Talk:Porsche/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 F1 2 Pronunciation revert 3 Model list 4 Model Linking 5 "Correct" Pronunciation 6 Standard infobox 7 Missing History 8 Porsche template has been created 9 Currency for Pricing Information 10 Ferrari 11 Carl Sagan on the famous owners list 12 Crest 13 Porsche sales correct? 14 Club Section 15 External links 16 FERRARI VS PORSCHE ~ WARRANTY/MANTAINANCE/REPAIRS 17 Bargraph 18 category companies founded... 19 Added new image from Japanese version 20 PORSCHE pronunciation

F1

Success of Porsche in Formula 1 is questionable. The TAG-Porsche engine was a success. But Porsche car in Formula 1 1,5 L were never competitive and the atmosperic engine supplied to Footwork was a real crap.

Something about technical originality and innovation : air-cooling, turbo-charger, 4WD....

That same TAG-Porsche turbocharged engine with only 1500cc generated more than 1,000 BHP....

Pronunciation revert

Reverted to previous edit: changing the pronunciation guide was IMO no improvement, and further information about Ferdinand Porsche belongs on HIS page. —Morven 21:35, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)

It was an improvement as poor-sha is definitly wrong. I choosed pour-sha, but the first e in letter is better than the a in sha. 80.131.61.198 00:59, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC) (de Nankea)

Model list

What do you all think about reorganizing the "9xx" series numbers into subcategories of the more familiar names (911, etc)? It's a little daunting right now... --SFoskett 15:48, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

I agree with you. I also think that some articles need merging. For example, Porsche 924, Porsche 931 and Porsche 932 are all articles about different versions of the same model. SamH 09:19, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Those article names are also against Wikipedia article naming guidelines, which suggest the use of the best-known name. Internal Porsche model numbers definitely do not fall within that category. They are only known to Porsche insiders and serious Porsche fanatics.

The names should of course exist as redirects. As to whether the 924 Turbo, for instance, should have its own separate article -- it depends how much material we have. If the stuff in both articles would make one reasonably sized article, I see no reason to break it out into another. —Morven 17:18, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)

I removed some models which never existed.. I'll try to organise the models list better, and leave only the base models. Different variants should be listed in a particular model's page, IMHO. Brunner 19:55, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)

Good work on rooting out non-existent models, but I disagree that we should list only base models. If someone wants to know what, say, the Porsche 987 is, it would be useful for it to be listed here. Of course we should talk about variants on the main model pages, but I do feel strongly that we should continue to list them on this page SamH 19:26, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You're right about that, I just had a different thing in mind when i said 'variants' :) Porsche 987 is a base model, IMHO. So is the Porsche 986, but it has 13 variants(starting from the Carrera 2 and ending with the Turbo S cabrio). It would be overkill to list them all on the same page. I'll try to put together a better structured list tomorrow..Brunner 23:05, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)

My opinion is that if Porsche have an offical code name for a model then it should be listed. Otherwise, variants should be talked about on the relevent pages. SamH 22:14, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ferdinand Porsche worked with his son Ferry Porsche in designing the 356 but died soon after the first prototype was built.

The 356 was introduced in the 1948

car designer Ferdinand Porsche (1875-1952)

this doesnt work...it says he died before the first prototype but the car was done in 1948 and he didnt die until 1952

It would be nice if there was some sort of a family tree that would sort out the numbers a little better and show what lines and models and years/eras they refer to. Naturally this should link to the various pages. How many pages and how divided, IMO, should be decided on how much information there is as well as what the guidelines say. I like the current pages except for the staggering number and variety of models that makes it hard to piece together without a main map of some sort.

Model Linking

Should every reference of a model have a link to its page? I.E. should several references to the 944 on the 924 page be hyperlinked to the 944 page?

The Wiki style is to hyperlink just the first reference (and any explicit cross-references).

Atlant 01:01, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The 911 began as the Model 901...but another company already had a 901, so the second '1' was used to replace the zero.

"Correct" Pronunciation

Of course, the word "Porsche" is pronouced as two-syllables in German. No one contests this. But foreign words often acquire different pronunciations when borrowed by other langugages. There is not anything necessarily incorrect about this practice; it is natural evolution occurring in all languages.

The recent insistence that Americans pronounce "Porsche" as two syllables rather than the familiar one strikes me as nothing more than thinly-veiled snobbery. It's an opportunity for people who view themselves as superior to separate themselves from the masses. I suppose this should not be surprising given the nature of the product as a status symbol.

A more accurate way of describing the situation would be to say that the cars are named after a man named "Porsche." This name is pronounced [porsh-uh] in its original German and in many parts of the world. Nonetheless, the word has been pronounced [porsh] in the United States by a majority of the people. Recently in the United States, awareness of the name's original German pronunciation has increased and a number of people have begun to use the two-syllable pronunciation.

(If anyone knows precisely when the [porsh] pronunciation became established in the United States, this would be helpful. Also, any information on when the [porsh-uh] pronunciation became fashionable in the United States would help. Historical pronunciation in United States "Porsche" advertisements would also be helpful. I seem to remember the [porsh] pronunciation being used by the company itself in its United States advertisements before the mid-1990's, but I'm not sure of this.)

As an American, I've always heard [porsh-uh] (homophonous with the Shakespeare character) and assumed [porsh] to be a slang-y truncated version, akin to "Chevy" or "Beemer." —Wiki Wikardo

Porsche as a/the car ( ie. Porsh ) Porsche as the brand (two syllables). see above slang- truncated version.

In the German language, the pronunciation rule is that an "e" at the end almost any German word is pronounced "uh", including "Porsche". - Ssschulte

And most of the people who pronounce it with two syllables in America are taken as effete snobs. So there you go: worldwide, pronunciations vary.

Atlant 12:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Here is a good article about the correct pronounciation of Porsche

http://german.about.com/library/weekly/aa020401b.htm - Ssschulte 00:50, Wednesday, Jul 19, 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, I fail to see how the proper pronunciation can be called 'thin veiled snobbery'. Isn't that hypocritical? There is no good reason to pronounce it incorrectly other than snobbery of an ignorant kind. Neither can it be asserted that the 'majority' of American people had always pronounced it incorrectly. It's not as if a survey was ever taken. Even if that were true, it doesn't make it proper. Americans can't go around making up words for things that already have a name, and expect others to just accept it.

There is no such thing as "proper" pronunciation. Americans, and any ethnicity for that matter, can and do go around making up words for things that already have names. This is why different languages have different words for the same concepts. The point of an encyclopedia article is to describe reality -- not to prescribe personal notions.

noone cares how americans pronounce it. however it is correct with two syllables. An di fits a word from another country, yes there is a correct way to express it. if you dont want to thats another question.--Tresckow 11:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The next idiot who puts in "pronounced porsch - one syllable" will be officially deemed idiot and ignorant. The Porsche family pronounces it in dual-syllable and so will you. -MSFT

The British pronunciation is also 'porsh'. 'German' is not the same as 'correct' - how do you pronounce 'Hamburg(er)' or 'Frankfurt(er)'? -- 86.6.5.37 08:47, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

"Porsche" is a proper name, and thus there is one and only one proper way to pronounce it, and that's however the person who bears that name pronounces it. Does the correct pronunciation of your name change when you're in Russia, Africa, or China? No. Hamburger and frankfurter are both regular nouns, not proper names. Stephen Hui 20:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Standard infobox

I think there needs to be a "standard" infobox for the Porsche car model pages. Please see the work I have done so far: Porsche Carrera GT, Porsche Cayenne, Porsche Cayman, Porsche Boxster, Porsche 997, Porsche 996, Porsche 964, Porsche 930, Porsche 928, Porsche 968, Porsche 944, Porsche 924, Porsche 912, Porsche 959, Porsche 914. They emulate the very uniform infoboxes in the Ferrari pages, e.g. Ferrari Enzo, Ferrari F50, Ferrari F40. Now look at Porsche 993. There seems to be some resistence against unifying Porsche 993 infobox with the others. Please see Talk:Porsche_993 for some more nitpicks. K3rb 01:53, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Missing History

I think we're missing a HUGE part of the history of Porsche. A lot of this seems to be a revision of history, something that Porsche and many german companies probably don't want to be related towards. But I think its extremely important to mention that Prosche began as a manufacturer of some of the greatest Armoured Tanks of WWII for the NAZI's. In fact, arguably the greatest heavy tank of the war, and possibly the best arsenal of NAZI germany, the Porsche King Tiger Tank.

I think its been a revision of history for the company to not mention these things, but wikipedia is not part of such ideas, and I think the article thus is missing the historical lineage of the company, and that needs to be included.

Please check the article on Ferdinand Porsche, where this is briefly covered. Porsche was mainly an engineering design firm at the time, they did not have the manufacturing capacity to mass produce cars, much less tanks. The truth is however, that Hitler held Porsche's engineering talent in very high esteem, which led to a number of defense contracts. Actual manufacturing might have occurred at a number of large industrial contractors such as MAN, Daimler (where Ferdinand started his career), Krupp and others.

Also, check the Tiger I, Tiger II and Elefant articles for further info. The value of the Elefant in combat is being disputed and it's quite likely that Porsche's contribution to the design of Tiger I, Tiger II and the Kuebelwagen (Nazi equivalent of the Jeep) might have had more impact on the battlefield. Jbetak 07:58, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree. If you are going to include tractors, then include the links to the tanks. If this this just about the sports car, then remove the tractors.

I disagree; the Kubelwagen is part of Volkswagen's and Porsche's (the man's) history and the tanks are also part of the man's history, not the company. The tractors are part of Porsche's (the company's) history

This is a very big part of Porsche's history that CANNOT BE OVERLOOKED! They supported the Nazi regime building advanced heavy tanks turrets (for the Tiger and more) which inflicted massive losses on the Allies. Porsche also used slave Jewish labour in their production efforts which is totally appalling. Can anyone comment if Porsche ever paid reparations to surviving slave labourers? The dark side of Porsche's history people just don't know about. http://www.holocaust-history.org/questions/porsche.shtml

You should read the above. It really wasn't Porsche AG that forced slave labor (Porsche was just a design agency). It was probably the production firms that produced Porsche's designs. Ferdinand was actually not a member of the Nazi Party. The only reason he made contracts with them was because they were the only design offers available at the time. It was tough for a designer to make a living in Nazi Germany without making those deals. Now I agree slave labor is a horrible thing, but don't be so hard on the production firms. If they didn't produce, they didn't make any money, and everyone need's money. And the only way to produce was to use slave labor (Remember all able-bodied men at the time were forced into military sevice). Also, the Nazi Party supported the use of slave labor for the companies; if the companies didn't do it, they'd be frowned upon by the Nazis. If the Nazis didn't like them, they would never get a contract. And they needed contracts, because that got them money and everone needs money to live. If there's anyone to be mad at, be mad at the Nazis, not the people just trying to make a living in such a horrible world.--Porsche997SBS 20:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

An editor above refers to "the article on Ferdinand Porsche, where this is briefly covered" Unfortunately, that article is flawed with errors. Daimler-Benz did not exit until 1926 and Daimler Motoren Gesellschaft (DMG) never built a brand named Mercedes-Benz, which was the product only of Daimler-Benz. All automobiles built by Daimler-Benz were required to carry that brand name after the merger of DMG and Benz & Cie. A DMG engine named Daimler-Mercedes was built by Wilhelm Maybach (Daimler had died in 1900) on special order for use in several race cars for Emil Jellinek. By 1902 that engine was the basis for the naming of a series of Mercedes models built by DMG before Maybach quit in 1907. -- Will tackle cleaning up some of the errors in that article soon. Please do not carry over incorrect information to this one. ---- kb - 18 June 2006

Further missing early history of Ferdinand Porsche. It seems he worked on some early electric cars: http://www.carkeys.co.uk/features/classichistoric/2938.asp which seems particularly relevant to get right today ---- Dan Frederiksen - 20 March 2007

Porsche template has been created

I have created Porsche template. You can look at it here. Please feel free to make it a lot better before adding to Porsche pages. I think Porsche deserves it :)

Very nice! Already did a small edit -- something I have picked up from editing the main article. Cheers Jbetak 02:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Shall we put it on all articles? - ManiacK 12:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Excellent work! This should definitely be disseminated throught all P articles. --K3rb 07:05, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Currency for Pricing Information

The price of the Carrera GT was changed from EUR to (presumably, based on approximate exchange rate) USD in the recent past. I've changed that back; being a supercar, the company isn't likely to fix the price in a currency that isn't their own, then get caught short when the exchange rates change.

If Porsche really did price the car in USD rather than EUR, the currency code "USD" should probably be used rather than "$" to indicate US dollars, rather than, i.e., Canadian dollars. Patrick O'Leary 13:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Despite building cars in Germany, the vast majority of Porsche's sales are in the US, so they target price points in USD and hedge the currency risk in the financial markets.

On the Porsche website (USA) they list the price of the Carrera GT in american dollars, $440,000 Since they make the distinction shouldent it be done on the site as well, both EUR and $

Ferrari

Porsche is way better than bike. Please let me know what you think about this! -Ez5698

HELL yah. I would buy a Carrera GT over two Ferraris any day, if I could afford either. Yes I would have to say that Porsche is my favorite car manufacturer

Sorry, but they don't make the Carrera GT anymore, and you still gotta' respect some of Ferrari's achievements and history (even though Porsche is my favorite marque). Let's keep it a peaceful rivalry and be sure to know your enemy. You might want to visit Ferrari's article and learn more about them.--Porsche997SBS 01:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Carl Sagan on the famous owners list

Do me a favor. Look at Steve McQueen and Porsche from google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&safe=off&q=steve+mcqueen+porsche&btnG=Search

Now look at Carl Sagan and Porsche from google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&safe=off&q=carl+sagan+porsche&btnG=Search

Other than 1 picture contending to be Carl Sagan's 1977 Porsche at U of AZ, nothing. 77k hits for steve mcqueen and porsche...12k hits for sagan. Steve McQueen and Porsche: notable. Carl Sagan and Porsche: meaningless...even if it is true. ju66l3r 04:29, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Carl Sagan had more than one Porsche -- I especially remember his red 911 with an extremely distinctive license plate bearing the name of one of the moons of -- perhaps -- Mars, Jupiter, or Uranus -- are you going to make me go ask other friends what planet it was and the name of the moon? The moon was small and pretty beaten up... lots of ice. The last time I saw him in that Porsche was as he took off for the Lincoln Tunnel on his way to New Jersey. Nobody who knew him could miss him -- between the automobile and the plate. I take your word for the number of hits. A comparative analysis of the number of hits in Google for this seems pretty meaningless to me. I get twelve -- pages -- of results in Google searches without extending the search (and without thinking that I am famous), how many thousands of pages does Carl Sagan get? That would determine whether he is famous. The fact is I knew him to be an owner of Porsches. He is famous, precision engineering and scientifically inclined, and had discriminating tastes. I believe he fits into the category and I am allowed to edit in Wikipedia. Hope that gives you my motivation for inserting his name as a famous Porsche owner. I do not understand why you presume to have a proprietary right over the article and the authority to establish only one criterion for this. ---- kb - 17 June 2006

I'm not sure where you think that I have exercised any more control over this article than you are by adding him. That's why I said it should be discussed here on this page. Welcome to wikipedia...this is how the process works and works well. The difference between you knowing Carl Sagan owned a Porsche and Steve McQueen or Janis Joplin is that there is numerous discussion and display of each of those owners having a Porsche. It was part of what defined them in some way. It was notable. For example, Britney Spears owns a Porsche ( http://wheels.luxist.com/2006/06/04/britneys-porsche-speedster/ )...but I doubt anyone's going to consider her a "Famous Porsche Owner". It doesn't define her in any way to own that Speedster just like Carl Sagan's Porsche didn't define him. This is my opinion on what exactly the article is trying to make known. With the discussion here, I hope to see if others might also feel the same way. ju66l3r 20:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay... It will be interesting to see how much concern is generated by the listing and, what its nature might be. Regarding my comment about the exercise of a proprietary right, it is one thing to contribute an addition to an article in a venue where people are invited to participate -- and another -- to delete the contribution of another that is provided with the best of intention -- because it does not fit your personal criterion. Others may see things quite differently, it doesn't make them wrong or unworthy of inclusion. Britney Spears—of the supermarket tabloid covers ? I refrain from discussion of the comparison to Carl Sagan unless you wish to pursue fame vs pathetic notoriety and I choose not to waste time attempting to identify clearly the lack of any enduring contribuion, through looking into her life. I hope that your example was given for this very reason. I perceive a reversal of the logic of the flow of the definition you discuss, from my view. To me, it defines Porsche that these famous people choose to purchase Porsche, not the reverse. Looks as if a couple of Wikipedians already have passed through during their reviews without sharing your view, making any comment, nor choice of action -- time will tell... ---- kb - 17 June 2006

While this gets away from the topic at hand, I do want to hopefully make the means by which wikipedia operates clearer to you. It is the same thing to both add and subtract from a wikipedia article as each person sees fit as long as it is in good intention. People add items all of the time that end up needing removal or cleanup. In this instance, an anonymous IP put a name alone into a list, within a page that the name seemingly has no connection, amid other names that have a greater connection and a detailed synopsis discussing their connection. If we are to use your definition of how an article develops, then if someone else were to add Britney Spears to the Famous People (because, hey, she decided to purchase a Porsche just like you say is the criteria)...then because of their exercise of a proprietary right, you'd have to leave it. They did it with the best of intention and it doesn't make them wrong or it unworthy of inclusion just because it doesn't fit your personal criterion (pathetic noteriety? come on, she has numerous musical accolades regardless of her current media image). ju66l3r 20:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I chose to use pathetic notoriety because I see her name only on the covers of supermarket tabloids to which I am subjected while standing in a queue—that is the limit of my recognition of her name. Now if she were famous... I might know something about her. I would not have put Seinfeld on the list, but seeing him there already, knowing that he is very well known by others (I do hear discussion of him among acquaintances at least), and, although he is another I would consider a celebrity rather than famous, I left it because I believe that the list is not for me alone to construct. Which brings me back to your point immediately above. Now, if you put Spears' name there I might feel compelled to call for its removal after initiating some discussion about its inappropriateness—I would not merely wipe it out. This seems more the Wikipedian way to me after working with editors on many other articles. I considered, but did not put Briggs Cunningham on the list (even though he is in the International Motorsports Hall of Fame, owned the most renowned collection of automobiles assembled by anyone in automobile racing—that included porsches—some of which he raced, was featured on a Time magazine cover, and won the Americas Cup in sailing) -- because his fame is unknown to most readers and editors of Wikipedia. Perhaps, as the depth of Wikipedia research increases, its articles will contain more than the very recent and the very earliest information on subjects. There are great gaps in most of the Wikipedia articles, this one included. ---- kb - 19 June 2006

Carl Sagan was an Emmy award, Peabody award and Pulitzer prize winner. The legacy the man left is tremendous. He certainly deserves to be on this list. Ju66l3r, I'm not sure why you're making such an issue of this. Yes, removing info in Wiki has the same status as adding info, however I do not see the point in removing information that is credible as this is. If your only argument is that "Carl Sagan is not famous enough to deserve inclusion on this list", it's a weak one. I suggest you spend 5 minutes reading up on the man before you compare him to Britney Spears. --Chris 16:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

First, you are commenting under a false assumption that I made "such an issue of this". I, at most, made an issue of the attitude I initially received from kb concerning my deletion. As for Sagan, I removed him once and then left him on the page after the entry was immensely improved from its initial addition. At the time he was added, the other listed "Famous Owners" were famous in part because they were Porsche owners, (i.e., some part of their fame was related to their Porsche). Others haven't removed him (showing no agreement with my position) and so I left it for the Famous People section to include individuals because they were famous and own a Porsche, a different but acceptable criteria for inclusion. Sagan meets the latter but not the former criteria because while his is well-accoladed and most definitely famous, he was not famous because of his Porsche(s). Finally, you should try a broader world view if you think that it's unreasonable to compare the fame of Sagan and the fame of Spears. There are many flavors of fame and while Spears' music may not interest you, her influences and awards in the music industry and society are definitely notable. ju66l3r 19:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It is true that ju6613r made a gracious concession to collaboration... leaving Carl Sagan on the list right away—thanks—and regarding Spears, I am reminded of the adage, there is no accounting for taste. Some things will always boil down to that. (But if you put her on this list, I surely would be tempted to delete it!)  :-} ---- kb - 27 June 2006

Crest

Isn't the crest a copyrighted symbol that can't appear here?

It's almost certainly fair use to use the car/company crest in an article specifically discussing the car/company. Plus, do you really think any corporation in their right minds would make a fuss about positive publicity?

Atlant 14:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Porsche sales correct?

The article mentions Porsches current sales as something like 3000/month. I believe (based on the latest half year report) that number is only the sales for north america, whereas the sales worldwide are more like 7000 cars/month.

This has just been fixed. Thanks for posting your comment and keeping Wikipedia factually accurate!--Porsche997SBS 23:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Club Section

I can only see 3 links to clubs, surely there are hundreds available. Should clubs be only entered at the top level, ie by Country? (No doubt each country club site will have links through to regional sites.) Or add all clubs known to editors until it starts to require better organisation. [Rennsport.ca] Quebec & eastern Ontario, Canada --Aus911 20:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

External links

The external links section should be trimmed per WP:EL and WP:NOT. Specifically, don't need to provide links to all the various sub-sections of the Porsche USA website. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 02:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

FERRARI VS PORSCHE ~ WARRANTY/MANTAINANCE/REPAIRS

A ferrari f430 comes with a 2 year warranty and about 20k miles.. while all 911's have 4 years/50,000 miles.. how much does an oil change, or brake pad change cost on a Ferrari, and on a 911 on the other hand? i can tell you its A WHOLE LOT MORE on the ferrari.. and i believe Porsches are better build, and will probably break less than a Ferrari.. and when something breaks on a ferrari, you will be paying BIG BUCKS... so its not just the starting price one has to pay that makes a porsche better, its all these things.. maybe some might be worth mentioning in the article..

This is an encyclopedia, and what you're suggesting isn't very encyclopedic and won't be mentioned in this article the way your suggesting it. Most people buy Ferraris because of what they are, Ferraris. Ferrari owner buys his car because these reasons: performance, prestige, "the image" (of owning one), and/or he really loves the brand (many of these reasons apply to Porsche owners too). Also, most Ferrari owners have money coming out their sleeves; they don't care about the sub-par warranty, high fuel consumption, or constant maintenance; neither do they care a car 65% their car's price can outperform it, out quality it, and out luxury it (I am refering to the F430 and the 911 Turbo). They have the perfect right to do this too; you may love a car for any reason you'd like, no matter why, its your opinion. Also, please refrain from titling sections with CAPS LOCK; by the way I love Porsche too, but here's a tip: if you want to be a serious editor, you should eliminate bias and arrogance while writing articles (also see the conversation above.--Porsche997SBS 23:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Bargraph

I not a big fan of these bargraph because they need annual update. May I suggest :

• to include the year somewhere,
• to provide a source file like an Excel spreadsheet if Excel was used to make update easier.

Aside of this I think its Lorraine-Dietrich not Lorraine. Ericd 17:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

category companies founded...

i included it in the category of companies founded in 1931. however, it wont appear there. any suggestions?--Tresckow 14:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Added new image from Japanese version

I took one of the Porsche images from the Japanese version of the Porsche article and have added to the American version of the Porsche 959 image. Professional Gamer 23:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

PORSCHE pronunciation

^{Porsche is a car brand made by Ferdinand Porsche. The word is pronounced with 2 syllables [por-shuh]. Most people only say it with 1 syllable [porsh]. The 1 syllable pronunciation is INCORRECT. The correct pronunciation is [por-shuh]. Go to [[http://www.autoatlanta.com]] to order Porsche parts or a Porsche shirt, swestshirt, or hat.}