Please vote on which generation of recent 911 has the strongest brand identity

I'm writing an academic paper about Porsche, their production techniques, and their use of Japanese consultants Shingijutsu to avoid bankruptcy during the early 1990's. One of the issues is the compromise between brand identity and controlling manufacturing costs. It would be great to get a ranking of which generations of 911 better epitomize Porsche's brand identity, in the eyes of you, Porsche owners. Since I'm dealing with the period in the 1990's and later, please limit your ranking to the 964, 993, 996, and 997 only. Yes, I know it's be a no-brainer, but I need some statistical data to support my points. And yes, this survey will be cited. Thank you!

Might be easier if you made the thread a poll...

I think it would have to be the 964, that car just never gets old.. at least in my eyes..

Hopefully our resident statistics professor will stop by and give you some guidance on how to do such a poll. I'm afraid asking people on specific boards might taint your numbers just a bit. Having said that, I'm a racer and a track rat. To me Porsche is defined on the track where the 996 and more recently the 997 based race cars are creating a great new identity for the company. My ranking: 1) 997 2) 996 3) 964 4) 993

Jim, with the price of fuel going up and up and up I"m done giving pro bono stats lectures ps. I'll give one nugget of help and then see where it goes. But if the OP what's to investigate on which model has the strongest brand identity he needs to sample OUTSIDE the p-car phunny pharm. We recognize with all of them. Pictures of all models of 911 on a placard and then have a non-porsche nut select which picture is most representative in their opinion of a 911. I'd also ask for some open ended explanation since clearly this is developing into a pilot that can be refined for future work.

Quotes source post: 5460461

Always the teacher!

well stated... just going on a hunch based on my circle... one of the 911 based turbo cars is probably it. Which generation... we'll see.

Quotes source post: 5460568

I've got the summer off to do research so I guess I could help a little bit

I would also recommend you seperate by age group to see how that plays a part.

Quotes source post: 5460759

Something you should ALWAYS collect. But do NOT do age group parameters as you will pigeonhole yourself into categorical/ordinal data. Keep the data rich by sticking with a measure that simply requests their age and then if you care to create categories, you still have all the richness of the data and still know EXACTLY how many at each age are represented not just how many are in a category. When constructing ANY measure it is almost always a good idea to throw in a pretty thorough demographic inventory. You'd rather have TOO MUCH data than not enough. Try not to create categories unless it is nominal data which forces you to (ie, race, gender, etc).

The 80s series Porsche 911 turbo, this model of 911 in my mind is what I thought a Porsche 911 before I bought my first Porsche.

Quotes source post: 5460271

You will have to define statistical data for me...I know what data is BTW. Are you are looking to test some hypothesis and are interested in alpha and beta risks? Are you trying to draw conclusions on a larger population? Are you trying to prove something (which BTW can't be done statistically speaking)? I may have misread the OP's first post, but it says [It would be great to get a ranking of which generations of 911 better epitomize Porsche's brand identity, in the eyes of you, P orsche owners [/quote] So the population he should sample from is Porsche owners. Perhaps that is what you imply Dell? I'm not sure that a placard of all Porsche cars is appropriate either. I might place some other cars on there (like F-car) to see if they have any clue. I do agree that sampling the population here on the list would be quite biased.

One could argue that the original 911 and its derivatives up to the 964 have the strongest "identity" as they started it all. From a numbers stand point, the 996/997 have (by a huge margin) been the most popular 911's ever produced. It's hard to pick a "best" as there are aspects of each generation you mentioned (964, 993, 996, 997) that are note worthy. I think there is a lot to like in all of them.

I guess he needs to determine if he wants to keep it specifically to P-Car owners or not (2 different populations obviously). Personally, I think there is quite a bit model loyalty within the marque even though it's not the "iconic" look. Personally, the 911 is the icon of the line. I agree, that a F-car, etc should be included to control for marque identification.

If only Pcar owners are sampled, one could control for model bias by asking which model is and/or has been owned, and then which model best epitomizes the brand. Alas, I imagine that Boxster owners are feeling left out in the cold.

Quotes source post: 5460461

Unfortunately, because the 997 is currently being marketed and the 996 to most is virtually identical, there's no way to get this info using this method. This is asking people to identify what they recognize in relation to a brand, so the current or most heavily marketed model will be most identifiable.

I have to say that dividing the 911 into Porsche model designations is the wrong way to understand the Brand Identity. The brand identity of the porsche 911 is the continued history of the beautifully fast car with the lump in the back. The brand identity is how the entire market views the brand, not just porsche nuts. The 911 is not like a Ford Mustang which has radically changed from one decade to another. You can't simply walk up to a 993 or 997 and put a blue ribbon on it stating that this model is the Brand Identifier. I've wanted one since I was a kid back in the 60's and early 70's and sharing headlights with another model has never deterred my drive to get one. In fact I got into a boxster first so I could eventually get a 911 when funds became available. I bet both agencies that have done recent porsche advertising for the brand (past 2 or 3 years) have had similar creative briefs. Kid coming into showroom, "I'll see ya in 20 years" and recent "Strong Bloodlines" builds off the strong 911 heritage. You have to connect emotionally with the audience and having someone pick from a car that has round headlights or egg shaped headlights is simply dismissing what the company has tweaked on in the past 40 some years, both in the showroom and on the track. So, which sub-model has the strongest brand identity? They all do as a combined and inseparable group. The 911 does! Like the little kid said that rode his bike up to the porsche dealership. "I'll see you in about 20 years".

Quotes source post: 5460803

We were talking at the track one day and for most the 930 is what they thought of when they thought of a Porsche. I was one of them.

Quotes source post: 5461114

+1 but i might be biased since the 930 or 993 is what i wanted/longed for in my younger days.

993 younger days? I must be too old, my younger days were the 928, 930 days. LOL!

Quotes source post: 5461137

I was thinking the same thing but didn't want to admit it.

Quotes source post: 5461105

Brilliantly said!

Quotes source post: 5461137

you might be getting on in years ;P i consider my younger days as any day before today. but in reality, i haven't quite hit 40 yet. hence my purchase of a 996 a few months ago. i like to tell people that it's my mid-life crisis car. well, at least my 1st mid-life crisis. i plan on having another one in 10 years or so.

993,997,996,964. Cayenne outstrips them all sadly

Good points have been raised by all relating to the data acquisition techniques I'm using. It is worth mentioning that I'm trying to get data from enthusiasts, not the general population, which is why this survey is here. Some clarifications about the paper: This paper is not about brand identity. This paper is about production techniques. I am trying to observe how the new production techniques changed brand identity, not exhaustively explore brand identity. That's why I limited the choices to cars that were built during and after the new production techniques (i.e. 964, 993, 996, 997). This question is actually just a small part (roman numeral IV, part c) of the entire paper.

this is now available in poll form here for those wishing to vote: https://rennlist.com/forums/general-porsche-discussions-forum/433664-please-vote-on-which-generation-of-recent-911-has-the-strongest-brand-identity.html

For me it is the late 70's 930. You know, the one you received a poster of the backside with your last name on the license plate

well here's the finished draft of the paper of those interested. i bet this is going to start some controversy...where's the popcorn? http://www.stanford.edu/~dtscott/mse181.html

None of the above: It is the 930

Quotes source post: 5467962

Absolutely.

Quotes source post: 5467931

Interesting read. I would offer the following pointers and rebuttal: - Cut down the section on the history of Porsche. While your enthusiasm of the marque is apparent, it is beyond the scope of the paper's central argument. Conversely, you need to add more detail on how adopting lean manufacturing philosophies have benefitted Porsche particularly from a cash-flow, inventory reduction, lead time and capacity expansion perspective. Porsche, like many companies on the brink of bankruptcy, was short of cash in the late 80s. Lean manufacturing's prime tools are utilized to minimize waste and maximize human productivity as opposed to machine productivity, which is a central tenet of 'mass producers.' - If I read your paper correctly, your main argument is that by adopting lean manufacturing, Porsche has managed to increase profitability but at the expense of "soul" and brand identity. You cite the example of prolific parts sharing between the 911 and the Boxster and how 911 customers protested as evidence. This argument is flawed because you incorrectly assume that lean is about a ruthless reduction of costs at the expense of the customer's desires. In reality lean is about being able to increase flexibility to cater to customer requirements at the lowest cost. The economies extracted from parts sharing are a principle of mass production rather than lean production. Consider the following: A single plastic molding machine has the capacity to make the headlight housings for either A) Boxster or B) 911. Using SMED, a concept of lean, mold change time is dramatically reduced, which allows the molder to not only increase machine uptime (though this is not an important metric of lean producers), but also interchange the molds making 911/Boxster headlights frequently thus reducing the batch size of each. A mass producer would like to keep the same mold in the machine and just keep producing one headlight all day, which is essentially what they did with the 911/Boxster. Therefore, lean would have enabled Porsche to offer different styling configurations to headlight design than mass production techniques. Also, I would not confuse "lean manufacturing" with streamlining the product development process. While there are certain ideologies in common, Porsche only used the consultants in improving the assembly of cars, and not in product development. The principle reason that Porsche chose to share so many parts between the 911 and the Boxster is capital expenditure (CAPEX) reduction. Molds and stamping dies for plastic and metal parts are extremely expensive, which makes them uneconomical for small production runs. Porsche did not have the $$ in their development budget to differentiate the models sufficiently and they likely planned for the facelifted NA 996 to use the same headlights as the Turbo well before the first 996 was sold. You also talk about "craft" production vs. "lean" and "mass" production. What you might not be aware of is that you can be a "craft" producer and still be a "lean" producer by adopting lean tools, though the reliance on human craftsmanship over machine often produces an inferior result. In fact, craft production makes a lot more sense for vehicles that are produced in small lot sizes. Marketers often tout the fact that Aston Martins, Veyrons, Enzos, and CGTs are "hand-made" as a selling point of their quality and exclusivity. In actual fact, it is cheaper to hand make cars that are produced in small numbers than to invest in the capital required for mass production. You also get an inferior result from a quality standpoint, but that is beyond the scope of this topic. There are some other small inaccuracies in some of your usage of terms such as kaizen and mistaking QFD-House of Quality as a lean manufacturing tool. I presume this is an undergrad class so I don't think your prof would expect you to know these tools in such great detail, so I'm pretty sure you're going to get your A.

I think when people talk about Porsches and their "dream" Porsche, and have not owned one, and if we're talkin 90's....I would have to vote for 2: 993 Turbo or C4S (based upon looks) 930: same criteria I still think the modern cars are obviously better, but as far as the turn on factor...the 2 above. My 7 cents. J

959!!!!

Hard to keep the 911 identity in the 90's since they made too many changes in that era. The true brand identity was the 74-89 series especially the 930. The 930 was on every kids and adualts wish list at that time (along with the Contach). If I had to choose which one transends Porsche in the 90's it will be thw 993.

Quotes source post: 5468627

Finally some worthwhile criticism. I don't know lean intimately; I haven't even read The Machine that Changed the World in its entirety! I plan to develop this paper more, but given that I have a deadline (and two other term papers and a final exam in the next week, on photography, V12 aero engines in WWII, and electric grids, power systems, and utilities), I have to call this "good enough" at this point. I certainly see what you mean about conflating lean with cost-cutting, although I did read an interesting article about how lean contributes to reductions in brand identity, perhaps in other ways. If you're interested, it's called "Brand or Bland?" and is in the June 2006 issue of Manufacturing Engineer. Given what you have said, I think it would be possible to subtly reorganize the argument logic to more accurately describe the phenomena (i.e. attribute that parts sharing to an inability, for financial reasons, to properly implement the principles of lean if I have understood you correctly). I also see what you mean about the Porsche history and I honestly couldn't help myself. Especially because I used writing that as "warm up" to get into the mindset for rest of the paper. Since the paper is already so far over the minimum length, I figured I'd just leave it in as gravy. As for the craft/lean/mass point, all of it seems fairly intuitive and I think it's very telling for example that Aston Martin no longer relies on craft production at critical manufacturing stages (particularly forming body panels) now that they have the financial backing and access to technology to do otherwise. Some people suggest that the craft production adds "personality" (in the same way that driving an Alfa Romeo that never works adds personality), but in objective QA terms, that stuff is a nightmare. Anyone who has ever tried to do bodywork or fit a windscreen on an old Ferrari is more than aware of this (so too is their checkbook). At this juncture, I am most interested in terminology inaccuracies.

You should probably read Adrian's new 996 book also as he addresses this issue as it relates to the 996 in particular. As for how iconic goes for me, in my 20's I had the yellow early 70's 911 poster with the girl in the short skirt under the car, up in my garage. I wanted one of those cars sooo bad. Then drove 928's for 16 years? But I digress... 964's rule Until this guy wants a nicer ride that stops, turns and goes better.

I read the draft and I can't tell what your premise is or what are you trying to prove. It reads more like an article about Porsche's history rather than an academic paper. Write an executive summary stating your objectives, how you will collect your data, arrive at conclusions, etc. Fyi - Brand identity is owned by the Marketing department not the manufacturing department. It seems pretty clear that the brand is stronger than ever as indicated by the company's profitability.

Gary, I agree with you about brand identity. I read the abstract of the article "Brand or Bland" and I totally disagree with the premise of the authors. They are confusing a final product due to engineering quirkiness or cultural specific traits and assume that lean results in making boring cars. At its broadest definition, lean is about eliminating non-value added steps/processes/waste that will never be noticed by the end customer except for lower cost and less aggravation. I would hazard to say the journal authors have no idea what they're talking about.

I kinda agree that "lean" will make a car lose it's heart. It is the little things that are characteristic of a car, good or bad, that make a car have heart IMO.

I think if you're talking about brand meaning "Porsche" then the 996. Unlike the 70s and 80s, where every different model line from Porsche looked very different, the 986/996 are instantly recognizable by far more people as being a Porsche, so much so that I would contend they are more obviously a Porsche to the average man woman or child than the other 3 generations mentioned. Some of this has to do with the huge volumes in which they were produced, putting them on every street corner and boosting brand awareness, and a lot of it has to do with the fact that they share the same face, multiplying that branding. The corporate face as brand identitfier across model lines is as old as the ferrari eggcrate grille, as old as the jaguar leaper, the rolls-royce grille and spirit of ecstasy. If you're talking about brand meaning 911, then my vote for the 964 or 965 (even though the 993 looks better to me, when males who are not enthusiasts think Porsche I think they think of round standup headlights and big rear fender flares, and some o them a whale tail. The 993 is much more evocative of the 959) The reason I don't say the 930 is because all the hottest track and street 930s of the actual period of 930 production were 935s or 935-look slants.

Quotes source post: 5472865

You can take any current product/ or any generation of 911 and lean the process to assemble/build the car, and this will have zero impact to how the car functions and feels. Quality might be improved, that's about it. If you apply lean thinking tools to the FUNCTIONING of the car, then you might get a car that is more idiot proof and more ergonomically laid out. But again, it's up to a manufacturer what tools they implement and where.

A hand built car will always have more heart than a leaned out manufacturing line, mass produced car. I believe it is the quality flaws and oversights that make the car have character.

1986, Candy Apple Red, 911 Turbo!