Blackstone wrote:I think there are a lot of misconceptions here about Porsches. They don't cost that much second hand, and insurance isn't really much higher than a BMW (I picked up a 328i in near perfect condition for $12,500 and pay about $100 a month in insurance). Repairs are pricey, but it's pretty much a wash when you consider that they hardly ever break (if I recall, second only to Lexus).
I consider $12,000 for a 92 968 a little much.
I can see the reasoning behind calling the Boxster a poor mans Porcshe, but they have that huge advantage of being mid engined. And if you are dead set on getting straight line performace, buy an S model...you'll get the best of both worlds.
If you're dead set only on straight-line perfomance, you wouldn't buy a Porsche... It's a waste of your money, because Porsches do well in so many other aspects... handling, styling, etc. If you want straight-line performance, you get an older turbo car like a DSM, older WRX, etc., and boost the crap out of it.
And mid-engined cars have huge performance gains, but can be a handful to handle, even for experienced drivers. My experience with MR cars like the MR2 is that they handle very well, until you exceed the car's limits, then the back end will snap on you instantly, with no warning, and you'll be back asswards before you knew what hit you. I'm sure Porsche has made it a little more nimble, but I'd still be careful.
As for paying for the brand, who doesn't like to brag about their car once in a while? I'd much rather brag about a Porsche than a Ford.
But would you like to brag that you have the "poor man's Porsche"?
I used to make it a point to drive every car I could get my hands on, even going so far as to test drive dealer cars just for the experience. One of the biggest things I learned was the little things go a long way. Some companies think of those little things and other don't, but they're always worth paying for. There's a reason a Boxster costs more than a Miata, and it's not in the numbers.
If it's not in the numbers, is it in the letters? P O R S C H E.
I'm not interested in the heated seats and heated mirrors and automatic-on headlights and headlight washers that a Lexus or Acura might provide. Nor do I like crap systems like BMW's iDrive and on-screen touch controls for basic functions like fan speed and temperature. It looks pretty, but it's harder to use than a simple button.
Sometimes those little things are a waste of your money. It's all in your priorities.
Every car maker tends to focus on certain aspects more than others and their cars show it. The Viper team was obviously focused on 0-60 times, and it shows. The car screams down the straights, but it handles like a rolling brick without a steering wheel. It's a modern day muscle car.
You see misconceptions about Porsches in this thread; I see your misconceptions about American cars. Vipers have huge, wide tires and a very light weight for their size (3100 lbs). Take off the traction controls, and they are pure driver's beasts. Very few people will be able to drive a viper at its limit, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. The car is fast in a straight line, yes, but will handle just as well in the corners. You only need to look at road racing to see the capabilities of Vipers with good drivers in their seats. Just because it can roast the tires in any gear doesn't mean that it can't handle the corners if you don't have a lead foot (in this case, you'll need ballerina slippers).
BMW is doing a great job at giving practical sedans a more sports car like performance, but what little kid sits around dreaming of driving a BMW (again, not in the numbers)?
That doesn't sound like a very good measurement of popularity. I would rather have an M5 or M6 than a Boxster, and I'm not even factoring in the extra seats.
Heck, I always preferred the sleek-looking cars as a kid. the Porsche looked like a short, fat slug compared to a Testarossa, McLaren, NSX, or even a 3000GT. That was before I knew about performance numbers and Porshce's handling ability, but then again, we're talking about kids here.
Mercedes are kind of like BMWs but for people who don't like to drive as much.
Agreed. Fast cars, but more luxury auto than driver's car. But 500+ hp is hard to argue with sometimes. And I respect the AMG division for making the SUV look like a minivan in the name of performance (lowering).
Honda has a whole line of cars designed for people who don't like cars enough to invest in them (add a turbo to a Civic and it's still a Civic).
I see some stereotyping here, perhaps? I'm not a big fan of ricers, but there is something to be said about a sleeper car that can outrun a purpose-built machine like a Porsche. I think minivans and Hondas alike running in the 10s in the quarter mile are a tribute to their owners' wrenching abilities. Anybody can drop a bucketload of money on a car that's already fast; taking a Civic or Miata to extreme performance levels is a talent few possess. Ever heard of the Tiburon with two turbo engines, one in the front, one in the rear? 560 hp to all four wheels at the same time, a 10.9 in the quarter mile, and it handled decently on a road course. Not to mention that not everybody gets a Porsche from their parents as a teen, so you work with what you have.
That "it's still a Civic" snobbery is the sort of thing that brand whores use to justify buying a car to raise their dignity level. You shouldn't be using a car as a crutch to build yourself up and break others down. That's the excuse people toss out when they're embrassed that they've just been burned in a race by an "inferior" car.
Cadillac drivers tend to prefer low speed cruising in a comfortable car. And it's that big, cushy, American plush comfort, too.
I think CTS-V owners woud disagree with the "low-speed cruising" part, and Crossfire owners would scream at you for calling their car American (German mechanicals, British designed)
Me? I prefer wide open twisty roads with very few stop signs and the feeling of downshifting to 3rd everytime I want to speed up to pass a Buick. I prefer bucket seats and leather interiors that wrap around me to give me that feeling of being connected to the car and the road. I prefer the jarring suspension that lets me feel every bump in the road. And I prefer the badge on my hood, and the one between my tail lights, that tells the people I'm passing that I like driving more than they do.
All that badge says is that you or your family has more money to drop on a car than other people do. If you really loved driving, you would test your car's limits in the canyons, and you'll see driver's cars like the Elise and Miata passing you on hard corners. Not to mention the Evo's and STi's.
Porshces are nice cars, but they're not the be-all and end-all of performance cars, nor are they touched by the hand of God.
You seem to have this belief that only Porsche can make driver's cars which truly connect you to the road. They don't own the patent to that.
So - my vote, and my advice, is to keep the Porsche. It'll cost you less than you think. And that big grin on your face every morning when you get to work, the kind you only get from sheer excitement, will be more than worth it!
Different strokes for different folks.