Just to let you know, Excellence has long called it as it sees it. The day we don't, or can't, is the day I'll need to find new work.
The 986 would have won if it had deserved to. And it turned out to be *this* close. If there is any car that I expected to win this comparo going in, it was the 986, even in 2.5 trim. It's just SUCH a great car, and one that's sorely underestimated in the Porsche world. Then again, the 968 and 911 3.2 aren't chopped liver.
As the test approached, I decided to go in with a blank slate, hoping to watch each car impress me with its talents and disappoint me with its drawbacks. All three did just that, and the pluses and minuses are noted (at length) in the (long) article.
In the end, the 911 was the one that pulled harder at my heartstrings on those roads over those two days. There is something about a car that "rewards" you vs. one that's simply very easy to drive and satisfying. 911 3.2 and 986 2.5 illustrate this, but to take it out of the "heritage" argument, so does a 996 Turbo and 996 GT3. The same goes for 997 Turbo and 997 GT3. Both models are incredibly fast, and most drivers will be quicker over a given road (and even a given track, in many instances) in the easier to drive fast Turbo. The GT3, while more challenging to drive, will be more fun and, yes, more rewarding. I've never heard a driver who has driven both put it otherwise.
For everyday use, the Turbo is a better pick than the GT3 for most. The same can be said for 986 2.5 vs. 911 3.2.
And I'm neither a "heritage" guy nor a 911 apologist. I like 'em all, from 356 to 987. I do, however, believe in the mid-engined platform for Porsches. There are two, a 914 and a 986, in my own garage as proof, this after owning a nice older 911 and spending countless miles in new ones. So I am primarily a mid-engined guy who has learned to love the 911's entertaining handling and exploit its advantage on the way out of turns.
But my favorite factory car, by far, isn't a 911. It's the Carrera GT... sort of an uber Boxster, if you will.
Also, remember that our test was not an "all-around" comparo — it was about driving the cars hard on challenging backroads. In the end, as good as the 968 was (it came very close to matching pace among four different drivers), the test came down to 986 vs. 911 and it was so very, very close that *I* didn't know which car to pick until that final sunset pic was snapped.
Enter daily driving or utility in the mix and the 911's wafer-thin advantage would go poof! and the 968 might re-enter the game. On those roads, though, what amazed me most was just how fast that 911 was despite its torsion-bar suspension and old, hard 205s and 225s — and how fun it was.
The 986 was a better car, but the 911 was a bigger thrill.
That last couple of paragraphs can be read a couple of ways (as many things can), but a careful reading will reveal a subtle message meant to boost the 986's place in the heritage of Porsche. The 986 more closely resembles the concept Ferry dreamed up (Porsche "No. 1") than the one he decided was a more profitable one (356 > 911).
Don't get me wrong, I love Boxsters (and 356s, 914s, 911s, C-GTs, 964s, 993s, 996s, 951s, 968s, and on, and on) -- but on those two days, the 911 shocked me with its goodness and character. Had you been there (with an open mind) I think it might have shocked you, too.
Oh, and about hate mail... I was damned no matter which car I chose. In this case, I hurt a lot of feelings among 968 owners. But if we're not scared to hurt Porsche AG's feelings (have you checked our repeated criticism of PASM in 997s?!?) then we can't be scared to tell it like we see it to readers, too.
Best wishes — and keep on enjoying your Porsches, which unquestionably benefit from the best mechanical layout for handling performance. If they didn't, I think F1 and prototype race cars would look a little different than they do...
Pete Stout
Editor, Excellence Magazine