97 boxster pricing

[RandallNeighbour]

Bookmark this auction on eBay and then when it ends, let's have a discussion about whether or not the buyer of this car got a good deal or not. It looks like a very clean, relatively low mileage boxster for it's age. No clue as to what's been replaced on it....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190416030715&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT

This car is in Houston, by the way. If anyone here is interested in bidding on it, I am happy to do a free look-over-the-car for you if you like... you know, like a pre pre purchase inspection.

[Overdrive]

Sorry if I'm jumping the gun in your discussion, but you'd think, even with the car being in perpetually hot and sunny Houston that they'd at least have a few shots of the car with the top up in their 200+ image photoshoot. Car looks great, especially inside, but my first concern would be does the top do what it's supposed to both ways without issue, and they're not showing me that.

[pothole]

Looks very similar in many ways to my 1997 78k mile Box, particularly in the cabin which is nearly identical in terms of trim and wear, barring my gear shift gaiter which is a bit tired.

One thing I will say regards the roof - it's absolutely trivial to get it up and down even if the mechanism has totally lunched itself (as I know from experience!). It's the work of about two minutes to disconnect a few bits and then it goes up and down manually with ease. Short of a video of the thing going up and down, there's isn't much they could post image-wise that would prove the roof works properly. This is something that's easy enough to query and even easier to check on collection and before you fork over the cash.

[tonycarreon]

There is a reserve price and their website shows an asking price of $9995...

So I'd say any buyer who pays over that got a bad deal.


I was driving around today and saw a yellow boxster, so I stopped and talked to the sales guy. Turns out it was an '06 base 5-speed. Previous owner had put cross-drilled rotors front and back, but they were quite rusty. Speed yellow (which I have to admit didn't look as bad as I had always imagined, since I had only seem pictures). Anyway, they were asking $36k - 6k miles on the odometer.

[husker boxster]

Interesting "bump" on the driver's door about 1/2 way down the seam between the door and fender. Looks like an outward dent in the door. Can't imagine you could create a dent like that without buckling the fender in. Don't expect a 13 yr old car with 79K to be pristine, but it makes me wonder.... Digital cameras can boost the price by $3K.

[RandallNeighbour]

Husker, good eye! But I think that puckered bit of sheet metal is on the passenger side... or there's a problem on BOTH doors.

Hehehe... if the seller only knew we were scrutinizing his car and listing publicly!

Keep those comments a coming. I'm enjoying this.

[husker boxster]

Yep, I meant passenger door.

[jcb986]

Detailing a car to look pristine is one thing. Mechanical is another. If that's the original engine and it's a 97'..well you guys know the rest of the story.

[RandallNeighbour]

jcb, I was thinking the same thing. 80k is right around the time a Porsche motor starts showing IMS issues.

[schoir]

Who put the 6-speed in there, and where did it come from? :chicken:

Regards, Maurice.

[pothole]

Originally Posted by RandallNeighbour

jcb, I was thinking the same thing. 80k is right around the time a Porsche motor starts showing IMS issues.

Interesting, my understanding is that it was often much earlier than that. Certainly when I was looking to buy there were lots of cars that had had new engines around the 40-50k mile mark, sometimes earlier, and also cars on 100k with the original engine. I spoke to one of the outfits that rebuilds M96 lumps here in the UK and was told that if the IMS bearing had made it 70k, that was probably a good sign. Apparently one of the major issues (the following will not be their precise words, only from memory) is that the bearing is very tightly sealed / packed and can dry out leading to failure. Bearings that have made it to decent miles usually have opened out just enough to stay lubricated.

So many different opinions on this, and obviously these things can die on you at pretty much any mileage, but personally I'd rather have an early 2.5 on 70k than, say, one on 30k to 40k. I certainly wouldn't have any more confidence in the lower mile car regards the engine grenading. Too many examples of low mile engines going pop for that.

For me, the sweetspot for buying an early 2.5 would probably be around 60k with a new clutch and RMS...Any fewer miles than that and I would actually be more nervous about it, not less.

[Overdrive]

Originally Posted by pothole

Looks very similar in many ways to my 1997 78k mile Box, particularly in the cabin which is nearly identical in terms of trim and wear, barring my gear shift gaiter which is a bit tired.

One thing I will say regards the roof - it's absolutely trivial to get it up and down even if the mechanism has totally lunched itself (as I know from experience!). It's the work of about two minutes to disconnect a few bits and then it goes up and down manually with ease. Short of a video of the thing going up and down, there's isn't much they could post image-wise that would prove the roof works properly. This is something that's easy enough to query and even easier to check on collection and before you fork over the cash.

pothole, I understand what you're saying, and I don't disagree, I'm just saying it wouldn't take much to put the top up for a few shots and show its condition as a part of the sale, not so much the mechanism, as I know exactly what you're saying, since the cable for the motor for my top fried the day I went to pick it up, leaving the seller to replace it that day. Pretty much only took him a half a day to knock it out, and works just fine. All I'm getting at is, if it's as pretty as the rest of the car then there's nothing to hide. I wouldn't be looking for a vid or anything, just a few pics.

[pothole]

Originally Posted by Overdrive

pothole, I understand what you're saying, and I don't disagree, I'm just saying it wouldn't take much to put the top up for a few shots and show its condition as a part of the sale, not so much the mechanism, as I know exactly what you're saying, since the cable for the motor for my top fried the day I went to pick it up, leaving the seller to replace it that day. Pretty much only took him a half a day to knock it out, and works just fine. All I'm getting at is, if it's as pretty as the rest of the car then there's nothing to hide. I wouldn't be looking for a vid or anything, just a few pics.

Yup, agreed.

[Overdrive]

Originally Posted by schoir

Who put the 6-speed in there, and where did it come from? :chicken:

Regards, Maurice.

Hey, Maurice, I think I'm more confused than you are...I don't see anything about a 6-speed, or a pic showing a 6-speed shifter...

[DamageINC123]

The seller should have spent more money on the house so he can get the cars off the street!!

[tonycarreon]

Originally Posted by pothole

Interesting, my understanding is that it was often much earlier than that...

So many different opinions on this, and obviously these things can die on you at pretty much any mileage, but personally I'd rather have an early 2.5 on 70k than, say, one on 30k to 40k. I certainly wouldn't have any more confidence in the lower mile car regards the engine grenading. Too many examples of low mile engines going pop for that.

For me, the sweetspot for buying an early 2.5 would probably be around 60k with a new clutch and RMS...Any fewer miles than that and I would actually be more nervous about it, not less.

agreed. i know if i were to go out today and look for a used boxster/M96, low mileage would not be a selling point for me. over 60k-65k miles would be my choice. i think once they get to around 80 most problems have probably revealed themselves ( but there's always those quirky ones that wait )...but what do i know?

[blinkwatt]

Originally Posted by RandallNeighbour

jcb, I was thinking the same thing. 80k is right around the time a Porsche motor starts showing IMS issues.

IMS wasn't a problem on the 97' 2.5L. The 98-99' had cracking sleeve issues. The 97's has some issue like a porous block or something,I don't remember anymore.

IMS issues mainly started when Porsche redesigned it for 00'+,mainly the 3.2L on the 986S and 3.4L on the 996 have the issue. People say it's a major problem on the 2.5L & 2.7L,it's not,go on the Rennlist 996 NA section,you'll see how much of a problem it really is. (proportionality speaking)

(not that people have said the 2.5L and 2.7L don't have IMS failures....just that out of all the shops I've talked to,all the post on all these boards on the net.....the 2.5L and 2.7L hardly have IMS failures).

[davemon]

Without repeating some of the earlier comments.

1) Missing the center glass between the seats.
2) IIRC those calipers should be black on the '97 Base boxster.
3) The front bumper is crooked. The lines around the front trunk are slightly off but the line where the passenger side turn lamp meets the fender really catches my eye.
4) If I were to buy this car, I would really like to know what the tire treads look like.


Not bashing the car. It could be a fine automobile, but if I were to buy it, I would like the details around 2-4 and would note I'd have to buy the center glass.

[Aron in Toronto]

Originally Posted by blinkwatt

IMS wasn't a problem on the 97' 2.5L. The 98-99' had cracking sleeve issues. The 97's has some issue like a porous block or something,I don't remember anymore.

IMS issues mainly started when Porsche redesigned it for 00'+,mainly the 3.2L on the 986S and 3.4L on the 996 have the issue. People say it's a major problem on the 2.5L & 2.7L,it's not,go on the Rennlist 996 NA section,you'll see how much of a problem it really is. (proportionality speaking)

(not that people have said the 2.5L and 2.7L don't have IMS failures....just that out of all the shops I've talked to,all the post on all these boards on the net.....the 2.5L and 2.7L hardly have IMS failures).

Just to add a bit more info (confusion) to the IMS issue. The early cars, pre-2000 IIRC had the double row IMS bearing that was switched to a single row bearing in the 2.7 and 3.2l engines then changed back to a double row around 2005. After reading many IMS failure stories on the net, it seems like the failure rate is highest on these single row IMS bearings in the years 2000-2004.
The 2.5 seem to be affected more with RMS leaks than IMS issues.
Some 97s also had issues with porous block castings that usually showed up early in their lives. In fact I have not read of a single porousity issue occurring in early motors since I’ve been following Boxsters starting around 2003.
And some later 2.5s had the slipped sleeve issue. This was in the 1998-99 range, but I’m not sure the exact manufacturing dates that were affected.

[Aron in Toronto]

Originally Posted by davemon

Without repeating some of the earlier comments.

1) Missing the center glass between the seats.
2) IIRC those calipers should be black on the '97 Base boxster.
3) The front bumper is crooked. The lines around the front trunk are slightly off but the line where the passenger side turn lamp meets the fender really catches my eye.
4) If I were to buy this car, I would really like to know what the tire treads look like.


Not bashing the car. It could be a fine automobile, but if I were to buy it, I would like the details around 2-4 and would note I'd have to buy the center glass.

Looks like front bumper has been replaced or resprayed and pass side headlight looks like it has been replaced too. But overall it looks pretty good to me.