987 vs 986 - Zowie!

[JoeFromPA]

A few thoughts:

1. More gears does not equal more likely to break. If you think otherwise, I guess we see alot more porsche gearbox problems since the 6-speed came out in the 911? Wait, we see less? How could that be?

2. Advancements in engine output go far beyond maximum output. Porsche makes engines with broader torque curves now than ever before - overall, a driver will experience more power at far more times than ever before. Look at in-gear acceleration times for good examples

3. Some amount of people, especially Porsche and BMW owners, will always want to go back to a "more visceral" experience. The air-cooled vs. the water-cooled crowd. The manual tranmission vs. PDK/DSG/etc. crowd. The e30 m3 against ANY CAR EVER MADE crowd. Etc.

There's nothing wrong with that. I fall into the middle myself. That being said, i rarely see the "visceral" crowd putting 10-20k miles a year on their "visceral" car of choice.

As each generation of cars come, they often exchange some visceral for some comfort. But, using the boxster or 911 as an example, usually it comes with a substantial increase in performance potential for a small decrease in subjective feel.

I haven't driven the 987 yet, but I look forward to it. However, one last note for those who will test drive one... remember not to confuse "feel" for "my 99 has a worn out motor mounts, cracked suspension bushings, and rock hard worn down summer tires, and I FEEL alot more of the road than this 987".

[insite]

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

i rarely see the "visceral" crowd putting 10-20k miles a year on their "visceral" car of choice.

bingo! there's only so visceral a road car can be; at some point, it becomes a toy & only a toy.

[stephen wilson]

Agreed. I've decided the '65 Mustang I'm restoring is a bit too much, with no power anything, or A/C, which means I'll never get my wife to go anywhere in it.

[insite]

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

Agreed. I've decided the '65 Mustang I'm restoring is a bit too much, with no power anything, or A/C, which means I'll never get my wife to go anywhere in it.

haha my wife has a VERY high tolerance for my......preferences. my car has no AC, no radio, racing seats, race suspension, no sound deadening, and a cat-less race exhaust. she STILL goes for rides. i will say, though, the cat bypass pipes ALMOST put her over the edge. they are very, very loud.

[stephen wilson]

That's impressive. I'm just happy my wife "lets" me have my toys.

[JoeFromPA]

My wife's tolerance depends upon whether or not she's driving.

If she's driving, she's far more likely to enjoy the sometimes stiff ride, the power, any sound, etc.

For example (a poor example, but an example): I let her drive it for the first time when she got in the boxster after I removed the intake snorkel. Top down.

She commented on how much she enjoyed the growl/purr behind her ear when she gave it some throttle around 2800 rpms.

Now she gets a kick out of it every time, rather than if I had driven the first time she likely would've said "So what, it's just more noise."

[Overdrive]

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

My wife's tolerance depends upon whether or not she's driving.

If she's driving, she's far more likely to enjoy the sometimes stiff ride, the power, any sound, etc.

For example (a poor example, but an example): I let her drive it for the first time when she got in the boxster after I removed the intake snorkel. Top down.

She commented on how much she enjoyed the growl/purr behind her ear when she gave it some throttle around 2800 rpms.

Now she gets a kick out of it every time, rather than if I had driven the first time she likely would've said "So what, it's just more noise."

Funny how that psychology works out, eh?

I got a kick out of that, Joe, because there's no denying the truth of how that could have worked out differently.