Crown
Board: Porsche - 911 - 996
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Oct 9, 2002 7:27:06 PM
-
Ron (Houston)
- Rennteam Moderator
-
- Loc: Houston, TX , United States
- Posts: 8812, Gallery
- Registered on: Apr 10, 2002
- Reply to: Jeru SDC
i don't see why this entry model would be a bad thing! 914
served this function well for a prior generation and there are still lots of 914's on the road. 
anything that keeps porsche an independant company should be viewed as a positive development. i think this would be a great alternative to rice rockets for those with smaller pocketbooks 
why is that bad? do we really want porsche to cater only rich old people? 
anything that keeps porsche an independant company should be viewed as a positive development. i think this would be a great alternative to rice rockets for those with smaller pocketbooks why is that bad? do we really want porsche to cater only rich old people?
Re: what is "independent"?
i would rather prefer porsche to be a pure sports car company over being an "independent" company. i do not care who the company belongs to. who are the shareholders? as far as i am informed, 50% belong to the porsche family and ferdinand piech (of VW fame). and the other 50%? they are probably in the portfolio of some investment funds, controlled by major bank and investment houses. is this any better over being held by a major car company?
and what is happening now? porsche is building a four-doored SUV which is manufactured on a VW plant and shares a lot with the VW touareg. so where's the advantage of being "independent"? as RC said in another post, they sold their soul.
ferrari (currently) belongs to fiat, but no ferrari shares the platform with any fiat (at least i hope
) and ferrari does not have to build all terrain vehicles... they focus on their key competence: racing and building sports cars. brillant.
cheers; zzboba
and what is happening now? porsche is building a four-doored SUV which is manufactured on a VW plant and shares a lot with the VW touareg. so where's the advantage of being "independent"? as RC said in another post, they sold their soul.
ferrari (currently) belongs to fiat, but no ferrari shares the platform with any fiat (at least i hope
) and ferrari does not have to build all terrain vehicles... they focus on their key competence: racing and building sports cars. brillant.cheers; zzboba
zz-fiat is nearly broke! ferrari is up for sale! bad example
furthermore--look at jaguar--the s type is a warmed over mondeo! to me anyone who believes that any major car company would maintain porsche's integrity is either naive or foolish. nothing personal towards you. i have seen your comments made before on rennlist and fun cars but it makes no sense to me 
the one exception perhaps would be mercedes but i have seen no evidence that they are interested
the one exception perhaps would be mercedes but i have seen no evidence that they are interested
Re: zz-fiat is nearly broke! ferrari is up for sale! bad example
ignacio,
IMHO jaguar is a bad example. they are doing the same mistake like porsche: they want to break new grounds. they should stick to their key competence (in this case luxury vehicles) as well.
what about lamborghini? belongs to audi, does only build very emotional sports cars and the latest model is better than ever.
and i have nothing against the fact that porsche is (in a way) "independent". but if the price is that they have to build bulky all terrain vehicles with diesel engines, i'd say: the price they pay is too high.
for me (only for me, you all may be of a different opinion), the cayenne is quite the same like the S type for jaguar. the S type is a mondeo like the cayenne is a touareg -- and yes, i know that weissach had the lead on the development.
cheers; zzboba
PS it's rennteam and i've never posted anything on "fun cars".
IMHO jaguar is a bad example. they are doing the same mistake like porsche: they want to break new grounds. they should stick to their key competence (in this case luxury vehicles) as well.
what about lamborghini? belongs to audi, does only build very emotional sports cars and the latest model is better than ever.
and i have nothing against the fact that porsche is (in a way) "independent". but if the price is that they have to build bulky all terrain vehicles with diesel engines, i'd say: the price they pay is too high.
for me (only for me, you all may be of a different opinion), the cayenne is quite the same like the S type for jaguar. the S type is a mondeo like the cayenne is a touareg -- and yes, i know that weissach had the lead on the development.
cheers; zzboba
PS it's rennteam and i've never posted anything on "fun cars".
zz- i hate suv's too but they are very popular and profitabl
to me i don't care what porsche does as long as they continue to make 911's that are up to date with their times. the fact that they also make boxter now is an added bonus. if they want to use the porsche name to sell pocket knives, sunglasses, watches or ugly trucks means nothing to me as long as the 911 survives. i also hope suv's generate the profit that will allow porsche to return to racing. to me, though, 911's are the only important thing that porsche does. i will never forget that the 911 almost died in the mid 80's. if that can be avoided by the sale of toilet paper so be it! peace.
if that can be avoided by the sale of toilet paper so be it! peace.
grant--?limited slip differential--who needs it with psm and
all wheel drive? if by real 911's you mean those antiques that lost all grip if you decelerated in a curve--you can have them!
i previously owned a 1979 911sc that i loved 20 years ago but it was a far inferior car to the 2002 c4s.
hell, i even like the cup holders--they fit a can of diet soda just fine--a nice feature in a daily driver. perhaps thats what happens when you build $ 80k sports cars--you attract much the same audience that buys $80k s class mercedes. for a younger demographic you need a less expensive car--like the entry class model above
i previously owned a 1979 911sc that i loved 20 years ago but it was a far inferior car to the 2002 c4s.
hell, i even like the cup holders--they fit a can of diet soda just fine--a nice feature in a daily driver. perhaps thats what happens when you build $ 80k sports cars--you attract much the same audience that buys $80k s class mercedes. for a younger demographic you need a less expensive car--like the entry class model above
You "hate" SUVs?
Apparently you never owned one or you don't have family. 
Sense of a high power SUV? Fun. Yes, it really is fun.
Almost anybody can drive a Porsche fast but try to be fast in a SUV...you'll be surprised how narrow the limit is.
No, I'd never race a SUV because even high power SUVs are no sports cars. But yes, they're fun and they offer all the necessary room for my family. How the hell should I go on holiday by car with a wife, a little kid and all those suitcases, toys, tons of diapers, etc? Right, there is no other solution: SUVs are GREAT.
Sense of a high power SUV? Fun. Yes, it really is fun.
Almost anybody can drive a Porsche fast but try to be fast in a SUV...you'll be surprised how narrow the limit is.
No, I'd never race a SUV because even high power SUVs are no sports cars. But yes, they're fun and they offer all the necessary room for my family. How the hell should I go on holiday by car with a wife, a little kid and all those suitcases, toys, tons of diapers, etc? Right, there is no other solution: SUVs are GREAT.
rc- i have owned both a toyota landcruiser and a pathfinder
they both had lots of space and were comfortable until you tried to corner them because all suv's are top heavy and unstable. i now own an e320 4matic wagon that is comfortable safe and won't roll over as easily as an suv.
as a practicing neurologist i can assure you that suv's are good for my business because of the frequency of serious head injury in roll over accidents.
i am a bit surprised that you like suv's. during my visit to germany last summer i saw very few suv's. i believe that sales for these vehicles will plummet when evidence gathers of frequent injuries in rollover accidents. to me station wagons are a much more sensible design unless you are really going off road.
as a practicing neurologist i can assure you that suv's are good for my business because of the frequency of serious head injury in roll over accidents.
i am a bit surprised that you like suv's. during my visit to germany last summer i saw very few suv's. i believe that sales for these vehicles will plummet when evidence gathers of frequent injuries in rollover accidents. to me station wagons are a much more sensible design unless you are really going off road.
grant--this may be true for a track car but certainly not
for a daily driver. i can't afford $80k+ for a track car so i guess i'll stick with awd and psm.
btw, am i the only one who thinks that the gt3 is grossly overpriced vs the turbo? eliminate awd, esp, rear seat,etc--add $60,000--what a deal!
btw, am i the only one who thinks that the gt3 is grossly overpriced vs the turbo? eliminate awd, esp, rear seat,etc--add $60,000--what a deal!
This is funny...
...we don't have roll-over accidents with SUVs. At least I might not be aware of.
Reason? Well, SUVs for the european market usually have a different suspension setup and different tires. We heard so much about the Ford Explorer accidents in the States but although there are some Explorers over here in Germany too, there never has been any accident related to tires.
There also have been extensive tests done by german car magazines and mostly some cheap japanese mini-Off-Roaders had problems with roll-over but none of the serious SUVs like Toyota Landcruiser, X5, ML, etc.
In fact you won't believe how fast I can be in my ML55...without rolling it over or even coming close to it.
Another problem in the US regarding roll-overs are usually unexperienced drivers (those moms driving their kids to school in a Ford Excursion ), unadjusted tire pressures (oh boy, never thought that Americans care so little about tire pressures) and last but not least...driver training.
Driving 150 mph in a SUV is no problem here, even in wide Autobahn curves.
At least I might not be aware of. Reason? Well, SUVs for the european market usually have a different suspension setup and different tires. We heard so much about the Ford Explorer accidents in the States but although there are some Explorers over here in Germany too, there never has been any accident related to tires.
There also have been extensive tests done by german car magazines and mostly some cheap japanese mini-Off-Roaders had problems with roll-over but none of the serious SUVs like Toyota Landcruiser, X5, ML, etc.
In fact you won't believe how fast I can be in my ML55...without rolling it over or even coming close to it.
Another problem in the US regarding roll-overs are usually unexperienced drivers (those moms driving their kids to school in a Ford Excursion
), unadjusted tire pressures (oh boy, never thought that Americans care so little about tire pressures) and last but not least...driver training.Driving 150 mph in a SUV is no problem here, even in wide Autobahn curves.
driver error is a substantial contributor to all accidents
but not even education will not change the center of gravity in a top heavy vehicle. a sudden avoidance maneuver that would be easy in a station wagon or sedan can be deadly in an suv even at moderate speeds.
think to yourself how your ml55 will respond if a dog or a child runs into the street as you approach it at even 100kph. :shocked:
i also have a family which i am sure is better protected in an e type wagon than they would be in an ml or x5 or cayenne. in addition ride is more comfortable and cornering is much better with a lower center of gravity.
i believe the e55 amg is available as a wagon in germany. to me this a much better alternative for speed safety and comfort than an ml55 amg. :cool: not as good for business for my neurological colleagues though :smirk:
think to yourself how your ml55 will respond if a dog or a child runs into the street as you approach it at even 100kph. :shocked:
i also have a family which i am sure is better protected in an e type wagon than they would be in an ml or x5 or cayenne. in addition ride is more comfortable and cornering is much better with a lower center of gravity.
i believe the e55 amg is available as a wagon in germany. to me this a much better alternative for speed safety and comfort than an ml55 amg. :cool: not as good for business for my neurological colleagues though :smirk:
ignacio...
...trust me...I tried everything to make my ML55 roll over but I didn't succeed.
I can give you some reasons:
1. tires: the tires the ML55 uses are not that "stiff" to avoid the car providing too much sidegrip which could result in a roll over on a SUV
2. extreme understeer setup of the suspension: the front tires start to understeer pretty early to avoid letting the light rear brake out or create instability
3. suspension setup: the suspension on the ML55 is pretty stiff, almost uncomfortable to eliminate side roll almost completely. The swaybars are huge.
4. ESP: the ML55 has a very good ESP setup which provides a lot of safety. Even in winter time or on wet streets, I couldn't get instability, no matter what I did.
5. the steering: steering is pretty indirect on the ML55. Almost like on a real truck. This helps to avoid sudden steering wheel moves which would result in possible instability.
One gets pretty fast used to it and I already adopted a certain method to be able to steer in more directly without provoking ESP activation or instability.
I would even speculate that an ordinary Boxster driver would have problems to follow me...and I'm not talking about the Autobahn.
SUVs are the only cars which have a sales increase over here in Germany. People started to love them and I think it will be pretty similar as in the US in a few years.
I know there is a anti-SUV sentiment growing in the US right now but maybe because some SUV manufacturers didn't build the right SUVs in the past. I rented a Lincoln Navigator for my march 2002 Florida vacation. It doesn't even come close to the ML55's driving abilities but it still is a pretty safe car. Couldn't make that baby roll over either (Hertz is very happy about that
).
My advise: as soon as the Cayenne hits the dealers, get one for a one day testdrive. I'm sure you'll be surprised.
A last word: I also owned a Isuzu Trooper many years ago. This thing was horrible and I'm sure that it would have been easy to put it upside down. But I neither had the gutts nor the experience to drive this thing fast by that time. Lucky me.
I can give you some reasons:
1. tires: the tires the ML55 uses are not that "stiff" to avoid the car providing too much sidegrip which could result in a roll over on a SUV
2. extreme understeer setup of the suspension: the front tires start to understeer pretty early to avoid letting the light rear brake out or create instability
3. suspension setup: the suspension on the ML55 is pretty stiff, almost uncomfortable to eliminate side roll almost completely. The swaybars are huge.
4. ESP: the ML55 has a very good ESP setup which provides a lot of safety. Even in winter time or on wet streets, I couldn't get instability, no matter what I did.
5. the steering: steering is pretty indirect on the ML55. Almost like on a real truck. This helps to avoid sudden steering wheel moves which would result in possible instability.
One gets pretty fast used to it and I already adopted a certain method to be able to steer in more directly without provoking ESP activation or instability.
I would even speculate that an ordinary Boxster driver would have problems to follow me...and I'm not talking about the Autobahn.
SUVs are the only cars which have a sales increase over here in Germany. People started to love them and I think it will be pretty similar as in the US in a few years.
I know there is a anti-SUV sentiment growing in the US right now but maybe because some SUV manufacturers didn't build the right SUVs in the past. I rented a Lincoln Navigator for my march 2002 Florida vacation. It doesn't even come close to the ML55's driving abilities but it still is a pretty safe car. Couldn't make that baby roll over either (Hertz is very happy about that
). My advise: as soon as the Cayenne hits the dealers, get one for a one day testdrive. I'm sure you'll be surprised.
A last word: I also owned a Isuzu Trooper many years ago. This thing was horrible and I'm sure that it would have been easy to put it upside down. But I neither had the gutts nor the experience to drive this thing fast by that time. Lucky me.
Re: This is funny...
You're being naïve Christian.
The factors you list are relevant to whether a vehicle can rollover on its own from lane-change or whatever. Here, proper tyre inflation, a stiff suspension, etc. are a factor.
But there is another side to the coin. What happens when there is some sort of external force? An accident with another vehicle, spinning and hitting a curb, this sort of thing. In these cases the height of the centre of gravity is going to make a difference to how easily the vehicle rolls. Your SUV is going to roll more easily in these situations than would a 996 and that all there is to it.
My own example was years ago spinning out in a Jaguar XJ12 on an exit that was in the shade and covered with frost. The Jaguar mounted the curb and came to a stop up on the grass. I was very lucky that I was in a car with such a low center of mass. I had to replace two wheels and part of the exhaust. Had it been an SUV it is much more likely that the car would have caught on that curb and gone over.
I really can't believe that you want to drive an SUV and to put your family in it!
S.
The factors you list are relevant to whether a vehicle can rollover on its own from lane-change or whatever. Here, proper tyre inflation, a stiff suspension, etc. are a factor.
But there is another side to the coin. What happens when there is some sort of external force? An accident with another vehicle, spinning and hitting a curb, this sort of thing. In these cases the height of the centre of gravity is going to make a difference to how easily the vehicle rolls. Your SUV is going to roll more easily in these situations than would a 996 and that all there is to it.
My own example was years ago spinning out in a Jaguar XJ12 on an exit that was in the shade and covered with frost. The Jaguar mounted the curb and came to a stop up on the grass. I was very lucky that I was in a car with such a low center of mass. I had to replace two wheels and part of the exhaust. Had it been an SUV it is much more likely that the car would have caught on that curb and gone over.
I really can't believe that you want to drive an SUV and to put your family in it!
S.
Naive?...
...or experienced? That is the question.
Accident? Well, I'm not sure what is better: to roll over or to be smashed to pieces.
I experienced a roll over accident in a Opel Kadett GTE in my youth: another driver (in a LADA) passed over the red light and hit me (I was driving at around 70 kph, he was going probably around 90 kph) from the right. He hit me in a way that my car flipped over on the roof and slipped for around 100 meters(!) on the roof. It happened at a huge intersection downtown. After the police and the experts analized the whole thing, they came to the conclusion that I probably would have been badly hurt if the car didn't roll over. My injuries? Well..."only" two broken ribs from the safety belt.
My friends couldn't believe that I got alive out of the car...it was completely wrecked (I might find a picture and post it).
SUVs have a bad reputation in the US...I know that. A lot of nasty accidents happened there...I know that too.
But again: the SUVs sold in the US in the past never made it to Germany with that setup. American drivers also always show that "freedom of choice" phenomenon, meaning: the freedom to choose a different tire pressure than recommended by the manufacturer. I remember our passionate discussions on Funcarsonline when people wanted to have the freedom to choose their own tire pressure.
SUVs have a good reputation over here in Germany and nobody thinks that they're more safe than a normal car.
And a last thing: my ML55 has a weight of around 2.3 tons, fully loaded almost 2.7 tons. Now imagine a 996 Turbo hits me...who do you think will be more likely to be hurt badly? You do the math...and physics.
Accident? Well, I'm not sure what is better: to roll over or to be smashed to pieces.
I experienced a roll over accident in a Opel Kadett GTE in my youth: another driver (in a LADA) passed over the red light and hit me (I was driving at around 70 kph, he was going probably around 90 kph) from the right. He hit me in a way that my car flipped over on the roof and slipped for around 100 meters(!) on the roof. It happened at a huge intersection downtown. After the police and the experts analized the whole thing, they came to the conclusion that I probably would have been badly hurt if the car didn't roll over. My injuries? Well..."only" two broken ribs from the safety belt.
My friends couldn't believe that I got alive out of the car...it was completely wrecked (I might find a picture and post it).
SUVs have a bad reputation in the US...I know that. A lot of nasty accidents happened there...I know that too.
But again: the SUVs sold in the US in the past never made it to Germany with that setup. American drivers also always show that "freedom of choice" phenomenon, meaning: the freedom to choose a different tire pressure than recommended by the manufacturer. I remember our passionate discussions on Funcarsonline when people wanted to have the freedom to choose their own tire pressure.
SUVs have a good reputation over here in Germany and nobody thinks that they're more safe than a normal car.
And a last thing: my ML55 has a weight of around 2.3 tons, fully loaded almost 2.7 tons. Now imagine a 996 Turbo hits me...who do you think will be more likely to be hurt badly? You do the math...and physics.
Re: Porsche trying to be Mercedes...
As I said before, Porsche is trying to be an independent car company. In order to stay this way, they have to transform themselves into Mercedes, VW or BMW. Sport car play very little part in today automobile market segament.
Sad, but our grandson will look at Porsche just like we look at MB today.
Now a GT, then a SUV, then a 1 series, pickup truck... it just keep on comming. Sport cars?? Look elsewhere.....
You will see people soon complaining about suspension parts from the Porsche pickup, engine from Porsche SUV. Button from 1 series....
Sad, but our grandson will look at Porsche just like we look at MB today.
Now a GT, then a SUV, then a 1 series, pickup truck... it just keep on comming. Sport cars?? Look elsewhere.....
You will see people soon complaining about suspension parts from the Porsche pickup, engine from Porsche SUV. Button from 1 series....
Re: You will be surpise.
X5 with sport suspension, Center of Gravity is very low, only slighty higher than a 540 with sport suspension. Reason because they use the chassis from a 5 series and the engine sit exactly the position where a 5 series engine will mount. Also the front engine mount so close to the front axle, similar theory of the old Porsche/MB E500. Purpose is to put the Center of mass close to center. Lowering the polar moment of interia to help cornering. Especially such high weight car. Its almost impossible to flip a X5. I snapped oversteer in my X5 at 102mph in the racetrack (left and right). It behave like a 5 series.....
at the end of the day, The X5 is design to go offroad, its inevitable for BMW to heighen the CG for offroad clearance. Its true that chance are 'higher' to flip a X5 over a E class, but the margin is so small you shouldn't even worry about.
In the future, The Cayenne, VW or even the new ML will not have this problem when the adjustable suspension come to place. It lowered to exactly like a sedan or estate when suspension is lowered.
My point is SUV now a day is as safe as a sedan. Then you ask yourself why you would want a sedan if a SUV provide the same or more of what you get?? As a sport car addict, I will choose a SUV for my day to day car anyday over a sedan.
Now a day, I still encouter many car nuts who thinks i am a nut to drive a SUV the way I drive, I hope they can be in the co-driver sit and change their mind
at the end of the day, The X5 is design to go offroad, its inevitable for BMW to heighen the CG for offroad clearance. Its true that chance are 'higher' to flip a X5 over a E class, but the margin is so small you shouldn't even worry about.
In the future, The Cayenne, VW or even the new ML will not have this problem when the adjustable suspension come to place. It lowered to exactly like a sedan or estate when suspension is lowered.
My point is SUV now a day is as safe as a sedan. Then you ask yourself why you would want a sedan if a SUV provide the same or more of what you get?? As a sport car addict, I will choose a SUV for my day to day car anyday over a sedan.
Now a day, I still encouter many car nuts who thinks i am a nut to drive a SUV the way I drive, I hope they can be in the co-driver sit and change their mind
Re: read my other post...
You shouldn't speculate... Come down to Dallas and be in my co-driver seat, I will drive 2 laps in the racetrack and let you see how it handles.
The situation you said is similar to a 90+mph hairpin chicane, then you can see rather or not my X5 4.6 is capable of fliping over I can tell you the answer... not even close!!
Did I mention my friend spun out my X5 4.6is at 95mph in the track?? more 360 degree...
The situation you said is similar to a 90+mph hairpin chicane, then you can see rather or not my X5 4.6 is capable of fliping over
I can tell you the answer... not even close!! Did I mention my friend spun out my X5 4.6is at 95mph in the track?? more 360 degree...
i am amazed to find such suv enthusiasts on a 996 site!
i guess porsche is not so crazy after all to make the cayenne! the laws of physics do not require speculation. trucks with high centers of gravity will roll over much more readily than conventional automobiles or especially sports cars i do believe that to each his own as for me trucks are for hauling fertilizer
the laws of physics do not require speculation. trucks with high centers of gravity will roll over much more readily than conventional automobiles or especially sports cars i do believe that to each his own as for me trucks are for hauling fertilizer
Re: i am amazed to find such suv enthusiasts on a 996 site!
The trend for the newest SUVs is to make them very similar to a station wagon, with a very low CG, and give them offroad clearance by the adoption of adjustable air suspension.
The Cayenne is a good example of this phenomenon.
If we consider these newest models (I wouldn't add the current ML in this bracket due to a fairly higher CG and its peculiar chassis structure), the handling and tendency to rollover are going to be much closer to that of a station wagon.
Other than these newer models of Station Utility Vehicles, an SUV can't compete dynamically with a station wagon IMO.
The Cayenne is a good example of this phenomenon.
If we consider these newest models (I wouldn't add the current ML in this bracket due to a fairly higher CG and its peculiar chassis structure), the handling and tendency to rollover are going to be much closer to that of a station wagon.
Other than these newer models of Station Utility Vehicles, an SUV can't compete dynamically with a station wagon IMO.
Re: Naive?...
-----------
And a last thing: my ML55 has a weight of around 2.3 tons, fully loaded almost 2.7 tons. Now imagine a 996 Turbo hits me...who do you think will be more likely to be hurt badly? You do the math...and physics.
-----------
this is IHMO one of the main problems with SUVs... they are big, they are heavy, they are hip. but what is this leading to? wouldn't a normal station wagon be enough and even a better drive? what if we all drive around in these things? here in hamburg it has become kind of an epidemic. women who wouldn't even be capable of parking a smart are driving happily around with their ML's, X5's, grand cherokees and pretty soon i suppose with touaregs and cayennes.
and do not get me wrong: i own a SUV myself
And a last thing: my ML55 has a weight of around 2.3 tons, fully loaded almost 2.7 tons. Now imagine a 996 Turbo hits me...who do you think will be more likely to be hurt badly? You do the math...and physics.
-----------
this is IHMO one of the main problems with SUVs... they are big, they are heavy, they are hip. but what is this leading to? wouldn't a normal station wagon be enough and even a better drive? what if we all drive around in these things? here in hamburg it has become kind of an epidemic. women who wouldn't even be capable of parking a smart are driving happily around with their ML's, X5's, grand cherokees and pretty soon i suppose with touaregs and cayennes.
and do not get me wrong: i own a SUV myself
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
