'Never read so much toilet in all my life
Discussion
What is this imbecile on? I've never read so much $hyte in all my life.
He describes a 3.2 as glacial. The G50 sedate and mundane. He even has a go at the sound of the motor which is unreal as the revs rise.
Josh Barnett is should take a drive of a W107 Merc SL.
Total911? Total Toilet.
http://www.total911.com/opinion-is-the-porsche-911...
He describes a 3.2 as glacial. The G50 sedate and mundane. He even has a go at the sound of the motor which is unreal as the revs rise.
Josh Barnett is should take a drive of a W107 Merc SL.
Total911? Total Toilet.
http://www.total911.com/opinion-is-the-porsche-911...
It's just click bate, the type Chris Harris would be proud of. Say something contravercial and watch all the internet nerds froth to your website, pushing up it's Seo ratings and revenue streams.
(It matters not however that I think he has a point. The impact bumper cars were utter s
te IMO)
(It matters not however that I think he has a point. The impact bumper cars were utter s
te IMO)The earlier cars definitely have a more exciting engine and their light weight makes them a delight to drive. I doubt this fellow has driven a good 3.2c but some of the points he makes are valid and I do not think he's trolling. 3.2c are too heavy IMO and the G50 does have a long throw.
All easy to sort though. Very easy to take weight out of a 3.2c if you're so minded. The factory short shift is a peach and if you do not find the car quick enough for your talents then Steve Wong or Wayne Schofield chip or remap can give you 250 + bhp. If you want even more power there is a Mahle 3.4 conversion which takes power up to 275bhp.
Having said that its all relative. I was in my 3.2c for a long drive today and by modern comparison to say a 997 they are so pure and precise to drive that to harp on about them being 150kgs too heavy (which they are), or the steering is too heavy (which it is for females), or the engine too linear in its power delivery seems a tad churlish.
Even my 964 C2 which I love for different reasons (she really is the first modern 911) isn't a patch on my 3.2C if you want the pure unadulterated 911 experience and lets face it you're far more likely to find a good 3.2c than you are good SC or earlier car or even the later 964 for that matter. The pre impact bumper cars are bonkers money so in the end you come back to the 3.2c which you can run on a tight budget and as long as there is no rot and your example has had a top end rebuild by an engineer who knows what they're doing then you cannot really go wrong with a 3.2c and they can be run on very little cash to boot.
All easy to sort though. Very easy to take weight out of a 3.2c if you're so minded. The factory short shift is a peach and if you do not find the car quick enough for your talents then Steve Wong or Wayne Schofield chip or remap can give you 250 + bhp. If you want even more power there is a Mahle 3.4 conversion which takes power up to 275bhp.
Having said that its all relative. I was in my 3.2c for a long drive today and by modern comparison to say a 997 they are so pure and precise to drive that to harp on about them being 150kgs too heavy (which they are), or the steering is too heavy (which it is for females), or the engine too linear in its power delivery seems a tad churlish.
Even my 964 C2 which I love for different reasons (she really is the first modern 911) isn't a patch on my 3.2C if you want the pure unadulterated 911 experience and lets face it you're far more likely to find a good 3.2c than you are good SC or earlier car or even the later 964 for that matter. The pre impact bumper cars are bonkers money so in the end you come back to the 3.2c which you can run on a tight budget and as long as there is no rot and your example has had a top end rebuild by an engineer who knows what they're doing then you cannot really go wrong with a 3.2c and they can be run on very little cash to boot.
I love 3.2's but I can see some of the points he's making:
"...thanks to the car’s 1,210kg base weight, it actually feels pretty gutless. ‘Slow’ is always a matter of degrees in Porsche 911s but the 3.2 Carrera often feels glacial, even if the figures suggest otherwise."
The 3.2 does feel slower than it actually is. Everything is relative the 3.2 isn't a fast car by today's standards.
"...the power delivery is extremely linear compared to the previously peaky flat sixes, which removes the sudden kick-up-the-backside at high revs."
So it is isn't as on/off power and is better suited for road driving. It has good torque so doesn't need to be thrashed to get it moving.
"The steering – while feelsome – is much heavier than early cars while the chassis feels exponentially less nimble."
But the steering is more direct than newer cars.
"The interior saw little revision over the G-Series cars that preceded it and must have felt a little dated, especially by the time the 3.2 Carrera was being readied for replacement in the late Eighties."
"The controls and various buttons continue to be scattered around the cockpit supposedly haphazardly while the steering wheel, with its off-centre rectangular hub certainly isn’t going to win any design awards."
The controls in the 3.2 Carrera are still classic Porsche. This didn't really change in the 964 or 993, it was only the 996 which made a change....and more people complain about the 996 interior (again I like 3.2, 993 and 996 having had them all).
All in all it's an article from a negative perspective. He obviously likes earlier cars (which cost multiple times more). I'm sure you could write a negative piece about most Porsche if you set your mind to it.
I do think the current prices are over hyped, but that's not just 3.2 Carrera prices.
"...thanks to the car’s 1,210kg base weight, it actually feels pretty gutless. ‘Slow’ is always a matter of degrees in Porsche 911s but the 3.2 Carrera often feels glacial, even if the figures suggest otherwise."
The 3.2 does feel slower than it actually is. Everything is relative the 3.2 isn't a fast car by today's standards.
"...the power delivery is extremely linear compared to the previously peaky flat sixes, which removes the sudden kick-up-the-backside at high revs."
So it is isn't as on/off power and is better suited for road driving. It has good torque so doesn't need to be thrashed to get it moving.
"The steering – while feelsome – is much heavier than early cars while the chassis feels exponentially less nimble."
But the steering is more direct than newer cars.
"The interior saw little revision over the G-Series cars that preceded it and must have felt a little dated, especially by the time the 3.2 Carrera was being readied for replacement in the late Eighties."
"The controls and various buttons continue to be scattered around the cockpit supposedly haphazardly while the steering wheel, with its off-centre rectangular hub certainly isn’t going to win any design awards."
The controls in the 3.2 Carrera are still classic Porsche. This didn't really change in the 964 or 993, it was only the 996 which made a change....and more people complain about the 996 interior (again I like 3.2, 993 and 996 having had them all).
All in all it's an article from a negative perspective. He obviously likes earlier cars (which cost multiple times more). I'm sure you could write a negative piece about most Porsche if you set your mind to it.
I do think the current prices are over hyped, but that's not just 3.2 Carrera prices.
g7jhp said:
If you hadn't noticed beards are mainstream and no longer the preserve of air cooled fans!
Very trueThe plethora of unkempt straggly beards sported by youths amazes me, though the predicted imminent demise of Hipster style culture will surely allow air cooled owners to be readily identified again soon
g7jhp said:
Mart-1 said:
The presence of a beard, and interest in home brewing suggests he really ought to be a natural air cooled fan
If you hadn't noticed beards are mainstream and no longer the preserve of air cooled fans! Footnote.
He's into MGB's! True motorised vomitus. About as dynamic as a pool of sick outside a Whitley Bay boogie joint.
Be gone with you fool!
Edited by P50 on Wednesday 8th April 17:41
Edited by P50 on Wednesday 8th April 17:42
I think as previously mentioned the guy has a point on certain aspects.
I could never understand how the performance figs were derived for the 3.2c.
My SC felt so much more alive and free revving and dare I say just quicker.
Granted the 3.2c I owned and the SSE appeared more refined (said tongue in cheek-old cars)but very lethargic and heavy and it used to frustrate me as the wife's Golf GTI felt far quicker and was IMO.
I have however always had a soft spot for the IB cars in any guise but yes they do feel slow even my 930 felt uninspiring until the blower decided to wake up and even then it was a quick shove and thats it, narrow power band but must have been good 30yrs ago.....
Old cars so what does he expect, you don't own or like them for their driving ability.............
I could never understand how the performance figs were derived for the 3.2c.
My SC felt so much more alive and free revving and dare I say just quicker.
Granted the 3.2c I owned and the SSE appeared more refined (said tongue in cheek-old cars)but very lethargic and heavy and it used to frustrate me as the wife's Golf GTI felt far quicker and was IMO.
I have however always had a soft spot for the IB cars in any guise but yes they do feel slow even my 930 felt uninspiring until the blower decided to wake up and even then it was a quick shove and thats it, narrow power band but must have been good 30yrs ago.....
Old cars so what does he expect, you don't own or like them for their driving ability.............
At 1200kg they are quite lardy though. That's why I'm ditching my impact bumpers for GRP items along with a number of other things. It's easy to shave 100kg of one of these and still have a compliant road car. Couple the weight with the longer stroke of the 3.2 and suddenly they don't feel as spritely.
BrewsterBear said:
At 1200kg they are quite lardy though. That's why I'm ditching my impact bumpers for GRP items along with a number of other things. It's easy to shave 100kg of one of these and still have a compliant road car. Couple the weight with the longer stroke of the 3.2 and suddenly they don't feel as spritely.
Mine was over 1300kg on the weighbridge with 1/4 of a tank , dunno where Porsche got the 1200kg weight.Its 1120kg now and the only FG panel is the duck , easy to shed weight on these..
Gassing Station | Porsche Classics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff