Thinking of buying a Boxster ? - MUST READ !

[Medevack1]

Hi all im new to the site im about to purchase a 1999 Electric Blue 986, has 135k this hopefully will be my 2nd Porsche my last one was a 83, 944. I’ve been goggling about the 986 and is pretty much the same. I came across this site so here I am, if anyone has any suggestions please let me know the good the bad and the UGLY, I will appreciate it hopefully, I will be going to go see it this weekend.

[WhipE350]

Good luck from another NC owner (70 miles from you). I think my son years ago used to go to Jr Golf meets in Advance. If you have any questions this is a great place. Good helpful folks. I'm about to purchase my second Boxster today, the truck will no longer be in the garage. It's getting a PPI today.
You should be getting an excellent price on a 99 with high mileage. Cheers!

[jsmith]

i have learned about the alphabet soup check list, ims, rms, aos etc etc, specially after getting really close to getting my dream car. the search continues, and this one popped up on ebay. car has 4 owners, third one allegedly a porsche mechanic. i don't think he's on the forum as the car is not in the for sale section.

Porsche : Boxster 986 in Porsche | eBay Motors

i asked if he checked the dtc's on the airbag, since this is a known item with a TSB and a kit to address the problem. came back saying there was nobody in the area that could read it(???).

still watching and thinking about it, what do you guys think?

[WhipE350]

Wow these prices have come down in the last two years. Was the IMS replaced with the LNS one? Nice rims also. Seems hard to go wrong at that price.

[jsmith]

Originally Posted by WhipE350

Wow these prices have come down in the last two years. Was the IMS replaced with the LNS one? Nice rims also. Seems hard to go wrong at that price.

On ebay, I see cars not moving for months. The IMS also gives me pause because I spoke to a Porsche "specialist" here in NJ about doing the IMS & RMS on a car I wanted a PPI on. He said they "only use Porsche parts" and that there was an upgraded factory part for it. He had no idea about this forum which is where I got most of my information from. There are also statements like "the old IMS was fine" - I mean, like how could they tell? Did they break the seal open to see if the grease was intact? Did they even know what the issue really is...

[BruceH]

Since you have looked at a few already, you know that this one is probably a cut above others. At least the IMS, RMS and water pump are done. I would see if you can arrange a PPI. Are you sure you want a Tip though? Seems like a well sorted Boxster and the mileage is a good range, not too much and not too little. Did you pull the CARFAX? I was able to talk to the shop that had been servicing mine for the previous 7 years by finding it on the CARFAX report. I bought mine long distance but in the end it turned out great. If its the right color/options combination that you are looking for, go for it! Oh, and it's an S

[jsmith]

On the tip, yeah, part of the reason it's not moving. I did read the car history and will re-read it again. I'm willing to go with a tip so the wife can drive it, although she can drive a stick (just not very well and not in a long time). This is what 2001's were and are still going for on ebay. Trying to get in touch with seller again...

[mr.drama]

I just sold my '97 with a blown engine(brought less than 2K)after 13 + yrs. of ownership.I have never had such a love hate relationship with an automobile.A great ride BUT the running costs were nothing less than obscene,(try a dollar a mile the last few years)particularly as the mileage climbed above 90K.The same things keep failing-top mechanism,flooded immobilizers,Actuator solenoids,water pumps,air/oil seperator.etc.CEL light on?Be prepared to ''assume the position".The engine quit abruptly at 122K.(that's how they all go-NO WARNING.-timing chain in this case)My favorite part is the congratulations you get from the community that your engine lasted that long!!This is BS:my former "84 Carrera was still running strong at 160K when I sold it (for more than paid for it) six years earlier.This is the problem-for years I was just waiting for this inevitable end-that's the killjoy.I WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER WATER COOLED PORSCHE,certainly not an M96 based car.I know it's tempting,especially when you drive one,but there are reasons these cars are cheap.

[upfront559]

I would see if you can organize a PPI. Are you sure you want a Tip though? Seems like a well categorized Boxster and the usage is a excellent number, not too much and not too little.

[Jamesp]

I bought a 2003 2 years ago after the IMS failed at 120K. The rest of the engine is pretty worn out as well with the rod journal bearings showing base material. I have the engine in pieces and just need parts. For me half he fun is tearing it down and rebuilding it. Now to find used parts...

[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!

[DEye]

I was looking at a Boxter as an alternative to the Miata I have, as a way to get more power but keep the Open air enjoyment.

Frankly the IMS stories scared me and the access to the engine in general wasnt ideal for someone who wants to do as much of the work themselves as they can.
( I know its accesble and possible to work on, i've read several of the posts about several DIY jobs )

So a nearly new Boss 302 is in the garage, ( I gave up on the Roof or lack thereof ) I picked it up for the same reason I had a MINI before the Miata, for the money a car with 6,000 Miles and that power will be hard to beat... although it is by NO means a small car at barely an inch smaller that my wifes Fusion

Well see how it goes, maybe there will be a 911 in my Future.

[southernstar]

Deye, your Mustang will no doubt be fun but it can in no way be compared to a Boxster. The Boxster is incredibly well balanced and has handling and steering response that is in another league entirely. Its like comparing a precision surgical instrument with a sledge hammer - yes, the sledge hammer will be more durable, but there is no question which one is better for 'carving' your way through a winding road!

[DEye]

Until i've had it for a few years I wil withhold any comments, but with the M3 as its compeditive target - and the reviews its had, this is supposed to be the *best Handling Mustang ever.*
Well see how it does at the track *IF I can must the Balls to use my new found power...

Comparing the MINI's turn in and cornerring abilities between Boxter was no contest - MINI + 1, but the Cooper had not power.

Keep the Shiny side up !

Originally Posted by southernstar

Deye, your Mustang will no doubt be fun but it can in no way be compared to a Boxster. The Boxster is incredibly well balanced and has handling and steering response that is in another league entirely. Its like comparing a precision surgical instrument with a sledge hammer - yes, the sledge hammer will be more durable, but there is no question which one is better for 'carving' your way through a winding road!

[southernstar]

DEye, if you think that the Mini had better handling than the Boxster (or an M3), you are alone in that belief. The lower center of gravity, lower roll center and wider track all contribute to better handling on the Boxster. Sure, if you had incredible tires on the Mini it might generate higher skid pad numbers - but that does not equate with handling and certainly not in the real world. Anyway, good luck with your purchase. Enjoy!

Brad

[DEye]

Originally Posted by southernstar

DEye, if you think that the Mini had better handling than the Boxster (or an M3), you are alone if that belief. The lower center of gravity, lower roll center, wider track all contribute to better handling on the sporsts cars. Sure, if you had incredible tires on the Mini it might generate higher skid pad numbers - but that does not equate with handling and certainly not in the real world. Anyway, good luck with your purchase. Enjoy!

Brad

I'm not saying that the MINI has better overall handling that the M3 or Boxster, I said turn in What does turn-in mean? - Ask.cars.com was better.
What makes a car *better* handling and fun to drive are quite subjective things...
A car might look good on paper but Nobody likes it enough to make it financially viable to produce so it dies...

I am not a Race Car Driver, but I've been participating in organized Motorsports activities for the last 12 years, AutoCross, Lapping days etc.. So it learned a lot and one of the things I've have learned is that even the same car can get different comments based on what the driver expects and their driving style.
Some aspects of a cars performance are not subjective It has HP, braking abilities, specific suspension geometry that affect how *you* perceive the car performs.
My personal perception of how the MINI responds to directional inputs initiated by my turning the steering wheel vs. the Boxster's I've driven are X you can try to convince me that you feel it is Y because it is somewhat subjective and personal... That's why there are so many cars for us to buy and enjoy because we all like some variety and perceive them differently.

Sorry - I don't see any Boxster's on this List ?
http://www.motortrend.com/features/laguna_lap
Just a Caymen S a half second behind the Mustang ?
http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna_seca.html
Behind 31/32 but tied at 37/ 38 ?

Have fun and maybe well meet on the track fellow Ontarion
You've seen my car, What Porsche are you driving ?

[southernstar]

We are on a site for Porsche Boxsters and unlike you, I actually own a 2000 986 Boxster. Will your car get better lap times? No doubt - although I suspect most of that can be attributed to straight-line speed and the tires. Understand that I too have owned American cars including a 1979 Mustang 5.0 litre; indeed, I started doing Autocross in the late 1970's in a 1973 Capri V6 with an ansa exhaust, koni shocks, bigger sway bars, hard steering rack bushings and what for that time were considered oversize alloy wheels with Michelin XAS tires. Although not an American car per se, it was similar to a Mustang and you could make it go quickly around a corner that was bump free.

I have owned two Datsun Z's: a 1970 240 and a 1974 euro spec 260Z with handling package and 3 piece Enkei rims, etc. I've also owned over the years, in no particular order, two Fiat X/19's (no power, but incredible handling and 'turn-in'.), a Porsche 944, a 1961 Posrche 356B, a Fiat 850 Spider as well as a couple of BMW's including my current winter vehicle, an X-3 with the sport package (wheels, tires, sway bars, springs and steering wheel).

Your experience with the Boxster is akin to my experience with the Mini - it is limited to test-drives: twice in a loaner by the BMW service departments and a few times in the Mini's that are owned by a couple of my friends (who coincidentally, have also driven my boxster and raved about the superiority of the handling). I like to be able to steer with both the steering wheel and throttle - something that can't be done with FWD (except to increase understeer); I will certainly acknowledge, however, that your Mustang will be plenty capable of throttle-induced oversteer. Anyway, since this is a thread on the 986 Forum entitled "Thinking of buying a Boxster?", perhaps you should go over to a Mustang or Mini forum to express your opinions on the vast superiority of those marques. I suspect, however, that very few people who are considering buying a Boxster would consider either as an alternative; conversely, I suspect that few persons considering buying a Mini or Mustang would be looking at Boxsters.

Cheers!

Brad

[DEye]

Hello SoutherStar,

So having that much experience with multiple cars over the years you can certainly appreciate their differences and the *endearing aspects* of each.

I try to stay away from the "Religious Crusades" but it is difficult at times, one cannot but defend the vehicle they own for the reasons they purchased it and the characteristics they have come to enjoy about cars.

- I am done here, I do hope there is a porsche in my future, but I doubt it will be a Boxster. ( my height and roll bar requirements to track the car, IMS althrough fixed in later models )
So I would appreciate my account being deleted in the interest of my no longer annoying anyone here with my non Boxster posts

So long and thanks for all the Fish,
Don

[southernstar]

DEye, you are right that there are endearing qualites to many cars including your new Mustang - which no doubt will be a great deal of fun (and which clearly offers great bang for the buck). However, comparing the Boxster to your Mustang is a bit like comparing apples and oranges, IMO.

Anyway, enjoy your new ride and participation in a site that is dedicated to your car, or at least, cars like yours.

Cheers!

Brad

[DEye]

yes indeed there are many differences between All cars, even the same cars after a couple of years driving - I had the opportunity to drive several MINI's *just like mine* and was quite surprised by how much different the transmission shifted, the ride quality etc...

With no disrespect or trying to be rude, it seems quite obvious that no one here knows anything about the Boss version of the Mustang, ( and why would you unless you were looking for another car ) Just like you can turn the 911 Pendulum of Death into a well balanced car with $$$$ the Ford engineers turned their attention to making a Mustang that can BOTH Turn and go Straight... ( Imagine ) at least that's the premise that convinced me to purchase this car for much more than I had planned to spend on a Boxster...
I will not try to argue the merits of one over the other - because they are two completely different automobiles...
I don't know what would be actually comparable to a Boxster ?
Two seater Mid-Engined Convertible ???
Third gen MR2 ?