Quote:
nberry said:
What you failed to mention is the other anachronism Porsche is clinging to. The rear engine set up. It has been past its usefulness for years yet Porsche continues it because it has an avid base of customers who have not moved on technologically. Clearly Porsche can and does engineer a car which will perform better than the antiquated rear engine.
I suspect they are waiting for the right time to jettison this relic from the past.
"Avid base" that has "not moved on"? That could be the understatement of the year around here.
In the thread about the car writer who had a favourable impression of the Cayman one of the posters here tried to tell me there is no such thing as a mid-engine car with 50/50 weight distribution, that 50/50 balance only existed on front engine cars, and that rear weighted--even in the modern all-wheel drive era--was superior regardless.
I didn't even respond. How can you argue with someone who is that clueless? 911's do something to the brain I guess.
For the poster in question, by the way, a mid engine car is, by definition, one with the engine between the centerline of the axels. It can be in front of, or behind, the cockpit. A front engine car has the engine over the front axel.
Regarding Porsche's own mid-engine design, test driver Walter Rohrl had this to say about the Cayman:
"If it is a very twisty road, I believe yes (the Cayman is quicker than the 911). In second and third-gear corners then I feel it is more precise - it is so, so competent."
The 911 remains king in Porsche's lineup and with its current engine layout because hords of fans still buy them and redesign and retooling cost a fortune.
When even rennteam posters believe only front engine cars, not mid-engine, can achieve a 50/50 weight balance and think Walter Rohrl doesn't know what he's talking about, I'm sure it will be a long time before Porsche needs to worry about changing the 911's basic layout.