Are BOXSTERS REALLY THIS TROUBLESOME

[cvhs18472]

When I first got my used Boxster, I also started to read about all the problems that they have. For the first month or 2 I was just waiting for the whole car to blow up and melt into a lump. 10K miles later and a MAF I realize that maintenance and no Moronic over revs and the car is as good , if not better , than any other performance car. If you want bulletproof get a Miata and pretend. Ed
PS I like Miatas, but.

[blue2000s]

My Boxster was just sitting in the garage when the rear window cracked from a stiff breeze, which set off the horn. The strong noise from the horn jarred the RMS open, which started leaking like crazy. At that point, the faulty MAF shorted against itself and the car burst into flames.

[mikefocke]

Driven 3 years 10k on my watch.
one O2 sensor replaced with generic equivalent at muffler shop for $50 labor (I didn't have access to as lift)
one intake leak, resolved by independent mechanic moving parts around which cured leak.
3 trips to dealer to resolve airbag/seatbelt warning light. One I paid for, 2 dealer/PNA paid for.

Repair needed once every 9 months. No disabling failures.

Total cost in unscheduled maintenance for 3 years less than $20/month.

Enjoyment....priceless.

If you can afford the depreciation, you can afford the repairs.

[JCL12]

The only thing I would really be worried about is IMS failure - low probability, disasterous results. If I spring a small RMS leak, I probably will not even do anything about it.

It does seem like most of the issues are more toward the "minor/stupid/annoyance" classification. But the IMS failure issue, the lack of public acknowledgement, standardized processes for financial relief, and porsche's subtle admission of the failure is certainly not something I like.

One thing I feel would be great is to have somebody take some pretty detailed measurements of the high cost segment of porsche box issues and survey a whole bunch of owners. Everything we hear is anecdotal and it would be great to document what really "is" with hard facts and establish a baseline for problems/costs.

[spark00]

i picked up my low milage '99 6 months ago and managed to hit RMS leak, shift linkage failure, clutch replacement, and MAF sensor failure. i think i had every issue discussed in this forum but the IMS failure in that 6 months. shift linkage failure kinda pissed me off since i was stuck in downtown DC rush hour with broken Porsche waiting for a tow truck. a bit embarrasing... but thankfully, most of these were covered under extended warrenty.

after all this, i still love the car. i knew i wasn't getting a bullet proof Honda when i made decision to purchase one. the way car looks and how it performs out weighs the problems for me.

[Franco]

HI, I just wonder are we FOOLS for buying these cars ,check this out , not too impressive what are we paying for

To read this better, copy and paste on desktop and then zoom the highlighted area.

[JCL12]

Franco, funny you put that up - I was just looking at it a few days ago. To me, those charts are meaningless. I could not find the basis for these ratings. For these to be meaningful measurements, the rationale behind these ratings needs to be clearly explained and defined for each reliability metric.

They also seem to fluctuate wildly over time and time related variability is not correctly explained (clearly to the reader). I recall looking at a very old issue of this and seeing my box year's rating to be substantially higher. I feel it is very difficult to interpret some of these results .

Furthermore, (I beleive those ratings are based on frequency of occ.) there are many more factors to consider than mere frequency. For example, cost and cost normalized for MSRP should also be included to further understanding of true reliability problems. After all, isn't everyone's bottom-line here long run expected cost of repairs?