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.
