What drop-top would you consider as a replacement to the Boxster?

[986Roadster]

hmmmm i would say anything audi.......

i have thought about this, and people have asked, what i would buy next.

not too much that compares to the boxster, without having to spend over $100,000.

sorry that mg looks like a 2 door jetta, and pretty awful looking.

i would only consider a cayman, but it seems that you want a roadster.

so pretty much you have to keep the boxster or put in another $100, 000 and
get the 997 or ahhhh used turbo.

no substitute

[986Roadster]

look at your sig pic and now look at the mg pics......no substitute

[CJ_Boxster]

The Pagani Zonda F

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by 986Roadster

hmmmm i would say anything audi.......

i have thought about this, and people have asked, what i would buy next.

not too much that compares to the boxster, without having to spend over $100,000.

sorry that mg looks like a 2 door jetta, and pretty awful looking.

i would only consider a cayman, but it seems that you want a roadster.

so pretty much you have to keep the boxster or put in another $100, 000 and
get the 997 or ahhhh used turbo.

no substitute

Hi,

I don't know where you get Jetta looking at it, but to each his own. Now, Audi's do have the Jetta look, similar DNA I suspect. But, the Cayman is just another Boxster with a fixed roof...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[RandallNeighbour]

I don't see a Jetta either. It does look a lot better top down than up. But I think that same thing about the Boxster too.

[TriGem2k]

The MG looks like a Volvo and an ugly one at that.

To each their own!

[SD987]

I'm thinking of an eventual replacement for my 2000 Boxster and coming up with few choices. Topping my list are the Porsche 996, BMW M3, and Acura NSX.

I'd agree with your assessment of the 996 cab's looks and my personal feelings on the car are that it suffers from the same drawbacks as the 986, everything about the car's design and engineering is inherently ten years old, which does not make it a bad car...just dated.

I hope you're not talking about an e36 BMW M3 convertible, because the 240 hp U.S. version of that car is an insult to the M division. The e46 M3 convertible is nice, just not a great performer due to chopping off the roof and adding three hundred pounds. If you get one, you should wait until the new M3 comes out next year to wait for the depreciation on the e46. I disagree about the looks and find it one of the more menacing convertibles around and more masculine than most roadsters. Four seats is also nice...

On the NSX, you'll want the 97 version or later due to the 3.2 engine upgrade but would suggest 2002 or newer because of the upgrades that went in that year (xenons, body kit, etc.). Make sure you call your insurance company first on this one, as the aluminum body makes them expensive to repair and insure. Maintenance is Porsche-dealer expensive as well, and you'll probably want to get service at a Honda/Acura dealer rather than an independent. This car chews through expensive tires even faster than a Boxster.

I've driven most of the late-model convertibles out there, and if you can live with the styling I'd recommend a new Z4M. Best standard kit, most powerful in class, free maintenance for 4/50 and they're not exactly selling like hotcakes so prices are good. The 3.2 engine on some of the earlier M3s were not exactly trouble free, but by now they've been ironed out. You might also want to wait on the next generation 325/330 convertible as it looks to be a stunner and the engine in the 330 coupe is a 300ft. lbs/ 300 hp ass-kicker from all accounts.

[Porschekid]

Originally Posted by SD987

I'm thinking of an eventual replacement for my 2000 Boxster and coming up with few choices. Topping my list are the Porsche 996, BMW M3, and Acura NSX.

I'd agree with your assessment of the 996 cab's looks and my personal feelings on the car are that it suffers from the same drawbacks as the 986, everything about the car's design and engineering is inherently ten years old, which does not make it a bad car...just dated.

I hope you're not talking about an e36 BMW M3 convertible, because the 240 hp U.S. version of that car is an insult to the M division. The e46 M3 convertible is nice, just not a great performer due to chopping off the roof and adding three hundred pounds. If you get one, you should wait until the new M3 comes out next year to wait for the depreciation on the e46. I disagree about the looks and find it one of the more menacing convertibles around and more masculine than most roadsters. Four seats is also nice...

On the NSX, you'll want the 97 version or later due to the 3.2 engine upgrade but would suggest 2002 or newer because of the upgrades that went in that year (xenons, body kit, etc.). Make sure you call your insurance company first on this one, as the aluminum body makes them expensive to repair and insure. Maintenance is Porsche-dealer expensive as well, and you'll probably want to get service at a Honda/Acura dealer rather than an independent. This car chews through expensive tires even faster than a Boxster.

I've driven most of the late-model convertibles out there, and if you can live with the styling I'd recommend a new Z4M. Best standard kit, most powerful in class, free maintenance for 4/50 and they're not exactly selling like hotcakes so prices are good. The 3.2 engine on some of the earlier M3s were not exactly trouble free, but by now they've been ironed out. You might also want to wait on the next generation 325/330 convertible as it looks to be a stunner and the engine in the 330 coupe is a 300ft. lbs/ 300 hp ass-kicker from all accounts.

Thanks for the advice. I was looking at the e46 M3... I love the looks of the regular ones but not a big fan of the drop top version. I'm not sure why... either too much canvas with the top up or the 4 headrests sticking up with the top down make it seem less sporty. I would get a pre-2002 NSX if not for the price then simply because I like the looks of the pop-up headlights alot more than the newer fixed ones. Hopefully someone around me will get an NSX in that I can test drive... that is probably #1 on my list of other cars right now. The more I think about it the more I think I should just save up for some upgrades to the Boxster (body kit, 996 engine swap). It might not be the most financially responsible descision but it would probably leave me the happiest.

[Topless]

I think the MG is nice looking. Much better than most of the Jap beer can roadsters. It doesn't say ATTITUDE though.

If faced with such a dilemma I would apply simple logic... If not Porsche... then Ferrari. They are arguably still the only game in town if you want great looks, great performance and great pedigree in a purpose built, no compromise roadster. If you do decide on a Ferrari keep a good mechanic on retainer though. Maintenance and repairs are mind-boggling.

[racer_d]

I'm not sure if "use" was specified but...

1) 1950's Porsche Speedster
2) Any 356 Cab (mmm Carerra II with Fourcam would be nice

3) Cayman Convertible
4) 996
5) Mini Cooper S JCW
6) MB SLK
7) Z4, M

[webster132]

You can get a used SLK55 AMG for ~$45-50k. It's a V8, 355hp, 376 lb-ft, convertible hardtop. That's a pretty nice machine and tad faster than a new Boxster S. (I'd still pick the S any day of the week, but if you're tired of the pcar for some reason).

See http://www.mbusa.com/models/features/specs/overview.do?modelCode=SLK55&class=07_SLK