Of course the corvette scored 19 more points in the cost category and the 991 lost to the Vette by 5. I think if they didn't put $48K in options on the 991 (more than half have nothing to do with performance) the comparison would have been more meaningful.

 

I was going to chime in here, and even add that past comparisons scored the BMW M3 over the Turbo because of the bigger back seat and trunk, and I agree that come scoring models don't fit.

They are all to be taken with a grain of salt. For example - a minivan would score a LOT higher due to storage space, visibility, legroom, and ride comfort, but do we really think a minivan is better than a Lamborghini?

However - I also find really entertaining (and the reason I'm currently struggling with the new 991) that there are $48k in options to add on to a $100k car.

That is a LOT worse (to me) than the $80k+/- package on the 918 Spyder. When you can add 50% additional cost to a vehicle in options, to me, there aren't enough standard features that warrant the base price to begin with.

Regarding the 'Vette, I still think it is an amazing car. It will get favorable reviews simply because it's new, and I can almost smell the financial incentives to publish these things.

 

A dark green C7 was parked behind my C2S Coupe at cars and coffee last week. It look way better live than in pics in my opinion. From the rear the roof tapers back as nicely as the 991. As with Porsche (esp Boxter/Cayman and Turbos) in dark colors even the multitude of otherwise tacky plastic vents in the body work blend in. The performance numbers speak for themselves and keep the Vette a "bang for the buck" leader. The Vette interior looked quite good to me, and there is no denying the arcade quality instrument graphics entertainment in its many selectable modes. I like the sounds it makes too.

But I don't think it compares favorably with the 991 as design art (admittedly subjective). Objectively, the production quality difference is blaring. Severe orange peel in the paint, some weird gaps in the bodywork at the front of the doors and a spoiler that looked like an aftermarket leftover. All combine to keep me liking my 991C2S far more.

 

I can't find the article online. Is it only available in the printed magazine?

 

I do recall an article a few months ago with either Car and Driver or Road and Track magazines where they put a 991s against a Lotus Evora. The Evora one by a couple of points. I looked at how they added the points and I noticed that the 991s cost was way up there. I think they put the Burmester system in there. I was thinking. Well, if they had the Bose in there or nothing, the 991 would have won.

These comparisons are kinda silly if you ask me.

 

lol! Agreed. I'm not sure who gets paid, or how much, to decide which compares to what, and by what measure...

BUT - they are in a business to generate money(through interest and advertising). So if enough people talk about how lopsided the review is - they win.

I hate marketing.

 

These are most likely press cars that the Manufacturer provides. Of course P will load them up w/ PDcc, PCCB, BUrmester, Red belts, etc and its their fault.

The comparable 991 should have been a Base, stick, Cast Iron Brakes, Bose etc.

 

Just like my car. MSRP $107k. Perfect!

 

Yeah, it was the April issue, and there ware no blimp tests. I am surprised so many people didn't get the joke.

 

Maybe they were afraid it would deflate from a broken roof...

And cost $millions to repair.

 

November issue of C and D has the article. MSRP on Vette was $51,995 with as tested at $68,376. 991 was $99,850 MSRP with as tested at $148,245.
The 991 didn't have the X51 option and yet they added so many cosmetic options to raise the cost. If they had added the X51 (435HP vs. 460 Vette) and eliminated $25K less for the cosmetic options, it would have been a fairer test.

 

I've grown so jaded about these comparisons. If the 991 beat the c7, would they sell more ragazines than if the c7 beats the 991. I don't think so. The former is "ho hum, expected"; the latter is "whoa, I gotta read that". Not which car is better, which sells more paper/downloads.

 

These comparisons are not very informative and would not sway my thoughts either way.

I personally do not have an issue with the number and cost of the options that Porsche offers on the 911 because you have the options to make a truly individual car. Whether it is deviated stitching or more performance options, it is fantastic!

 

Agreed.
Yup. Too much ~"Look at my magazine!!!" for me. Remember Edmunds - C7 vs GT-R - the C7 is inferior in EVERY measurable way, had improved traction control, etc..., but wins in the comparison?

Of course - in that comparison - all GT-R's came with over 600HP. So that explains the massive beating. Sometimes stupid people can write/recite articles as well.

I have been jaded since the M3 scored higher than both the Porsche Turbo and Nissan GT-R in a comparison several years ago. They've just been getting worse and worse. And I think it has EVERYTHING to do with the perspective you mentioned (buy my magazine/download/web page hits translates to advertising money, etc...).

 

+1 ...