Porsche eats caviar, we drive their time bombs. Vent. Long.
10-28-2011, 10:55 AM
#16
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: West Los Angeles & Truckee, CA
Posts: 3,907
Received 799 Likes
on
548 Posts
I love my 997.2S. If you're worried about your Porsche everyday - i'd sell it and buy a Lexus. The 911 is basically a sports car - by defn it wont be 100% worry free. When i bought my 911 in 2009, i'd say it was probably the most reliable option I had in the 100K range.
10-28-2011, 01:47 PM
#17
I hear you. But I love the sports car, grew up in them. I know nothing is 100% worry free but...ya gotta ask the questions.
10-28-2011, 01:52 PM
#18
nay..... sounds like making profit and driving porsches is a sin (and if you are a prop trader YOU MUST DIE NOW). 
if only it was making them below cost, made from plastic to be recycled every 2 years and driven by people on benefits ..... mmmm wait a sec ?
if only it was making them below cost, made from plastic to be recycled every 2 years and driven by people on benefits ..... mmmm wait a sec ?
10-28-2011, 02:03 PM
#19
Instructor
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-28-2011, 02:09 PM
#20
Instructor
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A modern vehicle is an extremely difficult and complex piece of machinery. Pretty much any vehicle these days will last 100,000 miles if properly maintained, and some may times that. Imagine the amount of stress that places on each individual part of your car. I don't think I could do a better job than Porsche does. Is there room for improvement? Sure. Ask yourself this though, if you build a perfect product how will you ever sell replacement units? All items in the marketplace now are designed to fail at some point so that they are replaced, from your cell phone to light bulbs to cars and homes.
I do agree that Porsche seems to react slowly to problems and I wish that was different. Anyone here could start their own car company to build a better product. You wouldn't be first, think Lamborghini or Tucker. Heck you could take your 100k and build a 100% custom kit car, would that fit the bill?
I do agree that Porsche seems to react slowly to problems and I wish that was different. Anyone here could start their own car company to build a better product. You wouldn't be first, think Lamborghini or Tucker. Heck you could take your 100k and build a 100% custom kit car, would that fit the bill?
10-28-2011, 02:13 PM
#21
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if people on Lexus boards are complaining about the exact opposite: why does Toyota build cars that are sooooo boring in driving dynamics and styling? A Porsche is everything a Lexus isn't, and vice-versa. The reason a Porsche isn't as reliable as a Lexus is likely the same as a Lexus being nowhere near as thrilling to drive as a Porsche. Perfect packaging carries an imperfect price. For what's available now, I'm happy with the overall compromise in the form of a 911.
10-28-2011, 02:45 PM
#22
Rennlist Member
The dealership breaks it for me.
10-28-2011, 03:10 PM
#23
Nordschleife Master
If Porsche or any other car company built a product that had an unlimited life expectancy, was 100% reliable and all it needed was oil and gas to keep going, 1) they couldn't afford to build it and 2) no one would be able to afford to buy it. All designs are a compromise of priorities among which are cost and reasonable life expectancy.
We seem to be living in an age where people are disconnected from reality. On product perceptions - everything must be perfect with no compromises of any kind. On the economy - they must be able to afford it all and everyone is entitled to anything they want. What a dream world! I predict waking up won't be pretty.
10-28-2011, 03:48 PM
#24
Rennlist Member
I find driving a time bomb exciting;-)
10-28-2011, 05:12 PM
#25
Drifting
Car makers like makers of coffee makers, know that every once in a while they may build something that is not a great design. It happens. But they don't include any insurance with the car sale beyond the new car warranty. If they want to provide a longer warranty, the price goes up.
Risk=money; always.
With any product, it may be a bad one. Get rid of it and don't buy more from the manufacturer. But don't expect the manufacturer to expend financial resources to compensate you for a guarantee/warantee that you didn't actually have.
10-28-2011, 05:41 PM
#26
.org
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 7,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole "complaint" sounds like something out of the mind of Glen Beck.
It's got everything...exaggeration of a supposed problem, a conspiracy to cover it up, and best of all, lots of supposed victims.
It's got everything...exaggeration of a supposed problem, a conspiracy to cover it up, and best of all, lots of supposed victims.
10-28-2011, 06:21 PM
#27
Burning Brakes
This is not correct. *how* a company stays in business is making enough revenue to match its operating cost. At that point the corporation's profit is zero, but it may be paying good salaries to lots of employees, making great products and reinvesting lots of revenue in improving those profits.
Something has dramatically changed in the last 20 years in that most corporations are now focused mainly on maximizing their *profit* which is then paid out as dividends, or in maximizing their stock valuation.
Corporations maximizing their stock valuation helps neither consumers nor the employees. It only helps the shareholders.
Unfortunately, the stock market is very short sighted, so doing things like maximizing the profit on current car sales even if you **** off long term buyers is a popular move. Similarly, mergers, break-ups, layoffs, etc that don't really help the company function any better but help the stock valuation are very popular moves.
Something has dramatically changed in the last 20 years in that most corporations are now focused mainly on maximizing their *profit* which is then paid out as dividends, or in maximizing their stock valuation.
Corporations maximizing their stock valuation helps neither consumers nor the employees. It only helps the shareholders.
Unfortunately, the stock market is very short sighted, so doing things like maximizing the profit on current car sales even if you **** off long term buyers is a popular move. Similarly, mergers, break-ups, layoffs, etc that don't really help the company function any better but help the stock valuation are very popular moves.
I'm sorry, this was too long and silly.
10-28-2011, 08:40 PM
#28
Nordschleife Master
Have you been smoking the drapes? Porsche is not in business as a hobby. The shareholders are the owners of the company and they want a return on their investment. Like all good business owners they want to grow their business and keep prospering. You achieve this with solid engineering,great customer satisfaction and selling your product at a competitive price. That price must include a margin of profit otherwise you fail and everyone loses their jobs and the owners lose their money. I think they call this the free market in our capitalistic society. The Soviets, under their old system could not build anything better than a Lada. It would appear that is what you are advocating.
I'm sorry, this was too long and silly.
I'm sorry, this was too long and silly.
10-28-2011, 08:41 PM
#29
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing wrong with Porsche's ambition to greatly increase its sales volume, but the reports earlier this week about the poor reliability of the Cayenne dropping the brand 25 places (from second to second last) on the CR ratings are likely to be the tip of the iceberg if the company pursues sales and profits at the expense of quality.
I've come to appreciate the relatively bulletproof nature of the 911, and it would be a great shame if that quality were compromised in the pursuit of sales and profits. Good stewardship would see Porsche grow while maintaining quality, but we've seen with BMW (whose current reliability is in the crapper) and MB (who are getting back to where they once were after a period of sub-par quality) that focusing only on growth can have adverse consequences. My strong suspicion is that people are going to be a lot less willing to drop 100K and more on a 911 if Porsche lets reliability on these cars decline.
I've come to appreciate the relatively bulletproof nature of the 911, and it would be a great shame if that quality were compromised in the pursuit of sales and profits. Good stewardship would see Porsche grow while maintaining quality, but we've seen with BMW (whose current reliability is in the crapper) and MB (who are getting back to where they once were after a period of sub-par quality) that focusing only on growth can have adverse consequences. My strong suspicion is that people are going to be a lot less willing to drop 100K and more on a 911 if Porsche lets reliability on these cars decline.
10-28-2011, 09:22 PM
#30
Rennlist Member
Although the OP is a bit dramatic on this post, and 997 in general is a very reliable cars, I can understand the frustration.
From what I've seen lately, Porsche has been leaving their customer who paid $100K+ for a car to fend for themselves, EVEN IF, the issue is caused by an ENGINEERING FLAW at Porsche! Perfect example is warranty denial of IMS failure of 2005 *old design* cars! Also, shrugging shoulders at extreme oil consumption of some .2 owners...
From what I've seen lately, Porsche has been leaving their customer who paid $100K+ for a car to fend for themselves, EVEN IF, the issue is caused by an ENGINEERING FLAW at Porsche! Perfect example is warranty denial of IMS failure of 2005 *old design* cars! Also, shrugging shoulders at extreme oil consumption of some .2 owners...