I would not consider the Porsche boxster or cayman because they are under powered for performance oriented cars. The 991 is just so retro. Most European performance cars with over 500hp are well into $100K range. The Jaguar F-type and XKR are a good buy in the market. Used 1-3 year old Jaguars are the best used car buy hands down.

 

I agree. Coupe or Vert The XK or F Type are better looking than just about anything out there and if you can grab one after the depreciation hit, you get to drive something way more exclusive.

 

You have to be responsible enough to know when and where to use the HP and know your limitations as a driver--these guys obviously were not since it was a single car accident.

 

I agree and this has always been my issue with verts since I would probably have the top up most of the time here in the Houston heat. There is no argument that there are some very attractive verts out there with the top down and yes, I understand that this is the trade off to be able to enjoy top-down driving if that is your priority.

 

Exactly. Just like everything in life: Always ski within your ability around dangerous objects, drink in moderation, always, always perform dangerous activities within your control. It's all about respect for yourself, others, and the activity you're doing. Who knows the car Paul Walker was in may have had a mechanical failure--it may not have been completely driver related. The closer you live on the edge the closer you are to things going bad, especially when you don't exercise caution. A car with over 600hp requires restrain and respect and can be a lot of fun in the right hands. Regardless of what you do in life there is risk.

 

It's just like some young kid or mid-life crisis guy with limited or no motorcycle riding experience going out and buying a 1400 CC hyper-sport bike--that's a disaster waiting to happen. You need to graduate up to that kind of bike by honing your riding skills on something easier to control with a lot less power--one wrong twist of the wrist on a bike with over 175 HP will send you off in the wrong direction. The Europeans have it right--by law you have to start with less powered bikes until you have the skills to move up.

It's no different with cars--you can get sideways pretty quickly with a lot of power in the hands of an inexperienced driver.

 

Roger Roda Inexperienced?

"According to a story in Wealth Management, the two met when Walker, at a track event, noticed that Rodas was driving a Porsche GT3 that Walker used to own. They ended up racing together at events like the 25 Hours of Thunderhill, but his schedule limited Walker's racing mostly to time attack-type events at Buttonwillow or other California tracks.

Rodas, though, moved up through the ranks from Porsche-only series like the Pirelli Driver's Cup, where he won twice in 2012, into the Pirelli World Challenge, leading a two-car Ford Mustang Boss 302S team, sponsored by Always Evolving and charities that he and Walker supported. Rodas raced car number 52; his co-driver, in car 75, was Erik Davis, owner of Autotopia, a massive, near-legendary car collection in Los Angeles that supplies cars for movie and TV productions.

Both rookies in the series, Rodas finished 13 in GTS points, Davis 16th, despite missing the races in St. Petersburg and Lime Rock. Had Rodas competed in those races, he almost certainly would have been the series rookie of the year. Rodas' highest finish was fifth at Toronto, impressive since the GTS class has such veteran drivers as season champ Lawson Ashenbach, Jack Baldwin and Peter Cunningham. By sad coincidence, Rodas and Davis raced against another Mustang driver in the class, Roger Miller, who died unexpectedly at age 44 last August – Miller's family owned the Utah Jazz and Miller Motorsports Park near Salt Lake City."

The driver of the Porsche Carrera GT had experience. My point is driving a car with 610 HP is not needed for driving on American USA streets, but a race track environment, sure.

 

These super cars should have an impact based fire system in them. When they go, they really go!

 

Well, maybe he was experienced on the track, but he obviously did something stupid on the street to cause the accident. As I said before, you have to know when and where to use the HP and it doesn't just have to be a car with 610 HP. A very prominant lawyer here killed himself recently on a curvy road in town in his SUV by driving too fast in the rain and losing control and hitting a tree. I think that drivers with track experience that think they can do anything are probably more of a danger to themselves and others on the street because they tend to push the limits more and possibly in situations when it's not smart. Certainly not always the case, though, to you guys out there with track experience.

If your logic holds up, no one should drive a car with over 100 HP on the streets because it's not necessary to stay within the posted speed limits.

 

I sort of disagree. Accidents happen. They happen even to experienced people. They even happen on bona fide racetracks. Accidents may happen more when you put yourself in dangerous positions, sure, but that's not a reason, by itself, to avoid doing dangerous things.

From what I understand Paul Walker (the passenger, from my reading) did a lot of his own Hollywood stunts. I sounds like Paul knew his stuff, he knew the car, and it stands to reason that he knew the risks. It simply didn't work out for him this time. There are some real idiots out there, I'll reserve my judgement for them.

 

Of course, what you say makes sense, but usually single car accidents are the result of driver error unless there's a mechanical failure. I guess in Paul Walker's case we'll never know exactly what happened, but from the looks of what's left of the car they had to be traveling at a tremendous speed. Apparently this happened on an urban street with a long straightaway, there were no skidmarks, and the car hit 2 trees and a street light pole which seems to indicate that the driver lost control of the car at a very high rate of speed.

 

I'm sure that there's a Liberal lawmaker somewhere this very moment, writing up his proposal to limit vehicle horsepower, in the interest of protecting us from ourselves. What would we do without restrictions?

 

I disagree. I believe that a Liberal Democrat legislator is more likely to introduce a graduated sales or use tax on high horsepower luxury cars, with the tax rate increasing incrementally as HP increases. Since those cars are usually bought or leased by high income/net worth individuals (or their employers), such a tax would advance the Democrat agenda of redistribution of wealth under the guise of fundamental fairness.

I'll get off my soapbox now, so we can get on with the business of this thread. Thanks for reading my rant. It did me more good than my psychiatrist!

 

This has already happened... It is no coincidence that most all "Gas Guzzlers" make high HP. Afterall we pay more to the government in Tax when we fill up than to the gas companies. Clearly it is a [at least] double tax.

 

My dealer hasn't noticed the tune and pulley and really doesn't care to tell you the truth. If course I haven't come in with a blown motor tranny but I don't see that happening either unless it truly is a defect.

 

+1

 

Get your eyes checked!

 

I am not sure how anyone can complain about the new 2014 Porsche Cayman unless you owned one yourself. As mentioned before, the Jaguar XKR and Porsche Cayman are different cars. The ride is different, the performance is different, the handling is different.

Both cars are amazing automobiles and serve a whole different driving experience. The XKR does not handle as well as the Cayman and the Cayman does not ride as smooth as the XKR. Many other comparisons and differences between the two automobiles can be made. All positive.

Test driving either car does not provide the real total driving experience of the XKR or the Cayman. You have to own them to drive on a regular basis to make an honest opinion and comparison of any strengths and weaknesses of both.

One is a sports car while the other is a GT (Grand Touring).

I am pleased to own one of both as they serve my craving for driving two nice premium automobiles.

Don't disparage either unless you own them.

 

I guess I was referring to the last Boxster/Cayman. I do think the new Cayman looks much better than it did.



vs



I don't know how we got off on talking about the Boxster/Cayman other than the looks between the convertible and coupe versions of the car. I mentioned that like the F-Type and the X150, the Boxster was designed as a convertible from the start and not just as an afterthought, as in many convertibles (which often happen to be pretty ugly) that are modified from their coupe/hard roof versions (A4, 3 Series, Lexus IS, Nissan 350Z, etc.) or literally manufactured by cutting off the coupe's roof (Porsche 944). This was in response to a claim that coupes ALWAYS look better than verts.

Do you really need to own a car to have an opinion on whether or not it looks best in coupe or convertible form?

 

I thought the caymans ride was quite smooth (on paved surfaces) and while my XK glides over my dirt road with nary a care, it's still not as smooth as the pre-2010 models I've driven. I have no beef with the cayman in ride quality. I choose the GT for the luxurious, pampering cabin experience.