Best year?

[78F350]

I have a '99 5-speed and an '01 Tip. Aside from what has already been mentioned, I like the interior plastics finish of the '99 better than the soft, 'easy-scratch' finish of the '01. The '99 engines seem to be really holding up well. I don't feel the need to have an S, but I am watching for the right deal on a 2000.

I strongly agree with:

97-99 is pure, raw, no frills boxster (base model). And they have the dual row ims ... My 99 loves to rev and be tossed around.

99 last of raw boxters.

Dual row IMS, center speedo, 18" wheels, upgraded chassis structure, no e-gas, better looking top (no center bow), excellent gas mileage, decent power, and raw feel.

The S model cars only come out on occasion. I drive one of the '99's almost every day.

For an S:

2000
Dual row IMS. Digi speedo in center. Cable hood and trunk. 18" wheels OK. 3.2 + light weight. Fewer electronic driver nannies. Right spot in depreciation curve.

[Fyeganeh]

I'm going with my model - a base 2000, 2.7l, turn of the century - I believe they are supposed to have the least failures too - dual row IMS, worked out the kinks on cylinder cracks, have metal pressure pin on billet ims to crankshaft tensioner paddle, less likely than larger engines to break - have five shift.

Of course I'm not biased at all

[evo-r]

2003 & 2004

[Luv2Box]

The early Boxsters. '97-'99 had the least amount of IMS failures of any model until 2006. From 2000-2005 had the most, some years as much as 10% according to the class action law suite.
As has been said here already the 97-99 Boxsters have a rawness to them that later Boxsters lack and, in my opinion, the 2.5L has the best exhaust note of any of them.
My vote is also for the '99 Boxster, the last of the body style closest to the concept car.
The only thing I would change would be adding a 2.7L Metzgar motor.

[njbray]

Originally Posted by Fyeganeh

I'm going with my model - a base 2000, 2.7l, turn of the century - I believe they are supposed to have the least failures too - dual row IMS, worked out the kinks on cylinder cracks, have metal pressure pin on billet ims to crankshaft tensioner paddle, less likely than larger engines to break - have five shift.

Of course I'm not biased at all

Like he said
2001 2.7 - dual row ims & pre-vvt (I think).
There is a quote somewhere from Jake Raby agreeing - so there

[BubblesinAZ]

Good to read many folks favor a 2003 S, me too. We live in northern Arizona - the land of wonderful, nearly empty, high speed limit, excellent condition, two lane blacktop twisty back roads. If you ever visit our state, get off the highways and see the real Arizona.
Now to my real reason for joining in: I'm having the IMS quandary. Our Boxster has 30K miles, gets an oil change every 5K, and runs like a top. However; recently I have had a concern of the possibility of IMS failure. The more I read and research, the less I seem to be calmed. I've talked to the area LN engineering rep and he sez got to do it, while the Porsche Service Manager sez not to worry. Are there any stats/hard science relating to the probability of my single row IMS going south? What has been your experience?
Bubbles in AZ or maybe Befuddled in AZ

[Luv2Box]

I posted this some time ago at the PCA Boxster register after speaking with the attorney who represented the plaintiffs in the class action law suit against Porsche regarding failed IMS bearings. My understanding is that the Tiptronics have had far fewer failures than sticks but no one has ever been able to explain the reason for that. Hope this helps you.
"This morning I had a conversation with Steven Harris, the attorney at Knapp, Peterson and Clark Law Firm, that represented the plaintiffs in the class action law suit against Porsche regarding the IMS bearing failures. The following information is FYI and is specific to the percentage of failures that were repaired by Porsche under warranty or good will claims. I have received permission to post the information and if you have any more questions regarding any other aspect of the suit please call 818-547-5100.
The law suit involves the years 2001-2005 both base and "S" models that have the single row IMS bearing.
The failure rate, that has been reported from warranty and goodwill repairs, for those model years ranges from 4%-10% and involves 57,000 vehicles in the United Sates only. The actual percentages for each model year are available but Mr. Harris did not have them available and I did not press him for more of his time to dig them up.
The highest percentage of vehicles affected were in California and again he did not have the exact percentage available or a reason for that.
The failure rate for the early Boxsters 97-2000 model years is less than 1% (.02-.04%) however the scope of the suit spans a 10 year period and vehicles up to 130K miles and is not entirely exclusive to 2001-2005 models. I did not get into this any further so I encourage individuals possibly affected to call for more clarification.
Please understand this information is specific to percentages and nothing else and is not being posted to create another debate about the IMS issue, spleen venting about after market fixes, or displeasure about the results of the suit. I've been curious about the percentages of failures that have been theorized on Boxster sites and wanted to get some specifics regarding them. Since my vehicle is not involved, has had the LN bearing installed and falls in the very lowest percentage of failure my curiosity is satisfied."
______

Originally Posted by BubblesinAZ

Good to read many folks favor a 2003 S, me too. We live in northern Arizona - the land of wonderful, nearly empty, high speed limit, excellent condition, two lane blacktop twisty back roads. If you ever visit our state, get off the highways and see the real Arizona.
Now to my real reason for joining in: I'm having the IMS quandary. Our Boxster has 30K miles, gets an oil change every 5K, and runs like a top. However; recently I have had a concern of the possibility of IMS failure. The more I read and research, the less I seem to be calmed. I've talked to the area LN engineering rep and he sez got to do it, while the Porsche Service Manager sez not to worry. Are there any stats/hard science relating to the probability of my single row IMS going south? What has been your experience?
Bubbles in AZ or maybe Befuddled in AZ

[Giller]

Originally Posted by Luv2Box

I posted this some time ago at the PCA Boxster register after speaking with the attorney who represented the plaintiffs in the class action law suit against Porsche regarding failed IMS bearings. My understanding is that the Tiptronics have had far fewer failures than sticks but no one has ever been able to explain the reason for that. Hope this helps you.
"This morning I had a conversation with Steven Harris, the attorney at Knapp, Peterson and Clark Law Firm, that represented the plaintiffs in the class action law suit against Porsche regarding the IMS bearing failures. The following information is FYI and is specific to the percentage of failures that were repaired by Porsche under warranty or good will claims. I have received permission to post the information and if you have any more questions regarding any other aspect of the suit please call 818-547-5100.
The law suit involves the years 2001-2005 both base and "S" models that have the single row IMS bearing.
The failure rate, that has been reported from warranty and goodwill repairs, for those model years ranges from 4%-10% and involves 57,000 vehicles in the United Sates only. The actual percentages for each model year are available but Mr. Harris did not have them available and I did not press him for more of his time to dig them up.
The highest percentage of vehicles affected were in California and again he did not have the exact percentage available or a reason for that.
The failure rate for the early Boxsters 97-2000 model years is less than 1% (.02-.04%) however the scope of the suit spans a 10 year period and vehicles up to 130K miles and is not entirely exclusive to 2001-2005 models. I did not get into this any further so I encourage individuals possibly affected to call for more clarification.
Please understand this information is specific to percentages and nothing else and is not being posted to create another debate about the IMS issue, spleen venting about after market fixes, or displeasure about the results of the suit. I've been curious about the percentages of failures that have been theorized on Boxster sites and wanted to get some specifics regarding them. Since my vehicle is not involved, has had the LN bearing installed and falls in the very lowest percentage of failure my curiosity is satisfied."
______

Interesting how it says California cars had the highest percentage, which tends to go against the grain as most say cars that sit for prolonged periods are more prone. I would have assumed that cars in California where driven a lot more due to the nicer weather.

[KRAM36]

Originally Posted by Giller

Interesting how it says California cars had the highest percentage, which tends to go against the grain as most say cars that sit for prolonged periods are more prone. I would have assumed that cars in California where driven a lot more due to the nicer weather.

Cost of living is high in California, people that can afford a Porsche there probably also have a Prius or similar to dive to work and the Boxster was their garage queen.

[KRAM36]

Originally Posted by BubblesinAZ

Good to read many folks favor a 2003 S, me too. We live in northern Arizona - the land of wonderful, nearly empty, high speed limit, excellent condition, two lane blacktop twisty back roads. If you ever visit our state, get off the highways and see the real Arizona.
Now to my real reason for joining in: I'm having the IMS quandary. Our Boxster has 30K miles, gets an oil change every 5K, and runs like a top. However; recently I have had a concern of the possibility of IMS failure. The more I read and research, the less I seem to be calmed. I've talked to the area LN engineering rep and he sez got to do it, while the Porsche Service Manager sez not to worry. Are there any stats/hard science relating to the probability of my single row IMS going south? What has been your experience?
Bubbles in AZ or maybe Befuddled in AZ

With that low of mileage I would get it done, but go with the IMS Solution from Flat6Innovation.