911 Buyers remorse

[Slate 01]

The old slantnose. It is just one of those looks that at first really grabs your attention and soon becomes tiresome, at least for me. Loved them when they first came out, then in about 1 year of seeing them everywhere in SoCal, grew old. The classic look just has lasting power and the pronounced variations just don't.

There are certain colors that have come out in the last 10 years that I feel the same way about, I won't mention as to not offend. My wife had a car we really liked and the color was awesome on the showroom, but about a year later NAH. Glad she totaled that thing.

[AP328]

Originally Posted by jeffm

Anyone else here purchase a 911 after owning a Boxster and have regrets?

I've owned my 1999 Boxster for over a year and have loved every minute of it. With currently 86k miles, I've had zero issues and the car is even more enjoyable every time I drive it. Even with those feeling, for some reason, I felt the need to own a 911 (996). I had this nagging feeling ever since doing a mountain run with the 911 guys that this would be the car for me.

Fast forward a month later and I'm still not in love with the car. Yes there are been some maintenance itemsI wish I didn't have to address (AOS, motor mounts, interior bits), but I'm OK with that. It's just that I don't get the same feeling in the 911 as I do in the Boxster when I stick the key in and drive.

Any similar experiences? Guess they'll be another 996 up for sale soon.....

Sorry to hear that you are not enjoying the car as much as you hoped. After I bought my 986 new in '99, I drove a couple of 996s a year or two later and while there was a definite difference in the feel of the cars (986 vs. 996), I really enjoyed the 996. The 996 was quick, and handled well. I think your plan to fix the niggles and give it a chance make sense. Good luck and hope you end up enjoying your new ride.

[ChrisZang]

Not exactly buyers remorse (I bought a 2009 C4S PDK which is fantastic) but I should have kept my box

[arnold33]

very nice . . . .

[Chuck W.]

While owning the Boxster I have also owned a 993 cab and a 993 turbo. The cab was a tiptronic and was bought to be a daily driver after a promotion took away my company car.... go figure. For daily Los Angeles traffic the 993 cab with the tip was fantastic. I would drive it in manual mode 99 per cent of the time. I bought it with 58,000 miles and sold it at 90,000 miles and it was problem free. The top was down unless it was raining. Once I got another company car I sold it and bought the 993 turbo. Of the two cars I liked the cab better with the exception of the tiptronic. The turbo was wild and a beast but for a nice drive the Boxster won out. Then add on the top down driving modern convinces and comfort and the Boxster was a better drive. As far as the "wow" factor, the 993 had it. As far as Porsche heritage, the 993 had it. When I rode motorcycles my last bike was a Harley. Kind of the same thing. The Hondas and Kawasakis I owned were better bikes but the Harley had the wow and heritage thing gong.

Bottom line, they are all great cars with very different personalities.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by Chuck W.

While owning the Boxster I have also owned a 993 cab and a 993 turbo. The cab was a tiptronic and was bought to be a daily driver after a promotion took away my company car.... go figure. For daily Los Angeles traffic the 993 cab with the tip was fantastic. I would drive it in manual mode 99 per cent of the time. I bought it with 58,000 miles and sold it at 90,000 miles and it was problem free. The top was down unless it was raining. Once I got another company car I sold it and bought the 993 turbo. Of the two cars I liked the cab better with the exception of the tiptronic. The turbo was wild and a beast but for a nice drive the Boxster won out. Then add on the top down driving modern convinces and comfort and the Boxster was a better drive. As far as the "wow" factor, the 993 had it. As far as Porsche heritage, the 993 had it. When I rode motorcycles my last bike was a Harley. Kind of the same thing. The Hondas and Kawasakis I owned were better bikes but the Harley had the wow and heritage thing gong.

Bottom line, they are all great cars with very different personalities.

That takes the cake for coolest company cars. Hands down.

As far as heritage, I may be in the minority but I think the Boxster has equal or more heritage than any 911. Calling it a "Boxster" at launch was just a marketing gimmick to get press for a nearly bankrupt company hanging on by a thread by proclaiming an "all new concept". But the reality was that there was nothing new here conceptually, just an updated purpose built roadster with a boxer engine in the middle. The RS '60 model being a very obvious inspiration for the '93 986 studio design. The Boxster is simply a modern day 550/718, re-interpreted to shock the company back into solvency at a time when, embarrasignly for Porsche, the U.S. economy was firing on all clylinders like no Bull market before yet they couldn't sell rear-engine cars.

Both 550 and 718 were giant-killing LeMans winners before even the idea of an updated 356 had entered Butzi's brain in '59, much less worked all those perilous handling issues that kept them from catching up with the midengine Porsches on racing cabability. Which to the engineer's credit they did remarkably well. But Porsche were obviously intent on manufacturing a new legend when one was already in their stable, one that collectors are now willing to fork over $3 million and higher for if you've been following auctions for the mid-engine cars. It might be a while before any limited production rear-engine Porsche hauls in that kind of coin. And technically, the 356 and 911 were both sold in the same year if I'm not mistaken which means the 911 heritage really begins in '64 so they were pretty late to the game as far as Porsche history. It seems to me that people who grew up driving in the 70's and 80's see Porsche prestiege as only a rear-engine story when the actual history is quiet different.

[RaisedOnPorsches]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

But Porsche were obviously intent on manufacturing a new legend when one was already in their stable, one that collectors are now willing to fork over $3 million and higher for if you've been following auctions for the mid-engine cars. It might be a while before any limited production rear-engine Porsche hauls in that kind of coin.

Keep an eye on the four-cam 356 Carreras. Those are rear-engine Porsches with stratospheric auction values. There is a good article about them in the latest Panorama magazine too.

I do agree that the 986 is based upon a heritage of mid-engine design that started with the 550/718s, and this heritage isn't often recognized or appreciated much by the modern audience. That said it took some major departures from that heritage through water-cooled engines and entry-level furnishings with mass production in mind.

The 911 heritage isn't simply about a rear-engine configuration, it is also about the design and evolution of the flat-6 engine design. Design that was ultimately adopted in the mid-engine 986 design.

In some ways it is a bit silly to call out one design lineage and say it is better than the other, because in reality Porsches' designers and engineers took inspiration from all of the company's previous designs and experiences to inform the design of their newer models. It just starts to get difficult to recognize this design evolution when the factory creates a major departure like the 928 or the Macan for that matter.

I am sure Perfectlap and I agree that we both wish the 986 was released truer to original '93 concept and not plasticized for mass-production. Unfortunately, there is almost always a big departure between what is presented in the concept car and what comes out of the production line.

Back to OP:

Chuck W. stated "Bottom line, they are all great cars with very different personalities."

As someone who is just going through this transition from 986 to 993, I completely agree. There are parts of the 986 driving experience that I prefer, and there are parts of the 993 driving experience that I prefer. The 986 feels more nimble and has more modern comforts and cockpit design. The 993 feels more powerful and raw.

It really comes down to a matter of personal preferences and not what others think. Both are incredibly fun to drive and isn't that what keeps bringing us back?

[Slate 01]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

That takes the cake for coolest company cars. Hands down.

As far as heritage, I may be in the minority but I think the Boxster has equal or more heritage than any 911. Calling it a "Boxster" at launch was just a marketing gimmick to get press for a nearly bankrupt company hanging on by a thread by proclaiming an "all new concept". But the reality was that there was nothing new here conceptually, just an updated purpose built roadster with a boxer engine in the middle. The RS '60 model being a very obvious inspiration for the '93 986 studio design. The Boxster is simply a modern day 550/718, re-interpreted to shock the company back into solvency at a time when, embarrasignly for Porsche, the U.S. economy was firing on all clylinders like no Bull market before yet they couldn't sell rear-engine cars.

Both 550 and 718 were giant-killing LeMans winners before even the idea of an updated 356 had entered Butzi's brain in '59, much less worked all those perilous handling issues that kept them from catching up with the midengine Porsches on racing cabability. Which to the engineer's credit they did remarkably well. But Porsche were obviously intent on manufacturing a new legend when one was already in their stable, one that collectors are now willing to fork over $3 million and higher for if you've been following auctions for the mid-engine cars. It might be a while before any limited production rear-engine Porsche hauls in that kind of coin. And technically, the 356 and 911 were both sold in the same year if I'm not mistaken which means the 911 heritage really begins in '64 so they were pretty late to the game as far as Porsche history. It seems to me that people who grew up driving in the 70's and 80's see Porsche prestiege as only a rear-engine story when the actual history is quiet different.

Good info, thanks for sharing. I like stuff like that.

[Perfectlap]

^I think the Production 986 was pretty close to the concept, but only if you went with all the options. Porsche as is their way, nickel and dimed the 2.5 launch car by selling it with small ho hum wheels, no aero and a chintzy bare bones interior. If you wanted a look closer to the '93 concept car, which Tequipment options easily delivered, you had to fork over some big cash.
A 1997 (or 96 in Europe) 2.5 Boxster today can be upgraded inside and out and it will still look current, just like the concept car and would still be a head-turner. And if you pick your options wisely, in terms of weight, you can get the total weight of the 2.5 launch car to within striking distance of spec racer @~2,500 lbs. So the complaints about low power seem hollow once your at the actual track doing some actual high performance driving. Even 21 years later a 2.5 at that weight can stay in the mirrors of a 2008 987.1 sold 12 years later. Which tells you that maybe the engineers didn't have it completely worng in selling the 1997-99 Boxster with a 2.5 engine. Especially in those days when a "really fast" car like the M3 was still in the 250 HP neighbohrhood.

And I agree lineage is all inter-related at Porsche. Except that's not how Porsche's marekting department sells it. They figured out that creating a new legend could hep push sales by inventing a mystique about "upgrading" from a midengine car to a rear engine car. It's perhaps one of the most brilliant upselling strategies ever devised by a company.

[woodsman]

Wasn't the German dollar at a, then, unfavourable high, relative to the Canadian and USA dollar, thereby making Porsche's much more expensive during the 90's and wasn't this a Huge factor in their ,near demise?
Also, I don't see a 'brilliant marketing concept' with regards to the 911 and Boxster's placement. I see them taking advantage of an icons special place in the minds of the general public and I contribute this to racing success's and the fact that the 911 turbo was for many years, the fastest damn thing you could buy, period. And while many knew of the 911 turbo at old, Porsche's height, what percent of the pop. knew of the mid-engine cars before it?The baby-boomers have most of the dough now and they dreamed of 911(turbo)'s, not the 550's.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by woodsman

Wasn't the German dollar at a, then, unfavourable high, relative to the Canadian and USA dollar, thereby making Porsche's much more expensive during the 90's and wasn't this a Huge factor in their ,near demise?
Also, I don't see a 'brilliant marketing concept' with regards to the 911 and Boxster's placement. I see them taking advantage of an icons special place in the minds of the general public and I contribute this to racing success's and the fact that the 911 turbo was for many years, the fastest damn thing you could buy, period. And while many knew of the 911 turbo at old, Porsche's height, what percent of the pop. knew of the mid-engine cars before it?The baby-boomers have most of the dough now and they dreamed of 911(turbo)'s, not the 550's.

Yes luxury was much, much more expensive in those days of higher interest rates, irrational stock market exuberance and especially luxury from German car makes. But Americans were still buying Mercs and Bimmers, along with every other kind of toy from Italy and the UK. And frankly even if they were expensive propositions, the U.S. top 1% were buying like it was the late 80's all over again. I worked at a five star hotel at the time and had to greet our well-heeled customers at the valet entrance for black tie events and man it was one $100K car after another. And the parties going on inside, Dom Perignon flowed like water. Nobody was looking at what things cost in those income brackets. If Porsche couldn't sell rear-engine cars it wasn't really because the wealthy were all of the sudden demanding value. Porsche's biggest market had issues with the cars or were simly bored with them. Ye they loved the 996, bought 10x's as each year and now ironically that saturation of used Porsches is workign against the cars that saved Porsche's butts!

As for the Boxster placement and the 911 upselling, I simply have to recall one interview with Patrick Long, who at the time was still a brand new Porsche factory driver. In the interview he admitted that Porsche would not lease him, an extremely skilled driver, a Carrera. All new drivers were "only" issued Boxsters. And if they ate all their brocoli and did their homeworks (my words) they would give Long a Carrera. I belive he said you had to earn the right to even drive a Carrera strictly for personal rules. I think that tells it all right there about the ' stepping stone to a rear-engine car' that not only was the marketing department pushing so effectively to upsell the Carrera but apparently even the racing program! Amazing that even the racing program forgot that mid-engine roadsters were what brought them to the party quickest.

[jeffm]

Thinking about it more, I like the size, relative simplicity and convertible top of the Boxster. After driving the 996 around again today, I do wish for slightly more power from the 986. Not that I need it to drag race a minivan, but for those times of lane changes, on ramp merging, etc...the extra horsepower would be nice.

Again, with my 986 @ 86k miles the question becomes, do I spend the money to refurbish the seats, replace top with glass window, upgrade the 16" wheels and tires, add aero side skirts and install the 996 GT3 bumper I have sitting in my basement? If so, I'm at least another $6,000 into the car. Of course add back the $16k I would sell the 996 for and I'm still on top. Or, do I spend an additional $10k and go the 987 route?

Bottom line is I feel the 2 seat roadster is my personal choice even though I wanted to like the 996.

[woodsman]

Originally Posted by jeffm

Thinking about it more, I like the size, relative simplicity and convertible top of the Boxster. After driving the 996 around again today, I do wish for slightly more power from the 986. Not that I need it to drag race a minivan, but for those times of lane changes, on ramp merging, etc...the extra horsepower would be nice.

Again, with my 986 @ 86k miles the question becomes, do I spend the money to refurbish the seats, replace top with glass window, upgrade the 16" wheels and tires, add aero side skirts and install the 996 GT3 bumper I have sitting in my basement? If so, I'm at least another $6,000 into the car. Of course add back the $16k I would sell the 996 for and I'm still on top. Or, do I spend an additional $10k and go the 987 route?

Bottom line is I feel the 2 seat roadster is my personal choice even though I wanted to like the 996.

May I suggest, test-driving until you've found IT? You may find the 987 too heavy and cush, or....
Like an artist, at these painful times, we must push on into the darkness of our longing and not-knowing, searching for 'our beloved'... To the journey then! We are with you during you dark moments my dear friend...and know that even 'the world's most interesting man' has walked these lonely steps before you...

[RaisedOnPorsches]

Originally Posted by jeffm

Again, with my 986 @ 86k miles the question becomes, do I spend the money to refurbish the seats, replace top with glass window, upgrade the 16" wheels and tires, add aero side skirts and install the 996 GT3 bumper I have sitting in my basement? If so, I'm at least another $6,000 into the car. Of course add back the $16k I would sell the 996 for and I'm still on top. Or, do I spend an additional $10k and go the 987 route?

Bottom line is I feel the 2 seat roadster is my personal choice even though I wanted to like the 996.

You're right where I was with my 986 (82k miles) and looking at either invest money in upgrades or switch to a new car. That said, it looks like the roadster is right for you. I am a little confused, do you still have your 986 AND the 996, or did you have to sell it to make the move to the 996?

If you still have it, I'd stick with it. You know the car and its history. You can take your upgrades/repairs at a comfortable pace and appreciate the improvement that each one adds step by step.

If you sold it and want to replace it, do some test driving in all the variations (986, 986s, 987, 987 cayman (possibly)) as woodman recommends and figure out what works for you. Its a buyers market in the water-cooled Porsche world right now. Maybe you can talk ChuckW into selling his 986 after all.

[jeffm]

Originally Posted by RaisedOnPorsches

You're right where I was with my 986 (82k miles) and looking at either invest money in upgrades or switch to a new car. That said, it looks like the roadster is right for you. I am a little confused, do you still have your 986 AND the 996, or did you have to sell it to make the move to the 996?



If you still have it, I'd stick with it. You know the car and its history. You can take your upgrades/repairs at a comfortable pace and appreciate the improvement that each one adds step by step.



If you sold it and want to replace it, do some test driving in all the variations (986, 986s, 987, 987 cayman (possibly)) as woodman recommends and figure out what works for you. Its a buyers market in the water-cooled Porsche world right now. Maybe you can talk ChuckW into selling his 986 after all.

Yes, in fact I have both sitting in the garage right now. Probably the most prudent step would be to first sell the 996. I've pretty much made up my mind that this is not the car for me. I was thinking of putting it up on craigslist for what I paid for it ($16k range) for a quick sale. This is actually a good deal as I've just dumped $2500 in maintenance. It stinks to lose out, but I should have done more due diligence instead of being blinded by the 911 bug.

This would allow me to still enjoy the 986 and then leisurely shop around for a 987. I'm not convinced that the 987 is the car for me, but after driving the 996 I crave a bit more power. I would consider a 986S, but for the cost differential to "upgrade" makes more sense to go with the newer car.

[RaisedOnPorsches]

Originally Posted by jeffm

This would allow me to still enjoy the 986 and then leisurely shop around for a 987. I'm not convinced that the 987 is the car for me, but after driving the 996 I crave a bit more power. I would consider a 986S, but for the cost differential to "upgrade" makes more sense to go with the newer car.

For the price of the 996, I'm sure the folks at LN Engineering could help you with your HP itch. Drop in a 3.6L 996 motor with IMSB retrofit and you'd be hot to trot! :dance:

More seriously, I understand your frustration. I don't like the 996. I also don't like the 987 (Boxster Spyder aside). It was very difficult for me to find something in the $20-30k range that was a Porsche and satisfied my wants/needs. I got very lucky finding a 993 in that price point, but in doing so I lost that roadster experience.

Good luck figuring this all out for yourself!

[jeffm]

^^^ Look, I even changed my avatar back

[thstone]

You want driver involvement, excitement, and more feedback than a person can withstand? Buy a 964 RS clone like this one that I drove. Driving heaven.

[jb92563]

Originally Posted by thstone

You want driver involvement, excitement, and more feedback than a person can withstand? Buy a 964 RS clone like this one that I drove. Driving heaven.

A 964 clone RS?

Is it cloned from a base 964 or something else?

[coreseller]

Originally Posted by jb92563

A 964 clone RS?

Is it cloned from a base 964 or something else?

They are based off the 964, mainly stripping weight / options and beefing up suspension and rubber........RSAmerica.net: What is an RS America

Thstone is right, they are incredible to drive and the raw feedback is other worldly.

For me I wanted the modern conveniences yet the old school feel which IMO the 993 fills that need perfectly. I just washed it this morning lol, it had been months.



The 997 is much faster and more comfortable though, no debating that.