ORIGINAL: MrDemon Get a nice Boxster with a nice roof if you wanted that spec lol. This is my issue, with out the wheels and buckets seats, I would take a cheaper normal Boxster. I am using mine less and less, and my R more and R :-( . Keeps the miles down though on a car 3.5 years old and still not 8k. If the spec is missing the real Spyder items, then a normal Boxster is the better car with a sweet roof. The weather is so off and on I don't take mine out;-( But this weekend looks like it's going to be very hot
I hear you MrD and I think we agree that a white car with buckets and Spyder wheels and not too lardy on extra's is the best spec. The thing is, the buyers of cars go for various things that others think are absurd. For example, I personally think that buying a 4x4 offroad vehicle to solely drive on the road, is a kind of logic I can't compute. Big, slow, heavy, tall and therefore not the optimal road car ingredients (OK, a Cayenne turbo is fast, and no doubt drives pretty well, but if it was as low as a 911 and as light as a 911, and you don't do farm work, I know which one would give the better drive). But, i've no doubt Cayenne buyers have certain criteria that I don't see, and it's Porsche's best seller so, so many can't be wrong. They just buy cars for different reasons to me. So, I guess what i'm saying is, there'll be people who will want a Spyder for how it drives and/or how it looks but not care that the roof is manual, so it doesn't follow that if they want PCM or Climate then they want a Boxster. Maybe some drive their Spyder to Le Mans or want to lose themselves on Welsh mountain roads but would rather the PCM Nav module rather than a TomTom falling off the windscreen - and PCM really doesn't spoil the handling if you haven't got too many other extras to go with it. I know what you mean but there's a really varied bunch out there and I guess i'm one of them. I really wanted bucket seats but I wanted nothing but a Spyder and wanted to carry my son around, so thankfully, there are cars with sports seats. But i've openly made it clear what i'd prefer if the car was soley for it's intended design purpose. I guess there's many a buyer out there too who won't take the car beyond 4/10th of it's ability and wouldn't spot the difference between driving a heavyweight or lightweight example, and would notice more something that helped them get along with the car. Hey, we might actually see you selling first and keeping the R with the roof[
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1c4fb/1c4fb4a004ac374ae735c210f8560be0dce354ac" alt="Wink ;) ;)"
], whilst we soldier on through another 10 years with the Spyder, making the biggest sacrifice of living with the manual roof in this UK climate - a bigger sacrifice than having a few kg of options. I think the biggest design factor from a weight saving perspective that enhances the Spyder's dynamics over a Boxster or even a Cayman R, is the roof - the amount of weight that is removed, and where it is removed i.e. high up in the car. All other things being equal, the Spyder roof, must account for the total weight saving over the R and that 20kg extra in the R is right up top in the roof and steel/glass tailgate. The Spyder just pulled me over from being a staunch coupe buyer, to not even considering the R given that the Spyder exists. But I can understand anyone who would choose the R for practicality. As I say, I know what you mean and i'm not disagreeing with you but there are so many shades of grey. The only thing I can't fathom is why someone would change from Spyder wheels
AND pay money for that too, and I don't just mean dealers optioning on the turbo II wheel. For example, the turbo wheels were an extra £810 and I mean the old turbo wheels. All the alternative wheel options were at cost of varying amounts[&:]