did you guys read the $20K showdown in Excellence? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners

djomlas · 01-08-2007, 08:01 PM

turns out the boxster had a coolant leak out of it as well, damn thats common, even while testing the car for a magazine.
2nd place is not all THAT bad hehehe.

deliriousga · 01-09-2007, 03:29 PM

Great article, and even though it "placed 2nd" the writer basically said the Boxster would be his personal choice.

SC986 · 01-09-2007, 04:44 PM

He made it seem the Boxster was going to win until the end. Good article.

01-09-2007, 05:27 PM

Coolant leak? As is coolant comming from the overflow hose beneath the car? Or something else?

hdpt73 · 01-09-2007, 05:44 PM

the author is one of those heritage guys, i don't understand the rewarding to drive part alot of ppl say when buying a 911, unless you are tracking it, the majority of guys would spin their cars into a curb in the real world. i can see a new 911 with psm easily winning a comparision with a boxster but an old 911 with old ac and old power steering would be a chore to use.

dmcutter · 01-09-2007, 05:53 PM

I was surprised he picked the 911. If I want a workout on a twisty road, I'll ride my bicycle. For driving, the Box is the bomb.

horizontally-opposed · 01-11-2007, 10:54 AM

Just to let you know, Excellence has long called it as it sees it. The day we don't, or can't, is the day I'll need to find new work.

The 986 would have won if it had deserved to. And it turned out to be *this* close. If there is any car that I expected to win this comparo going in, it was the 986, even in 2.5 trim. It's just SUCH a great car, and one that's sorely underestimated in the Porsche world. Then again, the 968 and 911 3.2 aren't chopped liver.

As the test approached, I decided to go in with a blank slate, hoping to watch each car impress me with its talents and disappoint me with its drawbacks. All three did just that, and the pluses and minuses are noted (at length) in the (long) article.

In the end, the 911 was the one that pulled harder at my heartstrings on those roads over those two days. There is something about a car that "rewards" you vs. one that's simply very easy to drive and satisfying. 911 3.2 and 986 2.5 illustrate this, but to take it out of the "heritage" argument, so does a 996 Turbo and 996 GT3. The same goes for 997 Turbo and 997 GT3. Both models are incredibly fast, and most drivers will be quicker over a given road (and even a given track, in many instances) in the easier to drive fast Turbo. The GT3, while more challenging to drive, will be more fun and, yes, more rewarding. I've never heard a driver who has driven both put it otherwise.

For everyday use, the Turbo is a better pick than the GT3 for most. The same can be said for 986 2.5 vs. 911 3.2.

And I'm neither a "heritage" guy nor a 911 apologist. I like 'em all, from 356 to 987. I do, however, believe in the mid-engined platform for Porsches. There are two, a 914 and a 986, in my own garage as proof, this after owning a nice older 911 and spending countless miles in new ones. So I am primarily a mid-engined guy who has learned to love the 911's entertaining handling and exploit its advantage on the way out of turns.

But my favorite factory car, by far, isn't a 911. It's the Carrera GT... sort of an uber Boxster, if you will.

Also, remember that our test was not an "all-around" comparo — it was about driving the cars hard on challenging backroads. In the end, as good as the 968 was (it came very close to matching pace among four different drivers), the test came down to 986 vs. 911 and it was so very, very close that *I* didn't know which car to pick until that final sunset pic was snapped.

Enter daily driving or utility in the mix and the 911's wafer-thin advantage would go poof! and the 968 might re-enter the game. On those roads, though, what amazed me most was just how fast that 911 was despite its torsion-bar suspension and old, hard 205s and 225s — and how fun it was.

The 986 was a better car, but the 911 was a bigger thrill.

That last couple of paragraphs can be read a couple of ways (as many things can), but a careful reading will reveal a subtle message meant to boost the 986's place in the heritage of Porsche. The 986 more closely resembles the concept Ferry dreamed up (Porsche "No. 1") than the one he decided was a more profitable one (356 > 911).

Don't get me wrong, I love Boxsters (and 356s, 914s, 911s, C-GTs, 964s, 993s, 996s, 951s, 968s, and on, and on) -- but on those two days, the 911 shocked me with its goodness and character. Had you been there (with an open mind) I think it might have shocked you, too.

Oh, and about hate mail... I was damned no matter which car I chose. In this case, I hurt a lot of feelings among 968 owners. But if we're not scared to hurt Porsche AG's feelings (have you checked our repeated criticism of PASM in 997s?!?) then we can't be scared to tell it like we see it to readers, too.

Best wishes — and keep on enjoying your Porsches, which unquestionably benefit from the best mechanical layout for handling performance. If they didn't, I think F1 and prototype race cars would look a little different than they do...

Pete Stout
Editor, Excellence Magazine

z12358 · 01-11-2007, 11:11 AM

Pete, thanks for the note. The article was great and everyone could draw their own conclusions. I never understood how anyone could hate a car, much less a Porsche, so I always find any hate mail surprising.

Ghostrider 310 · 01-11-2007, 04:19 PM

The 911 should not have been allowed to have S Car Go suspension modifications to keep it a fair comparison. Yeah of course it has more grunt than a 2.5 boxster, let me get in on the next trip and give me an S to drive, I'll spank both of the other vehicles.

horizontally-opposed · 01-11-2007, 06:11 PM

Why shouldn't the 911 have been allowed to go to S Car Go, exactly? It's a 10-year older sports car based on (and still VERY close to) a design that's 30+ years older than the 986.

The 911 benefitted from re-valved Bilsteins a lowered ride height, and a performance alignment. And that's about it and just about exactly what the 986 had -- re-valved Bilsteins, stiffer springs, bigger anti-roll bars, a (slightly) lowered ride height, and a (semi) performance alignment. Actually, the 986 is sounding a little more "prepared" to me, all of a sudden. Plus, there's the small matter of fresh 225s/265s on 18x8s and 18x10s on the Box and old, hard 205s/225s on 16x6s and 16x8s the 911.

The 911 had (a little) more grunt, but not more pace. The two cars were neck and neck in most situations, especially whenever the 2.5 could take advantage of its second-gear ratio. A lot of 911 3.2 owners would have been very discouraged to see the 2.5 so large in their mirrors so much of the time. The 911 had a bit more power, but it also weighed within one pound of the Box -- a point emphasized in the article.

I dunno, you guys can Monday morning quarterback me all you wish (and, believe me, the 968 crew has -- and fairly so), but I am comfortable with the 986 and 911 I chose. Any advantage in one area was canceled out in another. Sadly, the 968 was another matter....

Finally, 986S 3.2 doesn't compute in the pricing sweet spot -- and I've got to be extraordinarily careful about who comes out on these things. As I'm sure you'll understand, anybody with "something to prove" on the road is automatically out. Then you work in logistics, weather, etc. and it gets, well, interesting!

I don't mind criticism, as we're certainly nothing more than a human enterprise, but I can't agree with your assertions.

pete

Adam · 01-11-2007, 08:45 PM

All very interesting commentary. It would have been interesting to see how things would've stacked up on a closed circuit track between the 3.

stucatz · 01-12-2007, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horizontally-opposed

Why shouldn't the 911 have been allowed to go to S Car Go, exactly? It's a 10-year older sports car based on (and still VERY close to) a design that's 30+ years older than the 986.

The 911 benefitted from re-valved Bilsteins a lowered ride height, and a performance alignment. And that's about it and just about exactly what the 986 had -- re-valved Bilsteins, stiffer springs, bigger anti-roll bars, a (slightly) lowered ride height, and a (semi) performance alignment. Actually, the 986 is sounding a little more "prepared" to me, all of a sudden. Plus, there's the small matter of fresh 225s/265s on 18x8s and 18x10s on the Box and old, hard 205s/225s on 16x6s and 16x8s the 911.

The 911 had (a little) more grunt, but not more pace. The two cars were neck and neck in most situations, especially whenever the 2.5 could take advantage of its second-gear ratio. A lot of 911 3.2 owners would have been very discouraged to see the 2.5 so large in their mirrors so much of the time. The 911 had a bit more power, but it also weighed within one pound of the Box -- a point emphasized in the article.

I dunno, you guys can Monday morning quarterback me all you wish (and, believe me, the 968 crew has -- and fairly so), but I am comfortable with the 986 and 911 I chose. Any advantage in one area was canceled out in another. Sadly, the 968 was another matter....

Finally, 986S 3.2 doesn't compute in the pricing sweet spot -- and I've got to be extraordinarily careful about who comes out on these things. As I'm sure you'll understand, anybody with "something to prove" on the road is automatically out. Then you work in logistics, weather, etc. and it gets, well, interesting!

I don't mind criticism, as we're certainly nothing more than a human enterprise, but I can't agree with your assertions.

pete

You seem to be saying the age of the 911 makes it fair to modify it to compete, that changes the parameters of the comparison. Unless I misread the article, the Boxster was bone stock. I think it's totally untrue to give the edge to the Boxster simply because it's newer, or to insinuate the older car cannot keep pace due to it's age.. I'll bet there are some vintage Ferrari's out there that would need no tweaks to show all three of these cars the short way around the track. For that matter, ask any 944 owner how many times they have taught an eclipse or some other Jap wanna be the short way through the curve much to the surprise of the owner of the newer sports car.

jeffsquire · 01-13-2007, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horizontally-opposed

Just to let you know, Excellence has long called it as it sees it. The day we don't, or can't, is the day I'll need to find new work.

The 986
Don't get me wrong, I love Boxsters (and 356s, 914s, 911s, C-GTs, 964s, 993s,
Pete Stout
Editor, Excellence Magazine

Thanks, Pete. Great article and analysis. You're right that you're damned if you do and if you dont.