Crown

I heard something about upcoming Cayman RS,what do You think about it?

I think their's a topic on this already, and I hope it is made.

Quote:
m a t r i x said:
I heard something about upcoming Cayman RS,what do You think about it?

Nothing. The Cayman RS or CS is just a fantasy some people have and they can't let go. As far as I heard, there may be a Cayman Turbo sometimes in the far future and of course the cheaper Cayman (non S) which is due around next year (if the Cayman S sells VERY VERY well, it may be delayed for another year). The Cayman Turbo is still undergoing testing as far as rumours go and of course it can't be excluded that Porsche will offer a sporty Cayman version in a few years depending on the success of the Cayman. It would be dumb to exclude a Cayman RS/CS completely from Porsche's future schedule but right now, I don't see it happening. Again I have to tell you guys: the Cayman S is a Boxster Coupe, this car never has been developped for racing, not even clubracing. But of course Porsche will be intelligent enough to change their Cayman strategy in the future if the car is a huge success and if it doesn't hurt the other sportscar sales too much.

Just let's wait and see.

Never miss the chance do you?

It's getting very boring

Boxster Coupe with more power, lower weight, stiffer setup,lower drag, quicker round the track and only 1 second behind the 997 from o-125 based on the worse figures you could find and posted recently

Countless reviews and independant hard data to say otherwise ,but Of course it's only a Boxster with a fixed roof

Keep grinding that axe

Quote:
Again I have to tell you guys: the Cayman S is a Boxster Coupe, this car never has been developped for racing, not even clubracing.

Agreed, but what is a 996/997 other than a Boxster with it's engine turned around backwards, two rear seats and a multilink rear suspension (developed, by the way, to exorsize the, shall we say, less than optimal handling traits of the rear engine configuration). Fact is, there is so much commonality between the Porsche sports models, it's absurd to think Carreras are superior to Boxsters/Caymans, or visa-versa, unless you want to just talk specific performance statistics. Like any product, the core cars are all engineered to meet specific requirements established by the Porsche product planning/marketing/business development people. They are the ones who decide the pecking order of the cars; the engineers can easily make changes to each model to change that pecking order. With this in mind, I don't think anyone with any reasonable amount of engineering/vehicle dynamics knowledge would argue the fact that a mid-engine vehicle configuration is superior to a rear engine vehicle configuration. It just seems that Porsche wants it's rear engine cars to lead the pack of their conventional road cars (behind the mid-engine Carrera GT).

Regarding the Cayman not being developed as a race car; the only Porsche model (in recent years) developed as a race car is the Carrera GT. 996/997 road cars were not developed as race cars; Porsche took the road cars and modified them to become race cars, something they could easily do with the Boxster/Cayman, if they so desired.

Quote:
Geza said:
Agreed, but what is a 996/997 other than a Boxster with it's engine turned around backwards, two rear seats and a multilink rear suspension (developed, by the way, to exorsize the, shall we say, less than optimal handling traits of the rear engine configuration). Fact is, there is so much commonality between the Porsche sports models, it's absurd to think Carreras are superior to Boxsters/Caymans, or visa-versa, unless you want to just talk specific performance statistics. Like any product, the core cars are all engineered to meet specific requirements established by the Porsche product planning/marketing/business development people. They are the ones who decide the pecking order of the cars; the engineers can easily make changes to each model to change that pecking order. With this in mind, I don't think anyone with any reasonable amount of engineering/vehicle dynamics knowledge would argue the fact that a mid-engine vehicle configuration is superior to a rear engine vehicle configuration. It just seems that Porsche wants it's rear engine cars to lead the pack of their conventional road cars (behind the mid-engine Carrera GT).

Regarding the Cayman not being developed as a race car; the only Porsche model (in recent years) developed as a race car is the Carrera GT. 996/997 road cars were not developed as race cars; Porsche took the road cars and modified them to become race cars, something they could easily do with the Boxster/Cayman, if they so desired.

Oh boy...

1. have you ever seen a Carrera GT used for professional racing? I didn't.
2. ever checked out the 911 history of the past decades? How many 911 models have been developped and used for professional racing?
3. what have the 987 and the 997 in common? 30% of the parts? No parts of the engine, suspension, chassis? What have the 987 and the Cayman in common? 80% of the parts? Most suspension, chassis and even some drive train parts?
4. finally: how many Boxster models have been used for professional racing in the past?

Finally, check out the Porsche Motorsport link: http://www.porsche.com/usa/eventsandracing/motorsport/
How many Boxster, Cayman and even Carrera GT do you see there?

Guys, this is getting ridiculous. If you don't have a clue about these cars, why do you buy a Porsche? For image only? For the sake of owning a Porsche? Some of you need a reality check and a serious one, honestly.

Quote:
Geza said:

Agreed, but what is a 996/997 other than a Boxster with it's engine turned around backwards, two rear seats and a multilink rear suspension (developed, by the way, to exorsize the, shall we say, less than optimal handling traits of the rear engine configuration). Fact is, there is so much commonality between the Porsche sports models, it's absurd to think Carreras are superior to Boxsters/Caymans, or visa-versa, unless you want to just talk specific performance statistics.

But of course, a 911 and a Boxster are almost the same-hey, they both have four wheels, two doors, and one engine. Geez, I was confused for so long, now I'm all straightened out.

And besides, except for the 911's superior acceleration, higher top speed, and slalom test results, it is no different from a Boxster-oops, that's assuming we're talking 911Cab. Well, just because the 911's performance statistics are superior to the Boxster/Cayman's, we don't want actual REAL (oops, sorry for the caps. ) numbers to ruin our fantasy, right?

There will be no "RS" Cayman. Period.

Porsche doesnt need to develop a Boxster/Cayman race car and a street derivative of it for homoglation purposes, or even make racing parts for a 987/C7. Porsche doesnt need a 987/C7 racing program because the 997 is king of both profits and motorsports.

That means that their production car based motorsports development money goes into the 911, and its that money wich has and will continously refine the 911, with the benefit of that showing up into the further evolution of the 911.

Has anyone seen any Ring times for a converted big engine boxster from Ruf or Gemballa that has come close to a 997S or GT3 lap times, No. They will sell you one, but think you are crazy for not just getting a 911 in the first place.

Porsche told the financial press several years back that a 996 cost them only 10 percent more to make than a Boxster,
so with that in mind, why race Boxsters to promote them when its better to race and promote the far more profitable 911?

The 911 is Porsches Icon car. Not the Boxster, not the Cayman and not the Cayenne. So if you think that the factory is going to spend a dime on a car that looks a bit like a 911, to compete in motorsports against the 911, and then sell a "RS" street version of it, good luck waiting!

Quote:
RC said:
Oh boy...

1. have you ever seen a Carrera GT used for professional racing? I didn't.
2. ever checked out the 911 history of the past decades? How many 911 models have been developped and used for professional racing?
3. what have the 987 and the 997 in common? 30% of the parts? No parts of the engine, suspension, chassis? What have the 987 and the Cayman in common? 80% of the parts? Most suspension, chassis and even some drive train parts?
4. finally: how many Boxster models have been used for professional racing in the past?

Finally, check out the Porsche Motorsport link: http://www.porsche.com/usa/eventsandracing/motorsport/
How many Boxster, Cayman and even Carrera GT do you see there?

Guys, this is getting ridiculous. If you don't have a clue about these cars, why do you buy a Porsche? For image only? For the sake of owning a Porsche? Some of you need a reality check and a serious one, honestly.

Although your points are all correct as far as I know, there's no need for your last comment.. anyone can buy a Porsche, you dont have to be an expert on their racing exploits and know which parts are shared between models to understand and appreciate the cars on a level more than just 'image'. Posting about stuff you dont know that well is a different matter, and I agree with you on that side of it.

Quote:
RC said:

Quote:
Geza said:
Agreed, but what is a 996/997 other than a Boxster with it's engine turned around backwards, two rear seats and a multilink rear suspension (developed, by the way, to exorsize the, shall we say, less than optimal handling traits of the rear engine configuration). Fact is, there is so much commonality between the Porsche sports models, it's absurd to think Carreras are superior to Boxsters/Caymans, or visa-versa, unless you want to just talk specific performance statistics. Like any product, the core cars are all engineered to meet specific requirements established by the Porsche product planning/marketing/business development people. They are the ones who decide the pecking order of the cars; the engineers can easily make changes to each model to change that pecking order. With this in mind, I don't think anyone with any reasonable amount of engineering/vehicle dynamics knowledge would argue the fact that a mid-engine vehicle configuration is superior to a rear engine vehicle configuration. It just seems that Porsche wants it's rear engine cars to lead the pack of their conventional road cars (behind the mid-engine Carrera GT).

Regarding the Cayman not being developed as a race car; the only Porsche model (in recent years) developed as a race car is the Carrera GT. 996/997 road cars were not developed as race cars; Porsche took the road cars and modified them to become race cars, something they could easily do with the Boxster/Cayman, if they so desired.

Oh boy...

1. have you ever seen a Carrera GT used for professional racing? I didn't.
2. ever checked out the 911 history of the past decades? How many 911 models have been developped and used for professional racing?
3. what have the 987 and the 997 in common? 30% of the parts? No parts of the engine, suspension, chassis? What have the 987 and the Cayman in common? 80% of the parts? Most suspension, chassis and even some drive train parts?
4. finally: how many Boxster models have been used for professional racing in the past?

Finally, check out the Porsche Motorsport link: http://www.porsche.com/usa/eventsandracing/motorsport/
How many Boxster, Cayman and even Carrera GT do you see there?

Guys, this is getting ridiculous. If you don't have a clue about these cars, why do you buy a Porsche? For image only? For the sake of owning a Porsche? Some of you need a reality check and a serious one, honestly.

RC, I agree with all your points except that you don't have to be that rude, not everybody has your kowledge.

When I read Geza post I instantly kwow he is wrong because I come here everyday, but for someone who is only reading car mags or checking less valuable forums, it is easy to come up with those thinkings.

Quote:
RC said:

Quote:
Geza said:
Agreed, but what is a 996/997 other than a Boxster with it's engine turned around backwards, two rear seats and a multilink rear suspension (developed, by the way, to exorsize the, shall we say, less than optimal handling traits of the rear engine configuration). Fact is, there is so much commonality between the Porsche sports models, it's absurd to think Carreras are superior to Boxsters/Caymans, or visa-versa, unless you want to just talk specific performance statistics. Like any product, the core cars are all engineered to meet specific requirements established by the Porsche product planning/marketing/business development people. They are the ones who decide the pecking order of the cars; the engineers can easily make changes to each model to change that pecking order. With this in mind, I don't think anyone with any reasonable amount of engineering/vehicle dynamics knowledge would argue the fact that a mid-engine vehicle configuration is superior to a rear engine vehicle configuration. It just seems that Porsche wants it's rear engine cars to lead the pack of their conventional road cars (behind the mid-engine Carrera GT).

Regarding the Cayman not being developed as a race car; the only Porsche model (in recent years) developed as a race car is the Carrera GT. 996/997 road cars were not developed as race cars; Porsche took the road cars and modified them to become race cars, something they could easily do with the Boxster/Cayman, if they so desired.

Oh boy...

1. have you ever seen a Carrera GT used for professional racing? I didn't.
2. ever checked out the 911 history of the past decades? How many 911 models have been developped and used for professional racing?
3. what have the 987 and the 997 in common? 30% of the parts? No parts of the engine, suspension, chassis? What have the 987 and the Cayman in common? 80% of the parts? Most suspension, chassis and even some drive train parts?
4. finally: how many Boxster models have been used for professional racing in the past?

Finally, check out the Porsche Motorsport link: http://www.porsche.com/usa/eventsandracing/motorsport/
How many Boxster, Cayman and even Carrera GT do you see there?

Guys, this is getting ridiculous. If you don't have a clue about these cars, why do you buy a Porsche? For image only? For the sake of owning a Porsche? Some of you need a reality check and a serious one, honestly.

Answers:

1) I didn't say Porsche raced the Carrera GT, I implied it was developed as a race car, and converted over to a road car.

2) I'm quite aware of the 911 series glorious race history. The fact remains that the 911 series is/was designed as a road car and modified for racing because Porsche wanted to modify them for racing, period. If they wanted to modify a Boxster/Cayman for road racing, they would, and I'm sure it would make a formidable race car.

3) I don't know or care what percentage of parts is shared; the more important question is what types of parts are shared? Are they fasteners and mounting clips? Are they body panels? Valve springs? I don't know. However, as a design engineer with over 20 years of product design and development experience (aerospace/defense business - oops...better ground the fleet), I assure you there is more commonality to the designs than percentage of shared part numbers may indicate. Do you think Porsche engineers started with a clean sheet of paper and forgot everything they learned during the Boxster development when they developed the 996? Did they work from a different engineering "play-book" because they were working on the "Iconic 911". I think not. As I implied earlier, they used all their knowledge, experience and creativity to design the best car they could which met the specifications established by product planning, et.al. And part of this was to minimize the development costs amortized into the production cost of the vehicle by sharing development costs and technologies.

4) I have seen Boxsters race in the Rolex series here in the states. What does that have to do with anything? As stated already, Porsche has decided to concentrate their production racing on the 911 series cars. Just because the 911 series has such a great history in road racing, I suppose it's just automatically a better car? Then I suppose the Audi S4 and RS6 road cars are even better (whatever that means) than the 911 because their Champion Motorsports converted race cars trounced 911s in the Speed World Challenge GT series for several years. I don't believe this, but this appears to me to be the reasoning of many people on this board.

May I recommend that we don't presume to know what people know or don't know about these cars. I'm certain there are folks reading this forum that forgot more about what makes these, or any car work than a lot of people posting here know

Quote:
Ziggy said:
RC, I agree with all your points except that you don't have to be that rude, not everybody has your kowledge.

I apologize if I sounded too rude, this wasn't my intention. Maybe I had too many Cayman S vs. The Rest of the World discussions lately (and I'm not talking about Rennteam.com but personal discussions with interested customers and friends) and I was just fed up to use the same arguments over and over again without being able to make people understand that they fell for a great marketing scam. And this is actually the worst part of my discussions: I think that the Cayman S is a great product and after driving it, I can confirm that it is a lot of fun. But due to some stupid claims, I always have to set the "truth" straight, making the Cayman S looking bad UNINTENTIONALLY because people just want to see black or white, nothing inbetween. The Cayman S is a great little sportscar and I'm really sorry if I sound like I don't like it. This is pure BS. But I won't allow this marketing scam going on and on forever, this is against all my beliefs.

Quote:
RC said:

Quote:
Ziggy said:
RC, I agree with all your points except that you don't have to be that rude, not everybody has your kowledge.

I apologize if I sounded too rude, this wasn't my intention. Maybe I had too many Cayman S vs. The Rest of the World discussions lately (and I'm not talking about Rennteam.com but personal discussions with interested customers and friends) and I was just fed up to use the same arguments over and over again without being able to make people understand that they fell for a great marketing scam. And this is actually the worst part of my discussions: I think that the Cayman S is a great product and after driving it, I can confirm that it is a lot of fun. But due to some stupid claims, I always have to set the "truth" straight, making the Cayman S looking bad UNINTENTIONALLY because people just want to see black or white, nothing inbetween. The Cayman S is a great little sportscar and I'm really sorry if I sound like I don't like it. This is pure BS. But I won't allow this marketing scam going on and on forever, this is against all my beliefs.

RC, please elaborate on what you mean by "marketing scam". I see Porsche as any other business in that they need to create products to meet specific customer desires at a price that allows for an adequte financial return. What differentiates Porsche is that their product is not an essential item, but purely discretionary and aspirational.

In the late 1960's, when I developed an appreciation for sports cars, they were essentially a 1-product company with only a few variations (4-cylinder, 6-cylinder base, and a more powerful 6-cylinder powered version) that sold in limited quantities (I really don't recall, but somebody on this board surely has the answer) of perhaps 5,000 worldwide. Today, the 911-series alone is comprised of over a dozen variations and the company is on the verge of selling more than 100,000 units using 3 platforms (rear-engine, mid-engine, and front-engine).

My dear sir, you and most of us here are enthusiasts, but we no longer comprise the majority of Porsche's customers. For us, Porsche will periodically offer a highly focused car (CGT, TT, GT2, GT3) at a substiantial price premium to the base vehicle. I don't expect Porsche to change any more than I expect them to allow the Cayman S to outperform the 911.

I applaud your efforts to remind Porsche not to lose sight of us enthusiasts, and you have chosen specific threads to further that cause. I'm just not sure your anti-marketing campaign against Porsche is best served by using the Cayman S as the tool. Afterall, is there really a need to have over a dozen variations of the 911? If the answer is yes, then I predict the Boxster/Cayman models will see even more variations in the future. If the answer is no, then that is where you need to focus you appeals to Porsche.

By marketing scam, I mean the following: not only has Porsche succeeded in selling a Boxster Coupe as a new product, they also succeeded to ask more money for it, despite the obvious fact that it has been developped together with the Boxster roadster from day one.
And furthermore, some dealers see some sort of gold donkey in the Cayman S and started to make interested customers believe that the Cayman S is that lightweight, superduper 911-killer model for less money, everbody seemed to have waited for. This remembers me a little bit of the first days of Cayenne introduction, when some dealers suggested to customers that the Cayenne is the only Porsche they'll ever need, a perfect combination of sportscar, SUV and off-roader. I even had some serious argueing with some Cayenne buyers about track capability, it was getting almost as ridiculous as the discussions over here on the Cayman forum.

But I think I said enough already: the Cayman S is a great car and buying it is no mistake. Period. Everything else I leave to the experience of owners and to the passionate discussions over the next coming years.

Quote:
RC said:
By marketing scam, I mean the following: not only has Porsche succeeded in selling a Boxster Coupe as a new product, they also succeeded to ask more money for it, despite the obvious fact that it has been developped together with the Boxster roadster from day one.

That is pretty amazing! I was shocked and insulted at first. Somehow, I've come to accept their pricing strategy for now. To your point, for how long will this work? It will be interesting to see how Porsche upgrades the Cayman S to maintain its price premium over the Boxster S, but still not threaten the 911 in coming years.

RC, from reading your posts on the Cayman it seems more like it was you that fell for a marketing scam then when you realised it wasnt true you felt you had to 'put right' a perception that only a few had. Sure I have read a few things saying the Cayman would be a lightweight racer, but it was mainly hopeful customers rather than any marketing scam.

I've said this already, and it keeps going on, there is more talk of the hype being wrong than there ever was about the hype in the first place!

Quote:
RC said:

Quote:
Geza said:
Agreed, but what is a 996/997 other than a Boxster with it's engine turned around backwards, two rear seats and a multilink rear suspension (developed, by the way, to exorsize the, shall we say, less than optimal handling traits of the rear engine configuration). Fact is, there is so much commonality between the Porsche sports models, it's absurd to think Carreras are superior to Boxsters/Caymans, or visa-versa, unless you want to just talk specific performance statistics. Like any product, the core cars are all engineered to meet specific requirements established by the Porsche product planning/marketing/business development people. They are the ones who decide the pecking order of the cars; the engineers can easily make changes to each model to change that pecking order. With this in mind, I don't think anyone with any reasonable amount of engineering/vehicle dynamics knowledge would argue the fact that a mid-engine vehicle configuration is superior to a rear engine vehicle configuration. It just seems that Porsche wants it's rear engine cars to lead the pack of their conventional road cars (behind the mid-engine Carrera GT).

Regarding the Cayman not being developed as a race car; the only Porsche model (in recent years) developed as a race car is the Carrera GT. 996/997 road cars were not developed as race cars; Porsche took the road cars and modified them to become race cars, something they could easily do with the Boxster/Cayman, if they so desired.

Oh boy...

1. have you ever seen a Carrera GT used for professional racing? I didn't.
2. ever checked out the 911 history of the past decades? How many 911 models have been developped and used for professional racing?
3. what have the 987 and the 997 in common? 30% of the parts? No parts of the engine, suspension, chassis? What have the 987 and the Cayman in common? 80% of the parts? Most suspension, chassis and even some drive train parts?
4. finally: how many Boxster models have been used for professional racing in the past?

Finally, check out the Porsche Motorsport link: http://www.porsche.com/usa/eventsandracing/motorsport/
How many Boxster, Cayman and even Carrera GT do you see there?

Guys, this is getting ridiculous. If you don't have a clue about these cars, why do you buy a Porsche? For image only? For the sake of owning a Porsche? Some of you need a reality check and a serious one, honestly.

RC shame on you ( I get the feeling you getting pissed off with the P tactics ) , I dont think I will consider my repurchase now as I dont enough about P's past and present .. No really I think your love affair with P is running thin due to the way they pull certain stunts off but as far as P is concerned the Cayman is a different vehicle in there growing range but sure your right about the relation in terms of parts and set up but that is the case with other car manufacturers to . For me I think the Cayman will sell well because at the moment P could sell absolutely anything..

I respect your knowledge ..

throt..

RC, a comment on both your nice Cayman review and this debate:

First of all: IMO there are very few absolutes and very few right or wrong opinions when it comes to picking or rating a car. Be it a Porsche or any other brand. Hence I find it inappropriate to bash people and even giving them the -sign when their opinions differ from your own.
It's your board and therefore you can do whatever you like - but bashing people for "daring" to disagree with certain "correct" opinions and views is less than fruitful for the discussions in here.
I see you as a very knowledgable porschephile whose advice and insight I have always respected. Whether I agree with you or not.
Please don't flush that down the toilet by branding people as "enlightened" or "unenlightened".
I would think all of us in here - yourself included - lack knowledge about Porsche in varying degrees. It's simply not possible to know everything (I'm being modest, I know ).
And I know for sure, that even if someone knew every fact there was to know about Porsche, that this person would still lack knowledge about the subjective experience each of us have about the brand that is Porsche - something that is even more important than the objective, rational, physical facts about the car itself.

Claiming a Boxster is faster in 0-100 than a CGT is naturally a sign of ignorance or lack of knowledge, but many other of the questions in here leave a lot more room for debate and different views.

As you know I belong to an elite few who believe the Cayman is a potentially serious threat to the 997 - be it on the streets or the track.
I say this knowing that Porsche will NEVER make the Cayman a REAL threat to the 997 and being fully aware, that the power of the Cayman is inferior to the 997.
But I still believe the Cayman is bult on better principles of physics and therefore handling than the 997.
You can argue that the rear engine design is working well, but it's pretty hard to disregard the fact that the Porsche top model is a mid-engine car.
The rear engine layout has its limitations - which is exactly the reason why the CGT is not rear-engined.
F1 cars are hailed as being the pinnacle of automotive ability, and they aren't rear-engined.
IMO Porsche is obligated by history, myth and heritage to keep the 911-series alive and make the most of a less-than-perfect engine setup. And they probably will do so for years to come. But you have to be a pretty die-hard 911-fan not to acknowledge that Porsche is building the 911 on a great cash cow, and not on the most ideal engine set-up.

Objectively the 911-series is built on old-fashioned design principles.
God knows how Porsche has managed to eget such a great car out of an engine setup, that only Skoda, the Beetle designers (whoops! Porsche again) and a few Beach Buggy producers dared to use.

The Cayman is built on the most modern principles of automotive design, the 911 isnt.
Am I wrong or right? I guess it's both, depending on what view you have.
In my book the 911/997 is a beautiful, potent and superb sporstcar in every sense of the word.
Is it the most ideal sportscar? That depends SOLELY on who you are, what automotive religion you subscribe to and your objective tastes.

Geza's post contained some good points that I subscribe to.
E.g. the fact that the GCT hasn't (to my knowledge) been used for professional racing should probably be found in its serious pricetag and limited production number. Not in the fact that the CGT would prove to be an inferior racecar compared to the 911. On the contrary.
IMO it it was built to be a much more dedicated and singleminded trackcar than the 911 ever was.
The 911 is a popular trackcar because it's relatively affordable (and vey much so compared to the CGT), has been around for decades and provides raceteams and owners with a much broader sparepart market than any other Porsche model.

Besides, the Boxster model IS being used for professional racing, and so will the Cayman undoubtedly be.
Furthermore, the 986 was actually built from the 996 and sharing a lot of the same components, simply in order to make the Boxster an affordable car to produce in a time where Porsche needed a quick success and just didn't have the financial prowess to afford to gamble with new technology.

Ever since the successes of both the 986 and the 955/Cayenne models Porsche has had the financial means to make later models more individual, but like Geza suggests, of course Porsche didn't start with a clean sheet of paper when developing the 997, 987 and Cayman models.
Of course they dont share EXACTLY the same components, but they do share some, and above all: They all come from the same heritage, pedigree and factory.
So claiming that the 997 and 987/Cayman are totally different cars (one being the poor man's version of the other) is absurd IMO.


The 911 is indeed an iconic sportscar and THE sportscar every other sportscar is measured against. But this is not only due to the fact that it handles brilliantly, but also because it has a history, an impressive pedigree and so much myth and intangeable stories surrounding it that far exceeds it's actual, physical traits.
No other Porsche model has this.
And I believe all of these emotional values that surround the 911 makes it practically impossible for any other car to beat it at its own game.
Even if the Cayman was equipped with 400 BHP and ran in circles around the 997, many would still claim that the 911 is the "original" and "real" Porsche, and that nothing comes close to it. The same people would probably also keep calling the Cayman and the Boxster "poor man's 911".
Well, the ONLY thing in the world that could ever change that, would be to make the Cayman/Boxster as or more expensive than the 911. And we all know that will never happen.

I have only tracked my Boxster a few times and definately dont see myself as a very accomplished driver. Having said that, I have often found myself behind a 911 (996s/997s) on the track without any difficulty whatsoever following it around. I am sure that Wally Rörhl & Co could easily make the differences stand out much more clearly, but the fact remains, that most Porsche buyers aren't Walther Rörhls, Horst von Saurmas, Hans-Jochen Stucks etc. Regular Porsche owners (even those who track their cars on a regular basis) probably cannot drive their car perfectly on the limit and make the difference between a Cayman and a 911 stand out.
So making the absolute most of a Porsche -or any car - is reserved for an elite few - or those who dedicate a lot of time and effort to that goal.

Regarding you view on the marketing stunt, I absolutely agree that Porsche is trying to make the most of every single model they launch.
You can see that as an icecold, calculated sales ploy.
And I believe it is. But I also believe this is part of Porsche's philosophy on how to maximize their profit. To us Porsche may be a sparetime leisure activity, or a brand we dedicate a lot of time debating, enjoying and sometimes even feeling emotionally very attached to.
To Porsche this is all that PLUS a business that needs to make money.
We need to stop kidding ourselves.
If we want a car built purely by car idealists we have to forget current Porsche models and look to others, like Koenigsegg or other products of the minds of excentric millionaires.

Porsche is building cars in their factory.
We build the experience in our minds.

And since this experience is very individual and therefore highly subjective, there will be only very few absolutes.
So keep stirring the debate soup, but don't spill the pot

Stick these threads together ..

http://www.rennteam.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=162475&an=0&page=0#162475

throt..

Quote:
Dr. Phil said:
And since this experience is very individual and therefore highly subjective, there will be only very few absolutes.

I'm afraid I don't agree, Doc. This is what my five year old daughter would tell me, not an adult, sorry.
Let me explain: you can't turn black into white by just talking about it and discussing it. Facts are facts, like it or not. I think the biggest problem of today's people is actually the information flow, especially on the vastly available media like the internet. People read so many things, they start to think they actually learned a lot or even know it all. But things aren't that simple I'm afraid.

I'm a pharmacist by profession, I studied medicine before and moved to pharmacy university one year before my final exam due to family reasons. So I actually have over 5 years of medicine studies, another five years of pharmacy and ten years of experience in the job itself. But I still have customers coming to me, telling me that they've read something on the internet or in some sort of magazine and they start to argue with me and even tell me I'm wrong.
This happens very often, not only in my business but other business too, where the customer thinks that he reads a few hours about a certain thing and suddenly he knows more than other people achieved from five years of university.

The internet is a wonderful thing but unfortunately a dangerous one too. Not only because there are some weirdos or psychos trying to do their thing but because people often tend to believe what they read on the net, without even questioning it. And if what they read serves their beliefs, even stronger the trust is.

I accept other opinions, no problems with that. But ONLY if these opinions are based on arguments, maybe facts or even personal experience. Now tell me: how many people have driven the Cayman S over here? How many of those "believers" actually know something about Porsche history, the story behind the Boxster and the 911? How many people have actually owned a 911 before or even a real Porsche "lightweight" race car? YOU tell me.

The point is: I started a very friendly thread about the Cayman S and some mis-conceptions some people may have about this car. The reason: I wanted to help people to make the right decision and to understand what they're getting, especially since some people were already having fantasies about serious track racing, etc. What did I get in return: some very friendly comments from frustrated soon-to-be Cayman owners. Funny: everybody who already ordered a Cayman, ordered it blindly before even having taken a testdrive. No problem with that, the Cayman S seems to be a nice car. But to start argueing with me about handling and performance, this is ridiculous.

So my last reply to such posts is this: if people don't like honest opinions, based on many years of experience with various sportscars, especially made by Porsche, no problem. There is that Caymanclub website where you can sing "hooray hooray, Cayman" all day long. I don't have problems with that. But whenever you're "ready" to have a serious discussion between adults, based on experience and personal testdrives, you're welcome to come here and to discuss it.

I'm sorry that you guys don't like what I said. But hey, that's life and the best part of it is: I give a damn.
This is no business, this is a private site from enthusiasts for enthusiasts. If you like it, you're welcomed. If not, bye bye, no problem. I have a wife, two little kids and a business to worry about, my hobby is...just a hobby. And if I don't like it, I do what everbody should do in such a case: I turn off my computer and do something else. Good night, gentlemen.

and dont let the bed bugs bite

throt..

Quote:
throt said:
and dont let the bed bugs bite

throt..

They wouldn't dare...

To right Dr Phil, Well said.

The 911 is an Icon and one of the reasons I've owned one and loved it, bit it does have its limitations.

Mainly the fact you have to transfer the weight from the back to the front by using the brakes to get good turn-in. Hence you have to time your braking zone prefectly for rapid progress,which be can be a bit of a pain when not in banzi mode.
Also the front ends too light and the ABS is triggered to often if you're not using the correct technique to slow down the 911 or just jump on the brakes if something takes you by surprise.

RC,
I've made some points above I'd like to discuss,the most impressive one being the Cayman is only 1 second behind the 997 from 0-125(the figure that sorts out the men from the boys), but you seemed to ignore them, also seems you've changed you opinion of the Cayman slightly in your recent review? Is this the case

Why are RC and others getting such hostility.

Its my feeling that one is no longer able to constructively criticise the Cayman. Lets face its not everyone's cup of tea and as an open and educated forum we must all be able tolerate the opinions of our fellow members.
I personally dont fathom nor loath the car, hence I dont share the same thoughts as some of the other members of the forum. Does that constitute that I know less about Porsches than the supposed members in the know. Does that allow anyone to undermine me or my opinions. NO.

The only bias that seems to prevail pertains to potential or current Cayman owners. It is understandable to reassure ones choice in automobile selection, but lets not try to demean the input of others.

Anyways those were my 2 cents.

P.s: I think the Cayman is more appropriate for teenage girls.(Just Kidding)

I'm making a list of the multi-headed hydra threads on rennteam.

1- Break-in procedure: hoax or commandment from God?
2- Z06 vs. 911
3- Cayman S: uber Porsche or overpriced hardtop Boxster?

I have one request.

Perhaps everyone who has actually DRIVEN the Cayman and who has ORDERED a Cayman could say so at the beginning of their posts. This way I can get some idea of who is regurgitating Porsche marketing hype, and who really has some seat time in the car.

I fully expect this to be an excellent car, but I don't need to give Porsche extra $ for a 987S with a hardtop and reworked (and detuned) 996 powerplant. Wake me up when they build a mid-engine car that is competitive with the rear engine ones. Until then the Cayman is primarily an exercise in product positioning and customer extortion.

The changes in the transmissions specific to the Cayman are further proof. See my other thread.

mcdelaug

Quote:
LorenzoB said:
Why are RC and others getting such hostility.

Its my feeling that one is no longer able to constructively criticise the Cayman. Lets face its not everyone's cup of tea and as an open and educated forum we must all be able tolerate the opinions of our fellow members.
I personally dont fathom nor loath the car, hence I dont share the same thoughts as some of the other members of the forum. Does that constitute that I know less about Porsches than the supposed members in the know. Does that allow anyone to undermine me or my opinions. NO.

The only bias that seems to prevail pertains to potential or current Cayman owners. It is understandable to reassure ones choice in automobile selection, but lets not try to demean the input of others.

Anyways those were my 2 cents.

P.s: I think the Cayman is more appropriate for teenage girls.(Just Kidding)

Hi Lez
Everyone's entitled to there own opinion of course; I'm just not sure I agree with RC's opinion that the Cayman is just a marketing exercise or a Boxster with a fixed roof and without any worth while improvements or dynamically the same as the Boxster.
The figures RC produced seems to trust even show this, but he still persist with the same old "marketing exercise" posts, the figures he quotes are the worst I've seen and I feel he picks these figures to back up his own views. While constantly ignoring the independent positive reviews and more impressive performance figures recorded, but even with the poor AMS figures the Cayman still only a second behind the 997 from 0-125. The Boxster can't come close to matching this, but this just seems to be ignored.


I don't want to come across as hostile and offend anyone and reading back some of my other posts it does read a bit stronger than it was meant to in parts.

The recent review was a lot more balanced than I was expecting and I feel it contradicts some of RC's earlier posts and thoughts in my view. Overall it was good, but I disagree regarding about the 997 being fast round as track. Manly because, Evo (a well respected magazine) recently tested a Boxster S with PASM against a base 997 without PASM and the car which set the faster lap times was the Boxster S, due to the higher corner entry/exit speeds, the extra grunt of the 997 couldn't make up on the staights for the slow in/fast out driving style of the 911, now the Cayman is hardcore version of the Boxster, So find it hard to believe some of of RC's post regarding the 997 vs the cayman on the track.
The review goes on about the 997 to much and it's clear he's a massive 911 fan, as am I; a bit too much I feel to be impartial about the Cayman.

My opinion is this, Porsche have made the Cayman to fit right in between the Boxster and the 911. This is done by design and not by chance (something that doesn't bother me in the least), if Porsche have designed the Cayman to fit in the middle there's a very good chance that it will do just that and not just be a Boxster without dynamic improvements or just a marketing exercise on the part of Porsche, after all Porsche make some of the best cars you can buy today.

Thanks for the teenage girl comment too

Quote:
RC said:

Quote:
Dr. Phil said:
And since this experience is very individual and therefore highly subjective, there will be only very few absolutes.

I'm afraid I don't agree, Doc. This is what my five year old daughter would tell me, not an adult, sorry.

I'm not really sure if you're trying to be witty or trying to insult me..or seriously mean your daughter would say such a sentence
Isn't it possible to have a different opinion than yours without getting compared to a 5-year old?

I'm not even sure what exactly it is you refer to as "facts" and what exactly it is that you mean I don't understand?

Perhaps you haven't read my post properly, but I actually never stated that you were an ignorant or that your review was biased.
Not even close. In fact I liked your review and thought it was well-balanced and very positive towards the Cayman.

Nor have I stated that the Cayman was the second coming of Christ. How can I? I haven't tried it yet!

I was mainly commenting on your conclusion -or "fact"- that while the Cayman is nice, the 911 is the answer to almost every car enthusiast's wet dreams, and that the 911 is what most want...if they can afford it.
That's just dead wrong IMO.
In your review you wrote: "(...) specially those who feel too young for the 911 or who just don't have enough money for a 911 yet and never liked the topless Boxster."

And:
"(...) the 911 is part of a longtime tradition at Porsche, no other sportscar worldwide has been developped to perfection like the 911 has been in the past. "

I just don't share your views on the 911.
It is NOT a fact that the 911 "has been developed to perfection". Why? Since the car's engine placement is physically flawed! It is not perfect at all!
Porsche has managed to compensate that imperfection brilliantly, but the car is still inherently flawed.

Unless you seriously believe the CGT also is inferior to the 911, the very fact that Porsche made their top model a mid-engine car proves my point.
But again: To some the 911 is perfect, to others it isn't.
The 911 is legendary, and to some it is the best sportscar.

But claiming that it is a simple FACT that the 911 is superior to the Cayman or any other Porsche model would be a naive attempt to simplify reality.
Please accept that your "facts" about Porsche in general and the 911 in particular are not shared by everyone.
The simple reason being that your "facts" arent facts. They are YOUR interpretations of the cars and your impressions of them. And no matter how good your reviews are, you cant expect everyone to agree.

I've been 20+ years in the advertising business, but does that entitle me to disrespect people for not subscribing to my professional conclusions or sharing my opinions when we talk about Porsche as a brand? Absolutely not.

If I understand you correctly, you believe that driving and choosing a car isn't subjective, but just a matter of "facts". (Correct me if I'm doing you wrong).
You seem to have a difficulty accepting the fact that we do not all believe that we can quantify, measure and rationalize everything.
I'm sure being a pharmacist requires logic and reason, as I believe is required in many professions - including the automotive biz.
But do you seriously mean that comparing two cars is ONLY a matter of facts? Facts that cannot be debated?

And the "have you ever seen a Carrera GT used for professional racing? I didn't" - answer you gave to Geza.
Why ridicule someone when the point he is making is actually very relevant, and IMO more insightful than your own answer?
It doesnt take a lot of reading or knowledge to figure out the reason why the CGT isnt a popular racecar. I dont recall seeing very many Enzos on the pro tracks either.
Does that make the Enzo inferior to the 360 CS?

IMO you need to get your background info totally straight before telling others they are off the mark.

This is getting biblical in length - so I'll end it here.
You gave a nice review of the Cayman, and I DO NOT believe you are wrong in any of the views you aired about the Cayman itself.
First off I haven't driven the Cayman yet, and secondly; how can I say you are wrong about your own subjective impressions?
They are just that; SUBJECTIVE...which leads us back to my point:
Unless you are a robot, driving a car will mainly stay a subjective experience.

If your five year old shares this very view, i suggest you listen to her more often. She sounds like a clever girl

Dr. Phil for president!

Doc, my five year old daughter is a little genius, just for the book (and I'm not kidding). But still...she's five and you are...?

I'm afraid you fell for the same BS which is floating around the sportscar world for decaded. Rear engine design a flaw, bla bla bla. This came from frustrated drivers of other car brands, even Porsche dealers (I remember how dealers were making the 911 look bad to sell the new 928 and even the 968, thinking that the 911 is a thing of the past) and of course from the media. Talking about media and advertisement: I'm shocked to see that you're 20+ years in the business and "fell" for it.

Right, you didn't drive the Cayman S but that's not a real problem. The question is: did you drive the 911? An even better question: have you owned one and driven it hard? Because during my over 10 years of 911 ownership, I drove everything from a little Fiat 500 to a Mercedes 40 t truck.
I don't say that I ate the wisdom with a spoon (like we say here) but maybe 20+ years of advertisement don't really make you a car expert? Anyway: the 911 IS indeed a very fascinating sportscar and for a reason. Look at the track performance, look at the straight line performance, look at the interior room and even comfort and look at the reliability as a daily driver, even in winter time. Sorry but there ain't many sportscars out there on the market to really cope with that.
Maybe the fact that you're driving a Boxster "only" most of the time somehow frustrated you, I don't know. Otherwise I can't explain your problem to acknowledge that the 911 is indeed almost the perfect sprortscar. The only thing which is missing, in my opinion, is more horse power and maybe slightly lower weight. Otherwise, the 911 is perfect from many points of view. Maybe too perfect since perfection sometimes makes passion die little by little. Sometimes out of boredom, sometimes out of the lack of a real challenge.

The Enzo is the hell of a sportscar. It is NO race car, sorry. Same with the Carrera GT. Why would fore example somebody like Alzen drive a modified 911 Turbo for professional racing and not a modified Carrera GT? The 911 Turbo, with all it's modifications costs even more than the Carrera GT. So where's the secret?

Also look at various race tracks around the world but especially in Europe: how many Porsche 964 RS are teasing modern sportscars nowadays? These cars are almost 15 years old.

Boxster lovers should understand one thing: the Boxster is a great car and it is fun. But it was NEVER developped for racing. Remember the pretty pathetic "body crack" story back in 1998 or 1999? So if you think that a mid engine design makes a car perfect, you're wrong again. It is the ideal setup but only if the concept is right.

But I can talk and talk and nobody would listen. Perhaps because everbody seems to be the same smarta.. like me.

Welcome to the 21st century and internet blogs: everybody believes he knows everything by just reading about it.
Try this with sex, you'll hate it...and maybe you start to understand my point. Peace.

Quote:
RC said:
Doc, my five year old daughter is a little genius, just for the book (and I'm not kidding). But still...she's five and you are...?

I'm afraid you fell for the same BS which is floating around the sportscar world for decaded. Rear engine design a flaw, bla bla bla. This came from frustrated drivers of other car brands, even Porsche dealers (I remember how dealers were making the 911 look bad to sell the new 928 and even the 968, thinking that the 911 is a thing of the past) and of course from the media. Talking about media and advertisement: I'm shocked to see that you're 20+ years in the business and "fell" for it.

Right, you didn't drive the Cayman S but that's not a real problem. The question is: did you drive the 911? An even better question: have you owned one and driven it hard? Because during my over 10 years of 911 ownership, I drove everything from a little Fiat 500 to a Mercedes 40 t truck.
I don't say that I ate the wisdom with a spoon (like we say here) but maybe 20+ years of advertisement don't really make you a car expert? Anyway: the 911 IS indeed a very fascinating sportscar and for a reason. Look at the track performance, look at the straight line performance, look at the interior room and even comfort and look at the reliability as a daily driver, even in winter time. Sorry but there ain't many sportscars out there on the market to really cope with that.
Maybe the fact that you're driving a Boxster "only" most of the time somehow frustrated you, I don't know. Otherwise I can't explain your problem to acknowledge that the 911 is indeed almost the perfect sprortscar. The only thing which is missing, in my opinion, is more horse power and maybe slightly lower weight. Otherwise, the 911 is perfect from many points of view. Maybe too perfect since perfection sometimes makes passion die little by little. Sometimes out of boredom, sometimes out of the lack of a real challenge.

The Enzo is the hell of a sportscar. It is NO race car, sorry. Same with the Carrera GT. Why would fore example somebody like Alzen drive a modified 911 Turbo for professional racing and not a modified Carrera GT? The 911 Turbo, with all it's modifications costs even more than the Carrera GT. So where's the secret?

Also look at various race tracks around the world but especially in Europe: how many Porsche 964 RS are teasing modern sportscars nowadays? These cars are almost 15 years old.

Boxster lovers should understand one thing: the Boxster is a great car and it is fun. But it was NEVER developped for racing. Remember the pretty pathetic "body crack" story back in 1998 or 1999? So if you think that a mid engine design makes a car perfect, you're wrong again. It is the ideal setup but only if the concept is right.

But I can talk and talk and nobody would listen. Perhaps because everbody seems to be the same smarta.. like me.

Welcome to the 21st century and internet blogs: everybody believes he knows everything by just reading about it.
Try this with sex, you'll hate it...and maybe you start to understand my point. Peace.

RC, I am not playing the smarta** and I am not even close to know as much as you do. But I have a question: if the rear engine layout is flawless, how come it has been for over 40 years unique to the 911 and hasn't since been followed by the other sports cars manufacturers (for e.g. Ferrari, Lamborghini,even Porsche with the Boxster/Cayman etc.).

Again, I am not arguing with you and I tend to always agree with you given my lack of knowledge, it is just a simple question that comes in my mind

Thanks in advance for your answer.