do you think you'll get a 911 at some point?

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

That's the typical Porsche owner these days though. It's so out of reach for so long that they worship the brand. Then when they get one, not even a lemon of a Porsche will ruin their enthusiasm for it. They'd keep that lemon POS and just chalk it up to the price of Porsche ownership.

I've been part of several conversations with small groups of Porsche owners where they were just having a straight up bitch season about the things they weren't happy with or they found annoying with their vehicles. And almost without variation, the conversation ends with, "well that's the price of owning the best sports car on earth". Those guys give real meaning to the word sheeple.

That's right, because people understand and appreciate a car with less performance compromises (with a higher price point obviously) doesn't make them sheeple. Sorry that the M3 is barely the sum of its parts and the Porsche more so.

Look at the spec sheets - The M3 has a bigger engine, more power, wider wheels, etc and yet it's a portly best that gets walked over by a base 911, with less hp and more tidy package, better reliability and a racing heritage that spans over 60 years. Yeah, I'm sure Porsche owners are upset that their car doesn't have the same ergonomics as a 328i like I have, with it's shot cup holders and widow regulators, but that is a small price to pay for one of the best overall cars in existance. The Porsche doesn't have to settle fot being almost a BMW, or almost a Ferrari, or a poor man's anything - it is the benchmark on which every enthusiast measures cars by. Just think, if BMW sweat the small stuff and put out a little more effort, we wouldn't even have to ha e this conversation, instead I'd argue that the 911 is a better car than the M3 at any price.

[M2BMW]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

That's the typical Porsche owner these days though. It's so out of reach for so long that they worship the brand. Then when they get one, not even a lemon of a Porsche will ruin their enthusiasm for it. They'd keep that lemon POS and just chalk it up to the price of Porsche ownership.

I've been part of several conversations with small groups of Porsche owners where they were just having a straight up bitch season about the things they weren't happy with or they found annoying with their vehicles. And almost without variation, the conversation ends with, "well that's the price of owning the best sports car on earth". Those guys give real meaning to the word sheeple.

My Porsches have had no problems, wish I could say the same for my BMW's.

[///F80M3]

No

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

That's right, because people understand and appreciate a car with less performance compromises (with a higher price point obviously) doesn't make them sheeple. Sorry that the M3 is barely the sum of its parts and the Porsche more so.

Look at the spec sheets - The M3 has a bigger engine, more power, wider wheels, etc and yet it's a portly best that gets walked over by a base 911, with less hp and more tidy package, better reliability and a racing heritage that spans over 60 years. Yeah, I'm sure Porsche owners are upset that their car doesn't have the same ergonomics as a 328i like I have, with it's shot cup holders and widow regulators, but that is a small price to pay for one of the best overall cars in existance. I would dare argue that the 911 is a better car than the M3 at any price.

I don't have to look at the spec sheet, i've got real world, lived with them both, experience.

It's ok for Porsche to be the demigod of all cars in your eyes. For me, the GTS was an unenjoyable $125k mistake. And at the same time, the M3 was more than worth every penny. Also, check your spec sheet, because in the real world, that NON base 911 didn't walk all over the M3.

I'm not saying Porsches are bad; i'm saying through my experience, they aren't for me. And well.... that some people should disengage from Porsche's balls, especially if they've never driven one.

But i do wish people would buy more 911s because they are absolutely beautiful to look at when driving around town.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by m235i

My Porsches have had no problems, wish I could say the same for my BMW's.

My experience was the opposite. The 911 spent more time at the dealer than my last 2 M3s, combined. M3s went in for scheduled service, nothing more.

[John 070]

Kinda interesting when folks have to feel they have the best, or that they have been there/done that. Whatever happened to doing what you feel is best....

A coworker has a 47' boat, and I don't. I don't miss it and don't plan on getting one. He also has no kids, and doesn't plan on having any. Everyone is different.

For me, having driven every BMW (series) to include the Alpina B7, I like Porsche better, but don't have to have one, and am not currently in a financial position to get one. They are a thrill to drive, to me that is, whereas BMW is not.

The E92 is not the greatest car on earth, but it's more than good enough for me and I love owning one. I mean that thing was paid off almost 6 years ago i.e. was very comfortable with the price. 911? No way, too much for me.

[Jashley73]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

But i do wish people would buy more 911s because they are absolutely beautiful to look at when driving around town.

I think some may argue with you on that point...

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by John 070

Kinda interesting when folks have to feel they have the best, or that they have been there/done that. Whatever happened to doing what you feel is best....

A coworker has a 47' boat, and I don't. I don't miss it and don't plan on getting one. He also has no kids, and doesn't plan on having any. Everyone is different.

For me, having driven every BMW (series) to include the Alpina B7, I like Porsche better, but don't have to have one, and am not currently in a financial position to get one. They are a thrill to drive, to me that is, whereas BMW is not.

The E92 is not the greatest car on earth, but it's more than good enough for me and I love owning one. I mean that thing was paid off almost 6 years ago i.e. was very comfortable with the price. 911? No way, too much for me.

It's clear to me that when some people categorize a car as the best, or better than another, they do so by citing one specific aspect of the vehicles capability. I will not argue that a stock Porsche is a better track car than a stock E92 M3. I will argue that the M3 is a better daily driver than a 911. They are both fabulous cars, both have their shortcomings and they both have their intended purposes. Porsche's intention is much more focused on performance and it performs. While BMW intended for the M3 to do everything very well, which it does. For some people, the sum of a vehicles attributes can out weigh a single superior attribute for which all others have been compromised. I personally would rather have a car that scores an 8/9 in all categories than a car that scores a 10 in one and 6/7s in all other. (not saying Porsche is 6/7s, just an example)

I only shared my experience thinking that maybe someone who was cherishes the Porsche brand may be more OK with not having one seeing that some people don't think they are all that and a bag of chips when daily driving it. But in hind sight, i should have known that people that cherish the Porsche brand would overlook my experience in favor for keeping their angelic vision of Porsche in tact.

[M2BMW]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

It's clear to me that when some people categorize a car as the best, or better than another, they do so by citing one specific aspect of the vehicles capability. I will not argue that a stock Porsche is a better track car than a stock E92 M3. I will argue that the M3 is a better daily driver than a 911. They are both fabulous cars, both have their shortcomings and they both have their intended purposes. Porsche's intention is much more focused on performance and it performs. While BMW intended for the M3 to do everything very well, which it does. For some people, the sum of a vehicles attributes can out weigh a single superior attribute for which all others have been compromised. I personally would rather have a car that scores an 8/9 in all categories than a car that scores a 10 in one and 6/7s in all other. (not saying Porsche is 6/7s, just an example)

I only shared my experience thinking that maybe someone who was cherishes the Porsche brand may be more OK with not having one seeing that some people don't think they are all that and a bag of chips when daily driving it. But in hind sight, i should have known that people that cherish the Porsche brand would overlook my experience in favor for keeping their angelic vision of Porsche in tact.

It is your view, your experience. Not sure why you think people need to take your experience as the only "experience". Think about what you have posted, you are doing exactly what you say "some people" are doing.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

I don't have to look at the spec sheet, i've got real world, lived with them both, experience.

It's ok for Porsche to be the demigod of all cars in your eyes. For me, the GTS was an unenjoyable $125k mistake. And at the same time, the M3 was more than worth every penny. Also, check your spec sheet, because in the real world, that NON base 911 didn't walk all over the M3.

I'm not saying Porsches are bad; i'm saying through my experience, they aren't for me. And well.... that some people should disengage from Porsche's balls, especially if they've never driven one.

But i do wish people would buy more 911s because they are absolutely beautiful to look at when driving around town.

Now that you mention it, I'm positive the base 997 Carerra walked all over the E92. They aren't even in the same realm of automobile, one is a real focused driver car that will reward the driver, the other is a warmed over 3 series than can barely outrun it's siblings, much less a Mustang.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by m235i

It is your view, your experience. Not sure why you think people need to take your experience as the only "experience". Think about what you have posted, you are doing exactly what you say "some people" are doing.

Can you please show me where i said i think people need to take my experience as the only experience?


I said some people tend to judge a car based on a single attribute. While I tend to weigh a cars value based on all of it's attributes. So how am i doing exactly what i said some people are doing?

That's how things work on a forum. Someone posts their opinion, then someone else posts their own opinion. Maybe that opinion agrees with the first, maybe it contradicts it. Either way, based on spec sheets or experience, they are both just opinions for other members to take as they see fit. Heck, sometimes other members will post up their own opinions after the first 2 have been offered. It gets crazy in these forums sometimes.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

Now that you mention it, I'm positive the base 997 Carerra walked all over the E92. They aren't even in the same realm of automobile, one is a real focused driver car that will reward the driver, the other is a warmed over 3 series than can barely outrun it's siblings, much less a Mustang.

Ok, yep, spoken like someone who's never driven one. You're will to make ignorant statements about a car you haven't even driven, let alone owned, is just too strong for me to contend with. You win.

I hope that when you do get to drive your hero, it turns out to be everything you hoped it would and then some.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

Ok, yep, spoken like someone who's never driven one. You're will to make ignorant statements about a car you haven't even driven, let alone owned, is just too strong for me to contend with. You win.

I hope that when you do get to drive your hero, it turns out to be everything you hoped it would and then some.

That settled it guys, everyone sell their Porsches and buy 328s and Mustangs.

[eric@helix]

Does this count?

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

Now that you mention it, I'm positive the base 997 Carerra walked all over the E92. They aren't even in the same realm of automobile, one is a real focused driver car that will reward the driver, the other is a warmed over 3 series than can barely outrun it's siblings, much less a Mustang.

base 997 carrera did nurburgring in 8:02 vs. the e92 which did it in 8:05.

however how can you say the m3 is a warmed over 3 series that can barely outrun its siblings? that statement is so inaccurate.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by rjd598

base 997 carrera did nurburgring in 8:02 vs. the e92 which did it in 8:05.

however how can you say the m3 is a warmed over 3 series that can barely outrun its siblings? that statement is so inaccurate.

Hyberbolic statement, but to be fair I believe the E9x M shares a lot of parts with it's siblings. Still, his criteria in which he based his criticisms on is silly. The Porsche brand as a whole is rated more reliable than BMW, and I haven't heard of any issues with the DI Carrera motors - and even if his was problematic, one car isn't statistically relevant in the grand scheme. Is the Porsche a better performance car? Absolutely no doubt in any objective measure, however if you're expecting it to drive like a Camry, one has to wonder what expectations you had of a car, and what business you have driving it - money doesn't buy sense.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

Can you please show me where i said i think people need to take my experience as the only experience?


I said some people tend to judge a car based on a single attribute. While I tend to weigh a cars value based on all of it's attributes. So how am i doing exactly what i said some people are doing?

That's how things work on a forum. Someone posts their opinion, then someone else posts their own opinion. Maybe that opinion agrees with the first, maybe it contradicts it. Either way, based on spec sheets or experience, they are both just opinions for other members to take as they see fit. Heck, sometimes other members will post up their own opinions after the first 2 have been offered. It gets crazy in these forums sometimes.

That's exactly what you're doing.

Yeah, your BMW is a great daily driver and you didn't see the the appeal of the Porsche because you're farting around town with it. I'm sure you're ok giving up performance for some comfort (why buy the GTS then?) And I'm the opposite.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Using 'Ring lap times alone to compare cars is probably not the best measure.

Many laps are run to get a peak number. I was talking with an ex-Porsche factory driver once who lamented that they dont publish the distribution or average of times, which he felt was actually more revealing and important.

Car A is hard to drive, twitchy at the limit, but if you nail everything just right, will do a lap in 8:02. It may take many laps to get to that number. Maybe only 1 driver of the group of testers can reach that number. The other lap times for the same driver, in that car, on that day, might be all over the map at 8:05, 8:10, 8:07. Numbers for other drivers may vary even more.

Car B is more predictable, but has a peak number that is slightly less impressive; 8:05. However, the driver may have achieved that sooner in the lapping session, and the distribution of times may be 8:06, 8:07, 8:06. Other drivers of that car can all reach close to the 8:05.

This means that most drivers will get a faster, more consistent 10-lap AVERAGE time in car B, but if given enough laps, one of those drivers can squeak out a better number once or twice in car A.

If you were going to run some endurance race, with different drivers taking a turn at the wheel over the race distance, which car would you want to campaign? Car A or car B ?

The ex-porsche factory driver said that with traction and launch control, 0-60 times are easy for morons to reproduce all day, but back it the 90's, he would laugh at people who thought their car was faster 0-60 because some magazine said so. Usually it was a case of the "faster" car had a number that only a pro could achieve once in a blue moon, and would actually lose more drag races than it would win. But, the best possible number was the only one published.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl

Using 'Ring lap times alone to compare cars is probably not the best measure.

Many laps are run to get a peak number. I was talking with an ex-Porsche factory driver once who lamented that they dont publish the distribution or average of times, which he felt was actually more revealing and important.

Car A is hard to drive, twitchy at the limit, but if you nail everything just right, will do a lap in 8:02. It may take many laps to get to that number. Maybe only 1 driver of the group of testers can reach that number. The other lap times for the same driver, in that car, on that day, might be all over the map at 8:05, 8:10, 8:07. Numbers for other drivers may vary even more.

Car B is more predictable, but has a peak number that is slightly less impressive; 8:05. However, the driver may have achieved that sooner in the lapping session, and the distribution of times may be 8:06, 8:07, 8:06. Other drivers of that car can all reach close to the 8:05.

This means that most drivers will get a faster, more consistent 10-lap AVERAGE time in car B, but if given enough laps, one of those drivers can squeak out a better number once or twice in car A.

If you were going to run some endurance race, with different drivers taking a turn at the wheel over the race distance, which car would you want to campaign? Car A or car B ?

The ex-porsche factory driver said that with traction and launch control, 0-60 times are easy for morons to reproduce all day, but back it the 90's, he would laugh at people who thought their car was faster 0-60 because some magazine said so. Usually it was a case of the "faster" car had a number that only a pro could achieve once in a blue moon, and would actually lose more drag races than it would win. But, the best possible number was the only one published.

I'm sure an Accord is more stable at the limit than an M3...and the M3 is still faster.

We are talking about performance cars, the focus is on performance. I don't personally use laptimes/0-60 as an absolute measure of these cars, but I'm not going to ignore it either.

Make no mistake, the P cars are in a whole different league in comparison to BMW cars regardless of what arbitrary criteria you want to use to justify the M3's inferior performance.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

I'm sure an Accord is more stable at the limit than an M3...and the M3 is still faster.

We are talking about performance cars, the focus is on performance. I don't personally use laptimes/0-60 as an absolute measure of these cars, but I'm not going to ignore it either.

Make no mistake, the P cars are in a whole different league in comparison to BMW cars regardless of what arbitrary criteria you want to use to justify the M3's inferior performance.

The point I was trying to make is that performance superiority that is only available to the top tier of drivers, once in a blue moon, is not practical or usable performance. Obviously when I talk about 8:02 vs 8:05 I'm not comparing an Accord with an M3.

People who consistently attend track days are better drivers than the average person, and even in that group, I've seen newer M3's turn consistently faster lap times than 911's (not counting stuff like GT3-RS).

Axiom, how many track days have you done? You speak with such absolute and unyielding confidence you must be very experienced with taking both M3's and 911's to the limit on a track.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl

The point I was trying to make is that performance superiority that is only available to the top tier of drivers, once in a blue moon, is not practical or usable performance. Obviously when I talk about 8:02 vs 8:05 I'm not comparing an Accord with an M3.

People who consistently attend track days are better drivers than the average person, and even in that group, I've seen newer M3's turn consistently faster lap times than 911's (not counting stuff like GT3-RS).

Axiom, how many track days have you done? You speak with such absolute and unyielding confidence you must be very experienced with taking both M3's and 911's to the limit on a track.

When you're talking about 3 seconds, between laps of cars, you're talking about a huge difference. If you're argument is that the M3 is easier to driv, that's fine. The Porsche will reward the more talented driver with better lap times instead of needlessly inflating his ego by attempting to "flatter" him. Do most of these cars exceed mine or yours, or the majority of people's talent level? Perhaps, but if it doesn't I know I have room to grow in a car that is literally superior in that aspect.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

When you're talking about 3 seconds, between laps of cars, you're talking about a huge difference.

That depends on the length of the course. This ain't drag racing. At last weekends IMSA race at Road America, the qualifying times gap between the fastest and slowest cars in the top prototype category was 5.45 seconds, and that's on a 4 mile course. The Ring is more than triple the length, so that would equate to a 16 second gap! These are purpose built racecars which have regular adjustments and weight penalties applied between races to ensure parity to make the "show" better. So, a 3 seconds gap between cars on such a long course is hardly evidence of 1 car "walking all over" another, to borrow your phrase.

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

Do most of these cars exceed mine or yours, or the majority of people's talent level? Perhaps, but if it doesn't I know I have room to grow in a car that is literally superior in that aspect.

Based on the fact that your lack of response to my question tells me you've done ZERO track days in either an M3 or 911, then I'd say even the "inferior" M3 will give you plenty of room to grow, no 911 needed there.