14 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH03 vs 04
Reported or suspected cause
best model porsche has ever bulit
Reported cause
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
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 report identifying a cause
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.
Reported cause
Actually, '02 C4S's in seal grey with the aero kit have been proven to be the best model Porsche has ever bulit.
Leading evidence: 'best model porsche has ever bulit' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'best model porsche has ever bulit' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Repair data...or what broke down' (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.
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 report identifying a cause
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.
Reported cause
04's are proven to be more reliable, and faster than the 03's.
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 contain suggestions
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.
Suggestion
Think about it....where do you think they're going to get repair data...or what broke down and when?
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.
14 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: 20261027T171335Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I was thumbing through the Consumer Reports at the bookstore the other day and looked up what they thought of 911's, just for grins. The article was pretty standard for their ilk (trunk is too small, too much acceleration, needs better gas milage etc).
But in their used car chart they rated the 03 in the worst category for major engine and minor engine problems (RMS, I figured) as well as transmission. The suprise though was that the 04 was rated in the best or second best rating for those categories.
I am unaware of any major breakthroughs in the 03 vs 04 engine/tranny (it wasn't like they solved the RMS problem).
Any ideas or just more CR bull5hit?
Did you hear the big fiasco about the CR reports on child seats? They claimed that most were ineffective, then 2 months later they rebutted their comments saying the reviews were flawed.
Consumer Reports depends upon a cross section of folks who actually own or used to own the particular car they're rating. Think about it....where do you think they're going to get repair data...or what broke down and when? They have a group of folks who are supposed to represent a cross section of car ownership and they send out queries to these folks. I'm on one of the query lists for home appliances., but I've also received inquiries about what I drive, did it ever break down, what gave out etc.
I'm not too sure that I'd get my panties in a wad over the findings about the 03 04 Porsches in CR. I would love to be able to elicit a resoponse from them about the size and makeup, demographics etc of their data collection, and how extensive the queries were. Ten questions about "Have you ever experienced transmission problems in your XXX" or "How many times have you had to have the car into a mechanic" doesn't constitute a very comprehensive research project to me.
I hope there's someone out there who worked for CR for 10 years who can tell me I'm all wrong and why....but based upon the inquiries I received, I don't think I 'm too far off.
CR is for idiots! There write ups are based on.......
Who cares what CR writes about cars?? Cars are an emotional buy and CR deals with it the same way they deal with a fridge or any other kitchen appliance......yes I know the Toyota CAmry is the "best" car in the world....for the money!!
i read that too - amazing the bs in CR... i think thought it has to do with the number of responses they get per year. As a good business/stats major knows, you are likely to get 4x more negative responses than a positive response... Ross
I agree with the bs statement, didnt Porsche beat out Lexus one year in reliability according to CR's. Come on now, lets be real with ourselves. Porsche's are very reliable but beating a Toyota in reliability, hmm. As much as I spread the news all over to friends through e-mail, I knew in the back of my mind it was probably untrue, but my friends didnt need to know, haha.
