[AW335TT]

Originally Posted by MightyMouseTech

Cars are only worth what somebody is willing to pay for them.

Nothing more, nothing less.

That goes for everything.

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by Smooth 330i

Respect 911 but it's not for everybody. That weight balance is tricky business.

I prefer close to 50/50.

Except that once a car is moving 50/50 isn't ideal, rest weight bias is. Rear weight bias is ideal for performance and handling, not 50/50. There's a good reason why Porsche has been a force in that has been all too consistent in professional motorsports and why their street cars are at anytime the best and most desirable.
The 911s, especially those that wear the GT moniker are so balanced and so dialed in that I don't find it to be much different than a mid engined car. I believe Chris Harris said there is nothing as perfect as a 911 in the way it drives once it's in motion. Have you ever gotten to go 9/10ths or 10/10ths in a mid engined car like a Ferrari, especially older ones that were known for snapping and being hairy at those limits? They're also rear weight bias btw, as are lamborghinis, Mclarens, lotus' etc.

[David70]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Except that once a car is moving 50/50 isn't ideal, rest weight bias is. Rear weight bias is ideal for performance and handling, not 50/50. There's a good reason why Porsche has been a force in that has been all too consistent in professional motorsports and why their street cars are at anytime the best and most desirable.

Agree. BMW Marketing decided 50/50 was perfect (and it is really good and better than most) but I don't believe it is ideal. At the same time a rear engine 911 doesn't have the weight (engine) in the ideal location either.

[overcoil]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Except that once a car is moving 50/50 isn't ideal, rest weight bias is. Rear weight bias is ideal for performance and handling, not 50/50. There's a good reason why Porsche has been a force in that has been all too consistent in professional motorsports and why their street cars are at anytime the best and most desirable.

Except that front engine front drive configuration can give the ideal straight line stability particularly in the wet. Like a throw dart the front weight has inherent stability. For quickness of turning things change. For accelerating the rear drive weight over the rear is probably best though all-wheel drive is very good at accelerating. Guess it depends what your trying to accomplish.

[Mavus]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Except that once a car is moving 50/50 isn't ideal, rest weight bias is. Rear weight bias is ideal for performance and handling, not 50/50. There's a good reason why Porsche has been a force in that has been all too consistent in professional motorsports and why their street cars are at anytime the best and most desirable.
The 911s, especially those that wear the GT moniker are so balanced and so dialed in that I don't find it to be much different than a mid engined car. I believe Chris Harris said there is nothing as perfect as a 911 in the way it drives once it's in motion. Have you ever gotten to go 9/10ths or 10/10ths in a mid engined car like a Ferrari, especially older ones that were known for snapping and being hairy at those limits? They're also rear weight bias btw, as are lamborghinis, Mclarens, lotus' etc.

Can you explain how is it ideal?

I never drove old school analog high performance car except 911. These days high tech 911 is not comparable to air cooled 911 except for the basic layout..I was on track in modded and stripped 2006 Cayman and it was a beast. I think it had 911 engine. Holy shit was it good. I think If you put the same engine in Cayman and 911, Cayman would kill it.

[mylydiamy]

Hi all,

I just got 911 991 about a month ago and though I should give you my honest and unbiased opinion how BMW compares to Porsche.

But first, I agree with OP that P cars are overpriced, especially when you start adding options that come free with most cars. If you look at it from value perspective, they are REALLY overpriced. So I got 2014 CPO 911 991.1 with only 4K miles. It came with better warranty than a new car and the car is literally brand new. I got it about $38K below sticker price. There were even better deals out there but I wanted to get the color and options. So if money is your concern, that's the way to go.

Now the pros and cons (coupe vs coupe):

BMW's pros :
- More practical car for everyday use. More usable rear seats. Much bigger trunk. Much quieter ride. More comfortable ride.
- Free maintenance for 4 years
- Cheaper after market parts
- Cheaper to tune/upgrade
- Gets less attention (if this is what you want)

Porsche's pros:
- Much better handling
- Much better built.
- Looks like a real sports car (BMW looks like sporty car)
- Interior is much better looking and has much more quality parts. Less squicks and rattles.
- Gets more attention (if this is what you want)
- If the stats are correct, it is a more reliable car
- Better gadgets

Tnx all

[Never_Enough]

Originally Posted by mylydiamy

So I got 2014 CPO 911 991.1 with only 4K miles. It came with better warranty than a new car and the car is literally brand new.

No, it's used.

Porsche's pros:
- Interior is much better looking and has much more quality parts. Less squicks and rattles.

I think the car needs more than 2-3 years & 4k miles for that to be determined. Most 2-3 year old cars with 4k miles have no rattles.

[MightyMouseTech]

Originally Posted by DC-T

Funny, Lexus sells so well in the US and you can't give them away here. Assumption is overpriced Corolla...

Because they are an overpriced Corolla.

[ShocknAwe]

Originally Posted by OrangeZ06

I think the car needs more than 2-3 years & 4k miles for that to be determined. Most 2-3 year old cars with 4k miles have no rattles.

Agreed. Even at 25k miles my 1er had zero rattles . In the next 50k it developed a few. 4k Miles isn't enough to judge anything on build quality other than materials.

[mylydiamy]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Agreed. Even at 25k miles my 1er had zero rattles . In the next 50k it developed a few. 4k Miles isn't enough to judge anything on build quality other than materials.

My 2008 e93 335i had rattles soon after I got it and it got worse and worse each day

[mylydiamy]

Originally Posted by OrangeZ06

No, it's used.

I think the car needs more than 2-3 years & 4k miles for that to be determined. Most 2-3 year old cars with 4k miles have no rattles.

Sorry, I am esl. Meant to say "almost new"

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by mylydiamy

Hi all,

I just got 911 991 about a month ago and though I should give you my honest and unbiased opinion how BMW compares to Porsche.

But first, I agree with OP that P cars are overpriced, especially when you start adding options that come free with most cars. If you look at it from value perspective, they are REALLY overpriced. So I got 2014 CPO 911 991.1 with only 4K miles. It came with better warranty than a new car and the car is literally brand new. I got it about $38K below sticker price. There were even better deals out there but I wanted to get the color and options. So if money is your concern, that's the way to go.

Now the pros and cons (coupe vs coupe):

BMW's pros :
- More practical car for everyday use. More usable rear seats. Much bigger trunk. Much quieter ride. More comfortable ride.
- Free maintenance for 4 years
- Cheaper after market parts
- Cheaper to tune/upgrade
- Gets less attention (if this is what you want)

Porsche's pros:
- Much better handling
- Much better built.
- Looks like a real sports car (BMW looks like sporty car)
- Interior is much better looking and has much more quality parts. Less squicks and rattles.
- Gets more attention (if this is what you want)
- If the stats are correct, it is a more reliable car
- Better gadgets

Tnx all

I can concur with your above comments but have been able to put 50k in a cayenne GTS that was as good an solid as day 1. The actual quality of the materials are better too. My 991 Carrera S (everything is covered in leather and alcantara) is nicer inside or as nice as just about anything I've been in as of late. I never thought Ferrari for the price has very nice interiors. Lamborghini is summize similarly, at least for the prices, which by definition people would say are overpriced. Maybe everything just is these days.

[roastbeef]

cayman with 11,000 miles and a manual for $30k. claims clean title.

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/cto/5581843574.html

[ShocknAwe]

Originally Posted by mylydiamy

My 2008 e93 335i had rattles soon after I got it and it got worse and worse each day

Ouch. Sorry to hear that. Bad luck!

[RM7]

Originally Posted by David70

Agree. BMW Marketing decided 50/50 was perfect (and it is really good and better than most) but I don't believe it is ideal. At the same time a rear engine 911 doesn't have the weight (engine) in the ideal location either.

Exactly. The 911 design is inherently flawed. They get around this with more engineering, R&D and ultimately, cost. This is one reason you can take something like a Z/28 and spank a Turbo S, because one of these has the chassis going in it's favor, rather than trying to make up for the chassis with outrageously wide track and and tires. 325s on the GT3 RS, but the issue is you can't put tires that wide up front, or the car will eat you alive, while the Z/28 can run 305s all around. Not saying that the Z/28 is the ideal car, just that you can see the effect of having a better chassis to start with.

The Cayman GT4 on the other hand, that's really exciting IMO. That's the pure Porsche experience. Sure, the 911 can go fast and in some cases, faster, because Porsche has decided to produce it in trims that do just that, but the Cayman is a better chassis, because the rear engine isn't hanging behind the rear axle.

The 911 is flawed just as much as the turbo subaru platform, which is kind of the opposite situation, engine hands out in front of the front axle. Sure, you can do all sorts of things to improve this and make it handle better, but at the end of the day a better chassis is a better starting point, everything else being equal.

As we move forward, it's getting harder and harder for Porsche to match the competition IMO, at the very least for any kind of comparable pricepoint, with the idea that Porsche is inherently premium and will always be more expensive. It's getting to where you have to spend 2-3x more to get comparable performance...

None of this means I wouldn't rock a 911 4S or similar, but I'm also realistic about the chassis. Not ideal. I think a lot of people can't seem to grasp having to give up the non-seats in the rear, but a 911 body fitted on a cayman would look almost exactly the same to anyone (in fact it did when they had the prototype caymans). I say do it and get it over with.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Exactly. The 911 design is inherently flawed. They get around this with more engineering, R&D and ultimately, cost. This is one reason you can take something like a Z/28 and spank a Turbo S, because one of these has the chassis going in it's favor, rather than trying to make up for the chassis with outrageously wide track and and tires. 325s on the GT3 RS, but the issue is you can't put tires that wide up front, or the car will eat you alive, while the Z/28 can run 305s all around. Not saying that the Z/28 is the ideal car, just that you can see the effect of having a better chassis to start with.

You chose the wrong 911 to use as an example. As great as the Z28 is, it isn't spanking the Turbo S around a track or in a straight line. Randy's got 2+ sec on the Z28 around Laguna.

Independent testing, SportAuto just did the ring in 7:34 in the new 911 Carrera S. These new turbo base 911's are serious.

Porsche said in the new 991.2 Turbo S press release, it does the ring in 7:18. That is mega quick.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

You chose the wrong 911 to use as an example. As great as the Z28 is, it isn't spanking the Turbo S around a track or in a straight line. Randy's got 2+ sec on the Z28 around Laguna.

Independent testing, SportAuto just did the ring in 7:34 in the new 911 Carrera S. These new turbo base 911's are serious.

Porsche said in the new 991.2 Turbo S press release, it does the ring in 7:18. That is mega quick.

Hehe, you might want to look into those numbers just a bit more. Like how Porsche "came up" with that 7:18.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

You chose the wrong 911 to use as an example. As great as the Z28 is, it isn't spanking the Turbo S around a track or in a straight line. Randy's got 2+ sec on the Z28 around Laguna.

And do you mean this one?

Randy on the Track
The track was a little bit wet because it had rained all night. The Nissan was first to run, and after four hot laps, Randy’s best time around Barber’s 2.4-mile circuit was 1:36.45. Next up was the potent Porsche, and it clicked off a quicker lap time of 1:36.34, beating the GT-R Track by 0.11 second. Finally, it was the Camaro’s time to shine, but the best Randy could muster was 1:37.28. So there you go. The Camaro Z/28 lost to the bonkers Nissan and the German superfreak. The Chevy put up a good fight, but America, it seems, simply can’t compete.

Just kidding!
Turns out we had the tire pressures set wrong. After dropping 6 psi per wheel, Randy went back out and knocked over a second off his lap. Yes, friends, despite having less power, an antiquated row-your-own transmission, and only RWD, the Camaro Z/28 laid down a time of 1:36.17, beating the Porsche by a larger margin (0.17 second) than the Turbo S clipped Godzilla (0.11 second). I went into this comparison thinking the Z/28 would be pretty damn great, but, at the end of the day, not as skilled nor as fleet as the Nissan or Porsche.

[StatenEye]

One thing that always kept me away from considering Porsche is the interior. A friend of mine got a Cayenne last year and although i didn't tell her, i was appalled. I honestly despise the interior and i cant for the life of me see what other people see in it. The layout looks dated and tacky. It was very very similar to the layout of a car i drove a few times, the 2010 Ford Escape.

The center console was full of plastic and what seemed like a million buttons. It was so busy it made my head spin.

The shifter looks extremely out of place and high, almost like the positioning a minivan has.

The passenger's side dash has no curvature at all it reminded me again of the Ford escape. It was like no creativity was used to create integration of all the components.

The vents looked like they were ripped out of a for F150.

Lastly the nav screen positioning and quality looked no better than the Escape's; zero integration just looked like BestBuy installed an after market double din kit.

Am i crazy does this interior look like a bad Frankenstein of other bad interiors? Drives me nuts when i hear people say the interior is nice!!! To me the X5M blows it miles out of the water the E70 and the F15. I wouldn't knock anything else about the Porsche its just a pet peeve of mine to hear people say the interior is sooo nice, doesn't compute.

Pics
Cayenne 2015
Escape layout comparo
F150 Vent comparo
X5M 2015 comparo
X5M 2010 comparo

[dgoldenz]

It's only overpriced until you drive one, then you have to buy one.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Hehe, you might want to look into those numbers just a bit more. Like how Porsche "came up" with that 7:18.

Exactly same thing they did with the new 911 Carrera S. They said in press release it would do 7:34 around the ring. Well, SportAuto just backed that time up in an independent test. Guess we will have to be patient to find out the Turbo S is on another level, 20 sec faster around the ring. Turbo S is supercar quick. I can fanboy over the Z28 too, but I live in reality. It is amazing drivers car. But is also aided quite well by some of stickiest R compound tires on the market.

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by StatenEye

One thing that always kept me away from considering Porsche is the interior. A friend of mine got a Cayenne last year and although i didn't tell her, i was appalled. I honestly despise the interior and i cant for the life of me see what other people see in it. The layout looks dated and tacky. It was very very similar to the layout of a car i drove a few times, the 2010 Ford Escape.

The center console was full of plastic and what seemed like a million buttons. It was so busy it made my head spin.

The shifter looks extremely out of place and high, almost like the positioning a minivan has.

The passenger's side dash has no curvature at all it reminded me again of the Ford escape. It was like no creativity was used to create integration of all the components.

The vents looked like they were ripped out of a for F150.

Lastly the nav screen positioning and quality looked no better than the Escape's; zero integration just looked like BestBuy installed an after market double din kit.

Am i crazy does this interior look like a bad Frankenstein of other bad interiors? Drives me nuts when i hear people say the interior is nice!!! To me the X5M blows it miles out of the water the E70 and the F15. I wouldn't knock anything else about the Porsche its just a pet peeve of mine to hear people say the interior is sooo nice, doesn't compute.

Pics
Cayenne 2015
Escape layout comparo
F150 Vent comparo
X5M 2015 comparo
X5M 2010 comparo

See I don't think this way at all. I've been in the new x5M and walked away unimpressed with the quality for the price nor the chintzy design.
I owned a cayenne turbo and it was much nicer when I cross shopped the x5m. of those layouts, cayenne in garnet red and black takes the cake and the quality of the design is much better. No comparison to me even, the cayenne blows It out of the water and twice on Sunday.