RE: New 911 Turbo S Revealed

[911p]

Fittster said:

With all these toys in the 997 the new toy for the 'playstation generation'?

I don't quite understand what you're saying?

Edited by 911p on Tuesday 9th February 16:35

[911p]

Double post, oops

Edited by 911p on Tuesday 9th February 16:38

[thewheelman]

Love Porsches,this one looks great & 0-62 in 3.3 is damn fast. Mine would have to be the hard top,the ragtops just don't look right in my opinion.

Not going to bother reading previous comments as no doubt some clown would have made a comment about it being an old design or the engine is in the wrong place.

[Silver993tt]

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

broker1 said:

Its obviously a hugely impressive bit of engineering, but is unlikely to turn many heads in my work car park.

but that's the whole point. The market for these cars is for people who don't have anything to prove or the need to show off. It would be one of their many assetts and purely for personal pleasure - not for anyone elses. It's one thing I find strange when people, say their car is a "head turner" or it generates "conversations" at gas stations. I'd prefer to be left alone and enjoy the superb package and not be noticed by anyone else. After all, who are you buying the car for, you or everyone else?

Aesthetics are important to many people. I fail to see why wanting to drive an attractive car is something to be ashamed of.

It's not but surely the important thing is that it's attractive to you, not necessarily other people? Otherwise I think there's a big insecurity problem that a car will never fix unless of course it's a teenager buying the car but I doubt that is the intended market.

Edited by Silver993tt on Tuesday 9th February 16:33

[RobM77]

Silver993tt said:

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

broker1 said:

Its obviously a hugely impressive bit of engineering, but is unlikely to turn many heads in my work car park.

but that's the whole point. The market for these cars is for people who don't have anything to prove or the need to show off. It would be one of their many assetts and purely for personal pleasure - not for anyone elses. It's one thing I find strange when people, say their car is a "head turner" or it generates "conversations" at gas stations. I'd prefer to be left alone and enjoy the superb package and not be noticed by anyone else. After all, who are you buying the car for, you or everyone else?

Aesthetics are important to many people. I fail to see why wanting to drive an attractive car is something to be ashamed of.

It's not but surely the important thing is that it's attractive to you, not necessarily other people? Otherwise I think there's a big insecurity problem that a car will never fix unless of course it's a teenager buying the car but I doubt that is the intended market.

Edited by Silver993tt on Tuesday 9th February 16:33

I guess the looks don't appeal to everyone, but personally I like the way the 997 Turbo S looks. Not turning heads in the office car park is precisely why I would buy the car! Many people (me included) don't want to shout about the money they earn, especially at work!!

[broker1]

Silver993tt said:

broker1 said:

There are no women in my office.

It is the wrong car for me.

I am young and yes image is important to me.

Sorry if this is bothersome to you guys but I was just being frank.

If you need a car to give you an "image" I seriously think you have other problems. Do you seriously think that people who are worth knowing are going to want to know you just because of a car? If that's so you'll look back and regret the many wasted years with that mindset.

Thanks for the life advice.

But, I do like a bit of 'wow' when I visit my friends. I like things that look as special as they are. Maybe I'll feel differently when I'm 45 but for now chaps its load and proud. Anyway, I try not to enter pointless (circular) arguments on forums but just wanted to represent those whos choices are a bit more rawcus as there are plenty here who a extoling the virtues of stealth performance.

[Dagnut]

911p said:

Dagnut said:

Lets not start this sh!t again the GTR has beaten the 911t in the hands of every car mag and car show you could care to mention..do some research..I'm not getting into the whole 911 v GTR debate..just get over the ring time and except it.
Will this be faster than a gtr in the real world yes probably..is anyone going to get even 7/10ths of either cars ability on the road? only if there an r$ehole.

The 997.2 TTS now has PDK, PTV, new engine mounts etc, +50 bhp over the 997.1 TT so I don't think that it'll have a problem beating a GT-R.

There's no doubt about it the GT-R beats the 997.1 TT hands down, but this is the MkII, S model.

That was a response to your quote of videos of the 997.1 tt beating the GTR on the road.. hence the 7/10ths comment...I think the 997.2 will be match for the GTR yes beating it hands down is a bold statement it will still be close.



EDIT: Sorry for the GTR v 911 cr@p again.

Edited by Dagnut on Tuesday 9th February 16:43

[911p]

Dagnut said:

I think the 997.2 will be match for the GTR yes beating it hands down is a bold statement it will still be close.

I'd like to see a 997.2TT vs GT-R video, it will be close, but out of all honesty I think that the Porker would just have the edge (with all of the new stuff like PTV etc).

Getting into eachothers price bracket, a GT-R V-Spec vs 997.2 TT or TTS would be fair!

[Fittster]

Silver993tt said:

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

broker1 said:

Its obviously a hugely impressive bit of engineering, but is unlikely to turn many heads in my work car park.

but that's the whole point. The market for these cars is for people who don't have anything to prove or the need to show off. It would be one of their many assetts and purely for personal pleasure - not for anyone elses. It's one thing I find strange when people, say their car is a "head turner" or it generates "conversations" at gas stations. I'd prefer to be left alone and enjoy the superb package and not be noticed by anyone else. After all, who are you buying the car for, you or everyone else?

Aesthetics are important to many people. I fail to see why wanting to drive an attractive car is something to be ashamed of.

It's not but surely the important thing is that it's attractive to you, not necessarily other people? Otherwise I think there's a big insecurity problem that a car will never fix unless of course it's a teenager buying the car but I doubt that is the intended market.

It's comfortable to walk around the house naked but you wouldn't go down to the shops that way would you? What other people think matters.

If it's just about how quick it will go get a bike.

No one uses the potential of a 911 turbo (or any other high performance car) on the road, the cars are just too quick. A small percentage of owners may venture onto a track but the majority won't so the majority of people are buying them for reason other than outright performance.

The desirability of a car is based on many things including image and aesthetics. It's probably more sensible to consider a supercar as a luxury good rather than a form of transport.

[Silver993tt]

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

broker1 said:

Its obviously a hugely impressive bit of engineering, but is unlikely to turn many heads in my work car park.

but that's the whole point. The market for these cars is for people who don't have anything to prove or the need to show off. It would be one of their many assetts and purely for personal pleasure - not for anyone elses. It's one thing I find strange when people, say their car is a "head turner" or it generates "conversations" at gas stations. I'd prefer to be left alone and enjoy the superb package and not be noticed by anyone else. After all, who are you buying the car for, you or everyone else?

Aesthetics are important to many people. I fail to see why wanting to drive an attractive car is something to be ashamed of.

It's not but surely the important thing is that it's attractive to you, not necessarily other people? Otherwise I think there's a big insecurity problem that a car will never fix unless of course it's a teenager buying the car but I doubt that is the intended market.

It's comfortable to walk around the house naked but you wouldn't go down to the shops that way would you? What other people think matters.

If it's just about how quick it will go get a bike.

No one uses the potential of a 911 turbo (or any other high performance car) on the road, the cars are just too quick. A small percentage of owners may venture onto a track but the majority won't so the majority of people are buying them for reason other than outright performance.

The desirability of a car is based on many things including image and aesthetics. It's probably more sensible to consider a supercar as a luxury good rather than a form of transport.

You really don't understand this type of car. It's for those who are very happy with their lives already and don't have to purvey an image to prove anything. It's as simple as that and is clearly not a car for you in this case.

[broker1]

Silver993tt said:

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

broker1 said:

Its obviously a hugely impressive bit of engineering, but is unlikely to turn many heads in my work car park.

but that's the whole point. The market for these cars is for people who don't have anything to prove or the need to show off. It would be one of their many assetts and purely for personal pleasure - not for anyone elses. It's one thing I find strange when people, say their car is a "head turner" or it generates "conversations" at gas stations. I'd prefer to be left alone and enjoy the superb package and not be noticed by anyone else. After all, who are you buying the car for, you or everyone else?

Aesthetics are important to many people. I fail to see why wanting to drive an attractive car is something to be ashamed of.

It's not but surely the important thing is that it's attractive to you, not necessarily other people? Otherwise I think there's a big insecurity problem that a car will never fix unless of course it's a teenager buying the car but I doubt that is the intended market.

It's comfortable to walk around the house naked but you wouldn't go down to the shops that way would you? What other people think matters.

If it's just about how quick it will go get a bike.

No one uses the potential of a 911 turbo (or any other high performance car) on the road, the cars are just too quick. A small percentage of owners may venture onto a track but the majority won't so the majority of people are buying them for reason other than outright performance.

The desirability of a car is based on many things including image and aesthetics. It's probably more sensible to consider a supercar as a luxury good rather than a form of transport.

You really don't understand this type of car. It's for those who are very happy with their lives already and don't have to purvey an image to prove anything. It's as simple as that and is clearly not a car for you in this case.

Give it an f-ing rest would you. Your high and mighty posts are nausiating and frankly make me wish I'd never enter the discussion (which is what I thought it was!). I'll leave you to police the opinions of others at your leisure. Clearly your view is the only right view....

[BIST0]

Silver993tt said:

.
You really don't understand this type of car. It's for those who are very happy with their lives already and don't have to purvey an image to prove anything. It's as simple as that and is clearly not a car for you in this case.

What? You're telling me a 911 Turbo S is bought without any regard for image?

I would argue that the chap you're describing should be comfortable enough in his own skin to a) not feel the need to buy a hugely expensive performance car that can never legally be used to its full potential or b)not feel the need to go and buy the newest incarnation of a car that does nothing better than the car he no doubt already has except wear a 59 plate.

[Dagnut]

Image is completely subjective..how can you argue it? ridiculous..you can argue the merits of engineering as you have quantifiable values to compare...some lads like bright shirts some conservative..some lads like Ferraris and some like 911's...most like both..pointless arguments about people choosing 911's "because they nothing to prove"..as if a 911 is not making a statement.
Utter B0ll0x.

[mcelliott]

Lost soul said:

TWIN TUBI said:

Caractacus said:

fluffyducky said:

BSC said:

TWIN TUBI said:

Seriously This is just a pathetic face saving attempt by the German car company to build a 911 that's faster than a sub £56k 2010 Nissan spec GT-R. For £130,000 i could buy GT-R, cayman S and a Golf gti instead of this mutated Volkswagen beetle with its Nazi sponsored origins from WWII . German efficiency and innovation is only matched by the Japanese so why do they insist on being second best trying to perfect this outdated rear engined relic?

Could you imagine that not the "rear engined relic" is outdated but your mentioning of Nazi is?

Why do so many comments on here refer to some Nazi stuff? And everytime to vilify either the Germans or German cars, designed vehicles, technology. As long as I follow gassing station I have never ever read a comment mentioning the british behaviour in the famine catastrophe. I will not compare Nazi crimes to other crimes, but I think Pistonheads doesn't provide a platform for both.

Godwins Law. Always going to come in early when talking about Porsche...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Indeed. TwinMoobie - pay attention - "...once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress..."

I am TOTALLY dumbfounded by your pathetic attempt to cover up the history of the Porsche 911.Why do you automatically ASSUME that I wrongly coined the term "nazi" with the 911? because i offended your sacred German car? Please don't let your disagreement of certain comments cloud your judgment of historic FACT.

maybe you need a history lesson copy and pasted from Wikipedia.



In 1933, Adolf Hitler gave the order to Ferdinand Porsche to develop a "Volks-Wagen". The name means "people's car" in German. Hitler required a basic vehicle capable of transporting two adults and three children at 100 km/h (62 mph). The "People's Car"<beetle> would be available to citizens of the Third Reich through a savings scheme at 990 Reichsmark, about the price of a small motorcycle (an average income being around 32RM a week).



....The announcement lead to two projects for Porsche, and set a precedent for the rest of the decade with Porsche accepting further projects from Nazi Germany, latterly including military vehicles from the Panzer, Tiger Tank and the Elefant tank destroyer.



he Porsche 911 classic was developed as a much more powerful, larger, more comfortable replacement for the Porsche 356, the company's first model, and thus essentially a sporting evolution of the Volkswagen Beetle. The new car made its public debut at the 1963




Before all the German car lovers and apologists on this forum start denying historic fact please understand the Ferdinand Porsche benefited massively from the support of the Nazis. that's fact not random trolling.


If mentioning the "N" word Is disallowed under pistonheads T&T please report me.

You seriously have a big problem mate

+1

[Mr Whippy]

I'd rather be 'seen' in a 993 of some rare road vintage (993 C2S, 993 Turbo 4), than a modern thing.

Anyone with lots of money can buy the latest most expensive Porsche, but you need to know what you want to get something a bit older and different.

Thats just me though. Makes you look like you know something, which is better than just looking wadded (but possibly on credit anyway)



All that said, I wouldn't give a toss anyway. Cars are for driving and looking at, not being looked at in imo

Dave

[Silver993tt]

broker1 said:

Silver993tt said:

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

Fittster said:

Silver993tt said:

broker1 said:

Its obviously a hugely impressive bit of engineering, but is unlikely to turn many heads in my work car park.

but that's the whole point. The market for these cars is for people who don't have anything to prove or the need to show off. It would be one of their many assetts and purely for personal pleasure - not for anyone elses. It's one thing I find strange when people, say their car is a "head turner" or it generates "conversations" at gas stations. I'd prefer to be left alone and enjoy the superb package and not be noticed by anyone else. After all, who are you buying the car for, you or everyone else?

Aesthetics are important to many people. I fail to see why wanting to drive an attractive car is something to be ashamed of.

It's not but surely the important thing is that it's attractive to you, not necessarily other people? Otherwise I think there's a big insecurity problem that a car will never fix unless of course it's a teenager buying the car but I doubt that is the intended market.

It's comfortable to walk around the house naked but you wouldn't go down to the shops that way would you? What other people think matters.

If it's just about how quick it will go get a bike.

No one uses the potential of a 911 turbo (or any other high performance car) on the road, the cars are just too quick. A small percentage of owners may venture onto a track but the majority won't so the majority of people are buying them for reason other than outright performance.

The desirability of a car is based on many things including image and aesthetics. It's probably more sensible to consider a supercar as a luxury good rather than a form of transport.

You really don't understand this type of car. It's for those who are very happy with their lives already and don't have to purvey an image to prove anything. It's as simple as that and is clearly not a car for you in this case.

Give it an f-ing rest would you. Your high and mighty posts are nausiating and frankly make me wish I'd never enter the discussion (which is what I thought it was!). I'll leave you to police the opinions of others at your leisure. Clearly your view is the only right view....

no, I think you have the correct opinion, that should make you feel much better about your "image".

[Complex]

pSyCoSiS said:

I love this car.

0-60 in 3.3 seconds?! Isn't this a fair bit quicker than that Carrera GT?!

Such a good all-round package.

Yep, CGT wheelspins flatout up to third gear, 997t has weight directly over the driving wheels, so gets great acceleration off the line (and in gear, though probably slightly less than the CGT?).

[Caractacus]

TWIN TUBI said:

Caractacus said:

fluffyducky said:

BSC said:

TWIN TUBI said:

Seriously This is just a pathetic face saving attempt by the German car company to build a 911 that's faster than a sub £56k 2010 Nissan spec GT-R. For £130,000 i could buy GT-R, cayman S and a Golf gti instead of this mutated Volkswagen beetle with its Nazi sponsored origins from WWII . German efficiency and innovation is only matched by the Japanese so why do they insist on being second best trying to perfect this outdated rear engined relic?

Could you imagine that not the "rear engined relic" is outdated but your mentioning of Nazi is?

Why do so many comments on here refer to some Nazi stuff? And everytime to vilify either the Germans or German cars, designed vehicles, technology. As long as I follow gassing station I have never ever read a comment mentioning the british behaviour in the famine catastrophe. I will not compare Nazi crimes to other crimes, but I think Pistonheads doesn't provide a platform for both.

Godwins Law. Always going to come in early when talking about Porsche...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Indeed. TwinMoobie - pay attention - "...once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress..."

I am TOTALLY dumbfounded...

Doesn't surprise me in the least. Your 'history lesson' was a proper laugh. You need to learn a great deal more about Porsche and the evolution of the VW Beetle, who did what, when and how. You then may even learn more of the 356, the 901, which later became the 911 and the subsequent evolution of the 911.

To mention Nazi Germany in reference to the 911 of today is purely juvenile and an easy target for the weak of intellect.

People like you rely on Wikipedia. Go do some proper research and learn something, perhaps?

[Fittster]

Caractacus said:

Doesn't surprise me in the least. Your 'history lesson' was a proper laugh. You need to learn a great deal more about Porsche and the evolution of the VW Beetle, who did what, when and how. You then may even learn more of the 356, the 901, which later became the 911 and the subsequent evolution of the 911.

To mention Nazi Germany in reference to the 911 of today is purely juvenile and an easy target for the weak of intellect.

People like you rely on Wikipedia. Go do some proper research and learn something, perhaps?

Are we allowed to say Mr Porsche nicked the idea from Tatra? Hans Ledwinka should really get the credit. If it hadn't been for that pesky Hitler......

Edited by Fittster on Tuesday 9th February 19:03

[Caractacus]

Fittster said:

Caractacus said:

Doesn't surprise me in the least. Your 'history lesson' was a proper laugh. You need to learn a great deal more about Porsche and the evolution of the VW Beetle, who did what, when and how. You then may even learn more of the 356, the 901, which later became the 911 and the subsequent evolution of the 911.

To mention Nazi Germany in reference to the 911 of today is purely juvenile and an easy target for the weak of intellect.

People like you rely on Wikipedia. Go do some proper research and learn something, perhaps?

Are we allowed to say Mr Porsche nicked the idea from Tatra? Hans Ledwinka should really get the credit. If it hadn't been for that pesky Hitler......

Edited by Fittster on Tuesday 9th February 19:03

Indeed we are! And, due to the payout from Mr Porsche to Tatra, you could say they had been the 'design house' of the moment. Still, Tatra didn't design the 911, and if they'd had a crystal ball and could see where the VW Bettle would lead I for one could see them being paid just a wee bit more

No doubt TwinTubi will be along telling us that the 928 was also a product of the VW Beetle and Nazi Germany...