986S vs 987 base ?

[23109VC]

this may have been asked a million times..

i've got my wife on board to get a boxster. we are starting to think that we would be wiser to get a newer CPO car vs an older less expensive one from a private party o third party dealer... the CPO will have some peace of mind.

i'm trying to keep my budget close to low-mid 30s. that rules out newer S model cars for th emost part.

i have seen certified 986S cars in the high 20s and low 30s.

i have also seen 2005 base model 987 base models in the mid 30s... depending on how badly a dealer wanted to move a base 987, and depending on how optioned it was and what kind of mileage - it's possible i could find a nice 987 base for a similar price as a 986S.

as far as hp goes - it looks like the 2000-2002 S models are similar. 2003-2004 have similr power. then it went up again in 2005-2006, and again in 2007.

the hp rating for a 2007 base is 241 - not quie as high but almost as high as a 2002 S model.... but as far as the rest of the car - there may be too many other differences that make one or the other superior.

i read one thread on anothe forum where someone said they had a 986 and went test drviing a 987 and they felt the newer cars were "softer" and not as sporty. having never driven a 987 not sure if that is BS or what. can't imagine that his true...

anyway - given the improvements and changes that were made year over year - where is the best "bang for the buck"?

for what it's worth - my wife really likes the updated interior of the 05+ models. i think they look better too - but i don't mind the 986 interior at all either.

thanks!

First, you are a lucky man! If your wife wants a Boxster you are 90% there.

Couple things to consider:

1) The 987 has more leg room for taller drivers
2) The 2006 and newer Boxster has a "smart" system for the airbags, so if you have young children this is an advantage too. The 2005 987 does NOT.

There are some great recent (and older) threads that cover your questions. Do a search and you will find a ton of great advice.

[Sloan]

I started a thread just like this to help me decide, and after all of the input that I got here, along with my own research and test drives, I selected the 986 S, and have been thrilled with my choice.

My wife was also very supportive of the purchase. I think we both actually preferred the look of the 986 interior.

Rather than try to recall all of the details, let me see if I can find it .....

purchase choice - 2003 S or 2005 2.7?

here's another one that may be helpful:

Should I buy 2003 S or 2005 (986 or 987)?

[bnordin]

I also went through the same process and purchased an 05 987. I preferred the look and room of the 987 but had no need for a 987S. The car is a blast to drive and find the 240 HP to be very capable. This car is my daily driver and gets on average 24 m/g on my commute. When people ask, I just tell them I needed an economy car! Good luck on finding the Boxster that brightens your day.

[John Y]

For what it's worth, the 2007 is rated at 245hp.

[23109VC]

the 2005 is the first year of the new "look". which I like a lot. I think the 986 looks great...but I think the 987 has a newer more modern look which I prefer...but if I was going to save a lot of money to get a 986 - still under warranty...i'd opt to save money and get the 986. I don't "have to have" a 987.

my wife REALLY likes the 987. she thinks it's a night/day difference in the look/feel of the interior..and I know if it comes down to almost equal dollars - she will want to get a 987 base over a 986 S.

I have been very happy driving my dad's 2000 base which is only 217 hp. he does have the 18" wheels, with the M030 suspension package and I LOVE how his car handles. my #1 goal is to get a car that handles like HIS. his is super stiff..you feel every bump in the road..and it corners TOTALLY FLAT..I mean I know there is *some* roll..but compared to most other cars, even other 986's I"ve driven, it feels much stiffer.

so my goal is to get a car and make it handle like his. if that means adding M030 to whatever car I buy - so be it. mabye the newer cars like 987s...or the 986S models have a suspension that is stiffer/higher performance...similar to what was coinsidered "Upgraded' when he bought his car...

i'm less concerned with power - more concerned with handling and looks and the feel of the car. i assume if i'm happy with his 217hp versino, then a 240 or 245 version..heck even a 2003 base with 228 might be more than enough for me.

i was cross shopping an s2000 at one point...and compared to THAT...anything has more torque and feels fast...

i'm going to test drive an S and see if I cant' live w/out it.

are there many things STANDARD n a 986 S that I would NOT expect to get on a 987 base?

[Quickurt]

There were many reasons for my choice of the 987. Getting an S was icing on the cake.
There were a couple of base 987's that were very, very interesting. I believe it was called sport package and it was the 2.7 base model with PASM, Sport Chrono and 6 spd in the package. PASM and Sport Chrono switch the shock settings to a little stiffer than standard S settings and also switch, among a few other things, the throttle response to a much more agressive setting. I drove a PASM S model and was not impressed because the standard S settings were very close to what it was switched to, however, my salesman is an absolute Boxster maniac and he said PASM and Sport Chrono turned the base model into an monster.
The 6 spd is wonderful, I can't stand driving a 5 spd after having the S. There's just more than an extra gear missing..........the extra ratio means they're all closer and you just can't find a corner you don't have the right gear for.
One Sport Package base was just like the S I bought, the other was white with gray top and black/gray two tone interior, which I loved. I had reservations to go to Austin, but my dealer came through with a great deal on my first choice.
See below

[Quickurt]

Damn! I got carried away with the Sport Package info and forgot the point I wanted to make.
Hurley Haywood guaranteed me I could drive the base 987 faster, safer and more consistantly than a 986 S. He said, in his opinion (I value that ALOT!), the base 987 was a superior car in every facet, and he knew I'd be buying used.

You say now that you don't need the "S"...but in about a month you will be starting threads about, "How can I get more HP out of my Base Boxster without my wife really knowing that I spent the future kids college fund?"!!!!!!

Much cheaper to buy the HP now...rather than later.

[RandallNeighbour]

Buy the newest CPO Porsche you can afford. After the first RMS leak or engine failure you experience, you'll be thankful you're covered to 100k.

The 987 is a very different car aside from the interior. Lots of suspension changes and other stuff that make it a far better sports car to own.

The problem with a base boxster of any year is that you'll quickly become accustomed to the power and wish you had bought the S. However, I don't hear many forum members whining because their 3.2 or 3.4 just doesn't have enough torque.

Look at the torque differences, not just the HP. You feel the torque.

[fragdude]

Originally Posted by RandallNeighbour

Buy the newest CPO Porsche you can afford. After the first RMS leak or engine failure you experience, you'll be thankful you're covered to 100k.

The 987 is a very different car aside from the interior. Lots of suspension changes and other stuff that make it a far better sports car to own.

The problem with a base boxster of any year is that you'll quickly become accustomed to the power and wish you had bought the S. However, I don't hear many forum members whining because their 3.2 or 3.4 just doesn't have enough torque.

Look at the torque differences, not just the HP. You feel the torque.

I don't think I have enough torque

I agree with Randall, the 3.2 does have a good amount of torque. Unfortunately (for you) I also agree with him when he says buy the newest car you can afford. I didn't have enough money for a 987. But if I did, I would have prolly still gotten a 986S because I know I can make it stiffer (M030) it has a 6 speed transmission (unless your car puts out prodigious power with few RPMs this is very useful) and I really like the brembo brakes. But that being said, I don't know much about the 987 except that its out of my price range it looks damn good and I like the 986 interior over the 987

[baseball]

Originally Posted by RandallNeighbour

The problem with a base boxster of any year is that you'll quickly become accustomed to the power and wish you had bought the S. However, I don't hear many forum members whining because their 3.2 or 3.4 just doesn't have enough torque.

I agree, there are many threads where base owners wish they had more torque. But consider me someone who's very happy with the torque of my 987 base and have no need or desire to improve upon it. I realize I may be in the minority on this issue.

[MikenOH]

If i were looking at the same buying question, the first item on the list would be warranty. If I could afford a 987 that came with a warranty, that would be the car I would pursue first. The additional torque and HP in the earlier S models might be fun, but he cost of repairs on these models--in my mind-puts the warranty issue ahead of the power ratings. The reliability on these cars has improved with each year and I think the 987 models--for the most part--have been extremely reliable. Adding to that, the number of IMS failures that I've seen on this and other boxster boards--particularly in the 2000-2004 range--would give me reason for pause when considering those models. No stats on how many, but they sure seems to be showing up with some frequency as the miles go up.

I wasn't real high on the 987 styling when it first came out but have grown to appreciate it. Interior wise, this car is leaps and bounds above the '99' in comfort and and quality of materials. I've heard criticisms of "lexus like" interior styling; it does look a bit generic compared to the 986 style but it works.

Regarding the tranny, I think the base 987 5 spd has a great linkage--very smooth. Every 987 six spd I've driven feels notchy, not terrible but not quite as silky. By comparison the '99's linkage felt more akin to a VW than Porsche.

The only time I miss the S extra HP on the track going down the straight at Mid-OH and the bigger brakes which you need when you're looking at turn 7 at the end. For typical use on the street, I don't think the HP differential is a big deal. Of course, YMMV..

[Quickurt]

Believe me, you'll get used to the torque in anything.
The first few times I drove an Atlantic car I was breathless from the power (1180 lb.- 245 HP). Within a few events it was the same old thing, it needs more power.
Brian Redman said the 917/10 Can Am monsters were unbelievable. It took five weekends before they needed more power.

[Quickurt]

Originally Posted by baseball

I agree, there are many threads where base owners wish they had more torque. But consider me someone who's very happy with the torque of my 987 base and have no need or desire to improve upon it. I realize I may be in the minority on this issue.

The only reason we don't ******************** about S power is because there is no S2.

[bnordin]

Originally Posted by Quickurt

Believe me, you'll get used to the torque in anything.
The first few times I drove an Atlantic car I was breathless from the power (1180 lb.- 245 HP). Within a few events it was the same old thing, it needs more power.
Brian Redman said the 917/10 Can Am monsters were unbelievable. It took five weekends before they needed more power.

I guess I have an advantage over most base 987 owners as when I get the feeling that 240 HP is a little short, I unwrap by 1990 Miata STS2 car and take it for a spin. I have owned the NA since 1989 and still love to drive it. I hope the 987 hold up as well.

[renzop]

The 987 S six speed and the optional 6 speed for the base 987 are both geared weirdly. Even accounting for the different rear axle ratios, there is a bigger gap between 1st and 2nd on the 6 speed than the 5. So when folks say that the 6 speed is closer geared they are not entirely correct. The Porsche 6 speed ratios are perfect for the track, where 3rd-5th are nice and close. But the base Boxster will accelerate to 60 faster with the 5 speed than the 6.

If you doubt this, all it takes is a speed in gears calculator (lots of them on the web) and the ratios (in the back of the owners manual).

Regards,
alan

[fragdude]

Renzop your right! the transmission is geared more for the track and the for the 0-60 sprint! (with the first couple gears being longer so you don't have to change as much). I've heard that the 911 uses the same gear ratios (I haven't had the chance to check this out), so what I assumed was that Porsche put in the effort for calculating good gear ratios for the 6 speed with the 3.4/3.6/3.8 liter engines and calculated the 5 speed for the 2.5/2.7, and just said hey, 6 speed on the 3.2? what the hey! keep it the same!

Which is why I wish I had the cash for a 3.6 swap! also why if you put a 3.4/3.6 in your 5 speed you get great acceleration!

[Perfectlap]

Mileage is important. I could have bought newer but after I found my Boxster with not even 10K miles I decided no need to spend more. Best decision I ever made.
Looking back I'm not sure I would have taken such a leap of faith buying a Porsche without an extended warranty. When things go wrong on this car they go wrong in a big way. Porsches are expensive to work on and the parts are very expensive too.
But so far I've had Japanese or better reliability. Most reliable car I've owned so far. Which for Porsche and its track record is truly an amazing claim.