I reckon the designer at Porsche are the biggest bludgers in the world. lol
Boss: “I need a new design for the next gen car”
Designer: “Right away boss!!” *Photocopies the previous design sheet and emailed it to the boss, done.*
On the plus side, your 1990 Porsche still looks the same as a brand new one. lol
Oh HOW original…
Porsche is iconic (I’m not even that big a fan, but it’s true) and one of the main things to thank for that is that they don’t constantly re invent what they’re aiming for. They have a very aerodynamic basic shape that they don’t mess with, rather improve on. And improve they have, the Cayman always looked awkward but I think this looks great.
I agree, and the interior is a whole new design over the original
yep love the interior, outside is looking a little sharper. I think it’s mostly nose and tail though. (I know they recon. every panel is new, but really?)
yeah its very hard to see how all the panels are new!
A great design is a great design….you just don’t throw out the baby with the bath water.
How often do Apple change the look of their iPhone or Macbook Pro ?
You get a winning philosophy and defining image and then it’s evolution not revolution.
Great design? Please… Aston Martin has a great design, Jaguar has a great design, Ferrari has a great design.
The Germans make great cars, and they’re not bad looking cars either, but they’ve always been more bland than sexy. Just look at the backside of this Cayman… Rear lights that creased into a spoiler? Come on…
Come on Dave….it’s a totally pointless exercise to argue which cars look better.
It’s personal preference.
BTW, Aston, Jag, Ferrari do make some nice looking cars but they also make some ugly ones. So I’m not sure such a sweeping generalization is wise.
Maybe so, but at least they made the effort to evolve their design.
There’s so little change in Porsche design that it doesn’t even qualify as an “evolution”. Watch Top Gear season 18 episode 4 I think it was. The one where they also did mobility scooters.
Apple about every 6 months.
Yes a great design IS a great design. This isn’t one of them.
The 911? All time classic. Beautifully evolved and iconic.
Lovely elegant interior on this one though.
I think you need your eyes checked.
Lighten up boy, it was a joke.
its called brand DNA – you can recognise a Porsche from 5 miles away – the other gimmicky brands with out of control design departments have unrecognisable cars until you see the badge. I worked in design and engineering for 25 yrs it’s much easier to do a clean sheet “no holds bar design” than doing an evolutionary design that needs to include recognisable brand cues. The exact opposite of most armchair design experts think …
Mate I completely agree that the designs are generic, but the minute you drive a Porsche, all of that is forgotten. Had a mates 2010 911 Turbo for a weekend and I can easily say that it was the best car I have ever driven and ever will.
I think it looks awesome, and the new Boxster is already a cracker, this should be great to drive.
yeah porsche are making fantastic cars at the moment! and the porsche engineers should be congratulated by the fuel consumption of their new flat 6 engines!
The rear tail lights look a bit too far apart. Other than that, this looks fantastic.
The shape of the rear lights looks the same as Golf’s front lights. lol
Fantastic looking car, but as usual it’s $100k more than in europe or the states.
Not worth it.
Thank you Julia Gillard and Co for LCT and Stampduties … what else would we do with our money?? (not!!)
US price for the S model – $63800.
Porsche are the undisputed champion of price gouging Australians.
Everyone else tries to compete with Porsche at price gouging, but Porsche steps it up every time.
Would you try to get the very best price for your house or car ?
So then we shouldn’t be so judgmental of others.
Everyone tries for the best price but not many can charge a premium because their product isn’t good enough.
To put it into perspective, the cheapest Ferrari is half a million. Makes the Cayman look like a bargain.
Correct Jax , love the whiners , cant afford it get a corolla , always price your product at the price the market will bear .
Nice , looks the business as usual , Hail VAG .
The Australian Government makes more off each car sold than Porsche does – take off the 33% LCT and we’re not looking too bad. Still, every Cayman holds the stigma of “he couldn’t afford the 911″
I don’t think there’s much stigma when you are coughing up 150 K.
Thank you Jeremy Clarkson.
Who’s being judgemental? Everyone’s just stating facts here. You act like you’re high and mighty, but in actual fact, you’re the only one judging others here.
Ferrari are much worse… check it out.
The Poms pay £40000 ($61000) for a base model Cayman. There would barely any LCT on that price and also much less stamp duty. At that price I would already have one in my garage.
Thanks for the gouging Porsche. (and BM, Audi and Merc, Rolls just dropped some of their prices a couple of hundred grand so it shows how much they were inflated)Where’s the senate enquiry regarding price gouging on cars? It costs our economy hundreds of millions a year in extra debt to finance this blatant rip off of the Aussie consumer.
I like this quite a bit. Hopefully, one day in the next 7 years I get to own a Porsche.
Very nice….much better looking than the original.
More hunkered down, aggressive and fatter.
Check out the pics of the grey one at the LA Show….that’s one sexy beast. !!!
I just keep seeing MR2 in those headlights and it puts me off.
The MR2 was a blatant rip-off of the original Boxster.
Yet some folk actually think Porsche copied Toyota…hahaha.
I love this car…it’ll scoop a bagful of awards as usual.
I’ll take mine in white.
Neither of the companies copied each other. They don’t look that alike.
Yet some folk actually think Porsche copied Toyota or Toyota copied Porsche…hahaha.
What did happen was that, at the time, Porsche had to hire former Toyota engineers to tear down, revamp and modernize the entire company, in order to make the Boxster a profitable business endeavour. Perhaps that’s where all the rumours stem from.
In your dreams boyo .
Nope, not in my dreams – in the New York Times.
Please don’t make it sound like Porsche needs Toyota’s engineering expertise.Modernise the entire company?Not quite…Porsche already made hi tech & modern products.
Porsche CEO Wendelin Wiedeking brought in some retired Toyota executives to help streamline the manufacturing process to make it more efficient and profitable.The MR2 mk3 looks quite similar to the original boxster.
Oh, you’d better call the New York Times (where I got the information) since apparently you know the story better than they do. Here’s the direct quote, from the New York Times: “But to have any chance at making money on a $40,000 sports car, Porsche had to hire former Toyota engineers — again, almost unfathomable — to tear down, revamp and modernize the entire company.”
Is this a problem?
@d29c93597fc89562acc9c631081d3626:disqus Apparently Jonty thinks it is.
Sure, they have their similarities, but there are also many differences too. It’s a stretch to say that the MR2 was a “blatant rip-off”.
I’m not the one who’s making it sound like Porsche needed Toyota’s engineering expertise – it’s the New York Times doing it. If you have any further issues, you can take it up with them.
3 replies to my post….are you on drugs?
Since when do we take newspaper articles as absolute truth ?
I read the Porsche CEO Wendelin Wiedeking interview, so it came straight from the horses mouth.
Google it…it’s not so hard.
Are you seriously trying to play the ‘newspaper articles aren’t absolute truth’ card? That does not mean that everything in newspapers are a lie, as you mistakenly.
And if your source is so infallible, please quote it directly or provide it. Wendelin Wiedeking has done countless interviews, it is very difficult to find the exact one you are referring to.
*as you mistakenly believe
Um, Porsche actually did need Toyota’s engineering expertise. Engineering is a broad term that covers many aspects – it’s not just about “hi tech & modern products”. Porsche was humble enough to admit they needed help and has no hang ups about this part of their history, so I don’t see why you should.
Wendelin Wiedeking brought in the ‘executives’ to teach “‘lean’ manufacturing, ‘constant improvement’ and other strategies that had made Toyota a world automotive superpower” and they “faulted most everything from initial planning to final assembly. When the dust settled, payroll was cut from nearly 9,000 to 6,800, parts inventory slashed by 82 percent, and the Zuffenhausen plant completely reorganized. Another outcome was Porsche’s first tear-down shop, where competitive cars could be taken apart and analyzed.” Source: HowStuffWorks
Sounds like they were dealing with the whole company and more than just streamlining.Also, it is rather naive to think that the people who Porsche turned to for help were simply ‘executives’, especially considering that Wendelin Wiedeking himself was a mechanical engineer by training before he became CEO. Wendelin Wiedeking proves that having engineer expertise and knowledge and being an executive are not mutually exclusive.
I said no engineering input.
Engineering as in car design…..engines, motors, suspension, steering….get it?
Please read my post properly and take off your blinkers before making stupid comments.
John you’re an know all idiot.
Since when is payroll, parts inventory & lean manufacturing called engineering.
They brought the Toyota executives in to help make a better business model to make production more efficient.
Bean counters not engineers.
@803135be9d8ddcb638177f676ceb00e7:disqus You clearly have no idea what engineering means – a significant part of it is “the creative application of scientific principles to design or develop structures, machines, apparatus, or manufacturing processes.” Then clearly, Porsche did “need Toyota’s engineering expertise”, to quote you. “Car design” is only one aspect of engineering. Please inform yourself before making stupid comments.
Here, I’ll spell it out more clearly for you John since it seems you and Phil are one and the same.
My original post was about the MR2 & Boxster.
In that context I said there was no engineering input from Toyota into the design of Porsche’s cars.(because their product was already modern}. Phil said Porsche hired Toyota engineers to”modernise the entire company”. Entire company ? So that must include their product too, right?But clearly this never happened & the articles you both mentioned don’t say that it did….& Phil, some newspaper stories are very accurate & some not so. .That’s a fact of life. It’s a gullible person who believes everything.I never said (as you’ve once again imagined) that everything in the newspaper is a lie.So I’ve made my point and stand by it.
It is indeed a gullible person who believes everything.
However, this is not a case of believing ‘everything’. No one here has told
anyone to believe ‘everything’. I certainly have not? Have you?
No, this is not the case of believing ‘everything’; this is the case of believing ONE thing – I’ve
merely quoted ONE article, from a known REPUTABLE source (the New York Times no
less, and the exact title of the article is ‘Porsche’s Baby Turns 16; Seeks a
Bigger Allowance’ if you want to double check. And yet you have still failed to
provide your source, even after I had requested it) and with MULTIPLE mentions
of the same/similar information available from other sources on the internet. It
is a foolish person to take the rather ignorant line of argument “Since when do
we take newspaper articles as absolute truth”, when posed with such damning
Also, sure, you might not have explicitly said that everything in the
newspaper is a lie, but your actions certainly said it. You posed the question:
“Since when do we take newspaper articles as absolute truth”, implying that you
believed the article I quoted was giving false information. On what grounds were you questioning the
truth of the article? Did you have any reason to believe that the information I
quote from the newspaper was false? If you didn’t have any pre-existing reason,
then it must be the case that you think everything in the newspaper is lie,
until proven to be true.
Also, in your ORIGINAL comment you didn’t say: “there was no engineering input from Toyota into the design of Porsche’s cars”.
What you actually said was: “Please don’t make it sound like Porsche needs Toyota’s engineering expertise.”
Firstly, Porsche did need “Toyota’s engineering expertise” in modernising their production processes. If you meant engineering input into the design of Porsche’s cars, then you should have been clearer in your message and actually said “engineering input into the design of Porsche’s cars” in your ORIGINAL comment. You can’t blame us for your own inability to convey your point. Also, I told you, if you had issues with the quote from the article – for example, regarding the use of the word ‘entire’ when they describe the extent of modernisation – you ought to take it up with the New York Times, as I am not responsible for their writers’ choice of words. Please don’t come running and complaining to me. I’m sure the people at the New York Times have email addresses which you can write to.
Perhaps next time you should learn from your mistakes and spell it out in your FIRST comment, because you aren’t nearly as clever enough to be succinct in your comment and also convey the full meaning that you’d like to, all at the same time.
@4d1268de0d0d1ff605af7d8f04235c56:disqus ”Know all idiot”? What an oxymoron right there. Also, it’s not a crime to know stuff. I don’t know who told you it was, but they were wrong. You should try it some time.
Well, they sure as hell are looking more and more like the MR2′s headlights now.
Looks fantastic! Regrettably underpowered to protect the 911 ….. what a waste!
At $116K for the base, it should have min. 230kw & 400nm. Just make sure you throttle the dealer to throw in PDK at no extra charge ….. they will in this economy – trust me.
I’d be happy just to be able to throttle the dealer at no extra charge.
Don’t forget this car has a kerb weight of only 1300kg and Porsche factory performance figures are always conservative.
You are right the base is underpowered and overpriced.
I recall a shoot out on fifth gear that put this against the 135i coupe which is la lot cheaper and it flogged the Cayman.
“Tich tich fancy a BMW beating a Porsche”
lets not forget the exchange rate. EUR is 40% cheaper vs AUD over the past 3 years, but these prices keep going up ? its profit straight into Porsche
Smexy. nice interior too.
The Cayman S will practically make the 911 Carrera useless. It will have similar performance but for only around 2/3 the price. It’s also deemed to be better balanced given that the engine is in a better position.
Please Porsche make me a Cayman 4 (with a 3.8 NA engine, 6 speed manual tran, awd) all for 65,000$ PLEASE !!!!!!!!!