Oh thank goodness. Guess I need not lust after one anymore. :p

A 2.0T in a small Porsche platform would be a modders dream come true. The aftermarket support for the 2.0T is ridiculous and the engine is built to take lots and lots of boost straight from the factory.

Well, that's one way to look at it, but the way I see it:

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...psc86636fd.jpg

;)

How I learned to love the 981!
 

Last night a 26 year old friend of my son was at our house, saw my 986 Boxster in the driveway and exclaimed, "Wow, that's one of the original Boxsters, isn't it?" Well, yes. "How old is it?" She'll be 14 years old in August. "Looks incredible!" Well, that's it then. I don't have to care if the 981 has better acceleration, a higher top speed, better handling, braking and ergonomics, because mine is a classic!

I know, in most States in the US a car has to be 20 years old to get a classic car registration and plates (although the first Boxsters will be getting there in only three years), but still... As I see it, when the 987 came out, the 986 was relegated to being nothing more than a used Porsche - the previous model. Now that the 981 has arrived, the 986 Boxster has become not simply a used car, but the 'original' Boxster. The one that started the line - and unlike the 914, 924, 944 and 928, I say line as I fully expect the Porsche 'Boxster', like the 911, to carry on for a very long time. So in a sense, the introduction of the 981 and its more modern (if less unique) design has allowed us to move past the used car label, into the classic car one. And for that, I have learned to love the 981 and its electronic power steering, electronic emergency brake activation, optional vector control, non-unique styling, etc., etc.

Brad

+1 here!

The more newer models they introduce, the more nostalgia points our 986s earn!

Maybe it is because I own one, but I prefer the looks of the 986 over the 981.

986
http://986forum.com/forums/uploads01...1366725152.jpg

987
http://986forum.com/forums/uploads01...1366725168.jpg

981
http://986forum.com/forums/uploads01...1366725185.jpg


I know the 981 is a couple inches longer, but it looks squatier (?) to me. Like I said, maybe I am biased becasue I have a 986.

using your pic, my 13 year old car (or 20 year old concept design) is aging quiet well when compared to the current car.

I have to wonder if the 981 will look as current when the 2033 Boxster is parked next to it some day.

http://986forum.com/forums/uploads01...1366725185.jpg
http://986forum.com/forums/uploads01...1325572324.jpg

Coffinhunter, I also think that the 986 is a more original and cohesive design, although I believe that the 981 is a much more modern design (as expected), and one that is very attractive in its own right. The 986 makes consistent use of 'modifed C', or 'half-oval' shapes throughout the design. From the front:
- the shape of the front air intakes
- the profile of the side mirrors
- the shape of the instrument cover (and the opening)
- the shape of the headrests
- the shape of the roll bars
- even the shape of the much maligned 'fried egg', lower amber portion of the headlights.
From the side:
- the overall body shape - sloping down front and rear
- the shape of the side windows
- the shape of the top
- the shape of the side air intakes
- in the optional 17 inch Boxster design wheels, in the slots between the spokes
- the shape of the front side-marker light
- the side profile of the tailights
- the shape of the door handles
From the rear:
- the shape of the rear bumperettes
- the shape of the rear central deck light
- the shape of the tailights.
- in the base Boxster, the shape of exhaust tip

These same shapes are also carried into the interior. Simply put, rather than being a mix of angular and rounded shapes, the design elements remain balanced, consistent and cohesive throughout. It also carries a strong family resemblance to the first mid-engined Porsche (apart from the prototype 356), the famous 550 Spyder. This is something that became less pronounced in the 987 and which is virtually absent from the 981. While others have already pointed out the similarity of the 981 to some other mid-engined sports car designs, one cannot confuse the 986 with any other car. Dated or not, it is immediately recognizable as a Porsche and no other car. And to me, that is no bad thing!

However, as to which car looks more aggressive (some would say masculine)? I would say the 981. Which looks faster when it is standing still? The 981. Which looks state of the art in 2013? The 981. In sum, the 981 is an attracitve, aggressive-looking, state of the art design for a mid-engined sports car.
A job well-done. But the 986 is also an attractive, balanced and original design - and one with historical elements that are uniquely Porsche.

Brad

Still a pretty timeless design. I never get tired of looking at 986's. The 987's and now the 981 are nice, but there is just something about the earlier models that draws me in. When people see it either in person or in a picture, they always comment "that's a beautiful car!"

It's really hard to believe that car came out in 1997. Back then, this is what its competition looked like:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2549/...e6a0e833c6.jpg

Today, the SLK looks really dated to me, but not the Box.

I was sitting here doing the math in my head: "Now hang on just a minute! Three years? I thought my car was 15 years old being a mid-97 build and all...k, subtract that, carry the 2, adjacent over hypotenuse...oh, hey, he's right! My car's gonna be 16 in a couple months! Woohoo!"
:dance:
Don't mind me, I've been staring at numbers and all sorts of files all day and my mind is shot, totally wrong time to be doing any sort of math.:rolleyes:

I actually think the original SLK is similar to the 986 Box in the sense that it too is simpler, purer and cleaner than the fussy cars that have followed it.

The SLK isn't as nice a design as the 986, but I don't think it's as bad as you suggest.

Generally I think the 986 has aged well because it's such a clean, unadorned design. There's not a huge amount to date. Parts of the 987's design are very fussy and have dated badly.

The 981 is pretty fussy too, so I suspect it will date fairly quickly.

There are of course always exceptions. The original Z4 is a very busy design, but for me it's aging very, very well. Still looks exceptionally fresh - arguably looks fresher than it's rather bland successor.

I like the 981's styling. But I like the 991's styling better :)

I think the ginourmous wheels on the 981 make it look squatty.

I do like the look of the 981, but it's so close to my 987.2, I can't justify the extra $$.

Well, not yet anyway . . . ;)

What I REALLY want is the GT3 :cool:

that is exactly how I feel about my 987, that the 986 was smaller, less luxurious and more raw

and..... i hate to say this.... hope i don't get flamed... but... the 2.5 986 is.... faster? I know, it shouldn't be, but it is, my 200 hp 2.5 feels faster than the 245hp 2006 2.7, at least in 3rd gear from 60 up. They changed the gearing, from 2000 986 on, 3rd use to go from 62 to ~93mph, now it goes from about 65 to ~103mph, approximate because I would never travel at those speeds. The 2000+ 2.7s I test drove were even slower, so if you're gonna get one, get a 2.5 or 987 or S, of course.

not only that but the 2.5 got the same gas mileage, if not a bit better, and I spend far more time staring at the mpg now since I have a mpg trip computer and the 2.5 didn't.

Ok, flame me, i'm sorry, it's my opinion only

http://images.automotive.com/stock/3...R/2005/2CA.JPG

yes i have to do a double take too when a mr2 drives by. Even worse if it's modded
http://www.evworld.com/press/Toyota_...Spyder2005.jpg

Fortunately they're rare and the back looks very old and dated compared to the boxster
http://www.carsinamerica.net/toyota/...pyder-rear.jpg

surprised Porsche didn't sue them considering it was a blatant rip-off, but maybe that's what Toyota was hoping for? "We look so similar Porsche is suing us!" Common back then, kind of like Hyundai Tiburon ripping off Ferrari
456 vs the Hyundia Tiburon - Ferrari Life

I've been thinking lately that the perfect 986 could be a 2.7 with the transmission from the 2.5 fitted. So you get the proper benefit of the 2.7 without it being compromised by the longer gearing.

Then you have the 2.7, which is pretty robust as these engines go (ideally an early 2.7 with double-row IMS), it'll be a bit cheaper to run (smaller brakes etc, cheaper insurance), it looks that bit cleaner and purer without the central air intake.

It'll be plenty quick enough and with the 2.5's gear ratios it should be nice and revvy.

Nice wheels!

Yes, the headlights do throw me off a bit. According to an article I read on the 981 they are supposed to remind us of the stacked headlights of a 917.

Still in person and in the drivers seat you won't mistaken it for an MR2.

I've been following all the replies. While there my be some similarities between the 981 and other cars, trust me I don't think they will ever be mistaken when seen in the flesh. I'm still mulling over all the options and plan to test drive the new cayman again this weekend along with perhaps a 911. I've also been looking at an Audi R8 V8 but that might be too much of a stretch especially pre owned with little or no warranty ...

I think our 986's are still stunning. I literally had a guy raising his hands and yelling over to me "nice car man, nice car!" As I drove around the corner from work the other day. Hehe. And definitely the classic Porsche curves and feel is probably stronger in these earlier cars. Still undecided for now...

Now that I've seen a few 981's in person, the exterior is not the drastic change it seems to be in these pictures. It looks like an updated 987, the side vents don't stand out as much as you would think. Just my 2¢

Especially from the rear, I just don't get the 1999-2007 MR2 versus 981 comparisons. Yes, both are mid-engined 'spyders' and consequently there are bound to be a number of similarites in terms of overall design and packaging. But the 981 has much more rounded (and to my eye, attractive) lines to the front air intakes, front shape of the hood, headlights, wheel arches, side air intakes and especially, rear fender/tail light forms.

Yes the MR2 weighs much less, but it is also a smaller car both in real-lfe appearance and in dimensions. For example, the MR2 has a width of 66.7 versus 70.1 inches (which carries over into interior width/elbow room/increased comfort as well as better handling). The length of the MR2 is 153 versus 171 inches and this contributes again to greater interior room, but also greater trunk space. Finally, the Toyota had a buzzy 1.8 L4 while the 981 has a 2.7 H6 (with not only better acceleration and top speed, but much less vibration and much more glorious exhaust notes).

Frankly, I thought the previous iteration of the MR2 was much more attractive than the final one which, to my eyes, looked small and boxy. Regardless, I am pretty confident that no one is going to confuse the MR2 with the 981 up close.

Brad