divides opinions like nothing other than PDK vs manual. The paradox is that on track (where it probably does have braking advantages) the costs of replacements is so high that many prefer steel, and on the road steel disks might have an advantage - except when it comes brake dust is concerned...

Think I'd use that budget to look for a gen 2 car without PCCB...

norscot said: Think I'd use that budget to look for a gen 2 car without PCCB... It's all just personal opinion but I have to say, I agree.

Rockster said: Well, I'm sure I am in the minority but I'd have PCCB's on my "new" Cayman in a heartbeat. ('course I looked at a low miles used 2014, and 2 new 2015's, yesterday and all 3 had the iron brakes... Just my luck.)............ Happy shopping. Thanks for your feedback, will check out the details on the features regarding the ceramics. bcr5784 said: You'll find PCCBs divides opinions like nothing other than PDK vs manual. The paradox is that on track (where it probably does have braking advantages) the costs of replacements is so high that many prefer steel, and on the road steel disks might have an advantage - except when it comes brake dust is concerned... Thanks, in an ideal world the PCCB's would be a massive selling point for me (saying that i would probably laid on a beach somewhere if it was an ideal world!). I would prefer to have a car with them, but only if they can be realistically be replaced. I do plan to track the car, 3 or 4 times a year so it will be a factor in speeding up the wear process. From the limited info available it still appears that steel/iron discs are still in excess of £800 a rotor... Ozzie Osmond said: norscot said: Think I'd use that budget to look for a gen 2 car without PCCB... It's all just personal opinion but I have to say, I agree. I would prefer a gen2 car admittedly, more power, revisions and curing gremlins from the original model but the Caymans are holding money so well and they dont appear to be any for sale. They are literally the same price they were two years ago. 25k just about purchased a gen2 and same appears today. Happy for any links to any you guys can find, as my results with the usual places; RSJ, Harbour cars, Trader, PH etc all seem unproductive. anonymous said: [redacted] Its comfortably south of £25k, that just happens to be my budget. In fairness, i would have agreed initially, but the market has dried up and demand is driving prices north, as above, when looking 18 months ago, the Cayman is the same price now as it was then. The car in question is 'fully loaded' and I am particular about spec as i know what i am looking for. This one in question has the following options: PASM - Must have Sports Chrono - Desirable Sports Exhaust - Desirable Cruise Control - Must have Xenons - Desirable PCM - Must have Phone Connectivity - Must have Carbon Buckets - Desirable (Sports seats were a must have) Aero Pack PCCB's Turbo Wheels 6 CD Autochanger all with a full Porsche service history.

You can swop out of your PCCB's for steel one piece discs and decent pads for less than £1K. I do around two or three trackdays a year in my 987.1 CS and apart from braided brake lines and Motul 600 fluid, the brakes are stock and give no cause for concern whatsoever. Edited by Trev450 on Monday 27th July 16:44

My 10 cents - don't let the PCCBs put you off, they are an excellent option as long as you're not planning to track the car intensively and frequently. I have them on my GT3 and I can definitely feel the benefit in both retardation (no sniggering) and lightness. I was initially concerned at replacement cost, but you now have plenty of options in terms of OEM steel replacements OR you can have them refurbished to a higher than OEM standard by a company like SICOM relatively inexpensively: http://www.carbonceramicbrake.com/porsche.html http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=150... From what I can see on the above images, those look to be in fine fettle - the surface appears to be still shiny :-) Must have options? Maybe PCM, sports exhaust and manual to be honest, but condition is far more important, particularly if the model you're looking at suffers from M96/97 weaknesses. Ask Cmoose he knows his Caymans!

I'm sure the standards are up to the job and I'm sure the PCCB's are even better. I only mention track days as the additional wear is a concern on the ceramics. Where have you seen to replace rotors for, for that amount? All i can find is Brembo in the 350x34mm that come in at £3k by the time you factor pads which is more than I am willing or able to spend on a consumable part.

Fl0pp3r said: My 10 cents - don't let the PCCBs put you off, they are an excellent option as long as you're not planning to track the car intensively and frequently. I have them on my GT3 and I can definitely feel the benefit in both retardation (no sniggering) and lightness. I was initially concerned at replacement cost, but you now have plenty of options in terms of OEM steel replacements OR you can have them refurbished to a higher than OEM standard by a company like SICOM relatively inexpensively: http://www.carbonceramicbrake.com/porsche.html http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=150... From what I can see on the above images, those look to be in fine fettle - the surface appears to be still shiny :-) Must have options? Maybe PCM, sports exhaust and manual to be honest, but condition is far more important, particularly if the model you're looking at suffers from M96/97 weaknesses. Ask Cmoose he knows his Caymans! Cheers. 1700 Euros per disc is still more than I am wanting (again, or able) to spend on a consumable such as rotors. The thing that sticks in my mind is that whilst its now a £25k~ car, its a £50/60k car that needs maintaining and to do this adequately would have to exclude PCCB's. Glad you think the rotors are in good condition. I have asked the garage to get back to me ref the details on the brakes and if any of the history show replacements. If they are recent this maybe enough to sway in this direction. I didn't list manual as the required spec as its sacrilege to have anything but in a Cayman!

anonymous said: [redacted] Thanks for your thoughts. Just in answer to your points.. PCM is required as I'm led to believe that you cant have any phone function without it? A dated 4 letter/Number postcode Nav is not the priority when google maps is a lot better alternative. As stated, I wasn't looking for PCCB's, just happened to come up and I'm a little concerned about subsequent costs, vs the additional performance if any. FSH is a bonus, but, again any car can have issues regardless of age. Hence why i asked about warranties and if they are worthwhile for the Caymans and if so, who to look to in particular. What makes the Gen2 cars that much more reliable? What issues have been fixed? If Gen2 is what most would consider a better buy, thats a direction i would be looking to take. It just seems there arent any Gen2 cars around, nevermind with some of the spec i am looking for. Which, i would be willing to compromise on for the right car/deal. I would have the bores checked on the car, appreciate your thoughts on that. Do they suffer like the early 997's? Would a borescope be covered in a specialists pre-purchase inspection? I've come here to ask for advice and fully prepared to listen to it. I appreciate all feedback. I've come from outside of the Porsche world and the sports car scene having just sold my Megane track toy and a 3 series oil burner to free up the funds to buy a new car. I haven't decided that a Cayman (or this car) is the direction I am definitely going to go in. If anyone has any cars on their radar that are gen2 if this is the better car, sub £25k that are manual and come with PASM as a minimum then I am all ears. Thanks again

Tubes89 said: I'm sure the standards are up to the job and I'm sure the PCCB's are even better. I only mention track days as the additional wear is a concern on the ceramics. Where have you seen to replace rotors for, for that amount? All i can find is Brembo in the 350x34mm that come in at £3k by the time you factor pads which is more than I am willing or able to spend on a consumable part. Just one of many sources: http://www.porscheshop.co.uk/acatalog/porsche_caym...

Trev450 said: Tubes89 said: I'm sure the standards are up to the job and I'm sure the PCCB's are even better. I only mention track days as the additional wear is a concern on the ceramics. Where have you seen to replace rotors for, for that amount? All i can find is Brembo in the 350x34mm that come in at £3k by the time you factor pads which is more than I am willing or able to spend on a consumable part. Just one of many sources: http://www.porscheshop.co.uk/acatalog/porsche_caym... Thanks, but I am pretty confident that you cant just replace the ceramic rotors with OEM non ceramic rotors, due to the sizes required for the ceramic calipers. The sizes required are 350x34mm on the front and 350x28mm (iirc) on the rears massively limiting your options.

PCCB performance on track is not in doubt, they provide tangible benefits but longevity is obvious reduced if you track A LOT, that's the point. If you're using your car on road primarily with a few TD's per year - PCCB's have the potential to outlast steel by quite a margin; if you change the pads on time the discs can last the life of the vehicle or certainly your ownership thereof. Don't think you'll be getting into a gen2 Cayman for £25k, will you?

Tubes89 said: Cheers. 1700 Euros per disc is still more than I am wanting (again, or able) to spend on a consumable such as rotors. The thing that sticks in my mind is that whilst its now a £25k~ car, its a £50/60k car that needs maintaining and to do this adequately would have to exclude PCCB's. Glad you think the rotors are in good condition. I have asked the garage to get back to me ref the details on the brakes and if any of the history show replacements. If they are recent this maybe enough to sway in this direction. I didn't list manual as the required spec as its sacrilege to have anything but in a Cayman! Refurb is more like £600 per disc http://www.ceramicdiscrefurbishment.com/pricelist

Tubes89 said: Trev450 said: Tubes89 said: I'm sure the standards are up to the job and I'm sure the PCCB's are even better. I only mention track days as the additional wear is a concern on the ceramics. Where have you seen to replace rotors for, for that amount? All i can find is Brembo in the 350x34mm that come in at £3k by the time you factor pads which is more than I am willing or able to spend on a consumable part. Just one of many sources: http://www.porscheshop.co.uk/acatalog/porsche_caym... Thanks, but I am pretty confident that you cant just replace the ceramic rotors with OEM non ceramic rotors, due to the sizes required for the ceramic calipers. The sizes required are 350x34mm on the front and 350x28mm (iirc) on the rears massively limiting your options. Ah yes you're clearly more informed than I am on this. Try speaking with Ian at http://www.godspeedbrakes.co.uk/ There's not much he can't do when it comes to brakes.

There are definitely steel replacement kits available that allow you to keep your pccb calipers - Alcon I think are amongst them.

Fl0pp3r said: PCCB performance on track is not in doubt, they provide tangible benefits but longevity is obvious reduced if you track A LOT, that's the point. If you're using your car on road primarily with a few TD's per year - PCCB's have the potential to outlast steel by quite a margin; if you change the pads on time the discs can last the life of the vehicle or certainly your ownership thereof. Don't think you'll be getting into a gen2 Cayman for £25k, will you? Personally I don't, but others seem to think so.

Trev450 said: Tubes89 said: Trev450 said: Tubes89 said: I'm sure the standards are up to the job and I'm sure the PCCB's are even better. I only mention track days as the additional wear is a concern on the ceramics. Where have you seen to replace rotors for, for that amount? All i can find is Brembo in the 350x34mm that come in at £3k by the time you factor pads which is more than I am willing or able to spend on a consumable part. Just one of many sources: http://www.porscheshop.co.uk/acatalog/porsche_caym... Thanks, but I am pretty confident that you cant just replace the ceramic rotors with OEM non ceramic rotors, due to the sizes required for the ceramic calipers. The sizes required are 350x34mm on the front and 350x28mm (iirc) on the rears massively limiting your options. Ah yes you're clearly more informed than I am on this. Try speaking with Ian at http://www.godspeedbrakes.co.uk/ There's not much he can't do when it comes to brakes. Will drop them a line, I had a godspeed kit on my Megane.

Tubes89 said: Fl0pp3r said: Don't think you'll be getting into a gen2 Cayman for £25k, will you? Personally I don't, but others seem to think so. I suppose that depends on whether you would be comfortable spending that kind of money on a private purchase instead of from a dealer. It would probably be more of a rsk but could get a newer car for the same money that way. Indeed I may know of one

So I went up to look at the car at the weekend, more so out of curiosity than anything as I also planned to go have a look at a M135i and a M235i as a comparison (completely different cars I know). Having got there, the car was better in the flesh than the pictures let on. After a good prod round and a drive out I was really impressed, the car wdrove really well and I liked it. We decided to talk figures and they offered more for my e92 oil burner than I expected so it led to deeper conversations, as contrary to opinions in here, in the current market i dont think the cars a bad price after what we discussed. Now the brakes didn't scare me, they seemed in great condition and I was really impressed at the pedal feel (though admittedly it's been two years since i drove a regular Cayman). However, it's the borescoring issue and whilst they were offering a 1 year warranty I told them that I would want the car inspected. The dealer got a bit defensive and I'm not sure if it was because he was convinced i was going to buy it and was disappointed by my stance or whether his reaction was worried about I might find. Being stubborn as I am I shut down the conversation pretty much there and then and left. So the question is.... Is a PPI worth while? And who to go to? The car is in Carlisle and everyone wants the car taking to them. The dealer won't budge unless I put down a non refundable deposit which is understabdable. I'm still not 100% sure if it's the right thing but I have an itch to scratch. Edited by Tubes89 on Monday 3rd August 22:14

If you're that worried about the bore-scoring issue (which nothing but a Porsche warranty or specialist maintenance plan is likely to cover), which is also a tad over-hyped by a select few peddling it about, then i'd tell Mr David Hayton that his car is overpriced and take your £24k and buy yourself a gen2 cayman and sleep at night. If you like the admittedly very high spec of that particular car which I can understand is tempting then take the risk, get a quote for a worst case scenario from a well reputed specialist buy it and take the risk of something very rare albeit a bit expensive happening. You might want to speak with Hartech about their maintenance plan and their experience of the bore-scoring issues and see what they say about how you can protect yourself. But all that aside that car is way overpriced IMO - you're paying about a £10K premium for the trinkets on it, and you'll lose a lot of money on it and face the difficulty of one day selling a car that the internet has already half ruined from stupid scare mongering stories. I have to agree with Moose, buy a decent a £15k Cayman S (plenty of decent ones around at that kind of price) and stick the £10k in the bank for the best warranty you could ever hope for, chances are you'll never need it and your experience will be no less diluted from not having PCCB etc I can assure you. Edited by Beanoir on Monday 3rd August 23:12

Cheers gents. Hartech are going to be calling back ref warrenty today, as even an untrained eye like mine looking through the T&Cs I was aware that it wasn't going to cover the common issues. I wouldn't get too caught up in the price the car is for sale. Though it's still north of £20k I've hunted high and low for the last week all over trader, piston heads, specialist dealer pages and it appears that the car is priced well given it spec, age and mileage. I would love someone to prove me wrong (because it will save me money!!) but it appears to be accurate. You cant get a gen2 car for sub 28k, if you want to pay less than early twenties it's going to have been to the moon and back or it's an early car at base spec (which is naturally going to be worth less to trade it). It's as surprising for me that cars I was looking at 18 months ago are the same price today. Edited by Tubes89 on Tuesday 4th August 06:25

Tubes89 said: Cheers gents. Hartech are going to be calling back ref warrenty today, as even an untrained eye like mine looking through the T&Cs I was aware that it wasn't going to cover the common issues. I wouldn't get too caught up in the price the car is for sale. Though it's still north of £20k I've hunted high and low for the last week all over trader, piston heads, specialist dealer pages and it appears that the car is priced well given it spec, age and mileage. I would love someone to prove me wrong (because it will save me money!!) but it appears to be accurate. You cant get a gen2 car for sub 28k, if you want to pay less than early twenties it's going to have been to the moon and back or it's an early car at base spec (which is naturally going to be worth less to trade it). It's as surprising for me that cars I was looking at 18 months ago are the same price today. Edited by Tubes89 on Tuesday 4th August 06:25 In pretty much the same place as you right now. Have decided that a Cayman S is probably the way to go after some great times with my TVR Chim 500 (which incidentally I bought from the dealer who is selling your Cayman). Like you I'm nervy about the Gen 1 engine issues and for this reason the Gen 2 cars are very tempting - except that as you say there is really nothing out there at the moment around the 25k mark that is anything other than silver (boring for me) and with totally base spec. I suspect we may both suffer from he same issue - namely a lack of patience! I'm sure the ideal car will come up in time but hey, once you have decided what you want you never want to wait too long for it right? Of course the other big issue is that in a few years' time who is going to by a Gen 1 CS when for only a little more they can get in to a decent Gen 2 car? I suspect that as the Gen 2 prices start to fall - and they will - then the Gen 1 prices will suffer badly. Actually this is already the case it is just that it is all happening a little north of my preferred budget just now. Not 100% sure I want to be saddled with a Gen 1 CS in that scenario since it will be hard to get a decent price for it, but then neither a Gen 1 or Gen 2 CS is ever going to be an appreciating asset. One question to all of you experts. Is there ANYTHING that is better on the Gen 1 CS than on the Gen 2? I did read somewhere that the engine was perhaps a fraction more involving and aurally rewarding - but other than that it seems the Gen 2 CS wins in pretty much every department. If there were some real and important advantages the Gen 1 over the Gen 2 (steering feel or something) then buying a Gen 1 might make more sense but I'm not sure there is much in this case. Views folks?

TorqueDirty said: In pretty much the same place as you right now. Have decided that a Cayman S is probably the way to go after some great times with my TVR Chim 500 (which incidentally I bought from the dealer who is selling your Cayman). Like you I'm nervy about the Gen 1 engine issues and for this reason the Gen 2 cars are very tempting - except that as you say there is really nothing out there at the moment around the 25k mark that is anything other than silver (boring for me) and with totally base spec. I suspect we may both suffer from he same issue - namely a lack of patience! I'm sure the ideal car will come up in time but hey, once you have decided what you want you never want to wait too long for it right? Of course the other big issue is that in a few years' time who is going to by a Gen 1 CS when for only a little more they can get in to a decent Gen 2 car? I suspect that as the Gen 2 prices start to fall - and they will - then the Gen 1 prices will suffer badly. Actually this is already the case it is just that it is all happening a little north of my preferred budget just now. Not 100% sure I want to be saddled with a Gen 1 CS in that scenario since it will be hard to get a decent price for it, but then neither a Gen 1 or Gen 2 CS is ever going to be an appreciating asset. One question to all of you experts. Is there ANYTHING that is better on the Gen 1 CS than on the Gen 2? I did read somewhere that the engine was perhaps a fraction more involving and aurally rewarding - but other than that it seems the Gen 2 CS wins in pretty much every department. If there were some real and important advantages the Gen 1 over the Gen 2 (steering feel or something) then buying a Gen 1 might make more sense but I'm not sure there is much in this case. Views folks? Gen 1 is cheaper...that's about it. As for Gen 2 prices coming down, I doubt it. Nothing dramatic, anyway. There are not that many Gen 2 Caymans around, and demand is quite strong. It looks to me that prices are about the same as when I bought 2 years ago.

Hartech have left me a message. Need to call them back. Still browsing everywhere but cant find anything, not that I am in a particular rush, just be nice to see some god weather still. Booked to go see an e92 M3 & 235i on Saturday (even though both outside of my budget, some employee discount can be had and passed on) so who knows. Cayman still a strong contender!

Let us know how you get on with the M3 - it is the other car on my list but I have not yet had a chance to drive one. The Audi S5 got firmly rejected as an option the other week after a test drive because it was deeply dull, if very competent TD

As the owner from new of a March 2006, 86,000 mile 987.1 Cayman S I would say that the steering feel of the 987.1 cars is marginally better than the 987.2 cars. The engine noise is also IMO marginally more raucous in a good way, although the 987.2 3.4 engine is keener to rev. Although I have a GT4 coming in December I'm hoping to keep my 987.1 S for a while longer yet. Apparently it's worth tuppence-ha'penny but it still puts a smile on my face every time I drive it. The E92 M3 is an entirely different proposition (I also have an E90 M3, since April 09) - it's a great all-rounder but not in the same universe as a driver's car. It's a great contrast to the Cayman but steering feel is very remote by comparison, and it's too quiet unless/until you really cane it. Happy shopping!

Stunters said: As the owner from new of a March 2006, 86,000 mile 987.1 Cayman S I would say that the steering feel of the 987.1 cars is marginally better than the 987.2 cars. The engine noise is also IMO marginally more raucous in a good way, although the 987.2 3.4 engine is keener to rev. Although I have a GT4 coming in December I'm hoping to keep my 987.1 S for a while longer yet. Apparently it's worth tuppence-ha'penny but it still puts a smile on my face every time I drive it. The E92 M3 is an entirely different proposition (I also have an E90 M3, since April 09) - it's a great all-rounder but not in the same universe as a driver's car. It's a great contrast to the Cayman but steering feel is very remote by comparison, and it's too quiet unless/until you really cane it. Happy shopping! I have to agree on the engine in the Gen1, a bit more of the angry sound and feels a bit more cammy too which is no bad thing. Comments above regarding lack of Gen2 cars available keeping prices quite buoyant, worth the investment though and PASM really won't give you anything.

Excellent car. The only M car that tempts me, and that engine is exquisite. They are good value at the moment, in my view.

Well thought I would just update the thread.... Didn't end up test driving the M3 but did drive the M235i at that point. Was set on a Cayman. Ended up getting dragged abroad with work so put everything on hold. Recently test drove a lot of cars not really knowing what I wanted.... S3, RS3, m135, a45 amg, S5, Z4M coupe, Megane 275 trophy and then lastly an e92 M3 and that was the one.... I knew instantly I wanted one (even though Iwas convinced it was going to be a Porsche). So I set out on a hunt for one, found a couple locally and began to choose my desired spec and colour combo etc. Resulted in a long drive down to London one Sunday with a hangover looking at a Monte Carlo edition car. Got there and it was a state, rough part of London and didn't appear to be a dealer though they are listed with 30-40 cars for sale... Quick look on trader and I found a car listed that morning, had the perfect spec, age and milage though the colour in the pictures didn't look great but decided to head in the direction of Southampton. Got there and I knew this was the car. Blew my budget by 2k but worth while and I haven't stopped smiling. I know its not quite the drivers car and never on a million years did i forsee driving a auto but it ticks all boxes, pace, looks, performance, comfort and ability to go round track rather quickly! Will deffo have a Porsche at some point but not just yet.... Pics (love how much the colour changes in different light) Edited by Tubes89 on Saturday 26th September 22:33

Agreed. It was the noise that sold it to me. Hopefully keep it clean, well looked after and keep the mileage down and it should do ok being an well specced LCI car and the last ever N/A V8 BMW (assuming it is).

To my mind, it is the absolute zenith for that kind of car (standard saloon with a motorsport inspired engine, better suspension, etc). I can't see the point in the new M3/M4 by comparison, and the C63 was always a just a barge with a noisy engine.

ORD said: To my mind, it is the absolute zenith for that kind of car (standard saloon with a motorsport inspired engine, better suspension, etc). I can't see the point in the new M3/M4 by comparison, and the C63 was always a just a barge with a noisy engine. Re Old vs New M3/m4 there are clearly many who are anti turbo (and I can understand where they are coming from), but if you can get over that the new M4 is 80kg lighter, most of it over the front wheels, has more power, much more torque and much better economy.

bcr5784 said: ORD said: To my mind, it is the absolute zenith for that kind of car (standard saloon with a motorsport inspired engine, better suspension, etc). I can't see the point in the new M3/M4 by comparison, and the C63 was always a just a barge with a noisy engine. Re Old vs New M3/m4 there are clearly many who are anti turbo (and I can understand where they are coming from), but if you can get over that the new M4 is 80kg lighter, most of it over the front wheels, has more power, much more torque and much better economy. None of which matters at all. The old M3 needed neither more torque nor more power. The last thing it needed was to lose a spine-tingling V8 and to replace it with a run of the mill turbo 6 pot that would be more at home in a fast Audi. Probably the biggest example of an old car being much better than its direct replacement!

ORD said: None of which matters at all. The old M3 needed neither more torque nor more power. The last thing it needed was to lose a spine-tingling V8 and to replace it with a run of the mill turbo 6 pot that would be more at home in a fast Audi. Probably the biggest example of an old car being much better than its direct replacement! The BMW 6 has been the benchmark IL6 (NA or turbo) for as long as I can remember (at least 30 years) - so hardly run of the mill. Not everyone gets hooked on noise (it's quite low on my priorities) nor high rev limits (any sports bike revs to 10000+ and some to 15000 - but so what?). If those float your boat - absolutely fine, but take that out of the equation (it's purely subjective) then a more balanced view can be taken of the objective advantages - particularly the weight loss.

bcr5784 said: The BMW 6 has been the benchmark IL6 (NA or turbo) for as long as I can remember (at least 30 years) - so hardly run of the mill. Not everyone gets hooked on noise (it's quite low on my priorities) nor high rev limits (any sports bike revs to 10000+ and some to 15000 - but so what?). If those float your boat - absolutely fine, but take that out of the equation (it's purely subjective) then a more balanced view can be taken of the objective advantages - particularly the weight loss. 80kg is the difference between having and not having a passenger. Sure, you can feel it, and I am not saying that it isnt a good thing. But it is a very minor difference in such a heavy car and compared to the difference between a gorgeous NA engine and a turbocharged pile of meh. The V8 was an highlight in BMW's engine history; this latest turbo 6 will be forgotten even while you are using it. You could replace it with any other high output turbo engine and nobody would notice.

ORD said: 80kg is the difference between having and not having a passenger. Sure, you can feel it, and I am not saying that it isnt a good thing. But it is a very minor difference in such a heavy car and compared to the difference between a gorgeous NA engine and a turbocharged pile of meh. The V8 was an highlight in BMW's engine history; this latest turbo 6 will be forgotten even while you are using it. You could replace it with any other high output turbo engine and nobody would notice. You are being less than fair to the engine - peak power is held to 7300 and it revs to 7600 -unusually high for a turbo, and not that much different to a NA Cayman S/GTS. What other 6 cylinder IL turbo could you replace it with? Certainly not the V6 porsche turbo in the Panamera which has nothing like the breadth of power band. It may not be your cup of tea but it certainly isn't just another turbo any more than (say) the Ferrari 488 one is. Even the weight (heavier than I would like too) is less than a Porsche 911 Turbo!

bcr5784 said: You are being less than fair to the engine - peak power is held to 7300 and it revs to 7600 -unusually high for a turbo, and not that much different to a NA Cayman S/GTS. What other 6 cylinder IL turbo could you replace it with? Certainly not the V6 porsche turbo in the Panamera which has nothing like the breadth of power band. It may not be your cup of tea but it certainly isn't just another turbo any more than (say) the Ferrari 488 one is. Even the weight (heavier than I would like too) is less than a Porsche 911 Turbo! I haven't driven the new M3/M4, but people who despise turbos a lot less than I do have said it is uninspiring (see, e.g. Sutcliffe at Autocar, who is a bit of a knob but certainly not a turbo-hater). Even Cmoose, who at least tries to like new cars, thinks its a turd

ORD said: I haven't driven the new M3/M4, but people who despise turbos a lot less than I do have said it is uninspiring (see, e.g. Sutcliffe at Autocar, who is a bit of a knob but certainly not a turbo-hater). Even Cmoose, who at least tries to like new cars, thinks its a turd Not sure Moose does try to like new cars - he hates turbos, active suspension, autos (or autoblippers?) so he's not likely to like it. All the road tests I've seen rate it 4 1/2 or 5 stars, so clearly most think it has some merit. I don't think many are keen on the Active Sound (me neither) but then there are ways to turn it off, so I wouldn't regard it as a deal breaker. If the M235i is anything to go by with the sound turned off, the sound would be fine for me, but, perhaps (or probably) not everyone. Would YOU really right off a 488 or MP12C JUST because they are turbos? Roadtesters certainly haven't.

anonymous said: [redacted] I remember reading that at the time. I had forgotten that it was that bad, though: it got trounced by the Golf R and barely beat the Audi. Shocking. Bcr, yes, I would rule out any turbo supercar (or, indeed, sports car). While there are still awesome NA engines out there, I dont see why I would settle for a turbo just for the extra torque. More than 300 or so lb/ft is a complete irrelevance in cars that are already so fast as to be practically unusable on the road. Why would I want a turbo lump when I could have the F6 in the GT3 or the V8 in the 458 S (even the on-paper statistics for which make me tingle)?

ORD said: Bcr, yes, I would rule out any turbo supercar (or, indeed, sports car). While there are still awesome NA engines out there, I dont see why I would settle for a turbo just for the extra torque. More than 300 or so lb/ft is a complete irrelevance in cars that are already so fast as to be practically unusable on the road. Why would I want a turbo lump when I could have the F6 in the GT3 or the V8 in the 458 S (even the on-paper statistics for which make me tingle)? If (as commentators seem to be saying) that overall the 488 is a better car than the 458? It's similar to ruling out any supercar because they are all auto. Of course it's obviously a choice you can legitimately make. I wanted a DD as fast, refined and practical as a Cayman that was no wider or heavier than an Elise, with manual steering. I might have had to wait a while ... or decide which lines I was prepared to cross. And relating to moose's view - on the M3 turbo engine - let's get back to the issue we were discussing - Autocar said "Yes, there is the tiniest delay between asking for a lot and getting it, but BMW has still crafted an engine that is better than any of its turbocharged peers. It is silky smooth, revs commendably high and, at higher revs, responds as closely to natural aspiration as it’s reasonable to expect" - hardly a dog.

bcr5784 said: If (as commentators seem to be saying) that overall the 488 is a better car than the 458? It's similar to ruling out any supercar because they are all auto. Of course it's obviously a choice you can legitimately make. I wanted a DD as fast, refined and practical as a Cayman that was no wider or heavier than an Elise, with manual steering. I might have had to wait a while ... or decide which lines I was prepared to cross. And relating to moose's view - on the M3 turbo engine - let's get back to the issue we were discussing - Autocar said "Yes, there is the tiniest delay between asking for a lot and getting it, but BMW has still crafted an engine that is better than any of its turbocharged peers. It is silky smooth, revs commendably high and, at higher revs, responds as closely to natural aspiration as it’s reasonable to expect" - hardly a dog. It's funny how differently people read things I read that as polite speak for 'It's good for a turbo'. Autocar, as much as I like it, does tend to mince its words when it comes to the Germans (to the point of hilarity in Audi reviews where, reading between the lines, the writer obviously hates the car). I also would never again buy a sports car with any type of auto, not until I am old, anyway. There is still enough choice that you don't have to make that huge compromise!

anonymous said: [redacted] I wouldn't buy either the old or new M3 so I'm not hell bent on defending it - but I do think a bit of balance ought to be brought into the argument regarding turbos. ORD originally raised the point suggesting that this was just a run of the mill turbo - which looking at the power curve and reading road tests it isn't. I accept that you have driven it and don't like it - but since your views on turbos are based upon your engine priorities (whether turbo or not) which I know from previous discussions are completely different to mine, I would much prefer to take the consensus of magazine opinion, particularly as the magazine actually says WHY they take that view. Simply saying it's s t without a reason carries no weight with me. It seems that ORDs position is that he wouldn't ever countenance a turbo if he had an option. Given that with modern turbo technology - as the 488 demonstrates to a great extent (and the M3 to a lesser one) you can pretty much engineer any power curve you like and get good throttle response, it's not an opinion I share. But we might as well leave it there - we don't have any common ground. Edited by bcr5784 on Tuesday 29th September 10:57

The best can be said for the engine is that it approximates well the experience of an NA engine. I am not saying that this is true or not, as I do not know from my own experience, but it is the point that is made most strongly in its favour. For what it is worth, when I have driven FI cars said to have "no lag" or to "feel like an NA engine", I have found that to be utter b ks. This car might be different, but I am inclined to trust Cmoose's judgment (because I usually agree with his assessment of cars that I too have driven (except he is wrong about the 997 )). Why would I want an engine that does its best to be like an NA engine when I can have an NA engine? If capacity was limited to 3 litres, I could see an argument that choosing a FI engine that is trying to feel like a bigger NA engine might be a good idea; but while I can instead just get the real thing, I have no interest in an approximation.

Moose if you actually analysed and stated WHY you disliked this or that, I might take more notice. I'm not cherry picking (you are with Evo) there are plenty of 4 and 5 star reviews of the car - and I've not found anything worse. Sure it may not be perfect, but you damage what validity there may be in your argument by making all black statements when there is plenty of grey about. And regarding power curves - sure they don't tell you everything - but (shock horror) I have to say I wish the Cayman had one the same shape as the M3 turbo, rather than a hole in the middle. If the (rather silly) sports diesel comment means anything - say - doubling the width of the power band by raising the rev limit by 2500 revs to 7500 revs, removing diesel combustion harshness, and making the flywheel vastly lighter - sounds like a pretty good idea to me... But the bottom line is that, unlike you, I like SOME of the characteristics of turbo engines and SOME of highly tuned NA ones so we are never going to agree what are the qualities of good engine.

anonymous said: [redacted] Have to agree - when I was looking for a new car recently, I test drove the new M3. Good point - it's seriously fast. The performance is impressive by any standards. But - I actually thought the engine was not unlike a 335i, but with more power available. Not like driving a traditional M car. The exhaust note is disappointing for an M, although quite good compared to a lot of other cars out there. Ultimately, I preferred driving the E90 M3 despite the fact that it's not as fast. There's something very satisfying about a high revving NA engine that just isn't there in the new breed of turbos. We have to accept that smaller capacity, fewer cylinders and turbos are the way that cars are going if they have any chance of meeting the requirements of the current emissions tests - but that doesn't mean that everyone is going to enjoy driving them. When I drove it, I was hoping that the F10 M3 would be my 'one car that does everything' - but it wasn't the case. Seems I'm stuck with a combination of 987S for fun, and something less exciting for family duties.

anonymous said: [redacted] As I said if you explained WHY you take your view it might be helpful. Sounds crap - might well agree, but am no fan of any synthetised noise and, as I've said above, I'd be quite happy with the noise an M235i makes with the artificial stuff disabled, so doubt I'd have a problem with the M3, so fixed (Car and Driver seem to do that on their tests) . It lacks high rev crescendo - probably GOOD as far as I am concerned ON THE ROAD - high rev crescendo means low rev lethargy generally speaking (Trust me having ridden fast bikes - particularly two strokes - it's something I am EXTREMELY familiar with - and, in some circumstances like, but not as a DD ) It clearly feels turbocharged - not sure if that is bad or good. Bad for you, no doubt, not sure for me. Like I say because you are coming from a different perspective, and almost certainly use your car differently from me, you come to different (perfectly valid) conclusions for YOU. Consider that others might just have a different perspective - and might JUST come to different, but equally valid, conclusions - for THEM.

anonymous said: [redacted] Of course I don't share your view. But that doesn't mean either of us is right or wrong. Can't you understand that?

anonymous said: [redacted] Utter b ks. I don't think you are wrong for YOU, but you are wrong for ME. In these issues, as I have said MANY times there are no rights and wrongs - only personal preferences. I wish you shared that view.

You're both right People resort far to easily to saying 'It's a matter of opinion' as a way of avoiding engaging on an issue. Nonetheless, a lot of this does come down to taste and preference. Some people like mid-range punch and enjoy the characteristics of a 3 litre turbo engine. Others, like me, are not nobdheads and would prefer a gorgeous V8.

ORD said: You're both right Some people like mid-range punch and enjoy the characteristics of a 3 litre turbo engine. Others, like me, are not nobdheads and would prefer a gorgeous V8. There must be lots of nobheads around - buying "crap" like Megane 275s etc - and can you believe it - if the Evo review is to believed - choosing a non-NA engined car (F Type) over a Cayman GTS. Can you even believe that even a nobhead (let alone professional journalist) would highly rate a car without a gearbox or a soundtrack (BMWi8)?

Well it's escalated in here gents! Ref the new vs old. I bought the best I could afford, would I purchase the new m3. I'm not sure , I haven't driven it. What I can say is the gearbox is supreme and whilst it doesn't have the same positive feeling as the DCT it certainly is efficient. Engine wise, I've driven the baby version in the 135i and the 235i and found it to be a positive experience. Sound wise though they aren't in the same league as the s50 engine in the e9X series. They need the M Performance exhaust. On track at Cadwell tomorrow as had a phone call from the TDO and offered me a price I couldn't refuse as opposed to just being a passenger!

bcr5784 said: There must be lots of nobheads around - buying "crap" like Megane 275s etc - and can you believe it - if the Evo review is to believed - choosing a non-NA engined car (F Type) over a Cayman GTS. Can you even believe that even a nobhead (let alone professional journalist) would highly rate a car without a gearbox or a soundtrack (BMWi8)? Frankly, it doesn't surprise me that a journo could rate the i8. In general, car journos are cash poor with access to expensive cars so are obsessed with running costs, and they (like most people) are also obsessed with the next new thing, shiney shiney trinkets and technology. The F-Type is so compromised that I have never even been interested enough to go and drive one (and I quite like Jags and was, for a while, convinced it would be the car for me).

There was a time when I bought car magazines religiously. Autocar for 20 years. It was a wrench to stop. And I sold them all on ebay! I still buy the odd mag but I am mostly over it. The bulls t. I am surprised that printed media still exists. But then, I heard today that vinyl is now beating downloaded digital stuff. And I feel good.

anonymous said: [redacted] I agree entirely. It is what it is. Reading articles by the good journos requires you to learn their individual code for 'This car is actually horrid, but I have to give it 4 stars'. I think Prior strikes the right balance. Sutters went off the rails a year or so ago and now almost always talks Clarksonian crap. Anyone who can keep a straight face while saying anything at all about the latest 2.0d Audi deserves a f king medal, though, and it must become pretty tiresome after a while! I still enjoy the odd piece in Autocar and Evo, but I will gladly write off a journo for good if he doesn't at least drop hints to the reader that, despite the editorial line, he thinks that latest 500bhp Audi Quattro TFI Sportswagon AMG S-Line Le Mans D Sport (M Division) is actually s t.

Prior sometimes writes short pieces in which he says, basically, that he loves proper cars. Small pieces hidden away, but it's pretty clear that he is a driving nerd, rather than a car/tech nerd

ORD said: Frankly, it doesn't surprise me that a journo could rate the i8. In general, car journos are cash poor with access to expensive cars so are obsessed with running costs, and they (like most people) are also obsessed with the next new thing, shiney shiney trinkets and technology. The F-Type is so compromised that I have never even been interested enough to go and drive one (and I quite like Jags and was, for a while, convinced it would be the car for me). If you see the video of the ECOTY http://www.evo.co.uk/videos/14716/evo-car-of-the-y... you will (I think) get the clear view that HANDLING and FUN are really their key values in rating their cars. Gearbox type manual/auto/none , NA/non-NA/No A and engine/exhaust note are (seem to be) very much secondary issues. I am completely in sync with that.

I find it genuinely hard to imagine anyone who is actually seriously into driving choosing an i8 over a 911. It has nothing going for it but novelty value.

anonymous said: [redacted] What they actually SAY might well be somewhat tailored/moderated to reader preferences, but, given the disparate mix of cars, it's difficult to imagine that their rankings are so contrived. And the overall rankings STILL favour handling and fun.

anonymous said: [redacted] An AUTO....? Like I say, in the final analysis, auto/manual NA/none-NA/No A are peripheral issues, whatever your personal preferences in these areas might be.

bcr5784 said: anonymous said: [redacted] An AUTO....? Like I say, in the final analysis, auto/manual NA/none-NA/No A are peripheral issues, whatever your personal preferences in these areas might be. How is handling (subjective) and fun (uber-subjective) any less personal a thing? I had a PDK Porsche for 2 years and had less fun driving over those 2 years than I have had in a couple of months in a manual Porsche. I mean driving the pants off the car, rather than just cruising (for which PDK is excellent). I bloody hate turbos, though

I'm not sure about the last bit. I know bugger all, have barely any experience of cars and yet can tell a car is a turd just by using the steering wheel, throttle and brakes for 5 minutes. And most are turds on that quick test.

anonymous said: [redacted] If the opinions expressed in ECOTY are so unrelated to the truth why did you raise them in the first place?

anonymous said: [redacted] So journalists are employed mainly to gauge sentiment and then churn out what they think people want to read (subject to advertising pressure)? And you are saying that when a journalist thinks a car is complete rubbish to drive but still ends up giving it 4.5 stars or something just to toe the editorial line, it is not consciously dishonest? evo at least has a tagline that says..."the thrill of driving", not "the thrill of driving new cars". One would have thought at least with them, if a car ticks all the boxes of modern convenience but still is s t to drive they would be honest enough to state that clearly and not just have some subtle hint buried inside the article that it is not actually as good as they are saying it is.

isaldiri said: anonymous said: [redacted] So journalists are employed mainly to gauge sentiment and then churn out what they think people want to read (subject to advertising pressure)? And you are saying that when a journalist thinks a car is complete rubbish to drive but still ends up giving it 4.5 stars or something just to toe the editorial line, it is not consciously dishonest? evo at least has a tagline that says..."the thrill of driving", not "the thrill of driving new cars". One would have thought at least with them, if a car ticks all the boxes of modern convenience but still is s t to drive they would be honest enough to state that clearly and not just have some subtle hint buried inside the article that it is not actually as good as they are saying it is. "Good" is not entirely divorced from "What the public wants". Cars are mostly assessed on fitness for purpose.

anonymous said: [redacted] Are you saying that the RANKINGS each of the testers in ECOTY give to the ten cars is influenced by what they think the market wants - rather than their personal preference. It's fair enough not continuously banging on about manual gearboxes because they believe most readers don't care, but to, in effect, misrepresent their own views would be dishonest.

bcr5784 said: Are you saying that the RANKINGS each of the testers in ECOTY give to the ten cars is influenced by what they think the market wants - rather than their personal preference. It's fair enough not continuously banging on about manual gearboxes because they believe most readers don't care, but to, in effect, misrepresent their own views would be dishonest. I think the ECOTY rankings are fairly personal, but probably still not 100% detached from the context of the 2015 car buying world.

The question of what a reviewer actually wants to drive in the real world has to be put to one side, too. I imagine that a 458 S or 991 GT3 would absolutely blow me away at an ECOTY testing day, and I would give it a very high score. But I am far from convinced that I would actually want one in the real world for reasons that arent really valid if trying to be objective and provide information to others. I would not want one because (1) they are too fast and (2) they are autos. Plenty of people want insanely fast autos.

I can personally see no reason why the reviewers did anything but play with a straight bat - ranking cars based purely on how much they enjoyed driving them. Ranking a Mclaren below a Golf R or Megane is hardly pandering to anyone's prejudices. You'd need a bizarre conspiracy theory to come up with that order otherwise. And, while individual testers may have preferences for particular engine or gearbox types, you'd have to conclude, both by the ranking and the comments made, that handling comes way above those preferences.

It's also called "handling day", isnt it? It's obviously not 100 % straight bat time, or there is not a chance that a Golf R would score so highly. It's there as the blue collar car to hit a certain demographic (into which, conveniently, car journos themselves fall).

ORD said: It's also called "handling day", isnt it? It's obviously not 100 % straight bat time, or there is not a chance that a Golf R would score so highly. It's there as the blue collar car to hit a certain demographic (into which, conveniently, car journos themselves fall). If you watch the video you'll see they rate the Golf very highly for handling - clearly higher than they expected. Whatever reason it was included in the first place it clearly justified it's place.

anonymous said: [redacted] No-one would sensibly suggest there was a conspiracy theory - that was the point I was making!!! Please don't ruin another thread by sinking into abuse.

anonymous said: [redacted] Read what I read - it was " You'd need a bizarre conspiracy theory to come up with that order otherwise." IE I can think of no sensible reason why the journalists would come up with that order OTHER THAN THAT IS WHAT THEY GENUINELY BELIEVED. Is that clear enough?

bcr5784 said: anonymous said: [redacted] Read what I read - it was " You'd need a bizarre conspiracy theory to come up with that order otherwise." IE I can think of no sensible reason why the journalists would come up with that order OTHER THAN THAT IS WHAT THEY GENUINELY BELIEVED. Is that clear enough? You two sound like my parents .....why don't you both get married?

FrankCayman said: You two sound like my parents .....why don't you both get married? Why don't they get divorced? That might be a more pertinent question.

bcr5784 said: FrankCayman said: You two sound like my parents .....why don't you both get married? Why don't they get divorced? That might be a more pertinent question. Boom goes the dynamite! Where has this sense of humour been hiding during your interminable flirtation / squabbling with Cmoose?

bcr5784 said: FrankCayman said: You two sound like my parents .....why don't you both get married? Why don't they get divorced? That might be a more pertinent question. Rather like you and Cmoose....if they didn't have each other, they would only argue with themselves ;-)

FrankCayman said: Rather like you and Cmoose....if they didn't have each other, they would only argue with themselves ;-) Moose has been arguing with the everyone on here long before I joined. He might well have been arguing with himself before then, but it's impossible for me to judge.

ORD said: Boom goes the dynamite! Where has this sense of humour been hiding during your interminable flirtation / squabbling with Cmoose? I'm perfectly capable of "barbed" whit - but it's not my preferred method of discourse.

bcr5784 said: I'm perfectly capable of "barbed" whit - but it's not my preferred method of discourse. If asked to choose between barbed wit and cack-handed patronisation...

anonymous said: [redacted] Yes, I think the poor old boy gets a little confused...whit, what, whittle?! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBnkjK9LbjA

FrankCayman said: Yes, I think the poor old boy gets a little confused...whit, what, whittle?! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBnkjK9LbjA I think if you actually read the thread you'll find it's not the old boy getting confused, but the young one having difficulty in understanding whole sentences.

anonymous said: [redacted] Afraid it is. You persistently misread what is written. If you took time to read what is written before you made an inappropriate reply you would avoid getting abusive to others when it was your misreading (as in this case) that was at fault. (You often reply so quickly you couldn't possibly have had time to have read and understood what is written).

anonymous said: [redacted] Given that I've spent much of my life writing requirement specifications on large contracts - it's my job to know exactly the implications of what I write. I suggest you take a course in slow reading, your fast reading isn't working.

bcr5784 said: Given that I've spent much of my life writing requirement specifications on large contracts - it's my job to know exactly the implications of what I write. I suggest you take a course in slow reading, your fast reading isn't working. You once accused me of owning a BMW Z4 and tried to argue against my comments based on this...when I pointed out I'd never owned a Z4, you realised it was somebody else on here with a 'similar' name. I assume/hope you have retired now? Perhaps you could at least retire from this thread? Excuse my sarcastic whit...wit...whatever! :-)

FrankCayman said: You once accused me of owning a BMW Z4 and tried to argue against my comments based on this...when I pointed out I'd never owned a Z4, you realised it was somebody else on here with a 'similar' name. At least when I realised that I had made an honest mistake, I acknowledged it. I wish everyone would do the same. And those that have nothing of technical interest to contribute to a thread would .......

bcr5784 said: At least when I realised that I had made an honest mistake, I acknowledged it. I wish everyone would do the same. And those that have nothing of technical interest to contribute to a thread would ....... Not a problem, sir. I shall bow out gracefully so that you can educate us all with your amazing technical insight as you have done throughout most of this thread.....cough.