Well, it's been a while since I posted my message about the 2.7L vs. base so here goes... those that have seen it can stop reading now (Although i do have a couple of new quotes), but for people considering the 'S' vs. base, it is crucial reading. While reading the below, keep in mind that Porsche has implicitly admitted there is a problem with the 'S' tranny by having a short shifter standard on the special edition "550 Spyder" version of the 'S'. The short shifter helps a tiny bit, but what really needs to happen is for the gear ratios to be optimised for the 'S' (not 996).
Believe it or not the regular 2.7L Boxster is better
than the 'S'. The reason is because of the 'S' transmission (tranny). You see the 6 speed on the 'S' is the same tranny from the 996 bolted on. Think about it, the 996 has completely different powertrain characteristics than the Boxster 'S' (50
more HP) and yet they share the same tranny. The 996 tranny just doesn't fit onthe 'S'. On the other hand, the 2.7L has a 5 speed tranny designed specifically for it and no other Porsche model.
I have collected various quotes regarding the problematic Boxster 'S' tranny from actual honest people, some 'S' owners, from PPBB. I have been banned from PPBB
for posting this information (some of the admins have an 'S', hehehehe).
Don't fall for Porsche marketing. A lot of people automatically assume a 6 speed tranny is superior to a 5 speed. Not if the gear ratios are for a different (996) car! Also remember the 'S' weighs more than the base 2.7L. The extra HP of the 'S' is essentially negated by its extra weight. So what about the faster 0-60 times of the 'S' reported by Porsche and car magazines? It has been suggested that Porsche and car magazines "punished" the 'S' into eeking out a fraction of a second faster 0-60 time to justify the 'S' model. It has been suggested that Porsche took
the fastest of many 'S' 0-60 times and the slowest of many base 2.7L 0-60 times and used those numbers as "official" 0-60 times of the models to justify 'S' price. Never forget the 'S' weighs more than the base 2.7L. That's a FACT.
Also, be sure to read the Excellence magazine article from around two years ago with an article comparing the 2.7L vs. the 'S'. Their conclusion was the 2.7L is a better overall buy. The article had this to say about the 'S' tranny:
"And with the base car's slightly longer gear spacing, you're less likely to shift up to third while driving from light to light - which makes it a bit easier to drive around town. So in an urban environment, the base car may be a better pick than the Boxster S, ..."
Yes, in many ways the regular Boxster is a superior car than
the Boxster 'S'. The main reason is the 'S' tranny problem.
If you don't have access to the Excellence article I would be happy to send you a copy
if you send me your mailing address.
Good luck, Another S in S
Here are the quotes regarding the 'S' transmission:
"Drove 6000 miles in 2 years [Boxster 'S'] and the gearing was horrible in
my opinion....I was unhappy with the Boxster 'S'...
The Boxster 'S' should have gotten the 5 speed gearbox of the 2.7..."
-Chris from Germany (CFG)
Admin for 996 board (
http://www.funcarsonline.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php)
"I've read that criticism ('S' tranny) in other reviews of the S over
the years since its introduction. The criticism is based on the fact that
the S 6-speed gearing is the same as the Carrera 6-speed's gearing.
Considering the S' considerably less power & torque than the Carrera's, it's easy
to understand why either the S' engine is too little for its transmission
or its transmission is too much for its engine. Many here & elsewhere have
theorized Porsche did this intentionally, both to save $$ and to keep
the S way below Carrera performance territory IAW their marketing strategy.
All sounds reasonable to me. But the actual gear ratios of the S can
pretty easily be compared to the Carrera specs & then we'll all know for sure.
Data's probably even available on the net."
-John Brown of Northern Virginia
"I prefer the 5 speed over the 6 speed"
-Meredith
An admin on PPBB
"Have to make a comment about the 2.7L, after owning one for 2 years and an
S for 8 months I have to say I wouldn't mine going back to the 2.7. Driving
in the city you couldn't tell the difference, as a matter of fact the
2.7 feels better in the city than the S."
-Shaeetoon(DFW)
"I've own/owned 3 Porsches (01 996, 02 996 and 01 Boxster S). Strangely, the shifter in my
Boxster S is one of its weak points. It feels sloppy, plastic, and it's hard to get into
3rd gear. The dealer service tech tested my car and told me it is typical, and within
normal. "
-Ray Gram
"The gearbox on the S seems mushy, as well as the clutch. The base seemed a lot more
precise. "
-robb in socal
"I still maintain that the 5-spd feels better than the 6-spd. "
-Brian Harrington, 'S' owner
"When I drove the 5-speed it seemed to shifter easier (less balking) than the 6-speed
in the "S"."
-John S
"that was my experience as well."
-al greenborg
"On a test drive of the S 6-speed vs 2.7 5-speed , I loved the S power, could not
tell the difference in brakes but much prefered the 5-speed. It seemed to match the
engine better."
-Iwas There (Toronto)
"but its gear ratios are not particularly well suited to the S' 3.2 liter engine. "
-John Brown of Northern Virginia
Andrew P's observations ('S' owner)
1) Torque delivery in 3rd is lackluster. This isn't a complaint, but I'm used to cars
pulling a lot harder in 3rd. There's plenty of pull in 2nd, but 3rd seems a little anemic.
Having said that, I am faithfully following the break-in guidelines and not taking the
engine past 4200... I have a feeling that the 3rd gear "fun" doesn't start until the 5000
range...
2) The shifter is a little sloppy. I find the throws to be a tad long, but not too long.
It's not spongy (is that a word) like my BMW... it's just... ahh... the best way to
describe it is that the spring that brings the shifer in between the 3rd and 4th gates
while in neutral isn't strong enough. I've missed a number of shifts (fortunately I've
cuaght myself).... It seems that I've been conditioned to work with that spring-load and
I'm just not getting that feedback.
3) The synchros don't always seem to work. I've never "ground" anything, but sometimes I
just can't get it to go into gear (on upshifts). A little bit of double-clutching solves
the problem. I'm not sure what's going on here... hopefully I was just having a bad day...