rss997

Do you really htink PCNA will make one without it because of your letters? Oh well, give it a try but there are probably way more people who would buy one with a sunroof than you think.....I think they did their homework on this issue....

I might buy a GT3 now that it has a sunroof..........

RonCT

Two thoughts... First is that if everyone felt this way - that nothing will change even if we complain or voice an opinion - then the world would be an unbearable place to live in. I suppose we'd have dictators running the show. The way we make improvements is to express ourselves, and many will say to do it with your wallet. In this case, we are trying to tell a company we like how we feel before they make their final decision. It is still possible, at least optimists think so, that they may realize that for the future of the company as it relates to enthusiasts, it might be best to go ahead and certify the car without a sunroof, which is how the entire world market will receive this car (yes, everyone else can order the optional sunroof and pay for it if they want).

Second - I am really amazed to hear that only because it will come with a sunroof you plan to buy one. That sounds counter-intuitive given what the GT3 is. I don't think anyone that will take this car on the track would want one for the simple fact that you lose helmet clearance. So, if you are thinking that the sunroof option will get more "street" GT3s sold, then maybe you are right.

Nizer

I don't think it's going to make a bit of difference but I'm sending it anyway. At the very least it allows for much needed venting. Here it is....


I’ve followed with keen anticipation the progress of the new 997 GT3 and am number one on my local dealer’s (Clair Porsche, Boston) waiting list. After reading more than a dozen print and web-based driving reviews I’m even more excited about the opportunity to own and drive the new GT3.

I am however dismayed that the car tested by both US and non-US journalist won’t be offered in the US. I refer specifically to early press reports suggesting that the lightweight Carrera GT-based seats as well as the Clubsport option won’t be available on the US GT3. This is frustrating given that these items are vital to safe track day use and in my view are integral to the performance and character of the GT3. Porsche obviously feels the same given that every vehicle provided to journalists has been specified with these options.

A similar situation with the 996 GT3 forced many owners into the aftermarket to retrofit these vital components - a costly, frustrating, and potentially risky exercise for those owners. It remains unclear to me why Porsche would expose itself to the liability of forcing owners into the aftermarket to fit factory-installed safety components available on vehicles sold in all other markets.

Is this a deal-breaker? At the end of the day probably not assuming the dealer is willing to retrofit these items and provide some compensation for the cost of installing the “no cost” Clubsport option.

However, I’m now hearing rumors that all GT3s will come with a mandatory sunroof. If this is true I’m at a loss. A sunroof goes completely against the requirements of track-day use where maximal structural stiffness and integrity, light weight, and sufficient headroom to comfortably accommodate a helmet are priorities.

Given that I fully intend to use the vehicle on the track as well as the street, should the US-based GT3 come without the ability to delete the sunroof I’ll sadly be taking a pass. More generally, I’d strongly encourage you to sell the same cars in the US that are produced for the rest of the world, not to mention the ones that you very astutely provide for magazine reviews.

Regards,

RonCT

I'd consider removing any talk of liability from your letter... Mine was short and sweet - talked about me being on the wait list, trying to decide between GT3 and RS, that the sunroof was a deal-killer due to weight / structure, helmet clearance, and philosophy / image (I wrote "Can you imagine an enthusiast / club racer purchaseing a GT3 RS with a sunroof?").

Seats, etc. are something we in the US already understand - no amount of talking is going to get PCNA to change that aspect. But the sunroof mandate so they don't have to certify the GT3 is just being "cheap". If they at least did a delete option, they'd be paid for a lot of sunroofs that they will never provide. Free money to pay for the certification process.

Flying Finn

Sure it can. If there's enough people to do that.

This is not personally to you but how I personally see this.

This is more about trying to let Porsche know there still are people who like Porsches as true sports cars and are not so keen about all the comfy crap.

For me, this is also another item of "pussification of the world" that can be seen everywhere.
People are more and more lazy and just so into all comfort, pampering, men using all kind of lotions, manicures & other crap like that and good old manual labor and craftsmanship is worth nothing.
To me, that's a big issue (and ****ed up) in general and seeing an item as sunroof to be an important item in a sportscar to so many people is just one example of that.

Beside sir, when I'm dissatisfied, ok pissed, about something I much rather do something about it than bend over and grab my ankles.

Nizer

Yup, I can reconsider... But given Porsche's perceived risk-aversion in the US, this was a bit of an attempt to get them to reconsider in a way that hits there hot button. Ya never know what can be accomplished.

On a separate but related note, anyone interested in pooling resources to buy a full page in Road & Track? Reproducing the best letter here will likely have many times the impact of our individual efforts.

RonCT

Interesting idea about the ad, but I think that if we all send our letters to R&T, Excellence, C&D, Automobile, etc. - basically all of the magazines here in the US that have claimed how great the new GT3 / RS is (remember, they tested Euro cars without sunroofs), that might have more of an impact.

I could just see a writer working on it now (ie: Today) - trying to write the article in a way that hammers PCNA for the mandated sunroof, while perhaps leaving the door open for them to make a final decision that does not mandate it - remember, this is the "Preliminary" order guide.

A letter to PCNA with a copy to the magazines...

TD in DC

Interesting idea about the ad x2, but may I suggest that an ad in a larger circulation paper might be more effective? For example, imagine an ad in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times or Washington Post. Anything that could get reporters talking about "what the hell is the deal with the sunroof" Porsche already knows what the enthusiast thinks. They care about image for the general marketplace, so widespread exposure might be better. Of course, I do not know the costs for something like that . . .

RonCT

Hmm, sort of a "watering down" of the label by putting cruise and a sunroof in the Porsche "Race Car". As you say, they already know what enthusiasts think, but what about the general P-car buyer. The vast majority of buyers already are non-enthusiasts. Perhaps like BMW they don't really care because overall they sell more cars. But if the heritage is lost...

AW

Actually, BMW is doing a nice effort to deliver a pure sports car. Check this out:

http://bmwusa.com/Vehicles/M/Z4MCoupe/default

AW

Holger B

Nice try by BMW, but in the "Highlights" section they focus on Bluetooth, brake lights & BMW Assist.

cosmos

I would contribute to the open ad in a major newspaper. I would not want to pay for the entire thing, but if we get 20 of us toghther that might work.

mooty

i priced it out. 51795 min. options.
arnaud, you should get it, we can play with your mzcopu and my underpowered gayman.

cosmos

Someone should buy my e46 M3 race car.

mooty

nice try, evan.
i PROMISED myself, i will NEVER EVER buy another bmw or audi.