Article Comments - 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera/Carrera S First Look and Drive

21 messages, Last post on Aug 22, 2008 at 5:24 AM

You are in the Porsche 911 Forum. Your Host is claires

What is this discussion about? Porsche 911, Coupe, Convertible

First Look: 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera and Carrera S - The 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera and Carrera S bring critical midcycle updates in what will be the fifth year of the 997-generation car. (more)

First Drive: 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera S Cabriolet - First Impressions:The new engine is a treat, but while the PDK dual-clutch transmission is technically impressive, it's not perfect.(more)

Outline

Messages Page 1 of 2: 1; 2; Prev; Next; Last

#1 of 21 Article Comments - 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera and Carrera S First Look by KarenS HOST Jun 11, 2008 (8:46 am)
You don't hang around for 45 years while perfecting your rare (eccentric?) rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive automotive formula only to get blindsided by a 21st-century technological juggernaut. You are the Porsche 911, and as good as the Audi R8 and Nissan GT-R might be, you are ready for them. Or you will be in the autumn of 2008 anyway. Read more and post your comments here! First Look: 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera and Carrera S Replies to this message: heckmotor (Jun 22, 2008 4:34 pm) madmanmoo (Jun 23, 2008 5:07 am) heckmotor (Jun 23, 2008 7:30 pm) and 3 more...
#2 of 21 Porsche Value by jfjr Jun 13, 2008 (5:03 pm)
Porsche is to sports cars as Rolex is to watches. One can always pay much more for jewelry when ordinary materials will accomplish the same task as well if not better. Replies to this message: fedlawman (Jun 13, 2008 8:30 pm) jfjr (Jun 15, 2008 7:48 am) fedlawman (Jun 15, 2008 9:49 am) huntzinger (Jun 17, 2008 8:46 am) habitat1 (Jun 18, 2008 3:55 am) occarfan (Jun 13, 2008 10:21 pm)
#3 of 21 Re: Porsche Value [jfjr] by fedlawman Jun 13, 2008 (8:30 pm)
Replying to: jfjr (Jun 13, 2008 5:03 pm) That's a very poor (and inaccurate) analogy. A Rolex tells time. A Rolex does not possess dynamic qualities that generate inertial forces directly in response to user input. Without the presence of these inertial forces, a Rolex cannot provide feedback that stimulates the vestibular and proprioceptive system in such a way as to produce a physiological and emotional response. Yes, all cars possess certain dynamic qualities in varying degrees, but the Porsche 911 does so on a higher level than most other automobiles. Just because you can't detect a difference doesn't mean there isn't one. Just stick with your trusty Camry, watch your mirrors, and keep right. Replies to this message: jfjr (Jun 15, 2008 7:48 am) fedlawman (Jun 15, 2008 9:49 am) huntzinger (Jun 17, 2008 8:46 am) habitat1 (Jun 18, 2008 3:55 am)
#4 of 21 Re: Porsche Value [jfjr] by occarfan Jun 13, 2008 (10:21 pm)
Replying to: jfjr (Jun 13, 2008 5:03 pm) I've owned Honda and Timex in the past. I now own Porsche and 3 Rolex. Believe me, there's a big difference and it's not "ordinary".
#5 of 21 Re: Porsche Value [fedlawman] by jfjr Jun 15, 2008 (7:48 am)
Replying to: fedlawman (Jun 13, 2008 8:30 pm) You've either missed the point or don't want to acknowledge it. For what they cost and how they perform, a Porsche is not good value. I've driven many and am not impressed. By the way I drive a CTS-V and will be getting a 2009 one in the fall. Perhaps you Porsche owners will need to watch your mirrors and stick to the slow lane. Replies to this message: fedlawman (Jun 15, 2008 9:49 am) huntzinger (Jun 17, 2008 8:46 am) habitat1 (Jun 18, 2008 3:55 am)
#6 of 21 Re: Porsche Value [jfjr] by fedlawman Jun 15, 2008 (9:49 am)
Replying to: jfjr (Jun 15, 2008 7:48 am) You're entitled to your opinion.
#7 of 21 First drive available! by KarenS HOST Jun 16, 2008 (11:05 am)
First Drive: 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera S Cabriolet
#8 of 21 'Value' mathmatics 101 [jfjr] by huntzinger Jun 17, 2008 (8:46 am)
Replying to: jfjr (Jun 15, 2008 7:48 am) For what they cost and how they perform, a Porsche is not good value. I've driven many and am not impressed Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, just as are those qualitative factors that individual consumers choose as their priorities (or not!). By the way I drive a CTS-V and will be getting a 2009 one in the fall. How ironic is it that you mention that you're buying a new car immediately after complaining about "value"? The CTS-V has only been sold since 2004, so at best, you're selling a 5 year old car, but as per Edmunds, it has already lost $25K (roughly 50%) of its original $50K MSRP. In contrast, a 2004 911 lost only $16.8K (roughly 25%) of its original $69K MSRP. "Value" advantage? Obviously, not the 2004 CTS-V. Alternatively, if your CTS-V is the 2007, then again as per Edmund's (TCO tables), the CTS-V has depreciated by $8K, which is 15.5% of its $51.4K base MSRP. In contrast, the 2007 911 depreciated by $11K, which while it is more than $8K, because of the 911's higher MSRP of $79.4K, is a smaller percentage: 13.9%. "Value" advantage? Its IMO close enough to be a wash, but the 2007 CTS-V is clearly not winning. FWIW on a personal note, one of my vehicles still retains 60% of its original MSRP after 15+ years of my ownership. Unfortunately, it wasn't made by GM. Thus, we see that this "not a good value" claim is proven bogus when we look at actual values and we come back to qualitative factors, which for many are semi-intangible elements of "feel" and "character" and highly influenced by personal preference. As such, there is no clear 'right' or 'wrong' answer, just as no one can claim that fucia is the best car color, because its a matter of preference and taste. Perhaps you Porsche owners will need to watch your mirrors and stick to the slow lane. Perhaps you'll someday have the opportunity to drive on the Autobahn in Germany, or the Autostrada in Italy and experience the environment that these cars were designed for, because that driving environment simply doesn't exist in the USA. Personally, I've found that there's a huge experiencial difference between doing a quick sprint up to 130mph on a USA highway when there's no police around and having the opportunity to go out and cruise at a sustained 130mph for a full hour. -hh
#9 of 21 Re: Porsche Value [jfjr] by habitat1 Jun 18, 2008 (3:55 am)
Replying to: jfjr (Jun 15, 2008 7:48 am) Save your "value" judgements for the GM boards. You can all pat each other on the back that you've bought great cars from a company on the brink of bankruptcy because for decades they have been more concerned about protecting union jobs than being passionate about delivering a quality product. And, has been pointed out, their piss poor resale values tend to reflect that, after you've mashed your foot to the floor a few times, you have enjoyed everything that they have to offer and it's all downhill from there. I am happy to debate - and even take the Honda side - of the S2000 being a better value than the base Boxster. But a Caddy vs. a 911? Please. I'd take a $20k Honda Accord, give you stop light bragging rights, and have a far, far superior car in terms of construction quality and long term value. Enjoy your new Caddy for the next 4-5 years but don't do the math - you might find out that you paid more in depreciation than a 911 would have cost you and then be embarassed by the lack of value - to go along with the inevitable rattles and other insults that GM throws at you.
#10 of 21 I'm wondering by dhamilton Jun 18, 2008 (5:29 am)
if passing a test should be required to post? Replies to this message: huntzinger (Jun 18, 2008 6:30 am)