9th Sep 2007, 06:43
(986) Boxster S was 252bhp until end of 2002, then 260 bhp until 2004. The 2005 (987) Boxster S is 280bhp, 2007 987 S is the Cayman S dry sump 295bhp. Although visually these cars are very similar, so the model year is important.
10th Sep 2007, 10:20
The only reason anyone would buy a boxer is because you can't afford a 911, and everyone knows it. I would take an Audi TT over a Boxster.
11th Sep 2007, 01:46
Why would you swap a perfectly balanced mid engined car for a 4 wheel drive under steering piece of crap?
Only bad drivers would need 4wd in a sports/performance car; it's been proven many times the world over that mid engined cars are among the best performers when it comes to balance, handling, braking etc.
So if the TT is still what you would choose, then good on ya. But for an actual drivers car, I'm afraid it's gonna have to be the Boxster.
And whats this about it being a poor mans 911? This is mid engined and the 911 is rear engined. Therefore two completely different cars, handle differently etc.
For example the new Cayman is basically a Boxster coupe; now some owners have fitted lsd's to their cars and this made them actually faster than a 911 Carrera around the Nurburgring.
So before you say what a poor car these are, you might want to do some research and maybe test drive one alongside a TT, and see which is the better, more rewarding car to drive. However if your driving leaves something to be desired, I'd suggest getting in the safe and secure Audi.
11th Sep 2007, 08:46
I haven't driven the new model, but the old TT is not a serious sports car. It's a fashion accessory. The V6 and 225 go well, but the steering feel, balance and composure are no better than the Golf it's based on. What's more, VW's 1.8T engine has all the charisma of cardboard!
Nice interior though, but that doesn't make a drivers car. The Boxster is in a different league.
12th Sep 2007, 06:18
Agree totally, the TT is still a posers car no matter what anyone says, the boxster is the type of car you'd take to the track, and then drive home again afterwards! (tyres permitting)
12th Sep 2007, 11:00
I'm not saying that the TT is necessarily a better car than than the Boxster, but when people see you in a TT they think "nice car" or "he's doing well". When you see someone in a Boxster you think "he can't afford a 911".
The Boxster is the cheapest Porsche by a long way and everybody knows it. Who cares about which is a better drivers car? Roads aren't meant for racing around on.
The TT can be chipped for £300, and then it's 290bhp; plus more seats, it looks better, has a better interior and it's a lot cheaper.
And who really cares where the engine is? If you're out with the wife and her family, you don't say I've got a Porsche and the engine's in the middle of the car.
5th Oct 2007, 05:42
The Boxster is a FAR better car than the TT in every respect. It might be the "cheapest Porsche" but it's STILL a Porsche!
25th Oct 2007, 06:56
Hi all, thanks for the comments. I wrote the original piece and would like to add to the TT debate. Firstly I've owned front and rear engined Porsches, so I have experienced both sides of the coin. No offence to any owner, but the TT is just a Golf in a pretty dress!
Every Porsche past, present and future will be compared to the 911. The model is as strong as the brand – it's a design icon. So Porsche are up against it every time they go back to the drawing board.
As correctly mentioned earlier about the Cayman S, lsd was left out due to 911 politics, and Porsche engineers publicly admitted it. My 1988 944 turbo had lsd for god sake!
As far as a Boxsters appearance goes, I understand the guy's comments, they can look bland (sliver, grey, black, small wheels etc) But my car is Guards Red with 19" Carrera S wheels with full black leather sports seats. So I'll take the Pepsi challenge with any TT in the looks department. Kids love it and I get a kick out watching point and wave! I hope I give them bug for when there older!
Most Porsche owners don't buy the cars to be noticed, I feel quite self conscious when adults comment on it because for me it's always been about the driving experience. I don't quite get the comment about it being a 'poor mans car' to me £40k was a BIG dent in the bank account! But worth every penny.
Lastly £4k will get you a good 944 turbo, look for service history and don't worry about high miles. It's still a brilliant Porsche which is quicker on a lap than a 911 of the same year and you won't pay for the image.
16th Dec 2007, 03:41
Buddy of mine has an Audi. He drives a loaner car more than he drives his car. Enough said about Audi.
22nd Dec 2007, 16:21
The Boxster does everything the 911 will do (within the majority of drivers skill levels), but for half the cash.
When you get to performance cars of this level, it's how much of the car's ability you have the skill to exploit, not how good or bad the car is.
I know that doesn't sit well with the badge snobs and the poseurs, but its the truth. Stick an average driver in a 911 and a skilled driver in a Boxster, and I wouldn't like to bet on the outcome.
7th Jan 2008, 20:43
Not wishing to appear bias, but this is more a females Porsche in the Northeast from what I am seeing...I'll take the 911. Driving a modified 930 Turbo 20 years ago was pretty memorable as well. Not for the faint of heart.
9th Jan 2008, 13:07
Wow, apparently if you drive a Boxster not only are you a poseur, but not manly. Jeez.
This is the kind of stuff I hear from people who call them a "Porsh".
Why does the Boxster get such a bad rap? The power? The Boxster S is just as quick as a 911 (not the turbo). The price? I just walked into a dealership yesterday and could easily spend $70k on a Boxster. The Engine layout? The first Porsches made were all mid-engine cars, not behind the rear axle... someone needs to explain this to me. It's not a 911, wasn't supposed to be a 911, and to be honest if that was the only thing Porsche ever made, they would have been bought by Ford or Toyota 20 years ago. 911 owners should love the other cars, since they bring in the money to make the 911 better.
9th Jan 2008, 17:53
I would rather have the new $192,500 Porsche 911 given the opportunity to choose. Someone needs to explain to the Toyota owner on here about drivetrain layouts.
10th Jan 2008, 01:25
Not a Toyota owner, I have a pulse. I don't remember that the discussion was about $200K cars, either. Maybe you can teach me something about Porsche "drivetrains" that I didn't know? Did Porsche move the 911 engine in front of the rear axle and I missed it? Is the Boxster not a more balanced car with a mid mounted engine? I'm not bagging on the 911, it's a great car, okay? Just trying to give the Boxster it's due. If the Boxster sucked I doubt Porsche would have built it. One man's opinion, that's all. Heck they're about to make a $100K Corvette, so apparently the world has gone bananas anyway.