15 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHGreat GT2 article in latest AutoWeek
Leading reported evidence
Test (in certain respects
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
For those who don't get AutoWeek and have an interest in the GT2, the latest issue is a great read...like it's the best car they've ever tested (in certain respects, that is)
<strong>For those who don't get AutoWeek and have an interest in the GT2, the latest issue is a great read...like it's the best car they've ever tested (in certain respects, that is)
Leading evidence: 'Test (in certain respects' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Test (in certain respects' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Test (in certain respects
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
For those who don't get AutoWeek and have an interest in the GT2, the latest issue is a great read...like it's the best car they've ever tested (in certain respects, that is)
<strong>For those who don't get AutoWeek and have an interest in the GT2, the latest issue is a great read...like it's the best car they've ever tested (in certain respects, that is)
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
15 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T133652Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
For those who don't get AutoWeek and have an interest in the GT2, the latest issue is a great read...like it's the best car they've ever tested (in certain respects, that is)
[quote]Originally posted by Don Watson:
<strong>For those who don't get AutoWeek and have an interest in the GT2, the latest issue is a great read...like it's the best car they've ever tested (in certain respects, that is)
</strong><hr></blockquote>For that kind of money I'd expect nothing less!!!
[quote] This is the car Porsche should be selling for the $80k they are getting for the Carrera. <hr></blockquote>
Why would they do that when they are selling everything that can build for $180,000? In 2002 Porsche will sell more turbos than C2 Coupes. Now you can argue whether these cars are a good value or not, but that is up to the individual that makes the buying decision. And currently they are voting with their checkbooks that this strategy is a successful one.
[quote]Originally posted by RogerJ:
<strong>In 2002 Porsche will sell more turbos than C2 Coupes. Now you can argue whether these cars are a good value or not, but that is up to the individual that makes the buying decision. And currently they are voting with their checkbooks that this strategy is a successful one.</strong><hr></blockquote>Considering the Vette Z06 can hang with a 996 TT for about 1/3rd the price, then the question of value may not be so subjective. I'm not flaming the TT but if one mentions value... well, that was the thought that jumped into my mind.
The quotes from other press in the Autoweek article was quite the gamut of opinions.
[quote]Originally posted by RogerJ:
<strong>
In 2002 Porsche will sell more turbos than C2 Coupes. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I find that difficult to believe. What's your source on this factoid?
GT2 is a great car...... major understatement.......they should be selling them for ~ $110-$125K.
There are alot of GT2s sitting on dealers lots....they are not Sold-Out. Its a shame as for around $100-125K they would be a good deal for customers and Porsche AG and..... I would have one too.
We should all be happy that Porsche builds some Xtreme sportscars for all of us out here and has many more slated for the future!
Have a great weekend
<img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
2002 996 production:
Coupe-1981
Cab-3605
C4Cab-1438
C4S-1668
Targa-662
Turbo-2107
That is US Production for 996
Boxster 2002 production:
Boxster-7071
BoxsterS-5039
That is US production for Boxster
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jim Sloves:
[QB]Considering the Vette Z06 can hang with a 996 TT for about 1/3rd the price, then the question of value may not be so subjective. I'm not flaming the TT but if one mentions value... well, that was the thought that jumped into my mind.
Yep and out-brake em too!!!
No question of ZO6 value over the TT. I could have had 3 of them for what I paid for my X50TT. But if you've driven the ZO6 you might have sensed the same differences I did. The Zo6 interior is slightly cramped for 6'+ drivers, but more than that, it lacks any sense of quality. While the numbers at the track are similiar, the TT feels faster because of the dramatic increase in the rate of acceleration as boost builds. The ZO6 is much more linear, and therefore doesn't feel thrilling. It is an easier car to drive quickly, and hence the track advantage.
In the end, i felt it wasn't a question of value. You can't buy what the Porsche TT has for any less than Porsche charges. So, one of the definitions of value is what a willing buyer will pay a willing seller. 2000 people are saying it has that value to them. Right now you can buy any ZO6 at deep discounts (and probably with 0%financing)That's saying something about perceived value. If chevrolet offered it in the fastback body and spent $500 more on the interior, it might be a different story. AS
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
