Well, I'm interested to reactions re the Excellence Comparo. Seems our beloved 968 came out on the bottom. I have to re-read it a bit more carefully, but the author seems to have a bit of that old "not a proper Porsche" attitude.
I can respond entirely since it was my car and I was on the entire trip and drove each car. As it was set up, both of the other vehicles had extensive modifications to their suspension and the 911 had ceramic brakes. My 968 is bone stock, the way I want it since I use it more to cruise than anything else. I was curious to see how it would stack up with the 986 and 911. From a performance standpoint, I felt like the car was the fastest with the most usable power. The 986 felt slightly anemic below 3500. Through the twisties however, my car had a significant amount of body roll due to the stock suspension. An M030 would have fared better.
It was a great experience for me and I feel like the car represents the 968 community well. There were two 911 guys with us and you can read in the counterpoint at the end of the article, who are really dyed in the wool. 911s are their passion. The author, Pete Stout, is an upstanding guy. He went in giving each car and equal chance and really wanted to see what the 968 could do. All of the guys really know their Porsches well and can drive much better than I. Pete did his research and we all tested each car for ourselves. It came down to preferences and the 911 did have quite a bit of charm. It's just not that fun to drive for more than an hour at a time! I drove up to the Bay area from Santa Barbara and back in the three day span and even with all that driving, the car still felt comfortable and accomodating. Neither the 986 or 911 would be a car I could drive on extended trips. Where would you put luggage? Golf clubs? My legs?
Personally, being 6'5" and appreciating space, the 968 is the only car for me. I know an 968 M030 would hold up well and in my opinion, would be the top choice. Perhaps that leaves room for another comparo in the future!
good show old bean. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/smile.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />
Front engined Porsche FTW! er, loss. er, you know what i mean.
I was disappointed with the review and felt that the comparo was a little unfair considering the amount of modifications the other cars already had installed. I also thought the reference to the 968 being like any other car out there was a little harsh! In the end, the 968 was not considered very scintillating. ;-(
"...an other car out there..."
You might as well let that little tidbit out into the sunshine...
PS: I love yr avatar (I want that car!), but note the reflection (of nothing) on the hood???
[quote name='Etnier' post='29274' date='Dec 21 2006, 03:50 PM']"...an other car out there..."
You might as well let that little tidbit out into the sunshine...
PS: I love yr avatar (I want that car!), but note the reflection (of nothing) on the hood???[/quote]
Second that! I want those headlights. Yes, please!
[quote name='sbdrivingdotcom' date='Dec 21 2006, 05:15 PM' post='29270']
I can respond entirely since it was my car and I was on the entire trip and drove each car. As it was set up, both of the other vehicles had extensive modifications to their suspension and the 911 had ceramic brakes. My 968 is bone stock, the way I want it since I use it more to cruise than anything else. I was curious to see how it would stack up with the 986 and 911. From a performance standpoint, I felt like the car was the fastest with the most usable power. The 986 felt slightly anemic below 3500. Through the twisties however, my car had a significant amount of body roll due to the stock suspension. An M030 would have fared better.
Hey...is that the car from Florida that was listed on cars.com?
It sure is nice.
I came out of a store today and as I walked over to my black coupe, I thought man, this is a beautiful car.
I need nothing from Santa this year.
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.
Steve
The article left me with a couple of questions -
1. What where the costs of each car?
($15 to $25 with a medium of $20k)
2. How much money was put into each car?
Here are a couple of quotes pulled from the article -
Quote:The 986 is closest to the sports car Ferry dreamed up for the Alpine roads, while the 911 is most like the 356 he took into production. . .
Quote:Where does that leave the 968?", "But the manner in which it goes up the road is a lot like the character of its big four-cylinder motor: always competent, but hardly scintillating.
I'll add a few comments; read the article last night. First and foremost thanks to Jarrod for providing a beauty of a car!
The main thing for us to remember is the context for the comparison. The article states clearly that their foundation for comparison is “the thrill of driving a Porsche as Ferry would have on the kinds of roads he created his cars for. ... … the best drive … on the best back roads…”
I do believe that the 968 has a touch of Grand Touring in the blood, some character similar to the 928. Therefore I don’t think the stock 968 was as fair as it could have been given the context for the comparison. The 911 and the 986 both had some very significant suspensions mods to tighten up their ride. It was even to the degree that the article had repeated concern that about the firm ride over certain kinds of bumpy roads. Now personally, I don’t think Ferry had very good roads in post WWII Bavaria. And I think I've read repeatedly that Porsche always wanted to offer drivers to the public, not just weekenders (i.e. Ferrari) for the back roads.
However, I joined the 968 underground (ha! we are the chosen, the bold, the wise) coming from 11 years in an ’82 911 SC Targa, as a daily driver, at least about 2/3 of the days. It was lowered, short shift kit, hi-po exhaust, otherwise stock. I absolutely don’t miss the bumps, the smell, the noise, the leaks, questionable climate control, and yeah it is much rougher and takes its toll on the driver. I have never driven an ’89, but I suspect it isn’t much more refined. The 968 is a dream (I have the tip), and incredible on the freeway at any speed. The 911 didn’t get smooth until about 90 mph, before that it was a somewhat unstable and rough ride. Turn in on the 911 was excellent; as mentioned in the article the 968 lets me know the lump is in the front.
Sure the 911 was the closest thing I ever owned to a street legal go-kart, and great in the mountain roads. I do miss it quite a bit, but I usually don’t want that kind of experience (my 968 is again a 2/3 DD). And, it was fairly clear the 911 in this test is a weekend car, also chipped. With its significantly more HP, the 968 might actually beat these other 2 in many legs of the fun-run, especially against stock examples of the 911 and 986.
So, in the end a stock 968 may not give that raw mountain road, street-legal racing feel, but for the $ this may be the perfect all around Porsche.
very well put, syncro. you should have written the article.
I think it is great that they are still talking about our 968s, even if we did end up in third place. My favorite comment was about the interior, very eigthies but not in a good "U2" sort of way, more a bad "flock of seagulls" sort of way. ha ha <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/smile.gif" class="smilie" alt="" /> I still think it looks good. Congrats on having your car in the article. It may not have been the best performer but it was certainly the best looking, IMHO!!!
The facts on this 'comparison' test:
1989 911
lowered on stock torsion bars and runnin 2.0-2.5 degrees of negative camber
revalved RSR Bilsteins
stock anti-roll bar
Big Brembos
SSI manifolds
sport muffler
performance chip
1999 Boxster
18" wheels
RoW M030 suspension
short shift kit
1993 968
bone stock
If the 968 was a M030 with a decent chip and the airbox mod... well, don't get me started.
I really like Excellence, but it is a 911 magazine to be sure.
Thanks to Jarrod for his time and trouble to fly the 968 flag!
Haven't read the article yet (mail can be slow out here in the west - since the Pony Express went away!). Looking forward to the arrival of my next Excellence magazine with more than the usual anticipation.........from the comments here I guess it pretty much proves the obvious: a modified sports car will outperform a stock sports car. Well, sure! Personally, I have no problems beating either a 3.2 Carrera or a Boxster/Boxster S on the local track unless one of them is driven by an exceptional driver. Still love the 968 and will not trade it for either of those Porsches. Good luck, Bob Blackwell.
i don't understand everyone's surprise - this one was entirely predictable, and for good reason
the boxster is a sportscar - the 911 was modified - the 968 is a touring car - good or bad, the 968 is a heavy, underpowered, mushy, antiquated car by comparison to the boxster, and the 911 is an entirely different animal all together
as much as we all love our cars, we really should stop the continually frustrating comparisons to superior modern engineering and design - let's face it, our car's design is over 30 years old - this is bound to happen - enjoy it for what it is, and stop looking at the grass on the other side of the fence - we won't be happy with the results otherwise
Predicable outcome and another reason I stopped subscribing to Excellence years ago. It's not hard to find a P car rag that's biased to the 911 crowd. In fact, the general population shares that bias which is why we aren't driving 2 or 3 year old 968's. Don’t even get me started on the ergonomics and comfort issues on a 911 or Boxster for someone 6’5”.
I offered up my very clean 50,000 mile M030 968 coupe with the stock M030 suspension re-installed for the article. My car also sports a drilled airbox, some mod’s to the stock exhaust, a chip and a light flywheel. I was told that they were looking for a completely stock, unmodified 968, representative of what the “typical enthusiast's drive.”
Okay, all you guys with 100% stock 968’s raise your hand, hey wait, I see one! we want YOUR car for the story!
I also offered a few years ago to have an Excellence writer co-drive the Silver State Challenge with me in my 400 rwhp PCA GT3 944T. They declined that offer and blatantly told me that “…our readers are tired of 944 articles”.
I have had my street 968 on track a few times and after a session or two, I usually have the 911 street contingent’s drivers in my pit asking me how I was able to kick their asses in my 4 cylinder dinosaur? Yeah maybe I have more track experience than some of them, but it’s also the car, which is very well balanced and easy to drive. I guess that doesn’t count either.
I’m so over it… but I thought this post was relevant to the discussion and I’m slow at work right now so what the hey!
I'm sorry Orphan, what did your avitar say? <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/blink.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />
[quote name='orphanowner' post='29314' date='Dec 22 2006, 03:44 PM']I offered up my very clean 50,000 mile M030 968 coupe with the stock M030 suspension re-installed for the article. My car also sports a drilled airbox, some mod’s to the stock exhaust, a chip and a light flywheel. I was told that they were looking for a completely stock, unmodified 968, representative of what the “typical enthusiast's drive.”[/quote]
Given what that “typical enthusiast's ” totally stock car was
subsequently put up against you'd think Karl Rove was running Excellence.
My own take after reading the article last night is that on the day, with those 3-cars used for the feature, that the results were fair.
The reason I say that is because I trust Pete Stout to give all the cars a fair shake -- he's a genuine Porsche enthuasist (e.g. he restored his first 914 while still in high-school) and I know how much importance he places on editorial objectivity.
Most folks here (and on the Rennlist threads) are focusing on the negative 968 comments in the article. But if you read the entire article, the 968 received a lot of praise, multiple times. It was described as being very quick, effective, practical, etc.
But as was clearly stated in the article, they were not looking for the best overall car. They wanted to pick the best car for a Sunday afternoon blast through the canyons. That Carrera (with a suspension and brake upgrade) won because it sounded and felt the best in those conditions. You might not like living with that Carrera every day, but it was a great car on that day.
As regards the 2.5-liter Boxster, it was Pete Stout's own car and he recently had a RoW M030 suspension upgrade installed. Its a 2-decade newer design than the 968 and if it didn't beat the 968, then there would be something seriously wrong with Porsche's development teams. One interesting comment was how more stiff the Boxster's structure felt when compared to the 968 (Jarrod was quoted as agreeing in the article). I can feel (and hear) my own 944S2 flex when a front wheel is elevated (e.g. going slowly over a tall speed bump). Its amazing to see a convertible feel more stiff than a (older design) Coupe -- just shows how technology moves along.
And finally the 968. If you read contemporary reviews of the 968 it was described as refined, practical, etc. -- and very expensive against its competition. The 968s that won all those handling competitions (Autocar, Performance Car, etc.) were all CS models. In fact, those same magazines commented that the stock 968 was a bit soft (even for the early ninties), exactly what Excellence found.
In the Excellence article, Pete Stout pointed out that they (almost certainly) made a mistake in not selecting a M030 968 (or one with an equivalent upgrade). Pete has previously reviewed and given very high marks to modified 951s and 968s (e.g. Graham Gillies' Powerhaus 951 or David Chen's turbocharged 968). He knows the cars. But he did comment that even if Jarrod's 968 had a M030 suspension, he guessed that it probably wouldn't have changed the overall results.
At the end of the day, the better results of the Carrera and the Boxster take nothing away from the great qualities of the 968. Its looks, refinement, rarity, etc. And with a suspension upgrade from stock, it has great handling. Maybe not as good as a RoW M030 Boxster or an amazing 1989 Carrera with RSR suspension.
But so what? When I bought my first 1991 S2 in 1996, I also test drove a beautiful 1978 SC -- they were very similarly priced. The SC really did have a certain something. The feel, the view between the raised fenders, the bobbing and weaving, etc. But at the end of the day, I placed more value on having a newer car, with airbags, ABS, working A/C, predictable handling, faster, etc. The S2 was simple a better package. But you know, I sometimes wonder if that SC would be more fun at 7 AM on a Sunday morning up in the hills near my home...
Karl.
PS - I'd be very interested to hear Jarrod's comments on driving the other cars. Turn in, mid corner stability, braking, traction, etc.
Regarding the recent Excellence comparison test, I couldn't agree more fully with wjk glynn. Our 968s have inherent strengths and weakness, both from an absolute standpoint and from a comparative standpoint when held up against the competition.
The article presented a fairly accurate description of those strengths and weaknesses. That the 968 finished third within the specific creteria selected for the test does not diminish our cars, nor our enjoyment of them. Thanks, wjk for writing such a thoughtful comment for this thread. And to you, too, flash.