did you guys read the $20K showdown in Excellence?
 

turns out the boxster had a coolant leak out of it as well, damn thats common, even while testing the car for a magazine.
2nd place is not all THAT bad hehehe.

Great article, and even though it "placed 2nd" the writer basically said the Boxster would be his personal choice.

He made it seem the Boxster was going to win until the end. Good article.

Coolant leak? As is coolant comming from the overflow hose beneath the car? Or something else?

the author is one of those heritage guys, i don't understand the rewarding to drive part alot of ppl say when buying a 911, unless you are tracking it, the majority of guys would spin their cars into a curb in the real world. i can see a new 911 with psm easily winning a comparision with a boxster but an old 911 with old ac and old power steering would be a chore to use.

I was surprised he picked the 911. If I want a workout on a twisty road, I'll ride my bicycle. For driving, the Box is the bomb.

great article
 

come on guys, did you think for a minute that they would pick ANYTHING that wasn't a 911? Pleeze. Its rigged. Always will be too. Nothing can be better than a 911, didn't ya know?

The thing I found interesting is, originally I wanted a 968. I had wanted a 968 for a long time. I think it is the best looking Porsche, period. I love the rear fender flares and the pop up headlights. I almost bought one, a 93 horizon blue coupe with 31k miles, I still kinda of wish I had bought it. It test drove very well I thought.

Then I test drove a Boxster, and I did want a cab, and the 968 cabs ruin the look of the car. Plus the Box is newer, and it also has smashing looks. But they really pissed all over the 968 in the article. I had two pretty long test drives in them, and thought it was a pretty nice handling car, and the big 4 cyl was a very nice, smooth engine. I think the 968 got a bad rap in the article.

Call me a cynic, but the Excellence dudes know on which side their bread is buttered. Look at the advertising in the magazine. Probably 80% of it has to do with stuff you can buy for your air-cooled 911.

yea it was coming from the overflow hose beneath the car.

and yes the whole way trough reading this i tought the box will win, but then again, based on the driving experience only they should have picked the box, not a 911 based on its heritage.
thats where its kinda weird, you may pick another car because of the name or something along those lines and not pick another car that is clearly better just because its a lower model, even though that may be a better car.

Well I have to say that Excellence have on more than one or 20 ocassions outright written that the engine choices in the Boxster and Cayman were held back to ensure that 911 had the most power. So you can't really say they tow the company line completely.
But it would be foolish to think that there wouldn't be a ton of hate mail if anything other than the rear engined choice was picked.
I once started a poll on Rennlist once asking if a mid engine option was possible for the 997 would they in fact check that box. 3/4's of non-GT3/2 911 owners said no they would not choose a mid engine set up while 3/4's of the higher end 911 said they would. There is definitely a loyalty factor(y) going on there...

When confronted with a clean sheet of paper for a performance/racing car, Porsche, along with just about every other manufacturer, invariably chooses the mid-engine configuration. Porsche has clung to the rear-engine configuration in their 911 GT racing cars for marketing reasons, not technical or engineering reasons.
In terms of pure transportation device packaging, the two configurations that make the most sense are front engine/front wheel drive, and rear engine/rear wheel drive. Once the technology for both steering and power delivery was available, front/front has dominated the market, principally because it packages all of the mechanical operations, including cooling, into one end of the car. leaving the rest for cargo. Rear/rear does the same thing, as long as you have an air cooled engine that doesn't require radiators to be mounted 10 feet from the motor and all of the consequent plumbing.
The mid-engine configuration is a compromise heavily weighted in the direction of pure performance. One of the factors that Porsche struggled with in designing the Boxster was how and where to place big enough radiators to cool the engine adequately.

well I'm not 911 apologist but the rear engined pcar's resume in racing is long with many mid-engined casualties in its wake.
There are some big advantages to having the engine in the back like big time track out acceleration only possible because of unparalleled grip allowed by having so much weight over the rear wheels. Many mid engine cars have gone up against the 911 most have failed to beat Porsche in endurance racing.
BUT**This year the FIA GT championship goes to an all sprint race (except for 24h LeMans) schedule so the Mid engine Ferrari F430 will go up against the rear engine 911's without the enourmous advantage Porsche engines have enjoyed in longer-than-sprint-length races due to their bullet proof reliability over the Italians.
We shall see which is better mid or rear.

it will be interesting to see if the improvements in the gt3 rsr will be enough to beat the ferrari. It will be even more interesting to see what Porsche does if they lose a bunch of races and the constructors title.

Would that spell the doom of the rear engined Porsche? It would be hard for Porsche to deal with getting their butts kicked over and over.

At least they admitted the 2.5 Boxster is not a "no go showboat".

Is there anyone that could send me a copy of this article, I would love to read it !

I just subscribed to Excellence a couple of weeks ago, but have not yet received a copy, and this article is not posted on their website :(

TIA !

Nick

"Would that spell the doom of the rear engined Porsche? It would be hard for Porsche to deal with getting their butts kicked over and over."

Knowing Porshce, they would likely find another series to race in where they don't lose. Or start their own!

I think that's called "Porsche Cup". There are similar series for Ferraris, Mini Coopers, Mazda Miatas, etc, ad nauseum.
I remember years ago when I was running SCCA Solo II, they added the Caterham 7 to the A Stock class to run against the 'Vettes. One of them showed up at a local event and, of course, beat the crap out of all the 'Vettes. Overnight the A Stock entry list went from having a dozen Corvettes to one or two. Nobody likes to have an upstart outsider come in and start mucking up the works in their sandbox.
Porsche, it seems to me, is more tolerant of competition in the classes they run in than most manufacturers. Probably because they have a long history of using racing as a central part of the marketing of their cars, so as a company they have a greater committment to racing.

^ that's exactly what I thought of "start their own series" yeah its called Porsche Cup. BTW, the 996 GT3 beat the 997 GT3 in several events last year. Which makes sense since it takes a new model about a season to catch up to a tweaked previous year model. A big reason why allot of 996 GT3 track junkies aren't diving into a 997 GT3 for the big jump in price and non-existent performance advantage over a well modified 996 GT3 that is taking a beating in resale, well this seems to be the case with all PCars minus the CaymanS and the limited production RSR GT3.

Now the only problem is finding if the Speed Channell will even cover the FIA GT races. I would be surprised if Porsche came out on top. The Ferraris were the benchmark on pace and if not for some better team management (Ferrari drivers crashing into each other) Porsche would have been beaten worse.

ferarri is going to eat porsche's lunch until porsches go to a mid engine design, there is no subsitute for displacement or placement. they have the right idea with the cayman, but if they wanted to keep up the the competition they would put a v8 in there. when i can afford to buy a used bmw 5 series cash, i'm trading in my beloved boxster for a family car with a v8. back to to subject, i still think this article is toilet paper because they dissed the 968, the 968 is one of the best handling cars on the road, even when compared to boxster and for sure an old 911. i bet this pissed off alot of 944/968 owners who hate the boxster.

99% of the article hinted and pointed to the Boxster as the winner. The final decision (911) did not follow from the text.

Just a quick hello...
 

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...

:cheers:

Pete Stout
Editor, Excellence Magazine

Pete, thanks for the note. The article was great and everyone could draw their own conclusions. I never understood how anyone could hate a car, much less a Porsche, so I always find any hate mail surprising.

The 911 should not have been allowed to have S Car Go suspension modifications to keep it a fair comparison. Yeah of course it has more grunt than a 2.5 boxster, let me get in on the next trip and give me an S to drive, I'll spank both of the other vehicles.

Why shouldn't the 911 have been allowed to go to S Car Go, exactly? It's a 10-year older sports car based on (and still VERY close to) a design that's 30+ years older than the 986. :confused:

The 911 benefitted from re-valved Bilsteins a lowered ride height, and a performance alignment. And that's about it and just about exactly what the 986 had -- re-valved Bilsteins, stiffer springs, bigger anti-roll bars, a (slightly) lowered ride height, and a (semi) performance alignment. Actually, the 986 is sounding a little more "prepared" to me, all of a sudden. Plus, there's the small matter of fresh 225s/265s on 18x8s and 18x10s on the Box and old, hard 205s/225s on 16x6s and 16x8s the 911.

The 911 had (a little) more grunt, but not more pace. The two cars were neck and neck in most situations, especially whenever the 2.5 could take advantage of its second-gear ratio. A lot of 911 3.2 owners would have been very discouraged to see the 2.5 so large in their mirrors so much of the time. The 911 had a bit more power, but it also weighed within one pound of the Box -- a point emphasized in the article.

I dunno, you guys can Monday morning quarterback me all you wish (and, believe me, the 968 crew has -- and fairly so), but I am comfortable with the 986 and 911 I chose. Any advantage in one area was canceled out in another. Sadly, the 968 was another matter....

Finally, 986S 3.2 doesn't compute in the pricing sweet spot -- and I've got to be extraordinarily careful about who comes out on these things. As I'm sure you'll understand, anybody with "something to prove" on the road is automatically out. Then you work in logistics, weather, etc. and it gets, well, interesting! :rolleyes:

I don't mind criticism, as we're certainly nothing more than a human enterprise, but I can't agree with your assertions.

pete

All very interesting commentary. It would have been interesting to see how things would've stacked up on a closed circuit track between the 3.

pete, thx for chiming in here.

i LOVED the article, i just read it and i was cheering for 986, but i kinda knew it wasnt gonna win, but its great to see that a 'top line 986 S " wasnt used, but a simple 2.5

i read it on the train (best train ride so far heheh) :cheers:

One only has to look at Ferdie Piech to understand Porsche, its culture and its direction. And that direction is BACK to the future. Excellence mag is the saddest shill rag I have ever read.

The 911 and its back ass engine placement will still be the favorite son of Porsche when I am long gone dead.

For those of you who like this stuff, follow the VW saga. Bernie was just fired at VW because, guess what, Piech is back in charge. You cannot have anyone in the company that might disagree with him.

What a Palooka.

Off this mornings wire.




"A management shake-up at Volkswagen AG is putting more power in the hands of its engineering-minded new chief executive officer, Martin Winterkorn, and raising concerns among investors about how aggressively Europe's largest auto maker will continue to cut costs.


Europe's largest auto maker by vehicles sold said yesterday that the head of its core VW brand, Wolfgang Bernhard, would leave the company "by mutual consent" effective Jan. 31, less than two years after taking office and roughly two months after then-CEO Bernd Pischetsrieder abruptly resigned. Mr. Pischetsrieder had clashed with Volkswagen Chairman Ferdinand Piëch over the company's strategy and governance.

Mr. Winterkorn, who officially became CEO of Volkswagen Jan. 1, couldn't be reached to comment and has said little publicly about his plans for leading the company. While Mr. Winterkorn has garnered praise for increasing Audi's sales in recent years, investors question whether he will bring the same energy to cost cutting as Mr. Bernhard, who had taken a prominent role in the effort.

Volkswagen said in a statement yesterday that its new management structure "opens the way for greater synergies" within the company. An aide at the company's communications department said its representatives were traveling back to Germany from the North American International Auto Show in Detroit and weren't available to comment.

Mr. Winterkorn will now lead the VW brand and oversee research and development for the company. Volkswagen also reorganized its brands, putting luxury nameplates Audi, Bentley, Bugatti and Lamborghini together in one division, and mass-market brands VW, Seat and Skoda in another.

IN TRANSITION


• The Situation: Wolfgang Bernhard, who oversaw Volkswagen's biggest brand, departs the company, giving a greater role to Chief Executive Martin Winterkorn.

• What Matters to Investors: Some question whether Mr. Winterkorn will be as effective in cutting costs.

• The Bottom Line: Volkswagen must bring down its costs amid tough competition from other auto makers.

The new structure is the latest sign of the rising influence at Volkswagen of its biggest shareholder, German sports-car maker Porsche AG, and of Mr. Piëch, who is a member of the family that controls Porsche.

Earlier in the week at the Detroit auto show, Porsche CEO Wendelin Wiedeking, a close ally of Mr. Piëch and a member of Volkswagen's board, made clear he would push for "a lot of changes" at Volkswagen. He described VW as a "gold mine" and said he would demand productivity improvements. "I know how to make money," Mr. Wiedeking told reporters.

People familiar with the matter say Porsche officials and Mr. Piëch had argued in favor of the management shake-up, claiming it would promote more sharing of engines and other components between its brands.


As head of the VW brand, Mr. Winterkorn will face major challenges, such as turning around its unprofitable U.S. operations, shoring up its underperforming Chinese business and maintaining its competitiveness against leaner rivals, such as Toyota Motor Corp. At some of VW's German plants, it takes twice as many hours of labor to assemble a car as some rivals' plants require.

Under Mr. Pischetsrieder and his handpicked lieutenant, Mr. Bernhard, the company in recent months has pursued a vast restructuring intended to bolster its profit, which has fallen sharply since the early 2000s. The program involves the elimination of as many as 20,000 jobs, mainly in Germany, over several years; an extension of work hours without pay increases; and steering the VW brand back to its roots as a maker of affordable "people's cars." VW ran into trouble a few years ago when it launched a luxury sedan that flopped.

With Mr. Bernhard out, some investors worry the company's progress on those fronts may stall. One source of concern is that Mr. Winterkorn played a prominent role in several projects that have contributed to the VW brand's woes, including the ill-fated $68,000 VW Phaeton sedan. Sales were so disappointing that Mr. Bernhard ordered the luxury car pulled from the U.S. market in 2005.

Mr. Winterkorn's "track record on cost reduction is much less convincing than that of Dr. Bernhard," said Stephen Cheetham, an analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein Ltd. in London. "What this [shake-up] shows is that Volkswagen has reached the high-water mark of its restructuring. Investors should be extremely cautious."

The company said that it also set aside a new seat on its management board overseeing its sales activities and that it would create a new management post overseeing companywide production, to be filled by Jochem Heizmann, formerly head of production at Audi. The company said the sales post would be filled "at a later date." The management board runs the company's day-to-day operations.

It remains unclear where Mr. Bernhard will go now. Only 46 years old, he was well-known even before joining Volkswagen for leading a major restructuring of DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler division in the early 2000s, before a strategic dispute with his boss, then-CEO Jürgen Schrempp, resulted in his departure from the company. Mr. Bernhard couldn't be reached to comment yesterday."

You seem to be saying the age of the 911 makes it fair to modify it to compete, that changes the parameters of the comparison. Unless I misread the article, the Boxster was bone stock. I think it's totally untrue to give the edge to the Boxster simply because it's newer, or to insinuate the older car cannot keep pace due to it's age.. I'll bet there are some vintage Ferrari's out there that would need no tweaks to show all three of these cars the short way around the track. For that matter, ask any 944 owner how many times they have taught an eclipse or some other Jap wanna be the short way through the curve much to the surprise of the owner of the newer sports car.

I haven't read the article but I have to wonder how many of you have actually driven an 80s air cooled 911. There's no question that you're in a car meant for people who love to be connected to the machine. Light weight, manual steering, a screaming engine that needs to be rev'ed all make for a pure direct communication driving experience that the Boxster can't match.

Cars have evolved to add more safety, luxury, weight and power. The Boxster is from a more modern era where a direct line of communication with the vehicle is much more muted. Acceleration and cornering performance have dramatically improved but the driving experience certainly hasn't.

When I get behind the wheel of my sports car, I don't time how fast I can get through my favorite stretch of road, I enjoy the experience and let time melt away.

The 81 3.2 SC is one of the world's greatest driver's cars, period.

My brother had a 1973 air cooled 911. It was a great automobile, no arguement about that. Everyone has their favorites, which is great, it's what makes the world go around. Truthfully, I could push my 944 through a corner much faster than I would ever have been comfortable doing in the 911. Go into a corner with a 911 agressively and you better not chicken out and back off, if you do, you will see more doughnuts than Tim Horton's..

My definition of fun. Get the heart rate up and enjoy the drive!

My 986 S can easily outrun the 911 SC that I mentioned, but that doesn't make it more fun to drive.

blue2000,
very true all modern Pcars are disconnected in comparision to the air cooled Porsches. I've heard GT3 owners say they felt their car was the LEAST disconnected, interesting since that infers even a raw GT3 is still not 'connected'

The older 911's like the famous 73 rs have that 'closest thing to a go kart' feel
But from my exprience you don't have to stay within the Pcar brand to feel planted to the ground. Many cars out there to give you that feel from old Lotus Elan to its modern day copy cat the Mazda Miata. Triumphs, old RX7's and tons of old BMW's...none with the engine in the wrong place and no puddles underneath.

If you're saying that other manufactures haven't gone the same way as Porsche, I disagree.

I think this statement reflects more about you than the magazine. But, at least I know where I'm not welcome.

I'll just have to hope a few of you enjoyed the reading, as it seems some did.

Cheers...

pete

Pete, while I'm just another poor poster on this forum, I for one am overjoyed to know that you read the endless list of opinions and conjectures that appear every day. Or maybe you just read the stuff related to Excellence??? In any event, it's nice to know the grumps and complaints don't just disappear into the internet void. Who knows, maybe some of our opinions even get communicated back to Porsche. Maybe? Huh?
I also have to disagree with Brucelee. I think Excellence is by far the best of the Porsche marque mags I have seen. Certainly much better than the other US and UK competitors.
Accusing Excellence of being a "shill rag" is a little over the top. It's a magazine about Porsche, what would anybody expect? If you want to read a shill rag, pick up a copy of Christophorus some time.

pete, I haven't read your magazine but was actually impressed that you were on here as well.....I wouldn't let that opinion make you feel unwelcome....he's kind of the owner, but man oh man I can say we all don't agree with his opinion....on many things.....hopefully you'll stick around and be part of the group in the future

:cheers:

Mmmnnnn... white/black 987 on S 18s with no PASM? Tasty!!!!! :dance:

If you haven't read the magazine, what may be our best issue in the 10 years I've been here is on newsstands now, all 228 pages of it for $5. Decide for yourself if it's any good or not.

Within, you can read the story we're talking about here as well as a Carrera GT vs. 911 GT1 Evo street vs. the 959S -- and a lot more. As well as industry leader's opinions on what Excellence is and has been.

But then, you can read both of those articles on our website for free: www.excellence-mag.com

Finally, my guess is that Boxsters will be the way forward for an increasing segment of the Porsche community. Personally, I think a garage with a 986 or 987 and an earlier Porsche is the way to go -- and I am seeing more readers follow this road. So we'll be featuring more 986 content as time moves forward.

Oh, and Ronzi, you'd be surprised how much I lurk on the various P-car web forums. I learn a lot there about the cars and even more about the people who love them as I do, though such info must often be taken with a grain of salt. I'm also usually notified when some disparaging remarks are made about the mag. Those are fine (and often helpful!!!) -- so long as they're factual.

I know that Porsche AG keeps an eye on the forums, as well, and suspect that the 997 Turbo reflects some of the comments it's seen online.

:cheers:

pete

Exactly. While I'm not extremely active in the local PCA chapter, I do notice that many owners of '80s and '90s 911s are moving into the 986/987 cars.
What's not to like? You get a sports car with all the mod cons, and a Porsche badge to boot.

911 gee what a coincidence- Shocking!!
 

Is all in the cachet. The 911 has it and the Boxster does not. Porsche as many have stated will modify the 911 adnaseum till doomsday. No matter how you slice that car it is a VW on steroids. The Ferrari 430 Modena has clocked the 911 countless times and will continue to do so in the racing series televised by Speedvision. The 911 brew is elitest snobs that look down at anything that is not a 911. As a matter of fact they don't even acknowledge you as if the Boxster drivers were some sort of subhuman species. The Boxster is a quantum leap over the 911 Steredzoid. Design wise handling and fun to drive there no car that can top the Boxster. I was very happy and pleased when the Cayman beat the 911 time in N-ring. Oops! Imagine if the Boxster and Cayman had the same engines as the 911, they would from fast to super rediculous fast in a jiffy.