[southernstar]

Since this thread is recommended for prospective purchasers of a Porsche Boxster, I thought it would be interesting for members to rank which models/years they consider to be the best and why they believe that. Herewith my list:

987 Boxsters:

1. Porsche Boxster Spyder. The lightest, fastest and best handling of all. Since it was introduced after the elimination of the IMS bearing in 2009, the main worry about Boxster ownership/reliability is gone. Yes, the top is flimsy and impractical and it has been stripped of some equipment - but the same was true of the Porsche 356 Speedster as opposed to the 356 Cabriolet and Coupe. IMO this car is the heir-apparent to the Speedster and if there is a true collectible 987 Boxster, I suggest that this is it!

2. 2009-2011 Boxster S - Apart from the Spyder, the fastest and best finished Boxster until the 981. It also does away with the dreaded IMS bearing!

3. 2009-2011 Boxster - Less performance than the S, obviously, but the fastest and best finished base Boxster of all time. They also get better fuel mileage than the earlier 987's and most importantly, no IMS bearing to worry about. For this reason, I rank these above earlier 987 S models in spite of the performance deficit.

4. 2005 Boxster S and Boxster - Even though these have the dreaded single-row IMS bearing (with 8-10% failure rate), at least this version of the bearing can be replaced and upgraded without tearing down the engine - something that cannot be said about the larger bearing used in the 2006-2008 versions of the cars.

4. 2006-2008 Boxster S and Boxster - See above. If the potential for a failed IMS bearing and the resulting loss of an engine scares you, these will be the least desireable of the 987 model Boxster S and Boxster due to the cost associated with an upgrade (as the engine must be torn down). Admittedly, the IMS bearing in these is larger and should therefore be more reliable. I suppose you can toss a coin as between the two. Yes, these bearings should be more reliable than the ealier single-row, but you can't replace them during a standard clutch replacement as with all of the earlier cars, including the early double-rows.

986 Boxster:

It will take a little while to explain why I believe the early 2000 Boxster S to be the best of all 986's, as it runs contrary to the usual expectation that models improve with time and production changes. For similar reasons, I also consider a very limited number of base Boxsters (the early 2000's) to be superior to some of the S models and all of the later base 986's. Here goes!

1. Early 2000 Boxster S - No, the 2000 doesn't have the 'updated' and purely cosmetic sheet metal changes that came out in 2003 (although personally, for a car that was designed to bring back memories of the 550 Spyder, I actually prefer the look of the original 986). Nor does it have the glass window and glove compartment that was fitted to the 2003 and 2004 Boxster S. However, consider the following:

- It is the lightest Boxster S. Remember, the 2003-04 Boxster S gained weight with the large glass window and the additional top bow that was required for it. What is worse, the additional weight was placed exactly where you don't want it in a sports car - up high. The result of less weight and a lower center of gravity in the pre-2003 Boxster S means that with the same tires, they will be the best handling of all 986 Boxsters. However, if you want a glass window, you can upgrade at relatively low cost to a new top with a glass window that will connect to the pre-installed wiring for the rear defroster. Furthrmore, since the replacement top has a smaller window and does not require the additional top bow, it will still have less weight up high than the 2003 and 2004's.
- Although the 2000 Boxster S does not have the virtually useless cupholders that were installed in the 2001 through 2004 Boxsters (ones that will allow spilled fluids to leak over the stereo and HVAC electronic controls), it at least has the HVAC controls where they should be - mounted conveniently and visibly, rather than hidden behind the shift lever. This is, afterall, a sports car and are you prepared to sacrifice good ergonomics for cupholders?
- The cupholders and glove box also add a little additional weight and while minimal, think of the expense that racers will go to just in order to lose a few pounds! Indeed, think of the removal of comfort items in the Porsche 356 Speedster and 987 Boxster Spyder over the base models of those cars - items that were deleted precisely for the purpose of reducing performance-robbing weight.
- The 2000 Boxster S retained the digital speedometer at the bottom of the tachometer, allowing someone to see both the speed and RPM's with one glance at one instrument. Inexplicably, Porsche reduced the size of the digital speedomenter and moved it to the bottom of the analogue speedometer (where it is completely redundant), in the 2001 to 2004 Boxsters.
- The early 2000 Boxster S (up to engine serial number #M 671 11237) had the much more reliable dual-row IMS bearing. According to numbers released by Porsche in the course of the class-action lawsuit, significantly less than 1% of these failed (regardless of mileage, oil change intervals etc.) compared to 8 - 10 % for the later single row-bearings. Even if you choose to upgrade this already quite reliable part with a new bearing from LN Engineering, take note that your upgraded ceramic bearing will also have dual rows rather than the one for the 2001-2004; not suprisingly, while LN has not released the failure rate for their own bearings, they do note that while a few of their single-row bearings have failed (allegedly due to, or assisted by faulty installation), none of their dual-row bearings have failed!

Late 2000 and early 2001 Boxster S with dual row bearing - Apparently some engines after serial # M671 11238 received the superior dual-row bearing as there were parts left over. It is, however, impossible to tell which cars unless the transmission and clutch have been removed so that the bearing can be inspected. Nevertheless, with proper documentation (e.g., the bearing had to be upgraded with a dual-row, rather than sinlge row IMS bearing) one receives the various benefits referred to above.

Early 2000 Boxster 2.7 - see the comments above concerning the 2000 Boxster S, many of which apply here. The 2000 received virtually all of the benefits/upgrades that were put into the 986 over the years, except the glass window, top liner, cupholders, glovebox, inconveninently relocated digital speedometer and HVAC controls and the 3 spoke steering wheel. Fortunately, up until engine serial # M 651 12851 it retained the much more reliable dual-row IMS bearing and for that reason I place it higher than the later Boxster S with the single-row bearing. I understand that some will place the performance benefit of the S above reliability; in that case, your personal rankings will differ.

However, one must bear in mind that when the 2000 Boxster 2.7 was originally tested by Porsche Excellence magazine, they commented that it felt closer in performance to the S than to the pre-2000 2.5's. Unlike later versions of the Boxster (or the S), its weight remained virtually unchanged from the 2.5, but it nevertheless had the following upgrades over the 2.5:
- 2.7 engine with higher horsepower, greater torque and much more flexibility.
- revised gear ratios that increased the top speed in second gear by over 10 MPH to 67 MPH. Not only does this improve flexibility in the twisties, it also eliminates the shift into third that is often required in 2.5 Boxsters in autocross events.
- significantly faster acceleration and top speed
- lengthened rear trailing arms to reduce bump steer
- updated fuel injection to provide a 'fly by wire' accelerator.
- brushed aluminum-look door handles, air bag trim and sport shift knob.
- plastic sliding doors on rear storage shelf.
- map pocket in back of seats
- soft finish on black plastic interior parts
One should also keep in mind that most of these cars were delivered with the upgraded wheels and tires from the Boxster S so that, with its lighter weight, there were very little handling differences from (and a better ride than) the S; and, those that were ordered with the optional handling package were identical to the S in handling. For me, the improved acceleration and top speed of a later S are not worth the risks (and sleepless nights) associated with the single-row bearing. Then again, I don't engage is stop-light drag races, nor do I take my car to the track.

2001 to 2004 Boxster S with single row IMS bearing - For me, however, the much greater peformance advantage (and increased flexibility) of the 3.2 S over the 2.5 Boxster do outweigh the risks associated with the single-row bearing. If one can afford to install an upgraded LN Engineering ceramic bearing (or the more expensive, so-called 'solution'), even though it is still a single-row and therefore more apt to fail (see above), the risks should be substantially reduced.

1999 Boxster - While these cars have the 2.5 engine and therefore less performance and flexibility, they nevertheless are extremely rewarding cars to drive and have the advantage of the dual-row RMS bearing. They also have some important upgrades over the 1997, 1998 Boxsters:
- improved block casting eliminated the porosity problems that led to engine failures in the 1997, 1998 2.5's
- rear suspension pick-ups points were strengthened (in 1998).
- side air bags were added (again, in 1998).

2001 to 2004 Boxster 2.7 with single row bearing - I debated ranking these above the 99 Boxster - and for some, the additional performance and flexibility of the 2.7 over the 2.5 will outweigh the risks associated with the single-row bearing. For others, the greater luxury, comfort and better finish of the 2003 - 04 would do the same. Not for me - I'd need to move all the way up to an S for that!

1997, 1998 Boxster 2.5 - see above. Double-row bearings but with a caution: some of these cars had engines replaced with new, or remanufactured engines due to failure from block-porosity problems. It seems that depending upon when the engines were replaced/remanufactured, they could have the later and less reliable single-row bearing. While the block porosity problem should have shown itself by now, nevertheless I would want to confirm that one has the double-row IMS bearing before purchase in order to avoid ending up with the worst of all worlds - a 2.5 with a single-row bearing.

Other opinions (and priorities) will vary, so lets see what others have to say. Who knows, we may end up with a general consensus on at least some of the cars!