base Boxster vs. MR2 Spyder advantages
 

As I don't have my first Box yet, I'm still on the fence. Please help pull me to one side if you have an opinion! today, one side is a base Box (say 986) and the other is an MR2 Spyder.

Thoughts?

Mine:

MR2 Spyder:
Cheaper to buy
Cheaper to maintain (due to reliability)
Fairly easy/cheap to modify for speed (SC/turbo/2zz-ge engine swap)
Lighter
More reliable
No significant engine issues (e.g. IMS)

base 986 Boxster:
Classier (Porsche emblem on the hood)
Torquier
Faster
Better sound (engine/exhaust)
More refined interior
Porsche emblem on the hood (or did I mention that already?)



Handling is probably a wash between them. I think they are both nice looking. Porsche likely faster, though I'm not sure how much. It probably feels faster.


any comments appreciated!

Mentioning the Porsche emblem as a influence and what sounds like a desire to make many mods makes me vote you toward the MR2.

You will never get laid driving an MR2.

You have been warned. That is all...

I've owned both - a 2002 MR2 Spyder (which I sold to a friend and have driven recently) and a 2008 base Boxster (which I still have).

MR2 Pro - lower repair costs
better fuel economy
cheaper tires
lower initial cost to buy
more reliable
People sometimes mistake it for a Porsche (is this a pro or a con?)

MR2 Con - Noisy harsh motor
NO TRUNK SPACE
Poor handling compared to Boxster - I never found the MR2 as tossable as its low weight suggests and I had good tires on the thing.
Low power


Boxster Pro - It's a Porsche
Power
Handling - very big difference
Interior Room
Power top
2 trunks - both are bigger than the MR2- the Box has 3 times the trunk space of the MR2
Quality feel
The top down experience is better than the MR2. The wind ruffles your hair just the right amount. The engine noises top down are very, very nice.

Boxster Cons - purchase price
repair costs - expect to pay 4 times more in maintenance than the MR2
worse fuel economy
premium fuel required

To me there is no contest. The Boxster wins hands down. The MR2 cannot be an only car as there is no room in it. The MR2 always feels like it is put together with bailing wire and shoestring. The Porsche feels like it was chiseled from stone.

The MR2 should only be your choice if you are strapped for cash. But if you are then why buy a sports car at all? You would be better off with an econo car based sports coupe.

I'm a huge sporty Toyota fan... I love my IS300, and the MR-Spyder has always intrigued me. It's very light (2200 lbs), so I'm betting it'll be much more tossable than the already nimble Boxster. The MR isn't particularly fast, as it only has 138 hp, and the mileage is similar to that of the Boxster. Practicality goes to the Boxster... the storage capacity in the Toyota is a joke. You're probably right about ease of ownership, especially with a Toyota built during one of their strong periods.

Unfortunately I haven't driven one (they are hard to come by), so I can't give any back-to-back comparisons. The Boxster does sound better though... far better.

If you do get the MR, don't get the crappy SMT automated manual transmission. I've heard nothing but complaints.

They're both quirky and somewhat unique cars that'll be more than enough to put a stupid grin on your face. The Boxster will be more practical everyday, but the Toyota will be more Toyota everyday...

http://www.spyderchat.com/spyderimages/s27.bmp

The MR2 will be cheaper, no doubt. It's a fine car and will be tons of fun to drive.

Some of the daily issues you may run into are:

Good MPG
Good interior layout-seats not so great.
It's a bit raw-lots of noise and vibration.
No Storage.
Cheap vinyl top
Cheap to own and operate


The Boxster is, as everyone has said here, more refined. It feels far more substantial.

Some of the daily issues you may run into are:

Reasonable MPG
Superior interior-great seats
Very refined ride
Plenty of storage-do not underestimate this issue.
High quality materials everywhere
Not so cheap to own and operate

Back in '01 I test drove the both the MR2 and the Mazda MX-5. I bought the MX-5. Mainly, because it wasn't as harsh and it had (some) storage. I later traded my MX-5 for the Boxster.

Drive both and let that experience inform your choice.


good luck

For the money I second the MX5. I had 3 (94, 97, 03) of them and you can not touch the smiles per mile/$. If you want to know what a manual trans should feel like, get in to any late model 6 spd MX5 and you will see what I mean. As far as I am concerned it is the best shifting manual at any price point.

Is it the same as a Boxster...no, but I am not a youngster any more and was looking for something a little different. I have 2 favorites, the 93 black and red LE with the BBS wheels and the 2003 fully loaded with the 6 spd (the new models have more HP but lost some of the magic of the original models.

Back to Boxsters....the only big advantage, aside from the more powerful engine and that crest on the hood, is the dual truncks, although with a little practice, you can pack a lot in the MX5 if you leave the spare at home.

As to the Toyota....I was never a fan. Too small and no luggage space. At least the Boxster and the MX5 could be a DD.

just my 2 cents. BTW go out and drive them. Which one wants to make you go for a drive.....once you figure that out, buy the best one you can afford. If you choose the Boxster, make sure you keep a little money in the bank in case something goes wrong.
jp

I have a buddy who has an MR2 Spyder, and I agree that it has absolutely no storage space, and is definitely slower than the base Boxster. I know cause I raced him. LOL

The one thing no one mentioned also was that the Toyota's cheap vinyl top also is not automatic. You have to manually stand there and open/close the top.

The Search for Value
 

Hey Guys,

I find these X vs. Y vs. Boxster threads to be interesting. They illustrate the attributes of all types of sportscars as perceived by the members. The lesson I always get is that different folks vote differently with their hard earned bucks. Oppinions, wishes, and suppositions are not the same as purchases.

My two cents: I value balanced, precise handling, braking, and power. The kind of reliable precision and balance that makes pushing a sportscar to its absolute limits a fun experience for driver and passenger. I like a sportscar that has has grunt and grip that give the thrill of hard g-force in all horizontal directions. I like style, the kind that makes me stop and look at my sportscar, even after 6 years, and go "OOOOhh".

I have limits to my finances, so I don't drop the coin on a "Supercar".

I have a real appreciation for the value that the Boxster S provides stock, and for the extra outrageous performance value that mods can bring to it. I consider my S to be the car of a (my) lifetime, and I put my bucks into it.

Buddy, go test drive what YOU can afford, and buy what suits YOUR taste best.....Yugo all the way to Lambo, put your money into YOUR best value.

Happy Trails,
Ike

2003 S, 3.6L X51, PSS9s, M030 sways, Pagid Blues, Strut Brace, Hardwired Beltronics 995. Brembo Big Brakes next!

The biggest mistake Toyota made on the car was they put the 1ZZ engine in it.

My friend really wanted one until he found out the amount of luggage space there is. It's just as bad as a Lotus Elise - extremely unpractical.

I would compare MR-S to a Miata not to a Boxster. Completely different animal other than they share the same engine location. MR-S feels very bare bone when you sit in it.

I'd rather be in an accident in a Boxster than in an MR2. I hope now one ever is, but it happens.

2 cars ago I owned an 01 MR2. I agree with what the others have said about it but wanted to add a few tidbits. The city gas mileage was excellent - 30mpg, but the highway was OK at 33. It had a 5spd and 5th was not OD. The ride was harsh due to the short wheelbase. The interior design doesn't get your heart racing. And you had to put your golf bag in the passenger seat. I loved MR 2 - he was my introduction to open air motoring, but I don't miss him.

I traded him for my 01S. The Boxster is a more refined vehicle in every aspect. If you're on a budget, then the MR2 is probably the way to go. If you've got a few more discretionary dollars to spend, find a nice 986.

Also, MR2s are not bullet proof. I perused an MR2 forum in an effort to sell an extra set of wheels and tires I had left over. There was plenty of discussion about catalytic converters or something like that failing fairly regularly. I put 48K mi on mine without any problems but maybe I got rid of it just in time. I'd suggest looking around SpyderChat and get a feel for any problems discussed there. However, the folks there aren't as friendly as on this forum. Many have a snot-nosed kid attitude, maybe because most of the owners are younger. My name there was MR2NoMore and I posted a pic of my LE. While some were very interested in finding out about it, many had rude comments. So watch yourself.

You have some fun choices to make.

http://i31.tinypic.com/14w607o.jpg

Sorry I couldn't resist:



http://i421.photobucket.com/albums/p.../MR2spyder.jpg




It's supposed to be funny:cheers:

People in glass houses should not throw stones... :dance: :p

Hey I thought we're all hairdressers?

Dude, I know, I hear it all the time!

Just thought it was a funny pic! :D

Having a 1993 MR2 myself with a 3vz-fe v6 and a Porsche Boxster... I can offer some insight (even though I only have a MKII).

Based on my research the MK3 is a BLAST to drive and auto x, loves being thrown into corners. Extremely reliable and will never leave you stranded (less likely at least).

The MKIII itself may not be torquey but a 2ZZ will solve that. I have seen incredible MKIII's, very capable of outrunning most cars on the road today.

I told you... my hairdresser drives a Vette. But she did have an original Fiero (first week it came out... way back when).

That's so funny! My wife's hairdresser just sold his Fiero and according to the wife was very depressed about it. She later mentioned to him that a Boxster might be a good choice as a replacement... he didn't think it was the right car for him?

My previous car was a 2004 MR2 Spyder. I had a four year lease on it and went to the Toyota dealership with the intention of buying it. The dealer said "Well, before you buy your MR2 let me show you what else I have." Then he pulled out the Boxster and said "Why don't you leave your Spyder here and take the Porsche for the day." And that's all she wrote. Also keep in mind I have a 2.7 base, not the S and there was still no comparison. The Spyder feels like a toy compared to the box with its whiny 4 cylinders.


In my opinion there really is no comparison. If you get the MR2 you'll just wish you had the boxster. It has enough storage space for two medium sized duffel bags. Under the rear deck lid is the engine, under the front is a spare. ZERO storage. The convertible top is manual and made of cheap vinyl that is known to crack. Power and handling do not compare. I loved my Spyder but quickly forgot it when I got my Boxster.

My two cents.

I think the limited storage space in the MR2 makes it pretty impractical. The Box has some pretty decent trunks. I can take my Box camping with tent, sleeping bag, folding chairs, tackle box, fishing poles, cooler, etc. That would be impossible in an MR2!

If you're looking to mod the car, then you're probably pretty handy. If you do the work yourself the Porsche maintenance costs aren't all that bad.

Kirk

the boxster is better. You will like it more - for all the various reasons that have already been stated.

When I was shopping for my boxster, I also considered the S2000 and the RX8. I know the RX8 is not a roadster, but i test drove it, and I really really liked the rotary engine, and the sporty way it handled - I rationalized the RX8 as it had back seats and would be a somewaht "practical" 3rd car b/c you could get mor eusage out of it... anyway... of all these three cars...

I liked the boxster the most the boxster was the most fun. the other two cars, were "fun" and I considered them more affordable, more reliable, I could buy a newer one for the same money, etc etc..but in the end, I was buying a third car for me to have fun in - and ultimately, that meant I should buy the car that I really wanted..and what made the little hairs on the back of my next stand up, was the boxster. the way it sounds when you are running toward redline, the way it corners, the way it looks - the S2000, or in your case, the MR2 is a compromise.

Just be prepared that it will cost you more to fix it, and there is a remote possiblity of motor failure that will cost you an arm and a leg. NOt sure what you are looknig to spend, how new/old of a car you are considering if you go the boxster route - but if you have $$$ to spend you can get a CPO car from a dealer and you have no major worries for a while.... if you go the used car route - like I did, you can get a VERY good deal on a base or S model. I would suspect you could find a nice nice nice base model 986 like a 2000-2002 for $10-13k. I bet $15k gets you into a nicely equipped "S" with reasonable miles.

be patient, shop a lot, look at everything, test drive all of them, know WHAT options you want, don't want, and then find one you want and then know that you are in teh driver's seat to to speak as the market for these cars is a buyer's market all the way. have some money stashed to repair stuff that will break.

there is nothing that a good drive in the boxster can't fix. :) okay, that's not really true...but you know what I mean.

for me, the S2000 was too small, buzzy, had ZERO low end torque...the boxster was way classier, felt faster (even my base model), and was just an overall better car. in the end, with cars, you usually get what you pay for. look at the MSRP of a new boxster vs a similar year MR2. the Boxster was a $50k car and the MR2 was a $20k-ish car... it's no big suprise the boxster is what you will like more...

arrange to test drive them back to back...on the same day. go home and see which one you still think about when you are back home.... for me, I test drove back to back, and it was obvious which one I wanted...

good luck.

I owned a 1986 MR2. Loved the car. Underpowered, but I loved the way it handled. It was a neon blue go-cart.

I also have a friend with a highly modded MR2 Spyder. He's bolted a Supra motor into it and the thing takes off like a scalded dog off the line. I think he's doing 0-60 in the mid 4 second range for very little cash outlay. The car was his daily driver for a long time too. He's got a carputer in it and a fully adjustable race suspension in it too. The thing can turn on a dime.

Now what I don't care for about his car is the fact that it gets squirrelly over 100 mph because the aerodynamics of the car is simply not created for triple digit speeds.

My 86 was a very cool looking car. The Spyders are not attractive at all IMHO.

But if you want a convertible you can mod the heck out of for little to nothing compared to our cars and you don't have the urge to do triple digit speeds, it's not a bad choice.

You're gonna be asked if it's your daughter's car though. I'm just sayin'

Mine came with Yokohoma Advans - speed rated to 150mph! What were they thinking???

If you are young enough to squeeze in and out, I vote #3, the Lotus Elise. Perfect blend of Europe and Asia

Fantastic. Many thanks for all the replies. I really didn't expect so many former MR2-S owners.

As per older threads, I have previously owned an NA miata (95) and just got out of an 08 S2000 lease. I actually preferred the miata. S2000 way too harsh for me, not only engine noise but ride on broken pavement--it's too stiff-- if that's possible (I'm talking cars people, cars!) It just wasn't for me.

So I'm down to probably my last comparision---the Spyder. And you have all made some really valid points. I also posted in the Spyderchat forum about whether that car was for me, and based on their very candid feedback, I think I agree with them and you all that I will likely have fun in the MR2-S but will always be thinking---why didn't I just get the Box?. Just like this forum they have a pretty good group of folks who tell it like it is.

So thanks again. I will still test drive one, but I think you've pulled me over the fence--on the side of which sits a beautiful red or silver late model 986 or early 987 :D

Just wanted to mention, my wife and I are mid 30's DINKS. So I could buy a new 911 turbo if I wanted to . But we are responsible. We are planning for the future. I don't want blow my future early retirement just because of a car. I believe that this is the best time probably in my lifetime to invest in corporations (stock market). So right now, I'd rather use my cash to help grow the economy--and my nest egg. I'm looking for the most fun I can have on a moderate budget,so as Ike put it----VALUE. So I could afford a boxster and any catastrophic engine failures, but would prefer not to if there was something out there that was 95% of what the Boxster is for 50% of the cost.

What attracted me to the MR2-S is it looked like loads of fun for about $10k. Boxster will run me considerably more. But even though it's so much cheaper, I think in the end, I would have regretted it for many reasons. So I guess I'm back in the hunt for the perfect Box for me!! :cheers:

CRCGuy,

Sounds like you've made a good decision. We are in similar situations as well, and we decided on the Box after looking hard at the S2K. In a couple years we may be interested in swapping out the Box for something different, or we may keep enjoying it as we do today!

Anyway enjoy the hunt for your Box! :cheers:

we should talk. I could swap ya for my MY08 S2K!! oh wait...you already made that decision. crap....

I too am a former MRS owner, a 2000. My thoughts echo the other owners, but I will add a few tid bits (if these are repeats, I apologize, I scanned some of the responses).

I have had the opportunity to track both the MRS and my 05 Boxster. The MRS was alot of fun, being so light you could out brake nearly every car on the track. And it had decent power to around 100 mph. The MRS may hit 115 where the Boxster my hit 128 on a straight. But it behaved more like an older 911 than a Boxster in the handling department, since it is nearly a rear engined car. My only spins on a track were in the Toyota. A few friends said the Toyota was very easy to steer with the brake pedal, that skill set is beyond me, I just took their word for it. The Boxster is a joy on the track. It makes it so easy to drive fast on the track. I truly am amazed by the car whenever I drive it. Hands down, Boxster wins this one (as it should due to its cost).

With regards to reliability, the MRS had bearing starvation issues if tracked with slicks. People developed new oil pans, remote oil sump pumps and such. It was also imperative to scrap the stock manifold and install a header in its place, as the manifold precats would break apart and cause the engine to fail. The only silver lining is a used engine is $1200, compared to $12,000 with a Boxster. Advantage, Toyota.

Comfortwise, I had a Toyota TRD Sportivo suspension on mine, and it got to the point that I hated driving the car on the street. And it had 2 cubic feet of storage space compared to 10+ I think on the Boxster. The Boxster is head and shoulders above the Toyo in ride quality, fit and finish, audio sound, and cabin room.

So, I know I have a 987 and you are looking at a 986, but in either case, I think the MR2 Spyder will make one always wish they had sprung for the Boxster. But the MR2 is not a bad car. Of course I ended up selling the MR2 and buying the Boxster.

Wow this is over 11 years later, but I'm going to post as a MR2 Spyder owner with a very dear Porsche Boxter owner friend. In fact, I donated to his fundraiser to buy his Boxter. It was the car he longed for and I understood 100%.

A few years after he bought it he organized an event for Boxters and Boxter S's to meet at the Tail of The Dragon, in Tennessee / NC. I joined the event in my MR2 Spyder with 2zz engine upgrade (same Toyota engine as Lotus used for the Elise).

Together - Toyota Mr2 2zz, Boxters, and Boxter-S's, we had a great time on the Dragon.

My point?

Both the Toyota MR2 and the Boxster are fantastic cars. I've driven both. The Boxster is heavier and feels more solid, and has more luggage room. The MR2 only has room for large duffel bags in a compartment behind the seats, and a small area for 1 more duffel bag in the frunk.

The MR2 Spyder was my daily driver from 2002 to 2010. I carried computers, printers, etc. in it for my I.T. business. Where there's a will there's a way. If you love a car enough you make a way. I loved the MR2 that much. My friend loved the Boxster that much. We made our favorite cars work.

The Toyota MR2 is cheaper to own, maintain, and upgrade. Mine is currently getting a Toyota 2gr engine swapped into it, for 285 HP in a 2200 lbs total car. It will 0-60 in about 3.8 secs. If I didn't mind it being loud, I could have 310 HP, but that's not my style. Subtlety is a value.

My friend still has his Boxster and still loves it. And I definitely hope to take another road trip with him. Porsche - there is no substitute! If I had infinite bucks, I'd have a 928 in my "collection" which would include every model of Toyota MR2, the Porsche 928, the Porsche Boxter-S, the Ferrari F40, and the Lamborghini Countach.

I think it depends on what you want your car to do. Boxster is a refined ride but not a potential race car. MR2 Spyder is for those that like taking tight corners. If you want to work on cars and take them to the track then the MR2 spyder has way more potentials than the boxster. MR2 K20/k24 swaps are giving gt4 the run for it’s money. The mr2 is very peculiar about the wheels and tire setup. Lower the front, double staggered the wheels, installed proper coilovers, add a k20/k24 and you’ll have a beast at the track. Boxster S and Caymen S won’t be able to catch it. But it won’t cruise around town in style like the porsche for sure.