Vellum Venom: 2012 Porsche 911 Carrera

Sajeev Mehta
by Sajeev Mehta

Vellum is a material at the heart of Automotive and Industrial Design. Venom is something this website has in spades: so a few positive comments from a recent Piston Slap column brought the two concepts together. Before we start; some ground rules: I analyze what’s seen from my camera phone, no press cars and therefore no time to second guess my thoughts.

And a few shout outs:

  • Jeff Sanders: it was 5 years ago this week when you left us. I will never forget you.
  • Jack Telnack: for forming a team that made the cars of my childhood so remarkable. Meeting you in 2007 was an honor.
  • Robert Cumberford: for not being offended that I’m copying your idea.
  • My Parents: for paying the Industrial Design tuition to the Center (now College) for Creative Studies.

On to our first subject, the new 991 iteration of the 911: slightly longer, wider and with a ton more wheelbase in the proud Harley Earl Tradition, but you’d be forgiven if you see little difference between this and the outgoing model. That said, the evolutionary changes are noteworthy, beautiful and maybe a little laughable.

The first thing most notice are the new taillights. Mercifully, the 991 is part of a new crop of vehicles ushering back the era of normal sized lighting pods: back when the non-functional portions of plastic lens were not a significant part of a vehicle’s real estate.

Even better, the new lighting pods and extra dimensions translate into an even more voluptuous side profile. It’s not obscene like a Ferrari Testarossa, the more prodigious fenders give the feeling of even more tumblehome…which is sorely needed in today’s age of boxy silhouettes.

While I wanted a direct shot of the side, I intentionally steer clear of the press car lifestyle. So this 991 merely sits in a dealership’s inventory. But even from here, the extra wheelbase pushes the rear wheels further behind the greenhouse, giving the 911 less of a Pure-Porsche feel…even if it still is purely evolutionary in scope.

Aye, there’s the rub. While I’ve read that moving the side mirrors to the door removes a boatload of aerodynamic nightmares, they aren’t nearly as elegant as having them on the A-pillar like the older models. More to the point, imagine if that plastic triangle on the A-pillar was the footprint for the mirror instead? Not to mention the flat black plastic trim on the mirror’s base is just asking to turn chalky after a few visits with an orbital buffer operated by an unprofessional.

The 991’s extra length and width translates into a sleeker, less stubby nose. If you squint just a touch or remove your corrective lenses, the new schnoz turns into something distinctly Ferrari 430-like. I am sure the Purists hate it, but this is a significant improvement for most everyone else.

Yes! What’s not to like about a bit more nose?

The only big problem? The wannabe Lambo lower valence. I know everyone steals everyone’s ideas in this business, but the 911 is supposed to be a little voluptuous, not wedgy and boxy. I’d love to take a heat gun to the lower bumper and bring a little sexy back. And what’s up with the flat black plug in the center? That’s a little cheap and chintzy for a big dollar Porker. If you need that for cooling in an upcoming model, just make a new bumper cover and add another grand to the asking price! Your clientele will neither know, nor care!

Sajeev Mehta
Sajeev Mehta

More by Sajeev Mehta

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 15 comments
  • Hogie roll Hogie roll on Mar 05, 2012

    You're quite the Renaissance man aren't you Sajeev? You've studied engineering, business and design? Did I miss anything?

    • Sajeev Mehta Sajeev Mehta on Mar 06, 2012

      And tons of cross-functional electives that taught me $20 words. Some day it will all be worth something.

  • -Cole- -Cole- on Mar 05, 2012

    Good point on the mirrors, I hate standing mirrors. The absolute WORST standing mirrors are on the A7

  • 3-On-The-Tree In my life before the military I was a firefighter EMT and for the majority of the car accidents that we responded to ALCOHOL and drugs was the main factor. All the suggested limitations from everyone above don’t matter if there is a drunken/high fool behind the wheel. Again personal responsibility.
  • Wjtinfwb NONE. Vehicle tech is not the issue. What is the issue is we give a drivers license to any moron who can fog a mirror. Then don't even enforce that requirement or the requirement to have auto insurance is you have a car. The only tech I could get behind is to override the lighting controls so that headlights and taillights automatically come on at dusk and in sync with wipers. I see way too many cars after dark without headlights, likely due to the automatic control being overridden and turned to "Off". The current trend of digital or electro-luminescent dashboards exacerbates this as the dash is illuminated, fooling a driver into thinking the headlights are on.
  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh given the increasing number of useless human scumbags who use their phones while driving (when it is not LIFE AND DEATH EMERGENCY) there has to be a trade off.It is either this, or make phone use during driving a moving violation that can suspend a license.
  • Wjtinfwb Great. Another Solyndra boondoggle wasting the tax dollars we contribute and further digging us into debt. The saying, "don't listen to what they say, watch what they do" has never been more accurate. All this BS talk about "preserving Democracy" and "level playing fields" are just words. The actions say, "we don't give a damn about democracy, we want to pick the winners and use the taxpayer revenue to do it". 100 million is chump change in auto development and manufacturing and doling that out in 300k increments is just a colossal waste. Nothing happens in a large manufacturing enterprise for 300k., it's a rounding error. A symbolic gesture. Ford and GM likely spend 300k designing a new logo for the 12V battery that runs your radio. For EV development it's a fart in a Hurricane.
  • Bd2 Let's Go Brandon!
Next