Stop the Porsche Panic: The Stop-Sale of Manual GT3s in California is No Big Deal

Tim Healey
by Tim Healey

It’s a headline that sounds ready-made for outrage-clicks from both the crowd and those who dislike too much regulation of autos: “Porsche 911 GT3 Manual Can’t be Sold in California.”

Some outlets used some variation of that wording when reporting the story. A story that sounds like a case of overbearing regulators killing the fun by meddling in the free market. Add in the California factor — remember, it’s the only state that can set its own emissions standards — and feel the blood boil.

Truth is, the story is a bit more mundane than all that.

To be fair, many outlets did get at the truth in their subheadlines and/or in the body of their tweets. And even those who used the headline construction above weren’t technically wrong. Nor can I say for sure that they were intentionally omitting detail to increase clicks. You can even argue that since the headline is technically accurate, it’s not shady to leave out detail in order to get dem clicks — I am sure we at TTAC have pulled similar maneuvers.

Whatever — the point of this story isn’t to accuse our competition of “ clickbait“, but to point out that the actual story of why Porsche can’t sell manual GT3s in California, at least for the moment, is really no reason to panic if you like three-pedal machines.

Car and Driver has the skinny, even though their story doesn’t mention the reasons for the manual ban in the headline or subhead.

The stick wasn’t banned by the fun police or because of some emissions thing — it’s all about noise. For reasons laid out by Road & Track, the manual GT3 is louder than the two-pedal version. And it doesn’t pass the test procedure for exterior noise, last revised in 1998. There is a newer standard, and Porsche almost certainly designed its car to meet that newer standard, but for whatever reason, Cali is still using the old one.

Again, we aren’t going to accuse our competitors of using misleading (though technically accurate) headlines for “clickbait” for the reasons listed above. But it’s a reminder that when you see headlines like that floating around Twitter, it’s best to actually read the story before letting your outrage get to you.

I’ve been thinking a lot about how Twitter can amplify minor stories and take them out of context and thus stir silly debates that aren’t even rooted in fact — discussion about Twitter’s ability (and social-media’s ability in general) to distort our discourse has been a topic of interest lately — and based on a few tweets I saw, this story appears to be an example of that. It’s really a mundane story, and there’s a good chance the regs are updated soon, but a few folks choose to rail against California rules, or how California is no longer a great place for car enthusiasts, or whatever their particular hobby horse is, using this story as a jumping-off point. Never mind that there probably isn’t any deeper meaning here other than maybe bureaucracy being slow. Oh, and that you shouldn’t panic if you like manual Porsches, even if you live in the Golden State.

Yes, I get it. It’s annoying if you live in California and want a GT3 manual or already ordered one. And it is a newsworthy story, though a mild one. But here’s the truth: It’s just a quirk of bureaucracy meeting a quirk of engineering, and either California will fix the rule or Porsche will adjust, the stick-shift will likely eventually be sold in California, and life will move on.

It’s easy to be outraged by a headline or a tweet — or a tweeted headline. Indeed, outrage has occasionally driven journalism, in at least some form, since the trade began (headlines designed to play on emotion pre-date the Internet, so it’s not like “clickbait” is some new concept). It’s not even necessarily unethical for outlets to use outrage to get attention — as long as the headline is accurate and fair.

What’s harder is taking the time to actually read the story. Even those outlets who listed the noise-regulation as the cause of the stop-sale in their headline weren’t able to go in-depth until the actual body text. Headlines, by definition, cannot and do not tell the whole story.

So the next time you panic about some state regulation or some OEM doing something that might kill your car-enthusiast fun, give the story a read before you let your emotion compel you into sending a rage retweet.

[Image: Porsche]

Tim Healey
Tim Healey

Tim Healey grew up around the auto-parts business and has always had a love for cars — his parents joke his first word was “‘Vette”. Despite this, he wanted to pursue a career in sports writing but he ended up falling semi-accidentally into the automotive-journalism industry, first at Consumer Guide Automotive and later at Web2Carz.com. He also worked as an industry analyst at Mintel Group and freelanced for About.com, CarFax, Vehix.com, High Gear Media, Torque News, FutureCar.com, Cars.com, among others, and of course Vertical Scope sites such as AutoGuide.com, Off-Road.com, and HybridCars.com. He’s an urbanite and as such, doesn’t need a daily driver, but if he had one, it would be compact, sporty, and have a manual transmission.

More by Tim Healey

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 24 comments
  • Flipper35 Flipper35 on Jun 21, 2021

    There is no difference in the two as the intake and exhaust are identical, but CA noise regulations require full throttle tests in a manual in 2nd or 3rd, but with an auto or DCT you can't push the throttle far enough to engage a kickdown to lower gears so the two vehicles are tested at different throttle positions.

  • ToolGuy ToolGuy on Jun 21, 2021

    How does Tesla get around California's noise regulations? [However they do it, it's probably pretty shady and very likely deserves the Indignation Treatment from TTAC's current Managing Editor.]

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next