2.7 or 3.4 that is the question?

[PKE]

ORIGINAL: Glyn

And its not just all about power, bhp and cudos, (or the .5 of a sec to 60) The S model has so many extra items as standard, personally, i think the S looks so much better, it performs better and the low down torque is better in traffic - low revs - higher gear and this makes them very economical too.

The 2.7 is a very good and able car, ( i previously had the original 2.5 and i was very happy with it for 5 years) but when the 3.4 is the same (ish) cost to buy for the sake of a few pounds for the extra tax and a fraction more fuel you would have to really want a 2.7, really want smaller brakes, really want halogen bulbs, really want black calipers, really want a single exhaust pipe, really want smaller alloys.

The 6th gear on the S is of the same ratio found on the 5th of a 2.7 (2004 986 Boxsters).
Also mine has Litronic ( standard on 2003-04)......they aren't any better than Halogens as they only have 35w instead of 55w.

The S also has a harder ride for daily commuting.

Only answer is the drive them to find out which you or your wife would prefer.........oh that reminds me, get a car with memory elec seats. That is one option I would love to have as like you, we both share the car.

 

[Gordon Attar]

ORIGINAL: maybe

ORIGINAL: PKE

It depends on which car she is trading up from. A 2.7 has more than enough power for everyday and even weekend use. Unless you're a professional racing driver, most people wouldn't be able to maximise the extra 0.5 seconds quicker acceleration from the larger engine.

Our current car is a 330 convertible. It has been an excellent car but is a 55 plate, and now has 66,000 miles on it and we are wanting a change. We initially were looking for something more economical, but with that comes tedium! We have been offered £6k from a dealer wishing to buy the Beemer, and for convenience sake I am inclined to take the money.
I have always wanted a 911, but realistical I just can't afford one. The wife likes pretty cars, so the Boxster seems a good choice to me. I really don't think she needs the bigger engine car, although the extras on it would be nice!

Any self respecting dealer would do better than £6k in p/ex, so go to a specialist. If the boss is used to a 330 then the 2.7 may feel a bit under powered especially on torqued.

 

[Maxxsirrah]

ORIGINAL: PKE

ORIGINAL: Glyn

And its not just all about power, bhp and cudos, (or the .5 of a sec to 60) The S model has so many extra items as standard, personally, i think the S looks so much better, it performs better and the low down torque is better in traffic - low revs - higher gear and this makes them very economical too.

The 2.7 is a very good and able car, ( i previously had the original 2.5 and i was very happy with it for 5 years) but when the 3.4 is the same (ish) cost to buy for the sake of a few pounds for the extra tax and a fraction more fuel you would have to really want a 2.7, really want smaller brakes, really want halogen bulbs, really want black calipers, really want a single exhaust pipe, really want smaller alloys.

The 6th gear on the S is of the same ratio found on the 5th of a 2.7 (2004 986 Boxsters).
Also mine has Litronic ( standard on 2003-04)......they aren't any better than Halogens as they only have 35w instead of 55w.

The S also has a harder ride for daily commuting.

Only answer is the drive them to find out which you or your wife would prefer.........oh that reminds me, get a car with memory elec seats. That is one option I would love to have as like you, we both share the car.

Just to clarify a feww points that are creeping in on here:

1. The 3.4 987 does NOT have litronics/Xenons or whatever else you want to call them as standard, they were an option.
2. The 3.4 987 does have a 6 speed box, 18' alloys, bigger brakes, leather seat facings, white dials, red calipers as standard.
3. The ride quality on the 3.4 987 is the same as the 2.7 987, it is only the wheels that are different.

I'd go for a 3.4 every day of the week (in fact I did!), I've had a 2.7 987 Boxster and a 2.9 987 Gen 2 Cayman as courtesy cars and they felt positively slow in comparison, especially the lack of torque. I've had mine for 5 years now since new and averaged around 27mpg in all driving over 47000 miles and still love it to bits!

Going back to one of the original questions, it is worth noting that the 3.4 engine contained an uprated IMS bearing which has meant that there have been hardly any reported IMS bearing failures on these engines.

Hope that helps! []

 

[rob.kellock]

I thought the OP was looking at a new 981?

There are powerful arguments to suggest that the base model on standard suspension and manual gears is the sweet spot in the range.

I preferred this:

To this:

Don't know why, can't put my finger on it. The PDK PASM S on 20" wheels is ruthlessly competent, rides bumps way better than a Spyder but somehow doesn't reward like the analogue car.

 

[Dylan1]

ORIGINAL: maybe

I feel I am getting closer to finding the right car for my wife, but my search has been narrowed to the 2.7 engine. My reason for this was that I presumed it to be much more economical, but when I have researched it, there is actually very little difference? Further, the 3.4 seems to be a very similar price second hand, and also generally better specced. I have also read that there are less engine failures on the bigger engine, so what is the point in the 2.7, and why buy one?[&:]

Rob
I think he was looking secondhand Prev model

I agree with you though that having had a loan 981 PDK 2.7 I was very happy but underwhelmed personally ,and was delighted to get my 987 3.4 back with new engine and rebuilt gearbox just feels right and more rewarding.

Don't get me wrong the 981is very competent but I am not going to rush and get a 981

 

[gouldian]

Had you tried a 981 3.4 "S" dyllan you would have noticed the difference, and not been underwhelmed, and whilst not necessarily "in a rush" your pace might have quickened somewhat!!

 

[Dylan1]

ORIGINAL: gouldian

Had you tried a 981 3.4 "S" dyllan you would have noticed the difference, and not been underwhelmed, and whilst not necessarily "in a rush" your pace might have quickened somewhat!!

Given past experience that may be dangerous then []

 

[Boxxster]

I would also consider he 3.2S (slightly biased) as I drove 3.4s and preferred the noise and response of the 3.2 S , but definitely go for 3.2 or 3.4 as the rush in he higher rev range is addictive , average fuel consumption is 26 on my 3.2 so far but only 2 k miles done, enjoy searching and finding the car for you

 

[rob.kellock]

I think gouldian raises an interesting point.

I have only ever been caught speeding twice - both times on quiet motorways in a 911 at 84 and 90 mph (pathetic really, I know).

I think my Spyder suits me because the racket at 80mph is enough to put me off going any faster most of the time. The 981 can be a very quick car with abilities that bear no resemblance to legal speed limits!

 

[flat6]

ORIGINAL: dyllan

I am certainly no pro driver but I can assure you that having driven a 2.7 for the last 3 weeks that I use the 3.4 power every single day I have it []

Well said dyllan. The extra power & torque is used all the time & in any gear. It's not about 0 - 60 times when driving on the road. It's about having the sufficient grunt to overtake in 3rd & 4th gear, and more importantly for me, when I do want to go for a thrill, there's actually a car underneath me that can provide it. My driving improves over time with a car and the 3.4 has more in reserve to offer me as I develop. I've outgrown the slower car in the short period I had one as a loaner.

If one is paying a considerable sum for a 987, I think a few quid saved on road tax & insurance or whatever, is not worth having in my pocket after splashing out considerably on my dream car. I personally wouldn't save on mpg because i'd be pushing the 2.7 hard in low gears all the time, trying to extract a thrill which never quite came.

Still, if it's for your wife, without being sexist, maybe the point of how exciting the 3.4 is, is less applicable. But if you're going to drive it yourself, even only once a year, i'd get the 3.4[]

Digressing onto 981... The new PDK in the 991/981 is remarkably different to 997/987 PDK. With 2nd generation PDK, even when in Normal mode, when cruising in 7th, as soon as you touch the accelerator it drops to 6th. A little more pedal travel and it's in 5th, and so on. So when you go for a big squirt on the gas its down into 3rd before the gas pedal has reached the floor and it's very instant. It's like it's always in the right gear for the throttle position as opposed to where the throttle ends up. With the first generation PDK it'll hang onto 7th until the gas pedal has travelled far enough (or fast enough?) for it to trigger that you're in a hurry. Only then does if climb down the gears and that is a frustrating lag (for me). With the first generation PDK I felt that you HAD to be in sport mode to avoid the high gears, to avoid the lag. With the new PDK, even normal mode is very sporty, being always in the optimal gear to some surge if you've given it any hint that you're accelerating rather than coasting. It's perfect IMHO, but I can see that for some, that set-up will make you irresponsible as the car runs away with you "Honest Guv, the car just keeps running away by itself"[] The 981 S manual gives more 'control' over going slowly if that is your problem.

 

[maybe]

Just a quick update, I bought a 3.2. A little less than 30,000 miles, with a fantastic spec, but including heated electric seats and special leather interior.

 

[maybe]

Another better pic.

 

[Wilsonjr]

I had a 2007 2.7 - 245 bhp before my latest stable mate. I loved the boxster 2.7 it was not slow and felt like every Porsche I have driven - rewarding, great sound.... Epic...on a summers day... It's a Porsche so turns heads always..... Only the boxster Spyder made mine feel a bit wooden... But that's another debate.... In a 997 gen 2 now... Another kettle of fish... But I still love the boxster.. Always will