It is very disheartening checking new posts

[fatmike]

Originally Posted by ElementAI

I want it to be as reliable as the 1994 Honda I still have with 186,000 miles

A Boxster is simply not as reliable as your 1994 Honda. If you want a Honda, buy a Honda.

Overall the Boxster is a simple car that unfortunately requires more money than average for things like maintenance, repairs, etc. You might be surprised by how much tires ($1200+) and oil changes ($100+) will cost as compared to your Honda. You may also be surprised by how much the cheap plastic bits in the cabin cost when they break (and they will).

If my Boxster dies one day on the side of the road, it will be a sad day. I would be very likely to go buy another one.

I think the Boxster is worth it, you may or may not.

[Lil bastard]

In all seriousness, if you truly have this much angst about the car, don't buy it.

There are more reliable and less expensive cars out there, there's no getting around that. Things may get exagerated on a forum like this, or probably more accurately concentrated making issues seem larger than they are.

But, the fact remains that these issues do occur and you have to be informed and prepared to live with it and this means realizing that the potential War Chest required to own a Porsche must be larger than that one might need for a Miata. There is no Porsche out there as reliable or as cheap to run as a Honda. If that's what you're looking for, forget it, it doesn't exist. These cars cost more to own and break more frequently than a Honda. The payback is the experiences you have in-between. For some the rewards are worth the risk, not so for others. The Boxster, or any Porsche for that matter is not a car for everybody, nor does it try to be.

You're buying a used car, there is an element of uncertainty and risk associated with ANY used car. And this fleet is aging, meaning issues will become more likely, not less.

Buying a car because it has a certain reputation or a certain panache is great, but you are also buying every poorly designed piece and system along with it. If you buy the car, there is always some risk involved. If you're willing to assume the risk, buy it. If not, look elsewhere.

But it's all about enjoyment. If you are uncomfortable sitting on Damacles throne, then don't. Go out and buy a BMW, Mustang, Evo or whatever else may turn your crank. Just realize that these will all have their own sets of issues.

There is no perfect car. If there were, in short order it'd be the only car on the market.

Cheers!

[Perfectlap]

I had a Miata for about 5 years too. Mostly an Autocrosser that I rarely drove during the week. Believe it or not this car has been more relialbe than the MX-5.
I'll go one better this is the most reliable car I have driven (inlcuding my folk's cars) based on 60K miles/6 years of driving.
Non-maintenace repairs in that time have been the following in this order:

1-faulty parking brake switch $4 at 10K miles
2-premature death of throttle body $300 (dealer) at 30K miles
3-02 sensor at 50K miles $150 (DIY)
4-alternator at 65K miles $200 (indy)

Now major maintaince (clutch/IMS, shocks, brakes) is not cheap but this isn't a Scion afterall...nor is it a Ferrari. I'd say its the best deal going for a racing brand.
You just have to have a little slush fund ready or you need to start one for the expected work as well as the unexpected.

Now all that being said, I think a lot of all of this has to do with how the owner or previous owner drove the car. I drive conservatively until the oil is up to temp, I don't mash on the brakes..actually I try to use the brakes as little as possible, I don't jerk the wheel in and out of corners, I don't lug the engine to save gas or whatever, I make sure the air pressure in the rubber is solid so as not to punish the suspension and wheels and I try to be smooth with shifts always trying to match the revs. If someone does none of this there will be problems.

[mikefocke]

because you are frequenting a forum where people are fanatical about cars and this one car in particular and are particularly knowledgeable. One failure may be being posted by the same person on different forums where he uses different screen-handles. And few post about their cars when their aren't problems or when they are just out driving them. Were you to know the same amount about any car, you would see they all have weaknesses.

I had to take a 120 mile trip the other day in a driving rain that was only going to get worse as the day wore on. And I absolutely had to be there. I had the choice of a Honda, and Acura and a Boxster. All with about the same age (9-10 years) and mileage (~50k) and all with fresh tires on them. I chose the Boxster. It has also been the cheapest to maintain.

[SeanZ4]

ElementAI, I also had a '90 miata about 20 years ago. It was a great car at the time. Since then I've had 3 Z3s, a Z4 and I decided a year and a half ago to buy a used 2000S Box w/38k miles. I went through all the same anxiety that you are. I weighed the pros and cons and still decided it was worth it to experience the ownership. Like everyone else states, they are more expensive in some areas to maintain. However, I've always heard that japanese car parts can be stupid-high priced also. Especially body parts. Read Mike Fockes website. That's what I did 2 years ago. It helped me make my decision. In the time I've owned mine I haven't put that many miles on it. It's a third car for us. The only problem I've had was that I had to replace the rad. cap a couple of weeks ago and my clutch is squeaky sometimes. That's about it. Have a PPI done and it will give you a great piece of mind.

good luck
sean

[davemon]

I believe that there is a subset of Boxster owners that are unlike any other car owning sector. That we have not only reduced the known catastrophic failures to about 3, we also have identified the trouble rate by year and even found a new and superior bearing to resolve 1 of those 3 problems. I'll admit I cannot afford a 911 or at least not with good conscience, but even if I could, I still know the Boxster is what I want. I initially thought I was going to buy the less expensive (both in terms of price tag and maintenance) S2000 for all the reasons people buy Hondas realizing it was a compromise bc I really wanted the Boxster performance. Frequenting these forums, Pedros Garage, mikefocke's site, LN engineering etc made me much more comfortable buying my used '04 986.

Because of these resources I know everything that may go wrong with this car, I'll be getting the ISMR soon that would have resolved about 1/2 or more of my worries. I can deal with the minor components crapping out, in exchange for a superior driving experience. What would be devestating is a grenaded 2.7L before I get significant return on investment (or is this a divestment, ha). As long as I can get some decent miles clocked on the 2.7L, I'll be extremely happy. One day the 2.7 will die and I only hope enough time has elapsed since my initial purchase that I can rationalize dumping more $ to get a (Raby) bigger HP replacement and get a second and more torquey life out of ole Boxy. Besides isn't gaining HP a good consolation for an engine biting the dust?

[CenterIsl]

I'm paying attention to this issue as well - really hoping for some objective statistics. Clearly the resale prices on 986 / 996 cars (and even 987 / 997) have suffered because of this issue, which I benefited from when I bought my car a year ago. And I'd love to truly believe that this is a non-issue. Poking around, I have come up with (in ascending sample order):

1) my mechanic (Squires in Bellevue) has seen one IMS failure ever, and they have worked on many (more than a hundred?) Boxsters, obviously all out of warranty.

2) MSN Autos has 629 user reviews (just checking 986s) and just 3 reported engine failures that I could find:
(year) (reviews)
1997 - 42
1998 - 32
1999 - 74 - "lost an engine", "blown engine"
2000 - 113 - "(heard about blown engines)"
2001 - 180
2002 - 103 - "engine failure (timing chain broke)"
2003 - 56
2004 - 29

3) Consumer Reports Reliability History for all Boxsters "Engine Major" compared to "average":
2000 - Better
2001 - Much Better
2002 - Much Worse
2003 - Average
2004 - (not enough data)
2005 - Worse
2006 - Better
2007 - Average
2008 - Much Better

4) Porsche's use of the IMS design for 12 years and hundreds of thousands of M96 motors. Sure, they revised the bearing - but they revise almost everything in these cars. Offhand, I think there were as many cupholder revisions as IMS revisions in that period. We all know that Porsche is the only one who knows what the true failure rate is, but think about it - do you really think they would have continued to build IMS engines for more than a decade if they really experienced a...10% failure rate? Beancounters or engineers, these guys have kept meticulous records for half a century and - IMHO - their slowness to move away from the IMS design is perhaps the biggest telling factor in just how significant this problem is.