Porsche 911 - My Analysis

i believe our friend OFSH used to own a 911 ( he currently owns Tesla Model S Plaid ) whereas i have never driven a 911 so it will seem more than a bit arrogant when i attempt to lecture him on the subject of Porsche 911 …

and yet i am going to share my concerns anyway.

Pictured: 2024 Porsche 911 Turbo:

every baller, power player, alcoholic and crackhead from Hunter Biden to Paul Pelosi drives a 911. it is the most iconic sports car ever. what Corvette is to American cars and Nissan GTR is to Japanese cars the 911 is to cars.

that said, the 911 is WRONG.

DECADES ago i told OFSH that 911 has engine in the right place ( as opposed to having it in the front ), but i was WRONG.

part of the reason i’m doing this thread now is to ATONE for that mistake.

some time after trying to misinform OFSH about the physics of weight distribution of 911 i got into an argument about it on SPEAKER BUILDING FORUM ( most guys who build speakers understand physics ) and i got deservedly SCHOOLED on the topic.

long story short - the optimum location for engine in a sports car is REAR MID SHIP which is where Formula 1 as well as every single modern supercar has their engine EXCEPT the 911.

pictured: Formula 1 Engine location:

the reason is two fold:

1 - the optimum weight distribution is somewhere around 45% front 55% rear.

2 - polar moment of inertia is minimized when the mass is close to the center of the car.

let’s look at weight distribution of some some good cars:

Formula 1: 46% front / 54% rear.
Bugatti Chiron: 43% front / 57% rear.
Porsche 911 Turbo S: 38% front / 62% rear.

I also recall the guy who designed the original 911 saying that 40% front / 60% rear would be “certainly unacceptable” - so by the standards of the guy who designed the original 911 the modern 911 is “certainly unacceptable”

so how come it works ? well because modern tire tech is beyond anything the guy who designed the original 911 could have dreamed of and is able to MOSTLY compensate for having the engine behind the rear axle.

the ONLY other cars i know of that put the engine in the rear ( as opposed to rear-mid-ship ) are BMW i3 REX

and Mercedes Smart Car.

the combination of great engine, great transmission, great suspension, great tires and great aluminum chassis and just how everything is tuned to work together makes for a great car IN SPITE OF the fact that the engine is fundamentally in the wrong place.

in other words the 911 is great because it is a Porsche and IN SPITE OF it being a 911.

( continued further down the thread )

so how is it that the ONLY sports car with engine in wrong place is also world’s best and most iconic ?

well it isn’t really all that incredible. for example intel X86 architecture is the worst chip architecture ( most needlessly complex and inefficient ) and also the only one full-fat Windows runs on and Windows has 73% desktop OS market.

in a word - MOMENTUM.

the reason i’m typing this on a computer that has an intel X86-64 chip is because that is simply what Windows always ran on and i would never run anything except Windows.

likewise the reason 911 is the best sports car is because it has been Porsche’s bread and butter sports car since forever and many people ( rightfully ) will not drive anything but Porsche.

( continued further down the thread )

essentially it is POSSIBLE to mostly compensate for the shortcomings of X86-64 chip architecture in a desktop environment and there is no will power at Microsoft to make a clean break and move to ARM like Apple did …

likewise it is POSSIBLE to use custom tires to mostly compensate for wrong weight distribution in a 911 and there is no will power at Porsche to discontinue the world’s most iconic sports car so they just keep dumping money into further refining it …

and in fact even as Porsche is readying the electric 718 ( see spy video below ):

they have stated that 911 is staying ICE.

have you ever asked yourself why he 911 has rear seats ?

it’s because it ultimately traces its heritage back to this:

that’s Ferdinand Porsche showing VW Beetle to Hitler.

the people’s car also had a rear air cooled engine like 911. and the rear seats were for children because Hitler wasn’t a huge fan of White Genocide and thought white people should have families and children.

but how often do you see children in the back of a 911 ? i saw it ONCE and it was a NIGGER who put his children in there. no white person would ever put their kids in the back of a 911. i saw a drunk HOE ( that i was flirting with ) getting in the back of 911 but once but again, a sober person wouldn’t get in there.

race modified 911s have a ROLL CAGE in place of rear seats:

the rear seats in a 911 essentially serve no purpose … so why are they still there ? why not throw them out and make the car shorter ?

well in fact the OPPOSITE was happening - 911 wheelbase has been getting LONGER. why ?

the answer is STABILITY.

the 911 has a high polar moment of inertia due to the engine not being between the axles like in any other supercar and thus it needs a long wheelbase for stability. the rear seats are there just to make the wheelbase longer same as how in a Formula 1 there is empty space behind the engine for the same reason ( stability ).

this design made sense when the engine had to be air cooled and you needed rear seats because the car was supposed to have some element of practicality …

the original 911 had 130 horsepower:

which is about as much power as modern design rear engine cars like Smart have …

this configuration was never intended for the kinds of performance levels modern 911s achieve … even the “RS” version in 1972 only had 210 hp …

which is realistically as much power as they should have ever put into 911 …

so to recap the original 911 came out in 1963 and was basically a sports car version of the VW Beetle which came out in 1938 and had a 25 horsepower engine. it had the same 2+2 seating configuration with rear mounted air cooled boxer engine as the beetle … only real differences being 6 cylinders instead of 4, more sporty tune and styling.

but when you’re buying a 911 in 2024 you’re basically still buying a 1938 beetle that was designed to handle 25 horsepower … except now the same configuration is asked to somehow handle over 600 ponies …

look at this 911 engine block

why are the cylinders not touching each other ?

it’s actually carryover from the air cooled days, which needed space for the fins:

no modern engines have cylinders like this.

instead they are as one block in liquid cooled engines, for example this Porsche Macan engine block:

the 911 represents homage to technology from 1938 …

yes of course it also has ultra modern tech like double clutch transmissions, turbocharging etc. but all that new tech is integrated into the 911 with respect for its roots as a 1938 volkswagen beetle …

why ? because WEALTHY CUSTOMERS pay for HERITAGE. it’s why Rolex costs more than Apple Watch.

the 911 is like a weird hybrid of Rolex and Apple watch in that it tries to simultaneously hold on to its roots as an air cooled rear wheel drive car and also to be at the forefront of technology with Formula 1 type Double Clutch transmission etc …

it works because it allows them to charge Rolex money and then use that money to develop Apple technology which they use to cover up the deficiencies of a fundamentally outdated design …

so if 911 is the wrong way to make a supercar - what is the right way ?

glad you asked. not surprisingly it was also invented by Porsche, in their 918.

the 918 came out in 2013 or 75 years after the Beetle … but in their infinite wisdom Porsche only made 918 of them and discontinued it after 2 years …

the 918 had rear-mid-ship engine and front electric motor. this same formula was later copied by Acura NSX which was also discontinued and most recently by Corvette E-Ray which is in fact in production.

would i get the Corvette E-Ray over 911 ? no i would NOT. because you don’t get a Chevy over a Porsche. for example in the E-ray when the engine shuts off ( which it being a hybrid it does a lot ) the Air Conditioning shuts off as well as it is belt driven by the Engine … this level of stupidity in 2024 can only come from Government Motors ( GM ).

It is infuriating to me that in 2013 Porsche showed us the future with 918 ( which was the fastest accelerating car in the world at the time, even without Turbos and with only 8 cylinders ! ) and then they just went back to 911 and its configuration from 1938 / 1963 because the customers wanted something familiar and were scared of the fact that 918 had electricity in it and you could even plug it into a wall ( it had 12 miles of electric driving range ).

by the way the Corvette E-Ray does NOT have a plug for charging.

the E-Ray debuts as 2024 model so 11 years after the Porsche 918 which debuted this configuration and Corvette acts like they have invented this and you know what ? they have every right to lie like this because the other guys ( Porsche and Acura ) discontinued their versions LIKE MORONS !

Tim Cook originally explained the reason for Apple’s decision to get rid of headphone Jack as “courage”

it sounded absurd at the time but in retrospect that’s exactly what it was. courage.

courage to break with the past against the wishes of all your customers and instead make a bet on the future.

after ditching the headphone jack Apple again showed courage by ditching Intel X86-64 architecture and moving to ARM architecture for all their devices.

unfortunately Porsche does NOT have such courage.

what the world really needs is a Porsche Made Acura NSX

the reason NSX failed is because the Acura brand simply couldn’t support the $160,000 price tag. it was objectively a great car but it had interior straight out of an Acura Crossover and a V6 out of Honda Odyssey minivan ( albeit with Twin Turbos ) and that was just a tough sell even though the performance was faultless.

if Porsche made the same exact car it would have been a success. which is exactly why Porsche did NOT make it. they made the 918 a million dollar hypercar limited to just 918 units to make a point that they have the best engineering on earth but to make that point without cannibalizing the sales of the 911.

this is why i can’t get behind the 911. it is simply not the best that Porsche can do.

personally i think the Electric 718 might be the car for me if they offer it with All-Wheel-Drive

because it would solve one of the main problems with EVs, namely the weight … ICE cayman is more than 1,000 lbs lighter than ICE Panamera and i would expect similar delta for EV cayman vs Taycan

but if your building doesn’t have EV charging or you want 4 doors then perhaps it’s not for you

so to sum up, no i can’t suggest a car that would work for @OldFriendSaysHello better than 911 would, but i have serious issues with the 911 and had to vent them.

i just feel it is wrong to spend more than 6 figures on a “least bad choice” which is what 911 is to me.

buying a 911 is like voting for Donald Trump. yes other choices are worse. but that’s why i’m not voting.

one final but important point i have to make is that perhaps people buy the 911 BECAUSE it is wrong.

a correctly built car like Acura NSX will never handle like 911. in fact nothing will handle like 911 precisely because no other sports car has the engine in the back like 911 does.

this is the WRONG place for the engine but that’s also what makes it unique - not just visually iconic - but also in terms of handling.

one issue in particular that comes up in context of 911 is “snap oversteer” … i haven’t looked into it because i would never get a 911 personally.

snap oversteer is objectively bad … but perhaps you WANT a car that is dangerous ?

everybody knows for example that Dodge Viper is a dangerous car - that is as much a reason for people to want one as to not want one.

i feel like 911 may be in that same category.

Air Cooling, Manual Transmission, Snap Oversteer - these are things that are objectively bad and yet subjectively it is what makes cars unique and desirable.

by contrast Lexus is objectively a good car and that’s why nobody wants Lexus just like nobody wants Minivans for the same reason - because they are very safe and practical and that makes them boring.

the 911 is a schizophrenic mixed bag of practical and silly, of cutting edge mixed with old school, of refined mixed with raving mad … maybe that’s why people love them …

but as a proud Autist, my OCD would never let me get a car that is made WRONG. the engine is in the wrong place. don’t shoot the messenger.


to summarize. an objectively properly made supercar has the following characteristics:

1 - long wheelbase
2 - low polar moment of inertia
3 - weight distribution close to 45 front / 55 rear

the 911 fails on all 3 counts. it is objectively not the right way to make a supercar.

but objectively properly made car isn’t what people want.

people want:

1 - style
2 - class / prestige
3 - heritage
4 - refinement
5 - extravagance
6 - danger

and the 911 delivers on those counts …

it’s objectively wrong but it’s what people want. the other such car that comes to mind is Jeep Wrangler:

in Consumer Reports testing the wrangler scored 20 out of 100 points - the lowest score of any car ever. and yet it is the most beloved car in America.

most personal trainer chicks dream of the Wrangler.

people are not rational. desire is not rational.

the 911 is loosely in the same category as the Wrangler and G-Wagen in that it has the right mix of heritage, style and capability ( which nobody needs ).

pictured: G-Wagen:

another point is that 911 has rear axle steering as either standard or optional depending on the model … RAS can effectively make the wheelbase appear long at high speeds resulting in improved stability …

along with super wide rear tires this is a trick that can mitigate some of the downsides of a fundamentally flawed design ( wheelbase too short, engine too far back ) …

so on one hand the overall design is really bad … but on other hand the understanding by the engineers of the shortcomings of that design is also very good and they have a lot of fancy tools at their disposal to compensate for these shortcomings …

the problem is you are paying for all this engineering and all these tools when none of this would have been necessary if the design was right to begin with …

but reality is nobody outside of VW group can really compete with VW group products and within VW group they already have PLENTY of mid-engine models such as all of the Lambos, the Bugattis and the Audi R8 … and of course the Cayman and Boxster …

so when you consider that Porsche is part of VW group they really aren’t hurting themselves by giving people a rear-engine option which against all odds continues to be the most popular one - because anybody who insists on having mid-engine configuration has PLENTY of other options within VW group …

one option is conspicuously missing though … and that’s an affordable TURBO mid-engine car …

the cheapest Turbo mid-engine car in VW portfolio is literally Bugatti Chiron …

my guess is this is how VW is protecting the 911.

if Audi R8 had turbos it would be game over for 911.

naive people believe manufacturers ( not just of cars, but anything else like phones, TVs etc. ) are trying to make the best product possible within a given budget.

they are not.

only companies that barely have any chance of surviving try their best. companies that own the market like VW, Samsung etc. try to give the customer as little as possible because they want you to always look forward to the next upgrade. they want you to never be satisfied. they want you to constantly pay for incremental improvements.

Audi in particular is the sacrificial lamb of VW group that is always nerfed to make sure it can’t beat Porsche. If Audi put Rear Axle Steering and a pair of turbos on the R8 V10 it would destroy not only all 911s but most Lambos as well … which is why it won’t happen.

And to be fair Audi R8 is a nerfed version of Lambo anyway just like Audi E-Tron GT is a nerfed version of Porsche Taycan. The point is Audis are always nerfed - it is their job within the VW group to suck so that Porsches and Lambos can beat them.

and Lambo in turn doesn’t have Turbos so that Bugatti can beat it.

you would be amazed how little the corporate fags care about making a better product and how much they care to make sure they don’t accidentally make a product better than what you deserve for the money you paid.

this is why Tesla was able make it - because Legacy automakers were too busy ruining their own products on purpose to worry about competition from startups.

i feel like maybe Porsche as a brand within VW group is allowed to develop their products to the fullest as long as these products are very weird.

the 911 is BEYOND weird, being the only supercar with rear engine on the planet.

the Cayman and Boxster are equally weird.

Panamera is Weird.

Porsche to some extent is the Research and Development arm of the VolksWagen group. for example the platform developed for Panamera was later used in Bentley and the engine was later used in Lamborghini Urus.

so within VW group Porsche, especially the 911 seems to have a license to fuck around with advanced tech like Double Clutch transmissions, Carbon Ceramic Brakes, Rear Axle Steering and on and on …

whereas most Audis are NOT allowed to use these toys …

and Porsche itself is forced to charge insane prices like $200,000+ for properly kitted out 911s so that Lambo can sell cars too …

it’s soul crushing because the way the system works is you can’t win. you will never get more than what you paid for because the job of the smartest people in VW group is to make sure that you don’t.

probably the reason 911s are allowed to have better performance than Lambos for the money is because 9 out of 10 people prefer the looks of the Lambos. so you’re allowed to get a bit more performance if you agree to sacrifice some style.

this is the real reason why dollar for dollar 911 beats Lambo. it has NOTHING to do with engineering because literally they’re both made by the same company ( VW group ).

it will be interesting to see what happens of the merger between Bugatti and Rimac

the maker of 1,500 hp ICE car merged with the maker of 2,000 hp EV car

i should note Koenigsegg which specializes in Hybrids was getting their EV tech from Rimac …

so logically Bugatti will become Koenigsegg …

so the sky is the limit in terms of what VW can do but you will never get more than what you paid for


don’t even dream about it !

about fucking time germans got rid of that estrogen shit :slight_smile:

yeah i saw that news. i actually liked the egg shape. unfortunately it was the only thing i liked about that car.

i didn’t sit inside the EQS but i sat inside EQE and it had very poor ergonomics.

reviews didn’t talk about it because reviewers never mention negatives. these reviewers get all expenses paid trips to various resorts like Monaco to review cars in exchange for reviews that are always positive.

but you only need to sit in the car for 5 minutes to realize it is cramped and uncomfortable.

it’s sad that car makers have to cater to customer whims that are not really rational. i mean the reason some cars look good and others don’t is to some extent just what we’re used to and what we expect. but there is no reason why Electric cars should look like what we’re used to with ICE cars.

for Example BMWs have long hoods because of the inline-6 engine that BMWs are famous for … and everybody loves the new BMW i5 because it is the exact same body as the ICE 5 series … but there is NOTHING under that long hood - not even a frunk. that space is just wasted.

Mercedes shortened the hood on EQS because there is nothing underneath it but the customers revolted because they want their $$$ car to have a long hood like they expect $$$ car to have.

it’s sad to see adults behave like children this way. it’s like all these Trucks have enormous hoods and if you open them there is an engine somewhere on the bottom of that bay, occupying maybe 20% of space under the hood.

literally the egg shape was the only thing i liked about the EQS. i thought it was AWESOME they had the BALLS to make a car FUNCTIONAL despite the fact that it was obvious nobody would like it.

on the other hand - who the fuck buys a $150,000 car to save $5 a month on electrical bills versus a slightly less aerodynamic shape ?

effectively they made the same mistake Porsche made with Gen 1 Panamera - they went for functionality at the expense of style. It didn’t work for Pontiac Aztec. It didn’t work for ( G1 ) Panamera. it didn’t work for EQS and it will never work because Engineers are Autistic like me but customers are Normal like you.


people will always buy the least practical cars like Jeep Wrangler because they are the most cool looking.

i mean yeah i get it swoopy lines are feminine - look like ass and titties

masculine lines are more angled - like a chiseled jaw or ripped muscles

a car should signal athleticism, power, aggression … masculine traits

the EQS always looked like a beached whale - not very sexy …

but there is a reason a whale looks like this - it is to glide through the water effortlessly

same reason why airplanes look this way ( minus the wings etc. )

the idealists among us were hoping people would put aside their prejudices and understand that function is more important than form …

but deep down we knew you were never going to do that and we were just playing ourselves :slight_smile:

just like nobody wants an ugly girl with great personality so nobody wants an ugly car with great aerodynamics …