'98 986 vs 2011 987

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by ekam

Yes most car reviews also failed to mention that tire technology have advanced quite a bit. Whatever that they used back in the day are dated and replaced by stickier modern tires.

If you arm a low mileage 993 Turbo with new modern tires I'm sure it can still outrun most new turbos.

All you have to do is look at power to weight to answer that question.

993: 3307lb/400hp=8.27 lb/hp
997: 3487lb/480hp=7.26 lb/hp

The 997 carries around less weight per unit power. It's going to be faster if tires are equal.

[thstone]

My take on all of this is that 986's are truly bargains even when the expensive maintenance and repairs are factored into owning a 10+ yr old car. You can do a LOT of repairs for $56,000.

[pothole]

The 2.5 used for the article was my '97 2.5 and I was at the wheel during the "unscientific" side by side rolling start acceleration comparison. The car had about 85k on it at the time.

To put it mildly, we (the author of the article who was helming the 2.9 press car at the time and I) were both very surprised. The drill was to roll at roughly 1.5k rpm in 2nd (obviously the two cars weren't rolling at exactly the same revs as have different gearing), drop the hammer up through 2nd and 3rd (can't remember if we went into 4th).

From 1.5k to 6k in 2nd, there was very little in it. By 6k, the two cars were still mostly side by side. The difference, of course, is that you then change up in the 2.5 (you could hold maybe another 500rpm) but the 2.9 has another 1 to 1.5k to give. IIRC, by the time we got to the top of third, the rear of the 2.9 was about half a car length ahead of the front of the 2.5 (might have been a full car length, I can't actually remember that clearly - but it definitely wasn't multiple car lengths). But overall, overriding memory was that it really not what either of us were expecting given the 2.5's reputation for being dog slow.

For the record, I bought the 2.5 in May last year. I've had a few niggles, but doing most of my own labour kept maintenance costs over that period to about £1,500, which includes wear items inc. disks and pads all round and tyres.

Actually, add another £200 to that - I had the rear screen replaced a few weeks ago!

Here's a couple of images I took on the day:



Of course, the other thing I learned on the day (but probably knew anyway) was that my 2.5 is pulling well. It's always felt healthy, which is one of the reasons why I bought. Subjectively, it felt as quick as the 2.7 I also looked at buying.

[surf40]

Thanks Pothole for chiming in with your thoughts. Isn’t the internet great! I post a few words about an article I read in a magazine, and a day later the guy who’s car was used in the article post about it. Very cool!

[AndyA6]

Originally Posted by surf40

Thanks Pothole for chiming in with your thoughts. Isn’t the internet great! I post a few words about an article I read in a magazine, and a day later the guy who’s car was used in the article post about it. Very cool!

Indeed!!!!

And I think the 986 is a great deal!!

[ekam]

I think it could be argued that Brits take better care of their vehicles than North Americans... after all it's not cheap to own a car there.

And Americans generally trade in for a new car every 3-4 years.

[pothole]

Originally Posted by ekam

I think it could be argued that Brits take better care of their vehicles than North Americans... after all it's not cheap to own a car there.

And Americans generally trade in for a new car every 3-4 years.

Yeah, I'm not at all sure about that.

Also, the weather here is totally filthy for 9 months of the year. I would take a SoCal Boxster over a UK Boxster all day long.

[MileHighBoxster]

Originally Posted by ekam

I think it could be argued that Brits take better care of their vehicles than North Americans... after all it's not cheap to own a car there.

And Americans generally trade in for a new car every 3-4 years.

I can't say whether a blanket average statement like this is true or not. I can say that nobody, on any continent, takes better care of their cars than I.

[coreseller]

IMO you can't beat a sorted 986, especially an S, bang for the buck. My partner has an S2000, bought it new, you have to rev the poor thing mercilessly to get it to do anything, not to mention it's tiny inside. JMHO.......besides, the 986's curves look much better than the 987's

[ekam]

Originally Posted by coreseller

IMO you can't beat a sorted 986, especially an S, bang for the buck. My partner has an S2000, bought it new, you have to rev the poor thing mercilessly to get it to do anything, not to mention it's tiny inside. JMHO.......besides, the 986's curves look much better than the 987's

Speaking from experience, Asian girls make too much noise, don't go anywhere...

German girls however makes the right kind of noise and are made to go high speed...

[pothole]

Originally Posted by coreseller

IMO you can't beat a sorted 986, especially an S, bang for the buck. My partner has an S2000, bought it new, you have to rev the poor thing mercilessly to get it to do anything, not to mention it's tiny inside. JMHO.......besides, the 986's curves look much better than the 987's

I don't have any problem with revving an engine out in a sports car - that's the whole point, surely.

I also don't want a big cabin in a sports car. I want something that feels tight and snug.

Despite that, the Boxster is a lot more attractive as a driver's car than an S2000. And I agree the 986 is much better looking than the 987.

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by pothole

I don't have any problem with revving an engine out in a sports car - that's the whole point, surely.

I also don't want a big cabin in a sports car. I want something that feels tight and snug.

Despite that, the Boxster is a lot more attractive as a driver's car than an S2000. And I agree the 986 is much better looking than the 987.

That's because they still know what a sports car is in England. In the US, anything smaller than a Chevy Tahoe is too small, if it doesn't have the torque of a 6 liter v8 it's too slow and if it doesn't have cup holders, it can't be driven (exaggerating, but not much). The bigger is better attitude has ruined the market segment and killed off most of the best driver's cars.

[Chuck W.]

For the money, you can't beat what you are getting when buying a used 986. I would always get a PPI on one prior to buying.

[Perfectlap]

These funny sounding Brit guys were the reason I opted for the Porsche over the S2000. After watching Tiff Needel on Fifth Gear laughing so Britishly as he was spinning (without skipping a beat) the Boxster around the track I was sold. I'm not sure it was the better value as a low cost daily driver but there is only one way to know for sure. Even if I had opted for the S2000 I would have ended up behind the wheel of a Boxster sooner or later. Aside from the Honda the list of potentials (for me at least) was rather short, from the Celica-engined Lotus (talk about head-scratching value), Cooper S (not sure if the Works was yet available), or an STI. When you really think about it the list of practical sports cars that don't have the engine in the wrong place, is rather short.

p.s.
The Boxtser Spyder styling is starting to grow on me in a way that the standard 987/Cayman has not.

[fivepointnine]

I had a choice of alot of cars when I was shopping around....
here are the cars I drove/looked at/considered

E46 M3
3.2 carrera
SC
996
E39 M5
C32 AMG
C55 AMG
CLK55 AMG

I had plenty of money set aside, I ended up with a 64k miles private owner '02 Boxster S because it just felt THAT good compared to all those other cars

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by fivepointnine

I had a choice of alot of cars when I was shopping around....
here are the cars I drove/looked at/considered

E46 M3
3.2 carrera
SC
996
E39 M5
C32 AMG
C55 AMG
CLK55 AMG

I had plenty of money set aside, I ended up with a 64k miles private owner '02 Boxster S because it just felt THAT good compared to all those other cars

That's an interesting list. Mostly GT status symbols.

[pothole]

Really? E46 M3, 3.2 Carrera, SC, 996 and E39 M5 are all proper driver's car, if you ask me - that's over half the list.

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by pothole

Really? E46 M3, 3.2 Carrera, SC, 996 and E39 M5 are all proper driver's car, if you ask me - that's over half the list.

I'd count only the carrera and sc. Modern bimmers are F-A-T.

[pothole]

E39 and E46 are big cars. But they're still proper driver's cars, even if they're a little soft and insulated.

I'd also put the 996 fully in the driver's car category. With the arrival of the 991, it's also looking very compact and understated. Pretty light, too, at just over 1,300kg. I really fancy a 996 C2 in Guards right now...

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by pothole

E39 and E46 are big cars. But they're still proper driver's cars, even if they're a little soft and insulated.

I'd also put the 996 fully in the driver's car category. With the arrival of the 991, it's also looking very compact and understated. Pretty light, too, at just over 1,300kg. I really fancy a 996 C2 in Guards right now...

Mah, e36 was the last driver's car that came from bmw. And it was still a porker. The horsepower wars, idrive, and Chris Bangle have sucked the life out of these cars.

If you jump from a pre-89 911 to a 996 it feels like a driving a Lincoln.