New Porsche model???

While browsing the PCS (Porsche Club Sweden) website, I came across the following this morning:



Information said:
Porsche considering building 928 successor.

Porsche will decide by year-end whether to go ahead with a fourth model line that would be a V8-powered successor to the 928.
The front-engined 2+2 GT coupe would share parts with the Cayenne, including gearbox, rear axle, air suspension and its 4.5-liter engine that produces 340 hp in naturally aspirated form and 450 hp with twin turbochargers. The new model could be on sale by 2005. (1 april, 2001)




------------------
1972 911S Targa
************************
My project!

The key date in that might be "01 April." I think that's a long-dead rumor. More recently, there's talk about a smaller-than-a-Boxster model, and most recently, a Boxster coupe.

But these pictures -- however doctored and made-up they might be -- get me started every time. I'm no automotive stylist, but Porsche seems to make some design decisions that I just don't understand. The headlights on this 980 prototype (or whatever it is) make me crazy. A while ago, I made them round for a picture:



And then this idea of the Boxster coupe -- or even the latest 911 and GT2. Why has Porsche jacked the rear tail lights up above the top of the rear tire? It makes the bumper look like a huge piece of plastic filler, and (in my opinion) it ruins the lines of the car.

Here's my latest doctoring, a crudely-drawn suggestion to bring the tail lights back down to a reasonable height. I know the car doesn't even exist, yet, but I think it makes the whole line of the car flow better. Compare theirs and mine:



And come to think of it, what was the guy who came up with this 'artist's rendering' for the magazine thinking? What are those rear lid vents for? To cool the transaxle? It's a mid-engine car!


------------------
Jack Olsen
1973 911 T (3.6) sunroof coupe
jackolsen@mediaone.net

[This message has been edited by JackOlsen (edited 04-09-2001).]

April 1st....
You're probably right, but I'm sure it'll be an interesting thread anyhow....


------------------
1972 911S Targa
************************
My project!

[This message has been edited by Bo (edited 04-09-2001).]

Double-post...

[This message has been edited by Bo (edited 04-09-2001).]

Sorry Jack, but I prefer the 'original' styling.

Sure the Boxster Coupe is not genuine, anyway.

When you lower the rear taillights, the rear end looks very much like an early 70's 911... hmmm, perhaps there is some correlation between you're aesthetic design choices and your current car?

------------------
Dan Tolley
1987 911 Coupe
http://www.cheaterswayside.com/911/gallery.asp?sort=0&userid=294

I agree with Jack. The new headlights look like two weeping eyes, and it just doesn't work. The 993 style is much better: colder and more ferocious.
Boxters are fine, but they are underpowered. I'm sorry but a 6.6 0-60 (the numbers for the early boxters) is pathetic for a sports car.
And if you're going to spend the money on a Boxter S, you might as well get a beautiful 993.
This points to the fact that those who buy boxters aren't really enthusiasts at all, otherwise they'd have bought 993s instead.


------------------
Kurt B
'84 Carrera Cab.
carrera_cabriolet@yahoo.com

I think the Boxters' success speaks for itself. It also speaks for the company as well. They made a $40k sportscar that out sells the other brands $40k sportscars. This translates to resources for the whole line. Including racing. I thought the prototype Boxter had nicer, tighter lines but I guess changes have to be made to hold the cost down in mass production.
I'd love to see a lightweight no frills Boxter for the track. Who knows, maybe they might do this in the coupe version.
If you want exclusivity get a Ferrari. If you want reliability and bang for the buck. Get a Porsche.

Next time you get a chance, swing by your nearest Porsche dealer and ask to test-drive one of those $40,000 Boxsters. He'll laugh so hard he may soil himself, so don't stand too close.

$55K is possible if you're willing to cut a few corners (out the door).

Mike 94 C2 cab

[This message has been edited by Mike Feinstein (edited 04-09-2001).]

you guys need to stop trying to make the new look old....change is good.....everything has to somehow evolve or the product gets stail...

------------------
85.5 Porsche 944

I'm all for evolution and refinement, but Porsche gets its exterior design wrong a lot more often than it gets it right. In my opinion, the original 911 was gorgeous, and the impact bumper changes were unfortunate, but necessary, and not too big a trade-off. The 964 update was a miss (although, again, not a huge miss). The 993 update was a complete slam dunk. It's a beautiful updating of the design -- a huge step forward. The 996 was a miss. The Boxster was a miss -- the 550 Spyder never looked better than it did after that Boxster came out. 914, 928, 944 and variants -- all pretty much misses.

Now, that's just looks I'm talking about (and my personal opinions, at that). Porsche's real strong suit is engineering and performance. A 914 is a fantastic, nimble track car. A 928 is a great touring beast. A Boxster S is arguably a more fun car to race in than a 996. And a track prepped 996, like Todd Serota of Tracquest drives, will kick the behind of just about any NA 911 variant that came before it. But if you're singling out just looks, the new cars are duds.

This is an aesthetic judgment, of course, and it doesn't have anything to do with hard facts. So those of you who think 996s and Boxsters are the cat's meow, when it comes to automobile styling, I say more power to you. They're really good performers, too.

------------------
Jack Olsen
1973 911 T (3.6) sunroof coupe
jackolsen@mediaone.net

[This message has been edited by JackOlsen (edited 04-09-2001).]

Whoops.

[This message has been edited by JackOlsen (edited 04-09-2001).]