Explain to me the "magic" of Porsche - Page 3 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

Well Starsky, I guess you're more comfortable in a red Ford Gran Torino with a white stripe along the side. You may also have some interesting knitwear.

You probably need to go and drive one to understand. It's all in how well they drive. Go and try a Boxster or a 911 and see if it helps make sense.

I don't get them either the 986, 987, 996 and 997's I've driven left me completely cold. After all I read I was particularly disappointed with the steering feel. Nothing really stood out, but maybe that's the appeal? I've read way too much about them not to buy one though, will probably have to be a GT car.

I probably need to hand in my PH card and I admit that some of this probably comes from ignorance (I've only passengered in and not really driven any Porsches) but I've never really "got" the appeal of Porsche (and I'm talking mainly about the Boxster/Cayman/911). On a rational/objective level then yes. 30+ years ago, a Porsche offered superior build quality and reliability to equivalent British/Italian "exotics" and in comparison were relatively cheap to run and easy to live with, "the sports car that you can drive every day" if you'll pardon the cliche. Perhaps a Ferrari/Lamborghini/Aston Martin was a bit of a "pipe dream" and a Porsche was actually the "premium" sports car that might one day be attainable and that you could actually run as your only car if you had to. However, the competition has caught up in this regard, there are more alternatives to their core products (Boxster/Cayman/911) than there used to be, the newer cars are not without issues and arguably some of the alternatives are more exciting. Don't get me wrong, the Porsches that I rode in were "nice' cars but I found the Ferraris/Aston Martins that I have had a ride in more thrilling. I'd probably take an Alpine A110/Lotus Emira/TVR/even a Nissan Z car over a modern Boxster/Cayman and for me cars like the AMG GT, AM Vantage, Jaguar F-Type and Audi R8 offer more characterful alternatives to a 911 ie a V8 appeals to me a lot more than a Flat 6. I'm not so keen on their modern offerings but I also used to think that a BMW M car offered a bit more character, power and practicality for the money than a 911/Cayman and not being a self-confessed driving God, I think that an M car would be easier to powerslide than a 911/Cayman where you probably need to know what you're doing. And yet, I know that I'm wrong, as every seasoned racing driver/motoring journalist/driving enthusiast loves a Porsche. Now this might be something to do with when my formative years were (1980s), as I just saw the 911 as an "old" car and a bit of an antique, which wasn't particularly fast and in fairness, it was pretty much a 20 year old car by then. I far preferred the more modern 928 and 944 Turbo but those were not the Porsche sports cars that endured. Granted that the 993 looked a lot more modern when it came out and very pretty, I lusted after an Arena Red 993 Turbo as a teen (and also the black 964 Turbo S in "Bad Boys" a little) . But 996-, I'm just a bit "meh" about 911s, partly because they seem to bring out a new "special" every week and over the years it has got a bit bloated and looks more and more like a caricature of itself, although granted, a 997 Carrera S would probably be quite a nice balance between classic and modern with a perfect level of performance for the road but if I pick up a car magazine and there's a story on a "new" 911 then I normally skip it. The only Porsche that I have really lusted after this century is a Carrera GT. Having said that, I would consider a V6 Macan or a 2nd gen Panamera, particularly with the very rare V8 diesel, as they're quite "cool" and seem like strong offerings in their respective market segments but again like the 944/928 in the 1980s, they're the "leftfield" less focussed Porsches when I know that Boxster/Cayman/911 are the core products that should be the ones that really appeal to me. So educate me, as I feel like I've got this one wrong and want to understand why a Porsche sports car is the car that so many aspire to. Edited by Starsky80 on Thursday 13th November 21:39 Edited by Starsky80 on Thursday 13th November 21:40 Edited by Starsky80 on Thursday 13th November 21:41 Edited by Starsky80 on Thursday 13th November 21:43 Edited by Starsky80 on Thursday 13th November 21:45 Edited by Starsky80 on Thursday 13th November 22:13 Edited by Starsky80 on Thursday 13th November 22:15

Sometimes they get flack for being the boring choice but they make good cars. Ok a lotus maybe a better driver's car, TVR more thrilling, Ferrari, Aston, Jag prettier , more exotic etc. But they do everything well, 4/5 in all areas where other brands are compromised. Sporty Audi's. Although not my cuppa, the interiors are great. I would love a Taycan or a 928GTS.

My best mate, whom I've known for 40 years, has always been Porsche mad and has two of them now. I was never sold on the idea. They were always too practical, reliable and abundant in numbers to have the exotic appeal of, for example, Ferraris and Lamborghinis. Porsches were the cars bought by posers. People with money who wanted a sports car to show off with but weren't willing to commit to the acute aggro that comes with a hardcore Italian supercar. Ferraris and Lamborghinis were always lower, wider, more beautiful, more dramatic and you barely had a cat in hell's chance of seeing one on the road so it was mindblowing when you actually did. Porsches, on the other hand, nice, but too accessible to be considered a supercar and, let's face it, "supercar" is the zenith that the true petrolhead aspires to. That said, in recent years Porsches have really started to appeal. As I've matured I've become increasingly enamored by the clean design and understated style of the majority of them. The 991.1, for example, is sublime. It looks and sounds gorgeous... and Porsche do have a rich racing heritage to tune into if you want to justify it to yourself as a bona fide petrolhead. I'd still buy a Ferrari - one from the '80s or '90s - if I ever found myself with money to burn but, if I didn't, and I wanted a very nice car that did everything really well, I'd be very happy with a Porsche. And perhaps that's it. A Porsche is for people who are a bit soft, or have softened over the years. That doesn't mean they aren't great. They are. Possibly just a little too great.

You sound a bit like me OP to be honest. I'd rather have a V8 AMG GT over a 911 for example. Plus the first time I actually drove a 911, I actually preferred my M4 over it because it was a touch more playful for example. The trouble with Porsche for me, is that they're the default choice for badge and image arguably, so a lot of folk tend to flock to them for that in my view. The Taycan used to be really popular as well, whereas now that doesn't seem to be the case though. So I think folk end up realising that a Porsche isn't the be all and end all really for me. In saying that, I'd pretty much rob my Granny for a lovely late example of the V8 928 GTS though!

I was similar, thinking that a 911 is a bit meh... After all, a bit of Jack of all trades. Go Lotus or Caterham for lightweight, tactile fun, go Aston, Ferrari, etc for exotic kicks. But finally gave it a go 4 years ago, with a 997.1 - and I'm sold. I'm not particularly tall or well built, so we can fit us and the kids in OK, and there's few cats that you can do the school run and a track day in. You can do long haul drives if needed, I've done 500 miles in a day and it's been perfectly doable... Obviously, if that was a regular occurrence, I'd pick something else, but every now and then it's fine. There's a subtle feel to the steering, not like a Lotus of feeling everything, but a real depth that takes a little while to tune into. It's not for everyone, but I now see the appeal... Plus, I can afford to run it, parts are plentiful, there's loads of aftermarket support and is OK to work on. I'd not be able to afford anything more exotic, perhaps a Jag F Type or Audi R8 would be in a similar bracket, but above that and it all gets a bit silly. On that note, you can drive it without it having to be an adventure, handy if you want to pop to the shops for a pint of milk... I'd say that get a cheap one, enjoy for 6 months, and then see from there.

As others have said, so I'm not really adding anything new, a Porsche is just the sensible choice when you have a 6 figure budget. You might be tempted by a more exotic brand, but when you inevitably sit down and work out running costs, look at reliability, and practicality, you find yourself drawn to the Porsche. Sure, if you're dripping with money, buy whatever you want... and a Porsche to use daily. A Porsche is the only choice for something fast, reliable, not ruinous on costs, and yet still has that dream car appeal. Oh, and it has rear seats, so you can sell the idea to the wife as a family 2nd car. Name another car that does all this...

It's a good question, and I've tried many cars over the years before buying a Porsche, from TVR Chimaera to 650bhp Skyline GTR (R32) and CLK55AMG. Maybe it's the right time for me as I don't find hot hatches as interesting (driven a couple in the last decade) and life's too short to be driving a family car but on the other hand I can no longer be arsed with triple plate clutches in traffic jams (I used to commute in the R32 which had one and didn't mind doing so 20 years ago). So for me a "boring" automatic 996 Turbo ticks all the boxes at the moment (it also happens to be the first Porsche I've ever driven and owned). It's very much more interesting than a "Golf in a posh frock" (my TT shed - which is also a pretty decent drive despite the sneers that other driving enthusiasts give it) and when I encounter London traffic, it's easy to deal with that in the 996. And yet when the road opens up, it's a giggle both in a straight line and round corners. And those corners - it feels so good to carve out those corners. The weighting feels good. And even rolling through my housing estate at 20mph or even just sitting in it with the engine off, everything feels special. Here's the thing, despite it being described as an "everyday" sports car and having a great automatic box (a Mercedes 5 speed), I actually would not like to commute everyday in it. It is still a bit tiring to drive unless you're in the mood. I think it's the "sensitive" steering combined with the firm suspension that can get tiring. I know people on here who've owned one describing it as boring and have swapped theirs for a Ferrari Something or whatever but if "this" (ie where I am automotively-speaking) is boring then whatever is considered "better" sounds like a pain in the arse to deal with. It has that right balance of special pain in the arse and usable that is right for where I am in my life, I guess. It's fun enough to drive to the gym but not so tiring that I can't drive back with knackered legs. And that's why I'm not keen to sell up and have held on to it 3 times longer than I planned to! (Excuse the multiple edits. There are a lot of different angles to consider!) Edited by Hoofy on Friday 14th November 00:22

JohneeBoy said: As others have said, so I'm not really adding anything new, a Porsche is just the sensible choice when you have a 6 figure budget. You might be tempted by a more exotic brand, but when you inevitably sit down and work out running costs, look at reliability, and practicality, you find yourself drawn to the Porsche. Sure, if you're dripping with money, buy whatever you want... and a Porsche to use daily. A Porsche is the only choice for something fast, reliable, not ruinous on costs, and yet still has that dream car appeal. Oh, and it has rear seats, so you can sell the idea to the wife as a family 2nd car. Name another car that does all this... I take it you’re talking about a 911 rather than Porsche in general? I think in addition to what you mention the appeal is timeless design, solid residuals and amazing brand recognition even among non car enthusiasts. To me though there has always been something more interesting than a Porsche at any particular price point. As a watch collector I see them as the Submariner of the car world in almost every aspect.

OP, I felt the same way and after years thinking that mid engined cars were superior and the 911 rear engine was just an example of engineering prowess over designer folly I decided to get a 996 cab just to see for myself. Near empty (low fuel and no luggage in the front), the car really shows it character and in the lower gears where you can lean on the gas and brakes, there is some satisfaction to be had achieving fluency through a series of bends. The steering is light and on some occasions disconcertingly so, but offers lots of feedback. Compares with a NA Miata or Elise; with the appropriate tires and geometry, you feel everything. The suspension design appears quite simple compared with many cars, but again offers feedback so unlike an Elise you do feel the influence of the moving weight bias and its doesn't feel planted to the point of inanimate. Disclaimer it's been a few years since I had my Elise but the low torque and subsequent need to rev the nuts off it meant that I never really got to feel any weight transfer. IME the Elise, was very capable but somewhat dead by comparison. On a dry road you can brake late while turning in and the nose tucks in and then you can power out very early without hesitation. Put enough negative camber on the front and it wants to turn when you stand on the brakes and as you lean on the gas it wants to straighten out. The motor has enough low down torque to be forgiving in `normal' driving and when pushed provides an enthusiastic response but it's at the top end, so no great gobs of torque in the low/mid range, hence very difficult to lose it coming out of a corner (dry road). But importantly there is enough torque that you can feel some rearward weight transfer in lower gears. The rear weight bias gives great mechanical grip under both braking and acceleration so unless you're completely nuts or have big power, it's very difficult to brake traction. Even in the damp it's pretty well behaved. RWD turbo and this all changes. More modern examples have dialled this sensitivity back to some degree to make it more usable as power has been increased. But `progress' means that these more powerful and well equipped cars are also arguably less characterful and like a 996 with full fuel and luggage in the nose, it's just a well-built car with less to make it stand out. The traits are still there but better hidden. Yes, you can experience all the good points of this design with modern versions but either you're going much faster or you have some rose-jointed 'less is more' version and either way they're a fortune. The Boxster is the value proposition, sharing everything from the seats forward with the 911, but it has a more subdued motor, so a muted character and lacks the capability of the larger 911. It is probably the faster car but IME it's less engaging to drive. The 911 is optimal for 2 person touring and functional as an occasional 2+2 and I think this is where it really wins over a Boxer or F type - the space behind the front seats. It is significantly flawed with well documented engine issues from 2001-2009. The cable change does not yield the greatest transmission feel, though it can be improved fairly readily. Aftermarket support is massive and (engine aside), at least in the US very reasonably priced. It's easy to work on and well documented. They're galvanised from early on, so generally better with regards rust than many cars.

Well they used to be in the business of selling cool cars and nothing else, so there’s that.

I felt I ‘had’ to try a 911 because everyone says how amazing they are and every car enthusiast should own one at least once. I went for a 992.1 GTS. It looks great, I like the brand, it’s weirdly practical for a family of four, has sensible running costs and it’s fast. But that’s where it ends. TLDR; it’s utterly soulless. A car should make you grin like an idiot - even better if it makes you laugh out loud. This does none of that, it just very efficiently gets from A to B rapidly. It drives well in the sense of it being easy to get it down a road quickly but the steering lacks feel, the engine is unpleasantly ‘boosty’, it sounds s t, the suspension is rock hard, the manual gearbox is crap and the interior is dull and drab. It just doesn’t feel special in the slightest - like a fancy Audi. Don’t get me started on the stupid centre-lock wheels! The problem is that if you want a daily-use, four seat sports car that can do everything there really isn’t another option. But, if I was given the option of taking this or the F-Pace SVR I had a few years back, I’d be picking the big fat SUV’s keys almost every time.

As noted above, get an old one... but then it's old, the interior is less plush, it's slower, its noisier,... All of this is largely pointless unless you live somewhere with minimal traffic. There's a good reason I drive my Tesla 95% of the time.

You don't have to 'get' Porsche, or any other brand. Buy cars you like, like what you like. No explanation needed.

Crumpet said: 992 I think that was the mistake. It's too modern. I hear that a lot about newer Porsches. They're very competent but lack something. It's one reason why I'm reluctant to buy a newer car of any marque.

Bought a 997.2 C2 in 2010 , fast forward to 2016 I bought an Aston Martin Vantage , both used only as a weekend car . Out of the 2 I look back at the Aston as being overall a much better experience, the 997 always left me cold. I look at the newer Porsche cars and nothing really hits the spot for me now. All imho.

In my experience Porsches tend to be objectively very good, albeit not the "night and day better than all of the competition" that people sometimes make out. However, whilst I've really enjoyed most of the older Porsches (80s and earlier) I've driven, the new ones (at least the mainstream models) are just to competent and hence too... sterile for my tastes. That's not really a criticism, it's clearly what most sports-car buyers want and Porsche need to make cars people want to buy. From reading the above, it seems I'm not as unusual in this view as I thought I was!

I always think the paintwork looks far better, deeper, on Porsche than on other cars. Although the dealership put swirl marks on my new one.

I got invited to a 24-hour test drive of the 996 when it came out. I didn't get it. Incredible heavy, crunchy feeling gear change. Seats were great, but you had to open the door to adjust them. I gave it back early. Not very long after I tried a Lotus Europa SE, and thought the Lotus infinitely more exciting and interesting to drive. I quite liked the Macan I tried though.

I've had two, a lovely 993 which drove really well and sounded lovely. Then a 981 GT4 which was one of the best drivers cars I've had (carbon buckets and an aggressive alignment), it just flew round bends, marvellous. I'd happily jump back into another GT3 or GT4 product, but not interested in anything else from Porsche really. I think everyone who likes a good drivers car should experience one of their sporty cars at some point.

200Plus Club said: I've had two, a lovely 993 which drove really well and sounded lovely. Then a 981 GT4 which was one of the best drivers cars I've had (carbon buckets and an aggressive alignment), it just flew round bends, marvellous. I'd happily jump back into another GT3 or GT4 product, but not interested in anything else from Porsche really. I think everyone who likes a good drivers car should experience one of their sporty cars at some point. I'd like to try a GT3 or a GT4 as well, just to see how different they feel to something like a 911 Carrera for example.

As a massive Porsche fan I wanted a 987 Cayman S from the day they were launched who wouldn't want a mid engined sports car, nothing else was even considered, it was the Porsche image that I always liked, the race heritage and the fact they didn't see any need to drastically change the cars design...just improvements. It took me many years to get one and boy was I impressed, the way it drove and the sound it made, also the build quality was top notch a properly put together car. Fourteen years later I still have it and its going nowhere, the newer cars are nice but I like my 987.2 S.

The whole it's a sports car that does "sports car" rather well while also being a completely usable daily was the point for me - after nearly a decade in V8 dailies I felt that particular itch was well and truly scratched. I'm always wary of things that seem to be the default choice but when I was looking the latest change the dice kept on coming up "911" so I went and drove a 991.1 C2S.. and loved it. The looks aren't going to be universal but I'm in the "looks great" camp, it's practical enough for my purposes, more than comfy enough for daily use and it does the sporty bit very, very well. I'm far from a driving god but it does everything I've ask of it, and is plenty quick. None of which means that you have to like, or "get" them of course, we all like different things!

I bought my first Porsche (C4S) last year - and I've had a lot of interesting sports cars over the years - FGT, Murcielago, Vanquish etc. There are a few things that appeal, none of which I would describe as 'magic' though. As some reviewer said recently, 911's are nine out of ten cars - but in every single area... daily drivers, potential track cars, GT cars. The parts that really appeal to me are that 911's feel very evolved somehow, there's nothing superfluous about them. Everything is there for a purpose and very well thought out. The interior is just right, the controls are just right etc. I bought mine to be a GT car for my annual trip to the south of France - it's perfect for that, it swallows luggage too. I have never driven my cars to their full performance potential, however, the 911 feels extremely competent at all speeds - it also has a split personality engine - quick and comfortable under 4,000rpm, but a bit mental if really pushed. I am also a really big fan of the PDK box, very clever, always in the right gear - I rarely resort to the paddles. Sport mode is my go-to setting and it suits my quick, but not mental, driving style. I also like the look of a 911 and the fact that even if you have a lowly base model spec, you still feel part of the 911 family and heritage. So nothing 'magic' from me, just a very solid well engineered sports car. I'd have another.

KaraK said: None of which means that you have to like, or "get" them of course, we all like different things! I also think that if you "get" them, then you generally stick with them too. There's a chap near me who has just swapped his Boxster for another Boxster for example. So I'd imagine that they do get under your skin for a lot of folk really.

cerb4.5lee said: I also think that if you "get" them, then you generally stick with them too. I am going to test out an analogy here.... could they be the MacBook Pro of the car world?! I switched to Apple after decades of PC's, both privately and corporately. Apple don't do anything amazing really, but they're very dependable for everything.

For me, there are cars which will do 1 or 2 things better, but perhaps everything else worse. Also, when I looked for a modern 2 seater manual convertible sports car around 30k, my only option was a Boxster. I enjoy the sophistication of the driving experience too - just feels well put together and a compelling everyday package.

For me at 49, the brand takes me back to childhood posters and is basically level with Ferrari and Lambo yet at a more attainable price point. In my mind its one of the big three "proper" legendary sports car makes. Aston's James Bond, Audi's a bit average. TVR has a kit car feel, Lotus is nearly up there. I cant quantify millions of hours of TV, magazines, posters and media from 1976 through to today but it's all of those details that make Porsche what it is to me. I can see poeple who are ten years younger, or older having a different view due to their influnces. At my age I struggle to put Pagani, Bugatti or Koenigsegg on the smale level as the three I grew up with.

I don't get 911s, for me the weight is in the wrong place. I do get Macans even though the weight is in the wrong place. I absolutely get Boxsters and Caymans because the weight is in the right place and with the 4.0 flat six it's all the sports car you'll ever need. And then I bought a 928

I have owned a 986 3.2S and it left me totally cold. There is seemingly an awful lot of one upmanship and option snobbery in Porsche circles, only beaten by the Aston owners I encountered when I had a vantage. I do not believe the "hewn from granite" myth that surrounds the brand either - for some reason, issues that would bury other brands seem to be accepted as "this is the price of Porsche ownership" Horses for courses I suppose, just not a brand that I feel any real passion for

NDA said: There are a few things that appeal, none of which I would describe as 'magic' though. As some reviewer said recently, 911's are nine out of ten cars - but in every single area... daily drivers, potential track cars, GT cars. this resonates with me, which is probably why I'm taking so long to get back into a Porsche. The Elise is just superb at a b road blast, where size and weight are more important than power. the Caterham ideal for track (and only track imo), the jag for long trips and a crossover thingy for chores. I've indulged myself with a big garage full of focused cars. To be fair to Porsche though, once you want more of an all rounder the competition doesn't exist - it's either not as good or way more expensive. Most bigger engined cars are FE and will never handle like a Porsche, and the R8 is a price point higher. The answer to the op is mostly: to feel the shove from behind of that low flat 6, so different to the pull of an I6. I want a 997/987 as I see those as the height of analogue Porsche.

I love Porsches, having owned a few... 911 3.2 Carrera Sport Coupe, 993 and two 996 C4Ss, one of which I've owned for 11 years now. The 996 C4S has actually been my favourite; for a sensible outlay you can buy an interesting 'classic' Porsche that is day to day usable and still properly supported by Porsche. You can even get an OE CarPlay headunit. Contrast this to Audi, where parts for early R8s etc are getting hard and expensive to come by. Recently I went for a weekend away with friends for an exciting drive for the day, then met our wives at the hotel before coming home the next day in dreadful wet and windy conditions yet the car was refined, comfortable and secure, then on the Monday I drove it to the office. I can think of few other cars that would do all this so convincingly, let alone one that is over 20 yrs old. That said, I once drove a 993 Turbo and was completely underwhelmed (and it was for sale for £39k!). My overriding impression was road noise and crashy ride. I suspect it now was a bad example but had that have been my only experience I too would have not been in the Porsche camp. But, its a free country and we don't all have to like the same things. Its great visiting the Classic Car Show for example and seeing enthusiasts getting excited about their thing, be it Hillman Imps or Bugattis.

I did the BMW thing for years, but always fancied getting into a Porsche. I’m a big fan of German cars, and Porsche just represent some of the best for me I finally bought my first one a few years ago, a 968 CS, and loving it so far. On paper it might not be too inspiring, but in reality I love the solidity of all the switchgear, things like how the doors close, and most importantly how it drives I will do the 911 thing at some point too, ideally also keeping the 968, and something like a 996 C4S appeals a lot A 964 RS is still the holy grail for me, but they’re a bit pricey now

Leins said: I did the BMW thing for years, but always fancied getting into a Porsche. I m a big fan of German cars, and Porsche just represent some of the best for me My BiL did the same. He was a big BMW fan having had an E39 535i/E46 M3/E93 M3 etc, but now he's in a 911, he absolutely loves it to bits. He'd wanted a 911 for most of his life, so he's over the moon to have achieved that now really.

each to their own, i bought a 996 as i had some spare cash and a good friend decided to sell their 1 owner fullpsh and i purchased at a price we were both happy with. Yes some crazy service bills but enjoying the car. No it is not the fastest but as a toy to potter around in i have no issues. i like the auto box as traffic and cameras everywhere. My one issue is the fornt sports seats are not built for 17stone 6ft humans (male or female) but i can live with them. On the few occasions i have had lead in my socks the traction from the 4wd has been plenty, personally the 996 is a a good looker from the side rear and from inside and ok from the front but starting to appeal now the prices are coming into basement prices

cerb4.5lee said: My BiL did the same. He was a big BMW fan having had an E39 535i/E46 M3/E93 M3 etc, but now he's in a 911, he absolutely loves it to bits. He'd wanted a 911 for most of his life, so he's over the moon to have achieved that now really. What 911 did he go for Lee? I think my days with older BMWs are probably done now

Leins said: What 911 did he go for Lee? I think my days with older BMWs are probably done now He went for a 2016 Carrera S Convertible(PDK) bud. It was an opportunity for me to drive my first Porsche when he got it as well. It's got the sports exhaust on it as well, and I like how vocal it is. It's loads louder than my 2018 F82 M4 for example, because I've got the stupid OPF's on that in comparison!

cerb4.5lee said: He went for a 2016 Carrera S Convertible(PDK) bud. It was an opportunity for me to drive my first Porsche when he got it as well. It's got the sports exhaust on it as well, and I like how vocal it is. It's loads louder than my 2018 F82 M4 for example, because I've got the stupid OPF's on that in comparison! Very nice. I have a friend of mine who’s gone the same route, into a 2016 Carrera S coupe, and loves it Only difference is he’s kept all his old BMWs too, the lucky fecker!

Oh this is very personal... but for me, I was sold when I was in single digits seeing 930s and then 964s in toys and film. I can't explain why, but I'm either taken very much by things with engines in the wrong place, or by wedges (and if you know my garage, I think it's probably not surprising). For me the 993 was the pinacle. I LOVED mine, but it's long gone. I'm in a 991.2 GTS now but with the PDK it's "too good" or "a little souless" or whatever ticks the box on any given day. Basically, for the road, it's too capable and lacking obvious flaws - the things we fall in love with. To compare, I've had a v12 Vantage for several years and it's SO similar in so many ways, yet nothing like a 911 (i.e. 2 doors, basically 2 seats, RWD, short wheel base etc.). One can be pointed at the horizon and the other needs to be spoken to nicely... I'm considering (but cannot justify) a GT product with a manual box, just to make the 911 feel more involved, but to be honest, I'll take any variant just to look at. So I'm really biased. I love 911s.

Apologies if I’ve got this wrong, but has the OP ever driven a Porsche, Ferrari or Aston or simply been a passenger? I’ve been very fortunate to own all of the above, three Ferrari’s and a couple of Astons but I’m now on 911 number eight, a 992T. It’s not just about the drive. If it were I would still be in my 355 Fiorano, it’s about the ownership experience and in that respect I think Porsche have it licked. Not too flash, good build quality and great dynamics, they’re also the only ones to offer a manual transmission.

Leins said: cerb4.5lee said: He went for a 2016 Carrera S Convertible(PDK) bud. It was an opportunity for me to drive my first Porsche when he got it as well. It's got the sports exhaust on it as well, and I like how vocal it is. It's loads louder than my 2018 F82 M4 for example, because I've got the stupid OPF's on that in comparison! Very nice. I have a friend of mine who s gone the same route, into a 2016 Carrera S coupe, and loves it Only difference is he s kept all his old BMWs too, the lucky fecker! The jammy git for sure! He had his E93 M3 for 11 years, and his E46 M3 for a long period too. He wasn't planning to keep the 911 for very long at first, but he's had that nearly 3 years now though. He was the one that got me into BMW's really as well.

Great cars, expensive to run, difficult to work on, but a car that every petrolhead should sample at least once, the 911 in particular. Now that I've had 3 of them, I've had my fill. Would I buy another? Only a 911 GT3 product. Of all the cars that I've driven, no car gives the feeling that a 911 does (997 C2), flooring it around the corner. The grip is off the scale.

maz8062 said: Great cars, expensive to run, difficult to work on, but a car that every petrolhead should sample at least once, the 911 in particular. My BiL's 911 has opened his eyes in that regard too. He isn't one for throwing his money around usually, but the servicing costs and fixing niggles on his 911...has meant that he's had no choice but to throw money at it though.

As others have said you really need to drive a Porsche to understand the appeal.

I just wanted one..... Living in Germany growing up (Army brat) BMWs and Mercs were just a bit over ordinary - VW, Opel, Ford etc. Porsches were rare and something that made you look. I'm no driving god, so talk of that extra 0.5 degree of negative camber goes way over my head. All I noticed was a bit of understeer on the power out of a roundabout on my way home. Dailied a 964 for a few years and massive regrets selling. Now I've got somewhere to keep one, I can't afford one. Replaced (substituted?) by a V8, albeit not a Porsche......

Gearing is only specific models...Cayman GT4 is probably the one best known for it.

Starsky80 said: So, back to Porsches. Is the Boxster/Cayman still a worthy Porsche and does it do some things better than the 911 or is the 911 just on a different level? Certainly the 981 Boxster/Cayman is a very nice-looking car and the GT4 certainly appeals and from a purist perspective it ought to be better than the 911 with the engine in the optimum place. Perhaps being NA, the 997/991.1 911 is the perfect compromise between classic and modern 911 ie you still have the NA throttle response and can wring them out a bit, whereas even the base Carrera with the newer turbocharged engine, still makes all the performance too accessible, so you're always having to watch your speed? The only real criticism that I read about Boxsters/Caymans/911s is the overly long gearing ie if you wring it out in 2nd, you're already breaking the speed limit. Has that always been an issue or only more recently? Is the PDK more shorter geared in that respect, which makes it a better choice than the manual in recent years? Edited by Starsky80 on Friday 14th November 16:40 Edited by Starsky80 on Friday 14th November 16:42 Boxster/Cayman are mid-engined - they're easier to drive compared to a 911. I had a 986 3.2S Boxster for a few months; it's the only car that I've ever driven that I could jump into and feel confident to attack a corner. The car has fantastic balance, grip, and poise - it'll make you feel like a driving God from the get-go. But it is not a 911, which is more challenging to drive with its shifting weight and dynamics and the voice in your head reminding you that they were once called the widow maker. The 911 is more challenging but more rewarding in my view. I'd choose one over the Boxster/Cayman all day, every day. Porsche gearing is long, yes. In the UK, it is virtually impossible (without breaking speed limits) to rev out 3rd gear, and there's 4th, 5th and 6th to come. But it is still fun wringing out 1st and 2nd.

I'd argue Boxster / Caymen are better cars, mid engined, better handling and you can either go with the wind in your hair, or stiff chassis... But of all the 2+2's out there, bizzarely the 911 seems to have a reasonable amount of space. An Evora is just a token back bench, and even a BMW 2 series is probably harder to get into... The sloped roof of the 911 doesn't help with tall folk in the back.

I remember watching a Top Gear episode, probably back in 2005 ish. They took a base 911 C2, a AM Vantage and the BMW M6 across the IOM. The Stig then did a back to back timed stretch across a decent stretch of road and amazingly the 911 was the fastest by far despite being something like 150+bhp down on the M6 and significantly down on the AM too. Maybe that's some of the magic? Very impressive how they cover ground. Edited by Lincsls1 on Friday 14th November 18:10

said: In my book that is the magic of Porsche. They always seem to be able to squeeze that bit more out of any given package. Generally through very good engineering. My first one, a 924 Carrera GT, was a great example. In its day it had tremendous useable performance, way better than the paper figures would suggest. That has been a recurring theme for me all the way through my Porsche owning journey ever since. The GT cars are especially good at over delivering in my experience. There are a lot of brands that promise more but somehow deliver less.

Starsky80 said: Thanks for all the replies, I think that maybe I'm starting to get it. FYI I've driven a Ferrari F355 and it was everything that I hoped for but only passengered in a Boxster/911/Vantage. I said that I lusted after the 993 Turbo as a teen but I still wouldn't say that it was my "dream" car, even back then. That would have been an early Ferrari F355 GTS manual in red or a black 1980s Aston Martin Vantage but I guess had I won the lottery back then, I would have bought the Ferrari, used it for a bit, realised that it wasn't a very practical daily proposition and then bought the 993 Turbo and used it 75% of the time (but still kept the Ferrari) and maybe that's the point? If you won the lottery, then it's not necessarily the first car that you would buy but if you had saved your whole life and had to consider some sensible stuff like running costs and residual values then you would get the Porsche? That said, my wife's uncle is in 70s and just bought himself a DB9 and is loving life, so a Porsche isn't the answer for everyone and good for him! A bit like some of the other default choices in their markets: Fiesta, Golf, 3-Series, 5-Series, MX5, Range Rover, maybe it doesn't necessarily "wow" you straight away but over a period of time it's easier to live with and a better "all-rounder" than the some of the alternatives, which may excel in specific areas (styling, performance, noise, handling, practicality) but just aren't as well-rounded. For example, on a real-world budget, there was nothing that I wanted more than a 205 GTi in my early 20s, so I got one. It looked fantastic (and I think still does) and was every bit as fast and thrilling to drive on a B road as I would have hoped it to be. I also considered a mk2 Golf GTi 8v and on a short test drive found it somewhat underwhelming in comparison. However, over the course of 2 years ownership, the 205 was loud on the motorway, the ride shook my teeth out, it was difficult to drive smoothly in traffic, the heater was crap and bits of trim fell off constantly. Worth those compromises to me at the time but the Golf would probably have been a much easier car to live with when you weren't in the mood to drive like your hair was on fire! Having owned quite a few C-segment cars, I have also come to the conclusion having owned a mk7 Golf for 6 years that the mk5- Golf is the best. It doesn't have the biggest boot in its class nor is it the best to drive or the best to look at or the one that wows you instantly but it's the attention to detail. Stuff like the carpeted door pockets, the rearview camera that doubles as the boot handle, so never gets dirty, the refinement and the ergonomics/simple user interface. All the other comparable cars that I have owned have impressed me more in one or two areas initially but then been more annoying to live with over time. So, back to Porsches. Is the Boxster/Cayman still a worthy Porsche and does it do some things better than the 911 or is the 911 just on a different level? Certainly the 981 Boxster/Cayman is a very nice-looking car and the GT4 certainly appeals and from a purist perspective it ought to be better than the 911 with the engine in the optimum place. Perhaps being NA, the 997/991.1 911 is the perfect compromise between classic and modern 911 ie you still have the NA throttle response and can wring them out a bit, whereas even the base Carrera with the newer turbocharged engine, still makes all the performance too accessible, so you're always having to watch your speed? The only real criticism that I read about Boxsters/Caymans/911s is the overly long gearing ie if you wring it out in 2nd, you're already breaking the speed limit. Has that always been an issue or only more recently? Is the PDK more shorter geared in that respect, which makes it a better choice than the manual in recent years? Edited by Starsky80 on Friday 14th November 16:40 Edited by Starsky80 on Friday 14th November 16:42 Dude, you're putting a tremendous amount of effort into discussing the driving subtleties of cars that you've not driven. My instinctive response is to say - go and drive them. Edited by TheJimi on Friday 14th November 19:02

Thanks for all the replies, I think that maybe I'm starting to get it. FYI I've driven a Ferrari F355 and it was everything that I hoped for but only passengered in a Boxster/911/Vantage. I said that I lusted after the 993 Turbo as a teen but I still wouldn't say that it was my "dream" car, even back then. That would have been an early Ferrari F355 GTS manual in red or a black 1980s Aston Martin Vantage but I guess had I won the lottery back then, I would have bought the Ferrari, used it for a bit, realised that it wasn't a very practical daily proposition and then bought the 993 Turbo and used it 75% of the time (but still kept the Ferrari) and maybe that's the point? If you won the lottery, then it's not necessarily the first car that you would buy but if you had saved your whole life and had to consider some sensible stuff like running costs and residual values then you would get the Porsche? That said, my wife's uncle is in 70s and just bought himself a DB9 and is loving life, so a Porsche isn't the answer for everyone and good for him! A bit like some of the other default choices in their markets: Fiesta, Golf, 3-Series, 5-Series, MX5, Range Rover, maybe it doesn't necessarily "wow" you straight away but over a period of time it's easier to live with and a better "all-rounder" than some of the alternatives, which may excel in specific areas (styling, performance, noise, handling, practicality) but just aren't as well-rounded. For example, on a real-world budget, there was nothing that I wanted more than a 205 GTi in my early 20s, so I got one. It looked fantastic (and I think still does) and was every bit as fast and thrilling to drive on a B road as I would have hoped it to be. I also considered a mk2 Golf GTi 8v and on a short test drive found it somewhat underwhelming in comparison. However, over the course of 2 years ownership, the 205 was loud on the motorway, the ride shook my teeth out, it was difficult to drive smoothly in traffic, the heater was crap and bits of trim fell off constantly. Worth those compromises to me at the time but the Golf would probably have been a much easier car to live with when you weren't in the mood to drive like your hair was on fire! Having owned quite a few C-segment cars, I have also come to the conclusion having owned a mk7 Golf for 6 years that the mk5- Golf is the best. It doesn't have the biggest boot in its class nor is it the best to drive or the best to look at or the one that wows you instantly but it's the attention to detail. Stuff like the carpeted door pockets, the rearview camera that doubles as the boot handle, so never gets dirty, the refinement and the ergonomics/simple user interface. All the other comparable cars that I have owned have impressed me more in one or two areas initially but then been more annoying to live with over time. So, back to Porsches. Is the Boxster/Cayman still a worthy Porsche and does it do some things better than the 911 or is the 911 just on a different level? Certainly the 981 Boxster/Cayman is a very nice-looking car and the GT4 certainly appeals and from a purist perspective it ought to be better than the 911 with the engine in the optimum place. Perhaps being NA, the 997/991.1 911 is the perfect compromise between classic and modern 911 ie you still have the NA throttle response and can wring them out a bit, whereas even the base Carrera with the newer turbocharged engine, still makes all the performance too accessible, so you're always having to watch your speed? The only real criticism that I read about Boxsters/Caymans/911s is the overly long gearing ie if you wring it out in 2nd, you're already breaking the speed limit. Has that always been an issue or only more recently? Is the PDK more shorter geared in that respect, which makes it a better choice than the manual in recent years? Edited by Starsky80 on Friday 14th November 16:40 Edited by Starsky80 on Friday 14th November 16:42 Edited by Starsky80 on Friday 14th November 20:21

Starsky80 said: So, back to Porsches. Is the Boxster/Cayman still a worthy Porsche and does it do some things better than the 911 or is the 911 just on a different level? Go and drive them. They are not the same. If you "get" mid-engine then go for it. In the same way Macan is IMO a better drive than the more expensive Cayenne you might find the small Porsche a remarkably pleasing machine.

Who said there s any magic? It s just a car brand with models of varying character and varying quality - some models are vulnerable to particular problems. As you may have gathered, OP, some people like Porsche and some are unmoved. It depends on the individual and the model. Do some test drives and make your own mind up. Me, I ve rather fallen out of love with Porsche in recent years but I m hanging on to my 991.2 to which I m very attached. Peak modern-ish 911 for me.

Shame they didn't continue the 944/924/928 as the modern day evolution would likely be fantastic. I always loved the shape of the 944/924 turbo and would have had one alongside my Lotus Esprit if the numbers came in.

Oilchange said: Shame they didn't continue the 944/924/928 as the modern day evolution would likely be fantastic. I always loved the shape of the 944/924 turbo and would have had one alongside my Lotus Esprit if the numbers came in. That is totally me as well. I've nothing against the 911 don't get me wrong, but I've always personally preferred a front engined Porsche though(especially the 928).

997 is probably a much better car than the 996, but engine issues come more to the fore with the larger bore motors (bore scoring), though IMS bearing failure rates are lower on the much later cars. I think part of the positive feeling about older 911s is that you view them in the context of being an older car; they really don't compare well with something current, yet they offer a lot of character and are easy to work on and parts are relatively cheap etc.. mechanical grip is excellent with a 911. The Boxster is probably the better car but loses out on convenience and the better engines (4.0 GTS excepted). And given you cant really drive quickly for any length of time on modern roads, so is this a car for driving pleasure at sane speeds, for posing, for momentary exhilaration or for going to cars & coffee and shopping. It all factors in. An older car will probably give you more tactile amusement at lower speeds and for an older car a 996 is remarkably usable today. A 1999 996 (cable throttle), a just post 2009 981 (hydraulic steering), or 4.0 GTS all very different at very different prices. Go drive them is the bottom line...

The thing that is so special about 911's is the fact there are so many options that all do it differently. What do you want from your 911? A weekend toy for back road blasts? A track car? A long distance mile muncher? Are you 25? Are you 75? There is a 911 to fit any criteria. Then you have the fact that they take a bit of time to learn, after years of M Cars I will be honest, I gave up on my first 911, it lasted around 3 or 4 months and I sold it and bought another M3. Second time around I bought a Boxster, it was cheap and it was sunny. After I started to click with that, which didn't take long I swapped for a 996, that honestly took me months to get to grips with just how capable it was. Then after a year when I started to really push it, I started to change the geo, then different springs, then it got better and better. You then move onto a newer car, the newer ones come out again, you change, then.....well, you get to 2015 and the 991.2 comes out and to me that was as big a change as aircooled to watercooled. The manual 997.1 is my favourite, and I really like the 991.1 too. A well sorted 996 is arguably the best fun, feeling a bit old school but you could drive down to Monaco no problem without worrying about it getting there. But they are getting old, but that is a nice thing too. But you could still daily a 997 if it is a well sorted one. To me, a well sorted 997 is perfect. 997 Carrera manual is all you ever need, just a fun, free revving car that is not too fast and one of the best ways to experience a 911 in 2025 imho. If you prefer V8's and M4 turbos etc. Maybe a 997 Turbo is more suited? Same if you are a bit older, the softer suspension set up of the Turbo makes it feel like a very different car. Find the Carrera too soft? Get a GTS or go GT3. The one thing they all have in common is the fact you can spend years learning how to take them that bit further, pushing them and finding the limit. Adjusting geo on these makes so much difference, a bit tame, a bit safe out of the factory, but tweak that and they get a bit rawer, they also get to the point where the levels of grip, the turn in, the steering is just ridiculous. I think that is why people get hooked on them, just when you think you have got bored you can get more from it, or, move along up the range, to outsiders you have just got another 911, maybe a different colour, but if you know your 911s you will understand why they have bought yet another.

TheJimi said: Most people have no idea how capable a 1.6 family hatchback can be, much less a 911 at 7/10ths upwards. As to the video, aside from anything else, any genuinely capable driver could do that in an equally capable car. What the video shows isn't unique to a 911. No, but it is amazing the amount of 911 owners who don't get anywhere near what they are capable of amazes me, let alone someone taking one out to test when considering one. So many take it to around 4/10ths and then say "I don't get what the fuss is about?" And then you get owners who have the car set up geo wise to be super comfy and planted and get bored of it when they want to go for a blast. Might as well have bought an Audi or something. But that is also what is nice about 911's too of course. There is something for everyone. Considering it is the same car, the differences between the variants they sell is incredible.

Inbox said: Most of it is just straight driving where the speed is highest, there was a little bit of opposite lock in a couple of corners but not much and in a 992 which is the least 'tail happy' and loaded with nanny state protections. Seeing the speedo would have helped understand more of what we are being shown. Looking at the digital speedo the highest I could see was high 170kmh (175kmh = 109mph). Not many are going to achieve/risk that on a road like that (not that we have them in the UK).

mr pg said: Inbox said: Most of it is just straight driving where the speed is highest, there was a little bit of opposite lock in a couple of corners but not much and in a 992 which is the least 'tail happy' and loaded with nanny state protections. Seeing the speedo would have helped understand more of what we are being shown. Looking at the digital speedo the highest I could see was high 170kmh (175kmh = 109mph). Not many are going to achieve/risk that on a road like that (not that we have them in the UK). Even my Gran could do 109mph on a straight bit of road, no Porsche magic in that, what was the peak speed in the middle of the corner? That's where the Porsche magic is.

He's an complete bell end :

It does seem weird to upload videos of yourself doing that on the roads. Mind you, who is that biker, Ghost Rider or something? Can't believe he is not in jail.

Ed.Neumann said: No, but it is amazing the amount of 911 owners who don't get anywhere near what they are capable of amazes me, let alone someone taking one out to test when considering one. So many take it to around 4/10ths and then say "I don't get what the fuss is about?" And then you get owners who have the car set up geo wise to be super comfy and planted and get bored of it when they want to go for a blast. Might as well have bought an Audi or something. But that is also what is nice about 911's too of course. There is something for everyone. Considering it is the same car, the differences between the variants they sell is incredible. For the majority I bet they never go on a track with them, not want to. So it's no surprise they don't get the true performance of the car when you consider traffic, road quality, speed cameras and the fact most people don't want to push top hard on their tyres or brakes. The guy being a dick on that video could be the best driver in the world, only need a freak tyre blow out or an idiot driver coming. The other way for that to have a very different outcome. I'd imagine an awful lot of Porsche owners have Rolex diver watches (other brands available) and only states get taken them in the pool bar. The car was never bought for the daily outright performance, they just like the pedigree, the badge and that occasional splurt down their favourite road or when some pillock is up their arse I speak from experience. I've a few dive watches. I've a M3 that I don't drive anywhere near it's limit and I may end up in a 911 in the not too distant future. I will love the track day with their tyres and brakes but mine will only get the odd blast ovcasionally

More impressed with the guys on the bikes tbh, don’t need the same skills to drive a fully loaded driver aid car at those speeds.

I 100% respect them but their sports cars do nothing for me. Have a close mate who is Porsche blooded through and through and wax lyrical but they do little for me. I tried owning a 986S when it was a few years old to almost try and convince myself how I must have missed something but everything I had preconceived only became my reality in ownership. As I say, huge respect for the cars but I am left cold to them as a sports car. A Cayenne or Macan as a daily I could see a possibility, but as my sports car it just wouldn't be on the agenda.

Slippydiff said: He's an complete bell end : Agreed.

Where is that? Looks like Austria maybe?

Ed.Neumann said: No, but it is amazing the amount of 911 owners who don't get anywhere near what they are capable of amazes me, let alone someone taking one out to test when considering one. So many take it to around 4/10ths and then say "I don't get what the fuss is about?" And then you get owners who have the car set up geo wise to be super comfy and planted and get bored of it when they want to go for a blast. Might as well have bought an Audi or something. But that is also what is nice about 911's too of course. There is something for everyone. Considering it is the same car, the differences between the variants they sell is incredible. But this is the problem if you are using it as a road car. I gave up with my 997 because it was impossible to enjoy without being obnoxiously over the speed limit all the time. Unless you are doing track days regularly, I just don’t see the point. If I buy another modern road sportscar it’s going to be something like an Alpine A110. I still have time for a classic 911 though. 200 hp, 1200 kg and no driver aids makes for a fun road car at a half-sensible speed. Feels quicker than it is too. The guy in that video was not even on the car’s limit either and yet he was driving way too fast for an open public road. But if he drove it at a sensible speed it would have been pretty boring. A classic case of too much car for the occasion.

uktrailmonster said: I gave up with my 997 because it was impossible to enjoy without being obnoxiously over the speed limit all the time. If I buy another modern road sportscar it's going to be something like an Alpine A110. I'm sure the Alpine can be just as "over the limit" as a 997. It's many decades since any "slow" cars were on sale at your local dealership. What sports cars do we actually see out and about on UK roads - Mazda and Porsche. I'm sure there's a reason for that.

I don't find that with the 996 or 997. I find them really fun without going silly speeds. I tried an Alpine a few months back, it was good, but I wouldn't say it offered anything above what the 997 offers, other than being a bit newer and what that brings to the table. But I do agree with what you're saying. But then I would take a base 2.7 Cayman over a 4.0 GTS, because like you say, for the roads it is simply more fun, for me anyway, I get others want something different.

Slippydiff said: He's an complete bell end : Completely agree. Also didn't notice any special "skills" as the comments espouse, other than being able make his right foot move forwards and backwards. Absolute moron. You see these types at track days occasionally. They usually have an off

a_dreamer said: I'd imagine an awful lot of Porsche owners have Rolex diver watches (other brands available) and only ever taken them in the pool bar.

Panamax said: uktrailmonster said: I gave up with my 997 because it was impossible to enjoy without being obnoxiously over the speed limit all the time. If I buy another modern road sportscar it's going to be something like an Alpine A110. I'm sure the Alpine can be just as "over the limit" as a 997. It's many decades since any "slow" cars were on sale at your local dealership. What sports cars do we actually see out and about on UK roads - Mazda and Porsche. I'm sure there's a reason for that. You could be right about the A110 as I haven’t driven one. It was just a thought about a lightweight sportscar with modest power. But I would definitely get something inherently slower than a modern 911 for exclusive public road fun.

Ed.Neumann said: I don't find that with the 996 or 997. I find them really fun without going silly speeds. I tried an Alpine a few months back, it was good, but I wouldn't say it offered anything above what the 997 offers, other than being a bit newer and what that brings to the table. But I do agree with what you're saying. But then I would take a base 2.7 Cayman over a 4.0 GTS, because like you say, for the roads it is simply more fun, for me anyway, I get others want something different. I enjoyed my 996 and 997 too, but I eventually realised I was driving way too fast on my local roads in the process of that enjoyment! I found going back to my 911 3.0 SC was just as much fun at lower speeds. I also tried a Boxster 987 2.9 and 3.4 S back when they were new and both of those were way too easy to drive obnoxiously quick too!

AM in no position to do supercar compares as I have only driven the Carrera GT at speed. Never drove a Ferrari nor an AMG either. I have driven a few Astons and the odd Bentley GT and they have always struck me as much more long distance cruisers, comfortable and smooth. Like a previous poster did not get Porsche we all have our own preferences, and I would never recommend a Porsche to anyone though I will often say,"drive a couple of them and see how they appeal". The was how I got hooked, but especially with my GT cars I am very well aware of the compromises. Not comfortable, not any particular fun as a road car unless you have access to some good back roads. I am one of those people who enjoys very edgy cars. I do have a Cayenne and a Panamera which are immensely comfortable and handle beautifully, but am aware that there are great alternatives. If I did not have the ST Turbo I would doubtless have an Audi RS6 for instance, but it is just handy to have one dealer . The Cayenne is a jack of all trades and I am not in the market at all for Lambo/Ferrari/Aston SUVs. It is cheaper and tough as old boots, but not 'magic"- just useful.

TheJimi said: Dude, you're putting a tremendous amount of effort into discussing the driving subtleties of cars that you've not driven. My instinctive response is to say - go and drive them. Edited by TheJimi on Friday 14th November 19:02 My budget is more Proton than Porsche at the moment, so I'm not going to go and waste a dealership's time let alone an OPC. I don't have any Porsche driving friends and I approached some Porsche driving strangers and asked if I could drive their cars and they told me to f*** off lol! Maybe at some point in the next 5 years though. My 11 year old son gets it, his favourite car is a 911 because he likes the way it looks, so maybe I'd give a 996/997 a go to solidify my "hero" status in his eyes but I think that I'd probably be happy with an M2 (newer car, bit more practical, just as quick) or a B7 RS4/C63 for that matter. I'd like to get back into some track driving, I did a bit in my 20s/early 30s but haven't owned anything worthy of driving on a track since then. You can get 10 laps one-on-one tuition with an ARDS instructor in an M2 or 981 Cayman at my local race circuit (Thruxton) for about 200 pounds. I kind of fancy trying out the M2, as it's a car that I could see myself buying but I guess that I could do the Cayman, if I wanted to experience a Porsche in its natural environment. It's only a "base" 2.7/2.9 981 Cayman though. No 911s on the fleet though. I haven't driven a Boxster/Cayman/911 no and maybe that's what it would take for me to "get" it but driving is really the last piece of the jigsaw. I find other cars exciting just looking/sitting in/listening to and travelling in them but I just don't get that excitement from the Porsches that I have been in. Everything could just "click" though, I didn't really love how my "Blobeye" WRX looked and the interior was pretty c*** and the noise not amazing but I gave it a chance, as they were so cheap for the level of performance compared to comparable vehicles such as Octavia vRSs/Leon Cupras/Golf GTIs/Golf R32s etc and it only took one drive for me to love it. The amount of thrust and sheer traction available on boost was amusing even as a passenger though. Edited by Starsky80 on Monday 17th November 21:28 Edited by Starsky80 on Monday 17th November 21:29

Pouhon said: Slippydiff said: He's an complete bell end : Completely agree. Also didn't notice any special "skills" as the comments espouse, other than being able make his right foot move forwards and backwards. Absolute moron. You see these types at track days occasionally. They usually have an off I don't see what the problem is in that vid. The car was designed for that, no? It looks like it is on the Costa d'Amalfi in Italy. No, we can't drive like that in the UK, we'd get caught, lose our licence or injure someone and/or ourselves - it's not like that in Italy; no cameras, Police that turn a blind eye. When in Rome... Your comments highlight the folly of buying the fastest cars with gearboxes designed for speed shifts, ginormous tyres, massive "ducktail" spoilers, and paying huge sums for the privilege only to pootle around town like Miss Daisy. For the most part, these cars are status symbols for some, while others try to sample what the cars were designed for. Folk who buy performance cars want to sample the performance promised, even if sometimes it can only be fleeting. Yes, one needs to go high in a 911 to taste the goodness, but not as high as that vid, there's plenty going on in the lower gears on public roads without being a nuisance or scaring yourself. If you've never driven a 911 in anger, even briefly, you don't know what you're missing.

People will have different views on what makes Porsche special for them. But it might be possible to have a more objective stab at what it is about the company that underpins that. I'd say it goes something like this. There are very few fully resourced OEMs with both significant human and financial capital who build ground-up, full-feature driver's cars now or through history. To take one example, BMW doesn't do it. Their driver's cars are all based on, ultimately, quite nice mainstream car platforms. Lotus has never had the funding. Ferrari made glorified kit cars with nice engines for most of its history. Latterly, it's fully funded and has cutting edge engineering. But arguably the brand isn't really about driver's cars and also the cars aren't really engineered to be used extensively. Aston, again funding is up and down as is, you have to imagine, is the human capital and expertise. Obviously Porsche nearly went to the wall in the 90s. But I suspect many of the people who really understood driver's cars at Porsche stayed on. So as the funding returned, the company had the right people with the right understanding. Then add in a certain German approach which means the cars tend to be remarkably well packaged and usable... The net result is that if you want a good driver's car with no major flaws and you also want it to be a good car, the answer is frustratingly often a Porsche. There are exceptions. Renault funded the A110 and the result was what you get when a big OEM with some sports car know how in corners of the organisation does a ground-up car. But then that car has a hatchback not a sports car powertrain, which is its clearest weakness. The original NSX is another example of a proper OEM ground-up sports car, but even that arguably didn't have a proper sports car powertrain - the transverse V6 and gearbox arrangement was really a front-drive package sportified and stuck in the back. The original R8 ticks most boxes in terms of ground-up top-tier OEM engineering and is a pretty nice car, albeit with some brand-enforced quattro baggage that you probably wouldn't otherwise have bothered with. You can point at certain Toyota and Mazda products, but they usually miss out on something obvious, like a dedicated sports car platform or else powertrain. 911s, Boxsters and Caymans aren't exotic. But they are on a bespoke, dedicated sports car platform with bespoke, dedicated sports car engines. It's that combined with full big OEM funding and engineering know how, plus staff who've been at it for decades and really know what they are doing. The result is a certain kind of cohesiveness and polish that probably doesn't exist elsewhere. Other companies emulate that for a period from time to time. But it's hard to think of another top tier OEM that has been doing it as consistently and for as long as Porsche. Either that or its just clever brandng and marketing with the 911, take your pick!

maz8062 said: I don't see what the problem is in that vid. The car was designed for that, no? It looks like it is on the Costa d'Amalfi in Italy. No, we can't drive like that in the UK, we'd get caught, lose our licence or injure someone and/or ourselves - it's not like that in Italy; no cameras, Police that turn a blind eye. When in Rome... Your comments highlight the folly of buying the fastest cars with gearboxes designed for speed shifts, ginormous tyres, massive "ducktail" spoilers, and paying huge sums for the privilege only to pootle around town like Miss Daisy. For the most part, these cars are status symbols for some, while others try to sample what the cars were designed for. Folk who buy performance cars want to sample the performance promised, even if sometimes it can only be fleeting. Yes, one needs to go high in a 911 to taste the goodness, but not as high as that vid, there's plenty going on in the lower gears on public roads without being a nuisance or scaring yourself. If you've never driven a 911 in anger, even briefly, you don't know what you're missing. I hardly think Slippy has never driven a 911 in anger. I do think we have to consider others when 'having fun' on the roads. If he drove past my family like that I wouldn't be thinking "Go for it son!"

housemouse said: Some good points. I'm not sure how you find the time to post so often on here housemouse?!

Starsky80 said: N111BJG said: Just bought my 5th Porsche, just a few months ago I drove my 991.2 C4S Cab through the Alps, up & down the hairpins on the paddles was pure driving ecstasy. I ve been promised a drive in my mates Ferrari in the spring, it may open my eyes to new possibilities who knows. I am sure however that I ll never buy another Aston Martin. Out of interest, why would you never buy another Aston Martin? I've rewatched Harry's Garage latest video several times and this still seems like perfection to me. Available from only 60k too. You probably could get a decent 911 for that but only a Carrera/Carrera S not a GT product. The Aston gives me the "fizz" just looking and hearing it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr7uykq-qVc&t=... Possibly a personal experience, but by no means unique, the engine fitted to my V8 Vantage, at the time recently acquired at four years old with 12k miles, suffered mains bearing failure. It took a long time to fix, as it needed a new complete engine (in all probability a factory rebuild) add to that my dislike of the sports t gearbox, it spoiled my birthday treat to myself. My friend urged me to consider a DB12 like his, but I was put off for good I’m afraid. But I can thoroughly endorse the Timeless warranty.

Youforreal. said: More impressed with the guys on the bikes tbh, don t need the same skills to drive a fully loaded driver aid car at those speeds. Tyre contact patches the size of a credit card, meanwhile our friend in his GTS has close to 8 times as much rubber on the rear tyres alone ...

uktrailmonster said: I enjoyed my 996 and 997 too, but I eventually realised I was driving way too fast on my local roads in the process of that enjoyment! I found going back to my 911 3.0 SC was just as much fun at lower speeds. I also tried a Boxster 987 2.9 and 3.4 S back when they were new and both of those were way too easy to drive obnoxiously quick too! The prime reason for selling my Cayman R and my 997 GT3.

N111BJG said: Just bought my 5th Porsche, just a few months ago I drove my 991.2 C4S Cab through the Alps, up & down the hairpins on the paddles was pure driving ecstasy. I ve been promised a drive in my mates Ferrari in the spring, it may open my eyes to new possibilities who knows. I am sure however that I ll never buy another Aston Martin. Out of interest, why would you never buy another Aston Martin? I've rewatched Harry's Garage latest video several times and this still seems like perfection to me. Available from only 60k too. You probably could get a decent 911 for that but only a Carrera/Carrera S not a GT product. The Aston gives me the "fizz" just looking at and hearing it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr7uykq-qVc&t=... Edited by Starsky80 on Monday 17th November 23:24

maz8062 said: I don't see what the problem is in that vid. The car was designed for that, no? It looks like it is on the Costa d'Amalfi in Italy. Your comments highlight the folly of buying the fastest cars with gearboxes designed for speed shifts, ginormous tyres, massive "ducktail" spoilers, and paying huge sums for the privilege only to pootle around town like Miss Daisy. For the most part, these cars are status symbols for some, while others try to sample what the cars were designed for. Folk who buy performance cars want to sample the performance promised, even if sometimes it can only be fleeting. Yes, one needs to go high in a 911 to taste the goodness, but not as high as that vid, there's plenty going on in the lower gears on public roads without being a nuisance or scaring yourself. If you've never driven a 911 in anger, even briefly, you don't know what you're missing. I couldn't give a toss about the moron in the GTS in that video, my concern is what happens to one or both of the bikers if something goes wrong. Now he may know the bikers, and if that's the case, they're clearly ok with having 1700kg of metal, rubber and plastic driving over and killing them in the vent something does go wrong. But if our amoeba-brained GTS driver had just happened upon them and thought he'd show his prowess behind the wheel by keeping up with them, then I'd suggest he really is a weapons-grade bell end. Of course you could say, the bikers could have slowed down, waved him on, then set off again when the W-GBE had disappeared into the distance, but they chose not to. maz8062 said: No, we can't drive like that in the UK, we'd get caught, lose our licence or injure someone and/or ourselves - it's not like that in Italy; no cameras, Police that turn a blind eye. Usual non-sensical piffle. You can drive like that in the UK, but the majority of soft Southerners can't be arsed to drive the 2-3 hours required to get to South/mid Wales, or the 10-12 hours required to get to the West coast of Scotland. If they did, they'd get the opportunity to drive their dick extensions as the manufacturer intended. Choose the right roads, at the right time of year, in the right conditions and you have motoring nirvana : The only problem with driving in that part of the country is the scenery is so stunning, you find yourself constantly having to stop every few minutes to take photos and admire the sheer majesty of the place along with the peace and tranquility :

housemouse said: People will have different views on what makes Porsche special for them. But it might be possible to have a more objective stab at what it is about the company that underpins that. I'd say it goes something like this. There are very few fully resourced OEMs with both significant human and financial capital who build ground-up, full-feature driver's cars now or through history. To take one example, BMW doesn't do it. Their driver's cars are all based on, ultimately, quite nice mainstream car platforms. Lotus has never had the funding. Ferrari made glorified kit cars with nice engines for most of its history. Latterly, it's fully funded and has cutting edge engineering. But arguably the brand isn't really about driver's cars and also the cars aren't really engineered to be used extensively. Aston, again funding is up and down as is, you have to imagine, is the human capital and expertise. Obviously Porsche nearly went to the wall in the 90s. But I suspect many of the people who really understood driver's cars at Porsche stayed on. So as the funding returned, the company had the right people with the right understanding. Then add in a certain German approach which means the cars tend to be remarkably well packaged and usable... The net result is that if you want a good driver's car with no major flaws and you also want it to be a good car, the answer is frustratingly often a Porsche. There are exceptions. Renault funded the A110 and the result was what you get when a big OEM with some sports car know how in corners of the organisation does a ground-up car. But then that car has a hatchback not a sports car powertrain, which is its clearest weakness. The original NSX is another example of a proper OEM ground-up sports car, but even that arguably didn't have a proper sports car powertrain - the transverse V6 and gearbox arrangement was really a front-drive package sportified and stuck in the back. The original R8 ticks most boxes in terms of ground-up top-tier OEM engineering and is a pretty nice car, albeit with some brand-enforced quattro baggage that you probably wouldn't otherwise have bothered with. You can point at certain Toyota and Mazda products, but they usually miss out on something obvious, like a dedicated sports car platform or else powertrain. 911s, Boxsters and Caymans aren't exotic. But they are on a bespoke, dedicated sports car platform with bespoke, dedicated sports car engines. It's that combined with full big OEM funding and engineering know how, plus staff who've been at it for decades and really know what they are doing. The result is a certain kind of cohesiveness and polish that probably doesn't exist elsewhere. Other companies emulate that for a period from time to time. But it's hard to think of another top tier OEM that has been doing it as consistently and for as long as Porsche. Either that or its just clever brandng and marketing with the 911, take your pick! some good points and the conclusion that Porsche has for so long been the default choice is justified. their engineers have honed their products exceptionally well. but even they have made compromises by using hatchback suspension and clearly cutting some corners on engine production. Lotus have always focused on a superb driving experience, at the cost of everything else and with the need to use hatchback engines. For me, there's just a little bit more magic there although I'll need other cars for practicality. The A110 was a fantastic achievement, the equal of a Cayman and 200kg lighter. Though again, hatchback engine. The GT86 had all the driver's needs and magical for its price (low cog, double wishbones, longitudinal layout), but that bloody engine! McClaren, pretty focused driving machines but they're quite new and not quite hewn from granite. Ferrari have been lazy when there was little competition but to be fair they've always been top dog and the 458 was the peak once they decided to try harder. Definitely a magical car. Porsche have been top of the game for decades, but they're far from perfect and others have given us some magic too.

Amazing the difference when you crop the video to 4:3 so the close up sides that are rushing by are now cropped up, and you then put some more relaxed music over the top. Doesn't seem anywhere near as quick.

maz8062 said: Your comments highlight the folly of buying the fastest cars with gearboxes designed for speed shifts, ginormous tyres, massive "ducktail" spoilers... Ducktail spoilers are fairly rare, and they're not usually massive. Suspect you're talking about GT3/RS style wings, of which the latest generation are known as swan necks.

Ed.Neumann said: Amazing the difference when you crop the video to 4:3 so the close up sides that are rushing by are now cropped up, and you then put some more relaxed music over the top. Doesn't seem anywhere near as quick. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5swQLyGUik[/youtu... GTS man doesn't know what fast is ... And if he thinks the above isn't fast, he could try doing it in the dark in sub-zero temperatures, frequently on the wrong tyres for the conditions ..

CABC said: some good points and the conclusion that Porsche has for so long been the default choice is justified. their engineers have honed their products exceptionally well. but even they have made compromises by using hatchback suspension and clearly cutting some corners on engine production. Lotus have always focused on a superb driving experience, at the cost of everything else and with the need to use hatchback engines. For me, there's just a little bit more magic there although I'll need other cars for practicality. The A110 was a fantastic achievement, the equal of a Cayman and 200kg lighter. Though again, hatchback engine. The GT86 had all the driver's needs and magical for its price (low cog, double wishbones, longitudinal layout), but that bloody engine! McClaren, pretty focused driving machines but they're quite new and not quite hewn from granite. Ferrari have been lazy when there was little competition but to be fair they've always been top dog and the 458 was the peak once they decided to try harder. Definitely a magical car. Porsche have been top of the game for decades, but they're far from perfect and others have given us some magic too. The magic requires both a great product and a belief in the integrity of the brand with their loyal customers that has them yearning for the next great product. When you tell a high percentage of these loyal customers that based on their unwillingness to buy cars that they don't want and / or cycle multiple barely or not run-in purchases back into the OPC network for the OPC's gain, doesn't this destroy the magic at all levels ? I mean, where even are the privileged few now ? They are still great cars, but where is the love ?? I for one have a complete shelf of Porsche bible books that I no longer look at .... But McLaren ? What they could do in their future excites the hell out of me ... the new kids on the block ?

Slippydiff said: GTS man doesn't know what fast is ... And if he thinks the above isn't fast, he could try doing it in the dark in sub-zero temperatures, frequently on the wrong tyres for the conditions .. I seriously struggle to watch Rallying. It scares the hell out of me. Amazing, proper skills.

Ed.Neumann said: I seriously struggle to watch Rallying. It scares the hell out of me. Amazing, proper skills. Best not to watch this then. There’s fast and then there’s Colin McRae bats t mental fast!

ChrisW. said: CABC said: some good points and the conclusion that Porsche has for so long been the default choice is justified. their engineers have honed their products exceptionally well. but even they have made compromises by using hatchback suspension and clearly cutting some corners on engine production. Lotus have always focused on a superb driving experience, at the cost of everything else and with the need to use hatchback engines. For me, there's just a little bit more magic there although I'll need other cars for practicality. The A110 was a fantastic achievement, the equal of a Cayman and 200kg lighter. Though again, hatchback engine. The GT86 had all the driver's needs and magical for its price (low cog, double wishbones, longitudinal layout), but that bloody engine! McClaren, pretty focused driving machines but they're quite new and not quite hewn from granite. Ferrari have been lazy when there was little competition but to be fair they've always been top dog and the 458 was the peak once they decided to try harder. Definitely a magical car. Porsche have been top of the game for decades, but they're far from perfect and others have given us some magic too. The magic requires both a great product and a belief in the integrity of the brand with their loyal customers that has them yearning for the next great product. When you tell a high percentage of these loyal customers that based on their unwillingness to buy cars that they don't want and / or cycle multiple barely or not run-in purchases back into the OPC network for the OPC's gain, doesn't this destroy the magic at all levels ? I mean, where even are the privileged few now ? They are still great cars, but where is the love ?? I for one have a complete shelf of Porsche bible books that I no longer look at .... But McLaren ? What they could do in their future excites the hell out of me ... the new kids on the block ? Both posts have great points. Re: McLaren. If Norris wins this year then it’s another massive boost for the kudos of the company.

Starsky80 said: Out of interest, why would you never buy another Aston Martin? I've rewatched Harry's Garage latest video several times and this still seems like perfection to me. Available from only 60k too. You probably could get a decent 911 for that but only a Carrera/Carrera S not a GT product. The Aston gives me the "fizz" just looking at and hearing it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr7uykq-qVc&t=... Edited by Starsky80 on Monday 17th November 23:24 I saw this and agree that it seems like a lot of car for the money. I’d put the R8 V10 in a similar bracket. Whilst contemplating a GT3 as an upgrade I decided to keep the carrera and add a V10 Spyder to the collection instead.

uktrailmonster said: Best not to watch this then. There s fast and then there s Colin McRae bats t mental fast! Love it!

I bought my first Porsche when I was 28yrs old in 2004. It was a Guards Red 968CS and I loved it to bits and owned it for around 3 years but the head gasket went and then the cams so after getting it fixed up I sold it to try and recover some of the money. It was in good condition, high miles but an honest car and featured in 911 & PW. Fast forward to 2025 and I had owned loads of cars but the better ones have been a RX8, E39 M5, Leon Cupra, TVR Chimaera, M2 and then a F Type R 575. The Jag was bonkers fast and very comfy but lacked the involvment that I got from my manual M2, it left me cold. Around 3 months ago I sold it and got a 981 GT4 with buckets and PCCB and it is also in guards red and I love it. It makes me smile at any speed and is everything the Jag was not (to me anyway). To me its the way it sounds and not just on the move. It makes lots of other noises in the cabin and feels alive. The way it drives is just mega and yes hot hatches will probably have me at the lights but wow can it handle. The Jag was 575PS and AWD but I can carry so much more speed in the GT4, it just feels so right.

Slippydiff said: Youforreal. said: More impressed with the guys on the bikes tbh, don t need the same skills to drive a fully loaded driver aid car at those speeds. Tyre contact patches the size of a credit card, meanwhile our friend in his GTS has close to 8 times as much rubber on the rear tyres alone ... Exactly, if I was betting on ball size the bikers would definitely be of a bigger circumference.

Youforreal. said: Slippydiff said: Youforreal. said: More impressed with the guys on the bikes tbh, don t need the same skills to drive a fully loaded driver aid car at those speeds. Tyre contact patches the size of a credit card, meanwhile our friend in his GTS has close to 8 times as much rubber on the rear tyres alone ... Exactly, if I was betting on ball size the bikers would definitely be of a bigger circumference. Ever watched the 2014 film “Road” about the Dunlop dynasty? A well known F1 driver gave me a copy of it at the time because he thought it was so mind-blowing and he wasn’t wrong! Those guys have the same mentality and level of bravery as F1 drivers had in the 1950-70s era when the grim reaper was a regular spectator at every event!

I've owned 911's since the late 90's and to be honest, the latest ones (992 and to a lesser degree the 991) feel like super fast and competent GT cars. Not Sports cars. They have lost a lot of the 911 DNA and only 'come alive' at very high speeds - so at 'normal' speeds, really don't feel that special. May as well be driving a BMW M4. 911's from 2010 and prior are probably the most like a 'real' 911 - but one still needs to make sure it's a well-maintained example with the alignment and tracking correct, health suspension, great tyres, healthy brakes, etc. Then one can truly experience a 911 in all its glory with the iconic steering and brake feel (and the 911 handling) that everyone raves about.

16610LV said: I've owned 911's since the late 90's and to be honest, the latest ones (992 and to a lesser degree the 991) feel like super fast and competent GT cars. Not Sports cars. They have lost a lot of the 911 DNA and only 'come alive' at very high speeds - so at 'normal' speeds, really don't feel that special. May as well be driving a BMW M4. 911's from 2010 and prior are probably the most like a 'real' 911 - but one still needs to make sure it's a well-maintained example with the alignment and tracking correct, health suspension, great tyres, healthy brakes, etc. Then one can truly experience a 911 in all its glory with the iconic steering and brake feel (and the 911 handling) that everyone raves about. I agree and really they have just become modern cars that look a bit like the original 911. That’s not necessarily a bad thing as I really like modern cars. But I don’t have a need for a modern 911. I can find more than enough road performance in more practical modern cars. They still look the part though and for many that’s enough reason to own one. I’m struggling with Porsche SUVs though. I like SUVs but really don’t see the point in paying for a Porsche badge on one. I read all the glowing reports of the Macan EV and its handling prowess, but it just felt like any other competent SUV to me. It wasn’t even particularly quick in the “4” spec. The Taycan 4S was much better, but hard to justify the cost.

Grantstown said: Starsky80 said: Out of interest, why would you never buy another Aston Martin? I've rewatched Harry's Garage latest video several times and this still seems like perfection to me. Available from only 60k too. You probably could get a decent 911 for that but only a Carrera/Carrera S not a GT product. The Aston gives me the "fizz" just looking at and hearing it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr7uykq-qVc&t=... Edited by Starsky80 on Monday 17th November 23:24 I saw this and agree that it seems like a lot of car for the money. I d put the R8 V10 in a similar bracket. Whilst contemplating a GT3 as an upgrade I decided to keep the carrera and add a V10 Spyder to the collection instead. Do your due diligence on V12V running costs, what can (and does) go wrong with them, and they don't look quite so appealing.

16610LV said: I've owned 911's since the late 90's and to be honest, the latest ones (992 and to a lesser degree the 991) feel like super fast and competent GT cars. Not Sports cars. I don't disagree (well, not much) and I bought my C4S to be a quick GT car, which is exactly what it is - I spend a while in France every year and wanted it for that. I have never dubbed any of my cars 'sports' or 'super' cars - but I would think any 911 would fall into the sports car description. A GT car is a type of sports car - in my mind anyway.

uktrailmonster said: Ed.Neumann said: I seriously struggle to watch Rallying. It scares the hell out of me. Amazing, proper skills. Best not to watch this then. There s fast and then there s Colin McRae bats t mental fast! A talent lost way too young.

Inbox said: uktrailmonster said: Ed.Neumann said: I seriously struggle to watch Rallying. It scares the hell out of me. Amazing, proper skills. Best not to watch this then. There s fast and then there s Colin McRae bats t mental fast! A talent lost way too young. Given his attitude to anything with wheels it was unfortunately quite likely he wasn’t going to grow old one way or another. I was quite close to some of the engineers who worked with him and they always thought he would eventually run out of lives. But he did have an aura of invincibility because of his sheer talent. Shame it all ended so badly. Tragic.

uktrailmonster said: Youforreal. said: Slippydiff said: Youforreal. said: More impressed with the guys on the bikes tbh, don t need the same skills to drive a fully loaded driver aid car at those speeds. Tyre contact patches the size of a credit card, meanwhile our friend in his GTS has close to 8 times as much rubber on the rear tyres alone ... Exactly, if I was betting on ball size the bikers would definitely be of a bigger circumference. Ever watched the 2014 film Road about the Dunlop dynasty? A well known F1 driver gave me a copy of it at the time because he thought it was so mind-blowing and he wasn t wrong! Those guys have the same mentality and level of bravery as F1 drivers had in the 1950-70s era when the grim reaper was a regular spectator at every event! Yep, have met them a few times (sadly some gone) I live in Ireland so surrounded by mental bikers, there was also a great one about the TT I seen in the cinema years back. I actually about to get a new bike myself, I know it takes way more skills to ride a bike at those speeds compared to a car, thus my reference to the video posted, the car driver was handy but those bikers were very highly skilled immaterial they knew that road or not.

uktrailmonster said: Inbox said: uktrailmonster said: Ed.Neumann said: I seriously struggle to watch Rallying. It scares the hell out of me. Amazing, proper skills. Best not to watch this then. There s fast and then there s Colin McRae bats t mental fast! A talent lost way too young. Given his attitude to anything with wheels it was unfortunately quite likely he wasn t going to grow old one way or another. I was quite close to some of the engineers who worked with him and they always thought he would eventually run out of lives. But he did have an aura of invincibility because of his sheer talent. Shame it all ended so badly. Tragic. Took three others with him, sadly.

Ed.Neumann said: uktrailmonster said: Best not to watch this then. There s fast and then there s Colin McRae bats t mental fast! Love it! When I used to watch him in real life, he always looked so much quicker than everyone else too. It was a proper buzz to see him live I always thought.

paulguitar said: Took three others with him, sadly. That’s what I meant by ending so badly. Anyway, it’s the sort of thing that makes you think twice about hooning around public roads at 3-digit speeds. It can go just as badly in a split second.

Saw this on "the best Top Gear" films thread, I don't recall actually watching this episode before. 911 vs. M5 vs. V8 Vantage in the IOM. This probably sums it up quite well. 911 was the quickest (997 Carrera S I think) even in the streaming rain but the Aston looked and sounded the best and the M6 was the quickest in a straight line. Hammond and May would both take the Porsche home because it's the best but Clarkson would take the Aston or M6 for similar reasons to why the Porsche doesn't quite do it for me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMsbSV1fxbk