Has Porsche cost-cutting in the mid-90s come home to roost?
Discussion
Deutscher said:
Interesting quote from the 911virgin site:
"Most 2.5's these days are tired and we probably reject more on the grounds of their condition than we do any other car."
Have Boxsters really worn so badly compared to Porsches built in the 60s/70s/80s/early 90s?
I dont know about Boxsters but considering 996's cost 50% less than 993's to make(according to my local OPC)maybe they will only last half as long"Most 2.5's these days are tired and we probably reject more on the grounds of their condition than we do any other car."
Have Boxsters really worn so badly compared to Porsches built in the 60s/70s/80s/early 90s?
Ah there you are Deutcher!!
Been worried you got kidnapped , or sent down for a spell of porridge or something ...
You haven't started an 'aircooled good , watercooled bad' thread in well over a week now.
If you haven't noticed , Henry has also remarked 'where are all the good 993's gone?' ....
Been worried you got kidnapped , or sent down for a spell of porridge or something ...
You haven't started an 'aircooled good , watercooled bad' thread in well over a week now.
If you haven't noticed , Henry has also remarked 'where are all the good 993's gone?' ....
Ballcock said:
Ah there you are Deutcher!!
Been worried you got kidnapped , or sent down for a spell of porridge or something ...
You haven't started an 'aircooled good , watercooled bad' thread in well over a week now.
If you haven't noticed , Henry has also remarked 'where are all the good 993's gone?' ....
Tell Henry theres a good one in my garage if he's got a good enough bidBeen worried you got kidnapped , or sent down for a spell of porridge or something ...
You haven't started an 'aircooled good , watercooled bad' thread in well over a week now.
If you haven't noticed , Henry has also remarked 'where are all the good 993's gone?' ....
kayc said:
Deutscher said:
Interesting quote from the 911virgin site:
"Most 2.5's these days are tired and we probably reject more on the grounds of their condition than we do any other car."
Have Boxsters really worn so badly compared to Porsches built in the 60s/70s/80s/early 90s?
I dont know about Boxsters but considering 996's cost 50% less than 993's to make(according to my local OPC)maybe they will only last half as long"Most 2.5's these days are tired and we probably reject more on the grounds of their condition than we do any other car."
Have Boxsters really worn so badly compared to Porsches built in the 60s/70s/80s/early 90s?
It lasted half as long and it was 10 times slower. Oh and both 99 and 05 are air-cooled. Now according to statistics for liquid cooled 05 ones they would last 5 times longer and still be 10 times faster.
Its called technological progress. Or you can choose to ignore it, live happily ever after, patting yourself on the back that you made the best decision.
league67 said:
kayc said:
Deutscher said:
Interesting quote from the 911virgin site:
"Most 2.5's these days are tired and we probably reject more on the grounds of their condition than we do any other car."
Have Boxsters really worn so badly compared to Porsches built in the 60s/70s/80s/early 90s?
I dont know about Boxsters but considering 996's cost 50% less than 993's to make(according to my local OPC)maybe they will only last half as long"Most 2.5's these days are tired and we probably reject more on the grounds of their condition than we do any other car."
Have Boxsters really worn so badly compared to Porsches built in the 60s/70s/80s/early 90s?
It lasted half as long and it was 10 times slower. Oh and both 99 and 05 are air-cooled. Now according to statistics for liquid cooled 05 ones they would last 5 times longer and still be 10 times faster.
Its called technological progress. Or you can choose to ignore it, live happily ever after, patting yourself on the back that you made the best decision.
Deutscher said:
Interesting quote from the 911virgin site:
"Most 2.5's these days are tired and we probably reject more on the grounds of their condition than we do any other car."
Have Boxsters really worn so badly compared to Porsches built in the 60s/70s/80s/early 90s?
Late 993's and early 2.5 Boxsters were sold side by side so there should be something to compare, at least in terms of age. Mileage and use patterns may be different for the two though."Most 2.5's these days are tired and we probably reject more on the grounds of their condition than we do any other car."
Have Boxsters really worn so badly compared to Porsches built in the 60s/70s/80s/early 90s?
A friend runs a 1996 Boxster (yes 1996), I think it's circa chassis number 1,500 with 130,000kms on it and althogh it has had a good front end stone chip repray you would be hard pushed to guess it was coming up to 11 years old. Original hood, exhaust and clutch (mainly highway miles). The grey seat coverings have worn a bit smooth but probably could be improved. It's the shiny buttons on the dash that give the game away. Parked next to it, my 5 yr old 2002 2.7 only really looks substantially newer/better(IMO) on the inside (the matrix dash and orientation lights help bring it up to date) but to think that his car is might sell for £10k and mine for £15k, it would be an absolute bargain for someone to buy a 5yr old Boxster and run it for another 5 years for a circa £5k potential depreciation risk....
Saying this I have also seen a horrid primrose yellow 2.5 in Aberdeen with flat paint, parking dings everyhwere and the paint flacking off the leading edge of the bonnet and orange rust showing so there are plenty of dogs out there too...
Saying this I have also seen a horrid primrose yellow 2.5 in Aberdeen with flat paint, parking dings everyhwere and the paint flacking off the leading edge of the bonnet and orange rust showing so there are plenty of dogs out there too...
Edited by MogulBoy on Tuesday 19th June 11:58
Look chaps - you have got to get your heads around the fact that Porsche were going bust when they made the 993 - mainly because they were losing money doing so - and were therefore unable to modernise the main original decades old design parameters that made them impossible to manufacture cost effectively and make a profit in the first place (and who would have paid say £40K more/car??).
If they had gone to the wall (as most financial analysts predicted they would until the family bailed them out) we would not have any of the cars we all love - to beef about or discuss.
Manufacturers need to make a profit to invest in new manufacturing and materials technology, new tools, new models , new legislation (emmisions etc) - so if they could not make a profit they would never recover.
So when they decided to try and get out of that viscious circle it is no wonder they decided to adapt their latest designs to incorporate the latest manufacturing techniques available and it worked - they continued to make great cars and enough profit to secure the future.
Computers, washing machines and cars are all made differently today than 20-30 years ago. They can make them relatively cheaper if they don't worry too much about repair issues (for which massive increases in the cost base of service industries makes a problem anyway) and as they are relatively cheaper to make it can become more profitable to make them the modern way - in which most made are 100% as good as they ever were (perhaps better) and relatively cheaper but the only down side of modern techniques is that say one in a thousand or two fails prematurely - while the others are all just great.
Now you can actually make more money by using these modern techniques and replacing the occasional one that fails FOC than trying to make them 100% bullet proof so that none ever fail.
Most manufacturers now adopt this philosophy and it works. But modern products become less attractive more quickly - no one wants to keep a computer, washing machine or vacuum cleaner for 30 or 40 years any more when new developments make the latest model more attractive.
We live in a more fast moving, technological society and fashion and rapid new developments make us less interested in products that quickly become outdated than we used to. This fits in well with modern production ideology because modern products are likely to be better and relativley cheaper but perhaps not quite have the longevity they used to have - but who cares as their desireability decreases more quickly anyway - so manufacturers are also right not to build in too much long term reliability - or perhaps to choose manufacturing techniques that have a down side that makes rebuilding and major repairs more expensive than the latest new replacement to encourage new product sales rather than service based repairs.
This all works well for most products and most mnanufacturers but unfortuntaley there has always been a lot of Porsche enthusiasts who cannot afford anything but a relatively old car and then cannot afford to maintain it.
They want the pleasure, or image, or status (whatever) of owning and driving a very expensive, high performance product that only extremely successful and wealthy people can afford new - but get mad when it also becomes expensive to run.
Well I am sorry but they are designed and made for wealthy people and our World has moved on and you need to move with the times and accept that newer with a shorter viable lifespan is the norm and no manufacturer can remain competitive without adopting this new philosophy to some extent.
If you want a Porsche and can only afford an old one - you are lucky in some ways because I cannot think of a comparable car that is worth even considering - none offer such general reliability, performance and little depreciation as a Porsche even today.
If you want the style and image of a relativley modern Porsche then you have to accept the consequences of why and how they were made.
The biggest problem we have with older Boxsters is actually that the previous owners seem less interested in maintaining the cars to a high standard and more interested in just driving them around - a different kind of owner in general to those that owned the more tradditional cars (perhaps reflecting the greater numbers they have been sold in and therefore selling to a bigger market).
There are also becoming too many Porsche's in the £5K to £20K price bracket for the number of buyers and this is keeping prices down. Meanwhile the internet search options have enabled buyers to search for the cheapest car listed first of any particular age or spec anywhere in the Country (and who would select the most expensive first??) and this excludes even finding the page with the rare nice well maintained cars of the same age and mileage - that are more expensive - the market is becoming more price lead than quality.
All this leaves respectable dealers in a dilema because they simply cannot find enough (nor afford to buy in and restore) good cars and compete with all the others for sale at lower prices - well that is what we have found anyway.
Some dealers have moved up market to reflect all this and only now sell newer cars. Some (like us) provide more comprehensive back up and sales preparation - to encourage discerning buyers to come to us - but I must say that there are less and less really interested in quality anymore.
Others offer more than one price option - but the problem is a difficult one and it will get worse not better making some less expensive models (like the Boxster) almost impossible to find in good enough condition to retail responsibly and make a living any more.
Perhaps this is what Henry is explaining in his brilliant one word answer way (I wish I could do that) - that I unfortunately take several pages to convey.
Baz
If they had gone to the wall (as most financial analysts predicted they would until the family bailed them out) we would not have any of the cars we all love - to beef about or discuss.
Manufacturers need to make a profit to invest in new manufacturing and materials technology, new tools, new models , new legislation (emmisions etc) - so if they could not make a profit they would never recover.
So when they decided to try and get out of that viscious circle it is no wonder they decided to adapt their latest designs to incorporate the latest manufacturing techniques available and it worked - they continued to make great cars and enough profit to secure the future.
Computers, washing machines and cars are all made differently today than 20-30 years ago. They can make them relatively cheaper if they don't worry too much about repair issues (for which massive increases in the cost base of service industries makes a problem anyway) and as they are relatively cheaper to make it can become more profitable to make them the modern way - in which most made are 100% as good as they ever were (perhaps better) and relatively cheaper but the only down side of modern techniques is that say one in a thousand or two fails prematurely - while the others are all just great.
Now you can actually make more money by using these modern techniques and replacing the occasional one that fails FOC than trying to make them 100% bullet proof so that none ever fail.
Most manufacturers now adopt this philosophy and it works. But modern products become less attractive more quickly - no one wants to keep a computer, washing machine or vacuum cleaner for 30 or 40 years any more when new developments make the latest model more attractive.
We live in a more fast moving, technological society and fashion and rapid new developments make us less interested in products that quickly become outdated than we used to. This fits in well with modern production ideology because modern products are likely to be better and relativley cheaper but perhaps not quite have the longevity they used to have - but who cares as their desireability decreases more quickly anyway - so manufacturers are also right not to build in too much long term reliability - or perhaps to choose manufacturing techniques that have a down side that makes rebuilding and major repairs more expensive than the latest new replacement to encourage new product sales rather than service based repairs.
This all works well for most products and most mnanufacturers but unfortuntaley there has always been a lot of Porsche enthusiasts who cannot afford anything but a relatively old car and then cannot afford to maintain it.
They want the pleasure, or image, or status (whatever) of owning and driving a very expensive, high performance product that only extremely successful and wealthy people can afford new - but get mad when it also becomes expensive to run.
Well I am sorry but they are designed and made for wealthy people and our World has moved on and you need to move with the times and accept that newer with a shorter viable lifespan is the norm and no manufacturer can remain competitive without adopting this new philosophy to some extent.
If you want a Porsche and can only afford an old one - you are lucky in some ways because I cannot think of a comparable car that is worth even considering - none offer such general reliability, performance and little depreciation as a Porsche even today.
If you want the style and image of a relativley modern Porsche then you have to accept the consequences of why and how they were made.
The biggest problem we have with older Boxsters is actually that the previous owners seem less interested in maintaining the cars to a high standard and more interested in just driving them around - a different kind of owner in general to those that owned the more tradditional cars (perhaps reflecting the greater numbers they have been sold in and therefore selling to a bigger market).
There are also becoming too many Porsche's in the £5K to £20K price bracket for the number of buyers and this is keeping prices down. Meanwhile the internet search options have enabled buyers to search for the cheapest car listed first of any particular age or spec anywhere in the Country (and who would select the most expensive first??) and this excludes even finding the page with the rare nice well maintained cars of the same age and mileage - that are more expensive - the market is becoming more price lead than quality.
All this leaves respectable dealers in a dilema because they simply cannot find enough (nor afford to buy in and restore) good cars and compete with all the others for sale at lower prices - well that is what we have found anyway.
Some dealers have moved up market to reflect all this and only now sell newer cars. Some (like us) provide more comprehensive back up and sales preparation - to encourage discerning buyers to come to us - but I must say that there are less and less really interested in quality anymore.
Others offer more than one price option - but the problem is a difficult one and it will get worse not better making some less expensive models (like the Boxster) almost impossible to find in good enough condition to retail responsibly and make a living any more.
Perhaps this is what Henry is explaining in his brilliant one word answer way (I wish I could do that) - that I unfortunately take several pages to convey.
Baz
Ballcock said:
Ah there you are Deutcher!!
Been worried you got kidnapped , or sent down for a spell of porridge or something ...
You haven't started an 'aircooled good , watercooled bad' thread in well over a week now.
Ballcock, me old stop valve, didn't you know that Porsche built water-cooled cars from the 70s onwards?Been worried you got kidnapped , or sent down for a spell of porridge or something ...
You haven't started an 'aircooled good , watercooled bad' thread in well over a week now.
It's you that's put your own strange spin on my post.
Deutscher said:
Ballcock said:
Ah there you are Deutcher!!
Been worried you got kidnapped , or sent down for a spell of porridge or something ...
You haven't started an 'aircooled good , watercooled bad' thread in well over a week now.
Ballcock, me old stop valve, didn't you know that Porsche built water-cooled cars from the 70s onwards?Been worried you got kidnapped , or sent down for a spell of porridge or something ...
You haven't started an 'aircooled good , watercooled bad' thread in well over a week now.
It's you that's put your own strange spin on my post.
I have yet to see any positive comment of yours refer to any other than older aircooled Porsches...
Ah , what does it matter ... They're bloody great cars those oldies , no doubt , but I have to say man , your attitude puts me off thinking of owning one . I see the same snobery attached to my local Porsche club and honestly it brings on a dose of the dry gawks.
Live and let live ... and open your mind a tad , you never know , possibilities might flood in (no inference to water intended
)... rick111s said:
or it could be that the entry level boxster's are attracting people who can stretch to own a porsche but cannot afford to maintain them by a specialist or porsche so in time they are not as looked after as they should be.
This is the kind of intelligent observation I was interested in, Ballcock.A poster recently spoke of his 25-year old 225,000 mile 928 looking like new, and that is WATERCOOLED.
Deutscher said:
rick111s said:
or it could be that the entry level boxster's are attracting people who can stretch to own a porsche but cannot afford to maintain them by a specialist or porsche so in time they are not as looked after as they should be.
This is the kind of intelligent observation I was interested in, Ballcock.A poster recently spoke of his 25-year old 225,000 mile 928 looking like new, and that is WATERCOOLED.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff