Went for a ride in a 996 turbo today...
 

GT3 seats, Carbon ceramic brakes, coilovers, RUF tune. Fast, nicer finishing on the interior plastics, but the 986 Boxster is a more fun car to drive.

Not in the straightaways!!

Uncouple the front driveshaft and see if it changes things.

That's it's only advantage. And the turbo lag is more annoying than exciting most of the time.

The old saying goes, it's more fun to drive a slow car fast than drive a fast car slow.

I very much prefer the rwd car, I've driven a similarly set up Carrera, but it's still not as much fun as the Boxster on the street.

My 3.6 Boxster is much more fun in the twisties than my 996TT. But it's a whole different arrival in a turbo.

I think I disagree with you there Blue2000S.

My brother's 996TT is magnitudes more fun to drive than mine. It's faster, classier, and it's so fast it doesn't even matter if it's rear engined-AWD. I never experienced turbo lag because the first one kicks in at such low RPM, and the 3.6L engine makes up for the rest.

Don't get me wrong, I love my car, but 911 Turbos are godlike.

Love both. Each has it's application. Huge sucker for a black 996 turbo.

different cars......... different league

I remember seeing that car in the flesh for the first time at the NY auto show. It was a sight to behold. Back then I never thought that some day it could be had for less than I paid for my Boxster S. A guy I know bought one for $27K when the stock market crashed from a guy desperate need of cash.
But the car has far too much understeer after getting used to a nimble, lightweight, midengine rear wheel driver. Cutting power to the rear when it starts to slide, even a little bit, pretty much kills the whole experience. Ditto for the 996 C4. They say you won't find more understeer in any Porsche than those two.

I agree with 2000. A 996 Turbo is a very fat lady and a snoozefest. Give me a Boxster any day.
:cheers:

A guy my old run group has one....unbelievably quick.

He would dive past me into corners and walk away down the straights. Initially I could walk away on a short flowing non technical track but then add in a couple straights and I was done for. Not sure what it is like to drive but lap times are quick

I asked him how he was doing it and he said that he was into the psam on every corner of the track....yeah don't have that

He has now got a lot seat time , different turbos pushing 530hp and JRZ suspension. I think he has learned a lot but might be missing a lot from not having driven a less powerful/automated car. The thing doesn't spin either..

[QUOTE=blue2000s;332985]That's it's only advantage. And the turbo lag is more annoying than exciting most of the time.

Stock 996TT has very little Turbo lag, it comes on so quick in 1st gear that's very hard to shift near redline without bumping the rev limiter.

Oh it does! It changes everything! :eek:

http://986forum.com/forums/uploads01/0351364152568.jpg

[QUOTE=BYprodriver;333234] That's not my experience. The engine is strong before boost, certainly stronger than the 986 even, but there is a very noticeable pause after heavy throttle movement before the real power comes on. Typical turbo behavior.

Disagree. Although it may be what Porsche wants you to think. They share about 25% of the same parts and today, it's conceivable that they could be cross-shopped. And to top it off, the Boxster is more engaging to drive.

It's because the thing is incredibly fast. No mystery. Fast doesn't make a better track car or a better street car.

Watching an awd 996 on a wet skidpad is a sad sight.

The Boxster is awesome, you can hold the steering wheel at a set angle and just spin around in a circle with the throttle. The 996 plows out of the circle over and over.

I think trying to compare an old Boxster 986 to a 996 Turbo is like trying to compare a stock 911 to a GT3. Wishful thinking at best. They are in completely different classes.

The gap has closed since the introduction of the 981 and the 991, but it's still there.

Again, don't get me wrong, I love our cars. But having driven the 996TT many times, there is no way that ours can compare.

If all that matters to someone is acceleration, I agree. If the driver is looking for more than one dimension, I don't agree. Considering them somehow uncomparable is silly. I can compare a duck to a bicycle if I want to.

Always a great debate. But if I was going for the seat of the pants feel (not acceleration mind you, but being one with the car and road), the Boxster is hands down one of the best drivers car.

I have driven many 911's and are plenty fast, but I always go back in the seat of my Boxster and go "Ah, just feels right."

For those arguing the $ factor or HP factor, don't. I have plenty of those and they don't matter jack to me...my fav car hands down is the 986 Boxster base.

Good for you 2000s!

[QUOTE=blue2000s;333293] The TT you were in is not Stock!

it's funny how my view of Porsche has changed in the last decade. When I first saw the 996 Turbo my first thought was that you could park that next to a Ferrari all day long.

Now I think, a Porsche turbo out of warranty? Pass.
PDK out of warranty? No thanks already ate.
Center lock wheels that have be serviced every 40K miles? Maybe next time.
PCCB? swap in the old school ones and we have a deal!
996/997/991 Carrera Turbo depreciation that could buy a used 997 outright? still a b1tch..

I don't have nearly the romantic view of high end Porsche cars that I once did.
These days it seems more like a liability/money pit.

Not different league, totally different league. Trying to compare that is like comparing a Miata to a 2.5 Boxster. Very similar/very different.

I'm yer huckleberry... ;)

3 Droptop Porsches at Putnam Park - YouTube

(Skip to 3:20 for the pass.)

KYPCA Blue (Advanced) Run Group, Putnam Park, September 2012.

Hey, you can't do that, your car isn't in the same league as the 996TT :rolleyes:

To act as if they were is simply a joke.......two COMPLETELY different cars. I'd take a 996TT over two 986's any day. Not trying to start anything, just wanted to point out the obvious......:cheers:

BTW.....for those of you with 986's looking to get offended....I'd suggest you ride in a 996TT then comment. Yes, I use to own a 986 S.

That's exactly what started this thread. There's nothing more special about the turbo except the thrust. If you want to feel like the turbo car is somehow special because it simply cost more than the Boxster, that's your prerogative, but I don't think so. Not everyone buys a Boxster because they can't afford a 911.

I don't simply put cars with more power into any kind of special category. If I did, the 996tt would be in a box with the new Shelby Mustang and supercharged Camaro.

We all think differently brother, if we all thought and felt the same it would be a pretty boring world......:cheers:

Regarding the increased power comment, I believe on that one you are in the minority and frankly I pretty much agree with you. But with every model line there is a hierarchy and the top dog (most expensive) always has more power than the base, whether or not people need or use it is a different question though.

Different perspectives are interesting. In 2005 I was shopping for my first Porsche and thought I would naturally pick out a nice 996 TT just off lease. The money was in the bank so no payments were involved but after driving a few I didn't like it. I drove a few 911SC and liked them much better, drove a few Boxsters and liked them the best for my needs (simple weekend joy ride with modern creature comforts).

After driving several 996/997 TT on race tracks over the last few years I have merely confirmed my choice. It is a very nice car for someone else but not for me. I am certain I will never own one. Now GT3RS??? Very different story. :D

I agree with you. Subjective opinions aren't universal, no matter how much of the world I control.

different - yes. one better than the other (different 'league' or whatever) - no. interiors are the same. front ends mostly the same. difference really only in price and power. I can afford both, so it depends on how i use it. I personally couldn't use a turbo. I have no need to race between stoplights. I have no need to break the speed limit on the road, and this is reinforced by the few tentative points I have remaining on my licence. the fastest road around here is 110 kph and the box will do this just fine. the only thrills I get are keeping speed through the corners and going to the track. for this the 986 is better.

for me the 986 has purpose, the turbo doesn't. if there is a different 'league' for impracticality then the turbo is in it.

note that, if the car was my daily driver, if I lived in a city, if there were a different set of circumstances, what I define as impractical would be different. given that, I am hard pressed to say that one is 'better' than the other.

I wouldn't mind a Turbo engine in the 986. It can keep the understeer.

Good Lord!! Now we have a West Coast version of JD...........:eek:

Driver error not taken into account :)

Interiors are NOT the same. 911s have much better build quality. From the leather, to the little door pocket covers. Everything in the 911 juts feels more special.

Front end may look the same, but that's about as far as it goes. 911 has a wider stance. The fender flares stand out more.

Hopefully, one of those WILL be in my garage one of these days! Grey with red accents and wheels please...

for $200 I can put 996 leather door cards in a 986. 996 has same brakes, uprights, etc., as 986s. 996tt has bigger front brakes, but just because it's a fat, heavy car bloated with options like electric seats, nav, etc., and needs the bigger brakes to deal with the additional mass. if that makes a car for you buy a Cadillac.

+1 on interiors being the same b/t 986/996.

Hypothetically, if you plopped someone without the roof into either a 986 or 996 driver seat blindfolded, then it would take that person quite some time to figure out which car it is (a dead giveaway would be the 5-gauge pods as opposed to the 3-gauge pods, but assume only 3 pods for both cars and you had to look elsewhere to find the difference).

incorrect. Part numbers on virtually every single item in the 986 interior come from the 996 Carrera parts bin. You are confusing premium 911 interior items with standard 911 interior items. For instance, I have many interior items that were not included in the 996 Turbo unless the original owner specifically spec'd his build with those upgrades.

From the seats forward a Boxster is basically a 1999-2001 Carrera. When the Boxster was being designed it was designed simultaneously with next generation Carrera that would replace the 993 Carrera. The concept was "one design for two cars". The plan was to introduce both at the same time but Porsche was so close to bankruptcy that they had to release the Boxster much earlier since people began putting deposits on the Boxster the minute it was unveiled. Which pissed off the Carrera team at Porsche because the first modern Porsche would look just like Boxster that was already being sold for two years. The Carrera team asked for different headlights but were rejected that's how broke they were. The compromise was that the Carrera got a slightly different front bumper. The only things not on the Boxster that aren't Carrera, are the things that could not physically fit. If you include the engine as one part, the 986 is basically "70% Carrera" by part number with the added benefit of having the engine in the right place. oh and to your point about build quality, the Boxster S got thicker cylinder walls less prone to cracking unlike the non-S C2 Carrera.