Why the excessive negativity on the Cayman R!
11-22-2010, 02:47 AM
#1
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
Why the excessive negativity on the Cayman R!
I followed closely the responses to MJones 'It's Official...Cayman R' and was surprised by the overwhelming negative reactions. I just came back from the LA Auto Show. I talked there to two German employees of Porsche (Sasha Glaeser and Michael Hack who were sent to Los Angeles for this introduction) and obtained their input. For over one year I have been following the gt3 market, thinking that is what I was going to get. But a few months ago, I started seeing interesting posts here by Savyboy, Zellamsee, Polarporsche and others which sang high praises of the Spyder and talked about their incredible driving experiences with this little dragon slayer 'Boxster', which drew comparisons to their more powerful gt3s stablemates. So if the Spyder was the little 'David' that could do these great things, why are we now so down on this new Cayman R, its coupe equivalent?
Perhaps Savyboy, who I know and respect, summarized the case for the critics best: "The Cayman R at best is a lazy, lackluster parts bin exercise. No coilovers. No adjustable sways. No monoballs. No spherical ends. Same old engine (yes, it is a good engine). The R designation is wasted and an insult for this car. After all the secret hush hush leaks about this model this is a HUGE letdown. Had it been introduced as simply an option package, well then fine. But this is no "R" and it is nothing special as far as Cayman or Porsches go. I was hoping for SO much more."
If one really analyzes where Porsche is today with the Boxster Spyder, a current / on-going model on the current 987 platform that its this Cayman R's open-top version, did anyone really think it alone would receive coilovers, adjustable sways, monoballs, spherical ends, or anything else that would have made is SO superior to its Spyder sibling? And at this late date, shortly before Porsche revamps the platform and introduces a new chassis in a year or so? And if that where to have happened, what do you think such a 'super' Cayman would have done to current Spyder values and it's owners happiness with Porsche?
You might also remember a quote posted here recently by Pete of Excellence Magazine: "Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension. Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court."
So did we really think Porsche was going to fix most of the Cayman's short-comings on this go-around now? I don't think so. In short, these expectations for the Cayman 'R', or the 'CS' we thought we would get, were totally unrealistic, given what we know about Porsche and how they have operated in the past.
As a contrarian, I will make a case for the Cayman R in a separate post. z356
https://rennlist.com/forums/987-foru...ml#post8075670
Perhaps Savyboy, who I know and respect, summarized the case for the critics best: "The Cayman R at best is a lazy, lackluster parts bin exercise. No coilovers. No adjustable sways. No monoballs. No spherical ends. Same old engine (yes, it is a good engine). The R designation is wasted and an insult for this car. After all the secret hush hush leaks about this model this is a HUGE letdown. Had it been introduced as simply an option package, well then fine. But this is no "R" and it is nothing special as far as Cayman or Porsches go. I was hoping for SO much more."
If one really analyzes where Porsche is today with the Boxster Spyder, a current / on-going model on the current 987 platform that its this Cayman R's open-top version, did anyone really think it alone would receive coilovers, adjustable sways, monoballs, spherical ends, or anything else that would have made is SO superior to its Spyder sibling? And at this late date, shortly before Porsche revamps the platform and introduces a new chassis in a year or so? And if that where to have happened, what do you think such a 'super' Cayman would have done to current Spyder values and it's owners happiness with Porsche?
You might also remember a quote posted here recently by Pete of Excellence Magazine: "Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension. Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court."
So did we really think Porsche was going to fix most of the Cayman's short-comings on this go-around now? I don't think so. In short, these expectations for the Cayman 'R', or the 'CS' we thought we would get, were totally unrealistic, given what we know about Porsche and how they have operated in the past.
As a contrarian, I will make a case for the Cayman R in a separate post. z356
https://rennlist.com/forums/987-foru...ml#post8075670
Last edited by Z356; 11-22-2010 at 03:51 AM.
11-22-2010, 03:56 AM
#3
Rennlist Member
IMO, people have been wanting the Cayman to be a better value ever since it was strangely introduced as a model above the Boxster. With this last hurrah on the current platform, my guess is many were hoping this would finally be the model that makes it worth the premium over a Boxster. But with what will surely be similar performance as the Spyder, but with a higher pricetag and without a the visual statement, the disappointment is that once again the Cayman is overshadowed.
11-22-2010, 05:01 AM
#4
Hello!
I believe there would have been less negativity about the Cayman R if it did not have THE "R" moniker.
"R" should, IMHO, be for something with (using Savy's list) coilovers, adjustable sways, monoballs, spherical ends etc... given what it was on historically.
I had a Cayman S, now a GT3, both are great cars in their own right. However, totally different driving experiences.
Best, w
I believe there would have been less negativity about the Cayman R if it did not have THE "R" moniker.
"R" should, IMHO, be for something with (using Savy's list) coilovers, adjustable sways, monoballs, spherical ends etc... given what it was on historically.
I had a Cayman S, now a GT3, both are great cars in their own right. However, totally different driving experiences.
Best, w
Trending Topics
11-22-2010, 01:17 PM
#9
Rennlist Member
What's in a name? When it comes to Porsche, the answer is simple: expectation.
Or at least it used to be.
I think most if not all of the criticism wouldn't have come had Porsche chosen to name it Cayman CS, or (ugh) Cayman GTS. Instead, the marketing dept chose one of the company's most hallowed names and applied it to a parts-bin special. To name the car Cayman R brings with it a linkage to just one other road-legal Porsche that was a lot more than a bunch of options. It was the ultimate 911 in terms of lightweight, and one that has not been eclipsed in more than 40 years. Only a few 911s even come close to the 1967 911R's aggressive weight-saving techniques, with the last one being the 964 C4 Lightweight —Streksomething that can hardly be called a "pure" 911.
If this Cayman had CF doors, a CF decklid, interior delete, a half cage, no trunk linings, etc. it might qualify for the term R. But it doesn't. I don't think very many knowledgeable observers were expecting pure-track suspension, etc. — but they weren't expecting this name. When I heard it I was disappointed, even more so than after the GTS and a Speedster that Porsche is proud of for weighing exactly the same as a Carrera S Cabriolet.
So let's look at what the Cayman R in fact IS:
-Stiffer than the Boxster Spyder, with similar (great) suspension, LSD, LW seats, etc.
-A coupe instead of the Boxster Spyder
-Lighter than the Cayman S, but not as light as the Spyder
-More expensive than the Spyder
-A relative bargain if you want a Cayman S with performance options
-10-hp more powerful than Cayman S or Spyder
So it's a fine car, but the name is a hangup for many. If only they hadn't chosen to link it to the 911R and GT3R, two cars it shares too little, if anything, with. It begs the question of whether the car is a phony.
We'll see how it drives — but my guess is it'll be wonderful. If so, I'll say so. But I know I'd order mine with badge and stripe delete —Strekin any color other than the R-specific green. And that's only if there were no more Spyders and I just had to have a coupe.
pete
Or at least it used to be.
I think most if not all of the criticism wouldn't have come had Porsche chosen to name it Cayman CS, or (ugh) Cayman GTS. Instead, the marketing dept chose one of the company's most hallowed names and applied it to a parts-bin special. To name the car Cayman R brings with it a linkage to just one other road-legal Porsche that was a lot more than a bunch of options. It was the ultimate 911 in terms of lightweight, and one that has not been eclipsed in more than 40 years. Only a few 911s even come close to the 1967 911R's aggressive weight-saving techniques, with the last one being the 964 C4 Lightweight —Streksomething that can hardly be called a "pure" 911.
If this Cayman had CF doors, a CF decklid, interior delete, a half cage, no trunk linings, etc. it might qualify for the term R. But it doesn't. I don't think very many knowledgeable observers were expecting pure-track suspension, etc. — but they weren't expecting this name. When I heard it I was disappointed, even more so than after the GTS and a Speedster that Porsche is proud of for weighing exactly the same as a Carrera S Cabriolet.
So let's look at what the Cayman R in fact IS:
-Stiffer than the Boxster Spyder, with similar (great) suspension, LSD, LW seats, etc.
-A coupe instead of the Boxster Spyder
-Lighter than the Cayman S, but not as light as the Spyder
-More expensive than the Spyder
-A relative bargain if you want a Cayman S with performance options
-10-hp more powerful than Cayman S or Spyder
So it's a fine car, but the name is a hangup for many. If only they hadn't chosen to link it to the 911R and GT3R, two cars it shares too little, if anything, with. It begs the question of whether the car is a phony.
We'll see how it drives — but my guess is it'll be wonderful. If so, I'll say so. But I know I'd order mine with badge and stripe delete —Strekin any color other than the R-specific green. And that's only if there were no more Spyders and I just had to have a coupe.
pete
11-22-2010, 02:00 PM
#11
Rennlist Member
Well the problem is as mentioned before is the "R" badge. I think it stands for racing, so where is the racing part of this car? It still is luxurious as any other Porsche, not much weight saving other than deleting AC and Radio, which in my opinion is a must for any person who actually drives his car to the track. Porsche should have taken more drastic steps to make sure this car was actually a lighter race car and really deserve it's "R" badge.
The GT3 RS has a complete different engine, transmission, suspension, aero from a regular Carrera and is still called an RS. New Cayman R should have a lot more to offer than what it currently has to deserve the name.
The GT3 RS has a complete different engine, transmission, suspension, aero from a regular Carrera and is still called an RS. New Cayman R should have a lot more to offer than what it currently has to deserve the name.
11-22-2010, 04:00 PM
#13
4th Gear
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Entry level coupe
Dear Porsche, please make me a Boxster 2.9 Coupe with cloth/manual seats, non-metallic paint, RS door panels, lowered springs, 5sp, FM/iPod stereo, 17" wheels, AC, and reduced soundproofing, for $42k. You have all the parts in stock!
It won't be the most prestigious or fastest Porsche on the block, but it would be the THE BEST and most desirable new car under warranty that I could afford. And a great car, regardless of price.
It won't be the most prestigious or fastest Porsche on the block, but it would be the THE BEST and most desirable new car under warranty that I could afford. And a great car, regardless of price.
Last edited by GVP; 11-22-2010 at 05:28 PM.
11-22-2010, 04:04 PM
#14
I followed closely the responses to MJones 'It's Official...Cayman R' and was surprised by the overwhelming negative reactions. I just came back from the LA Auto Show. I talked there to two German employees of Porsche (Sasha Glaeser and Michael Hack who were sent to Los Angeles for this introduction) and obtained their input. For over one year I have been following the gt3 market, thinking that is what I was going to get. But a few months ago, I started seeing interesting posts here by Savyboy, Zellamsee, Polarporsche and others which sang high praises of the Spyder and talked about their incredible driving experiences with this little dragon slayer 'Boxster', which drew comparisons to their more powerful gt3s stablemates. So if the Spyder was the little 'David' that could do these great things, why are we now so down on this new Cayman R, its coupe equivalent?
Perhaps Savyboy, who I know and respect, summarized the case for the critics best: "The Cayman R at best is a lazy, lackluster parts bin exercise. No coilovers. No adjustable sways. No monoballs. No spherical ends. Same old engine (yes, it is a good engine). The R designation is wasted and an insult for this car. After all the secret hush hush leaks about this model this is a HUGE letdown. Had it been introduced as simply an option package, well then fine. But this is no "R" and it is nothing special as far as Cayman or Porsches go. I was hoping for SO much more."
If one really analyzes where Porsche is today with the Boxster Spyder, a current / on-going model on the current 987 platform that its this Cayman R's open-top version, did anyone really think it alone would receive coilovers, adjustable sways, monoballs, spherical ends, or anything else that would have made is SO superior to its Spyder sibling? And at this late date, shortly before Porsche revamps the platform and introduces a new chassis in a year or so? And if that where to have happened, what do you think such a 'super' Cayman would have done to current Spyder values and it's owners happiness with Porsche?
You might also remember a quote posted here recently by Pete of Excellence Magazine: "Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension. Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court."
So did we really think Porsche was going to fix most of the Cayman's short-comings on this go-around now? I don't think so. In short, these expectations for the Cayman 'R', or the 'CS' we thought we would get, were totally unrealistic, given what we know about Porsche and how they have operated in the past.
As a contrarian, I will make a case for the Cayman R in a separate post. z356
https://rennlist.com/forums/987-foru...ml#post8075670
Perhaps Savyboy, who I know and respect, summarized the case for the critics best: "The Cayman R at best is a lazy, lackluster parts bin exercise. No coilovers. No adjustable sways. No monoballs. No spherical ends. Same old engine (yes, it is a good engine). The R designation is wasted and an insult for this car. After all the secret hush hush leaks about this model this is a HUGE letdown. Had it been introduced as simply an option package, well then fine. But this is no "R" and it is nothing special as far as Cayman or Porsches go. I was hoping for SO much more."
If one really analyzes where Porsche is today with the Boxster Spyder, a current / on-going model on the current 987 platform that its this Cayman R's open-top version, did anyone really think it alone would receive coilovers, adjustable sways, monoballs, spherical ends, or anything else that would have made is SO superior to its Spyder sibling? And at this late date, shortly before Porsche revamps the platform and introduces a new chassis in a year or so? And if that where to have happened, what do you think such a 'super' Cayman would have done to current Spyder values and it's owners happiness with Porsche?
You might also remember a quote posted here recently by Pete of Excellence Magazine: "Problem with all of these Cayman "fixes" is that none of them address the 987's fundamental weakness, which is not power, but rear suspension. Fixing it would not be a plug and play conversion, getting it to Weissach levels of refinement even less likely. And that's a big advantage that remains firmly in the 911's court."
So did we really think Porsche was going to fix most of the Cayman's short-comings on this go-around now? I don't think so. In short, these expectations for the Cayman 'R', or the 'CS' we thought we would get, were totally unrealistic, given what we know about Porsche and how they have operated in the past.
As a contrarian, I will make a case for the Cayman R in a separate post. z356
https://rennlist.com/forums/987-foru...ml#post8075670
What's in a name? When it comes to Porsche, the answer is simple: expectation.
Or at least it used to be.
I think most if not all of the criticism wouldn't have come had Porsche chosen to name it Cayman CS, or (ugh) Cayman GTS. Instead, the marketing dept chose one of the company's most hallowed names and applied it to a parts-bin special. To name the car Cayman R brings with it a linkage to just one other road-legal Porsche that was a lot more than a bunch of options. It was the ultimate 911 in terms of lightweight, and one that has not been eclipsed in more than 40 years. Only a few 911s even come close to the 1967 911R's aggressive weight-saving techniques, with the last one being the 964 C4 Lightweight —Streksomething that can hardly be called a "pure" 911.
If this Cayman had CF doors, a CF decklid, interior delete, a half cage, no trunk linings, etc. it might qualify for the term R. But it doesn't. I don't think very many knowledgeable observers were expecting pure-track suspension, etc. — but they weren't expecting this name. When I heard it I was disappointed, even more so than after the GTS and a Speedster that Porsche is proud of for weighing exactly the same as a Carrera S Cabriolet.
So let's look at what the Cayman R in fact IS:
-Stiffer than the Boxster Spyder, with similar (great) suspension, LSD, LW seats, etc.
-A coupe instead of the Boxster Spyder
-Lighter than the Cayman S, but not as light as the Spyder
-More expensive than the Spyder
-A relative bargain if you want a Cayman S with performance options
-10-hp more powerful than Cayman S or Spyder
So it's a fine car, but the name is a hangup for many. If only they hadn't chosen to link it to the 911R and GT3R, two cars it shares too little, if anything, with. It begs the question of whether the car is a phony.
We'll see how it drives — but my guess is it'll be wonderful. If so, I'll say so. But I know I'd order mine with badge and stripe delete —Strekin any color other than the R-specific green. And that's only if there were no more Spyders and I just had to have a coupe.
pete
Or at least it used to be.
I think most if not all of the criticism wouldn't have come had Porsche chosen to name it Cayman CS, or (ugh) Cayman GTS. Instead, the marketing dept chose one of the company's most hallowed names and applied it to a parts-bin special. To name the car Cayman R brings with it a linkage to just one other road-legal Porsche that was a lot more than a bunch of options. It was the ultimate 911 in terms of lightweight, and one that has not been eclipsed in more than 40 years. Only a few 911s even come close to the 1967 911R's aggressive weight-saving techniques, with the last one being the 964 C4 Lightweight —Streksomething that can hardly be called a "pure" 911.
If this Cayman had CF doors, a CF decklid, interior delete, a half cage, no trunk linings, etc. it might qualify for the term R. But it doesn't. I don't think very many knowledgeable observers were expecting pure-track suspension, etc. — but they weren't expecting this name. When I heard it I was disappointed, even more so than after the GTS and a Speedster that Porsche is proud of for weighing exactly the same as a Carrera S Cabriolet.
So let's look at what the Cayman R in fact IS:
-Stiffer than the Boxster Spyder, with similar (great) suspension, LSD, LW seats, etc.
-A coupe instead of the Boxster Spyder
-Lighter than the Cayman S, but not as light as the Spyder
-More expensive than the Spyder
-A relative bargain if you want a Cayman S with performance options
-10-hp more powerful than Cayman S or Spyder
So it's a fine car, but the name is a hangup for many. If only they hadn't chosen to link it to the 911R and GT3R, two cars it shares too little, if anything, with. It begs the question of whether the car is a phony.
We'll see how it drives — but my guess is it'll be wonderful. If so, I'll say so. But I know I'd order mine with badge and stripe delete —Strekin any color other than the R-specific green. And that's only if there were no more Spyders and I just had to have a coupe.
pete
For me, it certainly was a matter of setting sky high expectations for this rumored Cayman "hot rod" to finally be unshackled (I mean real horsepower as in 3.8 415 hp) and real lightweight (as with the GT2 RS, Porsche no longer holds back with the composite materials.)
There was a very real expectation set that this "new" Cayman could/would/should arrive with real engineering advances. And I still would like to see things at least on the option list like a carbon hood and fenders, carbon hatch, ground thumping horsepower and significantly lighter, not heavier, than the Spyder -- perhaps 100+ kilos lighter.
It would also be marvelous if Porsche could take the Camry suspension out of the parts bin and put it in the waste bin. The mid-engine Porsches are long overdue for a geometry do-over.
For me, the expected Cayman would have been the makings of ... well ... who knows ... maybe Porsche still has something to say on whether the back of the engine or the front is in front of the back of the car. For now, I still prefer to have the back in front at the back. So to speak. : )
11-22-2010, 05:06 PM
#15
Rennlist Member
Well the problem is as mentioned before is the "R" badge. I think it stands for racing, so where is the racing part of this car? It still is luxurious as any other Porsche, not much weight saving other than deleting AC and Radio, which in my opinion is a must for any person who actually drives his car to the track. Porsche should have taken more drastic steps to make sure this car was actually a lighter race car and really deserve it's "R" badge.
The GT3 RS has a complete different engine, transmission, suspension, aero from a regular Carrera and is still called an RS. New Cayman R should have a lot more to offer than what it currently has to deserve the name.
The GT3 RS has a complete different engine, transmission, suspension, aero from a regular Carrera and is still called an RS. New Cayman R should have a lot more to offer than what it currently has to deserve the name.
When one looks at the 997 Speedster, one wonders what a car similar to the Spyder in concept and weight savings with a GT3 engine might have been like. The only open-top 996/997 with Porsche's ultimate NA flat six. Now that would have been "worth" $180,000-200,000+ — certainly more so than a GTS Cabriolet with spandex seatcovers and something growing out of its decklid.
When I look at the hotter Cayman, I wonder about a 3.6 with LSD and real weight savings. Hell, even as the car as they've spec'ed it but with a CS badge (or RS America or Panamerica or M471 or GT or...) and a 3.6 or (and this is asking too much, I know) a 3.8. Something that truly raises the bar and separates the model from the Cayman S. And why not a different decklid that goes 904/Dino with a vertical rear window? Even if it costs a bunch more.
As is, it seems lazy and half-hearted — with a name that's all out.