new 997s tests faster than expected-a sports car bargin?

i wouldn't be so quick to trust car and driver. 4.1 to 60 is an unbelievable time. especially when porsche claims 4.6. wasn't C%D the mag that got 0-60 in 3.6 for a SL600?

anyway, i wouldn't call it a performance bargain as it does cost $80K base, and the C6 is $50K, compared to ferraris and lamborghinis it is however

 

Especially when the Z06 comes out....it won't look like a bargain when the Z06 competes with the Gallardo..

 

Why don't you post again in a couple of years about what a bargain your 997 is when it drops 25% in resale value. Granted, Porsches are great cars. I'm thinking about buying a 87-89 G-50. But Porsche is building too damn many new cars. Bummer.

Dale

 

No. Don't buy it unless you can get at least 10K off MSRP. These days the 911 depreciates like crazy.

10K off or no deal. Just wait a few months...

 

rear engine, rear wheel drive, if i remember correctly 911s have around average of 64% rear weight bias which means incredible traction - i would know, 1st and 2nd in my dad's C4S is scary

 

Back in '76 Porsche claimed 6.7 for the first 930. The real number was somewhere closer to 5.5-5.9. In 78 Porsche claimed ~6 flat and the car could do Five flat. Porsche has a long running record of under-estimating its car's performance. I think it has to do with them using the "normal" times as opposed to the clutch destroying launches car magazines do.

Dale, frankly, the depreciation will hit you harder and faster on the Corvette when compared to a Porsche.

 

good point, i tend to forget about that.

however, don't you think a manufacturer would try to state the lowest time possible, trying to be realisitc? you'd be surprised how many more people would buy a 997 if porsche stated 4.1 instead of 4.6 i believe. and you'd be surprised how many people choose cars to buy based on stupid 0-60 times and horsepower figures.

 

Oh, I agree 100%, except that a new vette will not cost you $80k+

 

Rumor has it Porsche does not abuse the cars for those peformance numbers. Seems plausable as most independant tests seem to suggest better numbers can be had, but hey it's all pointless benchracing imo, the "numbers" do not tell the whole story about a cars track abillity.
Spend an hour or two ripping it up a track and see which cars still manage to even stop.

 

I don't think we are the ones who should be questioning the policies of virtually the only truly independent and long-lasting Sports Car company in the world. Everyone else (such as Ferrari who can't resist overstating their horsepower) has been bought up by a larger car manufacturer while Porsche has successfully dealt with 54 years of good and bad times while staying independent.

 

Don't get me wrong I love the 911 but the new C6 is the best value for your money.
The porsche is way better built. Inside and out.
But when they come out with a 500+hp Z06 in 2006 it will be the best bang for the buck ever

 

In the UK I dont think their having much of a problem selling them

Seems like every1 has a 911. Partly what put me off. Along with the imminent arrival of the 997TT.

 

Its really quite simple. Porsche quotes the 0 -100 Kph time which is really 62.5mph - so there is your difference. Besides Porsche are very conservative in both their quoted power outputs and perfromance times - unlike a certain Italian Manufacturer...............

 

Kind of makes you long for the 997 Turbo doesn't it?

/Peter

 

Not to mention being the most profitable car company in the world...

Hmmm, sell LESS cars? What a GREAT idea. lol Not.

I don't think any Ferrari (or is that Fiat?) owner can question Porsche's business strategy.

 

Umm...you actually think that 2.5 mph is the difference? Please tell me you're joking.

 

The 2.5 MPH may be a little part of it, but the fact exists EVERY car mag that ever tests a Porsche beats factory stated acceleration numbers, usually by a significant amount. Porsche is just conservative on their stated numbers, for who knows what reason.

 

Ya everyone gives crap for everything, sports car (midlife crisis), S.U.V. (gas guzzler), small car (unsafe for your family).

You can't win unless you drive a mini van (boring). Oh well.
I love the C5's and C6's, but I can imagine the crap I would get if I got one,

 

I believe the standard C6 coupe has a starting price of 44k. A bargain indeed.

As far as factory performance figures, they can be fairly conservative in many cases. So the 911 going faster than Porsche stated is no real surprise.

 

Car and driver use a mathmatical program to restandardize their performance data to what they consider 'normal' elevation, pressure, temp, etc. That is why their data can be really messed up. The Renntech SL600 for example, only clocks after a number of tests a 3.9 to 60, and that car has much more hp then the stock. They also got a 4.5 to 60 for a NSX targa. (should be 4.8-9)

I do not trust C&D. R&T is a little better for numbers, IMO.

 

I don't recall for sure, but wasn't all official Porsche accel. times recorded with 2 people on board and with the gas tank 1/4 or 1/2 full or something like that? I don't recall what all of the major mags did either.