RE: Is there hope for the 718 Boxster? PH Blog
Discussion
jayemm89 said:
I am reasonably confident it isn't so much an emissions thing, as a top trumps thing. Also, most people will judge how quick a car is by putting their boot down at 2,000 rpm in 4th - not a great way to test a high revving, NA engine. When all others are moving to smaller, turbocharged units and reaping the torque benefits... not much you can do.
It will be massively better still when they eventually become all-electric. At least the intermediate step to a four pot means that the silence will be an improvement 
is1 said:
It was a reference to the likely age/lifestyle of buyers of new "mainstream" Porsches.
All the Porsche owners I know are "silver surfers".
So what age do I have to sell the Porsche and get a Honda Jazz to avoid offending your sensibilities?All the Porsche owners I know are "silver surfers".
Anyway, I thought the reason kids can't have Porsches is that they're premature ejaculation drivers, keep having accidents and can't afford the insurance premium.
Ozzie Osmond said:
So what age do I have to sell the Porsche and get a Honda Jazz to avoid offending your sensibilities?
Anyway, I thought the reason kids can't have Porsches is that they're premature ejaculation drivers, keep having accidents and can't afford the insurance premium.
I don't even understand your post so don't quite know how to reply to it.Anyway, I thought the reason kids can't have Porsches is that they're premature ejaculation drivers, keep having accidents and can't afford the insurance premium.
The point I was making was that the engineers have a brief which is to make an enjoyable 2-seat car that is easy to use in the real world and is generally bought by people with a bit of free cash (often, people of a certain age), who probably don't prioritise an engine sound over all else and in that regard, they have delivered the "solution" they were asked to come up with it - easier to drive, more powerful, more kit etc.
Even though I'm not in the market to buy one, I wish it hadn't gone 4-cylinder (choice etc.) but they will sell like hotcakes because Porsche know what their customer base wants.
I'm not sure how I've offended you.
OK. It doesn't bother me that much how badly other people drive. If Porsche can make the flat-4 vaguely as decent as the BMW I6 turbo, then it will be OK. Not totally NA brilliant, granted but good enough for all the other bits of the cars to be enjoyed, stuff like the chassis for instance - time will tell.
Based on Eric's graph in the other thread, things don't appear that different from 987 to 718
Based on Eric's graph in the other thread, things don't appear that different from 987 to 718
Edited by nickfrog on Friday 29th January 18:18
ensignia said:
Christ, some people are stupid.
Yep, gave my opinion which I thought I was allowed to do on here, unlike you who just randomly calls someone stupid, because you don't agree with their assessment. Couldn't give a stuff either way really but your arrogance is matched only by your demeaning manner. At least have an opinion on the car in question, then your forum contribution won't be a total waste of time ....is1 said:
The point I was making was that the engineers have a brief which is to make an enjoyable 2-seat car that is easy to use in the real world and is generally bought by people with a bit of free cash (often, people of a certain age), who probably don't prioritise an engine sound over all else ....
A 60 year old here who has a bit of free cash and does prioritise engine sound over much else! I love the GT4, enjoying the much meatier torque than other Coxsters, but if I had to choose between torque and engine sound I would probably go for engine sound.I guarantee that EVO and Autocar will give it a five star rating and ignore the increase in kerb weight and loss of n/a response....Porsche will sell a shed load more cars which is good, but I really do mourn the loss of the n/a engine.
As far as I can see, if Mazda can still give us a n/a MX-5, by shedding weight and keeping It simple, surely Porsche, the most successful sports car company in history can too....
Trouble is, with these mega hot hatches churning out 350 BHP now, the market demands that Porsche keep pace and I guess a n/a Boxster would feel slow compared with, say an RS3 or the new Focus RS.
As far as I can see, if Mazda can still give us a n/a MX-5, by shedding weight and keeping It simple, surely Porsche, the most successful sports car company in history can too....
Trouble is, with these mega hot hatches churning out 350 BHP now, the market demands that Porsche keep pace and I guess a n/a Boxster would feel slow compared with, say an RS3 or the new Focus RS.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I genuinely had no intention to offend you - I wish I hadn't mentioned the BMW thing and stuck to the power curve - I think it is more relevant as surely power = torque x rpm.Look, I am saying in total honesty : you took things the wrong way, I was trying to engage in a conversation about the fact that the power curves looked similar, irrespective of the amount of combined torque and rev to get there. I am sure you're right though but it's not a big deal.
This is not a rhetorical question : do you think you are superior to everyone ?
Mr Cmoose. The word pathetic was in reference to what you called me, as I am sure you know, twice. To this day I still don't know why. But fair enough, maybe not very clever of me.
I think you're very knowledgeable and I share many of your preferences. However, you can be very irritating in the way you convey your opinions : it always seems that people who
don't like the same subjective things as you (or who can live with a turbo), don't know what they're missing and are not true enthusiasts. You judge others and seem to belittle others on subjective criteria. And you're very eloquent, which really doesn't help matters actually. The other aspect is the amount of time you repeat the very same thing about turbo vs NA. You must have said it so many times, everyone knows so there is a point where it gets a little annoying.
My point is someone can be as enthusiastic about cars and have the same passion / spirit / values / knowledge as you and appreciate the finest things in a car yet still accept a turbo (while recognising its shortcomings) and should not be made to feel any less enthusiast than you.
I was genuinely trying to engage in a conversation btw, but I clearly failed. I just found those power curves very similar, that's all.
But still, I would like to maintain an entente cordiale, so sorry if I sounded too abrupt.
I think you're very knowledgeable and I share many of your preferences. However, you can be very irritating in the way you convey your opinions : it always seems that people who
don't like the same subjective things as you (or who can live with a turbo), don't know what they're missing and are not true enthusiasts. You judge others and seem to belittle others on subjective criteria. And you're very eloquent, which really doesn't help matters actually. The other aspect is the amount of time you repeat the very same thing about turbo vs NA. You must have said it so many times, everyone knows so there is a point where it gets a little annoying.
My point is someone can be as enthusiastic about cars and have the same passion / spirit / values / knowledge as you and appreciate the finest things in a car yet still accept a turbo (while recognising its shortcomings) and should not be made to feel any less enthusiast than you.
I was genuinely trying to engage in a conversation btw, but I clearly failed. I just found those power curves very similar, that's all.
But still, I would like to maintain an entente cordiale, so sorry if I sounded too abrupt.
Edited by nickfrog on Friday 29th January 21:13
if you were to say black, it'd be white! anonymous said:
[redacted]
Your grandiose view of yourself, total lack of tolerance for opposing views, public schoolboy tone, complete authority on engines not yet tested, the persecution complex...Is that enough
You honestly need to stop taking everything;
A. So seriously
B. So personally
Whatever it is you do I'm sure you wouldn't choose to communicate in the way you are here. Unless you work in IT, obviously. As frog said you are articulate and have some interesting views on things, but it's just so much hard work all the time.
GreenArrow said:
I guarantee that EVO and Autocar will give it a five star rating and ignore the increase in kerb weight and loss of n/a response....Porsche will sell a shed load more cars which is good, but I really do mourn the loss of the n/a engine.
As far as I can see, if Mazda can still give us a n/a MX-5, by shedding weight and keeping It simple, surely Porsche, the most successful sports car company in history can too....
Trouble is, with these mega hot hatches churning out 350 BHP now, the market demands that Porsche keep pace and I guess a n/a Boxster would feel slow compared with, say an RS3 or the new Focus RS.
The trouble is Porsche buyers. They want more power, bigger wheels, leather interiors, more toys and are prepared to put up with less feel, less involvement, more weight, etc. Good lord can you imagine if they somehow managed to shed 200kgs from a Boxster and released it with an NA engine that was smaller with less power?! The cries of 'but a (insert hot hatch here) has more power than a Porsche!'.As far as I can see, if Mazda can still give us a n/a MX-5, by shedding weight and keeping It simple, surely Porsche, the most successful sports car company in history can too....
Trouble is, with these mega hot hatches churning out 350 BHP now, the market demands that Porsche keep pace and I guess a n/a Boxster would feel slow compared with, say an RS3 or the new Focus RS.
People who buy MX5s generally couldn't give a flying f
k how it performs against a hot hatch because it's a st load of fun without having to get it's dick out all the time to prove it's 'better' than something else. Which is why they can get away with releasing a car that performs like one that was made 20+ years ago.The amusing thing is that Porsche owners bemoan the constant dulling of the driving experience over time. One thing after another and when you break it down what they actually want is an old 911. So you'd think following Mazda's lead in that respect would be the way to go... Curious that they just keep getting further and further away from that.
Richyboy said:
I don't know what the fuss is about. They made legendary four cylinder engines before, why can't they do it again?
Generally done to get a cheaper car into the market in order to try and stay afloat though. And as soon as the coffers were healthy enough they dumped it. And the last time they launched a cheap car to stay afloat they made the decision to give it the 911 engine. But Porsche have no need to do this with their sports cars any more as they firstly own 51% of VW Group and secondly they have diesel Audi vans to churn out in volumes for cash. It certainly is a big step to drop to a 4 pot, regardless of whether it makes for a superior experience or not there is a stigma to chopping cylinders. It's only in recent times that many people accept that the cheap 6 pot Dino is worthy of linking to Ferrari and more recently both Jag and Merc have received abuse for going for the cheap V6 option instead of reverting to I6. And with the Boxster it instantly drops the connection to the 911 that was once important.
I don't think it will matter but I do think that those who have raised concerns or made negative observations have valid views. Regardless of performance etc this car has lost something of significance.
GreenArrow said:
I guarantee that EVO and Autocar will give it a five star rating and ignore the increase in kerb weight and loss of n/a response....Porsche will sell a shed load more cars which is good, but I really do mourn the loss of the n/a engine.
As far as I can see, if Mazda can still give us a n/a MX-5, by shedding weight and keeping It simple, surely Porsche, the most successful sports car company in history can too....
Trouble is, with these mega hot hatches churning out 350 BHP now, the market demands that Porsche keep pace and I guess a n/a Boxster would feel slow compared with, say an RS3 or the new Focus RS.
I don't so much about EVO but I don't believe Autocar are that bad... Last year they did a TTS, Cayman & M235i group test with the Cayman winning and the TTS last. TT forum mumbers were pi$$ed because the TTS was faster 0-60 and in the mid range which is true. Autocar's reasoning though was the Cayman was a better sports car. They don't just go by the numbers. I'd imagine the 718 will still win any group test, inspite of it going turbo, because it will likely be way better than what little competition there is.As far as I can see, if Mazda can still give us a n/a MX-5, by shedding weight and keeping It simple, surely Porsche, the most successful sports car company in history can too....
Trouble is, with these mega hot hatches churning out 350 BHP now, the market demands that Porsche keep pace and I guess a n/a Boxster would feel slow compared with, say an RS3 or the new Focus RS.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff