[Overdrive]

That's definitely my concern...the whole point of the name of the car was combining two aspects of it, the boxer engine and it being a roadster...not trying to insult anyone's intelligence here, as I'm sure 90% of the members on here know this, but it just points to there being an obvious misnomer situation there if they continue to call the car a Boxster and the engine isn't flat, be it a flat 4, 6, whatever. That'd really be my only gripe if they were to make that error. If it's still a high power 4 cylinder, I can't really complain all that much, it's just the nature of the beast with car development these days.

As for the whole issue of the Lotus (a marque of which I am a fan, so don't try to paint me as biased) vs. the Boxster, as someone mentioned earlier, we're talking about two entirely different machines from two different eras with very different technological developments to them, as well as two very different weights. To expect a trackable street car over a decade old that used to put out 200 horses to the CRANK on a good day with the wind behind it to outperform or even keep up with a featherlight, barely streetable track car is not realistic. You might as well try to compare a Bugatti Veyron to a Tuk-Tuk. I really don't see why someone's trying so hard to point out how lame this car is. A Crown Victoria's pretty lame when you try to compare it to an F1 car, too, but which one can you drive to the track, on the track, and back home again? One could do this all day with any and every car you could think of, but why bother? People know the issues with the car and that Porsche messed up in a lot of ways...it's not stopping people from buying them and enjoying them on and off the track.
:dance: