RE: Porsche not perfect shocker: PH Blog

[blueg33]

LordHaveMurci said:

I think another thing with the Porsche/Lotus debate is that Porsche offer the whole package (in many peoples eyes) of looks, perceived quality, brand/badge, driving dynamics, usability, noise etc.

To me as a lifelong petrolhead, Lotus offer some, but not all of these & I would not personally consider an Evora.

Interesting, the points you make where I suspect that you think the Lotus fails are mainly down to marketing

Looks - subjective, many people think the Evora is a lambo
Quality - not as big a gulf as you would think, but Lotus marketing is poor on this
Brand - marketing
Driving Dynamics - Lotus win
Useability - My Evora is my 20k miles a year daily driver, its more comfortable than a Cayman, has cruise satnav, Bluetooth. (it is less easy to get into but is more practical in many ways than a 2 seat Cayman, less practical than a 911) I think this is a therefore a marketing issue
Noise - Evora 400 sounds great, an £800 exhaust made mine sound great, little difference from speccing sports exhaust on a Porsche

etc
Service interval is arguable too short on an Evora being the same as an AMv8 or a Maser Grantourismo

[chelme]

chrispj said:

chelme said:

+1. I agree with you. The Evora cannot be taken seriously by the majority of sports car buyers because of its... ...lack of a homegrown/bespoke engine

I presume you've dismissed Xenos, BAC, Elemental etc for using a 2 liter Ecoboost or any car out there using a crate Chevy LS? Will Aston drop off your radar once they put their first Mercedes engine in a DB11? Should Morgan make their own engines rather than buy in Ford and BMW motors? I think you're putting your own prejudice there and you're just being snobbish that there's a Toyota logo on the Lotus engine.

Can't comment on Xenos and Elemental, what are they??? As for BAC Mono, I may be wrong but I thought the 2.3 ltr engine in there is heavily breathed on by Cosworth (as in change of camshafts, pistons etc, no?) so much so that Cosworth call it their own. If so, then the engine is unique to that car.

Regarding AM, I think they know better than to give the impression they are simply picking up the 4.0 V8 and slotting into the AM engine bay, without arranging for serious changes to be made to the engines (all be it by Mercedes behind closed doors one assumes)...and no, I don't suppose it will be simply adding a larger set of turbos either akin to fitting a supercharger to a Camry V6. That would be a mistake.

[Impasse]

I've got an overweight car with a glued together chassis, bodywork made from old bottle tops, an engine from a Ford and switches stolen from a Volvo.

But I do like my Aston Martin, it can bring a joy to driving in a way Porsche would never understand - far removed from such irrelevances that the stopwatch dictates. But let's get back to criticising the Evora for having similar qualities.

[RobM77]

blueg33 said:

LordHaveMurci said:

I think another thing with the Porsche/Lotus debate is that Porsche offer the whole package (in many peoples eyes) of looks, perceived quality, brand/badge, driving dynamics, usability, noise etc.

To me as a lifelong petrolhead, Lotus offer some, but not all of these & I would not personally consider an Evora.

Interesting, the points you make where I suspect that you think the Lotus fails are mainly down to marketing

Looks - subjective, many people think the Evora is a lambo
Quality - not as big a gulf as you would think, but Lotus marketing is poor on this
Brand - marketing
Driving Dynamics - Lotus win
Useability - My Evora is my 20k miles a year daily driver, its more comfortable than a Cayman, has cruise satnav, Bluetooth. (it is less easy to get into but is more practical in many ways than a 2 seat Cayman, less practical than a 911) I think this is a therefore a marketing issue
Noise - Evora 400 sounds great, an £800 exhaust made mine sound great, little difference from speccing sports exhaust on a Porsche

etc
Service interval is arguable too short on an Evora being the same as an AMv8 or a Maser Grantourismo

I can really see what Murci's saying, or perhaps trying to say, but to be honest I think that's just another way of looking at what you break down blueg33; the fact that all cars rate at different levels across many facets, and which car you pick depends on how you prioritise those things. It's also highly personal with things such as looks and brand image.

I actually think much of Lotus' battle is won and lost before people have even clapped eyes on one, let alone driven one, which if true may explain the sales differences between Porsche and Lotus and how that stacks up with driving both cars. I find some of Lotus' marketing rather strange ("it's not for you" - what's that all about?) and to be honest as a thought experiment if you blanked people's minds and gave them both cars and MIRA's Alpine route I think the results of people's votes and purchases would be quite different to how they are back in the real world, where people carry with them prejudices, pre-conceived ideas, worries of what others will think, reception to marketing etc. It's a tough market, but if attitudes towards Lotus compared to Porsche ever change then that's a very lucrative tipping point reached for Lotus as more and more people realise how well their cars drive.

[Ozzie Osmond]

Impasse said:

my Aston Martin, it can bring a joy to driving in a way Porsche would never understand

Please tell us more! If I'm missing out on something I need to know what it is!

[ORD]

All very true re Lotus. I want to love the brand because it is aimed more at me than Porsche is. I just get annoyed that it has taken so many wrong turns over time. Still, it is pretty much impossible to make a small volume car competitive, so I should probably cut them some slack.

I agree completely that the battle for Lotus is to get people in the cars for a test drive! I think the brand is positively unattractive to a lot of buyers - it reeks of cheapness, and nobody wants something cheap for £50k.

[Vee12V]

Mermaid said:

Lotus had the potential to be be as attractive a marque as Porsche.

Porsche: good product, good marketing.

Lotus: Good product, poor marketing - in loose terms.

More like: "Lotus: Good product, non existing marketing"

And like others have stated most people think my Exige V6 costs A LOT more than it actually did.

Edited by Vee12V on Wednesday 19th August 15:01

[Mermaid]

Vee12V said:

Mermaid said:

Lotus had the potential to be be as attractive a marque as Porsche.

Porsche: good product, good marketing.

Lotus: Good product, poor marketing - in loose terms.

More like: "Lotus: Good product, non existing marketing"

I was trying to be polite to Lotus, for the 4 box matrix would be:
Bad product, bad marketing - Lada
Bad product, good marketing - some Italian jobbie
Good product , bad marketing - Lotus but bad seemed a harsh word to use
Good product, good marketing - Porsche (although Porsche have suffered lemons)

[RobM77]

As you say yourself, the Elise is a very different sort of car. True, I did buy one 10 years ago instead of a Boxster, as did Kambites on this forum, but I suspect we're in a minority. As you also say, the Evora is a much closer comparison to Porsche's offerings. I've not lived with either, just driven them on a few occasions, but I get so much more out of driving an Evora that I just know that like my Elise it would be a car that rain or shine I'd look forward to driving at the end of each day and from my experiences to date that probably wouldn't be the case with a standard Cayman or Cayman S.

[Impasse]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Please tell us more! If I'm missing out on something I need to know what it is!

A feelgood factor. An approach to driving that isn't solely focussed on the amount of time taken to travel a set distance or whether another vehicle might be able to generate extra lateral grip on any given corner. It's a nice place to be - it feels special, whether on a trip to the supermarket or a bit of exuberance along an empty B road.
There are many other attractive attributes about driving that don't require measuring with a stopwatch, slide rule or G-meter. (Nothing to do with "wafting", btw. That's a whole other appreciation.)

Some get it, some don't and go looking for numbers to ratify their purchase instead.

[LordHaveMurci]

Impasse said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Please tell us more! If I'm missing out on something I need to know what it is!

A feelgood factor. An approach to driving that isn't solely focussed on the amount of time taken to travel a set distance or whether another vehicle might be able to generate extra lateral grip on any given corner. It's a nice place to be - it feels special, whether on a trip to the supermarket or a bit of exuberance along an empty B road.
There are many other attractive attributes about driving that don't require measuring with a stopwatch, slide rule or G-meter. (Nothing to do with "wafting", btw. That's a whole other appreciation.)

Some get it, some don't and go looking for numbers to ratify their purchase instead.

Depends on your priorities though doesn't it. I drove a 4.3 V8V back to back with a 997 Non S before purchasing my 996, much though I loved the Aston the 911 was so much more focussed that the Aston didn't get a look in.
Even now, 6yrs later, I still really want a V8V but just couldn't take that step down to gain the image & feelgood factor the AM would provide.

[SidewaysSi]

LordHaveMurci said:

Impasse said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Please tell us more! If I'm missing out on something I need to know what it is!

A feelgood factor. An approach to driving that isn't solely focussed on the amount of time taken to travel a set distance or whether another vehicle might be able to generate extra lateral grip on any given corner. It's a nice place to be - it feels special, whether on a trip to the supermarket or a bit of exuberance along an empty B road.
There are many other attractive attributes about driving that don't require measuring with a stopwatch, slide rule or G-meter. (Nothing to do with "wafting", btw. That's a whole other appreciation.)

Some get it, some don't and go looking for numbers to ratify their purchase instead.

Depends on your priorities though doesn't it. I drove a 4.3 V8V back to back with a 997 Non S before purchasing my 996, much though I loved the Aston the 911 was so much more focussed that the Aston didn't get a look in.
Even now, 6yrs later, I still really want a V8V but just couldn't take that step down to gain the image & feelgood factor the AM would provide.

I can pretty much say exactly the same except replace Aston with 911 and 911 with Elise.

[ORD]

SidewaysSi said:

LordHaveMurci said:

Impasse said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Please tell us more! If I'm missing out on something I need to know what it is!

A feelgood factor. An approach to driving that isn't solely focussed on the amount of time taken to travel a set distance or whether another vehicle might be able to generate extra lateral grip on any given corner. It's a nice place to be - it feels special, whether on a trip to the supermarket or a bit of exuberance along an empty B road.
There are many other attractive attributes about driving that don't require measuring with a stopwatch, slide rule or G-meter. (Nothing to do with "wafting", btw. That's a whole other appreciation.)

Some get it, some don't and go looking for numbers to ratify their purchase instead.

Depends on your priorities though doesn't it. I drove a 4.3 V8V back to back with a 997 Non S before purchasing my 996, much though I loved the Aston the 911 was so much more focussed that the Aston didn't get a look in.
Even now, 6yrs later, I still really want a V8V but just couldn't take that step down to gain the image & feelgood factor the AM would provide.

I can pretty much say exactly the same except replace Aston with 911 and 911 with Elise.

Quite.

As for Aston v Porsche, some people think Astons are pretty. That's it. They are otherwise unequivocal worse than Porsches. Slower, heavier, less focussed on handling, more mainstream engines...

[chelme]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Yep, and I dare say in more recent tests the Cayman R and 911 were rated as good at the handling and ride department, if not better. This brings me to the fact Lotus have, by focusing too much on ride and handling, forgot other qualities it is a must to nail in the £50-£80k bracket, and thus limited their appeal to the greater market.

If as planned, Lotus had built the Evora GTE with the heavily modified (and thus 'bespoke') engine as exhibited in Goodwood, they would have sold many more I wager. Sadly that was the time of the Bahar era, and the plug was pulled on that project too. I also heard that the engine in its heavily modified guise was not reliable...shame.

[Ozzie Osmond]

chelme said:

Sadly that was the time of the Bahar era, and the plug was pulled on that project too. I also heard that the engine in its heavily modified guise was not reliable...shame.

Indeed. Kimberley's folly (2006) was followed by Bahar's insanity (2010) and then by very little. If Exige V6 was really the right answer they could have saved themselves the monstrous cost of developing Evora in the first place.

I await a genuinely new Lotus sportscar with great hope and with great interest. In the meantime "imperfect Porsches" have the field more or less to themselves.

[HLS30]

In 1975, being young, dumb and believing myself incapable of error, bought a new 911S. In two weeks it was no longer driveable as I learned the meaning of off throttle oversteer. The body shop manager said I should have purchased a used one to learn on, then buy a nice one to keep. It immediately occurred to me that any car that needs training wheels is probably not for me. I haven't drank the Kool-Aid since. I am of the belief that these have always been aspirational toys that the buyer uses as a tool to sell more Amway to his neighbors in their gated McMansion enclave. Their recent travails and up and down valuation have made clear that the regime is not about the cars anymore, and I expect they will be a truculent VW problem child. People that I respect tell me I am full of sh*t, that Porsche represents the pinnacle of automotive engineering. I think they had the grape.

[Impasse]

ORD said:

Quite.

As for Aston v Porsche, some people think Astons are pretty. That's it. They are otherwise unequivocal worse than Porsches. Slower, heavier, less focussed on handling, more mainstream engines...

And this is exactly my point. You've just given a whole load of measurable reasons why you think one car is "better" than another. Driving by numbers, how very dull.

[SidewaysSi]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I haven't driven a new AM Vantage but many will day it is a finer driver's car than a non - GT 991. I think Aston have come a long way since being simply the good looking one in comparison to a 911.

With regards the Elise, it depends on where your priorities and needs lie. Personally I find the car perfectly practical and if needed, would be more than happy to use it day in, day out.

I am a steering and chassis man however and prioritise these qualities way above anything else, be they dynamic in nature or otherwise so naturally I tend to gravitate towards Lotus. Aspects such as poor gearing and electric steering would drive me nuts if I had to use a Cayman daily.

The fact the Lotus makes far more financial sense is the icing on the cake for me.

I do however drive an S1 Sport 160 which has been modified with amongst other things a quick steering rack, upgraded dampers and a sports exhaust, all of which really uncork the car and intensify the driving experience.

[ORD]

True, true. But Lotus would back itself to get a fair number of people who actually drove the cars. It's getting people to even consider and try a Lotus that is so hard.

[MGJohn]

daytona365 said:

How can a car with most of it's weight in the back be 'perfect' ? Just basic physics, though you've got to hand it to the engineers in making the very best possible of a basically flawed design.

My views on the subject.

All hail the pendulous Porsche.... 'cept me.

Panamera anybody ? ... now you're talking