Talk:Porsche 928

RichL 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
90 images at 640x480 each is going to make this entry awfully hard to use (rough calculation based on the first image there: 4MB total). A thumbnailed side shot of one year and external links to a suitable enthusiast site ought to do it, I think. &mdash; RichL 00:58, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---going with 400x300 images, this will take a while, so, please leave the placeholders. There is no website that fully details the subtle changes to the 928, and I'd like to make this a very special entry. Thanks!


 * If I may make a suggestion, can we break this article apart if you want to work on it like this? For example, if you plan on outlining the differences from year to year, can we have articles like 1982 Porsche 928 or what have you.  After all, Wikipedia is not just a collection of images.  If they were incorporated into separate articles, I would consider that to be okay.


 * I'm also concerned about the copyright of this image. Is this something you created or something you found elsewhere?  R ADICAL B ENDER  &#9733;  05:54, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

-- Well, the whole point of this was to be able to have an excellent reference all on one page, since it doesn't exist elsewhere. People new to 928s often get confused over the changes in the model years. I would like to make this a very thorough article, but I don't want to overstep any limits. Essentially I wanted to have the perfect place to send people who wanted to know about this wonderful car, which will, one day, be highly collectible.

Perhaps we can set the images up in a table? I don't want it to be a mess, either... I want it to be an excellent resource.

I am planning on adding text to each model year to describe the changes, so, it won't be just a big page of images.

If this is just way too much, I'll make my own web site... I just figured that I'd share it with the Wiki community.

I have a lot more to add but I'm getting ZZZZzzzzzzy!

The image that you asked about was created by me.

I am into detailed pages, if you check out the Gothic rock page, & most of it's links, you'll see what I mean, as I also authored this entry.

L8R


 * Detail can be fine, it just has to be organized so that it doesn't bother the readers. I agree that tables would help, as would using the thumbnail feature, and perhaps splitting the images into several pages. By the way, you can sign messages on talk pages by typing 3 or 4 tildes or ~ . Dori | Talk 06:57, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)


 * "All on one page" might not be as helpful as you think -- if people need to compare two years, two browser windows will probably be more useful to them than scrolling up and down and up and down. I could see there being a need for per-year pages for other car models ("1998 Saab 900" is a completely different car than any other Saab 900, thanks to the GM buyout, for instance, and people interested in the Saab 900 probably aren't looking for the '98), so I doubt this situation will be unique. mendel 14:26, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC) (fka RichL)

Can someone post some example code for putting 400x300 pictures into a 2x6 Table?

Thanks


 * Have a look at Photographs of the Belize flora (1) for an idea. By the way, nowiki is only used when you don't want any formatting. When you want to put in your signature, just use the tildes by themselves. Dori | Talk 20:38, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)

UNIXCOFFEE928 Hi! Yeah, I realized that... Still in the process of getting the page together, please don't modify anything. I'll try out the Belize table code tonight. This page will bring a whole lot of people to Wikipedia!

L8R

UNIXCOFFEE928 ok, it's working out... is there a way to specify that the thumbnails should be sized equally?


 * As far as I know, the thumbnails are sized only according to width. So you would have to either upload images of the same size, and make the thumbnails the same size, or upload images with the same proportions and adjust the thumbnail size accordingly. Dori | Talk 20:10, Mar 30, 2004 (UTC)

Images
None of the images in this article have any copyright info on them and unfortunately, the user who uploaded them, UNIXCOFFEE928, is no longer active. However, they don't appear to be blatant copyright violations. Should they be removed from the article and if so, should they be listed on Possibly unfree images? SamH 19:02, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Images & the Current Edit
UNIXCOFFEE928 The images are not copywritten, as previously discussed, and should be replaced to aid enthusiasts, who would like to get involved with the 928, but are unfamiliar with the model changes. That is why it was there. If more people re-vitalized 928s, and loved them, the model will have the potential to be re-released.

I am extremely unimpressed with the changes that you have made to this page. The next time you decide to be a specialist, why not leave the hard work of others intact, and add to it, instead of throwing away many hours of work. I put a lot of time into making an entry for the 928, and some 911-centric editor decides to have a field day re-writing history to justify his current porsche purchase!!! This entry is now very heavilly skewed, and will be revised.


 * Hi UNIXCOFFEE. The images were deleted because they didn't have any source or copyright information on their image description pages, and I couldn't find any info elsewhere. I agree it's a shame that this page no longer has any images. If those photos are available freely (i.e. in the public domain or under a free licence such as the GFDL), then maybe you could re-upload them, but this time including the proper info.


 * Regarding the rest of the article, I'm sorry if you feel I have damaged your work, but I have only tried to improve it. Could you be more specific about what parts of this article you think are skewed?  I hope we can work together on this. SamH|Talk 17:59, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Model comparisons
All the info in this article can basically be found on google. Please if someone is into this car, spice up the article a little and make the reading interesting with info not readily found on elsewhere the web.

I sense a tendency on wikipedia.org in general to simplify detailed articles. Don't! The vast majority of readers here have come here to find as much information as possible. They have NOT come here through the "Random article" link to the left.

So if someone is interested in spending the time to write about for example the differences between the various models I'd very much welcome it! dsandlund 10:23, October 15 2005 (CET)

Articles
This page is in desperate need of some copyediting. Many of the sentences are missing useful things like articles. For example: To achieve performance expected from Porsche and at same time comply with strictening emission requirements it was deemed engine needed to have fairly large displacement. -- some as, ans and thes would make this readable. Also, I don't think that strictening is a real word. Pburka 23:01, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

"It was designed to replace the Porsche 911"
Does anyone have support for this claim? I think this is just legend. Sure it says that it was to replace the 911 all over the web, but if you google on it you'll find the EXACT SAME SENTENCE copy-pasted all over the place. Doesn't that look a bit weird?

I say that idea has been planted: The 928 was never priced even close to the 911. It was a matter of market segmenting, NOT replacement. The 928 was never intended to compete with the 911, instead it was intended to act as a sales booster for the 911 (and at the same time a cash cow for the very rich minority group of customers). It makes much more sense. Read up on Kotler and voice your opinion on this here please.

dsandlund 03:22, December 19 2005 (CET)


 * According to [this] thorough 18 page article from the Swedish motoring magazine Teknikens Värld from 1981 describing the full Porsche range at the time, it was the 924 that was designed to replace the 911 and not the 928. Some of the evidence for this, besides talking to Porsche I assume, include the fact that the 911 was being phased out and replaced by the 924 as a racing research car (as stated in the article). Demand for the 911 was thought to decrease, at which point the 924 would take its place as Porsche's lower priced car (below the 928). For customers, the 924 and 911 were even priced equally at one point prior to 1981. The 928 was the luxury car and didn't compete with the other two in any way.


 * The idea that the 928 was meant to replace the 911 is a plain lie.


 * I'm making appropriate changes to this article.
 * dsandlund 12:23, January 7 2006 (CET)


 * I have no idea how to cut that part out, but there was no replacement for the 928. 911 continued as usual, Boxster could have arguably been to replace the 924/944/968 series, but theres no way the 928 was replaced.


 * Your line of thought seems far-fetched at the very least imo. No replacament for the 928 you say, how about the Panamera? And so what if it wasn't replaced for that matter? And not the least, the 928 is a very different car from the 911. Have you actually driven a 928 and a contemporary 911 for comparison like I have? I doubt you have. Plus I have presented hard proof that you're wrong. I have also provided hard proof that the 924 was initially meant to replace the 911, another sentence that you prematurely removed.


 * You, apparently, don't seem to think that proof is necessary to prove your point. You also take the liberty of editing the article at your own discretion without prior discussion of this somewhat controversial (it seems) topic. I voiced this issue close to three weeks prior to editing the article. If you disagree with my points regarding the 928, present your proof and discuss it first. Until you have presented hard proof that I (and my sources) are wrong, please refrain from vandalising the article.
 * dsandlund 07:19, February 8 2006 (CET)

The assertion that the less capable 924 was meant as a 911 replacment is unfounded and silly. Most every source indicates that Fuhrmann intended the 928 to be the 911's replacement, including THREE Porsche specific books I have here including "Porsche: The Legend" by Jonathon Wood. I'm fixing the article, please don't revert to this nonsense.


 * You again fail to discuss before vandalising. You also don't bother to state your handle.


 * For the record, yes the 924 was intended to replace the 911 as Porsche's sportier offering--I have provided hard proof of this, above'--if you'd bothered reading it. The 928 was intended to replace the 911 as the top model, not as the sports car. This is aboslutely ridiculous.


 * I have no time for trolls vandalizing the wiki, someone else will have to deal with this bs together with the proper wiki authority.


 * dsandlund 14:15, March 19 2006 (CET)


 * Note that this debacle is now at the near bottom of the article so as not to overshadow information on the car itself. I'm quite sure that most people come here looking for information on the car and not the controversy. I have also attempted to make the statements more balanced so as to avoid POV, in the process making the arguments more concise (again, most people probably don't care about this).


 * dsandlund 15:24, March 19 2006 (CET)

First of all, I'm sick and tired of seeing people here throw around the word "Vandalize" like it doesn't have any real meaning. The word Vandalize means "To destroy or deface (public or private property) willfully or maliciously" according to Dictionary.com, a similar definition appears in Webster's dictionary. My changes to the page were made to coincide with FACT, and are therefore not vandalizations. Please refrain from making assinine inflamtory comments about contributors. Secondly, you're "hard proof" is in the form of an old Swedish magazine article; I have three books here (one of which I have already cited as a scource) which disagree with the assertion that the 924 was in ANY WAY intended to take over for the 911, they are: Porsche: The Essence Of Performance, Porsche: The Legend and Porsche Legends, all of which are still available and are fairly recent. In the case of the first book, PCA and the Porsche Factory PR people provided considerable amounts of information and consultation, so any assertion that your little magazine article carries more weight than these publications is simply silly. The 924 was never intended as anything more than an entry level model to replace the 914. The 912 and 914 both outsold the 911 during their production runs and were both cheaper to produce and less expensive - if Porsche had intended on axing the 911 for anything other than the 928, it would have been axed in favor of the 912 or 914, well before the 924 even went into production. Also, keep in mind that the 924 didn't even offically become the 914s replacement until Audi decided to drop it in favor of the Quattro Coupe, Porsche entered development on the 924 not even knowing that it would end up wearing a Porsche badge! In regards to dsandlund's moving and rewording of my opening comments, it looks fine this way - good work, I think it's actually better this way. --64.36.17.218 01:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The fact of the matter is that I presented proof before you did. To me it seems like you were POVing the article. On the Wiki, which is supposed to be an independent and scientific source of information, that's defacing. Which is a word for vandalism as we agree.


 * Now as you can see from the headline to this discussion ("It was designed to replace the Porsche 911") what I'm really on about here is the 928 vs 911. Not the 924. Apparently we have sources which disagree. One source is a journalistic article, the other is PR dictated by the company whose products we're talking about. We can discuss which source is more likely to be accurate at lenght, bit I digress. The right place for this, if any, is in the 924 article, not here in the 928 article.


 * Either we decide to write that some sources say this and others say that (it's called balanced, and it's kind of appropriate to strive for it in scientific articles), or we just don't mention it at all. I'd like to opt for the second option which I think I've already made clear by not trying to put mention of the 924 back in.


 * My beef is with the guy feverishly claiming that the 928 never was Porsche's top offering. Not with you.


 * dsandlund 19:21, April 6 2006 (CET)


 * Please scroll down to the topic "Position vis-a-vis the 911" for more on the 928 vs 911 (not 924).


 * dsandlund 19:33, April 6 2006 (CET)

merge from 942
I think the Porsche 942 article should be moved here. Only one instance of the 942 was made, and technical details on it are scarce. It's not even a protype, then -- so a full article on it is unlikely. -- Mikeblas 18:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I have to agree on this.
 * dsandlund 07:30, February 8 2006 (CET)


 * It has been over 2 months since this was proposed so I've performed it.
 * dsandlund 07:23, March 20 2006 (CET)

A New 928?
I read that Porsche is planning a new 928 for 2010. Does anyone have any pictures?

Yeah.... Do anybody have pictures? If so please post them!


 * As a grand tourer, the successor I think you are referring to would be the Porsche Panamera which may be made available as a 2-door (see the bottom of this article). There are pics of the 4-door car on google. The pics where it has Carrera GT-style rear lights are probably the more recent ones.
 * dsandlund 15:34, March 19 2006 (CET)

Road and Track magazine punlished a small priece on the possiblity of a reborn 928 riding on a shortened version of the Panamera's platform debuting sometime around 2010, but it was purely speculative, Porsche hasn't made any statements one way or the other.

I have edited the article to reflect that Porsche has made no confirmation in the three years after these rumors. Realistically this points to these rumors having been false, the article should be clear and not further these rumors until such time that there is some official announcement. Wikipedia is not for speculation and gossip, not to be rude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.95.202.43 (talk) 03:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Position vis-a-vis the 911
Since we now have a separate paragraph for this in the article and the discussion appears to have forked somewhat I'm starting a new topic here on the discussion page for clarification. This is about whether the 928 ever replaced the 911 as the company's flagship model. Please read the piece in the article carefully first, for proper background.

This parapgraph now contradicts itself. The problem is the sentence to the end.

The statement is extremely unprecise. Something seems to be assumed for a fact (something so obvious to the author apparently, that it doesn't even have to be spelled out). Some argument is then built upon that first (erraneous) assumption. Making such assumptions is erraneous in itself, no matter whether they turn out to be accurate or not. This sentence contradicts not only the parapgraph but the article itself.

I think this assumption of his (the author of the sentence added to the end of the first paragraph), is that the 928 was meant to replace the 911 as a sports car. That's absolutely wrong, period. This has been proven repeatedly, both through contemporary press (the Swedish magazine I've referred to previously in here), modern press (several citations inside the article referring to the 928 as nothing else than a GT), as well as simple empirical research (people who have actually driven contemporary 911s/928s conclude that they are vastly different).

For the record, Porsche was working very hard with the 924, entering big tournaments etc to have it receive the same racing pedigree in the eyes of the public, as the 911 had gained in the previous decades. The 924 was arguably the car that was meant to replace the 911 as a sports car. I'm not making this stuff up. Read the Swedish piece. Some may disagree on the 924 specifically but the fact of the matter is that the 924 and 911 were initially priced comparatively (I'm sure this can be verified in alot more places as well, aside form the Swedish journalistic article).

Really, if they were priced closely (the 911 and 924), what's the fuss? It's just simple fact!

I think this may be the key to this whole debacle: for fans of the 911, seeing the "lowly" 924 or 928s poised to compete directly with the "godly" 911 may be very painful.

Please, if you can't accept fact as proof, maybe this (the Wikipedia) is the wrong venue for you.

If you can't read Swedish then I'm sorry. I'd translate the key sentences if someone would just ask. But, somehow I doubt that me going through the trouble of doing that would make any difference with this kind of people.

I'm sure this same information can be found elsewhere as well anyway, in English.

Look these two terms up: Grand Tourer - Sports Car. It's apples vs oranges. And it's key to this whole "controversy" (it's not really a controversy, it's just fanatism imho).

Now let's look at how this parapgraph in the article ("Position vis-a-vis the 911") now contradicts itself. First, look at this sentence, which I think is extremely clear: "There's little question that the 911 was the company's top sports car offering,". Well that's basically all that whould be necessary to make this point clear, but it clarifies further: "while the 928 was the more luxurious, comfortable, heavier, larger and more expensive long-distance driving grand touring car offering.". Basically I'm calling the 928 a whale and the 911 an elephant. They have NO-THING in common. Clear enough I think.

Second, look at the sentence that this guy added to the end: "Nonetheless, it is well documented that Furhmann intended for the 928 to take over for the 911 after it's discontinuation". Yeah ok, the 911 was the company's most expensive offering prior to the 928. The 928 came in and took up that spot as the company's most expensive offering. We can all agree on this I think. It has basically already been mentioned in the introduction to the whole article so it's slightly redundant too.

But that's not all. The guy then goes on: "so the debate over whether or not it was as good a sports car as the 911 is somewhat moot." Hey wait! What?? What are we talking about here again? Well I'll answer that myself by quoting the first sentence in that paragraph: "There is some amount of debate pertaining to the 928's position as Porsche's flagship model." Flagship model, huh. Not sports car. That's what the whole paragraph is about: which car was considered the "flagship" model. It explains basically that one can't be declared.

But, this sentence at the end on the other hand, is suddenly saying that the 911 is the flagship model after all--because it's the better sports car. Has the author of that last added sentence even read and understood the paragraph before deciding to add his piece of wisdom to it? Well I thought the paragraph was extremely clear but I'll try to make it insanely clear then:

Are we suddenly suggesting here that the only thing Porsche makes are sports cars? Are we suddenly suggesting here that the only thing a car is good for, is as a sports car? Are we suddenly suggesting that the only thing that a car can be measured against, is how sporty it is? If one car is less sporty than the other, then does that make it inferior as a 'car?

A big commercial truck costs more than a Ferrari. Why are people paying so much for big trucks when they could be buying Ferraris instead? No, really? It doesn't make any sense now does it, the Ferrari is obviously the better vehicle right? What on earth could posibly possess anyone to buy such a big clumsy vehicle when they could've had a Ferrari instead?

Note: I'm being ironic.

How about the Cayenne Turbo, for example. It costs more than the Boxster. And it's got the bigger engine for sure. Is the Cayenne sportier than the Boxster? Not really! Does that make the Cayenne inferior? Well obviously not, the Boxster won't beat the Cayenne at being a SUV! That's kind of what the Cayenne does best.

Same thing with the 911 vs 928. Suggesting that the 928 was ever meant to compete with the 911 as a sports car, is just as ridiculous as suggesting that the Ferrari F430 is the better vehicle compared to a Volvo VN 780 heavy truck.

And that's exactly what this paragraph ("Position vis-a-vis the 911") is there for. To explain this and to make it very clear. It's its only purpose. And this guy didn't get it, but decided to go in and leave his graffiti sign anyway. That is, his POV graffiti sign.

I'm trying to keep the article balanced here (in the paragraph called "Position vis-a-vis the 911" in the article), by showing both sides, leaving judgement to the reader. Imposing your own views isn't balanced, that's POV.

dsandlund 19:29, April 6 2006 (CET)


 * The VAST majority of sources both on the internet and in print agree that the 928 was intended to take over the top-spot in Porsche's lineup from the 911. Although your sports car vs. touring car arguments are interesting, they bare no weight. A Swedish press article is meaningless - they aren't writing a history book and POV enters into the equation. The 924 was designed as Audi's top-spec sports car, it ended up with Porsche when Audi abandoned the program. That it was already production-ready and that Audi could handle the engine/gearbox production made it attractive to Porsche, who at the time needed something to supplant the 914 as their entry-level model. It may have been sportier than the 928 (although this is arguable as well), but it was an Audi model first and Porsche's *entry level* model afterward. The fact that the 924 could not even begin to approach the 911's performance is indicitive of this. The *reliable* sources, including PCA and the Porsche factory maintain that the 928 was meant to supplant the 911 - you're the one who is entering POV into the article by trying to make a case that the 928 appealed to different buyers than the 911 - are you claiming that the people at Porsche are lying?? Do you really think that some Swedish magazine knows better than the records-keepers at Porsche? Are you *really* going to try and maintain that a magazine article bears weight above and beyond both history books and the factory?

They saw the 928 as a vehicle which maintained 99% of the 911's performance while being easier and more comfortable to drive, and that this made it a more universally acceptable vehicle to all customers. Per your Cayenne Vs. Boxster/Truck Vs. F430 arguments, your point is moot. Porsche does not market the Cayenne aganist the Boxster, Volvo does not market their trucks or station wagons aganist the F430; Porsche marketed the 928 as BOTH a GT and a sports car and most certainly tried to make a case for it as being their best car. Furthormore, it was obviously Fuhrmann's intention - regardless of your GT Vs. Sports Car feelings - to have the 928 take over for the 911. Your opinion on how compareable the two models are is simply that - an *opinion*. It's your deluded POV that's taking over this article, not mine.

There *is* debate over if the 928 was really as good as the 911. but it's debate between individuals based on personal opinion. You CANNOT debate that the 928 was meant to be Porsche's top offering, nor do you have sufficent source material to make any claims that the 924 was meant to be the 911's replacement as a sport's car. Simply look at the 944 and 968 that the 924 spawned, will you claim that these were better than the 911 as well? --207.233.110.65 22:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

---

It seems that some have misunderstood my point completely. The current edit of the vis-a-vis section basically mirrors my views. It's just a rewording.

I'll be answering some questions here:

"the 928 was intended to take over the top-spot in Porsche's lineup from the 911" well that's exactly what I've been saying.

Now you bring the 924 up again; that doesn't belong on this section of the discussion page. I have already answered all of this, if you'd have a look further up please. This whole 924 thing is completely beside the point.

"trying to make a case that the 928 appealed to different buyers than the 911" I definitely think it's a matter of fact that such is the case. Have you driven the two yourself?

"are you claiming that the people at Porsche are lying??" If you'd read what I'm actually getting at instead of getting all worked up with non-issues, you'd see that I'm claiming no such thing. Porsche never claimed that the 928 was their sportiest offering. That's all I've ever had to say on this, period.

"magazine knows better than the records-keepers at Porsche" You are questioning the whole basis of the free journalistic press. I'm not taking the troll-bait, sorry.

"and most certainly tried to make a case for it as being their best car" Ofcourse they did. The problem is with people who misunderstood this for saying that Porsche ever claimed the 928 to be better than the 911 at everything. They didn't. That's my whole point.

"Furthormore, it was obviously Fuhrmann's intention (..) to have the 928 take over for the 911" Well ofcourse it was, again you have completely misunderstood my point. I think I have adressed this several times though so I'm not doing it again.

"Your opinion on how compareable the two models are" My OPINION is that the two models need no comparing, and that no one should go in and claim in the article that either model beat the other at this or that etc. Again you seem to have gotten all worked up on smoke, sorry.

"There *is* debate over if the 928 was really as good as the 911. but it's debate between individuals based on personal opinion" To clarify again, that is exactly the point I'm trying to make here. That, and the fact that writing anything close to a conclusion about which is better in the article, is clearly POV.

"You CANNOT debate that the 928 was meant to be Porsche's top offering" Is this adressed to me? I'm sorry but I've always been with you on this. I'm beginning to think you haven't bothered to read my stuff.

"claims that the 924 was meant to be the 911's replacement as a sport's car" zomg.

As I finished reading these answers I end up with a feeling that perhaps they were not adressed to me at all. If so, sorry for the mixup. Further discussion is welcome.

dsandlund 17:13, April 10 2006 (CET)


 * Ok this is all quite funny now that I examine the current edit more closely. It seems that suddenly people think I have a mix of (to me, contradictory,) views--views which I was originally trying to fight! I guess this is what happens when person 1 and 2 starts arguing, person 2 leaves and then person 3+4 joins without having seen the previous discussion betsween 1 and 2. While person 1 is trying to balance the views in the 1+2 discussion, 3+4 joins in and percieve person 1 to have person 2's views when in fact he's just trying to compromise. Either that or you're not talking to me at all, but someone else. Notice for example this statement by me a few days ago, further up: "My beef is with the guy feverishly claiming that the 928 never was Porsche's top offering."


 * If I have understood this all correctly and we've reached some kind of consensus here, I'll see if I can make further clarifications to the section later when I have the time. It's slightly hazy at some points as it stands imo.


 * dsandlund 17:31, April 10 2006 (CET)

Despite what anyone might think, the 928 was meant to be *not only* Porsche's top offering, burt also their best *sports car*. This is well documented, but also evident when we examine things such as Porsche's advertising of the 928. Although they did tout it's abiltites as a GT car, it's also plainly marketed as a sports car, and an equal to the 911 (which is largely true, yuo'd need to be a very skilled driver to squeeze the 911 for enough performance to outrun the 928 on a track). Simply examine the ad quoted here in the article - "It's about as fast as you can go without having to eat airline food". Is this not an implication of speed? It seems as though Porsche was making no bones as to their perception of the 928 - as both a GT and a sports car. Although I think it's nice that there is notation being made of the 928/911 debate, it should be made clear that within Porsche, this debate did not exist, it was manifest primarily by "Porsche-philes" with a favor for the 911 who were (and still are) laregly unable to admit that Porsche can produce anything better than the 911. This, BTW, is the same group that lamented the "true" 911 as being "dead" when to company switched to water-cooling in the 996 generation.


 * About whether the 928 was meant to be the company's top sports car, I won't get into it. There are some other things I will say though, which are significant.


 * The marketing slogan "It's about as fast as you can go without having to eat airline food" most certainly refers to the fact that the 928 was touted as the world's fastest production roadcar at the time. "As fast as you can go", for this reason, refers to doing it in a straight line, which indeed is quite the opposite of something you'd tout as the main feature of a sports car. A fast car is not the same as a sports car. A sports car is quick around corners. It doesn't have a monster engine, instead it's light and very agile. A GT on the other hand, is quick (and comfortable) across entire continents. It's often large and heavy, for high-speed stability, something which the sports car lacks. A small, agile (sports) car will be very difficult to drive at high speed. These make huge differences in design between the two. But perhaps this difference in meaning isn't as obvious in America as it is in Europe.


 * On Top Gear they often make jokes about american cars touted as "sporty" being "quick in a straight line", but "not around corners". One occasion on Top Gear that especially springs to mind (there are loads of these jokes, although I hear they have been censored from the airings on the discovery channel in the u.s.), was when (I think) it was Richard Hammond taking the new Mustang out for a spin. A "sports car", eh? Well not in Europe. He looked up a straight stretch of road on the map (several miles completely straight, very difficult to find in Europe). He was (sarcastically) very much worried about a certain bend on the map (a bend with a radius of a mile or so). He took it upon himself to risk his life in finding out if the car would cope with it.


 * When you write "it's also plainly marketed as a sports car", I'm not entirely sure that we are talking about the same thing. Fast is not the same as sporty. That's an important distinction, at least in Europe (and Germany).


 * "both a GT and a sports car" yes the car most certainly is a combination, an attempt to create the best of both worlds. This is stated in litterature everywhere. I don't think anyone will disagree on it. I love the 928 for it, as a realistic everyday car for the real-life speed freak. But this makes it a compromise.


 * How would anyone get the idea into their heads, that i compromise between a sports car and a GT could ever be better than a pure sports car? A compromise can be close, but never better! It's a basic law of physics. It seems though, just like you say, that some 911-fanatics (or whatever they are), like to think of the 928 was an attempt to create a pure sports car, that failed. It didn't, and it wasn't.


 * It doesn't take a very smart person to realize that this never was possible; and it was never actuelly implied either I'm quite sure. Ofcourse Porsche marketed the 928 as the best car in the world. And that's a subjective statement. They were probably right though. But, significantly, that sentence doesn't say anything about it being the best sports car in the world! That was cunningly left out. If anyone can find a quote explicitly proving otherwise, please post it here. I'd be really interested in hearing it. I'm not talking about sentences suggesting anything here. Suggesting is what marketing departments like to do -- it's their job. I'm talking about it actually being spelled out.


 * I have to agree on the rest of what you write. I have seen people crying when Jeremy Clarkson deliberately crashed a 911 on television. That kind of reaction is scary to see. Seriously, it's just a car!


 * Ofcourse the 928 is a sports car. A GT can be a sports car (have a peek in that article). It was Porsche's idea of what a modern sports car should be like. But, I just can't see how or when it was ever meant or implied to be a better sports car than the 911. There are just a bunch of people with glazed eyes claiming so. Someone has yet to prove me wrong on this.


 * dsandlund 13:41, April 23 2006 (CET)

No, no, no, the 928 is not a "sports" car. It is heavy, with a big engine, and an absolute pleasure to drive between 80 mpg and 140 mpg. While it handles much better than other so-called GT's, especially American versions from the same era (try 140 in a stock Corvette or Camaro--yipes!) there is absolutely no comparison to a true lightweight, small-engined sports car. Tear around a corner in a low-slung rice burner (Prelude SI, MR2, etc.), or a 911, and you will likely stay on track. Do the same in a 928 or other GT, while you might stay somewhere on the asphalt, your tires will be screeching like banshees and the slightest misstep will send you flying. Totally different philosophies, and that's why for the past three decades there have always been at least these two types of Porsche. July 29, 2006


 * You can argue all day long that ultimately the 911 was a more capable car sports car, but this is really only the truth in extreme circumstances. Thanks to it's more even weight distribution, higher power output and better overall balance the 928 can best more or less any pre-993 varaint of the 911 around a track *unless* the driver happens to be well versed in how to properly handle a 911. This becomes even more the case with the pre-993 911 Turbos, which had notorious turbo lag which made them both difficult and potentially dangerous to drive. In 9 cases out of 10, the 928 is going to be a faster car, and to many people, the 928's ability to perform at high speed without the need for the driver to have vehicle-specific driver's training makes it a superior sports car to the 911, which can only really be driven to ten-tenths by those who are properly trained for the vehicle. Yes, the 928 was a compromise, but it was a compromise that combined 98% of the 911's performance capability with 200% of it's comfort and versitility. Simply compare the 928 to the C4 generation Chevrolet Corvette, to which it had superior performance (the ZR1 not withstanding) - you'd still classify the Corvette as a sports car, yes? The C4 Vette is roughly the same physical size as a 928 (both are larger than the 911), both vehicles are rear-wheel-drive and powered by a front-mounted V8 engine producing over 300 horsepower and the 928's performance is in most cases superior to the Vette's. So if the Corvette is a sports car, the 928 most certainly is as well. You're definition of a sports car as being something small and nimble is much akin to Colin Chapman's defintion, a man whom is much respected and who's Lotus sports cars continue to garner praise for their competancy. But that deifiniton is a "pure" definition, and it's not neccesarily the one that everyone adheres to in qualifing a sports car. --207.233.110.65 21:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

As one (I'm not same person as anyone above, this is my first comment into discussion side) of several writers who have previously edited mentions of 928 and/or 924 replacing 911 this is what I have to offer into this somewhat silly discussion. Simple fact is that 928 was designed by Porsche to replace 911 as at the time Porsche deemed 911 too difficult to get by future US legal requirements. 911 was to be killed off around time of 928 introduction just like 356 was killed some time after 911 came into production. It didn't go like that eventually but that's different story. 928 being according to some opinions fat and lazy GT, not real sports car, has nothing to do with this. If you want to find out how factory saw all this back when EA425 (which eventually become 924) wasn't even thought of yet by VW please read Project 928 book by Julius Weitmann and Rico Steinemann. It was written with full factory support during 928 development and explains all about this. Illegal PDF copy of the book can be downloaded from here.

928 enthusiast and owner 141.192.27.120 13:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * 207.233.110.65 and 141.192.27.120 make important points. I agree with them and I always have. I have unfortunately wasted alot of time here this spring arguing with people who have completely misunderstood my stance on this and or/what the 928 is. Apparently you can't discuss finer points without first writing an essay about the whole background first. This shouldn't be necessary.


 * People, please read the whole discussion page (and relevant edits of the article from the history page!) first. Don't write answers to answers before reading about what sparked the original question(s). Just because I make examples in my replies that may seem way out there doesn't mean that I agree with them --- it's called rethoric. And consider that you may have missed my point.


 * What will follow is my experience (not a reply), so it's ok to reply to this before reading any of the above :) Sorry if I'm harsh in what will follow, but come on.


 * Someone who make statements such as "the 928 is no sports car" probably haven't ever seen a 928. Much less driven one. This ("the slightest misstep will send you flying") is a plain lie ofcourse, obvious to anyone who has ever driven one at the limit, especially in light of the comparison with the 911 at hand. The 928 is extremely forgiving, you can even read up on this to understand why; you don't really need to drive one to understand this.


 * The initial reaction from people, besides that from the sheer presence of the thing on the parking lot next to ordinary cars, only idling, is "omg, it sounds just like a chevy van v8.. but.. in a sports car!" (when seen in real life, it draws alot of attention due to its badly concealed somewhat odd and outrageous lines making it clear that this is definitely not an ordinary car) and then when I take them for a spin on empty roads, the pure shock and horror in their eyes as their world has been turned upside-down. Works EVERY time. They just didn't see it coming, which is something that surprises me every time.


 * For 99% of people, living in their eurobox and ordinary family saloons/SUVs type of world, nothing even comes close. And they don't realize it until they've experienced it. People always like to TALK alot. Talk is cheap. So true.


 * The 928 is one of the world's top sports cars of all time. Subjective statement, sure. But no one who has actually experienced one has ever disagreed with me. People who like to talk tends to have inferior cars themselves.


 * People, please be careful when you're just speculationg about things you have no experience with.


 * Yes I own a 928. But let me tell you, it's no accident that I do.
 * --Dsandlund 07:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Dsandlund, I'm not sure I get your point at all, not that it matter much as facts are facts anyway. Swedish magazine article means nothing compared to factorys opinion on this matter. My comment (141.192.27.120) was to point out that factory planned to simply replace 911 with 928. This a fact which can be verified from reliable sources. It doesn't matter at all if 924 was used in competition or not etc. You wrote back in 2005: ''Does anyone have support for this claim? I think this is just legend.'' Clear answer is in "Project 928" book and in my previous comment. 356->911->928 is how it was supposed to be all the time between 1971 and summer of 1977 during when 928 was designed. If all had gone according to Porsches plan, 911 production would have ended year or two after 928 introduction. Just like 356 production stopped when 911 came to production. Simple as that. All other discussion if 928 is sports car or not is totally irrelevant. If you want to continue this debate I suggest you to take it to http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/forumdisplay.php?f=69. You'll find just about all 928 related information available in the world in there. --Vilhuer 08:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Much of this discussion is completely silly, but I feel compelled to make a few key points.


 * Just because a silly claim is made by one anomalous article in the popular press, that doesn't make it a historical fact. Unfortnately I'm only familiar with English-language periodicals, but the truth is that automotive magazines routinely publish factually inaccurate information (although the UK publications aren't nearly as bad as the USA ones).  I think other posters have already made this clear, but there really shouldn't even be a discussion about whether the 924 was intended fill the same role as the 911, considering that it wasn't even developed as a Porsche model.


 * The team that developed the 928 arguably DID claim/intend the 928 to be better than the 911 at everything. An important point that seems largely overlooked in this discussion is that Porsche's executive leadership changed in the early '80s, and the corporate attitude towards the 928 (and towards discontinuing vs. developing the 911) changed along with it.  The way Porsche developed and marketed the 928 in the '80s and '90s has no bearing on the objectives of Porsche's engineers when they were designing it, or on the intentions of Porsche's executive management when it was introduced.


 * There is no clear delineation between what makes a sports car vs. what makes a GT car. To think that this discussion will establish mutually-exclusive definitions is silly.  It is anything BUT an apples-to-oranges comparison.  We could spend an eternity just trying to establish whether merit as a sports car should be based on performance on an autocross course or on a road course.  For English-language Wikipedia purposes, I think we need to accept that both are vaguely-defined terms that there is much overlap.  Certainly, most people will agree that a Lotus 7 is exclusively a sports car, and that a Maserati Ghibli is exclusively a GT car.  But the 928 is unequivocally both.  In fact, more cars probably fall into both categories than fall into either category exclusively (e.g. Corvette, M3, E-type, Alfa GTV-6, Ford Sierra Cosworth, most Ferraris).  For those of you that don't have an engineering degree and have never driven on a race track, please read (and understand) the applicable texts by Frere and Taruffi, and drive contemporary 911s and 928s on a race track before making overtly ignorant statements.  The July 29 post is particularly absurd.  The 928 is far more stable and has more mechanical grip than a 911 or any "low-slung rice burner" (be it a FWD poseur like the Prelude or a legitimate sports car like the MR-2).  Without a doubt you'll be more in control and make less noise in a 928.  I won't even start trying to explain the difference between grip and handling, although I will suggest that merit as a sports car has a lot more to do with the latter.


 * Further confusing the sports car vs. GT issue is that it's largely semantic, and Wikipedia articles are language-specific, not region-specific. Consider the different connotations associated with "gran turismo" (from the Italian), "grand tourer," "tourer," and "touring car."  If you're not a native speaker of English, you may not even be aware of the difference, but if you're a native speaker in Europe, you've probably thought of at least three distinctly separate definitions, at least one of which probably overlaps with your definition of "sports car," and at least one of which probably doesn't.  In America, the abbreviation "GT" frequently has a different connotation than the words "grand touring."  (Additionally, fifteen years ago, most Americans didn't have the term "touring car" in their vocabularies at all, but recently it's started to sneak into American usage, albeit with an entirely different meaning than the generally-accepted [European] one.)  A good example of the overlap in terminology is Road & Track magazine's now-defunct "10 Best" list; they didn't pick a "best GT" and "best sports" car--instead they had 2 to 5 categories for "best sports/GT," separated by price range.  This practice by a major periodical is a good indication that just because an individual, group of individuals, or a car manufacturer choose to think of one car as a "sports car" and another as a "GT car" exclusively, that doesn't mean that the two cars won't compete head-to-head in the marketplace.


 * Lastly, the whole reason I read this Discussion page in the first place is because I'm curious if anyone has any data to substantiate the popular misconception that an expertly-driven 911 will outperform an expertly-driven 928 on the track. (If your day job is racing 911s, or if you're a PCA driving instructor with no knowledge of the 928, you can't claim that your lap times in both cars are driven with an equivalent level of expertise, by the way.)  Unless I'm mistaken, the April 1983 issue of Road & Track includes an article in which Phil Hill takes both Porsches to their limits on a race track and finds the 928 to be 0.15 sec quicker.  Until someone can substantiate their opinion that the 911s are quicker than their 928 contemporaries, the assertion that the 911 is faster in the hands of "the most skilled drivers" should be removed from the article.


 * Jelliott4 18:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Jelliott4, I wholeheartedly agree on all your points including same year 928 being faster than basic model 911 as Road & Track magazine article prooves. Some model year 911 Turbo on some race tracks can be faster than same year 928. But 911 and 964 Turbos are extremely difficult cars to drive on limit.

In any case none of above even matters. My most important point is that 928 was designed and planned to be 911 replacements. 911 lovers might not like the idea but there is no escaping the fact that in the seventies factory management felt that 911 could not be developed enough to meet all future laws in the horizon in the eighties. Dsandlund's use of just one magazine article as proof against this fact got way out of hand. Anyone who knows even just basics about Porsche history should know how both 928 and 924 came into being and what each projects intented outcome was.

Seems that things have settled now and article is almost static. There isn't much I can think of which is still missing from it unless its taken to too detailed level for this kind of general article.

moonroof switchover
does anyone know what year was the switch from steel sunroof to glass moonroof. It doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere, but I can see a 95 gts with a moonroof and 80's models with a metal sunroof, just wondering where the split is.

71.207.156.16 01:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Never, moonroof wasn't available for 928. Its possible Porsche Exclusive department did some but it wasn't normal option. --Vilhuer 22:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

If anyone would question that the 928 is still being developed. Do a comparision of the dementions of the current 911 series to the 928. Just about the same. Soooo, the 911 has finally evolved in to what the 928 was 25 years ago, just with the power still in the back. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.170.241.106 (talk) 00:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleting a section
I make a move that we delete or greatly reduce the size of this section. There is nothing wrong with the information, but the section is way too big now. Zach4636 (talk) 17:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It should be in small tables, the page could have also couple of pictures more... --&mdash; Typ932T 17:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Section is long on purpose. Wikipedia is only place anywhere in internet and written media which has that information collected in one place. If data is deleted its not available anywhere in single place which is easy to access for everyone. --Vilhuer (talk) 23:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

MSRP

 * https://www.hagerty.com/apps/valuationtools/1978-porsche-928
 * https://www.hagerty.com/articles-videos/articles/2012/07/20/buyers-guide-porsche-928
 * https://jalopnik.com/5321705/porsche-928-despite-costing-as-much-as-10-pintos-when-new
 * http://www.928oc.org/928-resources/2015-01-23-21-15-13/model-info/78-82-model-info
 * Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 22:08, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

And what is this got to do with the article? U1 quattro  TALK''  17:41, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Closed Course Speed Record
I fail to see why fitting some powerful engine into a car and using it to drive quickly is relevant for an article about a production car. Are we going to see every production car article infested with records set by one-offs? Greglocock (talk) 21:45, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Supercar? Peacockism in the lede
Quite why Autoweek described this fat thing as a supercar is a bit of a mystery, but I suppose back then the UK motoring press were still worshipping Porsche and BMW. It certainly doesn't fit the European usage of the term at the time. Greglocock (talk) 22:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)