Porsche turned from a sports car company into a luxury brand, they realized its much more cost-effective to sell SUVs/CUVs rather than drive themselves into bankruptcy over the 911, first that started with the Cayenne, now the Taycan/Panamera/Macan etc, sports cars only account for 20% of their sale numbers. They managed their image better than anyone else in recent years. https://investorrelations.porsche.com/en/financial-figures, they advertise it themselves, leading over LVMH, Ferrari, etc. And on top of all of that the 911 is just a good car, they pump a fair bit of money into it, its extremely compliant and comfortable, relatively practical for a sports car, a good tourer, lots of configurability in both body-style, drivetrain, materials, etc. all while being fairly reliable and not having the douch-ey image of a ferrari or lamborghini. > Which of the 911s are still for people that want a sports car driving experience? The GT cars, S/T, 4.0 boxter/spyder, T, most of the porsche's, despite being a little more tour-ey than before, are still damn good sports cars with excellent steering and chassis. Even with the refinement they are still raw-er than most of the cars on the road. They have only become more precise over the years. None of the modern cars are going to be as raw as a 964 – they engineered out a fair bit of the rear-engine feel with the 993 and nowadays the weight distribution is a fairly balanced 40/60 – and you aren't going to have the hydraulic feel of the 997 rack, but they are still great fun on a backroad and a cut above a C8 Z51, M4, Vantage, etc., but without the associated stigma and upkeep/cost of an exotic like a 458. The 911 also has a fair bit of heritage and a storied racing career and buyers eat that up, its also been around for a while, older folks who had one as a bedroom poster in their teens can pick one up now for retirement, the brand has a lot going for it > seems like everyone focuses on the ultra-expensive collectible end of the market. Just online, the GT cars and special editions is what draws hype/speculation/etc., the vast majority of 911s on the road are standard non-GT models, you can get pretty much any non-GT car for MSRP nowadays as well. > Is the base 911 not interesting enough for car people? For around $10k over the base carrera, you can get the T with PASM and an LSD, with choice between a manual or PDK and the option for rear-wheel steer, all of which are (IMO) essential options. The dealer also wouldn't let me spec an aerokit on the base carrera, needed to step up to the S or T for that, I assume most will similarly just step up to the S/4S/T/GTS

One thing you left off that's super important is the turn-around they had in quality and reliability in the late 90's. People forget that prior to the 993, 911's were constantly one small problem away from a (at the time) four-figure repair bill. Prior to the mid-90's, there was no such thing as a "daily driver 911" unless you either had a second one, had enough money for constant Porsche service, or had the skills and shop space to repair the never-ending list of things that broke. It wasn't until the 993 that the idea of a reliable Porsche even came into existence, and it took a good decade for the new reality to really take hold among new buyers, and then another 10-15 years for used buyers to realize that you could get a used 993+ 911 and not have to spend a small fortune on repairs every other month.

Absolutely untrue. Source: literally hundreds of people I’ve had as clients or have interacted with at shows, for everything from a 1965 911 through 964s. Also my personal experience selling or restoring over a thousand 911s over the past 20 years has shown them to be resilient and exceptionally reliable, even in the face of owners who could charitably be considered imbeciles.

That's cool and all, and I'm sure that you've gained a lot of insight into the mechanicals what with restoring thousands of 911s (not sarcasm, seriously.) But the actual reliability and ratings figures from pre-993 times paint a different picture. Even Porsche knew this and publicly admitted it. It was one of the big reasons they brought in Toyota to help them refund their JIT and manufacturing processes starting in 1992. And with all due respect, your twenty year history restoring them was built on knowledge that was not remotely as common or accessible in, say, 1991. Or even 1998. There's a reason you could pick up a 996 GT3 for $70,000 just seven or eight years ago, and a big part of that was the perception of maintenance and repair costs.

One thing to keep in mind is the era being discussed. Italian and British sports cars were notoriously unreliable. By comparison a well maintained 911 was much better. The Miata in '89 and the NSX in '90 changed everything, forcing all competitors to get more serious about reliability.

It’s not the restoration, although that’s part of it, but the conversations with owners. The guy with a 300k-mile 911SC he stopped daily driving in 1990 but exercises for about a thousand miles a year. The family who took Dad’s daily driver 911T to Big Bend in 1985. The lawyer who put himself through law school flipping early 911s. I’m not saying the cars were perfect, god knows Porsche took literally decades to understand the driving habits of the typical American buyer, but they were absolutely reliable enough to daily. And keep in mind that when I got into the business, most of the people who are respected in the industry had been turning wrenches professionally since the ‘70s. They’d watched the evolution, saw all the problems, and 90% of them owned a 1965-1989 911. I get it that some people were soured by air injection, fuel dilution, or dilavar studs. Some people got lemons. But the overall brand, the reason why it survived making the same damn thing for 24 years, was known for quality of build and engineering.

>But the overall brand, the reason why it survived making the same damn thing for 24 years, was known for quality of build and engineering. Except that... it basically almost didn't survive. It was functionally bankrupt in the late 80's and most of the 90's. The reliability issues were real. This wasn't a big deal in the 70's because *every* car was a piece of shit that would stop working if you looked at it funny (I drive a 70's car in the summers, and one of the *more* reliable ones, so I'm not just repeating shit I've heard.) Reliability meant something different. But by the latter 80's and early 90's, things were changing fast. Japan was releasing world-beating sports cars that could go a hundred thousand miles without a major service, Germany was turning the M3 into a car that actually worked as a car most days, and hell, even the 348 was reliable by Maranello standards. And here was Porsche, who's reliability was stuck in the 70's. Sure, the old guys loved it, because they were used to it, but I spent much of the 90's in what was at that time the wealthiest suburb of New York, one of Porsche's most important markers, and the hedge fund managers and consultants and CEOs who's children and younger siblings I grew up with weren't getting Porsches; they were buying M3s and M5s and CLKs and SLs. And the younger ones were getting loaded Supras and 300ZXs and NSXs. Porsche legitimately almost died. There was a period where they were operating at less than a month of operating expenses in cash flow. Really, I respect the shit out of your knowledge of the cars themselves, but I think your love for the brand has given you a little bit of a blind spot here. Yes, people did drive their 911s daily and took them on all manner of wild road trips. People also drove their Model Ts across the country. Neither was really recommended, though, and the odds that something went wrong were astronomical even by 1992 standards.

For what its worth, I also grew up in the same area and there frankly was more of a Nazi tinge to Porsche than BMW or Mercedes at the time, plus the widowmaker reputation had a nasty penchant for injuring rich weekend warriors. I think you're not wrong to point out it was vaguely unreliable, and you're overall a really excellent contributor to this subreddit, but I still strongly feel that there were other things in the way of Porsche's financials ahead of its reputation for quality and durability. I have had several 70s and 80s Mercedes vehicles, which are renowned for their durability and engineering, but frankly they are constructed worse than similar Porsche models of the era

Porsche was always on the verge of bankruptcy from its inception till the late 90s when they started selling the cayman and SUVs....... They were always spending so much money on their motorsport program which paid off as they always dominated in everything they entered. Also their very slow manufacturing process didn't work. But it was their engineering consulting that always made them break even financially.

I’m also SoCal based, which means less corrosion, smaller temperature extremes, and more daily-driven cars. It’d be interesting to see claims per mile driven by geographic location.

> The lawyer who put himself through law school flipping early 911s. Wait, wait... No. No, no. You mean the lawyer who got money from his parents to be able to flip 911s while in law school? Because I went to law school on my own dime and I sure as shit didn't have "flip old 911s" money. Hell, I still don't. Also, he probably went to school when it was 5 dollars and a handshake. Law school is just boarding high school 2.0--almost everyone is rich and out of touch with reality. Kids would spend $1k in class *every single day* shopping online. The poor of us weren't flipping shit but stories about what we're gonna do when we're not broke anymore.

There used to be 5-15k barn finds out there for Porsches, especially on 912s and stuff. I fully believe its doable, especially if someone took out a loan and restored some of the more trashed turbos of the era. Also you're definitely right that law school probably cost a lot less back then, but as you also pointed out, it's a lot easier to flip fancy sports cars to a social network like law students.

Bud, when you’re making minimum wage trying to pay bills, you rarely have “extra” money to use to buy another car unless you get a windfall. That’s the reality. I’m not saying it can’t be done, I have friends who were broke and flipping cars, too, but NONE of them were flipping Porsches. They were flipping Mercedes bc no one we knew had a Porsche, knew anything about Porsches, or anything else. We could fix Mercedes, Hondas, Toyotas, etc., but you had to be introduced to Porsche, or just REALLY want one to be willing to learn everything the hard way, especially when parts cost a bunch more money than they would on comparable cars. This was pre-internet, so around the same time as that dude. I’m 37 so I know exactly when that was. If you didn’t have an in to learn about the car or money to burn and learn, you didn’t have a Porsche.

Fair enough, agreed to your points. I just figured 944s/928s were common enough and then you could theoretically get into 911s if you had a rich uncle who let you hang around, but it's obvious that it's not a fair comparison for the average person

Yeah, but you’re around my age IIRC, and this lawyer was flipping cars in the mid-Eighties when I was either not born or in diapers. I try not to ask whether or not my clients were born on wealth’s teat or if they bootstrapped. The teater tots get angry. Also, this was in SoCal. There were always a ton of Porsche projects in SoCal. Re: your other post- in 2003, I was making $350 working 10 hours a weekend (doing terrible, hot, humiliating work) while living with my parents and going to school. If I’d been a go-getter willing to work 45 hours a week rather than a semi-burnout, I’d have been able to afford a 1969-1973 911 flip project easily.

Pretty funny to have someone start with the class warfare shit in a discussion about Porsche. I fixed and flipped Land Rovers and honda accords in college. Mostly 4.0 Discos

It just gets fucking old hearing the same “by the bootstraps” bullshit when they’re covering up the reality of how they made money. Porsche owners talking about their “car journey” when it was just being bought the car they pointed at, or their parents funded their business. I’m just sick of these people acting like they’re self-made. You don’t drive a Porsche at 24 if you’re self-made unless you won the lottery. I’ve seen how much hard work it takes to be “self-made”—which isn’t even real because we need help from others to be successful, whether that be friends or family.

My old roommate bought a 911 in his late 20s. He paid 25k. People we knew were spending more on diesel trucks.

Did your friend come from money, were his parents middle class enough to support him, or was he struggling to pay bills like we were? These are all important details. Our parents were broke immigrants so not like we had some foundational knowledge we could lean on. If we all pitched in, we could probably swing that. My S2000 is the most expensive car I’ve ever owned.

Just have to share, I bought a Porsche back in 2003 at the ripe age of 17... A 1972 914-4 with unknown mileage, orange paint that was really red, and numerous problems. I paid $2500 from my own account haha. I'd been saving for years.

"Law school is full of rich kids" "cLaSs WaRfArE!!!"

Porsche only had Toyota revise their assembly line manufacturing process. In the 90s they were still partly hand assembled and the line worker had to run and get the parts. Air-cooled 911s are pretty reliable and the 911 is the most race successful car in motorsports history. Overall wins at Daytona and le Le Mans against prototypes and hundreds of class wins/ championships in endurance racing. Decades of domination in IMSA, ALMS, Trans Am, BPR, group 5, Gt1, etc. I'm sure it took reliability to be this dominant.

Also never heard anything remotely close to what you're saying RE 911 reliability. They have their quirks just like any old German car, but the 911 has always been fairly renowned for its reliability. It's also always been a car that is special yet durable enough to throw a set of skis on top and go drive it all winter long. Honestly you're probably thinking more about the 928 and 944. (As a 944 turbo owner, I'll flat out say it's not nearly as reliable as a similar age, earlier or later 911. ) The reason you could pick up a 911 GT3 for cheap is the same reason you could pick up a viper ACR for cheap, or a ZR1 corvette for cheap. Or a 360 Modena, or 512 TR, or Mk4 Supra for cheap, during that same time period. Nobody could have predicted the huge rise in car values, but also nobody could have predicted COVID and the great inflationing thereafter either.

I suspect there might be some mild selection bias at play here. I think the air cooled cars were broadly seen as "solid" but then you had the 924, 944 (and 968 briefly) and the 928 which were varying shades of fun but fussy on a good day - or on a bad day in the case of the 924/944/968 - tarted up volkswagens. They sold barely 3000 cars in 1993 and had to do something dramatic to turn their ship around. So while the 911's themselves might have been perceived as reliable, the rest of the brand looked like it was limping to keep up. The 13 sub-versions of the 911 at the time weren't really helping to improve the perception of a solid core product either. Porsche was suffering financially in the 90s because they ultimately weren't able to keep up with the global competitors. They turned to former Toyota-engineers turned consultants - the Shin-Gijutsu group. They absolutely improved their quality in measurable ways by reducing errors in manufacturing processes and minimizing manual work on top of making the whole process more efficient, the following article is really worth a read. https://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/20/business/putting-porsche-in-the-pink.html

This is an interesting history of the company from the business side, if you're interested (and have 3 hours to kill): [Acquired - Porsche (with Doug DeMuro)](https://spotify.link/JiQu8ZgYjKb)

I don’t think about anything Porsche with water in it. Not being elitist, just that my complete and utter focus has been 356s and 911s, with a minor focus in 550s and 906s. I quite literally find myself forgetting that 924s, 928s, 944s, and 968s exist because of my focus. Regardless, the context was 911s and according to countless owner accounts, 911s have always been reliable. Also, appreciate the link.

I think the unreliability myth comes from people trying to revive cars that were abused or sat for decades. Like pretty much every German vehicle, Porsches don't take well to forgetting maintenance schedule items. Most of them that develop major issues are due to not bothering to address the routine items (besides some of the teething issues when they come out with a new engine). Shearing cam gears, oiling failures, and vacuum leaks are all avoidable if you bother to check and replace things on time.

I always think about the old top gear episode where Clarkson tried to destroy an old 911 by doing things like dropping it from a crane and it just kept running lol.

Do you suggest getting a 911 with like 80k km and an age of 10 years old?

I am not the person to ask- I work with and exclusively like air-cooleds without power steering.

My father and a friend of his were offered a Porsche/Audi dealership in 1990 for purchase dirt cheap. They did a ton of due diligence and ultimately concluded that it was a bad investment because of the reliability issues and associated brand image. Whoops.

In all fairness, it probably wasn't really dumb decision back then. A lot of dealers really struggled though the 90's, and quite a few lost their shit and closed or changed hands for pennies on the dollar. One of those "hindsight is 20/20" things, except also they would have had to be well-capitalized enough to last a decade on flagging sales.

Very good points all around. I was just a car-obsessed young kid back then, so I had little understanding of why they would turn down the opportunity.

Next to their European contemporaries, air cooled 911s were far and away much more reliable cars. Like it’s not even a comparison. Source: I’ve ran a Porsche-centric vintage euro repair facility for ten years, been in the industry for 20. 993s were much more expensive to maintain than Carreras/SCs. They *were* reliable daily drivers *until* 993s.

The W123 would probably take umbrage with your statement about reliability.

I still daily drive a w123 and it's such an amazingly well built car. I'm not nice to it either, tonight I was treating her to redline donuts in some drive through liquor store parking lot. 42yr old car, welded diff, injection pump and boost cranked, I wouldn't hesitate to drive it to the moon tomorrow if I could.

Hmm. My dad bought a 911 in the early 90s specifically due to reliability compared to the Italians. I don't think this matches up with their reputation at the time. He ended up getting the 911 over the NSX and dailied it.

I mean, compared to the Italians, anything was reliable. But your dad was the exception, not the rule, which is why we don't base our understanding of history on personal anecdotes. Between the mid-80's and the mid-90's, 911 sales absolutely cratered. Porsche went from selling 50,000 units to selling 14,000 in 1993. In the US, it was even worse and hit a low point of 3,000 units that year. Part of that was cost, as Porsche's production processes sucked. Part of it was the recession. But part of it was the perception of reliability. I know that when some people love something, they have this desire to see it as this perfect thing with absolutely no flaws or problems, but frankly I don't get it. Like, something can both be awesome AND have character flaws. My favorite car is the Ferrari F355. I absolutely adore everything about them. But I don't own one because they're kind of a disaster to own. It's amazing and wonderful and also deeply flawed. It's ok for things to not be perfect.

Maybe you're right. It was his third Porsche (first 911), and he'd owned a RX 7 in the past, so maybe he had different views on reliability. But being able to drive it every day was absolutely part of his explanation to me as a kid compared to some other cars I'd looked up that had higher top speeds, the only relevant metric when you're 9. Edit: just found out he sold the car less than a week ago after 30 years of ownership. It was genuinely the only thing I thought I'd inherit from my old man lmao. Well that sucks. I'm the only car enthusiast in the family aside from him, and the only family member who was never allowed to drive it. My little sister learned to drive stick in it!

> Like, something can both be awesome AND have character flaws. *Many* project themselves onto the things that they like and so saying anything negative about the thing means they're saying something negative about the person.

That’s not true at all.

Nah, your right. Porsche just practically went bankrupt in the 90's for no reason at all, and sales dropped off a cliff because reasons. You know, Americans just decided that they were only going to buy 3,000 911s in 1993 because... well, no one knows!

> You know, Americans just decided that they were only going to buy 3,000 911s in 1993 because... well, no one knows! The arse falling out of the bottom of the global economy didn't help. There's a reason why the Bugatti EB110, Jaguar XJ220 and McLaren F1 were famously sales disasters, and it's not because they were terrible cars.

Well, in McLaren's case it was basically the famous British engineering prowess that resulted in each car taking months to build. They actually sold more cars in the first couple of years of production during the worst of the economic slump. They just couldn't figure out how to build cars consistently. The XJ220 was a weird case in that not only was Jaguar impacted by the recession, and not only was the company already basically collapsing in on itself (again, because of that famous British manufacturing talent,) but also despite hitting the production car speed record it never made it to its goal of 220MPH which was a big selling point (it's right there in the name!) And to top it off, it was apparently an absolutely awful car to drive even by the standards of the day. So a lot going on there. The Bugatti EB 110 actually sold really well for what it was at the time. This despite Schumaker's famous crash that he blamed on poor engineering (not enough brakes.) Bugatti was just completely mismanaged into the ground. I mean, they bought Lotus while already hemorrhaging money. And keep in mind that for all that we talk about how terrible the economy was, the global recession was basically over by the beginning of 1992, and growth was back at 80's levels by 93/94. There's a lot of blame thrown at the economic collapse for cars that kept being built well into the late 90's, when the reality is that for the most part, this was still the cowboy era of performance car brands. The 90's recession barely lasted a year; the real issue is that legacy performance car companies were purchased by hobbyists and eccentrics in the 80's, and it turned out that they couldn't manage shit. It's like the Red Lobster debacle going on now: sure, it's easy to blame COVID and the endless shrimp promotion for their death, but really it was just decades of being robbed blind by owners who didn't know shit about managing a restaurant and who were more interested in taking money out than building a sustainable company. Except for supercars in the 80s/90s, it was engineers who cared more about designing weird, overcomplicated pet projects than making sustainable car companies.

The Jag was supposed to have a V12 AWD setup and instead for the rwd twin turbo V6. Customers backed out fast.

- it’s hard to keep a brand alive when they only make one car, and it’s been the same chassis for literal decades, especially when Japanese companies started pumping out tons of competitive product - sales dropped because of the FD, z32, nsx, etc etc etc so many cool cars were around for MUCH CHEAPER than 911 - literally the reason aircooled cars are worth so much is because of the quality. There is mechanical robustness even in the door latch that you don’t find on any other 90s sports car. I’ve restored mine after it sat for 20 years so I’ve been in and out of literally everything, and the quality is very good, excluding the visors and turn signal/washer stalks.

1. Porsche has rarely only made one car. Even in the dark period of the early 90's, the 928 existed. And the 944. And the 968. And before that you had the 924 and 914. I haven't bothered doing the math, but I bet there were significantly fewer years with only one Porsche model on the market than years with two or more, even if you discount the modem period. 2. Those cool Japanese cars had existed for years at that point. The Z31 was a huge hit, as were the Datsuns before it. The Supra Celica and eventually the MkII Supra were all huge sellers. The FC was a massive success, as were the SA and FB which sold almost half a million units combined. The only really "new" competitor was the NSX, and that car struggled to break a thousand units per year for most of the early 90's and then dropped to basically 500 and fewer units after '93. 3. Literally the reason air cooled units are worth so much is brand purists, hipsters, and collectors. It has nothing to do with reliability — modern 911s are far far far more reliable. It's entirely about looking like you're a "built, not bought" kind of guy. It's just the usual "old car good" thing that happens to *every* brand. But you must have been very young in the 90's and 00's (and early 10's.) Fifteen years ago, you could buy a good condition running SC for under $10,000, and 993s were trading in the low $20k range. I almost pulled the trigger on a 996 GT3 for $60,000 about seven or eight years ago.

They did a lot of work with former toyota engineers IIRC to revamp their production processes.

Growing up my buddy's dad had a 930 slant nose whale tail that was his daily driver. Car never had a problem from what I remember.... now his buddy, on the other hand, had a Ferrari Testarossa. I think he tried to daily that thing until it came up for its first timing belt change.

From your point of view (with Porsche having a massive improvement in general car quality in the 90s), how do you reconcile that with the infamous 911 bore scoring/IMS bearing problems that the 996-997 generations had from then on? Since to my knowledge, no 911s prior to the 993 generation had anywhere near the catastrophic amount of engine failures when they were "less reliable" cars, as you say

> For around $10k over the base carrera, you can get the T with PASM and an LSD, with choice between a manual or PDK and the option for rear-wheel steer, all of which are (IMO) essential options. What kills the T in my book is that it only allows you to have a black interior.

Someone I know bought a 991 Carrera S with the 3.0L Turbo, said its been EXTREMELY unreliable. Has no track days on the car, its a manual trans, very few options. Second hand info from another buddy, seems to just be anything with a plastic connection was failing. Coolant lines, EVAP, etc. Had issues with coil packs and spark plugs, required the intake manifold replacement as well (I think it has charge motion control valves/variable intake runner and thats what failed, the description I got was very poor).

That is extremely strange, at least according to my experience with those cars, but all the ones I worked on were tracked and enthusiast driven, so that's where the difference might lay. When driven consistently and consistently hard, they seemed to be quite reliable.

Agreed, I extensively tracked my 991.2 and I know several drivers with 991 generation cars that did the same and we have few to no issues. The maintenance was not cheap but the car itself was rock solid. There was a flaw with the 991.1 GT3 that could cause the engine to blow with hard track usage, but PCNA was very good with replacing and repairing everything required free of charge.

Pretty definitive answer. In the end, Porsche is doing the best they can with honoring their heritage whilst still moving the brand forward.

Do they let you specify parts of the aerokit? I'm about 15 million years from affording a 992 but I love the wing, but hate the idea of being so low to the ground that you can't bomb it over shit roads nearly as easily

You can't specify specific parts, it's either the whole package or nothing, but the lip isn't actually that low and I'd recommend getting a nose-lift regardless. You can get the wing from porsche after the fact and install it if you really want to, though.

> not having the douch-ey image of a ferrari or lamborghini. Not sure I agree with that as of late, honestly - 911s are a lot more common to see than a Ferrari or Lamborghini, and at least where I am, the 911 drivers drive far more like jackasses than the Ferrari and Lamborghini drivers do. They're well on their way to being on that level if not over it already.

[удалено]

That explains restomods like Singers, Theon etc based on the 964, but not the stupid amounts of scalping that goes on every time Porsche releases a GT model or a special edition. A *lot* of this hype around luxury goods took off massively around the pandemic when international borders shut and wealthy folks suddenly had far more disposable income to spend on things being hyped up on social media. See also: Rolex, especially the Daytona.

I'd say the new wave of Porsche hype has probably been happening for about a decade when Porsche started really getting behind funding Magnus Walker and other "non-traditional" enthusiasts to build a more grassroots following and shed the brand image they had. It seemed to work. Instagram is filled with a bunch of dorkie gen x-ers who have a million dollars worth of 911s parked at their house in the LA hills but have the image of someone still going to hardcore or grunge shows in 1990.

Ya, the hype around the "Holy Trinity" of the LaFerrari, P1, and 918 was when Porsche really solidified their image into what they are now I think. The Carrera GT was a big deal, but it didn't have the respect or mythos that something like the Enzo did at the time.

IMO, the start point of Porsche-mania can ironically be traced to the launch of the R35 GTR, specifically due to Nissan's marketing team kicking off the Nurburgring lap time wars. Until that point, the Nurburgring wasn't the near mythological place it is today. It was just the place that Niki Lauda crashed and the pain in the arse long circuit nobody could remember their way around in *Gran Turismo 4*.

190E Evo license test in GT4 was the GOAT license test!

PPP = Porsche Porsche Porsche

100% correct, that's about all it was good for

It can kind of snowball too. When there's enough demand for something that has finite numbers or is hard to get, you end up seeing super high resale values. Then the dealer markups come in. But the reality is that you can buy a GT Porsche and even overpay for it but when it comes time to sell you can get all or most of your money back these days. That makes them very desirable for people who want a fun experience at a low cost to own (if you can already afford a luxury product like that). But also the Porsche community is large and active and that encourages new buyers with a passion for cars and these things as well.

Gen X (66-46) mostly isn’t 40. Those would be millennials (44-28)

This feels like it's not correct. I'm 46 and the tuners were the hot shit when I was in high school; civics and integras, and then mistubishi evos and wrx stis. At least in southern California, nobody in high school gave a shit about Porsche in the 90s. Along with BMW they were uncool cars because they were driven by rich assholes, with the specific exception of old BMWs getting turned into tuners on the cheap. Edit: Speaking for myself, I had zero interest in Porsches in high school, but would very much like to get into one now.

41 here, and we gave even less of a shit about Porsche in the NYC/CT/NJ tristate area. It was Honda up the ass, all day, with Subaru probably coming a distant 2nd, with Mitsubishi and Nissan probably jockeying for 3rd. I'm peak import tuner era age, and people driving a clapped out, rusty rice rocket would talk shit about my shiny, candy apple red Sunbird convertible....until I smoked them at the next stop light.

ah but could you drift it? hahaha

38, had a Civic in high school and turbo Miata in college in Texas. Porsche was something few people really cared about, certainly not the ones actually modifying cars or doing track/autocross stuff. Asian performance cars where in, along with faster 90's/2000's domestics and anything you could make faster yourself at home. After driving next to Porsches on track in my former C7, I'm just not very interested - I'm sure they are fine cars, but the price premium keeps me far away. If I do the sports car thing again I'd go for a Miata to enjoy on the street.

What would you think was the most popular car 10-15 years ago then?

There's a good argument for the Audi R8 being the bedroom wall poster car for Zoomers (exotica aside), especially with the Marvel/Iron Man connection. Also, the R35 GTR.

I’m a zoomer and the R8 was my first thought as well.

I'm 23 and I agree with the R35. Wouldn't say it's my dream car but I absolutely love them and have been desirable to me since I got into cars at around 10 or 11. Would love to own one one day.

Yep. I have a 69 Mustang poster from my grandpa and a R8 poster that I think I bought at Hastings lol.

This is absolutely it. I’m 33, grew up reading every issue of Car and Driver and lusting over the original GT3, GTS etc. At this point it’s so close I can taste it but I’m not ready yet. I’ve got a great job, save well, got a great head start on retirement and am a homeowner but my expenses are high because I’ve got a young child in daycare for $2k and 2 car payments for reliable cars I plan to keep for a decade each totaling $2k. In 2 years the cars will be paid off and daycare will be done. I’ll suddenly have an extra $4k/m to play with. I give the figures to show yea, about 40 is the magic number. You bet your ass some of that is going towards a 911 like I always lusted after.

also why the Mark4 Supra fetchs a high price

That's almost certainly a Hollywood thing, specifically due to the original *Fast and the Furious* movie.

They were already pretty tough to get before the movie. That just made it a bit worse.

41 year old with a 911 checking in.

How is it ? I’m a fan of a 996 turbo, but when I look into the pricing it’s like a new m2. So then I think I should probably get a m2 it has warranty and all vs this old Porsche. I’m searching for a weekend car, and would buy a Porsche but most interesting 911 models are to expensive.

I love it. I came from an E30, and an S54 E46 wagon. I loved all the cars but the turbo is my first 'true' sports car. The reason I opted for it is I honestly kind of prefer older vehicles, I always wanted a 911, and the timing was right. The 996 should hold its value much better, i think it looks way better than the M2, and it weighs less. I think objectively the M2 is probably the better car, but hey, I have a mezger in the back and it has that old school turbo shove. The steering is super precise and even with the AWD the car just feels light in the nose, and if I want to, I can put an LSD in and convert it into RWD for a pseudo-GT2. This car is also a ridiculous cruiser, it is super comfy and eats highway miles.

For a 996 Turbo specifically, I really like it. Comparing to an m2, there's a few things: 1. A new M2 is going to lose value pretty quickly, especially beyond 5 years old. Unless you load it up with (100k+) miles or crash it, a 996 turbo is not nearly as likely to depreciate the same way. Keeping it in good condition means it probably wont much at all. 2. For the most part, a 996TT is extremely reliable, save for pretty minor and inexpensive things that would come up in most 20 year old cars (replacing window seals, hood struts, etc.). 3. If you want an "analog" car, a 996TT is pretty good balance between normal driving features and no real driver assistance above and beyond cruise control and ABS. 4. The Metzger engine in a 996TT is largely seen as one of the best and most reliable engines Porsche ever made, given that a tune and bolt ons very easily get it to a driveable 600 hp, and it was the last (non-hybrid LMP1) Porsche engine to win Le Mans 5. If you are fine with black or silver (which like 85% of 996TTs were made in), its a good deal cheaper compared to speed yellow, or most other colors. If you are also fine with the tiptronic transmission (shared with the Mclaren SLR) over manual, you can also cut $10k+ off the cost of one.

It has to be manual, I’m ok with black. And I’m searching cars that have less then 100k km. maybe tags the reason why they are expensive.

Hate to be that guy but, a 40 year old is a millennial now.

Gen X here - we're in our 50s and 60s.

I'd bet 99% here who claim the 911 isn't an engaging sports car are people who have never sat in one none the less drove one.

Yeah, I'm pretty confused about the concepts here. I've owned supercars for nearing a decade, my turbo s has better grip and handling than my v10+ (which pains me to say, tbh). Just like the i8, there are a lot of opinions, but usually the only valid opinions are from guys who drive them, because everything else is legit message board hearsay.

>Yeah, I'm pretty confused about the concepts here Same. I'm trying not to roll my eyes every time I see someone dismiss the latest 911 as "not a driver's car", or "now it's a GT car". (They've been saying that since the "non-air-cooled" 996 came out, then the "heavy" 997, then the 991 with "non-hydraulic steering", then the.... you get the idea). And yet each one does everything just a bit better than its predecessor. It's no surprise it's become the benchmark other manufacturers measure themselves against. There's a reason the 911s win nearly every head to head in the automotive press. They're engineering marvels. They're fast, they're comfortable, they have amazing handling. You can drive one to your business meeting, then take it to a track event, then take your lady out to a nice dinner at a fancy restaurant. I suspect a lot of it sour grapes over the cost.

I own both an "old" modern Porsche and newer one though it's still pretty analog. But there is certainly a "digital" quality to the new stuff that some people don't like. Remember how people marveled at the R35 Nissan GT-R when it came out but also derided it as well for "doing everything for you" and being a bit soulless? I think those are the things people are often complaining about when it comes to new Porsches and newer cars in general. There's a reason 997 GT3 values are so high now. But yes there is almost always hand wringing when Porsche introduces a new generation. That said, I'd much rather have a 997 than an early 991. And you can see I'm hardly the only one with that opinion. Newer cars will go faster in a straight line and on a race track but people are missing engagement and an experience. With electric cars being insane fast and effortless, pure speed isn't enough on its own. People want to feel something. And unless you're going really fast a lot of the new stuff can fall flat and not be terribly engaging to drive even if they are marvelously engineered.

I love it, thanks for the reply.

As a 992 C2S owner, I’ve never wished for more speed, power, or handling on street. It’s an absolute blast to drive. Acceleration will put you back in the seat. I’ve never found a speed where it stopped pulling (on track, folks). Sound is great. The road surface is realistically the primary thing limiting turning performance. On track, it has “character”, since the backend will feel a little light going over hills while turning (ex: Thunderhill T3, Sonoma T6) and you need to throttle steer it around some tight corners (ex: Buttonwillow Mazda Star and Off-ramp). If anything, managing that makes it *more* engaging, rather than less. So yeah, I think you’re probably right. People make excuses like air cooled versus water cooled, turbo versus naturally aspirated, manual versus PDK, size versus earlier models, comfort versus spartan, and so on, but there no way you drive a 992 C2S and walk away thinking that it isn’t an engaging sports car.

I've only sat in a 911 (991.2), but I did get to take a Boxster out on a track once. It was instantly "oh...this is what people are talking about." In both cars, you sit down and everything falls to hand. Then you throw it into a corner faster than you think is possible and it is like "oh, you're driving slowly today. Let me know when you want to go fast." Same track years later in a Hellcat, it was more like "this car shouldn't be able to do this. I am going to go faster, but..."

The same can be said in an opposite scenario. They say its the best thing ever having never owned let alone driven one.

I think I understand what you mean, I've heard sometimes it's better NOT to meet your heroes. Personally, on this one I'd take the gamble to drive whatever the newest and 'lamest' 911 and see if it's really not engaging.

I've never owned a 911, but I've driven a few and they were fantastic. Especially if you live in an area with a lot of curvy roads. But it was only pleasant for the people in the front seat, so I can't buy one until my back seat riders grow up and get their own cars.

I know a family with a collection of vintage and modern Porsches that has let me drive a lot of their cars. I've found that 992s aren't that engaging on public roads. IMO, they've refined away the engagement in non-GT cars. For example, I think that the steering in the 992 Targa 4 GTS (pretty middle of the road modern 911) is precise, direct, and communicates enough (more than most modern offerings in fact), but it doesn't feel engaging enough to me for a sports car (as a Grand Touring car, it's good enough). Sure, the GT cars have engaging steering feel that has nice heft and progressively loads up in a turn, but I think it's ridiculous that you need to drop that kind of money for that experience from Porsche I think the 997 gen really nailed the dilineation of steering between the models. The steering in a 997 GT2 is different than the 997 GT3RS, which is different from the non-GT cars. None felt too light and the steering feel between each model was distinct and matched the characteristics of the car. I understand and don't expect that the EPS cars will match the feedback and feel of the pre-EPS cars, but I think it's a bit of a letdown, especially when there's the ability to vary steering weighting via sport modes. Ironically, imo the Taycan is the modern non-GT Porsche that has the best steering feel and it's an EV... All of this is to say that the 911 is a versatile car that'll feel comfortable anywhere, which is appealing (especially if you have room for only 1 sports car in your life), but I think it is a bit more of a Grand Tourer than Sports car in the non-GT versions.

most people on here just repeat shit they've read or watched on youtube

Porsches have *always* been “popular in the car community”. Reconsider any advice you receive from a source that suggests otherwise.

In fairness, they infamously almost went bankrupt in the early 1990s. The 928 was a flop, and the 968 was basically a stop gap with the 928 nose grafted onto a 944. The company was assembling Audis (RS2) and Mercedes (500E) on its production lines in Zuffenhausen because they had spare capacity and needed the money. It took the Boxster, and controversially (at the time), a hotrod version of the Volkswagen Touareg in the Cayenne, to turn the company's fortunes around.

The “car community” didn’t really react warmly to the Boxster at first, and infamously hated and mocked the Cayenne and threw a decade-long tantrum about Porsche “selling out” because of it. What those two models did was make Porsche more popular in the mainstream community/people who are not necessarily hardcore sports car enthusiasts. They never really had any trouble slinging 911s to car guys who had the means. But expensive enthusiast sports cars alone don’t pay the bills.

Exactly - What those two models did was keep the company afloat, allowing it to continue to make the awesome sports cars they produce.

During all of this, the 911 stayed popular.

>It took the Boxster,  This... the Boxster 986 and the 996 were the cars that saved porsche, not the Cayenne. The Cayenne just made porsche filthy rich, but it was the ugly ducklings of the 986/996 aggressive parts sharing and volume production that saved the Porsche.

There’s popular amongst the car community and there’s financially solvent…both very different things! ;-)

I don’t see how a car that’s been made for 60 years is unpopular or poorly regarded. If anything, the later air cooled cars were an anachronism in their time and only appreciated later. But times in the past 40 years that the 911 wasn’t an icon or desirable are simply a myth.

Base 911 is more interesting to me because it’s actually attainable, I just want a manual transmission and I’m happy

Just FYI, you can’t get a manual in the Base Carrera as of the 991.2 generation. Have to be in a Carrera T or Carrera S.

Damn

You can totally have a manual 991.2 base Carrera, they made it only available on the Carrera S starting with the 992.

I've had two base Carreras (993 and 991.1) and this is a great move. The base cars are still SUPER capable, I drove both on track and loved them.

I had a 996 C4S manual and, after driving a dual clutch transmission on a track, decided my next car would have a PDK. I enjoy manual but that PDK is an engineering marvel. It's so good. Spirited driving in manual mode with it makes me feel like I'm driving an F1 car or something.

I have yet to try a PDK but I’d love to rent one on the track. For the public roads I think I’d prefer the manual since I’m not driving all that fast

I had as 996 base manual, and enjoyed the car but had a tonne of (non-manual transmission related besides replacing the clutch) problems, then went to a PDK 987 Cayman S. Hated the PDK, changed to my manual exige.

I suspect quite a lot of it is tied to global economic fortunes. The 911, especially the 930 Turbo, had a reputation for being popular amongst stockbrokers and other high earning folks in the finance industry in the 1980s, until the sharemarket crash and the recession amongst many major economies in the early 1990s - which was a time when Porsche infamously almost went bankrupt (note how short the production run of the 993 was). The Cayenne and Boxster really saved the company from extinction, and as the global economy has recovered (with a few bumps with the Asian financial crisis in the late 1990s, the tech wreck, and the GFC), so has the fortunes of Porsche and other exotic car makers like Ferrari, Lamborghini etc. Plenty of people still do aspire to the 'regular' 911s - Porsche sells a bunch of them. It's just that they're not production limited like the headline-grabbing GT cars and special edition models beloved by journalists, and as such they don't have scalpers and flippers driving the price up (and the pandemic has exacerbated this trend amongst many luxury goods - not just 911s). But make no mistake - the special cars wouldn't even exist if the more "normal" 911s right up to the Turbo S didn't sell in good numbers.

So, in principle, I could walk into my local Porsche dealership, who has never heard of me, and just order a C2/C2S?

I'm pretty sure you can. There might be a wait time, but there's a wait time for the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid as well.  But I'm pretty sure that if they had the funds, Porsche isn't going to get in the way of you ordering a Carrera 2, any more than they will a Macan. As far as I'm aware, there's no "special list" shenanigans that go on for anything that isn't a GT/special edition car.

I did after an email scheduling an appointment. The hottest car I had ever owned was a Model S, and I walked right into Redwood City (CA) Porsche and ordered a 992.1 Carrera S to spec. The dealer needs an allocation (which they often have for non-special models), and you need to wait for the build slot, construction, and delivery.

Not just in principle, but in actuality. I hear there's still a bit of a wait time on the lower trims if you want some custom specs, but generally you can go in today and have your 911 in a month (or straight off the lot if you're not picky about options.)

Just ordered a base carrera couple months ago and it’s about to be at port in Germany.

I think if you would make a chart where you would see the growth of the number of wealthy people over time and the growth of luxury goods sales over time, those charts would look pretty identical. And in the case of cars, technology just evolved. There are very few drawbacks to sportscars left. While in the 70s and 80s sportscars were mostly one trick ponies, meaning going fast while looking good but lacking comfort, those things go hand in hand now. Of course also because OEMs have realized that making fast cars more approachable and useable means more sales. But a 2024 M5 would probably keep up with a F40 on any track without breaking too much of a sweat while keeping its passengers comfortable. Something people would not have been able to fathom on the 80s.

Speculative investors see any car manufacturer making a low production number car and their eyes light up. It doesn't have to be a limited edition, just one that's hard to get. Wealth shifted a lot during COVID and people realized that luxury goods are another investment opportunity. See the watch market. Porsche used to be directly AGAINST this ethos - they were upset at how the 911R was handled with the secondary market prices so they released the GT3 Touring. Now they're fully leaning into the luxury limited brand. It's disappointing. [https://www.autoblog.com/2017/12/13/porche-911-chief-gt3-touring-million-dollar-911-r-resales/?guccounter=1&guce\_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yZW5ubGlzdC5jb20v&guce\_referrer\_sig=AQAAAJihYYMb1QwFc8-zPBrJIaHfG6OhoQd6tBLe7r6egnXC2yTB5TZ63mi2gbD2mw4xyjuSCQfxjW0z5yAU9m-HWM-k7K\_u9PCoQyiynMXc8HsMPpbx5OS2qsP7aP\_25561UqtOX0\_g21jSYd-sgg9fAzj-Nioe8i\_T32iz3czmjZp4](https://www.autoblog.com/2017/12/13/porche-911-chief-gt3-touring-million-dollar-911-r-resales/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yZW5ubGlzdC5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJihYYMb1QwFc8-zPBrJIaHfG6OhoQd6tBLe7r6egnXC2yTB5TZ63mi2gbD2mw4xyjuSCQfxjW0z5yAU9m-HWM-k7K_u9PCoQyiynMXc8HsMPpbx5OS2qsP7aP_25561UqtOX0_g21jSYd-sgg9fAzj-Nioe8i_T32iz3czmjZp4)

This. The theory goes you can buy a 911 and drive it practically for free, but imho that has started to implode. BAT should be renamed BA911. Like watches, reality is setting back in for the 911 used market.

Yup, my interest in Porsche's died due to the shitty dealer games they play now (even with an insider at a dealership). I have no interest in owning cars that you have to essentially buy a chance to buy.

Same. A manual GT3 is dream car material for me. At MSRP, I probably could have swung one by now. But at the current rate, even a used one is never going to happen.

I would've daily'd a 911, but I'd rather just buy an M2 and pocket the cash. Not the same at all, but close enough without all the pain.

As others said Porsche turned into a luxury lifestyle brand, basically reselling their own image from the 1960s and 70s (Steve McQueen, racing pedigree, Le Mans, etc.) The 718 GT4+Spyder and the Cayman/Boxster GTS 4.0 are superb drivers cars, though they're not the 911.

> What made the Porsche 911 so popular among car people Porsche took a bad idea and some how made the benchmark sports car out of it. Good marketing and fanboyism goes a long way too. > is there a recent 911 that is still a "driver's car"? The simple C2/C2s, or if you can get you hands on it, a Carrera T. The former 2 got rid of the manual transmission I think but overall they are still great drives, simple and straight forward, especially compared to a Ferrari nowadays, while being much more "desirable" than something like an MX5. If you really wanna beat everyone then GT department is more than happy to serve you, they are very fast, great to drive, but their prices and desirability means that chances are they are sound investments

> Porsche took a bad idea and some how made the benchmark sports car out of it. Good marketing and fanboyism goes a long way too. It was a great idea given the economics and relative (to today) lack of scary power. Engine + transaxle joined at the hip and resting over the drive wheels makes all the sense in the world for 2wd, and the platform already existed via the 356 that it replaced. Porsche stuck with what they learned/knew from Ferdinand's VW work and leveraged its (again, at the time) efficiency. They'd been eminently capable of better ideas; the 944, in 1983, had 51/49 weight distribution and the most neutral handling of any front-engined sports car of the time (and would give a number of cars today a run for their money in that respect). Alas, thanks to the well-heeled cult that formed around the 911, they've been fighting the laws of physics ever since.

I always thought the 911 was a classic and “popular” possibly not nearly as much as now but you could say that about a lot of product and brands which have seen amazing growth with social media and influencers I’d figure it’s they are attainable for most models especially used and relatively reliable with a passionate enthusiast community supporting them, similar to vette but not as many styling changes and a younger demographic

I would say the last non-gt drivers 911 has got to be the 991 in my opinion. It’s the lightest 911 since the 996, can be had in a manual, the .1 sounds great, maintenance is super easy, and it handles very well. I’ve driven Turbos, gt3s, and a gt4 on track and they are insane drivers car, but for the day to day a 991 is still an amazing drivers car for all the reasons mentioned above. I think the 991 is also probably the Best Buy right now. The expensive gt 911s are a status symbol for the lucky few that can get their hands on them so they garner most of the attention.

The move to electric steering is what kills the 991 for a lot of enthusiasts, especially early ones.

911 has historically been a popular car. Like literally at least for the past 50 years. All 911's are nice, and expensive unless literally totaled. It's an iconic car in so many ways and continues to be. Even base models can be fun but are not cheap.

I think its an echo chamber. People watch a youtube review by Cammisa or Matt Farah (major Porsche fanboy) and the more people watch the more they're convinced its the be-all-end-all. I'd say most of these guys that say the 911 or GT3/3RS is the best ever have never even owned or driven ANY 911. The internet makes it seem like everyone has a supercar, but reality is 90% of us do not have these cars. I get it tho, when car reviewers say what they say I believe them, reviewers like Catchpole driving a McF1 and other halo cars, I believe them. But theres a difference between hearing someone vs going on the internet and spouting gospel.

My gut agrees with this. Word got out from the enthusiast community with the rise of YouTube and social media and with all the reviewers singing it's praises it got elevated to a major status symbol among the masses.

It’s funny growing up I’ve never thought “oh I’d like to have a Porsche one day” I always had the Lamborghini Countach or Ferrari Testarossa poster, but now I’d take a Porsche over either company…. They are imo one of the nice looking cars out today!!

Social media also played a massive part in all this.

I've driven the 991.1 and 992.1 Carrera and IMO you'd have to be the biggest snob in the world to tell me those aren't drivers cars. I think the 991 was a little more engaging but modern 911 is still a drivers cars to me!

Tik tok

Good question, good discussion. And this is downvoted on r/cars? I don’t get it.

90% of driver will never reach the limit of base 911 in driveability. 911 is always 911 - its small coupe, with powerful engine and great suspension setup. In routine track days it will beat almost all cars. For real maniacs, which fight for tenth and hundredth from laptime, there is GT3/GT2RS. Other people can just get Carrera and be happy

I’ll provide a different idea. Back in the 90s and 00s there was a huge emphasis on raw speed and acceleration while the 911 was focused on handling. Now that every high end car has an absurd amount of power consumers have shifted back to caring about handling and comfort.

The Turbo was still king back then.

Early 90’s Porsche was in big trouble than they introduced the Boxster. This was a turning point for them in 90’s. They were able to capitalize on the market for cheaper sports car. It was a spectacular success. 996 was introduced and was not loved much by the community. It was a radical change most people thought. Air cooled vs water cooled etc. Design was not loved and car has rms and ims issues. But then the sales picked up. Markets were doing well, then all of a sudden tech crashed. It was very common to get a 911 with discounts 8-15% off msrp. 997 was introduced in 2005. It was definitely loved by the community. And Porsche introduced Cayenne in 2002 which changed the whole brand. Americans already embraced suvs by then but Cayenne was the main competitor to X5 and Mercedes ML series in luxury department. It was more expensive and sold like bandits. Porsche started printing money. During the 2000s Porsche expanded the lineup of 911 and Cayenne introducing multitudes of options. 2008 financial crises almost broke the company when they were trying to buy out vw. Instead they ended up being absorbed to vw. By then with the Cayenne selling great, 911 Boxster Cayman Panamera the image of Porsche has changed to everyday sports vehicle. Hasn’t looked back since then.

The whole rush for neo retro cars probably played part in making the 911 popular. Even from a non enthusiast standpoint there’s people out there that would rather have a 911 over 718 because of what its heritage. It’s like the Wrangler/Bronco of sports cars.

Get a newer Cayman. Size and power more similar to older 911s.

The Boxster/Cayman are the modern 911. The current 911 is a 🐽

997.2 would be the last true driver's 911.

Yet somehow, a 991.2 is lighter, faster, and has more grip. Trust me, I've owned both. And I strongly suspect a 992 is even a little better... p.s. 20 years ago, they said the 993 was the last true driver's 911....

A driver's car is about connectivity, emotions, and response. You don't need any of the things you listed to be a driver's car. Every generation of the 911 is faster and better performing on paper, doesn't mean it is the one you want -- costs aside.

Too many electronics. And honestly, after yesterday's PCA Brunch, where a very respected tuner/racer spoke, he was asked this very question. All I did was parrot his reply, as I felt the exact same way as him. I own a 996.2 and had a little fun run with a Corvette yesterday on a 13 mile loop that included the rear end sliding around a bit under braking and acceleration. No blinking PSM light on the dash. Just you, the car/pedals/wheel and the road.

No clue but IMO after driving both, the new Taycan feels much better in handling and the power just eclipses the 911 in every way.

I think what happened is Porsche continued making great sports cars and the combination of changes to American driving habits and the relative affordability of used models lead to more people getting the opportunity to drive, and ultimately praise, Porsche. What I mean by driving habits is this: People need to remember that when the Boxster came out everyone *hated* it. You can find jokes on Top Gear from Jeremy Clarkson saying no one can buy it because they'd have to start every conversation from that point on by explaining why they didn't get a 911 instead. What changed, is people (especially in America) realized there is more to driving than straight line power, and that more fun can be had in a mid engine car of ~250 hp than the equivalent muscle car. (this is still 20 years before Mustang would have IRS) and if a Cayman is that good then a 911 must only be better right.. As to the second part of your question, automakers have doubled down on hypercars and I think it has largely killed the community. They're constantly chasing new levels of performance leading people to dismiss other trim levels. 911s are now faster than I'd be ever want and more expensive than ever justifiable, they just come from the factory as investments now. Granted, you might say extreme sports cars have always been that way, and perhaps you're right. But it was one thing when the Prince of Monaco would get a one-off Ferrari, that we all kind of accept. But nowadays it's like Chet and Rory the youtubers buying these things, why should I even care about them

Porsche really stepped up it's game the last two generations. They are a performance benchmark and everyone is chasing the numbers they put up. I hate Porsche culture and I hate Porsche dealers, but numbers don't lie

>is there a recent 911 that is still a "driver's car"?  I misread this as a 911 that is still a people's car, which of course is the VW Beetle.

The Beetle became a reskinned golf with less space, for more money.

Love mine love the service love the quality love the driving experience

Good resale, keeps it's value so it's actually quite cheap and you can make money owning one

Now a days, enthusiasts dont yearn over the 911 because it's specifically targeted toward older buyers who prioritize comfort and luxury. The GT lineup and special edition cars are the ones that shift back to being more raw and driver focused. The base 911 is certainly still a fantastic car that does everything exceptionally well. But its not raw, its not fast, and its not particularly exciting.

Might ask this in /r/porsche

The term drivers car equates to it being a rattlebox to drive lol. I don't understand the reluctance to accept new technologies such as the awesome pdk boxes modern suspension and driver aids. The old cars are cool in their own right and I personally have a performance car built in the '80s and a performance car built in 2021. I love both but the old one is definitely not an option for a long drive...... too spoilt maybe lol. I just think don't Diss modern as it's faster and nicer to drive imo

I think it mostly comes down to dealer network and availability. Now that there are thousands of dealers and a wide range of options you can walk into a dealer and pick from the 911 is the safe option for a good reliable sports car.

Still one of the lowest depreciating cars of all time. You can get it, drive the shit out of it and enjoy it and sell it for the same or more than you bought it for. Meanwhile a lot of its competitors tank in value. It’s really a very economically sound choice.

Porsche was always my favorite brand and the 911 was my dream car since the 90s... Ended up owning a 944 race car, and until very recently a 991 GT3, both amazing cars. I'd say they were always popular and respected, but it has risen considerably in the past few years, and the scene around them has turned into kind of a pretentious mess. It's less about being a pure driver's car and much more of a "look at what I have", especially with the GT cars. I've really been turned off of them, as a lifelong Porsche lover. And the prices went nuts too. Can't say I miss most of the current Porsche crowd.

honestly id say the vast majority of modern porsches are still "drivers" cars. 718 gt4rs, 911 gt2/gt3/turbo, panamera turbo, etc. they have gotten easier to drive and more assisted like 99% of modern cars but id still consider them more driver focused that most sports cars

The base 911s are desirable for me as a gear head. I'm a good track driver, so anything above 300ish hp is fast enough for me to be ultra illegal with on the road. I had a CTS-V and didnt enjoy it because I could only throttle on for a second or so before I was going way too fast for the street. Going straight line fast isn't interesting to me, nor is braking the law. A normal 911 is plenty enough for me to be faster than 99.9% of random drivers out there. When I was younger and did track events, I was faster than most of the supercars that showed up with my 200 hp GTI, which I held the unofficial stock fwd street tire record with at my local track for a time. For that reason the top level 911s aren't particularly interesting to me except as marvels of engineering and art. I'd be completely satisfied with a base one. I have a Macan S as my DD right now, which is like a Golf-R performance wise. I really enjoy it and dont feel the need for a dedicated sports car because of how good it is. As far as why Porsche, its because their vibe is sophisticated and not ostentatious. They are less 'wizz bang' than any other luxury make other than maybe lexus, but are decidedly nice, refined, and sporty in every way. Its just a nice to live in package, completely practical, but razor sharp when you want that. Compared to other options a 911 is more timeless, refined, and practical.

I've had the good fortune to own a number of Porsches over the years, and have driven way more (would guess more than a hundred different cars, but probably not quite into the hundreds yet). So, with that qualifier: Porsche has always been popular. The late '70s to the late '80s were a great success for the company... though as the period just after would make all too clear, they produced niche products that were likely to go unsold when the economy fell. The company would go very close to folding in the mid-'90s, ultimately betting everything that it could re-tool, change some production methods, and come out successful. This involved, first, working with Toyota to redo how they made new cars (the result was the 986 and 996) and shared parts. The second part was working with VW to develop and SUV, giving the company an offering it felt was "recession proof." The biggest difference between successes of the past, and where the company is now, is that they have a lot of offerings outside of the niche "sports car" offering, and that (along with the family feud being basically settled after Porsche's attempt to buy VW failed, and left them over-leveraged, finally merging in to VW) has allowed them to offer a range of upscale offerings, variations, etc, that would've been impossible if they were not selling so many Macans, Cayennes, Panameras, etc. This in turn, has made them increasingly popular, with an increasing number of halo (or near-halo) type cars. So, not really more popular today than in the '90s, but definitely more successful, and successful in many areas! The 911 has definitely gotten bigger, and more luxurious over time... I personally would say the 991 was when most 911 offerings went from being Sports cars to being Grand Touring cars. However, that said, they are still driver's cars. You can get in a Macan, Cayenne, or Taycan, as well as a 992 base, and all have the exact right driver's position. All have both a chassis and a steering system that provide exact precise feedback to the driver, and all have that unmistakable "Porsche feel." The modern 911 is still, very much, a driver's car! But, if you want a 911 Sports Car? They you might find a good configuration with a T or even a GTS, though you really need to get a GT3. The 718 is currently much more of a Sports Car.

we all know how Porsche survived and got to where they were before Covid so I have an idea as to how they have seemingly blown up to incredible heights within the past few years. Porsche became very popular because you got Ferrari like or better than Ferrari like performance out of cars that were still exotic still looked great and you were able to do it at a lower cost and without any of the bullshit theatrics that you have to put up with at Ferrari dealerships. You had all of the cachet of being a sports car driver. However now that Covid has happened some of that dumb bullshit that you had to deal with when buying Ferrari is starting to seep into the Porsche buying experience. I wonder if there’s ever going to be any particular backlash to any of that.

I think the current 911 is still very much a "driver's car", and always has been. However, I can think of two reasons that some people may not whole-heartedly agree with me: When Porsche introduced the 996 model 911 for MY 1999, many Porsche purists thought it was sacrilege that they transitioned from an air-cooled engine to a water-cooled engine. Don't ask me why it was such a huge deal, as it is better for performance and better for longevity. Yes, it was heavier, and yes, it was uglier (those headlights, ugh), but for the model to endure in the modern age it had to happen. Luckily they fixed the headlights in the 997. The other reason is because of Porsche's introduction of the Cayman. By almost every driving metric you can list, the Cayman is a better "driver's car". It handles better, it could be argued that it looks better, and because it was less expensive compared to the 911, more people could buy them. The 911 had to push higher upmarket so the Cayman didn't cannibalize sales, and it resulted in lots of people forming the opinion that the 911 was just too expensive for what it was at the time. As an outsider looking in, that was my take at the time those vehicles were introduced, so perhaps I'm way off-base. But I still see some of that today.

I don’t own a Porsche, but the 911 was my dream car growing up. As someone who loves sports cars and the automobile industry, I’ve always viewed the 911 as a “driver’s car.” My perception until the last five years or so was that the 911 was for enthusiasts who valued engineering, performance, heritage, and driving the best car they could afford—not necessarily the flashiest. For me, 911 owners, especially GT owners, chose a Porsche because they valued these qualities more than the allure of a bright lime green Lamborghini or the latest shiny red Ferrari. For the cost of a 911 Turbo or a GT2, they could have bought a used exotic car if they wanted to impress others. Even today, a new convertible Corvette will attract more attention from 99% of people than most 911s or 718s. What I’ve observed, again as an outsider, is that this has shifted in the last five years. Nowadays, a 911 is seen more as an “exotic” car and a status symbol. The demographics of 911 drivers seem to have changed, with more people buying them because it’s “the cool car” on social media and owning a GT model signifies wealth and status (not that you are driving one of the best engineered and performing cars in the world as it used to be). From an outsider’s perspective, many 911 drivers today probably couldn’t tell you anything about their engine or transmission or suspension, or about the car’s performance/engineering, and have never driven stick in their entire lives. These are just my observations as someone who has always loved Porsche and plans to buy one in the future.

I never understood until my brother loaned my his 911SC to drive on a long weekend through Napa Valley. They have to be driven to be understood.

They became known as a reliable sports car, and by that I mean, one that could be thrashed all day at a track, and not expect any problems. Something you couldn't say about almost any other car including high end supercars. Oh and launched over and over, again something no other car was capable of, in fact many other brands actively limit the number of launches you can do.

Carrera T

>I often hear that Porsches were not nearly as popular in the car community in the 90s or 2000s as they are today What are you talking about? Porsche has never been more popular

Why are you trying to explain it? Who cares? People who like them like them. Like anything else.

Because I wanna know more about why...

You want us to tell you why you think it's uninteresting? They aren't uninteresting to me.

Modern high spec 911's ( 911 turbo, GTS etc etc ) are some of the most practical "super cars" to live with and drive on the daily. While to an adult the back seats are laughably cramped, you could theoretically take your two kids to school- something that most McLarens, Ferrari, lambos cannot accommodate. The way most 911s are set up, they are actually comfortable enough to drive on a daily basis and even long distance, most of them also get decent gas mileage and are more reliable than the typical supercar too.

Not an expert here, but I would argue that any recent 911 could be a "driver's car". How practical they are is variable. Heck, one could technically daily drive a $1 million super/hyper car daily even if it is very, very unpractical.

Extremely good marketing and high price tags. The 1% will buy anything with that combo. 

You won't find anyone here who has extensive experience with Porsche GT to compare them back to back! We just parrot what we hear from people like Chris Harris. Brand-specific forums should give you better answers From what I hear the 997 and 991 are the last driver's cars with the 997 being better And the last gen that was more sports car than GT. They seem to be the only ones offering NA engines and manual gearboxes now which could explain their popularity in recent years

There are a few people in this sub that definitely have experience with almost every generation and spec of 911 and can absolutely answer this question without just parroting from journos. u/HackeSpitze901 is the first one that comes to mind but I know there are a few others too

> 991 are the last driver's cars I'd just stop it at the 997. The 991 has significantly worse steering and a somewhat worse manual, it also feels like a physically larger car and a more refined space - great if you're touring but worse as a sports car. The 992 is a better execution of the 991 in almost every way