981 Boxster & 987 Spyder comparision.

[fbr]

Very interesting article in the current January edition (682) PCNA "Panorama" magazine comparing the handling characteristics of the current Boxster (note non S) with the 987 Spyder. Both are manual variants with the sports suspension on the base 981.

Gives interesting breakdown of the suspension properties of all the 981 models together with the 987 Spyder.

"Strictly Analog"

Other v.good article on the 918 Spyder.

"Flat-Plane Fantastic"

Requires a short wait to load up the links. Note you can save the file as a PDF

FBR

 

[jdpef356]

Nice spot Frank![8|]

I have crossed ref to Spyder forum so the Spydermen don't miss out!

 

[rob.kellock]

Good spot, thanks for sharing.

Fascinating article.

 

[MrDemon]

the steering kills me on the 981 to the point I could never buy one over a Spyder, it would feel lifeless.

 

[fbr]

ORIGINAL: MrDemon

the steering kills me on the 981 to the point I could never buy one over a Spyder, it would feel lifeless.

You could try for a quicker exit courtesy of the all electric 918 or just keep aiming for your old age pension and stick with the more sedentary 987.


Back on topic, I'm sorry that the free access to the Panorama articles is no longer available.

Which is a shame, because Alexander Palevesky's 987/981 comparison, with regard to their handling & chassis development, is both well balanced and informative. Simililary Pete Stout's appended "Counterpoint" article provides an alternative but equally balanced view.

The direct comparison was between a low mileage, manual gearbox, 2011 Boxster Spyder (owned by Palevsky) & a new 2014 Boxster (supplied by Porsche NA). The 2.4 981 was fitted with the X73 sports suspension, manual gearbox and PTV/LSD. They were driven back-to-back on "Southern California's twistiest blacktop"

Perhaps the best overall summary can be encapsulated in these quotes from Pete Stout -

"Is a 981 with X73 more fun than a 987 Boxster Spyder? That's a hard one, but there's no question that its chassis is superior. Lessons learned in the Boxster Spyder have lived on here. These cars feel connected to one another, though the 981 does everything better. Does that include its electric-assist steering? I looked forward to this test as a chance to compare the systems on the same day and the same roads, and found that the 981 system gave up little if anything in terms of feel while returning noticeably better precision and placeability. Any lingering doubts are quashed by the 981's radically quicker turn-in, thanks to that increased front track width."

"Palevsky has covered the rest of the 981's improvements well, from its slick shifter (aka the six speed manual) to its overall refinement. Having now tested all three 981 Boxster chassis"”a 2.7 on standard suspension and 19s, this 2.7 on X73 and 19s, and a Boxster S on PASM and 20s"”I can say there isn't a dog in the bunch. All three suspensions are brilliant, with PASM getting the nod if ride quality is prized above all else."

Additional comments and opinions were given about benefits of increased 981 chassis rigidity and dimensions together with the improved 'turn in' allied to the benefits of PTV. Perhaps best encapsulated by this quote from Palevsky - "This Boxster (ie 981) appears to rotate not from the front end, but rather directly from the center of its body." I suspect this largely reflects the experiences of enthusiastic 981 members of PCGB. The value for money comments will chime well with our erswhile member from the Cotswolds!

On the technical front I'm sure you will enjoy (albeit USA derived) the attached summarised suspension data for the 981 models given in the article. You can see that no two models appear to have the same setup.


Overall I thoroughly recommend Alexander Palevsky's "Strictly Analog" article & Pete Stouts "Counterpoint" commentary!

FBR

 

[daro911]

So the soon to be launched 981 GTS could - should be the Boxster of all Boxsters[8D]

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1089809_2014-porsche-boxster-gts-spy-shots

 

[MrDemon]

These people must drive different cars to me, as the steering is night and day better on a 987.2

As for the turn in, all they have done is widen the front track, some thing I have been telling forum members to do for about a year !!!
The Spyder runs a wider track over a Boxster any way due to the wheels and then I run another extra 14mm over that.
As for PTV , well just more electronics to take away how to control a car.

Each to their own ofcourse but done of these new cars do anything for me what so ever.

Going from my car back to back into a 981 Boxster or cayman is no where near the same.
So sorry but another load of rubbish.

 

[rob.kellock]

ORIGINAL: fbr

Perhaps the best overall summary can be encapsulated in these quotes from Pete Stout -

You have the advantage over me as the article is no longer accessible to me but I did read it when you first posted it. What you say is the best summary comes from the counterpoint part of the article, ie your "best overall summary" seems to reflect the opposite conclusion to the main article?

 

[fbr]

ORIGINAL: MrDemon

...So sorry but another load of rubbish.

Being rubbished by Mr Demon is true approbation!

ORIGINAL: Rob.kellock

What you say is the best summary comes from the counterpoint part of the article, ie your "best overall summary" seems to reflect the opposite conclusion to the main article?

Not quite sure what you are asking? Both authors largely agree but they do, like most folk, have different viewpoints and emphasis. In this case Alexander Palevsky is more partial to the PTV/LSD and it's effect on handling than Pete Stout. I'm only giving an overview, not a blow by blow account. Try not to shoot the messenger .

FBR

 

[flat6]

Thanks for posting the summary Fbr as I didn't get to read the articles. Something I can identify with is where he says that the 981 steering lacks feel but is very accurate. I expect living with one you just tune into it after a while - no big deal. I found the 981 Cayman steering a bit more direct than Boxster but with both 981 Boxster and Cayman, whilst I didn't feel what was going on at the front wheels as much as the Spyder and therefore it lessened the sense of front grip I had, the 981's go exactly where they are told and are not inferior in terms of steering capability. Therefore i'd expect a 981 with X73 to be as sharp as a Spyder, if lacking a little of the feel of grip, imho. Would like to try X73 to find out for sure.

 

[fbr]

Thanks for the comments. It was a refreshing article that was presented as a development of the chassis technology and handling of the overall Boxster series and gave a good insight into the development of the 987 Spyder' in particular. Their purpose was stated "not to determine which of these Boxsters is the more desirable car, but rather to understand if X73 is the most desirable suspension for drivers seeking a sharper 981."

In my limited experience the 981 'feedback & feel' is dependent of the wheel/tyre combination. Most test cars are furnished with the 20" wheels/tyres, which do offer a prodigious level of grip (warm & dry) but I must admit to preferring the standard 19" shod with Continental Winter Contacts! The article does make a point of testing both cars shod in 19" summer rubber and alludes to the desirability of higher sidewalls.

For Flat6, this in particular is worthy of quote:- "With 1.5 inches of additional front track, it turns in like nothing else on the road, save for possibly a Ferrari 458 or an older Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. The steering is intensely accurate, and while it isn't necessarily any more feelsome than before, it really isn't any worse, either"”this despite all the protests over the switch from hydraulic assist to electric assist. The front tires, meanwhile, simply will not relinquish grip. Understeer refused to materialize. There's no doubt that this 981 will begin to push at some point"”but that point exists only within the safer confines of a closed circuit."

Outrageous!

I'm sure there must be a pdf somewhere?

FBR

 

[MrDemon]

they under steer still, and as I said Porsche keep widening the front track on their cars to try and stop it.
On track you now wear out your rear brakes 1st due to all this rear wheel braking etc

I guess it depends how fast you drive and what you are used too.
I drive my cars over the limit of grip just about every day. and come from GT3, Lotus, Noble, CSL etc

I have also had 4 load 981 cars of all sorts and all have been dull vs my R and I am very happy to hand them back but my mates and GF would take one over my cars every time.


That is not to say they are a bad car, they are a great car, but they are now a car which more people will like to own hence Porsche sell more, only 200 or so Cayman R sold.
Porsche are selling more and more cars now. The Macan will outsell any Sports car Porsche make.
future values are lower than ever due to the amount of cars for sale 2nd hand.

As for "chassis technology" well every car which comes out has a 20% stiffer chassis , who cares ? you can get the front wheel on a 993 to lift the chassis was so stiff back in 1995 !!!
the only reason these cars are getting quicker lap times now is electronics. Even the mighty GT3 had to have PDK to get the times vs other cars all now with dual clutch.
braking an inside rear wheel to aid turn in or electric diffs to do the same is why the cars are faster imo not chassis technology again tyres have come on a lot from 1995.

If "chassis technology " and stiffness is the key, buy a Coupe not a soft top ;-)

if getting the fastest laptime is important or getting from A to B fast and safe as possible with ease and luxury, then all the new cars win hands down

If you want driver involvement and buy cars to drive for fun, then you cannot beat real diffs, passive dampers, direct steering and having bucket seats to make you at one with your car.

the latter market is a very small market vs the new Market, so there is no right and wrong, I just get annoyed with write ups where every new cars is the best yet , but then they have to sell magazines.

what you will find is the people who write all these magazine seem to all own older manual type cars and just borrow new cars or get given them for 6 months for free.

 

[flat6]

Thanks Frank.

Interesting. I wonder why Porsche has gone to 20" on a car this size.

 

[flat6]

The 981 will indeed appeal to more people than the 987, from its levels of comfort to the quality of its interior and will poach buyers from a wider range of marques than ever before.

However, comparing it to an R set-up I don't understand. They wouldn't sell many at all with such a harsh suspension set-up, likewise 987. The Spyder/R set-up is for those who want the benefits it brings at the expense of the ride and comfort it sacrifices. I don't expect many people to spec X73 on their 981 and neither would they have on 987 had it existed. How many 997's do you see with the -20mm sports suspension? If you want a firmer ride to aid handling buy a Spyder, R, GT3 etc, or buy X73. Porsche will not set up a standard car that way.

 

[MrDemon]

X73

I would say it's impossible to try a X73

as you say no one orders one. and my local OPC who is one of the main sellers for the sporty models said they would "never" spec one for stock and have never sold one.

not even the GTS models will have the Sports chassis option.

"However, comparing it to an R set-up I don't understand."

that's what the thread is about , no ?

x73 vs Spyder

 

[lamboman]

I have a pdf of the Magazine with the article. PM me with your email address if you want a copy

I thought the article was balanced, well written and informative.

 

[kitchens]

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=29285 interesting read

 

[flat6]

ORIGINAL: MrDemon

I have also had 4 load 981 cars of all sorts and all have been dull vs my R and I am very happy to hand them back but my mates and GF would take one over my cars every time.

ORIGINAL: MrDemon

I would say it's impossible to try a X73

as you say no one orders one. and my local OPC who is one of the main sellers for the sporty models said they would "never" spec one for stock and have never sold one.

"However, comparing it to an R set-up I don't understand."

that's what the thread is about , no ?

x73 vs Spyder

As you say, the 981 cars you have loaned, have not been X73, so the outcome of comparing them with your R is a given is it not? They are not as sharp and aren't meant to be. As you said, "X73 vs Spyder", which is not what you have driven.

 

[spyderman]

ORIGINAL: MrDemon
On track you now wear out your rear brakes 1st due to all this rear wheel braking etc

Is that because you're leaving PSM on? Unless the owner asks for an aggressive geo, the car will understeer - that's how they're made. No idea if a 981 finally has sufficient negative camber (without modification) to allow a specialist to dial it out. I suspect not.

Chris.

 

[MrDemon]

ORIGINAL: spyderman

ORIGINAL: MrDemon
On track you now wear out your rear brakes 1st due to all this rear wheel braking etc

Is that because you're leaving PSM on? Unless the owner asks for an aggressive geo, the car will understeer - that's how they're made. No idea if a 981 finally has sufficient negative camber (without modification) to allow a specialist to dial it out. I suspect not.

Chris.

I always have PSM off. and have a nice geo.

I mean in general for the mass's the wear now is on the rear pads due to electronic braking. I e. the car is making the corner for you not the driver.
PSM off is never PSM off though, I can get PSM to light up on the very tightest of bends and full power from the apex on 1 corner of one of the tracks I goto and that's annoying.

it must think I am out of control, but as it's a hairpin the system must not like the amount of steering input used and PSM cuts back in braking the rear wheels or limiting the power , not sure which.

All other tracks I have not had an issue though, but goes to show PSM off is never really off,

And when I did some drifting in the wet, PSM off again (and spun a few times trying) PSM totally failed and I had to turn the engine off to reset.