**** GT3 Worldwide Action Group Letter to PAG & Dealers ***

[RushSpeed]

Robbo66 said:

One, a realistic one.....rather than an angry, aggressive, foot stomping one.
I'm suggesting you get over your assumed birth right, to acquire some preferential treatment....when you haven't even taken delivery of your car.
As I mentioned before, those with a car ....fully support their claims to compensation.

Don't know where you got me stomping around being aggressive? My birth right to acquire preferential treatment? again show me where I said that!
I still cannot understand why you say these things and yet you belong to a group list that is also fighting for compensation? - as I mentioned how many faces have you got because I certainly can see two.

[Robbo66]

RushSpeed said:

Don't know where you got me stomping around being aggressive? My birth right to acquire preferential treatment? again show me where I said that!
I still cannot understand why you say these things and yet you belong to a group list that is also fighting for compensation? - as I mentioned how many faces have you got because I certainly can see two.

I'll try and explain....slowly.
I am supporting those who have had cars delivered, and also hoping to raise an objection to the appalling lack of information offered relating to this debacle.
Not everything one does in life should be be for ones own personal gain...but this is something that you plainly cannot fathom.

[RushSpeed]

Robbo66 said:

I'll try and explain....slowly.
I am supporting those who have had cars delivered, and also hoping to raise an objection to the appalling lack of information offered relating to this debacle.
Not everything one does in life should be be for ones own personal gain...but this is something that you plainly cannot fathom.

Again show me where I am out for personally gain, you cannot! it is you that need to fathom things out. I have clearly put my flag on the mast, just look at my previous posts on here and the GT3 action Group.

How by putting yourself on one particular compensation list mean that you are supporting a different group on another compensation list which has a higher comp action than yours? And you talk to me about personal gain? - Go figure!

Before you reply please come up with facts from me stating I want compensation and that is all I am out for, because you will not find that. Indeed my posts are mainly about lack of communication - can you not read?

Edited by RushSpeed on Friday 25th April 00:35

[RushSpeed]

RushSpeed said:

Robbo66 said:

I'll try and explain....slowly.
I am supporting those who have had cars delivered, and also hoping to raise an objection to the appalling lack of information offered relating to this debacle.
Not everything one does in life should be be for ones own personal gain...but this is something that you plainly cannot fathom.

Again show me where I am out for personally gain, you cannot! it is you that need to fathom things out. I have clearly put my flag on the mast, just look at my previous posts on here and the GT3 action Group.

How by putting yourself on one particular compensation list mean that you are supporting a different group on another compensation list which has a higher comp action than yours? And you talk to me about personal gain? - Go figure!

Before you reply please come up with facts from me stating I want compensation and that is all I am out for, because you will not find that. Indeed my posts are mainly about lack of communication - can you not read?

Edited by RushSpeed on Friday 25th April 00:35

In fact specially for you Robbo66 because I know you are too lazy to do research, one of my posts dated 12 April 2014 - enjoy!

Saturday 12th April quote quote all edit delete
Just received my letter through the post this morning.

Let me go back over a week ago.
Had phone call from my Rep on 2 April stating in 2 days time (fri 4th April) I will hear from customer service
No show
7 & 8 April, no email
Rang CService to be told yeah we sent you email yesterday or oh sorry wait a minute no we did not but the system says yes we did. We will update our system! We will send you by post next couple of days.
Sat 12th April, received the same communication as everybody else but dated 11th April by post.

The moral of this story and this whole sorry saga is communication. It doesn't matter what walk of life you're in communication is very important specially when there are so many different media you can use, this is not acceptable from a Corporation like Porsche. I will keep my car because it is a brilliant car but the company need to sort this basic of all basic things out.

PORSCHE AG COMMUNICATE PLEASE!

[Gandahar]

chelme said:

Sierra Mike said:

rosino said:

SonnyM said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/car-manufactur...

This in itself is a great achievement with some press covering the debacle... whilst PH and Autocar pretend it's ok to award prizes to a car that is currently not even roadworthy

The automotive press are part of the same automotive industry as the automotive manufacturers. Unfortunately it's no surprise. The last time anyone took a stand it was Chris Harris with his story about Ferrari on Jalopnik.

HOW FERRARI SPINS by Chris Harris
I told the blokes here at Jalopnik I was pissed at Ferrari and wanted to tell a few people. They said I could do it here. Stay with me, this might take a while.

I think it started in 2007 when I heard that Ferrari wanted to know which test track we were going to use for Autocar's 599 GTB road test, but in reality the rot had set in many years earlier. Why would it want to know that? "Because," said the man from the Autocar office, "The factory now has to send a test team to the circuit we chose so that they can optimize the car to get the best performance from it." They duly went to the track, tested for a day, crashed the car, went back to the factory to mend the car, returned, tested and then invited us to drive this "standard" 599. They must have been having a laugh.
continues http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins

Needless to say, he was banned by Ferrari and therein lies the problem. You've got to respect Chris for his integrity. I don't blame publications for publishing nothing rather than the truth in case the truth comes back to bite them.

You have to be kidding right? CH's integrity? Get real, there was not an ounce of evidence CH could rely on...What is a disgrace is that here we HAVE evidence, and journos are keeping quiet about it...

There is actually, Evo were the people who were the people doing the rolling road test when the Ferrari technicans decided to optimise things as they didn't like the result. CH claim of Ferrari going too far with car fettling is true. They are slapping large fines on journalists breaking embargoes at the moment it seems, given that it is not outrageous to assume they also make sure the cars perform to beat the opposition if needed.

Or does every customer get a crack squad of Ferrari technicians every time they go on a trackday or rolling road?

Edited by Gandahar on Friday 25th April 07:56

[HoHoHo]

AndrewD said:

HoHoHo said:

So how has it been working?

Some people have called their OPC and been given a Porsche. Some have been refused. Porsche GB/AG have not been subsidising the OPCs so they've made their own commercial decisions. That's what my OPC did, and they won't be benefiting from my business in future.

Some of those customers who didn't "deserve" a loan car from their OPC have been pissed off enough to call PCGB. At which point, Reading customer services, with a straight face, have been offering "something from our mobility scheme, you can choose an Audi, BMW, Mini Countryman, etc". Once you've stopped laughing and realise they are serious, and if you have the energy to argue this, you find out that it does no good. Eventually, you contact Chris Craft PCGB MD. This is what I've done, to their credit they found a nice manual C2S with ducktail and delivered it immediately.

This is how it is working, not just for me but many others I have heard from, and it really shouldn't be like this.

Coming on top of late and incomplete information, it really is pisspoor. PCGB and the OPCs are largely in the dark but they way they have organised themselves to deal with the situation, eg loan cars, has generally made the situation worse. There's a helpful guy from PCGB who calls me from time to time, but the reality is he doesn't really know anything but it is at least a helpful gesture.

Thanks Andrew

What I was suggesting was to simply make verbal contact with the DP (or as you suggest PCGB MD) however the poster hasn't said he had done so and was clearly frustrated with regard to a loan vehicle. It's what you did and it's what I and most others would do and I have done on occasion when I've felt the need to be heard. Regardless of how busy we all are at work we're talking about a very expensive purchase.

As he's commented on several times, it's all about communication.

[RushSpeed]

HoHoHo said:

AndrewD said:

HoHoHo said:

So how has it been working?

Some people have called their OPC and been given a Porsche. Some have been refused. Porsche GB/AG have not been subsidising the OPCs so they've made their own commercial decisions. That's what my OPC did, and they won't be benefiting from my business in future.

Some of those customers who didn't "deserve" a loan car from their OPC have been pissed off enough to call PCGB. At which point, Reading customer services, with a straight face, have been offering "something from our mobility scheme, you can choose an Audi, BMW, Mini Countryman, etc". Once you've stopped laughing and realise they are serious, and if you have the energy to argue this, you find out that it does no good. Eventually, you contact Chris Craft PCGB MD. This is what I've done, to their credit they found a nice manual C2S with ducktail and delivered it immediately.

This is how it is working, not just for me but many others I have heard from, and it really shouldn't be like this.

Coming on top of late and incomplete information, it really is pisspoor. PCGB and the OPCs are largely in the dark but they way they have organised themselves to deal with the situation, eg loan cars, has generally made the situation worse. There's a helpful guy from PCGB who calls me from time to time, but the reality is he doesn't really know anything but it is at least a helpful gesture.

Thanks Andrew

What I was suggesting was to simply make verbal contact with the DP (or as you suggest PCGB MD) however the poster hasn't said he had done so and was clearly frustrated with regard to a loan vehicle. It's what you did and it's what I and most others would do and I have done on occasion when I've felt the need to be heard. Regardless of how busy we all are at work we're talking about a very expensive purchase.

As he's commented on several times, it's all about communication.

HoHoHo - you also cannot read! In my posts for the last week or so and up to yesterday afternoon if you troll back, I actually stated that at last my DP contacted me yesterday to sort the loan car out for my driving holiday. Obviously too late. So I have been using all media possible just not foot media as you suggested and I have explained reasons why.

[HoHoHo]

RushSpeed said:

HoHoHo said:

AndrewD said:

HoHoHo said:

So how has it been working?

Some people have called their OPC and been given a Porsche. Some have been refused. Porsche GB/AG have not been subsidising the OPCs so they've made their own commercial decisions. That's what my OPC did, and they won't be benefiting from my business in future.

Some of those customers who didn't "deserve" a loan car from their OPC have been pissed off enough to call PCGB. At which point, Reading customer services, with a straight face, have been offering "something from our mobility scheme, you can choose an Audi, BMW, Mini Countryman, etc". Once you've stopped laughing and realise they are serious, and if you have the energy to argue this, you find out that it does no good. Eventually, you contact Chris Craft PCGB MD. This is what I've done, to their credit they found a nice manual C2S with ducktail and delivered it immediately.

This is how it is working, not just for me but many others I have heard from, and it really shouldn't be like this.

Coming on top of late and incomplete information, it really is pisspoor. PCGB and the OPCs are largely in the dark but they way they have organised themselves to deal with the situation, eg loan cars, has generally made the situation worse. There's a helpful guy from PCGB who calls me from time to time, but the reality is he doesn't really know anything but it is at least a helpful gesture.

Thanks Andrew

What I was suggesting was to simply make verbal contact with the DP (or as you suggest PCGB MD) however the poster hasn't said he had done so and was clearly frustrated with regard to a loan vehicle. It's what you did and it's what I and most others would do and I have done on occasion when I've felt the need to be heard. Regardless of how busy we all are at work we're talking about a very expensive purchase.

As he's commented on several times, it's all about communication.

HoHoHo - you also cannot read! In my posts for the last week or so and up to yesterday afternoon if you troll back, I actually stated that at last my DP contacted me yesterday to sort the loan car out for my driving holiday. Obviously too late. So I have been using all media possible just not foot media as you suggested and I have explained reasons why.

If I missed that I apologise.

[RushSpeed]

HoHoHo said:

RushSpeed said:

HoHoHo said:

AndrewD said:

HoHoHo said:

So how has it been working?

Some people have called their OPC and been given a Porsche. Some have been refused. Porsche GB/AG have not been subsidising the OPCs so they've made their own commercial decisions. That's what my OPC did, and they won't be benefiting from my business in future.

Some of those customers who didn't "deserve" a loan car from their OPC have been pissed off enough to call PCGB. At which point, Reading customer services, with a straight face, have been offering "something from our mobility scheme, you can choose an Audi, BMW, Mini Countryman, etc". Once you've stopped laughing and realise they are serious, and if you have the energy to argue this, you find out that it does no good. Eventually, you contact Chris Craft PCGB MD. This is what I've done, to their credit they found a nice manual C2S with ducktail and delivered it immediately.

This is how it is working, not just for me but many others I have heard from, and it really shouldn't be like this.

Coming on top of late and incomplete information, it really is pisspoor. PCGB and the OPCs are largely in the dark but they way they have organised themselves to deal with the situation, eg loan cars, has generally made the situation worse. There's a helpful guy from PCGB who calls me from time to time, but the reality is he doesn't really know anything but it is at least a helpful gesture.

Thanks Andrew

What I was suggesting was to simply make verbal contact with the DP (or as you suggest PCGB MD) however the poster hasn't said he had done so and was clearly frustrated with regard to a loan vehicle. It's what you did and it's what I and most others would do and I have done on occasion when I've felt the need to be heard. Regardless of how busy we all are at work we're talking about a very expensive purchase.

As he's commented on several times, it's all about communication.

HoHoHo - you also cannot read! In my posts for the last week or so and up to yesterday afternoon if you troll back, I actually stated that at last my DP contacted me yesterday to sort the loan car out for my driving holiday. Obviously too late. So I have been using all media possible just not foot media as you suggested and I have explained reasons why.

If I missed that I apologise.

Friends now - until next time ;)

[HoHoHo]

RushSpeed said:

HoHoHo said:

RushSpeed said:

HoHoHo said:

AndrewD said:

HoHoHo said:

So how has it been working?

Some people have called their OPC and been given a Porsche. Some have been refused. Porsche GB/AG have not been subsidising the OPCs so they've made their own commercial decisions. That's what my OPC did, and they won't be benefiting from my business in future.

Some of those customers who didn't "deserve" a loan car from their OPC have been pissed off enough to call PCGB. At which point, Reading customer services, with a straight face, have been offering "something from our mobility scheme, you can choose an Audi, BMW, Mini Countryman, etc". Once you've stopped laughing and realise they are serious, and if you have the energy to argue this, you find out that it does no good. Eventually, you contact Chris Craft PCGB MD. This is what I've done, to their credit they found a nice manual C2S with ducktail and delivered it immediately.

This is how it is working, not just for me but many others I have heard from, and it really shouldn't be like this.

Coming on top of late and incomplete information, it really is pisspoor. PCGB and the OPCs are largely in the dark but they way they have organised themselves to deal with the situation, eg loan cars, has generally made the situation worse. There's a helpful guy from PCGB who calls me from time to time, but the reality is he doesn't really know anything but it is at least a helpful gesture.

Thanks Andrew

What I was suggesting was to simply make verbal contact with the DP (or as you suggest PCGB MD) however the poster hasn't said he had done so and was clearly frustrated with regard to a loan vehicle. It's what you did and it's what I and most others would do and I have done on occasion when I've felt the need to be heard. Regardless of how busy we all are at work we're talking about a very expensive purchase.

As he's commented on several times, it's all about communication.

HoHoHo - you also cannot read! In my posts for the last week or so and up to yesterday afternoon if you troll back, I actually stated that at last my DP contacted me yesterday to sort the loan car out for my driving holiday. Obviously too late. So I have been using all media possible just not foot media as you suggested and I have explained reasons why.

If I missed that I apologise.

Friends now - until next time ;)

I'm friends with everyone - just don't agree all the time

[RushSpeed]

This below is from a client on PH who ordered new Boxster. This is not good.
Surely the OPC can communicate with his/her client to keep him updated - not asking too much is it Porsche? Or is it you get what you get when we are ready?

I ordered the car mid March. OPC said they had the car coming and I was
just able to change it to my spec less a few items I couldn'it get added as it had locked within a day, with a build date of 26th April. Called the dealer yesterday and the build date has been moved to mid May ( nice of them to let me know) and I was also told that is only an estimate! Seems a strange way to plan prodution if they don't know a week in advance what's going on. Has anyone else had their build slot moved ?

Edited by RushSpeed on Friday 25th April 08:51

[chelme]

Gandahar said:

chelme said:

Sierra Mike said:

rosino said:

SonnyM said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/car-manufactur...

This in itself is a great achievement with some press covering the debacle... whilst PH and Autocar pretend it's ok to award prizes to a car that is currently not even roadworthy

The automotive press are part of the same automotive industry as the automotive manufacturers. Unfortunately it's no surprise. The last time anyone took a stand it was Chris Harris with his story about Ferrari on Jalopnik.

HOW FERRARI SPINS by Chris Harris
I told the blokes here at Jalopnik I was pissed at Ferrari and wanted to tell a few people. They said I could do it here. Stay with me, this might take a while.

I think it started in 2007 when I heard that Ferrari wanted to know which test track we were going to use for Autocar's 599 GTB road test, but in reality the rot had set in many years earlier. Why would it want to know that? "Because," said the man from the Autocar office, "The factory now has to send a test team to the circuit we chose so that they can optimize the car to get the best performance from it." They duly went to the track, tested for a day, crashed the car, went back to the factory to mend the car, returned, tested and then invited us to drive this "standard" 599. They must have been having a laugh.
continues http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins

Needless to say, he was banned by Ferrari and therein lies the problem. You've got to respect Chris for his integrity. I don't blame publications for publishing nothing rather than the truth in case the truth comes back to bite them.

You have to be kidding right? CH's integrity? Get real, there was not an ounce of evidence CH could rely on...What is a disgrace is that here we HAVE evidence, and journos are keeping quiet about it...

There is actually, Evo were the people who were the people doing the rolling road test when the Ferrari technicans decided to optimise things as they didn't like the result. CH claim of Ferrari going too far with car fettling is true. They are slapping large fines on journalists breaking embargoes at the moment it seems, given that it is not outrageous to assume they also make sure the cars perform to beat the opposition if needed.

Or does every customer get a crack squad of Ferrari technicians every time they go on a trackday or rolling road?

Edited by Gandahar on Friday 25th April 07:56

EVO? You mean 'Porsche Owner's Club Monthly' with Dick Meaden and Chris Monkey Harris at that time?? Give me a break...The level of bias and axe grinding against Ferrari from that duo was so obvious it stank.Dick owns a 964 RS he writes about every month in Octane and CH had been employed by Porsche/Porsche affiliates, wrote for Porsche Magazine and owned a Porsche at the the time.

A good lesson to learn when reading about anything, is to get to know and understand the source from which information is disseminated.

Embargoes are important because the Company wants to control the extent and timing of publishing news. I can appreciate it if you enter into an agreement with a journalist, and the agreement is brazenly broken by some hack who is greedy for a first bite...

[Gandahar]

chelme said:

Gandahar said:

chelme said:

Sierra Mike said:

rosino said:

SonnyM said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/car-manufactur...

This in itself is a great achievement with some press covering the debacle... whilst PH and Autocar pretend it's ok to award prizes to a car that is currently not even roadworthy

The automotive press are part of the same automotive industry as the automotive manufacturers. Unfortunately it's no surprise. The last time anyone took a stand it was Chris Harris with his story about Ferrari on Jalopnik.

HOW FERRARI SPINS by Chris Harris
I told the blokes here at Jalopnik I was pissed at Ferrari and wanted to tell a few people. They said I could do it here. Stay with me, this might take a while.

I think it started in 2007 when I heard that Ferrari wanted to know which test track we were going to use for Autocar's 599 GTB road test, but in reality the rot had set in many years earlier. Why would it want to know that? "Because," said the man from the Autocar office, "The factory now has to send a test team to the circuit we chose so that they can optimize the car to get the best performance from it." They duly went to the track, tested for a day, crashed the car, went back to the factory to mend the car, returned, tested and then invited us to drive this "standard" 599. They must have been having a laugh.
continues http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins

Needless to say, he was banned by Ferrari and therein lies the problem. You've got to respect Chris for his integrity. I don't blame publications for publishing nothing rather than the truth in case the truth comes back to bite them.

You have to be kidding right? CH's integrity? Get real, there was not an ounce of evidence CH could rely on...What is a disgrace is that here we HAVE evidence, and journos are keeping quiet about it...

There is actually, Evo were the people who were the people doing the rolling road test when the Ferrari technicans decided to optimise things as they didn't like the result. CH claim of Ferrari going too far with car fettling is true. They are slapping large fines on journalists breaking embargoes at the moment it seems, given that it is not outrageous to assume they also make sure the cars perform to beat the opposition if needed.

Or does every customer get a crack squad of Ferrari technicians every time they go on a trackday or rolling road?

Edited by Gandahar on Friday 25th April 07:56

EVO? You mean 'Porsche Owner's Club Monthly' with Dick Meaden and Chris Monkey Harris at that time?? Give me a break...The level of bias and axe grinding against Ferrari from that duo was so obvious it stank.Dick owns a 964 RS he writes about every month in Octane and CH had been employed by Porsche/Porsche affiliates, wrote for Porsche Magazine and owned a Porsche at the the time.

A good lesson to learn when reading about anything, is to get to know and understand the source from which information is disseminated.

Embargoes are important because the Company wants to control the extent and timing of publishing news. I can appreciate it if you enter into an agreement with a journalist, and the agreement is brazenly broken by some hack who is greedy for a first bite...

Get your facts right. Harris was not with Evo at that time. Also the Ferrari F430 still came 2nd in the Evo car of the Year, behind the Ford GT40. The Ferrari 599 won it the year after. I am going to guess the Ferrari 458 Speciale will likely win it this year. Chris Harris owns 2 Ferrari's at the moment. He seems to like Porsche and Ferrari.

If you want to talk about bias then I'd sit and think a moment if I were you whether you might not be biased towards Ferrari. There are a lot of people who are therefore the company can do no wrong. A balanced viewpoint is thrown out of the window in such cases, seen it time and time again on readers comments when their car or their company does not get full approval always from journalists.

[chelme]

Gandahar said:

chelme said:

Gandahar said:

chelme said:

Sierra Mike said:

rosino said:

SonnyM said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/car-manufactur...

This in itself is a great achievement with some press covering the debacle... whilst PH and Autocar pretend it's ok to award prizes to a car that is currently not even roadworthy

The automotive press are part of the same automotive industry as the automotive manufacturers. Unfortunately it's no surprise. The last time anyone took a stand it was Chris Harris with his story about Ferrari on Jalopnik.

HOW FERRARI SPINS by Chris Harris
I told the blokes here at Jalopnik I was pissed at Ferrari and wanted to tell a few people. They said I could do it here. Stay with me, this might take a while.

I think it started in 2007 when I heard that Ferrari wanted to know which test track we were going to use for Autocar's 599 GTB road test, but in reality the rot had set in many years earlier. Why would it want to know that? "Because," said the man from the Autocar office, "The factory now has to send a test team to the circuit we chose so that they can optimize the car to get the best performance from it." They duly went to the track, tested for a day, crashed the car, went back to the factory to mend the car, returned, tested and then invited us to drive this "standard" 599. They must have been having a laugh.
continues http://jalopnik.com/5760248/how-ferrari-spins

Needless to say, he was banned by Ferrari and therein lies the problem. You've got to respect Chris for his integrity. I don't blame publications for publishing nothing rather than the truth in case the truth comes back to bite them.

You have to be kidding right? CH's integrity? Get real, there was not an ounce of evidence CH could rely on...What is a disgrace is that here we HAVE evidence, and journos are keeping quiet about it...

There is actually, Evo were the people who were the people doing the rolling road test when the Ferrari technicans decided to optimise things as they didn't like the result. CH claim of Ferrari going too far with car fettling is true. They are slapping large fines on journalists breaking embargoes at the moment it seems, given that it is not outrageous to assume they also make sure the cars perform to beat the opposition if needed.

Or does every customer get a crack squad of Ferrari technicians every time they go on a trackday or rolling road?

Edited by Gandahar on Friday 25th April 07:56

EVO? You mean 'Porsche Owner's Club Monthly' with Dick Meaden and Chris Monkey Harris at that time?? Give me a break...The level of bias and axe grinding against Ferrari from that duo was so obvious it stank.Dick owns a 964 RS he writes about every month in Octane and CH had been employed by Porsche/Porsche affiliates, wrote for Porsche Magazine and owned a Porsche at the the time.

A good lesson to learn when reading about anything, is to get to know and understand the source from which information is disseminated.

Embargoes are important because the Company wants to control the extent and timing of publishing news. I can appreciate it if you enter into an agreement with a journalist, and the agreement is brazenly broken by some hack who is greedy for a first bite...

Get your facts right. Harris was not with Evo at that time. Also the Ferrari F430 still came 2nd in the Evo car of the Year, behind the Ford GT40. The Ferrari 599 won it the year after. I am going to guess the Ferrari 458 Speciale will likely win it this year. Chris Harris owns 2 Ferrari's at the moment. He seems to like Porsche and Ferrari.

If you want to talk about bias then I'd sit and think a moment if I were you whether you might not be biased towards Ferrari. There are a lot of people who are therefore the company can do no wrong. A balanced viewpoint is thrown out of the window in such cases, seen it time and time again on readers comments when their car or their company does not get full approval always from journalists.

Chris Harris may not have been working for EVO at the time his article in Jalopnik was written, so? The facts put to you above were relevant. As regards my bias, well, I don't have a mandate to be impartial, unlike journos. CH may own Ferraris now but that was then, this is now. His readership at the time consisted mainly of Porsche owners, or those aspiring to own a Porsche. In fact he had a whole troop of Porsche fans following him from one magazine to another, so for the reasons I have given, I would take what he said at that time with a pinch of salt...and really if we are to focus on optimization, we should all know that EVERY manufacturer does this...oh and it is worth pointing out too, that whenever there has been an issue with Porsche, CH has either remained silent or gone to their defense...really, are you going to insist that he is impartial?

I could not care much for Ferrari either tbh. I don't support their F1 Team, for example, nor do I own anything with a Ferrari badge on it, but what I do appreciate having driven a few, is their ability to produce some exceptional cars, the 458 Italia being one of them, which you have to accept is uncontroversial and has been globally considered a 'Great' car, just like, say the 997 GT3...

[sidicks]

chelme said:

....and really if we are to focus on optimization, we should all know that EVERY manufacturer does this...

Please share what evidence you have to support this claim....

[Mermaid]

sidicks said:

chelme said:

....and really if we are to focus on optimization, we should all know that EVERY manufacturer does this...

Please share what evidence you have to support this claim....

...Do you seriously believe they do not?

[sidicks]

Mermaid said:

...Do you seriously believe they do not?

Has there been evidence of cars being supplied with non-standard tyres / suspension, or engines producing considerably more power than standard?

Thats quite different than providing a car that has been checked over to ensure it is performing to its full capabilties.

[chelme]

sidicks said:

Please share what evidence you have to support this claim....

Here is one:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/mar/14...

Satisfied? Seriously, in the greater scheme of things, when here we have a manufacturer royally f*cking up a product and its consumers, this pinpointing of Ferrari is just ridiculous...

Lets just refocus on the current issue shall we?

[sidicks]

chelme said:

Here is one:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/mar/14...

Satisfied? Seriously, in the greater scheme of things, when here we have a manufacturer royally f*cking up a product and its consumers, this pinpointing of Ferrari is just ridiculous...

Lets just refocus on the current issue shall we?

Evidence?

Thats a bland claim about no specific manufacturer, relating to fuel efficiency testing. Hardly remotely the same as specific manufacturers providing non-standard cars for performance testing and magazine reviews.

[chelme]

sidicks said:

chelme said:

Here is one:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/mar/14...

Satisfied? Seriously, in the greater scheme of things, when here we have a manufacturer royally f*cking up a product and its consumers, this pinpointing of Ferrari is just ridiculous...

Lets just refocus on the current issue shall we?

Evidence?

Thats a bland claim about no specific manufacturer, relating to fuel efficiency testing. Hardly remotely the same as specific manufacturers providing non-standard cars for performance testing and magazine reviews.

Sidick, I am speaking of the principle, not the factual matrix of what has been manipulated when. If manufacturers feel they can get away with it, they will. It doesn't matter what it is that they do. You seem the suggest that only Ferrari bends the rules...not true at all and misleading the consumer on an important matter of emissions or mpg figures is arguably more pertinent overall (because it affects a greater number of people) than whether a 599 has done a track time in 1.19mins, instead of 1.20mins...