RE: Driven: Porsche Boxster S
Discussion
I'm not sure about this steering feel thing. In some ways I think its the most important tactile sensation in a drivers car (in fact, maybe any car - why ISN'T it important to feel front end grip in a diesel mile muncher?). But I get the impression that the latest Boxster has feel aplenty... but you need to adjust your senses to it. Just because someone talks quietly, doesn't mean they're not worth listening too - you just need to listen a bit harder.
Maybe its the same with DER NUE BOXSTER. Message not so loud? Listen harder!! I've experienced cars that were willfully disposed of any feel whatsoever, so I'm happy to tune in if its there to be found...
If the chassis' is as peachy as the written word would suggest - and lets face it, Boxsters have been dynamic winners since TAG EINS - then I'm happy to believe the steering is just-so. The almost non-Germanic adjustments to the exterior styling make for a package that will surely sweep all before for years to come. Its actually quite sexy. When was that last the case for a base model Porsche?
In summary:
Dear Mr Porsche
Please may I have use of a new Boxster for AS LONG AS POSSIBLE to confirm its as bl00dy awesomely superb as it would seem from early reviews. 3 years should do nicely
Maybe its the same with DER NUE BOXSTER. Message not so loud? Listen harder!! I've experienced cars that were willfully disposed of any feel whatsoever, so I'm happy to tune in if its there to be found...
If the chassis' is as peachy as the written word would suggest - and lets face it, Boxsters have been dynamic winners since TAG EINS - then I'm happy to believe the steering is just-so. The almost non-Germanic adjustments to the exterior styling make for a package that will surely sweep all before for years to come. Its actually quite sexy. When was that last the case for a base model Porsche?
In summary:
Dear Mr Porsche
Please may I have use of a new Boxster for AS LONG AS POSSIBLE to confirm its as bl00dy awesomely superb as it would seem from early reviews. 3 years should do nicely
So why would you want to spend 80 grand on a 911? That is before you start adding acronyms.
As for the styling I am glad someone has realised that you don't have to make all Porsches look like a '65 911. This bears well for the updated Cayman. I think a 2.4 turbo flat 4 would be alright as an entry model.
As for the styling I am glad someone has realised that you don't have to make all Porsches look like a '65 911. This bears well for the updated Cayman. I think a 2.4 turbo flat 4 would be alright as an entry model.
Plenty of things I'd like to see on the "no cost delete option" list there:
- electronic handbrake
- stop-start
- coast function
Does the coast function really cut the engine to idle? So if you are coasting downhill on a motorway, you could be looking at less then 1,000rpm on the dial yet traveling at 70mph? How does it rev match when you decide to accelerate/decelerate again? Weird.
Once we have completed our successful campaign for adding lightness across the manufacturers, we will start the next one to get rid of daft 'features' that are not in control of the driver.
First against the wall come the revolution will be stop-start and, of course, automated geraboxes. 
- electronic handbrake
- stop-start
- coast function
Does the coast function really cut the engine to idle? So if you are coasting downhill on a motorway, you could be looking at less then 1,000rpm on the dial yet traveling at 70mph? How does it rev match when you decide to accelerate/decelerate again? Weird.
Once we have completed our successful campaign for adding lightness across the manufacturers, we will start the next one to get rid of daft 'features' that are not in control of the driver.
First against the wall come the revolution will be stop-start and, of course, automated geraboxes. jeremyc said:
Does the coast function really cut the engine to idle? So if you are coasting downhill on a motorway, you could be looking at less then 1,000rpm on the dial yet traveling at 70mph? How does it rev match when you decide to accelerate/decelerate again? Weird.
The scariest thing I ever drove was a Rover P4 90 with non-servo'd drum brakes all round and free wheeling hubs... Lifing off on a hill removed any chance you had of ever stopping it... I've never shat myself as much in a car in my life (thankfully you could turn it off). Though I imagine in 50 years things might have improved somewhat. I still consider removing engine braking as a fundamentally bad thing.truck71 said:
Question is Chris, is it quick enough? I still can't get round to 315bhp being quite enough in a 1350kg car.
Oddly these days I think lower powered cars with less grip are more fun to drive than higher powered grippier ones. This reads like it has way too much grip rather than not enough power...Edited by juansolo on Saturday 10th March 08:47
No more handbrake turns then now owing to the electric handbrake?
What's the advantage of these? Do they save space? Is there a proper physical connection like the old mechanical ones? I'm assuming when they go wrong they'll cost quite a bit.
Looks good, 20 inch wheels seem big though.
What's the advantage of these? Do they save space? Is there a proper physical connection like the old mechanical ones? I'm assuming when they go wrong they'll cost quite a bit.
Looks good, 20 inch wheels seem big though.
wormus said:
Sorry, I just don't get Boxters. They are simply gay aren't they?
It's ok, you can relax. Nobody thinks you're a gheyer in your macho-mobile .I think it looks a lot better now that they've shortened the over-hangs. Looks great!
I've just sold my 986S, and I will miss it. Great car!
I really enjoyed Chris's article. It was most insightful and entertaining. I always enjoyed his writing in Autocar and never really understood why he became such a controversial figure (to some anyway).
Porsche has always been an engineering led company, so I'm always fascinated to see what updates they've applied to their latest model. It would appear that they've done it again with the new Boxster, better in every measurable way, but possibly lacking that last emotional 'something'.
However, that's not the real reason I would never buy one, not even a second hand one(which I could just afford!). For me the problem with the Boxster is it's origin and more particularly the name itself.
I can just imagine the committee of marketing men gathered around a table in the early nineties in their smart suits, drinking something 'frothy' from dainty little cups, when some bright spark suggested melding the words 'boxer' and 'roadster', to be met by simultaneous back slapping and nodding of heads.
The very name 'roadster' sends shivers down my spine - a kind of American open top 'sporty' car with vague 'Indy' overtones? Whenever I hear that word I always think of the the MGB. When it was first shown in 1962 it was a beautifully simple, elegant looking sports car with ample performance for the time. Fast forward to the end of its life and it had become a hideous, underpowered, jacked up monstrosity, prostituted for the U.S market. It had also, somehow, gained the new title of 'roadster' along the way too.
The Boxster is, of course, a far more accomplished car than the MGB ever was, or was intended to be despite being classed as a 'roadster' from the start. However, the image of women of a certain age and/or shouty types wearing red braces (you know who they are) driving these cars around (badly) just won't leave my head.
Anyway 'rant' over - the car saved the company, so what do I know...
Porsche has always been an engineering led company, so I'm always fascinated to see what updates they've applied to their latest model. It would appear that they've done it again with the new Boxster, better in every measurable way, but possibly lacking that last emotional 'something'.
However, that's not the real reason I would never buy one, not even a second hand one(which I could just afford!). For me the problem with the Boxster is it's origin and more particularly the name itself.
I can just imagine the committee of marketing men gathered around a table in the early nineties in their smart suits, drinking something 'frothy' from dainty little cups, when some bright spark suggested melding the words 'boxer' and 'roadster', to be met by simultaneous back slapping and nodding of heads.
The very name 'roadster' sends shivers down my spine - a kind of American open top 'sporty' car with vague 'Indy' overtones? Whenever I hear that word I always think of the the MGB. When it was first shown in 1962 it was a beautifully simple, elegant looking sports car with ample performance for the time. Fast forward to the end of its life and it had become a hideous, underpowered, jacked up monstrosity, prostituted for the U.S market. It had also, somehow, gained the new title of 'roadster' along the way too.
The Boxster is, of course, a far more accomplished car than the MGB ever was, or was intended to be despite being classed as a 'roadster' from the start. However, the image of women of a certain age and/or shouty types wearing red braces (you know who they are) driving these cars around (badly) just won't leave my head.
Anyway 'rant' over - the car saved the company, so what do I know...
It's the coast function I don't quite understand.
If you are going down hill in gear clutch engaged, throttle closed then no fuel is required, the momentum of the car turns the engine.
However if you do the same but disconnect drive and coast then fuel will be required to turn the engine, even if it is only turning at idle speed.
Or am I missing something??
If you are going down hill in gear clutch engaged, throttle closed then no fuel is required, the momentum of the car turns the engine.
However if you do the same but disconnect drive and coast then fuel will be required to turn the engine, even if it is only turning at idle speed.
Or am I missing something??
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff