Cayman GT4....Damn you Porsche!!

[Bimmed Out]

Originally Posted by radiantm3

A lot of us paid 60+k for a freaking 3 series.

Yup, and if I could find a leftover new 2013 E92 M3 6MT, I'd be ecstatic to do this very thing you speak of today.

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by kepler

You completely missed my point. If the Porsche allowed it, the Cayman could easily surpass the 911 because of its engine placement and size/weight. Evo suggested that this longstanding suppression of the Cayman/981 is now over as this GT4 is the "Cayman unleashed." But I think it's pretty obvious that a truly unleashed Cayman would not have an engine that is purposefully detuned to keep its performance limited/down.

I didn't miss your point at all. I don't disagree with the potential of the platform, but engineering doesn't exist in a vacuum; there are still market realities that have to be considered because you have to actually sell the car you engineer. And like I said, if Porsche were to build a Cayman GT3 (i.e. including the GT3 engine), then it would undoubtedly outperform the GT3. But it would also undoubtedly cost a lot more than the GT4, and possibly at or even above the 911 GT3 since, well, it's a better car. But given all the people we've already seen upset that "a Cayman" costs as much as the GT4 does, how do you think people will respond to one priced at or above the 911 GT3's level? Unfortunate as it is, some buyers really would care that if they bought a Cayman GT3 that was in every way superior to a 911 GT3, there would still be others who would think, "Yeah, but that guy still isn't driving the 911 flagship, so who cares", and that may well sway them away from the car. You're right that there may well be a restriction on the Cayman from Porsche AG that stems from their desire to protect the "911 halo", but even if they were fine letting the Cayman cannibalize the 911, they'd probably still have that restriction because otherwise they'd have the business problem of selling such a car -- and the additional business problem of probably losing some 911 poser customers who wanted it just because it was a halo car and would now no longer be interested.

The solution of course is for Porsche to develop a mid-engine supercar under a different name, which we know has already happened with the Carrera GT and 918, and seems will happen again with the 960, all of which are positioned above the 911. Of course those cars don't use the Cayman chassis, but again, I imagine it's s because although Porsche acknowledges mid-engine is superior and is proving it with their true flagship cars, they also know that they can't sell "a Cayman" for GT3 money, even if the performance is there to back it up.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by whats77inaname

Given your participation in the rod bearing/oil threads, one would think you would have learned this by now

Ouch....its weird, my posts seem to make perfect sense when I hit send!

[W///]

Originally Posted by whats77inaname

Given your participation in the rod bearing/oil threads, one would think you would have learned this by now

I had a good laugh at this

[AlpGolcuklu]

Looks better than M3/4 for sure !! I would prefer GT4 if i had the chance of choosing btw of them

[STALKER]

I find it amusing that many of you spend 70-80K( or more) on a M3 that is based on a 3 series and then are bitching about this car's price tag.

I have owned last three gens of M3s(spent thousands on mods), and own a BMW now. I made the jump to Pcars 2 years ago and own a 991 C4S and a 997.2 GT3. M3 is a great daily car, but its no Porsche. I know that sounds cliche but the first time you take a Pcar to the track you see where the extra $$$ you spent comes into play. Its ready to go right out of the box.

Cayman GT4 for what it is, is priced very well. Its really its own segment IMO, because it can be DD and track weapon like a GT3 for at least 50K less. Porsche is a premium brand, the pricing is getting stupid, but everything is getting expensive these days. Ford is the only company that is making track ready cars at reasonable prices with the GT350 and its R variant(which I love).

I do realize that the GT4 uses GT3 parts and thats why some are making a direct comparison, but these cars are not competing with one another. The 991 GT3 will be much much much faster out on track. If you can easily afford a 991 GT3, you will buy a 991 GT3 not a GT4, and perhaps even add a GT4 for the hell of it since you want a car with a 6 speed.

You could spend 75K on a M3, and it will take you another 15K to even get close to a GT4 around a track, and it still won't be as good. I know cause I have been there, several times.

[s85e90]

Originally Posted by STALKER

I find it amusing that many of you spend 70-80K( or more) on a M3 that is based on a 3 series and then are bitching about this car's price tag.

I have owned last three gens of M3s(spent thousands on mods), and own a BMW now. I made the jump to Pcars 2 years ago and own a 991 C4S and a 997.2 GT3. M3 is a great daily car, but its no Porsche. I know that sounds cliche but the first time you take a Pcar to the track you see where the extra $$$ you spent comes into play. Its ready to go right out of the box.

Cayman GT4 for what it is, is priced very well. Its really its own segment IMO, because it can be DD and track weapon like a GT3 for at least 50K less. Porsche is a premium brand, the pricing is getting stupid, but everything is getting expensive these days. Ford is the only company that is making track ready cars at reasonable prices with the GT350 and its R variant(which I love).

I do realize that the GT4 uses GT3 parts and thats why some are making a direct comparison, but these cars are not competing with one another. The 991 GT3 will be much much much faster out on track. If you can easily afford a 991 GT3, you will buy a 991 GT3 not a GT4, and perhaps even add a GT4 for the hell of it since you want a car with a 6 speed.

You could spend 75K on a M3, and it will take you another 15K to even get close to a GT4 around a track, and it still won't be as good. I know cause I have been there, several times.

Your sig says you drive a Golf

Everyone here is a snob, hence why we have M cars.

[STALKER]

Originally Posted by s85e90

Your sig says you drive a Golf

Everyone here is a snob, hence why we have M cars.

Golf R is my DD. Love it!!!! One of the best car's I have ever owned actually.

[s85e90]

Originally Posted by STALKER

Golf R is my DD. Love it!!!! One of the best car's I have ever owned actually.

Nice, been thinking of maybe getting my girl one. I like them.

[Craigy]

Originally Posted by jphughan

I think the point is why does the Cayman badge inherently impose an upper limit on what price is reasonable? That type of thinking makes Petros' point about people making judgments purely on the badge. If the Cayman GT4 is in a completely different league than the regular Cayman, then it shouldn't be seen as absurd that its pricing would be in another league as well.

For more extreme examples, look at $135K for a Ford (GT), $375K for a Lexus (LFA), and hell, $100K+ for a Nissan (GTR). If the car is worth it, then it's worth it. End of story. Seriously, who cares what others think about the wisdom of you spending $100K on what they wrongfully think of as "just a Cayman"?

Originally Posted by Hujan

I understand that the 911 is rear-engined and the Cayman is mid. My point was that this is basically a mid-engined version of a high-end 911. This makes the "It's just a Cayman" comments misguided and irrelevant. FWIW, I actually think a mid-engine setup is preferable in many respects.

Anyway, you're missing the point: People don't point out it's a Cayman to be technically precise. They do so to disparage the Cayman. That's what I don't get. Decrying the vehicle because of its name without regard for what this model brings to the table is the height of snobbery.

The Cayman is a cheaper car than the 911. Cheaper build, fewer features, less performance, etc. These are facts, not opinions. A base 911 stickers for $85k. A base Cayman stickers for $50k. Would y'all suggest that Porsche is selling 911-equivalents badged as "Caymans" for a $35k discount? I would think not.

The Cayman is a great car. But it is what it is: an entry-level model. There's nothing wrong with that. Some people will think it's worth the price, some won't. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make him a snob. There's an upper limit to anything. Porsche could offer a Cayman that performs like a 918, but people would still prefer the 918.

You can spend $150k on a Shelby 1000 Mustang. To many it's still "just a Mustang." They don't sell very many.

[knolow]

Great info. I was turned off when Porsche admitted its more of a both world type of car ie daily and sometimes weekend track. Wish they would have gone all out track with sometimes daily drive it setup. Like the C7 Z06 vette for example. All these cars are alround the same price and for me I find more track features better than traffic light to traffic light features.

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by knolow

Great info. I was turned off when Porsche admitted its more of a both world type of car ie daily and sometimes weekend track. Wish they would have gone all out track with sometimes daily drive it setup. Like the C7 Z06 vette for example. All these cars are alround the same price and for me I find more track features better than traffic light to traffic light features.

I think GM would argue that the Z06 is a both world car. The Z/28 is another story. But saying it works in both worlds doesn't mean they didn't favor track performance over DD comfort, which I'm sure they did. Porsche has the same dual world message about the 991 GT3 too, fwiw, and I think they would say that the only all-out track car they make is the GT3 Cup, maybe the RS.

[BrewRifle]

I also wouldn't classify the Z06 as a track only car, but I'm no GM expert.

[Jaypod]

Originally Posted by BrewRifle

I also wouldn't classify the Z06 as a track only car, but I'm no GM expert.

No your right, not just a track only car, most of the old guys who buy them probably won't take them to the track.....

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by Petros

Good car. But as usual with Porsche, pricing is absurd. For that price tag I would rather get a GTR or Vette Z06

The reason for Porsche pricing is partly due to the fact that these are relatively low volume cars, are of premium build quality, and can be had with a very high level of customization. The combination of these three factors is going to make for an expensive product.

Any type of product line that combines high quality, low numbers, and a high degree of customizability is going to be somewhat disproportionately expensive for a given individual production piece. Furniture is the same way, for instance.

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by LarThaL

The reason for Porsche pricing is partly due to the fact that these are relatively low volume cars, are of premium build quality, and can be had with a very high level of customization. The combination of these three factors is going to make for an expensive product.

Any type of product line that combines high quality, low numbers, and a high degree of customizability is going to be somewhat disproportionately expensive for a given individual production piece. Furniture is the same way, for instance.

Well said, although I'm not sure I'd factor customizability into this, since Porsche makes customers pay handsomely for customizations that they may want. Paint to Sample is $5500 (which GM doesn't even offer) and leather air vent slats are $1200. Now of course the fact that those options themselves are relatively low volume can certainly be used to explain their high costs, but the fact that a model CAN be highly customized shouldn't contribute too much to the base price, other than maybe the manufacturer using revenue from all cars to cover the costs associated with having the facilities to support customization rather than trying to cover all of those costs just on the customization options themselves.

[Petros]

Originally Posted by LarThaL

The reason for Porsche pricing is partly due to the fact that these are relatively low volume cars, are of premium build quality, and can be had with a very high level of customization. The combination of these three factors is going to make for an expensive product.

Any type of product line that combines high quality, low numbers, and a high degree of customizability is going to be somewhat disproportionately expensive for a given individual production piece. Furniture is the same way, for instance.

1) The 911 is not that low volume. They sell about as any as the M3 for example. The GT-R is actually quite a bit lower volume, yet is still a lot cheaper.

2) Premium build quality you say?


3) As for customization, as jphugan said, you don't get squat on the base car. All this "very high level of customization" will cost you a serious buck on top of the already inflated purchase price of the base car. Additionally, those customizations probably don't cost nearly as much as you think they do. Almost all the customization involves choosing the color of various body panels and interior trim pieces. While that does add to the expense, I don't think it costs Porsche all that much to hire some idiot to switch paint cans in between different cars on the assembly line.

Let's be honest. A huge reason for Porsce charging a premium is simply because they can. They have the badge presence and brand recognition that enables them to gouge their customers a bit more than other marques. There is a reason why Porsche is the most profitable car maker in terms of marginal profit per unit sold

[FTS]

Originally Posted by jphughan

...if Porsche were to build a Cayman GT3 (i.e. including the GT3 engine), then it would undoubtedly outperform the GT3.

I imagine it's s because although Porsche acknowledges mid-engine is superior and is proving it with their true flagship cars, they also know that they can't sell "a Cayman" for GT3 money, even if the performance is there to back it up.

Although I agree with most of what you have written, I do fail to understand how you came to the conclusion that mid-engine is 'superior' and would 'undeoubtedly' outperform the 911 platform. After all the 911 is the most successful racing platform of all times against any mid-engine cars from Ford, Ferrari, Lotus, Lambo, etc. Although mid-engine has advantages from a packaging perspective, I don't understand how so strongly you can conclude that it also performs better.

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by FTS

Although I agree with most of what you have written, I do fail to understand how you came to the conclusion that mid-engine is 'superior' and would 'undeoubtedly' outperform the 911 platform. After all the 911 is the most successful racing platform of all times against any mid-engine cars from Ford, Ferrari, Lotus, Lambo, etc. Although mid-engine has advantages from a packaging perspective, I don't under how so strongly you can conclude that it also performs better.

Fair point. I may well have been unwittingly roped into the "Best possible Cayman would be better than best possible 911" line of thinking just from hearing it so many damn times -- but you're right, maybe it's not a foregone conclusion. I'm not an engineer.

Then again, Porsche does seem to have tacitly acknowledged that mid-engine is the superior platform given that both of their range-topping cars have been mid-engine, the 960 that will slot above the 911 will also be mid-engine, and all of the other supercars and hypercars I can think of off the top of my head are mid-engine: Ferrari, Lambo/Audi, McLaren, Pagani, Koenigsegg, Bugatti. And then of course F1 cars are mid-engine. If Porsche wanted to prove the superiority of rear-engine over mid-engine, you'd think that they would have done that already.

I have always found it curious though that as you say, the 911 has seen such immense success for so long, and yet somehow in all of those decades, not a single other automaker has ever developed a single rear-engine model of their own. For these purposes I don't count the original Beetle or the Tucker.

[FTS]

Originally Posted by jphughan

Then again, Porsche does seem to have tacitly acknowledged that mid-engine is the superior platform given that all of their supercars have been mid-engine, and so have all of the other supercars and hypercars I can think of off the top of my head: Ferrari, Lambo/Audi, Pagani, McLaren, Bugatti.

I have always found it curious though that as you say, the 911 has seen such immense success for so long, and yet somehow after all these decades, no other automaker has decided to develop a rear-engine platform of their own.

Putting a V10 or electric motors+V8 require a lot of space, not to mention double wishbone suspension which is not compact by any means. Mid-engine offers a lot of flexibility in terms of packaging the technology they needed to achieve what ever objectives they set for those vehicles, the CGT and 918. Although Porsche had very successful mid-engine racers in the past, like the 908, technically the rear-engine platform is a better base to work from. It offers better traction under braking and exit of corners, the only time is shows weakness is mid-corner. Additionally, it requires significantly more lateral force to move a rear-engine platform off its trajectory than a mid-engine platform, hence it is more stable, particularly under high speeds.

So, coming back to the Beetle of 1940s, Porsche invested in the rear-engine configuration for 6 decades, they learned a lot of tricks, and ripped the benefits. For any other company to try to replicate what they have learned and done would take unacceptable levels of investment without any guarantees they would be successful. Purely for economic reasons, I argue, all of those companies choose the easy way to achieve their objectives and compete against Porsche using front- or mid-engine configurations.

However, I will also admit without any understanding yet, during the last Sebring PCA club race a week ago multiple Caymans in the GTB1 category broke track records against GT3s to the surprise of many. So, I am not concluding with any certainty that the 911 is superior, technically it should be and I personally have data that it should be, but racers always figure out a way to do the impossible

[W///]

Originally Posted by Petros

1) The 911 is not that low volume. They sell about as any as the M3 for example. The GT-R is actually quite a bit lower volume, yet is still a lot cheaper.

2) Premium build quality you say?


3) As for customization, as jphugan said, you don't get squat on the base car. All this "very high level of customization" will cost you a serious buck on top of the already inflated purchase price of the base car. Additionally, those customizations probably don't cost nearly as much as you think they do. Almost all the customization involves choosing the color of various body panels and interior trim pieces. While that does add to the expense, I don't think it costs Porsche all that much to hire some idiot to switch paint cans in between different cars on the assembly line.

Let's be honest. A huge reason for Porsce charging a premium is simply because they can. They have the badge presence and brand recognition that enables them to gouge their customers a bit more than other marques. There is a reason why Porsche is the most profitable car maker in terms of marginal profit per unit sold

While you don't get squat on the most basic cars, you get more than enough for the rest IMO. Are they very expensive cars? Sure. But they can do it, as you said, so why wouldn't they? Should a Ferrari F12 cost as much as it does? Absolutely not. But people will pay for them.

Having said that, the GT4 is optioned just fine the way it is. I built one and I think it came out to only $2k worth of options extra. I will say though, I much prefer the way Porsche lets you customize your car. I absolutely hate the way BMW packages things, when they used to let you order things as stand alone.

[Craigy]

Originally Posted by Petros

3) As for customization, as jphugan said, you don't get squat on the base car. All this "very high level of customization" will cost you a serious buck on top of the already inflated purchase price of the base car. Additionally, those customizations probably don't cost nearly as much as you think they do. Almost all the customization involves choosing the color of various body panels and interior trim pieces. While that does add to the expense, I don't think it costs Porsche all that much to hire some idiot to switch paint cans in between different cars on the assembly line.

Let's be honest. A huge reason for Porsce charging a premium is simply because they can. They have the badge presence and brand recognition that enables them to gouge their customers a bit more than other marques. There is a reason why Porsche is the most profitable car maker in terms of marginal profit per unit sold

Yep!

You can literally order a base Cayman for $50k and add $80k of options to it.