987 vs 986 - Zowie! - Page 2 - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners

The Radium King · 07-08-2011, 01:58 PM

it's a hp to weight thing.

a 986 puts out 250 hp and weighs 2822 lbs; that's a ratio of 8.86.

a 987 puts out 290 hp but weighs 3130 lbs; that's a ratio of 9.27.

the 987 has more hp/lb, but ...

lose 125 lbs, or gain an additional 10 hp, and the 986 is neck and neck with the 987. do both and you got the 987 beat. sure, the 987 has pasm, psm, pse, pcm, tpms, sc+ and some fancy-looking gills on the side. i think my 2000 S looks better and the only option it has is intermittent wipers. i have no stability control and will occasionally find myself spun-out in the rhubarb on track day. i have no nav and occasionally find myself wondering where the hell i am on a beautiful sunny day with the top down. my car can't tell me when my tires are flat. i don't have any buttons on my steering wheel to turn my stereo on.

stephen wilson · 07-08-2011, 04:50 PM

I hate the standard nanny PSM on my '06, it steps in much too soon. I turn it off every time I want to drive in a spirited fashion.

Flavor 987S · 07-09-2011, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

I hate the standard nanny PSM on my '06, it steps in much too soon. I turn it off every time I want to drive in a spirited fashion.

Improve your line and inputs (throttle and steering). Learn to heel/toe and tail brake. Run good tires at the proper pressures. Join your local PCA and particpate in a few nivice DE's.

insite · 07-09-2011, 05:35 AM

For a daily driver, I love the 987. For a weekend / track toy, I'll take my no option, no nanny 2600 lb 986 beast. Something about a raw, visceral experience that I love.

stephen wilson · 07-09-2011, 06:54 AM

I guess I phrased that wrong. I'm very familiar with proper high performance/racing technique, I race a Formula Ford. The problem is PSM allows virtually no "rotation" in tight radius corners. Besides, it's just fun to hang the tail out now and then! ( in a safe, unpopulated area, with clear run-off )

Oh yeah, one more "issue" I have, they've done too good a job eliminating trailing-throttle oversteer. This is very safe and stable for the average driver, but with the inherent low-speed push of the Boxster, it doesn't allow you to throttle-steer and tighten your line.

PhilNotHill · 07-09-2011, 07:13 AM

The 2004 Box S had 268 bhp and the 2011 has 310 bhp. Seems to me it makes a big difference passing in the mountains. Haven't tracked the 2011 yet.

Also, the gearbox seems much smoother on the 987. But that may be bcus it only has 4k mi vs 30+k mi on the 986.

The instrumentation on the 987 is more user friendly and more functional.

The PSM is not intrusive on either car.

Love all the gadgets and creature comforts on the 987. $70k for the 2011 vs $63k for the 2004 is well worth it IMVHO.

clickman · 07-09-2011, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilNotHill

$70k for the 2011 vs $63k for the 2004 is well worth it IMVHO.

Ha! I love the disparate economic circles the participants in this forum travel in. I couldn't dream of buying one of these things new.

Flavor 987S · 07-09-2011, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

The problem is PSM allows virtually no "rotation" in tight radius corners. Besides, it's just fun to hang the tail out now and then! ( in a safe, unpopulated area, with clear run-off )

Stephen, this is where having the Sport Chrono function/option helps. I puts the PSM into a different engagement phase.

vitaminC · 07-09-2011, 02:20 PM

987 is more likely to have a warranty. That's a plus.

stephen wilson · 07-09-2011, 07:28 PM

Yeah, PASM will likely be on the list of options for my next Boxster.

Lil bastard · 07-10-2011, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by insite

For a daily driver, I love the 987. For a weekend / track toy, I'll take my no option, no nanny 2600 lb 986 beast. Something about a raw, visceral experience that I love.

TOTALLY AGREE!!!
In terms of a Sports Car, RAW is where it's at!

Refinement is just a euphamism for 'dumbing down'.

Refinement is for people who don't really want a sports car... ala' non-AMG MB. These poeple want a car which exudes the Panache of a Sports Car without really being one - one easier to live with.

Sports Cars are not easy, they're not good DDs - they're not supposed to be.

I get to hang with the instructors of the Porsche Sport Driving School at Barber Motorsports Park for a week every year for the Indycar Alabama Grand Prix. Privately, they scoff and refer to PSM as 'Please Save Me'!!

Cheers!

insite · 07-11-2011, 04:04 AM

most of the things i've done to my car have been designed to 'let the porsche out'. there is a LOT of porsche in these modern cars, but IMO, they cover a lot of it up with extra 'stuff'. i like to let out a little more porsche......

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lil bastard

TOTALLY AGREE!!!
In terms of a Sports Car, RAW is where it's at!

Refinement is just a euphamism for 'dumbing down'.

ekam · 07-11-2011, 04:40 AM

PSM has never been a problem for me. These Dunlop Z1 Star Spec sticks like glue on the street.

JoeFromPA · 07-11-2011, 06:20 AM

A few thoughts:

1. More gears does not equal more likely to break. If you think otherwise, I guess we see alot more porsche gearbox problems since the 6-speed came out in the 911? Wait, we see less? How could that be?

2. Advancements in engine output go far beyond maximum output. Porsche makes engines with broader torque curves now than ever before - overall, a driver will experience more power at far more times than ever before. Look at in-gear acceleration times for good examples

3. Some amount of people, especially Porsche and BMW owners, will always want to go back to a "more visceral" experience. The air-cooled vs. the water-cooled crowd. The manual tranmission vs. PDK/DSG/etc. crowd. The e30 m3 against ANY CAR EVER MADE crowd. Etc.

There's nothing wrong with that. I fall into the middle myself. That being said, i rarely see the "visceral" crowd putting 10-20k miles a year on their "visceral" car of choice.

As each generation of cars come, they often exchange some visceral for some comfort. But, using the boxster or 911 as an example, usually it comes with a substantial increase in performance potential for a small decrease in subjective feel.

I haven't driven the 987 yet, but I look forward to it. However, one last note for those who will test drive one... remember not to confuse "feel" for "my 99 has a worn out motor mounts, cracked suspension bushings, and rock hard worn down summer tires, and I FEEL alot more of the road than this 987".

insite · 07-11-2011, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

i rarely see the "visceral" crowd putting 10-20k miles a year on their "visceral" car of choice.

bingo! there's only so visceral a road car can be; at some point, it becomes a toy & only a toy.

stephen wilson · 07-11-2011, 11:42 AM

Agreed. I've decided the '65 Mustang I'm restoring is a bit too much, with no power anything, or A/C, which means I'll never get my wife to go anywhere in it.

insite · 07-11-2011, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

Agreed. I've decided the '65 Mustang I'm restoring is a bit too much, with no power anything, or A/C, which means I'll never get my wife to go anywhere in it.

haha my wife has a VERY high tolerance for my......preferences. my car has no AC, no radio, racing seats, race suspension, no sound deadening, and a cat-less race exhaust. she STILL goes for rides. i will say, though, the cat bypass pipes ALMOST put her over the edge. they are very, very loud.

stephen wilson · 07-11-2011, 12:07 PM

That's impressive. I'm just happy my wife "lets" me have my toys.

JoeFromPA · 07-11-2011, 01:22 PM

My wife's tolerance depends upon whether or not she's driving.

If she's driving, she's far more likely to enjoy the sometimes stiff ride, the power, any sound, etc.

For example (a poor example, but an example): I let her drive it for the first time when she got in the boxster after I removed the intake snorkel. Top down.

She commented on how much she enjoyed the growl/purr behind her ear when she gave it some throttle around 2800 rpms.

Now she gets a kick out of it every time, rather than if I had driven the first time she likely would've said "So what, it's just more noise."

Overdrive · 07-11-2011, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

My wife's tolerance depends upon whether or not she's driving.

If she's driving, she's far more likely to enjoy the sometimes stiff ride, the power, any sound, etc.

For example (a poor example, but an example): I let her drive it for the first time when she got in the boxster after I removed the intake snorkel. Top down.

She commented on how much she enjoyed the growl/purr behind her ear when she gave it some throttle around 2800 rpms.

Now she gets a kick out of it every time, rather than if I had driven the first time she likely would've said "So what, it's just more noise."

Funny how that psychology works out, eh?

I got a kick out of that, Joe, because there's no denying the truth of how that could have worked out differently.