Ugliest 911 ever?
Discussion
Sine Metu said:
Eh, I think it's skipped your attention that I did answer that question four or five posts ago. I think your the one ranting by the way when you throw out silly infantile jibberish about my ynderstanding of the word subjective. Calm down.
Apologies - I missed it amongst the pages of ranting about the 996 :P Early and IB Targas. Got a picture? No idea what an IB Targa is to be honest.
As for silly infantile jibberish about your understanding of subjective - you repeatedly tried to use facts to back up what is clearly a subjective topic and then repeatedly demanded others to do so as well. In my opinion it's reasonable to question someone's understanding of subjective in that instance.
JMo22 said:
Sine Metu said:
Eh, I think it's skipped your attention that I did answer that question four or five posts ago. I think your the one ranting by the way when you throw out silly infantile jibberish about my ynderstanding of the word subjective. Calm down.
Apologies - I missed it amongst the pages of ranting about the 996 :P Early and IB Targas. Got a picture? No idea what an IB Targa is to be honest.
As for silly infantile jibberish about your understanding of subjective - you repeatedly tried to use facts to back up what is clearly a subjective topic and then repeatedly demanded others to do so as well. In my opinion it's reasonable to question someone's understanding of subjective in that instance.
mollytherocker said:
Sine Metu said:
IB = Impact Bumper
Its all subjective, but I love them.
So older Tara's then as my choice for the least beautiful 911's.
JMo22 said:
mollytherocker said:
Sine Metu said:
IB = Impact Bumper
Its all subjective, but I love them.
Now if only I had some facts to back that up
I'm not interpreting the fact but I might surmise that most people were put off by the looks. Even in sunny climates. Which is fine. Each to their own.
But if someone came along and said that the Targa was the 'most loved of all 911's and that the overwhelming popularity of the coupe was in no way proof that people preferred the lesser loved coupe which was only succesfull for economic reasons, i might cautiously suggest that the fact indicates otherwise. But I would remain open to a counter fact that might give some small degree of insight.
Edited by Sine Metu on Tuesday 2nd December 22:45
Sine Metu said:
Well I do have one fact. The vast majority of buyers opted for the coupe. Now from what I've read, Tara's actually make for a brilliant driving experience. What's not to like about lifting out that roof and driving along on a sunny day. Or chucking your jacket into the back seat without opening the door.
I'm not interpreting the fact but I might surmise that most people were put off by the looks. Even in sunny climates. Which is fine. Each to their own.
But if someone came along and said that the Targa was the 'most loved of all 911's and that the overwhelming popularity of the coupe was in no way proof that people preffered the lesser loved coupe which was only succesfull for econimc reasons, i might cautiously suggest that the fact indicates otherwise. But I would remain open to a counter fact that might give some small degree of insight.
Its quite a jump to go from the above to stating its the ugliest, no?I'm not interpreting the fact but I might surmise that most people were put off by the looks. Even in sunny climates. Which is fine. Each to their own.
But if someone came along and said that the Targa was the 'most loved of all 911's and that the overwhelming popularity of the coupe was in no way proof that people preffered the lesser loved coupe which was only succesfull for econimc reasons, i might cautiously suggest that the fact indicates otherwise. But I would remain open to a counter fact that might give some small degree of insight.
But, its all subjective, and I am no expert on beauty, I just know what I like, but not necessarily why!
Sine Metu said:
Well I do have one fact. The vast majority of buyers opted for the coupe. Now from what I've read, Tara's actually make for a brilliant driving experience. What's not to like about lifting out that roof and driving along on a sunny day. Or chucking your jacket into the back seat without opening the door.
I'm not interpreting the fact but I might surmise that most people were put off by the looks. Even in sunny climates. Which is fine. Each to their own.
But if someone came along and said that the Targa was the 'most loved of all 911's and that the overwhelming popularity of the coupe was in no way proof that people preffered the lesser loved coupe which was only succesfull for econimc reasons, i might cautiously suggest that the fact indicates otherwise. But I would remain open to a counter fact that might give some small degree of insight.
I thought Targas and Cabrios of that vintage (and even in many cases now except carbon-chassis cars) have much less rigid chassis and therefore flex a lot more and have a lot of "scuttle shake" in the steering so don't drive as well as coupes. I prefer the look of coupes to targas and cabrios too but would say there is a valid engineering/ driving enjoyment reason to prefer coupes too.I'm not interpreting the fact but I might surmise that most people were put off by the looks. Even in sunny climates. Which is fine. Each to their own.
But if someone came along and said that the Targa was the 'most loved of all 911's and that the overwhelming popularity of the coupe was in no way proof that people preffered the lesser loved coupe which was only succesfull for econimc reasons, i might cautiously suggest that the fact indicates otherwise. But I would remain open to a counter fact that might give some small degree of insight.
I didn't say it was the ugliest though. I hate that term. Which doesn't mean people can't find a car ugly. Loads of people think all 911s are to their eyes ugly. But I was asked to answer the OP and picked out that car as the ' least beautiful.' And in that photograph ( the IB one), it looks pretty good. It's also a very clean looking example that represents the model particularly well.
Edited by Sine Metu on Wednesday 3rd December 07:30
I don't really like 996s. (But I bought one, more later).
The first time I saw a 996 in the metal I felt that Porsche had made a complete dogs breakfast of the design.
The previously gorgeous roofline / outline down to the rear bumper that is trademark 911, was completely ruined by a fat ass in the air rear.
Oddly, sticking a spoiler on it's rear end disguised this practically completely, by interrupting the line. Dropping the ride height, and making it look even lower still by using a redesigned front bumper, gave the car the stance it deserved, that the standard car lacked.
So I bought a Turbo. So that's that out of the way, in case anyone calls me a hater. Hilarious thread over in GG, by the way (the Troy thread). Sorry for the O/T. Back to business.
Even the C4S does a good job of mitigation.
The unhappiness was carried over to the 997, although the front lights were back to the traditional look.
Sales figures over the preceding model don't really count all that much. At the time, many just thought that the 993, and the 964 before that, were just updated versions of the impact bumper cars, which in turn were just updated versions of the first 911s. The similarities were far greater than the differences, where it mattered, and to the average punter. Not many wanted to buy an updated 1960s vehicle, in 1995. Perhaps many on here no longer recall. Perhaps many on here also fail to appreciate that the majority of Porsches and other mainstream sports cars are not bought by car nuts like us, but by the sort of person who may and probably does today buy a Cayenne over a 911. And it's the Cayenne that outsells the 911, so much for sales figures necessarily relating to a vehicle's beauty.
So when the 996 came out many saw that it represented the future of Porsche's rear engined range, rather than it's 30+ year past, which the 993 stood for. And it did well. And let us also not forget that mechanically the leap was huge, so even if some may have had reservations over the styling, the updated driving experience "package" more than blinded them.
Good night.
The first time I saw a 996 in the metal I felt that Porsche had made a complete dogs breakfast of the design.
The previously gorgeous roofline / outline down to the rear bumper that is trademark 911, was completely ruined by a fat ass in the air rear.
Oddly, sticking a spoiler on it's rear end disguised this practically completely, by interrupting the line. Dropping the ride height, and making it look even lower still by using a redesigned front bumper, gave the car the stance it deserved, that the standard car lacked.
So I bought a Turbo. So that's that out of the way, in case anyone calls me a hater. Hilarious thread over in GG, by the way (the Troy thread). Sorry for the O/T. Back to business.
Even the C4S does a good job of mitigation.
The unhappiness was carried over to the 997, although the front lights were back to the traditional look.
Sales figures over the preceding model don't really count all that much. At the time, many just thought that the 993, and the 964 before that, were just updated versions of the impact bumper cars, which in turn were just updated versions of the first 911s. The similarities were far greater than the differences, where it mattered, and to the average punter. Not many wanted to buy an updated 1960s vehicle, in 1995. Perhaps many on here no longer recall. Perhaps many on here also fail to appreciate that the majority of Porsches and other mainstream sports cars are not bought by car nuts like us, but by the sort of person who may and probably does today buy a Cayenne over a 911. And it's the Cayenne that outsells the 911, so much for sales figures necessarily relating to a vehicle's beauty.
So when the 996 came out many saw that it represented the future of Porsche's rear engined range, rather than it's 30+ year past, which the 993 stood for. And it did well. And let us also not forget that mechanically the leap was huge, so even if some may have had reservations over the styling, the updated driving experience "package" more than blinded them.
Good night.
mollytherocker said:
Adam B said:
I like that but without the whale tail which look silly on narrow bodies IMHO, who signed the headrests?
Its a special edition, but I forget the name!
There was a few nice posters made with this car too.996TT02 said:
I don't really like 996s. (But I bought one, more later).
The first time I saw a 996 in the metal I felt that Porsche had made a complete dogs breakfast of the design.
The previously gorgeous roofline / outline down to the rear bumper that is trademark 911, was completely ruined by a fat ass in the air rear.
Oddly, sticking a spoiler on it's rear end disguised this practically completely, by interrupting the line. Dropping the ride height, and making it look even lower still by using a redesigned front bumper, gave the car the stance it deserved, that the standard car lacked.
So I bought a Turbo. So that's that out of the way, in case anyone calls me a hater. Hilarious thread over in GG, by the way (the Troy thread). Sorry for the O/T. Back to business.
Even the C4S does a good job of mitigation.
The unhappiness was carried over to the 997, although the front lights were back to the traditional look.
Sales figures over the preceding model don't really count all that much. At the time, many just thought that the 993, and the 964 before that, were just updated versions of the impact bumper cars, which in turn were just updated versions of the first 911s. The similarities were far greater than the differences, where it mattered, and to the average punter. Not many wanted to buy an updated 1960s vehicle, in 1995. Perhaps many on here no longer recall. Perhaps many on here also fail to appreciate that the majority of Porsches and other mainstream sports cars are not bought by car nuts like us, but by the sort of person who may and probably does today buy a Cayenne over a 911. And it's the Cayenne that outsells the 911, so much for sales figures necessarily relating to a vehicle's beauty.
So when the 996 came out many saw that it represented the future of Porsche's rear engined range, rather than it's 30+ year past, which the 993 stood for. And it did well. And let us also not forget that mechanically the leap was huge, so even if some may have had reservations over the styling, the updated driving experience "package" more than blinded them.
Good night.
That could be my post, bang on in my opinion, pretty much exactly my thoughts and actions, saved me the bother of typing the long post that I was going to The first time I saw a 996 in the metal I felt that Porsche had made a complete dogs breakfast of the design.
The previously gorgeous roofline / outline down to the rear bumper that is trademark 911, was completely ruined by a fat ass in the air rear.
Oddly, sticking a spoiler on it's rear end disguised this practically completely, by interrupting the line. Dropping the ride height, and making it look even lower still by using a redesigned front bumper, gave the car the stance it deserved, that the standard car lacked.
So I bought a Turbo. So that's that out of the way, in case anyone calls me a hater. Hilarious thread over in GG, by the way (the Troy thread). Sorry for the O/T. Back to business.
Even the C4S does a good job of mitigation.
The unhappiness was carried over to the 997, although the front lights were back to the traditional look.
Sales figures over the preceding model don't really count all that much. At the time, many just thought that the 993, and the 964 before that, were just updated versions of the impact bumper cars, which in turn were just updated versions of the first 911s. The similarities were far greater than the differences, where it mattered, and to the average punter. Not many wanted to buy an updated 1960s vehicle, in 1995. Perhaps many on here no longer recall. Perhaps many on here also fail to appreciate that the majority of Porsches and other mainstream sports cars are not bought by car nuts like us, but by the sort of person who may and probably does today buy a Cayenne over a 911. And it's the Cayenne that outsells the 911, so much for sales figures necessarily relating to a vehicle's beauty.
So when the 996 came out many saw that it represented the future of Porsche's rear engined range, rather than it's 30+ year past, which the 993 stood for. And it did well. And let us also not forget that mechanically the leap was huge, so even if some may have had reservations over the styling, the updated driving experience "package" more than blinded them.
Good night.
Except I bought a C4S not a Turbo.A vanilla 996 really suffers from its fat high bum looks-wise, forget the lights, that's the bit that puts me off. But as 996TT02 said, put a wing on it to 'hide' the bulge, drop the car a few centimetres and preferably add sideskirts and bumpers and voila, you have a GT3(-a-like) that looks awesome, fried egg lights and all
Mario149 said:
That could be my post, bang on in my opinion, pretty much exactly my thoughts and actions, saved me the bother of typing the long post that I was going to Except I bought a C4S not a Turbo.
A vanilla 996 really suffers from its fat high bum looks-wise, forget the lights, that's the bit that puts me off. But as 996TT02 said, put a wing on it to 'hide' the bulge, drop the car a few centimetres and preferably add sideskirts and bumpers and voila, you have a GT3(-a-like) that looks awesome, fried egg lights and all
Agree with most of what Mario said but the lights still don't put me off , And the 997 has an even higher bulge at the rear end when you look at it side on ! Except I bought a C4S not a Turbo.A vanilla 996 really suffers from its fat high bum looks-wise, forget the lights, that's the bit that puts me off. But as 996TT02 said, put a wing on it to 'hide' the bulge, drop the car a few centimetres and preferably add sideskirts and bumpers and voila, you have a GT3(-a-like) that looks awesome, fried egg lights and all
Edited by turk1 on Wednesday 3rd December 15:22
Edited by turk1 on Wednesday 3rd December 15:26
JMo22 said:
I thought Targas and Cabrios of that vintage (and even in many cases now except carbon-chassis cars) have much less rigid chassis and therefore flex a lot more and have a lot of "scuttle shake" in the steering so don't drive as well as coupes. I prefer the look of coupes to targas and cabrios too but would say there is a valid engineering/ driving enjoyment reason to prefer coupes too.
Not according to this but then, you can never take journos seriously. http://www.ferdinandmagazine.com/porsche-911-targa...
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff