This one in Orlando?
If your yardstick is driving pleasure, a 2.5 liter car is wonderful. Except for the clutch action. I was able to turn off traction control. Sounds even better than a 3.2 liter S.
If, however, your yardstick is measured against other cars, you probably want the extra power of the S cars.
Of course, if you're measuring it against other cars the extra power of an S probably isn't enough, either. What you really want is a supercharged 3.4 liter 996 engine dropped back there!
I think that the Magazine should get the car that the readers would buy in your position, and that's the Boxster S.
Side note, after a fantastic weekend where my car proved to be able to do basically everything with an incredible level of competency, I stopped by a Porsche dealer for the first time ever. A 2006 Cayman S has my curiosity for some reason. It totally fails the comparison with my C6, but I'm intrigued nonetheless.
There's a few base 2.5 cars kicking around for under $8k here.
I know it is an absolutely terrible idea but some part of me wants to see just how much fun I can have before it sprouts a $30k bill or gonzo engine swap.
Do the 2.5 cars have IMS issues?
mazdeuce wrote: Do the 2.5 cars have IMS issues?
Yup.
Very interested in reading this. I've looked for a Boxster on and off for a few years for the exact same uses.
Just in case your search isn't complicated enough, the 986 S and the base 987 make similar HP and can be found in the same price range.
The GT3 engine doesn't have IMS issues... And fits just fine.
*
Or, if the engine grenades, there's a fairly developed LS swap using the existing transaxle.
*cubic dollars required
In reply to 2002maniac:
I can't get past the extra 300 pounds a 997 weighs, so I still might assemble the project. I'll definitely do a build thread, if/when I do. As an aside, I was called middle-aged the other day for the first time, and at 37, having survived three malignant brain tumors, I thought to myself, "hell yes! Making it to 74 would be just fine!"
In reply to Nathan JansenvanDoorn:
But t3 engines cost $30k+ and I highly doubt that the stock VW Passat-sourced transaxle will survive behind an LS. Also, LS-swap taints one of my favorite aspects of the Boxster - the steering. LS swap necessitates electric power steering. I think my 3.4 swap is the right move. I've also done two IMS bearing upgrades (one on a 2.5 and one on a 3.4) and it's really not that hard of a job
Get the Boxster S. I had a 2000 and the torque is addictive. The car had over 150k miles but the motor had been rebuilt due to a water pump failure and a warped cylinder head. I threw a cheap ($500) EBay header/exhaust and the motor dynoed at 280hp. I tracked it once at Homestead and was impressed. Pull the brake pad sensors before you track the car, they have a tendency to melt... I sold it because I wasn't comfortable tracking a convertible.
Sun does terrible damage to the "embossed leather." If it's damaged, mine was, there is no way to fix it short of replacement which is $$$.
The interior was a little tight for me. I ended up removing the lower center stack and installing the GT3 console piece to finish. Much improved legroom
I'll also give a the 2.5L a plug. No it isn't fast, but the way the car drives makes it a ton of fun. Having owned a 2.5 and a 3.2S, I enjoyed autocrossing the 2.5 more. The cars are balanced a bit different, the 2.5 would rotate better where the S would understeer.
No driving in rush hour traffic? You'll want the extra grunt of the S.
I did say "bring cubic dollars "
On the LS: people have said the same for years about 944's with v8's, but they work. The 6 speed is reportedly plenty stout for a mild LS. As to the power steering: it's somewhat common in 964 993 circles to convert to an electric ps pump. (Like some of the factory race cars, apparently) Users report no change in steering feel, and assist can be adjusted.
M030 wrote: In reply to Nathan JansenvanDoorn: But t3 engines cost $30k+ and I highly doubt that the stock VW Passat-sourced transaxle will survive behind an LS. Also, LS-swap taints one of my favorite aspects of the Boxster - the steering. LS swap necessitates electric power steering. I think my 3.4 swap is the right move. I've also done two IMS bearing upgrades (one on a 2.5 and one on a 3.4) and it's really not that hard of a job
Tom_Spangler wrote:mazdeuce wrote: Do the 2.5 cars have IMS issues?Yup.
But they are the least susceptible of the group. The early cars used a double row bearing which seems to be a more robust design than the later single row bearings. They are not immune to failure and I have a friend at work who lost a low mileage 2.5L Engine due to the bearing going. It cost him $10K to get a used replacement engine, replace the IMS and get it swapped in.
As I said in my one line reply yesterday this topic is of almost critical interest to me.
Next year is my turn for a new car in the household car buying cycle. I’m probably the only person on the planet cross shopping A) A brand new S550 Convertible, B) A New Focus RS, C) A cheap used Boxster with D) A Cosworth Supercharged NC Miata as a very distant forth candidate. With the Mustang or Focus I would pass on my Volvo C30 down the generational ladder within the family. With the Boxster I would keep the Volvo as a Thanksgiving to Easter vehicle and use the Porsche as a summer car, allowing the miles to be kept lower on both cars and make it practical for DD use as I would always have a backup car if either needed time consuming/expensive repairs. I would see any purchase as having a 6-10 year DD life cycle.
I work for Ford and really want a new Mustang Convertible, but if I’m buying a new car, I want it the way I want it with the option I want. Simple as that. Even with my A plan discount every time I configure a Mustang convertible I come out with a price over $40K. I can do that, but I don’t want to spend that much on a depreciating asset. Ditto with the Focus RS, I have no idea of the price, but I’m betting $37+K and with the limited numbers I doubt any dealers will be willing to honor A plan. So I keep coming back to the Boxster/Cayman. I’ve lusted after a Boxster since they first came out and even though I’m a Convertible guy at heart, the Cayman is simply stunning to look at.
In either case (Boxster or Cayman) I think they are better cars in all ways than the equivalent 911’s. Better looking, better balanced, better priced, better everything except power when you consider year for year. But when you start to look at price for price, you can get a newer generation Boxster/Cayman compared to 911 for any price point, so you end up greatly diminishing the power difference.
My real dilemma with Boxsters is the age/model price point. Don’t forget I’m looking at these because I’m loath to spend $40K on a car, even though that’s something I wouldn’t have thought twice about a few years ago. I end up with a circular argument that goes like this:
I can get a nice early 986 for $8-10K, spend up to $5K on an IMS/Clutch/AOS/Tires etc. at time of purchase and have a great car.
But If I start at $12K I can get a great 986S and do the same.
Jumping to $17K I can get a 2003+ 986S and get the improved interior and very important to me, a glass rear window in the soft top.
That’s not too far off a 987S, I can get one with shopping for $25K and have a much updated car with again more power.
You know I’m really close to early Cayman S territory at this point, I could be in a 300hp Cayman S with fixed IMS for around $30K
At this point my mind revolts and tells me I’m spending too much money again so I return to the early 2.5L for $8K. Rinse, repeat ad nauseum
Some magazine did a comparison of 986-987-981 back in 2012, the name of Grassroots something or other. The basic gist of that was the 986 is a great car until you drive a 987 when it seems old and floppy. The 987 is so much better in every way, right up until you drove a 981 that is, when the 987 suddenly feels old, slow and floppy. Yet to counter that I’ve seen dozens of people over the last couple of years on 986 Forums, Rennlist, Pelican forums, Boxster Forums etc. say what has been said up thread here. That is that while the 987 is a superior car in every measurable way, the 986 feels more pure, more fun, lighter, more involving. This is a common theme said about many newer Vs older vehicles, but not normally two so close together in time and evolution. Further there are people here who are actively promoting the early 2.5L 986’s over the later 3.2L 986S.
So I’d love to see GRM do a deep dive into the 2.5L 986, the 2.7L 986, the early 3.2L 986S and the 03+986S with its upgrades including driving impressions, not necessarily lap times. The issue is they are probably too close to each other for any magazine outside of a Porsche only publication to print, but it could be a good online primer as part of the buying process before starting the print project car part.
One more thing, a significant number of early 986’s seem to have hard tops, and even more interesting is prior to the Cayman being launched there was an aftermarket hardtop called the Zeintop that made the Boxster look quite like the later Cayman, long before Porsche did it. The launch of the Cayman seemed to kill it off though.
Pic of a 986 with a Zeintop installed.
Those are aftermarket hard tops? They look fantastic!
Adrian, you went over my dilemma perfectly. I think I will keep looking and driving a few different cars and yes, I remember the comparison test. I wrote it.
Tom_Spangler wrote: Those are aftermarket hard tops? They look fantastic!
Yup, but I think the launch of the Cayman killed them. They trade for $4-5K these days so not cheap.
You can get a regular Porsche issue Boxster hard top for around $1,500 used, but it's not nearly as pretty. Either one makes for a very practical top for 4 season use.
Adrian,
It becomes a bigger conundrum once you see that $5k buys a 986 and $15k will buy you a base 987 in the Los Angeles area.
M030 wrote: Adrian, It becomes a bigger conundrum once you see that $5k buys a 986 and $15k will buy you a base 987 in the Los Angeles area.
Yes, I'm fully aware of Orange County Porsche prices, supply and demand can really work in your favour out there. That and the lack of Michigan rust! I hear there in one dealer there who sells more cars in LA than are sold annually in all of Michigan. I have several acquaintances in the Porsche community out there. I'm 90% sold on the idea of buying remotely, getting someone to check it out, if it looks good get it sent for a PPI, if that checks out pay for a clutch and IMS upgrade at the same time. Then fly out with the Spousal unit and drive back, LA-Sonoma-Napa-Salt Lake city- Rocky mountain NP - Chicago - Detroit. SWMBO is on board with that idea too. This time next year we will know.
For Boxsters, and Porsches for that matter, isn't Autotrader and Cars.com better sites than Craigslist?
Holy crap that top is sexy. That kind of changes the early boxter game for me. Even at $4k, it would be worth it. Maybe.
In reply to DWNSHFT:
If your yardstick is driving pleasure, a 2.5 liter car is wonderful. Except for the clutch action. I was able to turn off traction control. Sounds even better than a 3.2 liter S. If, however, your yardstick is measured against other cars, you probably want the extra power of the S cars. Of course, if you're measuring it against other cars the extra power of an S probably isn't enough, either. What you really want is a supercharged 3.4 liter 996 engine dropped back there!
I dunno. After daily driving a Mustang, the non-S felt a little too pedestrian to me. If I'm getting a Porsche I want it to be fast. The base was nice, but it wasn't special.
I want to find a cosmetic-total 2.5, strip it, build a tube frame into something like this:
You don't need the bigger engine if the car's 1300 lbs. less
You'll need to log in to post.
