Good post Perfectlap! And its not just in the USA where people are competitive by nature. Or look to and review the performance numbers before purchasing a car - especially a sports car. The latter is probably becoming more important as we live in an age when cars are rapidly advancing in terms of performance - and to make our assessment of the relative merits of one car over another, most of us look to these numbers as well as the opinions of the motoring press. Yes, our individual subjective impressions and taste will be decisive for most of us. But the objective numbers do matter.

In that case, you guys are following the wrong models and brands. There are cars that will deliver the competitive numbers numbers you seek for a lot less money (or better numbers for the same money). Porsche is about about the experience, not numbers on a piece of paper.

I wasn't aware there was a rule to being a Porsche owner.

Who dictated these rules, of what we can or can't do with our cars? Or what is considered right or wrong? What if we wanted the experience, speed, name, and luxury all in one package? What if we had the means to make our car deliver the experience as well as the speed? But most importantly, who appointed you as "the final arbitrator of what it means to own a Porsche"?

I'm unsure if you're arguing just for the sake of arguing, or if you're actually as unintelligent as your insipid offensive remarks. I gave you the benefit of the doubt earlier, but I'm quite convinced you're just here to offend. There's no need for it here on this board.

Sorry, what exactly was offensive that I posted? Nobody dictated anything. Nobody claimed the position of arbiter.

Think you're just throwing toys because because someone dares to disagree. If you want to have a discussion, make a point rather than a childish stab at scoring points.

Still waiting to hear how you square your posts where you firstly describe the BRZ as the most fun you you've had and then claim speed is everything.

It's not my fault you're contradicting yourself.

If purchased new, I would agree. But buying used has a great way of extracting the Porsche tax/premium from the value consideration. Once a Porsche is well-settled into pricing reality (and not the absurd pricing their currently getting away with) it's a pretty good proposition -- as far as the time sheets.
Others, granted are still better but they have their their drawbacks as well.
Recent Corvettes come to mind, out of the box they put up great single laptimes for an insane bargain price, but visit a local track often and you'll see quiet a few of them on the back of a flatbed, some before even lunch time. I guess you pay up dearly for Porsche durability, but certainly not at Ferrari levels. It's a sort of middle ground in the sports car jungle. However, GM is moving aggresively.
A look at the recently released Stingray options sheet reveals that they WANT their cars to be shaken down on track, while Porsche come up with new ways to screw their warranty holders. I guess GM are hoping to use their buyers as part of development to bridge the durability gap to Porsche. GM certainly has my attention. Even if you mitigate the Porsche tax by buying used, the maintenance costs are still an issue. And personally I like it when the cheaper alternative wins.

Hmmm... In my experience, simple GM pushrods V8s are far more robust than Pcar engines.

Actually Perfectlap, I consider the pricing (apart from options) on the new Boxster to be extremely reasonable - the base price of new 981, when adjusted for inflation, is virtually identical to the base price on the 1997 Boxster and the car is significantly faster, better finished, better equipped and has a better warranty.
The options, of course, are and always have been another matter. Nevertheless, if one is careful it is possible to get a very nice new Boxster or Cayman for a pretty reasonable price.

Where base prices become more difficult to justify is once one moves up to the 911 series. When one consider the number of shared parts and the fact the 911 has typically been produced in larger numbers, it is virtually impossible to justify. In order to maintain strong sales (and high profitability) of the 911, Porsche does 'de-tune' the Boxster engines - as has been pointed out in the BHP and torque per liter figures. Still, the Boxster and Cayaman are great cars and if the new ones are still decent 'bang for the buck', the old ones are even better.

It is interesting that the price of early 996's has dropped so much. Stone was able to purchase a nice example for a price in the same range as a 986 Boxster of the same vintage. That makes this debate more interesting, does it not? I suspect that many on this site, if being honest, would have purchased a 996 over a 986 if the prices had been comparable at the time. The 911 has not only more peformance, but also more status than the Boxster; for many, this would be far more important than better turn-in, a better exhaust note for the driver (and for some, a more original design). It will be interesting to see where they shake down in the long-term with respect to values, but at present, it seems that history is repeating itself: as pointed out in an earlier thread, the only time when Boxster (or Boxster + Cayman) sales exceeded the 911 was prior to the front-end redesign on the 996 in 2002. Prior to that, demand for the 986 actually exceeded the demand for the 996 and we may be seeing the same thing in the market today.

What was the 1997 US price, then?

In the UK it was £34,000. It's now £38,000. Adjusted for inflation, my car cost over £60,000 in 1997. 981 is much, much cheaper than the 986 was.

Same applies to the 991 and 996...

981 is a bargain in the UK.

Agree, I would have bought a 996 if I could have afforded it. But in some ways it's a blessing in disguise, because owning a 986 has probably made me more curious about how the 986 and 996 are related and more appreciative of how good a car the 986 is. One, I think, tends to assume a 911 is good. But the 986's virtues are less well appreciated, I think.

The late Rodney King wants us all to get along.

:D

Yes, I should probably add an apology if any of my posts came across as unnecessarily dismissive / aggressive / unfriendly. Wasn't the intention.

street or track? The issue seems to be with long stints pushing the car 10/10's.

I could not disagree more. I don't think there's anything reasonable about new Porsche pricing since they became profitable again -- insanely so. After all of those immense profits these cars have hardly been Lexus quality and they surely haven't been putting rivals to shame on track. So its pretty clear where the Porsche tax isn't going... into the cars. Granted the rate of mark up has not been as bad on the Boxster as other models but that's nothing more than common sense by Porsche because a roadster is always the toughest sell -- unless no one wants to buy any of your other cars like when Porsche were near bankruptcy selling air-cooled Carreras. Also, I hardly think the 986 Boxster was a good barometer for reasonable pricing back in 1997 with what was widely criticized as an underpowered engine and a bare bones interior. But I'll grant you they've been consistently over-priced relative to cars of similar perfomance, reliability and sigificantly lower running costs.

p.s.
I find it interesting that a Boxster rival like the Honda S2000 with moderate mileage of the same time period as a Boxster (2000 year in the link below) is commanding very similar prices to what was once a such an expensive car like the Boxster.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/00-HONDA-S2000-Convertible-Manual-Transmission-Leather-Low-Miles-We-Finance-/400484239259?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item5d3eb8879b

p.p.s.

I would NOT have purchased a Carrera if they were priced the same when I purchased the Boxster S because price was not the deciding factor. In fact it was my intention to buy a Carrera (only $10K more than the Boxster S at the time and well within my budget) but after watching Tif Needel on 5th Gear declaring a Boxster the best sports car money could buy I had to go drive one to see for myself. I had to agree 100%, once the Porsche tax was done away with by second-hand market reality, I saw no point in spending the extra $10K for the base Carrera. The 986 S was nearly perfect in bone stock trim. I'd never really driven a mid-engine car like that. I was instantly sold before I even returned from the test drive. And I certainly wasn't going to buy a Cabriolet 911. If I wanted a convertible this was the Porsche to buy. I'm no worshiper of the 911, for me Porsche racing history goes further back than than the 1970's. When I think of Le Mans, the Carrera is not what comes to mind. I simply thought why not give a tin top a shot this time but then I made the fortunate mistake of driving the Boxster S and it was no longer a debate. Although I certainly would never buy either new, it's just financially illogical given the obvious effects of mass production on depreciation not to mention the need to budget for the over-priced parts and specialized labor, no room for any Porsche taxes as far as I'm concerned.

$40,000 was the pricepoint the Boxster was promised to be under, simular to the reintroduced 924"S" @ $19,990 in 1988?

Perfectlap, I too would not have purchased a 996 over my 986 even if they were priced roughly the same at the time. I tried both, but my heart was with the 986. I have already indicated that I prefer the design, the handling (which is more precise) and the incredible sound that the driver gets underway because of the side air intake on the driver's side. I remember when the 986 was introduced - I WANTED one badly, but household expenses (and a young son) made it impossible. I loved the 550 influences in the design. I loved everything about it and was even prepared to put up with the relative lack of power. As to the 996 - when it was introduced, I had no similar feelings. It seems that I was not alone fin that regard for, as has been pointed out below, until the upgrades to the 996 in 2002 it was outsold by the Boxster - the only time that has ever happened. And Pothole, I am in complete agreement that for many, the 986 Boxster is an under-appreciated car. I love mine and would not trade it for a 996 of the same vintage.

Pricing? In around 2000 the Boxster started at close to 60K in Canada; due to the improved value of our currency, it remains at roughly the same price today. So yes, I consider the 981 to be 'reasonably' priced for what it offers and a relative bargain. I also suspect that the new 981 Boxster and Cayman may well reverse the trend of 911's outselling the Boxster/Cayman (or at least, dramatically outselling them) since 2001. In spite of Porsche's best efforts to avoid leeching off sales from the 911, I believe that the new Cayman especially will do exactly that; and, I believe that the Boxster will continue to sell in large numbers due to the roadster experience and its lower price. Time will tell.

With reference to future prices, however, the fact that demand was greater for the 2000/2001 Boxster than the same years of 996, bodes well for their ultimate resale value. They were, to many, a more desireable car. The more dramatic depreciation on the early 996 (they started with a significantly higher price), suggests that this remains the same. IMO, that and the new 986 Boxster spec series (which keeps the original Boxster in the public eye), can only help.

A two seat roadster or 2 seat coupe outselling a big comfy, plush, iconic Carrea?
I don't see that ever happening in the future. In fact at one point I was convinced VW would pull the plug on the Boxster if they took over.

The Boxster might have been the bigger initial hit, but the 996 as car was still a history-making success for Porsche. The Boxster simply brought a bunch of first time Porsche buyers out of the woodwork who never had any interest in air-cooled 911. Two different types of buyers for the most part, the initial Boxster fever cooled eventually. Meanwhile the 996 sold more than 30K units in the U.S. in 2002 alone, and were generally over the 25K mark annually. Now compare that to barely 2,600 993 Carreras sold in the U.S. in 1998! During a booming U.S. economy to boot! No wonder 993 are so valueable now they're like Ty Cob baseball cards...a rarity. 200K total 996's has been its ultimate undoing as far as resale. Ditto for the 986.

And it took a little while for the usual Porsche 911 buyer to warm up to a water-cooled Carrera, I don't think it was so much that they prefferd the Boxster, but even with that Porsche still sold 10X's as many 996's in 1999 than that last year of 993 production.
p.s.
The fact that we are saying that a 320 HP 981 Boxster at those prices is a relative bargain tells you what havoc a near zero interest rate policy has wrought on pricing of luxury items. Not to mention corporate profits and stock market all time highs. Porsche, Ferrari, Bentley, Merc know the deep-pockets have gotten deeper and their customers have no qualms with nose bleed pricing accelerating at absured levels. But to say that these sub $100K Porsches are good value isn't really based on their performance or expectations based on proven reliability. Look at the new Stingray Corvette at $50K, it will beat nearly every Carrera, including the new 991 S and the old GT3 and 997 Turbo. You can't even buy a used Cayman R or Boxster Spyder for that pocket change.

Nope, those are global sales figures. The total worldwide sales of any water cooled 911 in a single year have never exceed 3x,000 and have been ticking along at 2x,000 for several years now.

I tried to purchase a 996…waded it up with a block!

Actually the goons at the car lot had put Armour All on the tires AND on the tread part too! It was the scariest 30 seconds of my life. It put me off wanting a 911 after that.

I could have fought it but the insurance paid and I went on to a 986. Knew a wanted a Porsche, since I was a pup…but did not want to get "eaten alive" by a 996!

Steering with the rear tires is nothing new to me, dirt bikes, sport bikes, shifter carts - all steer with the rear….IMHO the 911 model is TOO DEPENDENT on steering from the rear - what happens when you do not have traction there? You wad the car up!

Fortunately, no one was hurt in my making that decision.

Pothole is correct - the sales numbers in post 10 are global, not for the USA. Did the 996 sell many more cars than the 993 it replaced? Yes as by the mid 90's sales of the 993 were hurt by ergonomics, HVAC etc. that had become positively archaic. However, if the original 996 had created the 'buzz' that the 986 did upon its introduction, one would have expected greater sales than the Boxster in the 1999 and 2000 model years. However, it was not until the upgrades in the 2002 MY that sales of the 996 finally surpassed the Boxster.

Was this because the 911 fraterntiy had finally accepted a water-cooled engine? I doubt it - as has already been pointed out, sales of the last air-cooled 911's had already hit rock bottom. Why then the sudden increase in sales of the 996 in the 2002 MY? While the 986 and 996 were developed jointly, the fact that the sheet metal and interior from the doors forward was indentical on both cars clearly hurt sales for the 996. Rather than seeing the 986 as having borrowed from the more expensive 996, since the 986 was introduced two years before the 996, the natural impression was that the 'new' 911 was an overpriced car that borrowed heavily from the significantly cheaper Boxster.

The 2002 MY front revision finally ensured that from every angle, the 996 could not be confused for its less-expensive brother. Lets face it, status is a significant factor for many of the purchasers of 911 Porsches and in that connection, the 911should be readily distinguishable from the 'lower-priced spread'.

Perfectlap, I still believe that the new 981 (so long as one is careful with options) is priced quite reasonably for what it delivers. For those looking to buy a roadster, I am not sure where you would be able to find a new Stingray convertible for $50,000. Even if you could, I (and I suspect many others) would still prefer the Boxster as:

1. To me, the new Stingray with its wedgy shape and Camaro tailights already looks dated. The new 981, however, is a well-balanced, modern design with elements drawn from various mid-engined 'supercars'.
2. Similarly, to my eye the dashboard faciia and steering wheel in the Stingray are overstyled and frankly, tacky. The interior of the 981 Boxster, on the other hand, is both ergonomically sound and understatedly elegant.
3. In an era of dwindling resources and over-reliance on oil from the middle-east (not to mention what most believe is the need to reduce greenhouse gases), the Boxster is dramatically more fuel-efficient. Some of us want to enjoy performance cars while still being seen as 'green', or at least respectful of the environment.
4. The fiberglass body on the Stingray is bound, over time, to develop the creaks and groans that have befallen evey Corvette (and every other car) constructed in the same way. This detracts from driving enjoyment.
5. Mid-engined placement is not merely a styling gimmick - all pure racing cars have used this layout for decades because it is superior than front (or rear) engine placement for vehicle dynamics including turn-in, braking and balance.
6. The ride and cruising comfort in the Boxster is also superior to the Stingray.

Porsches have always cost more than Corvettes and their performance in terms of acceleration, and often braking distances and skidpad numbers, have often been inferior. IMO nothing has changed - one (the Corvette) is a very blunt intstrument, whereas the other (the Boxster) is more like a surgical instrument.
Choose whichever weapon you prefer, but remain thankful that we still have the choice.

Brad

You'll be able to buy a Stingray "roadster" with PLENTY of change to spare over what you'd pay for the 981S. Enough to buy a used 987. Also nice: The factory won't void the warranty for driving on track in "an unusually aggresive manner" (Porsche lawyer speak to void warrantly claims for center lock bolts coming loose and putting you into the wall). To underline the night and day difference in attitudes towards warranty claims, the Stingray options sheet even comes with camera mounts so you can watch your laps at Sebring over and over.

Meanwhile these are the absurd state of options with Porsche fully stuck in "Nothing but Blue Sky" mode
(From the latest Road & Track)

Painted Remote Key: $335
Rear footwell light: $510
Painting 20" wheels: $2,225 (wheels not included of course)
leather on air vents: $1,710
color stitching on steering wheel: $1,025
Alcantara on shift lever: $865

^ excellent trimming for your 991 Porsche that will depreciate like a falling rock. God forbid you get a scratch on it...forget it you end up with one these

C7 Z51 laptime at ViR Grand Course: 2:54 (on skinny street rubber... not race)

Other cars at VIR GC (on fast rubber)

Ferrari 430 Scuderia: 2:54.6
997.1 GT3: 3:01.8
991 S PDK: 2:58.9
997.2 GT3 RS 3.8: 2:55.9

Which some have speculated will put the new Corvette at N-ring lap of ~7:33-36 on the right tires.
Again, this is BEFORE any performance mods which don't come with Porsche tax on a $50K out the door car...

N-ring:
Ferrari 430 Scuderia: 7:39
997.1 GT3: 7:43
991 S PDK: 7:37.9
997.2 GT3 RS 3.8: 7:33

From the book "996 The Essential Companion"

1998: 9248
1999: 28,040
2000: 20,979
2001: 27,275
2002: 33,013
2003: 29,536
2004: 23,145
2005: 4012

p.s.
Southernstar, if you look at the above, production for Boxster copy cat Carrera in 1999 was only signicantly lower than the face-lifted 996 for 1 of the 3 full years (excluding 2005) it was produced.

I'd put the drop in 2000 down to the stock market crash and short-lived recession it produced.
By 2002 the credit markets were face deep in the punch bowl of a nearly zero interest rate policy and the mass securitization of all of these loans that followed immediately after aka... the credit bubble.

You do realise what the 'x' in 3x,000 signifies, right?

Perfectlap, this thread concerned comparisons between the 986 and 996 and the production numbers from post#10 in this thread show the relative sales of the two models from one source (as well as the 997 versus 987 Boxster and Cayman). Since the 2002 revision to the 996, it and the 997 have outsold (and often dramatically outsold) the 986 and 987 Boxsters. Prior to that, at least from 1999 to 2001, the 986 was outselling the 996. Something brought about that shift in preference by the buyers of Porsche sportcars - and as subsequent numbers show, it is a preference that has remained constant since 2002 in spite of economic peaks and valleys.

The only price I was able to find for the new C71 Corvette Stingray Convertible with the Z51 package showed a base price of $59,795.00 (with an additional $595.00 for red-painted calipers, if we want to compare the Boxster S with the Stingray). Orders are still not being taken, but no one is expecting discounting for some time. The list price in the USA for the 2013 Boxster S is $60,900.00 and most purchasers are now able to negotiate a discount. So from what I can see, the out-the-door prices are essentially a wash.

I agree totally with the outrageous price of various Porsche options (and suggested that one needs to option wisely). As to the track numbers that you refer to, I am not aware of a C7 Corvette Convertible with the Z51 package having been tested on any track; indeed, in some reports up until about a month ago, there were suggestions that the z51 package would not be available in the convertible as it lacks the factory rollbar that is required for track work (and which the new 981 Boxster has as standard - and at a height that will not require rollbar extensions as on the 986). If it was a test of the coupe, then I am sure that you'll agree the convertible will be slower as:
1. the convertible will be heavier than the coupe;
2. the convertible will have to add even more weight (and weight up high, where it will effect the Cg) by the requirement to add a rollbar for the track work that you refer to.
3. the chassis on the couple will be stiffer than the convertible, improving ultimate handling and precision.
4. the coupe will likely have better aerodynamics than the convertible, even with the top up.

If we are to compare apples and apples, then surely we must compare the Boxster (a convertible) with the Stingray convertible. Nevertheless, while no doubt slower than the coupe, I still anticipate that the Stingray convertible will be faster on track than the Boxster S. I said as much in my earlier post. However, I still maintain that it is a relatively blunt instrument which puts up better numbers with its larger, but less fuel efficient engine and with larger standard wheels and tires compensating for a relatively primitive suspension ( I mean, a transverse leaf spring????). I also expect that it will be less comfortable to drive in the real world and that it will eventually develop the usual fiberglass body groans and rattles.

You may (and apparently do) prefer the new Stingray to the 981 Boxster S and, if ultimate lap times are your main priortiy, I can understand why. Others will have opinions and priorities that vary.

Brad

GM are eager to take on Porsche, they've already identified Porsche as their biggest target. With a head-spinning number of Porsches for each model on offer, GM know they will have to cater to every type of buyer. You want a Stingray roadster with the biggest engine. Fine, what color do you want? You want a stick to stir? No problem we won't shoehorn you into automatics only (aka PDK).

p.s.
If an old school suspension and old school engine is/will be beating the pants off $200K Porsches at the N-ring, where you MUST have scalpel-like execution, over a very long distance, to be the fastest well then what does that say?
Also, I'm not so sure about your contention that the Corvette will not be fuel efficient for a car that is substantially faster than an over-priced (imo) Porsche roadster. I guess you can justify the Porsche tax on subjective grounds then its not over-priced. But spec'ing performance upgrades (in league with Stingray upgrades) to any Porsche no longer puts you into $50-$60K range. In fact, pretty un-performing upgrades to 981 S will put you into a price range that borders on drunken sailor spending.

Now to be clear, I'm not saying I would prefer a Stingray convertible to a 981S (I'd go tin top on the Chevy, not convertible too big to feel like a roadster). I'm merely debating the point of "what are you really getting for that Porsche tax".
I think folks have been blindly justifying a premium that isn't making the cars any quicker and they're not keeping Lexus up at night on reliability. Over-paying just because? Perhaps the type of buyer that Porsche is shifting towards aren't the type to really analyze value, they merely want the perception of exclusivity -- that really doesn't exist anymore, not with hundreds of thousands of Pcars for each model series rolling about. It's like a Rolex, they make over a million of them a year, the high price isn't even justifiable on the grounds of exclusivity anymore. $800 of actual watch, $4,200 of image.

PS Perfectlap, I tend to agree with you about pricing when one looks at the new 991. Especially when one considers various tests of the new Cayman S which suggest that it is a better all around driver's car than the 991, I wonder if Porsche will not once again find itself in a position where the sales of the Boxster/Cayman exceed that of the 911. Even if history does not repeat itself, at the very least I expect the gap in sales to narrow substantially. The result is that any sales of the Boxster/Cayman that have been bled from the 911 will surely have the effect of cutting into Porsche's all-important profit margins.

In any event, just as in comparisons between the 986 and the original 996, only time will tell whether Porsche has let the gap in appearance, performance, driving pleasure and quality between the two models become too small to justify the substantial difference in cost. If sales figures ultimately reflect that, I have little doubt that Porsche will make adjustments so as to improve the 991, or downgrade the 981 so as to accentuate the differences. Is it any wonder, then, that Porsche is apparently considering replacing the smooth and beautiful-sounding flat 6 in the Boxster/Cayman with a turbocharged 4 cylinder? So yes, Perfectlap, I share some of your cynicism when it comes to Porsche's decisions on product development. On the other hand, I understand the profit motive and I still love the cars. And I wouldn't trade my Boxster for a Corvette, even though it would likely be faster and cheaper to maintain.

Brad

^ Walther Rohrl was recently quoted as saying the Cayman is "easily" his choice between the Cayman and 991. I like the way he doesn't sugar coat his opinions. He made a top 10 Carreras list not long ago and he left the entire 996 series off the list. Ouch.

I don't think the Cayman/Boxster and 991 buyers are the same people.
For instance, nearly every non-Porsche owner who I know asking about buying a Porsche falls into one of two categories: If he's over 40/late 30's with little kids he needs the back seat and disqualifies the Cayman/Boxster straight away.
If he's over ~55 and the kids are out of the house, he can go either way as long as its an auto (a few exceptions but not many). In that age range, if they've already owned one Carrera they rarely upgrade to a Boxster, they want to continue with the plush Grand Touring experience.
Meanwhile a big part of the Boxster owners, either moved out of the roadster within a couple of years, either because of the impracticality or the whim simply wore off. I'd be curious to see what % of new Boxster owners are purchasing a second Boxster. Neither have I met many Boxster owners who weren't late into their 40 and 50's, contrary to popular misconception its not really a woman's car nor a young person's car. Whereas the typical Carrera owner seems to be old enough to be earning a good salary (mid-late 30's) but still far from being an empty nester. I really believe the Boxster and Carreray cater to very different drivers, certainly the repeat buyers.

p.s.
After spending over $12,000 to maintan my Boxster S, probably not much less than the car is now worth thanks to excess inventory of used Porsches, a move to Stingray or some other non-Porsche may not really be a choice. Unfortunately a Porsche is not a car one can drive for too long before relegating it to leisure time car status. Porsche is really too big, too profitable and mass produces too many cars for me to find that really acceptable. An old 964 or 911? I guess that's one thing ...at least these are cars of the extrenely limited and dwindling numbers and not of the swelling numbers ranks.

My 3.6 Boxster is MUCH more fun and much more forgiving to drive on the track and the twisties than my 996 Twin Turbo.

I agree that as a group the potential buyers for the 911 and Boxster/Cayman are not identical, but there is obviously some overlap as thstone, the OP in this thread shows. I also believe that he is not merely the exception that proves the rule, as others here have opined that they would have purchased the 996 over the 986 if prices had been similar at the time of purchase. Indeed, prior to my purchase of a 986 I also tested a couple of 996's to see which I preferred.

I suspect that while some people would only consider a 911 (whether for status, rear jump seats, or increased comfort), and while others would only consider the Boxster/Cayman (lower price, or a preference for a mid-engined car with better transient response and turn-in), there are others who are interested in purchasing a sports car and, in many cases, a Porsche sports car specifically. For those, recent tests and the comments of Walter Rohrl and others cannot help but move some in the direction of the Boxster/Cayman. The extent to which this will bleed away sales from the 911 is yet to be determined, but we cannot overlook the fact that at one time the Boxster alone (without the hardtop Cayman version) outsold the 911.

Which is why most Boxster owners do not repeat, they really weren't 'roadster' drivers at heart. They were either A) curious, as most people are about convertibles in general, or B) in the second hand market, they made the flawed assumption that buying the Boxster itself was cheaper without taking into account the maintenance and repairs -- running a Boxster is not really any cheaper than running a water-cooled non-GT/Turbo Carrera. The Boxster requires nearly the exact same or very similar over-priced parts, expensive oil changes and specialized labor just the same. As far as convertibles, the Boxster design itself brought in customers who had thought about Porsches and finally buying a convertible merged the two dreams.

The 996 didn't have that draw, so it didn't have the 'untapped market' element of the convertible. As a result in the begining the Boxster cast a much wider sales net than the 996. Many other brands have done this with convertibles as well. Put it this way if the Cayman had been launched years before the Boxster it would not have outsold the 996. Afterall the Boxster was the first ever purpose built roadster by Porsche. Just like the Cayenne (long overdue) also had the untapped market element of the first Porsche SUV. Both Boxster and Cayenne brought in many looking for that specific vehicle type first, brand second. On the other hand the 996 draw was more about mechanical practicality. The potential for building Carrera sales numbers was better in the long term, once reliablity relative to the 'antique' Carreras, was proven. Once the convertible itch was scratched the sales figures didn't really build the same way, if they increased at all. Also why Carrera owners are much more likely to be repeat Carrera buyers than Boxster owners. And the enormous supply of 996/997 means that even if the new 991 Carreras are not to the coupe drivers' liking they have plenty, really endless variations, of water-cooled Carrera options at significant discounts. And as we know, most of those are recreational drivers who arent' really interested in the performance advantages of a mid-engine car. Certainly not if means being in a less comfortable, less practical car.

Interesting analysis and you may be right. On the other hand, I still believe that many purchasers of the 986 Boxster did so not just because it was a Porsche and a roadster (there were also Miatas and BMW's and by 2000, Honda roadsters), but because it was a mid-engined Porsche roadster with styling cues that referred back to the great mid-engined racing Porsches of the 50's; and. because it was very close in appearance and performance to the pre-2002 996. If it was merely a matter of merging the desire for a Porsche and a roadster, then one would have expected the 944 S2 roadster to have sold in much larger numbers than it did. Yes, I know that the 944 was originally released as a hardtop, but does anyone really believe that most customers care whether a particular roadster was designed that way from the outset?

I tend to agree that some of the people who purchase roadsters are not really 'roadster' people. More commonly, however, we see people who have a change in circumstance over time that makes them no longer interested in/capable of owning a roadster (children, relocation to a cold climate, spouses who do not enjoy top-down motoring, etc.). It is not that they weren't 'roadster' people, but rather that a change in circumstance rendered them unable to continue owning one. I was one such person.

In my late teens through early thirties I owned a seiries of sports cars including, in no particular order, a Fiat 850 Spyder, two Fiat X-19's, a Porsche 356B, a Porsche 944 and two Datsun Z's - a 240 and a 260. I loved owning and driving sports cars and having owned both roadsters and hardtops, I can say that I preferred open-air motoring. Please understand that at no time did I lose the desire to own such a car (in fact, I seriously lusted after the 986 upon its introduction); however, circumstances meant that until my children were grown, I was unable to justify the expense of owning one.

Now that my children are grown (essentially - a couple still return home to live from time to time - lol) I was able to justify buying a Boxster as my own toy. I know of many similar stories - of people in their 40's, 50's and 60's who are finally able to either satisfy an urge that they were unable to fulfill when younger, or to buy their first roadster/2 seat hardtop sportscar in many years. So yes, I believe that many who do not/cannot replace a roadster/2 seat sports car with another, will eventually do so down the road. I also believe that the number of people who actually want to buy such a car remains relatively constant.

If I am right and the improvements to the 981 Boxster and Cayman siphon off some sales from the 991, then we should see that reflected in sales over the next couple of years. If you are right, then the relative proportion of sales as between the new Boxster/Cayman and the new 911 should remain roughly constant. Regardless of who turns out to be right, a fun discussion! Thanks.


Brad