Ace of Base: 2020 Porsche 911 Carrera

by Matthew Guy

Published: July 31st, 2019

Take a guess as to how many variants of the 911 there are currently on sale today. We’ll give you a minute.

Nope, more than that. Yep — more than that, too. Including versions of the brand new model, no fewer than thirty models of 911 present themselves to customers who fire up the pricing tool. Earlier this week, Porsche rolled out the least-expensive trim of the new 911 so far. Simply called the Carrera, it starts at just a few stacks under a hundred grand.

Porsche is known for ladling option packages onto its cars like your Canadian author ladles gravy onto his poutine, so actually finding a no-options 911 would be akin to finding a unicorn or a jar of moonbeams. A base 911 is surely one of the rarest cars … in the world.

Stickering at $97,400 plus freight, the new 911 Carrera is offered in four no-charge colors including the fabulous Guards Red and an eye-popping Racing Yellow. Note that Miami Blue, the shade shown in all the buff books, pads the bill by an alarming $3,270.

That new little nubbin of a gear selector controls an eight-speed PDK bolted to a 3.0L turbocharged flat six (yes, Virginia, it isn’t just the Turbo that has a turbo) making 379 horsepower and 331 lb-ft of torque. It’s rear-drive, of course, since it is absent of a ‘4’ appended to its name. Porsche is currently saying “stay tuned” for news of a manual transmission.

Expect a 0-60mph run in about four seconds flat. Ace of Base customers will be leaving a couple of tenths on the shelf by not selecting the $2,720 Sport Chrono package. At least Porsche isn’t decontenting the base 911, as it is equipped with the brand’s active damping system and iron brakes the diameter of the entire wheel on my car in college. Those are four-pot pistons, compared to the six-point clampers of the Carrera S. A staggered tire setup is standard, sized 235/40ZR19 up front and 295/35ZR20 at the rear.

While this base Carrera has jumped $6,400 in price, largely thanks to its newfound level of standard kit, it remains $15,800 cheaper than the S. Ace of Base posts like this are flights of fancy, of course, but sometimes it is nice to see how the other half lives. Besides, if a person did manage to find themselves a no-options 911, they’d be holding the keys to a very rare car indeed.

[Image: Porsche]

Not every base model has aced it. The ones which have? They help make the automotive landscape a lot better. Any others you can think of, B&B? Let us know in the comments and feel free to eviscerate our selections.

The model above is shown with American options and priced in American Dollars. Your dealer may sell for less.

#911 #AceOfBase #Porsche #Porsche911

Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 36 comments

Focal on Aug 01, 2019

I went into specifying my P-car with the mindset that I can choose a poor man spec. I could avoid all the options that I would love to have but don't need. I'm tired of packages on my other cars bundling things I don't want with the one item that I do. Except for a rear seat, the GT4 > 911 I should know, I own the '16 GT4

Like Reply
PeriSoft on Aug 01, 2019

They're expensive as hell, but the damn things don't actually depreciate all that much. 10-year-old 911s go for somewhere around 50 to 60k, so you're looking at 400 bucks a month depre! At 5 years old it looks like they're selling for 75, so you're still not a whole lot more than 400 to 500/month. Of course, you've got to calculate the opportunity cost of having 100 grand socked away in a depreciating car rather than somewhere else, but compared to spending 100k on, well, pretty much any other $100k car, it's a lot cheaper over the long term.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?