Questions about the 986
 

Hey guys, I'm new to the forum and thinking about getting a 2000-2002 Boxster S. I'm planning to go test drive one this weekend, but how different is it than the 911 Carrera of the same year? I drove a 2002 911 last year and loved it, but I've been considering the Boxster because it's cheaper and I think it looks better than the 911 convertible. Also I know the 18" wheels come with 265 tires in the rear, but how wide are the rims? I was wondering if they are wide enough to fit 285's like the 911 has on the same style wheel? Any help is much appreciated!

Can't comment from personal experience on Boxster vs. 911, but if you go watch a lot of YouTube reviews of the Boxster, you'll hear a lot guys yelling "I can't believe it. It handles better than a 911 -- this is one awesome sports car!" I think it's pretty well accepted now that the 911 is the luxury grand tourer and Boxster/Cayman are Porsche's sports cars.

Wheels: see attached.http://986forum.com/forums/uploads01...1394212761.jpg

I think the 986 handles better for average drivers than a 911. Now that I have a 986 I can say that from experience.

That table is very helpful. Thanks! Seems like a 285 would fit perfectly fine on a 10" wheel. Anyone here running 285 rear tires? Any negatives to going wider than the stock 265's?

off topic
 

There is no such thing as a cheap Porsche . In the end you will pay....ask any of us

I meant cheap as in, it's not $90,000 like a brand new 911.

What he's trying to say is maintenance cost for $10k Porsche is the same as $90k Porsche.

I wouldn't go 285 on the rear... it will slow the car down by a good margin from stand still since there's too much rubber plus it will cause more understeer.

Drive a few and see what you like! If money was no object and I had the garage space, I would have one of each. That not being the case for either, I am more than happy with my 2001 S. Take a look at this thread, it will give you some more insight to the 986 vs 996:

http://986forum.com/forums/general-discussions/50962-911-buyers-remorse.html

Welcome to the forum:cheers:

There is not much comparison in handling and performance between the two. The Boxster justs feel better and more fun. If you need 4 seats(occasional back seat for 2 midgets) then the 996 is okay for that.

Not much difference in running costs between the two. Boxster slightly less but budget around $1500 to 2000 a year for expenses. If you are concerned about the ims then you will have to put out more to replace that.

I have tried to like the water cooled 911's but cannot sell my Box for something so GT like. Enjoy your search and try lots of cars. PPI is a must.
Cheers, G.:)

Shots fired!

Where did you get that table? I wonder if they have a 911 table like that lying around.

Just buy one of each like I did. Then you have the best of all worlds. :)

Yeah, I have an entire post on this...
Still have both cars, but the 911 will be up for sale soon. Actually, I'm going to drive an 05 987 this weekend, as well as, a Caymen S. Can't be too informed!

If I had the money I would have both. If I had the money for just one, I would take a boxster. You can only use so much power on the road but a cars handling matters at any speed. As lf you buying for imaige you will be disappointed with a boxster, if your buying for fun you would end up unable to justify the price you paid for the 911 over the equal if not better (upon occasion) boxster.

If I could only keep one of my fleet and I was most concerned about having fun, I'd keep the 3.6 Boxster. On the other hand, if I was concerned about which one would be worth more in 10 years and still be running, I'd keep the 996 TT.

A mid engine car is not faster than front or rear engine car. On a production car basis, with a gas-burning engine, the quickest car around the N-ring is/was a front engine Japanese made Nissan. However.... a car with the engine in the middle in mortal hands, is the platform that is the easiest to drive fast. A car without a roof, designed to be a roadster (and not a car with the roof hacked off afterwards like the Carrera Cab) avoids increasing the center of gravity, which in turn makes the car more of a "point and shoot" experience. The only Porsche, with a conventional engine, that has both of these things is the Boxster. You can add a fixed roof for rigidity, like in a Cayman, but the extra weight up top will cost you on handling. You can make the car longer and wider like the Carrera, but it will also cost you on handling.... partly why the 991 GT3 now comes with RWS, to give more of the short wheel base feel of a Boxster/Cayman and avoid that abrupt weirdness of (pre-991 GT3) bigger Carreras. You can add AWD like the Carrera C4 but the inevitable understeer (the way Porsche do AWD) will cost you on handling. So with the Boxster you get RWD, Mid-engine and lower COG.
(for color, see the huge gap on the time sheets below considering the tight track conditions)
http://www.excellence-mag.com/issues/196/articles/open-and-shut-case-track-test

As far as power, if you can swing a 2009 Boxster, it's the best option because unless that 2000-2002 has low miles or the seller did a bunch of work that he's not expecting to get back on his asking price, you must budget in some big repairs if mileage is over the ~60K mark. Having a few back to back repairs, that didn't rear their heads during the pre-purchase inspection, that equal 30% of the purchase price is not unheard of. In other words, there's no such thing as cheap 12 year old Porsche. Over the first 60K miles of my Boxster S experience I had exactly one unexpected repair that ran over $200. After 60K miles... it was payback time in a big way.

I hope i didn't misunderstand your statement but in the case you meant what i think you did. The Porsche 918, a mid engine Porsche is the fastest production car with a 6:57. And the Fastest lap EVER 6:11 being in a Porsche 956.... also a mid engine Porsche.

I was referring to conventional engines. The 918 is hybrid like the P1. That's a whole new can of million dollar worms.

The 956 was conventional... and while priced highly the 918 is carrying about quite alot of weight with if i am right less horsepower than the Nissan. (sorry i dont follow average car companies much) Despite this though if it wasnt for emission regulations and there was a 918 with just the v8 and the weight taken away from the hybrid drive train i am fully convinced it would maintain its time if not a faster one. Especially if it was matted with turbos the size of Texas like the Nissan is.

Thanks for all the info so far. I would only be putting around 5000-6000 miles per year on the car. I hear so many conflicting opinions on how expensive it is to own/maintain these cars, I don't know what to believe.

If you can do most of your own labor, It shouldn't cost any more to maintain than most other sports cars of it's caliber.
Just this weekend I was able to install a radiator on my own for about 90$... compare that to who-knows-what at a dealer.

I think most comparisons in maintenance costs are Boxsters vs. Zero-upkeep economy cars.
Not exactly a fair comparison.