Sold a boxter for a 944.....

gemmerson · Dec 19, 2007

..........not me, but I noticed on PH forum a few people who have recently sold boxter's as costs are getting to much and gone to a 944, and promptly said how fab they are, maybe even better than the boxter.

Never having owned a boxter or would want to maybe the value of our 944s might start to rise again !!

gemmerson · Dec 19, 2007

Boxster.........is of course the correct way to spell it !

Black_JPN · Dec 19, 2007

I went from a 944 S2 to a Boxster and back to a 944 (turbo - still smiling). Loads more character in the 944 a properly engineered old school sports car, with rarity, looks, charisma and stacks of performance. My old S2 was easily quicker than the 2.7 Box I replaced it with and the new turbo is in a totally different league. I never fell in love with the box and never fell out of love with the 944. Despite being a very competent car (the engine note is the main redeeming feature) I really grew to dislike the look of the Boxster and wondered how Porsche could have got the early 996/986 so wrong with jelly mould styling. I do like the 987/Cayman though but not enough to fork out the extra over my 944 turbo. Long live the renaissance. I want to know if they'll make a coupe version of the new Panamera...?

Peter Empson · Dec 19, 2007

I had a ride in a customers Cayman S the other day and if I'm honest I didn't quite get it as much as I hoped I would. It felt like an Audi from the passenger seat, difficult to describe but it just didn't have the old Porsche DNA I expected. It wasn't as quick as I'd hoped, but it did make a nice noise and do a lot of other things well (good grip and turn in etc). It almost felt like the soul had been engineered out of it [&:]

John Sims · Dec 19, 2007

ORIGINAL: Peter Empson

..... It almost felt like the soul had been engineered out of it [&:]

Another demonstration of the marketing requirement that it couldn't be as good as a 911 perhaps?

You can't expect a car to have soul when it is castrated at birth.

peanut · Dec 19, 2007

I've had 3x 944s2 now and have never been tempted by the Boxster . Jelly mould looks is very apt actually.
I guess we can't all be wrong.
A turbo sounds great but personally I prefer the instant grunt at all revs I get with the s2 (chipped) and whilst its a ll abit scary out there at the moment it would be a whole lot worse with a Turbo .I'd be in a ditch by now.

rob.kellock · Dec 19, 2007

As part of Bolton OPC's weekend drive event a couple of weeks ago, I drove a standard Cayman. It somehow reminded me of my old 944 lux - 5 speed box and the sort of car you can drive around with your foot on the floor without reaching stupid speeds too quickly. I quite liked it but it is rather lacking in the rear seat department.

RC18B 911 turbo · Dec 19, 2007

I've driven a few Boxsters at work and I also think they're no where near as good as my 944 I was very dissapointed by them. I do like the 996 GT3 Mk2 though that's a very good car.

zcacogp · Dec 19, 2007

OK, to add to the fray .... when my S2 was damaged earlier on this year I had a 987 Box (not S) as a loan car. And I liked it.

It was a good car, but did feel (as has been said) like the soul had been engineered out of it. (Good way of putting it.) Great noise, very sharp and crisp responses. The sort of car that, if you drive it briskly, makes you think "this is a REAL sports car."

Snag was that when you started to push on and give it some real welly, it disappointed. Too much electronic gadgetry, too much nannying. you could feel it moderate the driving experience around you. A fine technological display, yes, but fun?

No, not really.

I was glad to have my S2 back.

Oli.

John Sims · Dec 19, 2007

ORIGINAL: peanut

.........abit scary out there at the moment it would be a whole lot worse with a Turbo .I'd be in a ditch by now.

Seemingly contrary to popular belief, it is possible to limit the amount of Turbo boost by not pushing your right foot down quite as far. Granted you may then not be going as quick/slow [

] as in an S2, but it will assist in avoiding ditches.

Peter Empson · Dec 19, 2007

ORIGINAL: John Sims

Seemingly contrary to popular belief, it is possible to limit the amount of Turbo boost by not pushing your right foot down quite as far.

You big girl, that's what applying opposite lock is for [

]

sawood12 · Dec 19, 2007

Well i've grown to like the Boxster since i've driven a few now. The out and out grunt is not particularly impressive but the handling I find is very much more like a refined 944. It's very well balanced and feels 944ish. A work colleague of mine who, until recently, rallied a Mk1 Escort and had a 944 turbo and used to enjoy getting it sideways borrowed his friends Boxster S for a few weeks. He had plenty of time to have a 'play' with it and came to the conclusion that on the limit it was nowhere near as progressive or controllable as a 944. It was snappy on the limit (which you'd expect for a mid engined car). However he said he was often impressed at the speeds it could achieve and thought it a very very capable car. Deceptively fast.

In terms of soul, I'd imagine if you came straight out of an early air cooled 911 into a modern 911 you'd say that the more modern car has had soul engineered out of it. I think the essence of soul comes from imperfections and in modern cars there are very few imperfections.

I think where I get to is that I've respect for the Boxster/Cayman but i'll be sticking with my 944. If I ever get round to getting a different Porsche model it'll be a 911 because of the whole soul thing. A car with the engine in the wrong place has to have soul, no matter how much you try and engineer out the imperfections. Where's the soul in a modern, comfortable car with its engine in the right place? What modern cars could you consider to have soul these days? I can't think of any apart from maybe a 997.

Black_JPN · Dec 19, 2007

ORIGINAL: John Sims

ORIGINAL: peanut

.........abit scary out there at the moment it would be a whole lot worse with a Turbo .I'd be in a ditch by now.

Click to expand...

Seemingly contrary to popular belief, it is possible to limit the amount of Turbo boost by not pushing your right foot down quite as far. Granted you may then not be going as quick/slow [] as in an S2, but it will assist in avoiding ditches.

I'm slowly finding all this out. The turbo off boost can be very docile and I really quite like that as does my advanced driving observer who I think was a little taken a back when he first saw the turbo.
'Do you have any points?' he asked
'Nope' I replied
'None whatsover?' he retorted
'No, none'
'None for speeding?'
He really couldn't believe it!

When the boost does kick in (never on my observed drives) then the four horseman of the apocalypse are unleashed and I realise what all the fuss is about. It is all very controllable though and getting the time just right doesn't take long to master. It drinks more fuel, uses more oil but I couldn't go back to an S2 now. I've also come to realise how much more important brakes become in a turbo.

Guest · Dec 20, 2007

ORIGINAL: Black_JPN

I'm slowly finding all this out. The turbo off boost can be very docile

And very fuel efficent... Mine ran 35-37mpg off boost ... [

]

I liked driving the Boxter in fairness .. but it was too clinical and separated me too much....! As said earlier too many electronics to spoil the driving experience if you lean on her...

Prefer my 944......!

zcacogp · Dec 20, 2007

ORIGINAL: VanhireBoys

And very fuel efficent... Mine ran 35-37mpg off boost ... []

WHAT?

Blimey. That's a good argument in itself to get a Turbo ... my S2 gets around 26-28 - a LOT less! ('Round town commuting, admittedly, but the best I saw from a tankfull has been 32.)

Oli.

poprock · Dec 20, 2007

I simply could not afford a Boxster, Cayman, or anything else modern "¦ but I can afford a 944. My first one was a proper old banger, but I fell instantly in love with the feel of it. I've driven a fair few fast-ish cars (Imprezas, Alfas, Beemers, etc) but none of them gave me the tactile pleasure of even a basic old '44. I swiftly upgraded to a good quality oval-dash model (in my opinion, there were a lot of design flaws with the older square dash versions, which Porsche corrected in the oval-dash versions). As time passed and I became a little more financially flush, buying a modern car didn't even cross my mind. I went straight for a 944 Turbo. I can't see any reason to look back now. As my finances improve over time I won't be changing to a different car, I'll be tuning up this one!

Guest · Dec 20, 2007

ORIGINAL: zcacogp

ORIGINAL: VanhireBoys

And very fuel efficent... Mine ran 35-37mpg off boost ... []

Click to expand...

WHAT?

Blimey. That's a good argument in itself to get a Turbo ... my S2 gets around 26-28 - a LOT less! ('Round town commuting, admittedly, but the best I saw from a tankfull has been 32.)

Oli.

Well that is on a Classic Car Run which is your 40-50mph and REALLY nursing her. Driving normally with the odd blast Id say 28-30 would be the norm...! Roll on March and season start....[

]

rajagger · Dec 20, 2007

I'm lucky enough to have both a 944 Lux 1987 model and a 1999 2.7 Boxster.

Both are great cars but are totally different. There is no way a could say which one I like best!!!!

Diver944 · Dec 20, 2007

ORIGINAL: VanhireBoys

Mine ran 35-37mpg off boost ... []

The key words here are off boost [

].

Without any boost the Turbo is a 2.5 litre car with a higher ratio gearbox, in fact the official consumption figures in my handbooks show the Turbo to be more economical (showing how figures can be made to prove anything

). As soon as you hit 1 bar of boost you are pushing twice as much air through the engine so in effect it becomes a 5 litre car and requires substantially more fuel.

It's quite challenging trying to drive a Turbo using NO boost at all. I had to when running mine in, and it's easy at cruising speed, but just glancing the accelerator moves that needle towards the boost zone [8D]

Neil Haughey · Dec 20, 2007

ORIGINAL: poprock

I simply could not afford a Boxster, Cayman, or anything else modern "¦ but I can afford a 944. My first one was a proper old banger, but I fell instantly in love with the feel of it. I've driven a fair few fast-ish cars (Imprezas, Alfas, Beemers, etc) but none of them gave me the tactile pleasure of even a basic old '44. I swiftly upgraded to a good quality oval-dash model (in my opinion, there were a lot of design flaws with the older square dash versions, which Porsche corrected in the oval-dash versions). As time passed and I became a little more financially flush, buying a modern car didn't even cross my mind. I went straight for a 944 Turbo. I can't see any reason to look back now. As my finances improve over time I won't be changing to a different car, I'll be tuning up this one!

The thing I see fairly clearly now is that any 944 is remarkably cheap to run if you can do as much of the work as possible yourself, and phone around all the usual suppliers to get the best prices. This year my S2 has cost me £500 for track day tyres, £150 for a replacement ABS ecu, roughly £120 for the gear linkages/parts and about £50 for the service parts (I got 6 quarts of Mobil 1 for £23, see earlier post on this forum).

Tref is going to show me how to do the belts (assuming he doesn't do his this week) or at least how to check tension. IMHO the rear suspension, gearbox,clutch, AC if you have it etc. are the only things too big and nasty to do at home.

I reckon spending a grand including tyres is a bad year, whereas when my car was always going to specialists I was looking at as much as £2K a year not including tyres, never had a year until now for less then a grand.

The 944 is easilly the nicest car to work on I have come across. My brother actually enjoys helping with it sometimes, whereas he hates being asked to work on other cars because he isn't a mechanic any more and in his opinion most cars are dogs basically (you get to see how bad when you have to fix the blooming things).