Why can't I sell my S2 ?

[mik_ok]

ORIGINAL: 944 man
The 986 is a superior car too, in every respect.

Ooh - controversial []

Our 944 was purchased for many reasons, but one of the essentials was the "+2" ability to enable simultaneous transportation of sproglets. The 986 is fundamentally flawed in this respect [&:].

 

[Gavin944s2]

£5-8k for the 944 (any model) of your dreams is a steal. I am a development engineer for a motor company of 25yrs +. these cars last, are over engineered, build with pride & are DIY mechanics compared to later cars with ecu electronic controled throw away schit, printed & stamped in China...buy one now whilst you can, they fetch a fortune abroad, (double) as they know what they rare..& getting rarer, in good order.
compare the price to a 968, same car, but better looking at £2k less ..come on.....

The only problem is finance make cars £1 down drive away !! Its what folk have to spend..people with class know better []

 

[944 man]

ORIGINAL: mik_ok

ORIGINAL: 944 man
The 986 is a superior car too, in every respect.

Ooh - controversial []

Our 944 was purchased for many reasons, but one of the essentials was the "+2" ability to enable simultaneous transportation of sproglets. The 986 is fundamentally flawed in this respect [&:].

I love 944s: I bought my first one in 1992 and Ive owned many since. I do feel that the 986 is superior though: unless you want to carry two small children in the rear...[]

Later 944s arent as durable as earlier cars and I think that this is having a depressive effect on their values. Sill and engine shortcomings, along with the cost of a clutch where required, are substantial achilles heels.

 

[pauljmcnulty]

The 986 is a superior car too, in every respect.

Ok, I'll be first to rise to the bait....[]

Would a sub-£5K Boxster be a more economical car to run than a £5K S2 bought in good condition? Cost per mile, over let's say 5 years. It's important to some of us, as we are on very limited budgets. A cheap Boxster has got to be more of a money-pit than a very good S2?

As such, that means the Boxster isn't superior in every respect. I'd suggest that, if you want a 2-seater sports car that'll cost less than £1K per year to run then an MX5 would be a better alternative to the 944. [8|]

 

[944 man]

Theres no bait! Thats why I have qualified my remarks by pointing out that Im one of the biggest fans of the 944 that youll ever meet. Opinion is subjective of course, and there is no definitive answer, but I feel that a 986 is a superior car: particularly now that the more desirable (late) 944s are proving to be less than durable.

 

[PSH]

The 986 is a superior car too, in every respect.

I think I'll rise to this bait a little too, superior you say?
well I guess that depends on what you want from a car.
A friend of mine bought a boxter when they where first released back in 97. It was ok but it was not a true performance car, it held the road well but I wouldn't say it held it better than a 944. Even being a brand new car it was slower and more twitchy when driven hard when compared to a 944 turbo, add to this the fact that we are comparing a brand new car against a then 12 year old car and the 944 becomes even more impressive, but then the 944 turbo out performed GT3's until finally banned from the Porsche cup (back in 2002 IIRC) didn't it?.
On top of this todays build quality leaves a lot to be disired in comparison to cars built in the 80's so how will things be in another 10 years I wonder?
Yes the boxster has had a lot of improvements since it's release and it is indeed a fine car when compared to other choices available to todays roadster customer but I for one would not exchange my old lady for such a car, in fact I often ask myself will there ever be another car for me? , somehow I doubt it.

[8D][8D]


Pete

 

[PSH]

ORIGINAL: PSH

The 986 is a superior car too, in every respect.

I think I'll rise to this bait a little too, superior you say?
well I guess that depends on what you want from a car.
A friend of mine bought a boxster when they where first released back in 97. It was ok but it was not a true performance car, it held the road well but I wouldn't say it held it better than a 944. Even being a brand new car it was slower and more twitchy when driven hard when compared to a 944 turbo, add to this the fact that we are comparing a brand new car against a then 12 year old car and the 944 becomes even more impressive, but then the 944 turbo out performed GT3's until finally banned from the Porsche cup (back in 2002 IIRC) didn't it?.
On top of this todays build quality leaves a lot to be disired in comparison to cars built in the 80's so how will things be in another 10 years I wonder?
Yes the boxster has had a lot of improvements since it's release and it is indeed a fine car when compared to other choices available to todays roadster customer but I for one would not exchange my old lady for such a car, in fact I often ask myself will there ever be another car for me? , somehow I doubt it.

[8D][8D]


Pete

 

[ChasR]

I can see where Simon is coming from. 944s have more potential niggles than a Boxster (plate lift being one on certain models), and being older are more prone to rust. For me, I like the 944's uniqueness and its practicality (a big thing for me: Which other sports cars for similar money can take 1, make that 2 bikes in the back? My MGB couldn't even take one, and MX-5s/drop tops fail in this area (unless you go for a MkIV Escort XR3i Cabrio but when is a sports car not a sports car...))

 

[zcacogp]

ORIGINAL: 944 man
Theres no bait!

.... in which case I won't be taking it! But I'll express an opinion ... []

I had a 987 (later model) Boxster as a hire car for a month while my S2 was off the road. In the middle of summer, a soft-top for a month is always going to be recieved with a smile ... but I didn't like it. It felt distinctly superficial; everything was great when you drove it gently, or even briskly - the controls were beautifully weighted, it felt VERY crisp (much crisper than a 944 - and by 'crisp' I meant it responded with alacrity to tiny control inputs) and pulled pleasingly hard in the mid-range. The engine note made my S2 sound like a Vauxhall Nova as well ...

But step up the pace and it was a lot less rosy. These seemed to be no 'depth' to the character of the car, it felt as if it was designed to flatter the poor-to-average driver but had nothing to impress someone who wanted more. It had a VERY annoying Stability Control system (which, it being a hire car, I was too much of a coward to turn off), but if you tried to do anything fast, the stability control would step in and ensure that nothing got out of hand. Too much beans from a standstill? Nanny will back the throttle off for you and ensure all is fine. Too brisk a corner? You could feel nanny putting the brake on the inside rear wheel to keep everything where it should be. Wet roundabout? Well you could simply give it maximum welly in second and turn the steering wheel - nanny would drive the car for you to make sure that everything is nice and safe.

I was genuinely very glad to be sitting back in my S2. A car with depth and a soul which wasn't removed from an overbearing 80-year-old grandmother. And that did more than 18mpg as well.

987 a better car than an S2? I don't think so.


Oli.

 

[pauljmcnulty]

944s have more potential niggles than a Boxster (plate lift being one on certain models), and being older are more prone to rust.

I'm not at all sure. Read the Boxster forums for reliability issues and you'll soon see that they could throw a few big bills your way, not only in the engine dept. You see plenty of corrosion threads in the later 911 forums as well, let alone the older cars.

I'd still say that a well-bought 944 will be more fun and cost considerably less to run than a cheap early Boxster. I'd also compare them to more similar cars than a mid-engined 2-seater; I'd be far more likely to change my 944 for an estate or fastback than a less-practical car, with the dogs and luggage to transport around.

 

[zcacogp]

ORIGINAL: pauljmcnulty
I'd also compare them to more similar cars than a mid-engined 2-seater; I'd be far more likely to change my 944 for an estate or fastback than a less-practical car, with the dogs and luggage to transport around.

Good point.

I bought my S2 as an only car, a daily driver. You can seat four people, and take a LOT of stuff in the back. Other options were hot hatches or fast estates.

Had we been able to live with a strict two-seater and precious little boot I'd have been a-googling for an MX5 forum ....


Oli.

 

[TTM]

ORIGINAL: 944 man
Later 944s arent as durable as earlier cars and I think that this is having a depressive effect on their values. Sill and engine shortcomings, along with the cost of a clutch where required, are substantial achilles heels.

Not sure I understand the" engine shortcomings" on later cars - obviously there was no turbo or 16V engine on pre 85 cars so any of these two engines will require more servicing than the "basic" (in all sense of the term) 2.5 8V NA engine, from which a later example from '88 or '89 will be as reliable as one from '82.

It seems to me you are mixing here reliability with level of servicing - a 16V or turbo engine with no "performance mods" will be as reliable as a 2.5 8V NA engine if serviced accordingly.

 

[Suffolk944]

ORIGINAL: zcacogp



But step up the pace and it was a lot less rosy. These seemed to be no 'depth' to the character of the car, it felt as if it was designed to flatter the poor-to-average driver but had nothing to impress someone who wanted more. It had a VERY annoying Stability Control system (which, it being a hire car, I was too much of a coward to turn off), but if you tried to do anything fast, the stability control would step in and ensure that nothing got out of hand. Too much beans from a standstill? Nanny will back the throttle off for you and ensure all is fine. Too brisk a corner? You could feel nanny putting the brake on the inside rear wheel to keep everything where it should be. Wet roundabout? Well you could simply give it maximum welly in second and turn the steering wheel - nanny would drive the car for you to make sure that everything is nice and safe.

I was genuinely very glad to be sitting back in my S2. A car with depth and a soul which wasn't removed from an overbearing 80-year-old grandmother. And that did more than 18mpg as well.

987 a better car than an S2? I don't think so.


Oli.

And thats the great thing about the 944 and many older cars in general. There is none of that electrickery nonesense going on. YOU have all the input and there is an immediacy and purity to the driving experience that you just don't get with the more modern Playstation generation of cars. Lot more character in the styling department too.

 

[babyjack]

Getting back to prices,I've been watching PH avidly for the last week & have come to the conclusion that S2's between 5 & 6 K are being sold, but mostly by dealers. To me this means that people must be part exchanging their current cars for an S2. Also,they may be getting some sort of warranty included?
I'm going to stick with my plan of removing the chip & exhaust and returning to standard. I'll leave the suspension on though!
I'll then put it back on PH & see what happens..
To be completely honest with you all, I'm looking for 5K minimum. This is the amount that is missing from our savings on account of me buying a family car last year.The good lady wishes to see the money returned to said account! "fair enough" I said, " I shouldn't have any problems selling the red one" Doh!!!

On the subject of Boxsters, I have no passion for any porsche built after 1993. For me it ended with the 964&944. every model looked different before then.When I was younger I had a big poster of a slantnose turbo on my wall, I also remember the film Condorman with Micheal Crawford in it. Terrible film,but the baddies had black 911 turbo's!
Can't imagine having a poster of a diesel Cayenne on my wall.I remember seeing the boxster concept in The marque magazine & thought that looks good! then it came out & looked the same as a 996....Porsche don't build cars that scare kids & make them go "wow what's that Dad!"anymore (IMHO)
Ramble over!

 

[graham.webb]

Good point Paul....just look at the 996/997/Boxster forums and you'll read plenty of anguish about oil leaks, RMS failures, etc and isn't the fix for that really expensive?

How can it be acceptable these days to produce an engine thats's not oil tight, and fail to sort the problem even after several redesigns?!! Couldn't live with that I'm afraid.

Just idly looking through the magazines wondering what I might get next (go newer with a Boxster or older with a proper 911?) and it seems that only the later (dearer) Boxsters promise a leak free engine? Then I remember how much I like my (oil tight) 944 and that 3 years in, a modest outlay every year has fixed mechanical and bodywork stuff and the car will be great when it's all done and within budget.....

 

[ChasR]

ORIGINAL: pauljmcnulty

I'd still say that a well-bought 944 will be more fun and cost considerably less to run than a cheap early Boxster. I'd also compare them to more similar cars than a mid-engined 2-seater; I'd be far more likely to change my 944 for an estate or fastback than a less-practical car, with the dogs and luggage to transport around.

I believe that encapsulates the argument very well

I'd have a 944 over a Boxster as a Boxster doesn't really seem to excite me. As said, practicality was high on my list in addition for being one of the reasons for why I sold the tidy MGB (two seater at best, and not even a bike with both wheels off will fit). I admit a 3/4th person in a 944 is tight but it's still just enough to limp them down the road from the pub etc.

As for reliability issues I bet you most people would say a 944 would present more troubles than a 986 due the age, and these stigmas also affect values. But we'll see what the mag has to say about it.

Hmmm, it will be tricky to get another car that offers what the 944 does. Maybe I'll go to a hot hatch or Estate (say an E32 M5) but I'm loving the '44 for now.

As for what some members on here were saying about soul here's a little theory for you (for which I cannot take credit). Old Porkers were flawed and Flamboyant. 924 had an engine very loosely based on the VAG powerplant, the 944 had the large arches, and the 928 had interior designs that you would consider doing on your curtains (in the case of the 951 Silver rose, how about that chequered pattern?). That's what excited people. Hell, even today kids will get more excited from looking at a Countach compared to a Murcielargo. In the same way, Porsche designed their cars to be quick around the Nurburging, and went from designing cars with more convenience to driving convenience (say the car drives you, and even your mum could drive it without going into a hedge) as Oli described with the Boxster having lots of interior gismos.

 

[Fat Albert]

I was recently chased to the butchers by a guy in a Boxster, he had come up behind me whilst I was warming the engine through and then I gave it the beans as we left the village.

He wanted to find out what the car was as he hadn't been able to keep up with me on the twisty bits and had complete under-steer on the roundabout trying to keep up!

I think it was an early Boxster S (2.7?)

 

[ukmastiff]

Newbies point of view , from someone who recently chose a 944 over a Boxster though he could have had either. One word.

" Character "

Regards Mas

 

[babyjack]

when I was younger I had a big poster of a slantnose turbo on my wall, I also remember the film Condorman with Micheal Crawford in it. Terrible film,but the baddies had black 911 turbo's!

Nothing to do with this post but after writing the above I went and ordered the film!

 

[zcacogp]

ORIGINAL: babyjack

Sorry to say, if I was watching a film where the baddies were in 930s and the (presumed) good-guy was in something like a Nova kit-car, I'd be rooting for the baddies ....


Oli.