Kill the 911?

I agree with everything you said. My point is that you can honor the 911 and the company that makes it (see my previous posts on this thread) whilst not disrespecting different vehicles.

 

997S weights 3,131 lbs and with PDK is 3,219.


Cayman is 2932 lbs and with PDK is 2998.

So weight differences are 199 lbs or 221lbs both with PDK, not much weight difference between the two for me to pick a Cayman over a 911.

 

Point well made....porsche has the highest profit margins of any mass produced cars and the 911 has the highest profit margin of...and they sell more 911s than caymans and boxster by a large margin...porsche will stop making the 911 when people stop buying them...after all, they are in business to make money and the 911 does that very well for them.....

 

just bought a new 911 turbo to replace a c4s; great all-around GT car

 

Panamera just got here and its being shown the door ?
That car is just but ugly.

I'm convinced Ruf was told by Porsche not to do a super-Cayman when it designed its own supercar. So they had to redesign it from the A pillar back. It still is mid-engined. What does that tell you about a rear engined design ?

A 911 is still a great used car bargain after it has depreciated. Reasonably fast and economical, track worthy, and you get most of your money back on resale if you pick the right one. But a 450 HP twin turbo Cayman would skin it alive.

 

Big time opportunity.
I know a fellow that spent lots of time developing a NSX turbo kit to compete against other NSX turbo and supercharger kits.
Shoulda done a Cayman kit.
But I think a hit would be a Aston-Matrin V-8 Vantage turbo kit. That car is anemic in its class.

 

... that it's nostalgic.

Don't get me wrong, I understand why Porsche went rear-engined back in the 1940s and then with the 911 in the 1960s -- because they were a small company and needed to stick with their basic design for cost reasons (and also because they had only one model in the company line, and probably didn't want to tamper with the formula).

And, I love the early 911s, up to 1974. They sound great, are fun to drive, and frankly didn't have Ferrari-type horsepower so you probably wouldn't get killed when the car oversteered.

But by the 1980s Porsche was not a tiny, cash-strapped company, and the expensive Turbo was pushing 280+ bhp.

Maybe Porsche had just given up on the 911, and pursued the 924/944 and 928 lines, so the fact that the 911 was rear-engined was basically shelved.

 

There's a supercharger kit for 545hp, $30k installed. What they should offer is pre-made cars that are already modified so that you can roll that into the financed price of a used Vantage for ~$100k.

http://www.esxmotorsports.com/info/?id=5950

 

Normally aspirated 997s are under 3,200 pounds, not 3,500, and are definitely "sports cars"...my GT3 clocks in at under 3,100 pounds dry, and although it's definitely less cushy than a Carrera, the latter is no "GT" in my book.

 

I even posted the weight differences on my post number 52.

The weight differences are not much and I don't think people can tell the difference. The main difference is the rear engine feel to mid engine feel. There are drivers in 911 3.2 that will run circles around a Cayman in a track if such driver isn't a really good and fast. Worry about your skills first and progress into a faster car after you master your present one.

 

The Cayman is a nice car, but I would never buy anything but the 911.

 

Killing the 911 is like killing the corvette or the viper. It will be a sad day

 

Even my wife and kids would rather drive a 911 over the Cayman.... and they have been through some pretty advanced Porsche training, including the Masters Program and Ice driving in Finland (Camp4).

I wanted to buy my wife a Cayman when it was first introduced, and also suggested it to my kids.. the response?

The 911 is the car they want (and have) right out of the box.

Telling, don't you think!

 

Once you've had a 911 and leave you will come back. P's really take a hit with depreciation though. Buy used at a great price and you've got the perfect 911.

 

Only the new water cooled ones take that whipping. Classic 911's with air cooled engines hold their desirability and value pretty well.

 

I rather like the looks of the newest (997) 911. It has very clean, very simple lines (especially if it doesn't have flares), and looks great in darker colors.

It is funny. Back when the Cayman was released, one of the first things folks who raced their cars noted was what others here have observed -- with a few more hp and some of the 'massaging' that the 911 gets, the Cayman would be a faster race car. And so Porsche did what everyone expected: gave the Cayman a smaller motor, axed the limited slip diff, and generally kept most of the 'go fast' bits for the 911.

But of course, the business of selling cars isn't always about making the fastest car. The 911's iconic status and value to the brand are unquestioned. (And, let's face it, for a 'backwards' car, it hasn't done at all poorly on the race circuit). As is the fact that the vast majority of 911s (or Caymans) won't ever be pushed terribly hard.

And when it comes to 'axe-ing' the 911, I'll let the Germans have the last word:

"Das darf nicht wahr sein"

(That cannot be)

 

I agree, although even in white it looks nice.

And, while the softtops don't usually work well with these cars, I think the 997 cabriolet may be the first convertible 911 that I'd describe as seriously good looking.

 

Bullfighter, yet further evidence you're a man with great taste.

 

Or............

E: The 911 was already killed in 1998

 

Actually, it died of natural causes in 1989.

Dale

 

Actually, it died in 1974 from a NHTSA death panel.

 

You guys are brutal. The 1974-1977 Fed bumper car wasn't very attractive and had those head stud problems.

But the 1978-1983 911SC and the 1984-1989 Carrera proved to be a very durable car. I've seen some driven for 300K miles. I'd like to have a 1988 911 Club Sport (340 made).

The 1990-1994 911 (964) has a great reputation. I'd like a 1992-1993 RS America Coupe (701 built).

The 1995-1998 911 (993) has kept its value rather well. I'd like a 1997-1998 911S.

The water-cooled cars haven't done well in the used car market, but the GT3, GT3R, or the GT3 Cup car would fit in my garage.

 

my .02 having owned both a Cayman S as well as 911 C2S and turbo models ...

the Cayman is a better drivers car for sure. If it had more power the only reason to buy a 911 is for a little more room, back seats, or dare I say status of owning the top of the range.

 

I agree. The 911 has become..."Lexus like" comfort, status, and luxury, for the sports car. The Cayman still feels like a go-cart...if you want to feel the road (just needs more HP).

Anyone know if this story is true?
Back when the Cayman first came out.... it placed 4th in The 24 Hours Nürburgring endurance race in 2007. A little to close for comfort for the 911. So Porsche went out and paid-off these private teams (giving them cheap 911's and plenty of race support) to get the Caymans off the track.

2007 24 Hours of Nurburgring- results
1 Porsche 911 GT3 RSR 112 18:01:30.009
2 Dodge Viper GTS-R 111 18:08:00.157
3 Porsche GT3 RSR 111 18:13:18.990
4 Porsche Cayman 108 18:16:16.999
6 Porsche 997 RSR 104 18:06:02.248
7 Porsche RGT 103 18:12:57.052
11 Porsche 996 GT3 Cup 100 18:12:20.788
12 Porsche 997 RSR 100 18:12:26.365
16 Porsche 997 GT3 Cup 99 18:13:43.647

.

 

I'd believe it!