Porsche vs Porsche, say year, same options.
Which would you want and why?
VS
Porsche vs Porsche, say year, same options.
Which would you want and why?
VS
I'd want the one that isn't a convertible.
Because convertibles are awful.
Swank Force One wrote: I'd want the one that isn't a convertible. Because convertibles are awful.
This guy is biased.
Don't listen to him.
He'd tell you to buy a Porsche and put a turbo F2T in it. 
I'd rather have the 911. (The picture you have there is the better looking 4S that came out a bit later. 2001?)
It's more iconic, may be easier to work on, and more powerful out of the box.
"Easier to work on" is rather relative. Yes, some things may be easier to get at on a 996 (like the water pump, you don't have to dismantle part of the interior, "only" take about half the exhaust off) but both are definitely on the fiddly side.
My preference is the 996 over the Boxster, I just prefer the way they feel from behind the wheel.
Mind ewe, for an apples-to-apples comparison, you want to compare the Boxster to a regular (2WD) Carrera. The 2s and 4s feel surprisingly different.
BTW, there is no such thing as a '99 Carrera S...
Cayman
price notwithstanding, the 996. Seems like there's about a 10k difference in money though.
I like the Boxster much better personally. Nicer looking. Better balanced with the mid engine. Convertible is a plus also.
Swank Force One wrote: I'd want the one that isn't a convertible. Because convertibles are awful.
QFT. Also, 911 > Boxster all day every day.
Boxster s. Because the engine is in the right place and most of all because it's a vert.
Porsche hampers the Booster / Cayman as it's an inherently superior platform to the rubber beetle.
Also you can get a younger better condition 987 S for 996 money
911.
Back in 99 there was a lot bigger performance gap was there not? Now the Boxster/Cayman has come into its own and has very similar performance, some even say better, than the 911, but wasnt its a pretty big gap back then?
I remember an old road and track i think was about that time and IIRC, the 911 was better at everything and about the same in the slalom.
If its the same price, 911.
911 for me. Its more classic and to me looks better than the boxster.
Tom_Spangler wrote:Swank Force One wrote: I'd want the one that isn't a convertible. Because convertibles are awful.QFT. Also, 911 > Boxster all day every day.
Both so so utterly totally wrong
Opti wrote: If its the same price, 911.
They aren't, though. The 911 is usually about twice as expensive.
BoxheadTim wrote:Opti wrote: If its the same price, 911.They aren't, though. The 911 is usually about twice as expensive.
You can pick up a clean 996 in the $14k range or a similar mileage Boxster S in the $9k so yeah the 911 is more, but is it that much more car?
I found more than a few 50k mile Turbos in the mid$30s and one that was PCA owner owned with logs and multiple mods for an ask of $45k (Blue wrap and super cool if you ask me.)
580 hp and one of a kind look for $45k, that is a hard bargain to beat.
At least out here, a $14k 996 is going to need some work and/or isn't going to be that clean. The clean ones tend to be more in the $18k-$20k range, but that's still a lot of expensive car for the money.
Mind you, I've seen a high mileage one that would have made a good base for a track car for $3500 a couple of days ago. Just needs a new engine, and no, it wasn't the IMS that let go.
Adrian_Thompson wrote:Tom_Spangler wrote:Both so so utterly totally wrongSwank Force One wrote: I'd want the one that isn't a convertible. Because convertibles are awful.QFT. Also, 911 > Boxster all day every day.
The convertible thing I will concede because it's personal preference, but on what planet is any variety of Boxster/Cayman a better car than the same year 911? Having the engine a bit farther forward doesn't make up for the power deficit, lack of interior space, or the fact that one of them is a berkeleyING NINE ELEVEN! 
Autocrossing a base 996 was a pleasure--the car does everything right when on the limit. It is very, very good even in completely stock form. The drivetrain in the Boxster left me wanting more. The exterior styling and interior design/materials of the two cars are close enough to be a wash. If you have small kids, the fact that the 911 has (tiny) rear seats is a plus. I've been told that typical maintenance parts and consumables on the 996 are more expensive than the 986.
Tom_Spangler wrote: Having the engine a bit farther forward doesn't make up for the power deficit, lack of interior space, or the fact that one of them is a berkeleyING NINE ELEVEN!
Wasn't 2000 the first year for the Boxster S.
I would vote 911. On the other hand a Boxster S for sub $10,000 is alot of car for the money.
I vote 911 if it's those two I must choose between.
The Boxster and 911/Carrera are both wonderful. I think of them as pretty much the same car, in roadster and 2+2 coupe versions, so pick whichever fits your needs better. The 911 always has a little more power but typically goes for roughly twice the price on the used market.
You'll need to log in to post.
