The most unconfortable seating ever

The most unconfortable seating ever

Had a reunion yesterday downtown so I took the subway.
I saw a collegue of mine I haven't seen in a long time so we decided to go for a beer after and he insisted we take his Porsche Targa.
We were 3 guys. The car owner is 6'0, and we were 2 collegues, 6'1'' and I am 5'10'' so I was the lucky one to sit in the rear seat of the Porsche Targa.
Let me tell you this is the most uncomfortable $140 000 ride ever.
I had to hold my neck in a crooked position during the whole ride with my head bumping at every pothole and had to spread my legs to try to squeeze my knees around the front passenger seat.

Porsche Targa
420 hp at 6,500 1/min
Acceleration from 0 - 100 km/h
4.2 s (4.0 s with Sport Chrono)
Top Track Speed
303 km/h
Fuel Consumption City in l/100 km
Highway in l/100 km
MSRP $ 145,560

for the same price you can get a Model 100D with 5-adults seater and more cargo than a minivan

Model S 100D
539km range
416 hp instant torque
Acceleration from 0 - 100 km/h
4.4 s
Top Track Speed
250 km/h
Fuel Consumption City in l/100 km
Highway in l/100 km
MSRP $ 133,600

Would you ever buy a Porsche?

Red Sage ca us | May 14, 2017

Hmmm... If something the size, shape, weight of a Porsche Cayman were available for about the same current price as a long range fully electric vehicle with Supercharger access...? I might consider buying that car. Otherwise? No.

carlk | May 14, 2017

No. Like I said in the other thread the Tesla will kill the Porsche off line and accelerates better any moment you punch the pedal too. That's why I finally got rid of my Cayman S when I found out there in no longer the joy of driving it.

carlk | May 14, 2017

Red Sage From Porsche? I don't think that will happen even if it could make a car like that. It is still counting on people buying 911 and give them that great margin they want to enjoy forever. Sadly probably not from Tesla either. Roadster II will have best super cars but not just 911/Cayman in the bulls eye. It probably will be costing $150K and up if I have to guess.

FactDoc | May 14, 2017

Porsche is living on the legacy it made with the 911. If they don't evolve, they will disappear.

Red Sage ca us | May 14, 2017

carlk: I figure what the OP puts forth is a hypothetical question, rather than a rhetorical question. So my answer is phrased hypothetically. If Tesla did not exist, I would probably consider buying the BMW M235i or Alfa Romeo 4C. In the real world, I will never have to consider either those, or a Porsche Cayman. Because in an ICE only world, I'd probably hold out for the best Corvette I could afford. ;-)

Sparky | May 14, 2017

The back seats in a Porsche 911 are for the racing helmets, not for humans.

tstolz | May 14, 2017

The 100 D really does closer to 4.2 or less. I've clocked my 85D at under 4 on a charged & warm battery using 'power tools' and it seems to get 4.2 pretty consistently.

giskard | May 15, 2017

You have to remember, too, that a Porsche has never been about straight-line performance. Their biggest selling point is their handling. I would be very pleasantly surprised if any Tesla could keep up with pretty much any Porsche around a corner or, more importantly, be just as fun in that situation. If I had the money I'd get a used Cayman in addition to my Model 3 for no other reason than to be able to hang the tail out now and then or even take it to the track occasionally.

Ehninger1212 | May 15, 2017

Giskard, used caymans are cheaper than the most basic model 3 for $35000. In fact out of the many cars on my list of consideration the cayman was in there (used as well). My wife loves porsche, she's own a cayenne. While your correct porsche may out do the model 3 on the track, I think the model 3 will surprise us in that respect. Besides Teslas being known to be heavy it has many other aspects going for it. Extremely Low center of gravity, instant throttle response, optimal weight distribution. Other than the sound of the ICE people love so much, im betting the model 3 will be more fun to drive. Which is why I am going to see my reservation through.

jordanrichard | May 15, 2017

The rear seats on 911's, since the beginning, were really meant for small kids. That is not a joke, that is what "Butzzi" (Porsche fans will know who that is), designed the rear seat for. Though the 356 was a success for Porsche, it was simply a 2 seater and many of their customers wanted a pair of rear seats to fit their kids. The original concept had a longer roof that quickly dropped down. That was abandoned for the what is now classic roof line of a 911.

Garyeop | May 15, 2017

Speaking of sound, I am honestly investigating a thunder clap sound creation when more than x acceleration force is created. I just have to be sure the roof window won't shatter when creating the sound. More when research is completed.

Bill Korea | May 15, 2017

Seriously? If you regularly need a vehicle with full rear seating, that's what you should buy, preferably an electric version. If you rarely, or never have rear seat passengers, maybe ask why you want a vehicle with full rear seating? It's a waste if you don't use it. We still seem to think that making everything larger is the solution, when it is efficiency that matters.

For track use, BEVs still have big disadvantages in weight and thermal management. For now, they are great at off-the-line acceleration and low duty cycle loading.

carlgo2 | May 15, 2017

I like air cooled Porsches, motor in the back. Totally impractical, evil handling really in the old models, costly to maintain. Actually about the exact opposite of a Tesla in form and function and ownership.

JAD | May 15, 2017

The real reason they originally where there is a loophole in the racing rules that allowed the 911 to race as a sedan because it was a four seater. It dominated the sedan class. They kept them as the insurance rates are also lower for 4 seat cars. Of course the fast 911's like the GT3 don't have rear seats.

Captain_Zap | May 15, 2017

Another reason they have the small seats in the back is because many insurance companies would not cover 2 seat sports cars.

Red Sage ca us | May 15, 2017

Thermal management disadvantage? I'm not aware of any Porsche vehicles that have an optimal internal operating temperature between 35 and 120 degrees Fahrenheit on a track, or anywhere else while running.

hobowankenobi | May 15, 2017

Fun Fact:

My 1973-1/2 911 had a thin piece of ply wood with about 1/2" of foam over it, covered in leather for rear seat bottoms. That's it. Probably weighed 1 pound at most.

Bill Korea | May 16, 2017

Red - overheating is challenge for all vehicles operating at sustained, high loads. Tesla performance is good, but it looks even better when you play to its strengths - off-the-line acceleration and everyday efficiency. Tested under different conditions, like too many hot laps on a racetrack, or sustained high speeds, the battery management system will protect the batteries and understandably cut power. There are similar safeguards built into ICE vehicles too, but the current, properly designed ones can hold out much longer, even if the rear seats are small. Lots of compromises are required to keep Lion batteries happy, even though the battery management system is not too intrusive under everyday conditions. I've been convinced by BEV technology for many years now, but I've been pessimistic about consumer automotive knowledge and judgement for much longer.

Sparky | May 16, 2017

911's fascinate me as an incredible engineering, racing, and marketing success despite all its lovable character flaws. Even the 911 model designation is actually incorrect for every one of them!

Red Sage ca us | May 16, 2017

The point is that protection of a Tesla drivetrain is at around 130 degrees Fahrenheit of internal operation. An ICE won't even turn over below 200 degrees Fahrenheit, and most aren't considered 'overheated' until temperatures go beyond 500 degrees Fahrenheit internally. I protest the notion that one should celebrate the wasteful energy practices of ICE as a 'good' thing. With optimal temperatures between 35 degrees and 95 degrees Fahrenheit, that is only a 60 degree range of operation. An ICE has five times as much leeway to work with from 200 to 500 degrees Fahrenheit -- a 300 degree range of operation before anything is thought to perhaps 'go wrong'. If an ICE only had a 60 degree range of operation, it would suck even more. If an electric vehicle had a 300 degree range of operation, it would be that much more superior to ICE. Fact of the matter is, it wouldn't even take that much. Once batteries, and motors, and power electronics can all operate sufficiently up to the minimum of an ICE at 200 degrees Fahrenheit, no ICE powered vehicle will stand a chance. And this will happen, one way or the other, either by raising the maximum allowable temperature, or lowering the minimum capable temperature while maintaining longevity, reliability, and durability.

brando | May 16, 2017

I won't think any radiator could stay together much over 250 F. Only question would be which blows first.

pressure cap, hoses, radiator core

Red - what gets to 500 on an ICE? the exhaust header perhaps?

johnse | May 16, 2017

Common exhaust gas temperatures range between 900 to 1500 degrees Fahrenheit. It's a commonly used measurement of the air fuel mixture on airplanes an is also useful with turbos.

Red Sage ca us | May 20, 2017

brando: The range up to 500 degrees operational temperature is primarily for air-cooled engines, but those still qualify as 'ICE', just the same. Preferred temperatures for liquid cooled engines will still be lower, but certainly not in a 30 degree range. But yeah, there is a reason for the warning labels that read 'DO NOT TOUCH -- HOT!' around certain components in engine compartments and exhaust systems. I believe it was SamO that noted that ICE are heat generators that give off waste motion.

EaglesPDX | May 20, 2017

Chuckle...Porche Targa backseats are for 3rd wheels who can't take a hint.

As for the Tesla killing Porche sales, consider actual Porche sales over last 7 years of Tesla's increase in sales with sales increase 104%.

2010 U.S. 25,320
2011 U.S. 29,023
2012 U.S. 35,043
2013 U.S. 42,323
2014 U.S. 47,007
2015 U.S. 51,756
2016 * U.S. 54,280

We often forget that a lot of people just don't want EV's. And in the luxury status market, the brand names of BMW, Mercedes, Porsche are large what the people are buying. When impressing the neighbors, while some might be impressed by the social status of getting an EV, they will be more impressed the wealth and brand status of Porsche.

brando | May 30, 2017

Martian Observation:

air pump to oxidize hydrocarbons creates heat and some [wasted] motion

Question: Why do they want to change both atmosphere and carbon cycle?

ReD eXiLe ms us | May 30, 2017

Yeah. Logically speaking ICE is doomed. They might have a chance, for a while, if they could actually manage to tip the scales by being even as much as 51% to 52% energy efficient. That might allow them to last the projected 100-to-200 years that gearhead ANALysts have predicted for over 50 years. The problem is, that isn't likely to happen within the next ten-to-fifteen years, as it took over 25 years before the Toyota Prius ECO managed to topple the Honda CR-X HF in fuel economy. No way that a high performance ICE in a Corvette, Camaro, Mustang, or Challenger will yield even 75 MPG within the next decade. So choosing those vehicles will be both an exercise in futility and a statement of conspicuous consumption until or unless their drivetrains are replaced with a fully electric drive -- because they will all be seeing Tesla taillights at the track, on the highway, on the freeway, and on surface streets otherwise. If they had been unimpressed by what they called 'Rice Burners' for the past thirty years, they will certainly learn the error of that way of thinking -- denying progress in automotive technology... SOON.