Crown

Board: Porsche - 911 - 997 Language: English Region: Worldwide Share/Save/Bookmark Close

Forum - Thread

    Apr 14, 2005 6:43:53 PM

    svtrader1
    Veteran
    svtrader1
    Loc:
    Posts: 821, Gallery
    Registered on: Oct 17, 2003
    Reply to: mav21386

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    mav21386 said:



    dude wtf is your problem, why dont you shut the [censored] up and play hide and go [censored] yourself. Also write your little hypocritical comments somewhere else douchebag.



    How can a kid like this continue on Rennteam with such an attitude? Moderator?

    Apr 14, 2005 6:48:23 PM

    GM AustinM
    Rennteam Moderator
    GM Austin
    Loc: Texas , United States
    Posts: 3530, Gallery
    Registered on: Sep 10, 2002
    Reply to: STRADALE

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    Stradale said:
    Quote:
    dude wtf is your problem, why dont you shut the [censored] up and play hide and go [censored] yourself. Also write your little hypocritical comments somewhere else douchebag.



    Temper, temper. LOL !



    Right! This is a fun debate, but let's avoid the name calling. And don't worry about FixedWing, he'll be able to defend himself just fine.

    Apr 14, 2005 6:53:02 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: Dubliner

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    Dubliner said:
    You're pretty darn lucky not to be charged with driving without a licence if you've been driving on a Hong Kong licence. If you're a US resident, you need a US licence. International licences are for visitors only.

    Furthermore, you seem to believe that it is unusual for an officer to ask multiple questions about where you live, who owns the car, what you do etc. It is not. As a previous poster mentioned, officers regularly ask a series of questions to ascertain whether or not you appear to be DUI, and also to judge if you are being truthful.



    It is Connecticut resident and not USA resident. And no, I'm not a resident of Connecticut. Believe me, if he/they had been able to charge me with that then they would have. They clearly wanted to.

    Despite what cops do, the law is quite clear on what questions you must answer.

    I've recently noticed that police in Connecticut will now seek an admission that you were speeding (or whatever). They never use to do this. Which always creates a confrontational situation. You shouldn't have to confess you sins in an attempt to get the guy on the side of the road to "go easy on you". Sure it works sometimes, but it just isn't a good situation. Its putting far too much power in the hands of the police. At least that's my opinion. Obviously others here would not agree.

    Stephen

    Apr 14, 2005 7:13:43 PM

    jboyko
    Co-Pilot
    jboyko
    Loc: NEWARK, NJ
    Posts: 168, Gallery
    Registered on: Dec 5, 2004
    Reply to: svtrader1

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Well, look at it this way. The subject is really off the forum topic of 997 Porsches. The inappropriate subject, comments, and responses command a circus atmosphere, when there is nothing to be gained or lost, from each of us.

    Just a bunch of guys with nothing to do.

    I guess it does get boring after a while, talking about System Faults, RMS, new options, colors, warranty, speed parts and other gossip. That's probably why there have been so many responses in such a short time.

    jb

    Apr 14, 2005 7:26:05 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: jboyko

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    jboyko said:
    That's probably why there have been so many responses in such a short time.



    I agree. I also think it touches on a sensitive topic now in the USA plus, although I haven't posted much lately, I am well known to many of the longer term members here.

    But still, interesting to compare the responses to the earlier thread on the topic with the current responses.

    Stephen

    Apr 14, 2005 7:30:15 PM

    GM AustinM
    Rennteam Moderator
    GM Austin
    Loc: Texas , United States
    Posts: 3530, Gallery
    Registered on: Sep 10, 2002
    Reply to: jboyko

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    jboyko said:
    Well, look at it this way. The subject is really off the forum topic of 997 Porsches. The inappropriate subject, comments, and responses command a circus atmosphere, when there is nothing to be gained or lost, from each of us.

    Just a bunch of guys with nothing to do.

    I guess it does get boring after a while, talking about System Faults, RMS, new options, colors, warranty, speed parts and other gossip. That's probably why there have been so many responses in such a short time.

    jb



    Nice assessment jb!

    Now that that's over, let's talk about cars!

    Stephen, what you need is a Porsche for each continent you intend to frequent. I can't believe you've stayed in the States so long with no Porsche!

    Apr 14, 2005 8:01:08 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: GM AustinM

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    GM Austin said:
    Stephen, what you need is a Porsche for each continent you intend to frequent. I can't believe you've stayed in the States so long with no Porsche!



    Well, to my credit, I do think that the Audi has been absolutely ideal for the New England winters -- better than any Porsche could be -- and, for the most part, a lot less conspicuous.

    As for Porsche on different continents ... maybe I will have a few surprises come the end of the summer.

    Stephen

    Apr 14, 2005 8:03:57 PM

    vtrader
    Veteran
    vtrader
    Loc: Los Angeles
    Posts: 1086, Gallery
    Registered on: Jun 6, 2004
    Reply to: FixedWing

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    FixedWing said:
    ...But still, interesting to compare the responses to the earlier thread on the topic with the current responses.

    Stephen



    Stephen,

    When you first posted this story, we were all on your side. But then you failed to appear (whatever the excuse may be), then you were late, then you drove with a suspend license. And then you say you do not need a license here in the states, yet by your comments, you have had many different experiences with the Connecticut court systems. All of these from an attorney who is practicing law here.

    Whatever you may say about attorneys, all the attorneys I have came across, they have always errored on the side of the law. It seems to me that you are trying to skirt the law and then complain if you get caught.

    I still think that you were lucky and got minor probation. Now lets move on....

    Apr 14, 2005 8:06:12 PM

    Carlos from SpainM
    Rennteam Moderator
    Carlos from Spain
    Loc: Spain. , Spain
    Posts: 21152, Gallery
    Registered on: Feb 9, 2003
    Reply to: FixedWing

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    FixedWing nice to see you around!
    As I said before, very unfair what happened to you if you ask me, there is no excuse for the cop to act and proceed that way, like if he was treating with a freaking terrorist or something... this is just an issue about a self-infladed ego and a small #%&$& if you ask me...

    Apr 14, 2005 8:12:13 PM

    BD 997
    Veteran
    BD 997
    Loc: Boston, MA USA
    Posts: 833, Gallery
    Registered on: Feb 16, 2005
    Reply to: svtrader1

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    the point is that Conn is a strict state...no radar detectors allowed and they hate out of state speeders..so watch out if your headed to one of the Casinos thats where they look for out of state drivers...

    Apr 14, 2005 8:19:52 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: vtrader

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    vtrader said:
    When you first posted this story, we were all on your side. But then you failed to appear (whatever the excuse may be), then you were late, then you drove with a suspend license. And then you say you do not need a license here in the states, yet by your comments, you have had many different experiences with the Connecticut court systems. All of these from an attorney who is practicing law here.



    I grew up in Connecticut and was educated there. I've spent many years in the state. So I know it well. I once had a Connecticut license but haven't had one there in more than a decade. Basically, my lifestyle does not fit well with what most people are use to. If you try to pigeon hole me then you will most likely get it wrong - as you have done.

    Stephen

    Apr 14, 2005 8:21:17 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: BD 997

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    BD 997 said:
    the point is that Conn is a strict state...no radar detectors allowed and they hate out of state speeders..so watch out if your headed to one of the Casinos thats where they look for out of state drivers...



    Radar detectors are now legal in Connecticut. Otherwise, you are probably right.

    Stephen

    Apr 14, 2005 8:23:39 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: Carlos from SpainM

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    Carlos from Spain said:
    FixedWing nice to see you around!
    As I said before, very unfair what happened to you if you ask me, there is no excuse for the cop to act and proceed that way, like if he was treating with a freaking terrorist or something... this is just an issue about a self-infladed ego and a small #%&$& if you ask me...



    Ah, happy to see you still here! This place would definately not be the same without Carlos from Spain.

    And, yes, of course, I agree with you.

    Stephen

    Apr 14, 2005 8:39:09 PM

    Holminator
    Veteran
    Holminator
    Loc: USA , United States
    Posts: 1041, Gallery
    Registered on: Sep 28, 2004
    Reply to: FixedWing

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant
    You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant
    Walk right in
    It's just around the back
    Just a half a mile from the railroad tracks
    And you can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant
    (Excepting Alice)

    Apr 14, 2005 9:00:16 PM

    charly
    Junior
    charly
    Loc: D
    Posts: 78, Gallery
    Registered on: Aug 22, 2002
    Reply to: Holminator

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Well, Fixed Wing, I do remember your exciting reports 2 to 3 years ago on driving in Belgium, Romania and other countries in Europe and I also remember that this took place under a certain "umbrella" (CD) ...which was indeed necessary sometimes.....

    Were you still thinking of this kind of cover when driving slightly above limits in Conn.? Look at it from this point of view: now and then you just have to pay for this kind of fun... put it down to experience and let us hear some better news this summer.

    And at the end you will consider that the infamous story developing out of this partly reflected your own faults and/or negligence.

    p.s.: has your S4 been downgraded with coloured mirrors or did you upgrade an A4 with an S4 sticker )

    Apr 14, 2005 9:06:53 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: charly

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    charly said:
    has your S4 been downgraded with coloured mirrors or did you upgrade an A4 with an S4 sticker )



    I believe this is one of the differences between European delivered B5 S4's and and North American delivered S4's.

    The diplomatic status is sorely missed. But you never know what might be in the future..

    As for fault ... once of the few nice things to come out of the way this was resolved is this that fault is not an issue anymore. So you be the judge if you wish.

    Stephen

    Apr 14, 2005 9:21:37 PM

    Holminator
    Veteran
    Holminator
    Loc: USA , United States
    Posts: 1041, Gallery
    Registered on: Sep 28, 2004
    Reply to: FixedWing

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    I've never been a fan of litigation, but if you sue the department and win, there's a greater chance that the police will not let officers like that remain on the force. They will be weeded out. It needs to happen. Whatever happened to Joe Friday-style professionalism?

    Apr 14, 2005 10:27:44 PM

    Holminator
    Veteran
    Holminator
    Loc: USA , United States
    Posts: 1041, Gallery
    Registered on: Sep 28, 2004
    Reply to: vtrader

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    vtrader said:If you follow the law the law will leave you alone. Period.

    Apr 14, 2005 10:56:16 PM

    Dr. Phil Offline
    Rennteam Master
    Dr. Phil
    Loc: Denmark , Denmark
    Posts: 5884, Gallery
    Registered on: Nov 30, 2004
    Reply to: Holminator

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    vtrader said:If you follow the law the law will leave you alone. Period.



    Just as rememberable a quote as the classics: "Don't worry, babe, I'm only gonna slide the tip in..." and "they have weapons of mass destruction..."

    Apr 14, 2005 11:25:04 PM

    nberry Online
    Rennteam VIP
    nberry
    Loc: La Jolla, USA , United States
    Posts: 13737, Gallery
    Registered on: Apr 11, 2002
    Reply to: Holminator

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    Holminator said:
    Quote:
    vtrader said:If you follow the law the law will leave you alone. Period.





    WOW you guys have a warped view of policemen. Granted there are bad apples in every profession but to indict all of them is just wrong.

    Can any of you name one occasion when you were wrongfully pulled over?

    Apr 14, 2005 11:39:22 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: nberry

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    nberry said:
    Can any of you name one occasion when you were wrongfully pulled over?



    Sure. I was passenger. A friend driving. He passed someone. A cop was coming the other way. The cop turned around and chased. My friend had actually passed in a legal passing zone.

    And I personally have been stopped obviously because the officer wanted to snoop and for nothing I did wrong. That's the photo below. No ticket of course.

    The original quote was an absolute. As a matter of logic, all it takes is one example to prove the claim false. You try to turn it around and say that there are "only a few bad apples". But how many bad apples does it take? One bad apple ruins he bushel.

    Stephen

    Apr 14, 2005 11:42:39 PM

    SrfCity
    Expert
    SrfCity
    Loc: Orange County, CA
    Posts: 1339, Gallery
    Registered on: Jul 21, 2004
    Reply to: nberry

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    The minute you start to pull the, "I'm going to remain silent" stuff, the cops go ballistic. Jeez this guy went nuts and there was a camera rolling. This same kind of thing happened to me when I was a teenager. Most cops are on a power trip otherwise they wouldn't be cops so it isn't wise to get on their bad side.(it can be even worse in certain jurisdictions) What a total waste of energy dealing with all this. Think of how much better off you'd be now if this was handled differently? Live and learn and I hope you can just get it all behind you. Don't get me wrong, I feel for you but, based on what you know now I'd bet you'd do it a little differently the next time. I had to learn that lesson the hard way. Good luck.

    Apr 14, 2005 11:52:36 PM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: SrfCity

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    SrfCity said:
    The minute you start to pull the, "I'm going to remain silent" stuff, the cops go ballistic. Jeez this guy went nuts and there was a camera rolling. This same kind of thing happened to me when I was a teenager. Most cops are on a power trip otherwise they wouldn't be cops so it isn't wise to get on their bad side.(it can be even worse in certain jurisdictions) What a total waste of energy dealing with all this. Think of how much better off you'd be now if this was handled differently?



    It is impossible for me to either prove or know what would have happened had I handled the situation differently. How can anyone say for sure what would have been? That's impossible.

    But I think I have a pretty good idea what would have happened - I would instead have been arrested and charged with a lot more than Reckless Driving. It was obvious from the direction the trooper's questions were taking and it was obvious from the police report later and obvious from the comments of two different prosecutors on two different occasions. Once they found out I was a lawyer they tried very hard to pile on the charges to justify the original arrest.

    Also, every single person who has viewed the tape so far has told me that they thought I was calm and collected and handled myself well. Every single person has said that it was obvious to them that cooperating further was going to achieve nothing positive.

    But what do I know? Maybe you are right. When you're stopped next time, you do it your way. And maybe it will even be the right way. Maybe it would have been the right way this time. And maybe you'll end up sitting across from your defence lawyer with him shaking his head and asking you why people never learn to keep their mouths shut? Who knows..

    But I do think second-guessing gets us no where.

    Stephen

    Apr 15, 2005 12:57:15 AM

    SrfCity
    Expert
    SrfCity
    Loc: Orange County, CA
    Posts: 1339, Gallery
    Registered on: Jul 21, 2004
    Reply to: FixedWing

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Personally I think you're taking a victim role here the more I read this. Some times things aren't always fair but we need to take our lumps and admit that there may have been a better way. Considering the outcome it's pretty safe to say that this turned out for the worse. Given that you are the one paying the price, I'd say if different choices were made the probability of a better outcome would have been far greater. But hey, do anything you want as long as your willing to pay the price My opinion.....

    Apr 15, 2005 1:52:40 AM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: SrfCity

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    SrfCity said:
    Personally I think you're taking a victim role here the more I read this. Some times things aren't always fair but we need to take our lumps and admit that there may have been a better way. Considering the outcome it's pretty safe to say that this turned out for the worse. Given that you are the one paying the price, I'd say if different choices were made the probability of a better outcome would have been far greater. But hey, do anything you want as long as your willing to pay the price My opinion.....



    People develop a hypothesis and then along come some data that doesn't fit with the hypothesis. Do they question the hypothesis? No. Instead they argue with the data. Hypothesises are like religion and people feel naked without them. They don't give them up easily.

    Anyway, I was there. I've seen a great deal more on this than you have. I've lived it. I've thought about it a lot more than you have. I granted to you that there are no certainties in this world and I might have been wrong. But hey, if you know better then please be my guest with your pretty safe assumptions.

    The same goes for taking lumps. Please be my guest. But do allow me to stand on the side a safe distance away while you make your sacrifice. Ok?

    Stephen

    Apr 15, 2005 2:07:59 AM

    SrfCity
    Expert
    SrfCity
    Loc: Orange County, CA
    Posts: 1339, Gallery
    Registered on: Jul 21, 2004
    Reply to: FixedWing

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Sure, you are absolutely right. So right, that it has probably been hell for you and a disruption to your life. Is it worth it? That's for you to decide. I'm not the one that has had to suffer. Anyway, all the best.

    Apr 15, 2005 3:10:55 AM

    vtrader
    Veteran
    vtrader
    Loc: Los Angeles
    Posts: 1086, Gallery
    Registered on: Jun 6, 2004
    Reply to: FixedWing

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    FixedWing said:

    It is impossible for me to either prove or know what would have happened had I handled the situation differently. How can anyone say for sure what would have been? That's impossible....


    Stephen,

    I am sorry, but this is all B.S.

    First: You challenged the authority of the policeman. Since you knew you were going to be arrested, why did you call your mother?

    Second: As a layman, I know a hearing is held to see if there is sufficient evidence to go to trial. There was sufficienct evidence. Second, your motion was out of place. Even if the cop treated you bad, there was sufficient evidence to hold you over for trial.

    Third: You mention discovery. Discovery is for trial, not a hearing. The biggest mistake that you made was to represent yourself.

    Fourth: Connecticut Superior Court Judge Patricia Swords did exactly what she is suppose to do. Your tape was inappropiate at that time. It was a hearing to see if there was enough evidence and set a trial date. And then you were late because as I read it, the Judge, the clerks, the whole system is in a conspiracy against you. I thought she did you a favor because she could have kept you in jail until the trial, yet she only increased your bail by $250.

    Fifth: AND THE MOST DUMBEST THING YET, you fail to appear for your trial. Yet these same cops who were in a conspirarcy against you, let you turn yourself in and you complain about carrying $10,000 in bail money.

    Sixth: Now the prosecutor is in the conspiracy and holds your trial till after lunch. Yet, I am sure that other court matters were going on during the morning. And they did this to arrest you at lunch? As an attorney, why did you not do your homework? There is no excuse that an attorney did not know that if you miss a court date for reckless driving, that your license is automatically suspended. And in most states, driving with a suspended license is an arrestable offense. Yet they did not arrest you, so I guess the officer was or was not part of the conspiracy. I lost track with this one.

    And then you mention discovery again. Discovery is for trial, not for a hearing. And then I lost track. Was it two different cases where you failed to appear? The reckless driving and a minor speeding ticket?

    From your story, I find an individual who has total lack of respect of the law and has made numerous errors in judgement. And what really gets my goat is that this is from an attorney who is suppose to be an officer of the court. Yet he cries that the whole system and individuals are in some mass conspiracy against him.

    Apr 15, 2005 3:32:46 AM

    FelixC
    Newbie
    FelixC
    Loc: Los Angeles, California
    Posts: 44, Gallery
    Registered on: Oct 1, 2004
    Reply to: vtrader

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    vtrader said:
    ...And then I lost track. Was it two different cases where you failed to appear? The reckless driving and a minor speeding ticket?...



    You failed to appear twice? On two different cases? No wonder you were in shackles. What was the excuse for the second one? Just in case you don't know, when you signed the ticket, it means that you are going to appear.

    Apr 15, 2005 3:45:07 AM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: vtrader

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    vtrader said:
    I am sorry, but this is all B.S.



    My God. So may assumptions and misunderstandings as to the facts and the law. I don't even know where to begin.

    I called my mother to arrange bail after I had been arrested. The standard one call that we all get. This was some hours after I had been arrested. This is a pretty normal thing to do.

    There was no probable cause hearing. I was already out on bail. The charge was a misdemeanour. The excerpt I quoted came from a motion which had nothing to do with this.

    You are wrong about discovery only being applicable to "trials". It is generally applicable to fact based matters. For example, discovery is available prior to a determination of jurisdiction which is done on a motion. In any case, the discovery I am talking about is discovery in aid of uncovering the facts prior to trial.

    There is a general right to bail in the USA. On a misdemeanour such as this, the issue would only be the amount of that bail. Holding someone without bail for a charge like this would just not happen. Bail issues are immediately appealable and no appeals court would accept such a ruling. Bail might be set at $10,000 or $100,000 but there would at least be some level of bail set.

    It is normal practice to arrange to surrender when an arrest warrant has been issued. Else you run the risk of being arrested at any moment. The police prefer it also because it is efficient. And who is to complain if someone turns themselves in? You think they would just send him home?

    Your paragraph six is way too convoluted for me to understand. Actually the officer on the Operating Under Suspension charge (a misdemeanour) was very pleasant. He knew exactly what was going on. For example, he allowed me to call friends to move my car instead of having it towed. He didn't have to do that. He was basically just doing his job.

    I never claimed a "mass conspiracy".

    You make your opinion of me quite obvious. Everyone is entitled to an opinion including you so fair enough. My only comment is that your opinion seems to be based upon a lot of falsities. But I rather suspect that in your mind, the facts have little to do with anything. I have obviously managed to push some very powerful button or other in you.

    Stephen

    Apr 15, 2005 3:52:48 AM

    FixedWing
    Veteran
    FixedWing
    Loc:
    Posts: 870, Gallery
    Registered on: May 25, 2002
    Reply to: FelixC

    Re: That infamous Connecticut speeding case

    Quote:
    FelixC said:
    You failed to appear twice? On two different cases? No wonder you were in shackles. What was the excuse for the second one? Just in case you don't know, when you signed the ticket, it means that you are going to appear.



    Seperate cases. The minor speeding ticket because they failed to notify me of the hearing. The Reckless trial because I was notified of the hearing date as I was being led away and made a mistake as to what that date was. By the way, the failure to appear charge requires "intent". A simple mistake is not sufficient. We all make mistakes -- especially when being led away by sheriffs. If you don't think so then try it sometime.

    Stephen
     
    Edit

    Forum

    1. All 

    Boards

     
    Board Subject Last post Rating Views Replies
    Porsche Sticky SUN'S LAST RUN TO WILSON, WY - 991 C2S CAB LIFE, END OF AN ERA (Part II) 4/17/24 7:16 AM
    GnilM     		777031 1798
    Porsche Sticky Welcome to Rennteam: Cars and Coffee... (photos) 4/7/24 11:48 AM
    Boxster Coupe GTS     		441639 565
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Cayman GT4 RS (2021) 5/12/23 12:11 PM
    W8MM     		262749 288
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Porsche 911 (992) GT3 RS - 2022 3/12/24 8:28 AM
    DJM48     		260911 323
    Porsche Sticky The new Macan: the first all-electric SUV from Porsche 1/30/24 9:18 AM
    RCA     		85168 45
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Taycan 2024 Facelift 3/15/24 1:23 PM
    CGX car nut     		5547 50
    Porsche The moment I've been waiting for... 2/1/24 7:01 PM
    Pilot
     
     
     
     
     
    		 880612 1364
    Porsche 992 GT3 7/23/23 7:01 PM
    Grant     		815817 3868
    Porsche Welcome to the new Taycan Forum! 2/10/24 4:43 PM
    nberry     		390895 1526
    Porsche GT4RS 4/21/24 11:50 AM
    mcdelaug     		389956 1454
    Others Tesla 2 the new thread 12/13/23 2:48 PM
    CGX car nut     		372145 2401
    Porsche Donor vehicle for Singer Vehicle Design 7/3/23 12:30 PM
    Porker     		368883 797
    Porsche Red Nipples 991.2 GT3 Touring on tour 4/11/24 12:32 PM
    Ferdie     		289118 668
    Porsche Collected my 997 GTS today 10/19/23 7:06 PM
    CGX car nut
     
     
     
     
     
    		 261252 812
    Lambo Huracán EVO STO 7/30/23 6:59 PM
    mcdelaug     		240118 346
    Lotus Lotus Emira 6/25/23 2:53 PM
    Enmanuel     		230273 101
    Others Corvette C8 10/16/23 3:24 PM
    Enmanuel     		221172 488
    Others Gordon Murray - T.50 11/22/23 10:27 AM
    mcdelaug     		169192 387
    Porsche Back to basics - 996 GT3 RS 6/11/23 5:13 PM
    CGX car nut     		140984 144
    BMW M 2024 BMW M3 CS Official Now 12/29/23 9:04 AM
    RCA     		117451 303
    Motor Sp. 2023 Formula One 12/19/23 5:38 AM
    WhoopsyM     		108553 685
    Porsche 2022 992 Safari Model 3/7/24 4:22 PM
    WhoopsyM     		84122 239
    AMG Mercedes-Benz W124 500E aka Porsche typ 2758 2/23/24 10:03 PM
    blueflame     		75055 297
    Porsche 992 GT3 RS 3/3/24 7:22 PM
    WhoopsyM     		53623 314
    Motor Sp. Porsche 963 3/16/24 9:27 PM
    WhoopsyM     		25001 237
    Ferrari Ferrari 296 GTB (830PS, Hybrid V6) 1/21/24 4:29 PM
    GT-Boy     		21167 103
    BMW M 2022 BMW M5 CS 4/8/24 1:43 PM
    Ferdie     		19489 140
    AMG G63 sold out 9/15/23 7:38 PM
    Nico997     		16580 120
    AMG [2022] Mercedes-AMG SL 4/23/24 1:24 PM
    RCA     		13687 225
    Motor Sp. 24-Hour race Nürburgring 2018 5/25/23 10:42 PM
    Grant     		11244 55
    126 items found, displaying 1 to 30.