'98 986 vs 2011 987
 

In the November issue of 911 & Porsche World (a UK publication), there was an article comparing a 2011 987 base model and a 1998 986 base model. They compared the power to weight ratio, and in a very non scientific drag race, showed that the 986 kept up very well (someone yelled “go” and they raced)

The 986 was recently purchased by one of their staff for 5000 pounds ($8000 US), while the 2011 987 cost 35,000 pounds ($56,000 US). They showed that 13 years and $48,000 separated these two cars, yet the performance factor was not near as wide.

Some statements from the article (paraphrasing)

The 2011 987 is the most enjoyable car Porsche current makes. Its not the most capable, fastest, best looking or impressive, but with the roof down, and sliding around a roundabout with the optional LSD, there was nothing more enjoyable in the Porsche stable.

The 986 they got for $8000 is “the most spectacular sports car bargain at the moment”

I agree, I just bought a 2002 base Boxster W/ 68k miles on it last month for only $9,000 it is with out a doubt the best sports car bargain out there, hands down.:)

I like that story.

The story is accurate. The newer Box is superior in electronics and some amenities (including hp) but it is also heavier. That's why I always suggest folks buy the newest Boxster they can afford with the least miles. Afford means (for a toy or second car) one you can pay cash for and afford to keep up properly. If that's a 1998 or a 2008 then that's the way it is. Which ever one is purchased, the owner will have a blast.

I have been told that Boxsters hate extra weight! Thats why I say no to fat chicks. They're never impressed by my car!!! Haha jk jk...

Is there any little places that don't take away for the apperance of the car but take away a significant amount of weight?

Around the waist...... and alittle under the chin :D

it's not a bargain if you have to dump a bunch of caysh into the car.

That Boxster may be a bargain cost of entry but cost of ownership is another matter entirely.

Spending $8-10K in short order on a 13 year old Porsche is nothing unheard of (I just spent that much on 10 year old Porsche).
Then you run the risk of having the car totaled and getting paid only fair market value which means you just took a bath.

There is NO such thing as bargain Porsche. Miata is a bargain sports car. Boxster is not unless you got it for free in a raffle

Yes most car reviews also failed to mention that tire technology have advanced quite a bit. Whatever that they used back in the day are dated and replaced by stickier modern tires.

If you arm a low mileage 993 Turbo with new modern tires I'm sure it can still outrun most new turbos.

I disagree. The used car market doesn't care if a car is well maintained or not. So my car, which has no deferred maintenance, in fact has preventative maintenance like the water pump and IMS upgrade, is barely worth more than a car that looks decent and hasn't had an oil change in 2 years. And there are more Boxsters out there to choose from than any other Porsche ever before (save for maybe the 996). If you find a well taken care of car, the costs are in regular upkeep. Not cheap, but vastly less expensive than a new 987 with which it's being compared.

There is no way I'd buy another M96 motor Boxster, especially used and not knowing the way it was driven. The IMS is only one of several problems with this engine. As for the weight 986 vs 987, we are not talking huge numbers, in fact it's like having a passenger with you if anything. I'm sure the platform has had handling improvements as well. Hopefully, god willing I will be able to one day tell you if the new platform is righteous. I'm leaning toward a certified S, in 09 that's good for 295, I'll take my chances on whether it has better pace than my 98, especially hooked up to a 7 speed. It's funny how these issues recycle, when I got my Boxster the 944 club took it as an affront. They tried to assure me the 944 would feel faster than a base Boxster, you're making a mistake...I loved my 98, loved it, 2.5 was plenty of fun.

All you have to do is look at power to weight to answer that question.

993: 3307lb/400hp=8.27 lb/hp
997: 3487lb/480hp=7.26 lb/hp

The 997 carries around less weight per unit power. It's going to be faster if tires are equal.

:eek:

:troll: HOW DARE YOU!!!! lol

my point is that using the term "bargain" is a misnomer here. major maintenance items that should be replaced on a 13 year old car sooner or later, as everyone knows, do not scale down relative to the "bargain purchase price". you aren't going to escape those costs with any decade old sports car and with this particular car they are significantly higher than most due to expensive parts and specialized labor. And this doesn't take into account the unexpected repairs which are also on the pricey side and further diminish the idea that this is 'bargain' proposition. The Boxster like just about any Porsche is a classic 'pay me now or pay me later but you will pay". Those magazine editors would be doing their readers a great service by pointing this out to a first time Porsche buyer whose attention they grabbed by throwing out the term 'bargain'.

The word bargain has to be put into the correct context. I believe the point of the article is that an older 986 is a bargain for what you get compared to a new 987 considering the relatively small performance difference and other subjective measures. In this view, they are absolutely right, it's a screaming bargain.

The Boxster was never a bargain compared to other convertibles on the market and that remains true as a used car compared to other used cars. No one would argue otherwise. But if you compare what you get between a used Boxster and a new Miata, for example, the story becomes more interesting.

What difference would it make if you knew how it was driven, really?

I'm not so sure that a 98 Boxster is a bargain as much as that you are really paying up for the performance of a new 987. I suppose if you are arguing how you will least pay up for brand and status, things that don't necessarily translate into faster lap times, then I would agree that it's a good value in that strict sense.
I guess it would also be limited to someone who was intent on only exploring Porsche as an option.
I'd be curious to see a performance comparison, in lap times, of a turbo charged second hand miata with the savings over the 2.5 Boxster spent on Miata supsension, braking, intake/exhaust upgrades.

I have to disagree. You don't compare the Boxster to "other convertibles". First of all it's a Porsche - not a Honda or Mazda or other convertible. It is an exotic, mid-engined, performance roadster. There are very few in the world and it is - as agreed by every auto reviewer or auto expert - the best handling performance car available. So given all of its capabilities and relative low purchase price - it is not only a phenomenal car but an excellent value as well.

None to me. I want to know how it is when I inspect it and the maintenance history. The first is on me. The latter is verifiable through the maintaining dealership.

Blue,


As someone who used to teach shifting at the dealership, I know everyone's idea of a smooth shift is different. My brother knicknamed my sister's style "the sanding wheel" see what I mean? I'm not as mad at Porsche as I once was because I think the PO had some hand in the engine failure by driving it hard. As for mile high, the dealer isn't in the car 24/7 and a simple discon of the battery wipes out the bad driver report. Another good example, I would not buy anything I knew was tracked.

i am not sure what you guys are trying to prove. my work pick up truck cost me more in repairs than my boxster. any old used vehicle is a gamble , service history or not. anybody buying a 10 year old porsche should know what they are getting into. it's not hard to figure out just by looking , if a car is half decent or not. i would take a 987 mk2 PDK in a heartbeat over any 986.