Am I Crazy or is the Boxster More than Enough

[luxury1]

I saw a 911 go by today and although it was nice, I like my boxster just as much. Now I am one person who bought the car for overall styling (I think they look similar) and the overall driving experience (good overall handling, drop top, nice sound, nice interior, etc). I know that the performance of the 911 is better (my father has a AWD Carerra convertible) but I would never part with the additional funds for an experience that is so similar. Do many people who own a boxster go up the line to a 911?

[SD987]

Well, you are kinda crazy...but not because of your views on the 911.

I have zero interest in 911s...they're not particularly good looking (remind me of the shape of a cockroach - particularly the convertibles), and that's a dumb-ass place to put the engine. Even in 1948 that must have seemed like a bad idea, I'm surprised no one said "hold up there Ferdinand....let's rethink this one".

Bottom line, for 911 money (a wide range) I can think of several other cars I'd purchase.

...but that's just me.

[eslai]

That's me. 911's do nothing for me stylistically or logically. If I was going to spend $80,000 on a sports car, I'd be looking elsewhere.

[mach schnell]

part of the appeal of the 911 is it's heritage and character! how many other cars have retained so much of their original design? Furthermore, the fact that the modern 911 (although vastly different mechanically) is so reminiscent of the original car, speaks volumes of the engineering and design vision of Porsche in the beginning.

the boxster is certainly a strong and viable younger brother to the 911 and I say that as a former scrutinizer of the box (currently a little tentative again as I deal with this vibration BS), but the 911 is just something different and special. as i've stated in previous threads (again, depending on how my new issue plays out), it's my intent to keep the box (the nostalgia of first ownership - virgin porsche, etc) and drive it to the dealership when I pick up my new 911.

prior to buying the 987 i looked at several late 90, early 2000 911's more or less to have the advantage of the rear seats so that the car could truly be a weekend get away car for the entire fam - but the fear of mechanical issues and limited warranty was too daunting at this stage for me.

[BuffaloBoxster]

I never wanted a 911. They never did it for me. IMHO, any car aspiring to be the ultimate in performance has to have a mid-engine design. It's the 911's biggest drawback.

As far as the Boxster "being enough", I think that this car has limits so high that to get near them on the street is really irresponsible. If you want more straight-line speed, I guess I can understand that but handling is what gets me going and this car is so fast through corners you could easily do a lot of damage to persons and property driving it at the limit on the street.

In that respect, it's enough.

[SD987]

"part of the appeal of the 911 is it's heritage and character! how many other cars have retained so much of their original design? "

But if that original design was seriously flawed to begin with, why not scrap it? To perpetuate that flaw, model after model and apply electronic band-aids to make it viable, strikes me as obstinance. I don't consider the increased possibility of coming ass-out from a high speed turn due to quirky engine placement to be character.

Porsche holding down Cayman performance so it doesn't beat the 911 is a pretty obvious corporate admission that the 911 design doesn't make much sense. Put a rock in a sock. Twirl it around your head a few times then let'er fly. There's your 911. Now throw a boomerang...there's the Boxster.

[jangobox]

Originally Posted by SD987

Well, you are kinda crazy...but not because of your views on the 911.

I have zero interest in 911s...they're not particularly good looking (remind me of the shape of a cockroach - particularly the convertibles), and that's a dumb-ass place to put the engine. Even in 1948 that must have seemed like a bad idea, I'm surprised no one said "hold up there Ferdinand....let's rethink this one".

Bottom line, for 911 money (a wide range) I can think of several other cars I'd purchase.

...but that's just me.

I have to agree here. There is just something about the convertible 911 that just looks off on the 997 and 996 models, especially with the top up. I guess the side view just isn't that impressive looking, maybe it is because there is no catchy looking air vents. The only real reason I would get a 911 is if I still wanted a Porsche and I need more then 2 people in the car with me, so I guess a little one in the back seat.

Another thing I have noticed is that a lot of the people I see driving 911's are older gentlemen who drive the speed limit in the slow lane with the windows rolled up and the AC on. It never looks like they are having much fun in it. Never once have I seen a 911 pass me in any car I have driven. I don't know about you guys but I drive the hell out of my 987 with the stereo blasting and the rpm's up.

[luxury1]

Originally Posted by BuffaloBoxster

As far as the Boxster "being enough", I think that this car has limits so high that to get near them on the street is really irresponsible. If you want more straight-line speed, I guess I can understand that but handling is what gets me going and this car is so fast through corners you could easily do a lot of damage to persons and property driving it at the limit on the street.
In that respect, it's enough.

You hit my point exactly, this is more than enough performance and everything else. What more could I want especially since I don't spend time on the track.

911's do nothing for me stylistically or logically. If I was going to spend $80,000 on a sports car, I'd be looking elsewhere.

I agree and $80k is starting. My fathers was around $120k (with tax). I live in Pittsburgh so there is no way I am going to be able to drive this thing every day. I would much rather have a luxury sedan for those days that are rainy, cold or snowy and a boxster for the nice days.

[Perfectlap]

this is what usually distinguishes a sports car driver from a guy who just reads about them (or just looks at the pictures!) in magazines.

Roadsters are Roadsters

Coupes are Coupes

They serve different purposes.

A guy/gal who buys a Boxster wants two seats and purpose built top down fun without compromising performance. He'll consider a BMW Z4, Honda S2000 and AMG SLK.

A guy/gal who wants a non-turbo/gt2/gt3 911 probably needs a back seat and has kids and is probably older. He'll consider an Audi S4, BMW M3 or one of those Jaguars.

Whenver I hear someone say "Boxster nice but no 911" I know I'm talking to a guy who probably has never taken a trip around a track or autocross and the discussion will turn to styling vs. performance.
p.s.
On Styling I'll give the edge to the 2002-2004 911 over the Boxster.
The most beautiful 911 yet, in my opinion (would never be confused with a VW)
But good luck ever convincing me to give up a mid engine car for a rear engine one.

If Porsche made a mid engine AWD(with ZERO understeer) 911 I would never want another car. Well maybe I'd keep the Boxster for sunny days

[70Sixter]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

Whenver I hear someone say "Boxster nice but no 911" I know I'm talking to a guy who probably has never taken a trip around a track or autocross and the discussion will turn to styling vs. performance.

I've had a 911, and did not really realize that I'd been Boxstered until I calculated that I could afford to buy either. And there was no doubt in my mind I had to have a Box. Perfectlap hit a chord, but it isn't just the track aspect for me. The Boxster is a modern, mid-engined Speedster, and the spirit of the car is what I love.

Every bit of Porsche history that is in the 911/964/993/996/997 is also in the 986/7. Some Boxster owners might be posers and entry-level buyers waiting for "The Real Thing." But I think most of us know that the Boxster is more fun and the spiritual successor to the original mid-engined Porsche.

The 911 is a fine car, even if you don't need a 2+2. Just give me a Boxster.

[986Jim]

I have to whole heartily disagree. The 911 is a super car, and I would gladly trade in my Boxster for one if cash were to permit. They are better looking, faster, and all around better sports car than the boxster is. While the mid engine rear drive layout is superior, you just can't argue with 415hp from a NA rear engine rear drive car. The 911 GT3 is a super piece of machinery and purpose built for one thing. It's really hard to beat at any price point unless your into super cars which nobody really can afford.

I may afford a GT3 one day, I will not afford a Lambo or Enzo one day and they are not that much faster to justify 4x the price (or more).

I only have a Boxster because I can't afford a 911. If a 911 were the same price as a Boxster would any of us own one?

[Perfectlap]

ummm yeah.

I test drove Several 996's before buying my BoxsterS. Actually I didn't even consider a Boxster. I figured if I'm buying a Porsche it HAS to be a coupe.
My plan was to get a second hand S2000(track/autocross) and a 911S for daily driving. I wasn't comfortable with the idea of putting an expensive car on the track, especially a rear engine one.

Then I drove my 986S and no way was I going to pass it up.

If the 996 911 were a better car then 986 would have a 3.6 engine in it by now.
CaymanS with tall 1st gear just slow it down?

I think you get the picture.

Porsche wants people to think that the Boxster/S is a step down so that you'll buy up to a 911 some day. Keeps them in business, And some people actually "buy" that.

So yeah I could have easily gone for the 911 but
I'm A ROADSTER GUY 'TIL I DIE!

p.s.
I do plan on making my 'practical' car a 996 C4S but it will NOT replace my BoxsterS.

p.s.s.
I don't think anyone is arguing that a $100K GT3 isn't a better sports car than a $50K Boxster. We're are talking about more run of the mill 911's that aren't unpractical daily drivers that are dangerous in the rain when the alignment is off like the GT3.

[Rail26]

Why haven't they shoe-horned the new Cayenne Turbo S (520hp?) into the 911? That would be a monster!

By the way, I love all Porsche products. I wish Porsche would start making airplanes....yeah baby yeah!

Question: Is the wind in the cockpit of a 911 cabrio comparable to a Boxster? Didn't know if the aerodynamics of the 911 kept the cockpit calm without a wind deflector.

[mach schnell]

top down in 911 cabrio, though an exhilarating experience, is like being in a wind tunnel - a fun wind tunnel, mind you!

[AUDIOGUY]

For me, the decision was to make a step up from my prior BMW M roadster. I had always considered the Boxster S a step up to begin with. I considered a 2000 911 or even a 99, but for the money the Boxster S won hands down. I couldnt really afford the 911 Cab, nor was I totally in love with the looks of the car. I definately prefer the Boxster S styling to the 911 Cab. Having had 2 prior convertibles, I knew that I would be much happier in the Boxster S than a stripped vanilla 911 coupe.
So far so good!! My 1 year Boxster anniversary is in September!

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Rail26

... By the way, I love all Porsche products. I wish Porsche would start making airplanes....yeah baby yeah! ....

Hi,

Well, there was the Porsche PFM in the late '80's. Full of promise, it was an utter disaster for Porsche and for Mooney. Plagued by a variety of issues, both mechanical/design as well as administrative, not the least of which was the simultaneous battle for control of the Porsche Empire by the Porsche and Piesch families. Porsche shut down all aviation development since that day.

It failed as an initial offering and no further development was pursued by either Porsche or Mooney who switched their classic design over to a Lycoming 6-Cyl. powerplant the following model year.

I've flown the Mooney 4-cyl. extensively and a bigger squirrel cage would be ideal, but the poor cowling design and stretched fuselage of the PFM proved to be the wrong combination or at least an underdeveloped one. Love to try the Lycoming 6 sometime though...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Rail26]

I remember seeing one of those years ago. I would love to see Porsche follow in the footsteps of the HondaJet...that would be a sweet looking airplane. A Burt Rutan and Porsche project would be awesome....

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Rail26

I remember seeing one of those years ago. I would love to see Porsche follow in the footsteps of the HondaJet...that would be a sweet looking airplane. A Burt Rutan and Porsche project would be awesome....

Hi,

I dunno... while Burt Rutan and his designs appear radical to most of us, to him it's all about practicality. He may be too conventional to work with Porsche or vice-versa. I mean, he lives in a Pyramid with 3 cats and drives a Dodge Mini-Van. I personally think he secretly suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome (Vietnam era F-100 USAF Pilot) and his design work is his therapy...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[eslai]

Originally Posted by 986Jim

I only have a Boxster because I can't afford a 911. If a 911 were the same price as a Boxster would any of us own one?

See, here's the problem--some of you like the way the 911 looks, while others don't.

Money aside, I would still choose a Boxster S over a 911, simply because I think 911's are ugly.

BUT, for $80,000 I'd be looking outside of Porsche.

[SD987]

BUT, for $80,000 I'd be looking outside of Porsche.

I wish Honda would hurry up and finish development on the next NSX. That was a pretty bad-ass automobile back in the day. Kind of like the Carrera GT of the 90s...only, more practical as a daily driver.