Guibo

Surprising in what sense? The $25k rental car interior? The exterior that looks like it is based on a $25k rental car? The dearth of available options? The relative lack of luxury amenities? The fact that, unlike the 991 keeping pace with the C7 thru 130 mph, the Evo is only really quick compared to these cars off the line? The comparatively muted driving experience?

Dave68

The performance. Remember, this car was selected as the best handling car in the US for under $40K, a few years ago. Today, that figure would be closer to $50k. The 2WD 911 doesn't stand a chance in inclement weather, such as that experienced in many states. In fact, it can be downright dangerous. Would you want your kids in the back while spinning around like a top on a snow-covered road?

Dave68

How do you know they are NOT driving a parade. Assumption goes both ways.....

And according to you, the 911 regularly outsells Corvette in the US, so if there is enough data for Corvette reliability, there must be enough for the 911's - hence their recommendation that those model years be avoided like the plague.

Also, I've dealt with car seats and kids for many years. I know from experience that having a rear door makes things much easier. Anyone who tells you differently has not used both. Take a guess as to whether a 911 is as safe for kids as is many sedans. Ask experts in this field. I think they'll agree with me.

Yes, I know the Callaway C7 does not have a back seat. It is legal to place a kid in the front seat with inactivated airbag; it's just not recommended.

E in Phila

No it doesn't. YOU made the criticism, so the assumption belongs to you.

Speaking of assumptions, got any evidence to back up this blather? Tell us what the “experts” have to say on the matter exactly! A door is certainly more apt to crush inward than a framed cocoon of steel. What evidence can you offer that an EVO (for example) is safer for rear seat passengers than a 911? We’ll wait till you get back to us on that (in Nevuary).



You have a pattern of childishly lashing out against German cars in general and Porshes in particular. It's a typical fanboy mentality of emotional attachment to certain cars (Mazda for example) that causes you to attack anything that doesn't fit within your narrowly defined zone.

It comes across very dopey. How old are you?

Guibo

That is only one test result. In Motor Trend's '08 Best Handling test, the Evo finished 6th, behind the M3, R8, and 911 Turbo.

"Inclement weather"...and "dangerous." Two words not found about the 2WD 911s in this test (though they did say the Grand Sport felt dangerous):
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._s_comparison/

If there is ever a great example of spec sheet stats not telling the whole story, that is it.

Here's Walter Rohrl doing pretty damn good against an AWD Audi R8 GT here (and the GT2 RS is on Cup tires):

You are quite sure an Evo or Corvette could do this?:

And unlike the Corvette, you can actually get a Porsche in AWD. Here's a Sport Auto test between RWD and AWD 911s. The C4S is faster than the C2S, but the RWD car can do just fine. Both cars on the same tires:

Think a Corvette would perform like that in the snow? The reality is that with today's electronics (and lengthening the 911's wheelbase), "spinning like a top" is generally confined to blatant acts of idiocy, which one generally does not engage in with children in the car, weather it's dry, raining or snowing. Point mooted yet again. (And if you read the Motor Trend editors comments about trying to slide the 911 and the C7, you'd realize that the C7 was the one that spun out more than the Porsche.)

Guibo

Call it an educated guess, backed up with plenty of evidence:

• First of all, neither feet of either occupant is anywhere close to the pedals. Highly unlikely that a woman would drive with a child passenger and not at least cover the brake with bystanders so close. The woman's hands are nowhere even close to the steering wheel or paddles, which would be necessary to grab neutral in the event of any incident.
• Secondly, neither occupant looks belted in. The nearside receptacle has no belt latched in it. That would be prosecutable offense of child endangerment on the part of the "mother" (or, as it turns out, an easily litigious case of recklessness against the employee).
• Thirdly, the adult isn't even looking where she is going; grossly negligent with an unbelted child and with bystanders so close.
• Fourthly, look at the perspective of the camera. It's low down (perhaps to get a child's eye view of things), not high up as would be the case were the picture being taken from a normally seated adult. Which we know is not the case because the passenger seat is empty. This suggests the picture was taken from outside of the car. Meaning the car could not have been rolling at "5 mph on parade." (To get that view, with the child, adult, and much of the interior included in the shot, would require a wide-angle, nearly fish-eye view if taken from the passenger seat. The photo is not fish-eye at all.) Nor is it likely to be rolling on parade with the driver's side door open, which it clearly is in that picture.

Fifthly, we can take a look at the source information for that photograph: "six_year_old_neo_lee_from_alderley_edge _clearly_delighted_by_the_ferrari_458_it alia_with_stratstonea_s_elizabeth_ambros e"

Which is exactly the caption for that photo on this webpage:
http://www.cheshirelife.co.uk/out-ab...?id=2&storyId=

Check the plate: UK Ferrari dealer Stratstone's 458 at the Wilmslow Motor Show:


Kids were climbing in and out of that car, posing for pictures, Dave. It wasn't moving! Another erroneous assumption on your part. If you can back up your claim, please do so.

I never said the 911 regularly outsells Corvette in the US. Stop lying. I even stated that the Corvette outsells the 911 in the US and provided two prime reasons:
1) It's much, much cheaper
2) It's made in America and thus has a patriotic advantage

Are we debating that a 4-door is more convenient for kids than a 2-door? Or are we debating that the 911 does some things that a Corvette simply can't do? I'm pretty sure it's the latter.

And it is likely illegal and unsafe to put any kid in the back of the Callaway. The Callaway has neither the physical space nor the safety equipment of top and bottom child seat tethers, which the 911 has both of.
If you knew the Callaway cannot accomplish this, then why did you even bring it up?

NytmereZ

Holy crap!!!! , this has a lot of pages, which I won't bother to read..... reason..... I see Dave is at it again

He knows everything about nothing

Stewart Allison

I'll tell you something he really likes Mazda's and Lexus's.

MVR 155

Dave.... you can clearly see that the door of the Ferrari is open (the one where the mom has the kid on her lap). Nobody is driving anywhere in that picture. And to say that kids do not belong in sports cars is an absolutely ridiculous statement. Will I agree that sports cars are not the most kid friendly in terms of "functional utility".... Yes but that does not mean that they do not belong in them. You honestly are by far the most "closed minded" person I have ever encountered on a forum.

MVR 155

Ummmm........ YOU THINK?????? LOL!!!!!!!!

Dave68

I had to laugh at the pics that Guibo posted; NONE showed cars in motion. THEY WERE ALL PARKED. I can put a kid in the back of my Corvette, complete with car seats and straps. It means nothing. And no one has yet provided any challenge to my statement that kids are generally safer in sedans/crossovers than they are in sports cars when it comes to crashes.

The irony is that sports cars are safer for high-speed evasive maneuvers but let's face it, no sane person will strap kids in a sportscar and drive that way. Being a parent is about sacrifice, meaning that you do things that aren't necessarily what YOU want. It's easy to say "Throw the kids in the back; I'm not going to drive the CTS-V when I have a 911."
That is ludicrous!

E in Phila

What differences does it make that the pictures were of parked cars? I have a hard time grasping how your mind works. Huge gaps in logic.

YOU are the one making safety claims, so YOU need to provide the evidence. Do you really think a kid is safer in an EVO than in a 911, for example? WHY would that be?

And why would you throw crossovers into the mix. Now we are comparing 911's to SUVs? Most people who have 911's ALSO have an SUV or larger family vehicle. It's not an either or proposition.

You are blinded by your emotional feelings on this subject, and it is causing you to argue spastically.

E in Phila

This may be one of the dumbest things I have ever read on this forum.

Guibo

But they are not all parked all the time. What you're missing here is that once the cars roll, kids can be safely (and legally) be put in the back of the 911. Not a Corvette. It's also safe and legal to do in other cars, such as this Rolls Royce, which is in fact moving in this shot, taken during the Wilmslow parade:


Secondly, your entire argument against that photograph ("just because you can do something doesn't mean you should") is premised on the theory that the car was moving. It was not. Your premise is faulty, and that implodes your entire argument against what is going on in that picture. Which, as it turns out, is exactly as I've described it: A kid being photographed in a parked supercar, and perhaps a formative moment in one's developing love of cars. God forbid you'd have found this photo instead :
http://i3.macclesfield-express.co.uk...24-5911400.jpg

Nobody here said they are against taking photographs of kids in the back of a parked Corvette, Dave. (Though why you would ever want to is beyond me.) Looks like the laugh is on you? The difference, naturally, is what happens to those kids when the car gets going...

Sane people drive with kids in sportscars quite often. You've never been on a Corvette cruise, or seen kids being driven in exotics (and Corvettes) for charity events? So long as the driver is mindful, it's not necessarily anymore dangerous than driving in any other car.
And what if your wife takes the CTS-V to work for an early meeting, but you're left with taking the kids to school? There's an easy solution, if you have the 911. Not so easy if your other car is a Corvette. Just because an SUV could serve that purpose better does not prohibit us from acknowledging which car (911 or Corvette) fulfills the same purpose better. (And yes, you're fighting tooth and nail against acknowledging this.)
Considering your hypocrisy on the matter of buying the Lexus for no other reason than the badge (and slamming others for doing likewise with other marques), you're not really in a great position to be evaluating the "sanity" of others. Nobody here is promoting driving sports cars at anywhere near 10/10ths with kids in the car, if that's what you're getting at.

Guibo

It may be dumb, but I'd still like to see it.


That's a lot of downforce...

E in Phila

NytmereZ

And he LOVES VIPERS!!!!!


Uh ohh now I did it

VGLNTE1

I own both. The porsche suspension is stock besides springs. The vette is about as good as that platform could possibly be. Custom built coil overs, bushings, sways, aero, everything. The vette is my favorite and my baby, but the porsche is built better, it's more smooth and waaaay more confident at high speeds. I once was told you can tell the quality of a car the faster you go. It's true. The vette would beat its *** around the track, but for an all around perfect car, the 911 is the winner. And I have the turbo, not even a gt3

LTC Z06

There are a whole lot of Germans, and Americans that have lived in Germany, that drive 911s and VWs in the winter. Snow tires and 60% of the weight back there and you are good to go.

PeterK

My 5 year old twins love riding in the back.