http://gulfnews.com/life-style/motor...ence-1.1041562

Check out above article.

 

Not convinced by the article. I did not get a 997 cab because it was not stiff. I didn't get the 991 cab because I hadn't had a chance to see if they solved that problem. Corvette solved the stiffness problem and I'm now assuming that Porsche has done the same- but I need to see it to believe it.

ChuckJ

 

Wrong. He actually said the opposite:

"Only women bought the previous two generations of the Porsche Boxster. And on the rare occurrence that the buyer wasn’t a woman, then it was a poor homeless man who couldn’t afford a 911 Cabriolet. That’s what the general consensus would have you believe anyway, and it’s complete rubbish."

It might help if you actually try to read articles before linking to them. Then again, why change now? It seems like it is your m.o. to post ill-informed stuff like this.

 

Unsurprisingly we disagree yet again.

The main point of the article is that the 991 S cab is not worth paying double for over the boxster S. The part that he refers to as "complete rubbish" is that about one being labelled a poor homeless man for buying a boxster over a 911 cab. He later calls it idiotic that the boxster should be considered a poor man's 911. Just as idiotic as calling one poor for buying a 458 over a FF. You are just selectively quoting here. Upon reading the entire article is obvious writer considers both cars to be most attractive to women buyers.

The fact that you have responded to this post on both forums suggests that this article has gotten under your skin for calling the cabs and boxsters chick cars and you're also probably unhappy that he doesn't find the cab to be any better than the boxster. I haven't even expressed my personal view on the subject on either forum. I have merely posted a published article for any one who cares to read it, to form his own opinion.

 

i dont think there was anything wrong with the 987S. the 986S was dissappointing in interior trim quality and design, engine output. the 987 addressed those issues.

anyone continuing to call the new boxster a girl's car haven't driven one or has something missing in his pants to begin with.

 

Nope, there's nothing for you to disagree about. You are wrong. You claimed he said one thing, when if you actually read what he said it was the complete opposite.


Regardless of what you think the point of the whole article is, it is really irrelevant to the what I highlighted. i.e. - you claim the author wrote one thing when he in fact wrote the opposite.

Your comprehension skills are laughably poor. Go back and read the article again.

"Only women bought the previous two generations of the Porsche Boxster. And on the rare occurrence that the buyer wasn’t a woman, then it was a poor homeless man who couldn’t afford a 911 Cabriolet. That’s what the general consensus would have you believe anyway, and it’s complete rubbish."


Man, you really are a riot. The fact that you made a fool of yourself by posting the same idiotic comment on two separate forums shows that you are still trying to take thinly veiled potshots at 991s you deem as unworthy (cabs and 3.4s).

You suggested I ignore your posts and you ignore mine. I'm happy to do that as long as you keep the stupid level in check. If you don't, you should not be surprised to be called out on it.

 

It is obvious that you get riled and defensive when any one criticizes your choice of toy, i.e. a base and a cab. That is very immature behavior that you should have grown out off by now. You should stop taking this personally, after all, it is not your wife or child or any family member that some one may be criticizing. Just a car. As far as the base goes, if you browse this forum and others as you obviously do, you will find many users who think less than highly of it, even those that have purchased one. Others like it too. Just learn to enjoy your purchase without fretting about what others, including journalists, may negatively conclude about it.

 

Sigh.

This has nothing to do with cars or any of the other stuff you mention. That's just deflecting. The only point I made was you claimed the author said something that he clearly did not.

It really is as simple as this - As long as you continue to post lies and ill informed nonsense for whatever silly agenda you have, you can expect to be called out on it.

I actually thought that article wasn't bad and made some salient points.

 

That was one helluva poorly written article.